TJ admissions now verifying free and reduced price meal status for successful 2026 applicants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there should be a boost for Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade because I think it only increases the math acceleration race that is not healthy. How many of the kids in those classes are there because their parents want them at TJ and how many are there because they love math and are naturally good at math?

Who cares why the kids are in those classes? If they're taking Algebra II or Pre-Calc in 8th and have earned As in all of their math classes, they're undoubtedly more qualified to handle TJ math than kids who are only taking Algebra I in 8th and have not yet been graded on any math of any real substance. Those kids are also undoubtedly naturally good at math, as they would not be capable of earning As in such accelerated classes. I'd take the kid who has proven math ability over the kid who hasn't yet demonstrated any math ability.

I think what TJ is looking for is a well rounded kid who is good at STEM and writing skills which are critical. If kid can do math but cannot communicate effectively and convincingly what is the point. Those kids from TJ can just get into an ordinary college. I know lot of TJ parents who have one child in TJ under old process and another child in waitlist under new process who support this change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:improve the qualification bar then:

minimum requirement: Geometry HN, weighted GPA 3.8+
give extra credits for national awards, state awards and regional awards
use teacher's recommendation (better let the teacher mark a recommendation score to make it easier for calculation)
remove geographic quota. let's be fair. It's all about academic merit.

Even better

HN Geometry req
Use Unweighted GPA from STEM classes
Do Not use teacher recs they are unreliable and have shown to be racially biased
Add hard geographic quotas proportional to the region's population

I like this.

If there aren’t enough qualified applicants then put those spots into pool for remaining applicants.

I’m torn on Geometry though. I know great STEM kids who ended up in Alg I honors in 8th. And by requiring Geometry we’ll get parents pushing more kids to take it too soon. Bad consequence.

Maybe this will help you. If you take Algebra I in 8th the base school can generally meet all the math needs. TJ should be for the most advanced students who have a harder time getting their needs met at a base school.

Not universally true. There are various reasons why kids may end up in Alg I. I wouldn’t want to eliminate 100% of those kids.

And do we want parents to push their kids into geometry any more than they already do? As we’ve seen, they will do anything to get their kids in. We already have way more kids in Geometry than should be there.

DP, you can't obtain perfect. Requiring that we sacrifice the 99% so that we chase after that 1% is irrational foolishness.

I also don’t like encouraging parents to push their kids into geometry prematurely.

I don't like encouraging parents to push their kids who aren't smart at STEM into schools like TJ.
Algebra I in 7th is NOT a high bar. Smart kids all over the world do fine with it. If a kid can't hack algebra in 7th, that kid is at best somewhat above average. About 10% of FCPS kids take Algebra in 7th and are fine with it. There is no reason to dip down into the pool of kids who are slightly above average in math for a magnet STEM school.

I'd rather see kids get pushed into geometry prematurely, struggle, and get bad grades in their middle schools than see them pushed into TJ, where they will struggle and wash out of the school. Overaccelerated kids who get bad grades in middle school can expunge the grade and retake the class the following year. Kids who wash out of TJ can't really recover from that.

One of my kids friends who was actually from AAP, couldn't qualify for Algebra I 7th grade and got a B+ in 8th grade Algebra I in 8th grade along with couple of other B+/A- etc, made it to TJ. I presume the kid had impressive and creative essays. There are several other kids perfect GPAs, stem electives, plenty of after school activities, some of those who took Algebra 2 or even Pre-cal in 8th, couldn't get into TJ. May be their essays weren't as impressive, but is it fair? Not sure, but I am sure some of you think that its perfectly fair and every smart kid should be able to write stellar essays and do not accept that stem smartness doesn't always translate into creating writing abilities. Anyways!

It this is true i.e. the AAP kid who couldn’t get into algebra I in 7th grade and got B+ in 8th shouldn’t be preferred over a strait A students. It’s totally wrong and pretty much sumps what’s wrong new process. I have heard similar stories, kids with wealthy parents, who struggled in math and sconce were able to get in. Those who like the new process will keep defending it no matter ho many examples we throw at them!

They either lied about ED or did really well on the essay/portrait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:improve the qualification bar then:

minimum requirement: Geometry HN, weighted GPA 3.8+
give extra credits for national awards, state awards and regional awards
use teacher's recommendation (better let the teacher mark a recommendation score to make it easier for calculation)
remove geographic quota. let's be fair. It's all about academic merit.

Even better

HN Geometry req
Use Unweighted GPA from STEM classes
Do Not use teacher recs they are unreliable and have shown to be racially biased
Add hard geographic quotas proportional to the region's population

I like this.

If there aren’t enough qualified applicants then put those spots into pool for remaining applicants.

I’m torn on Geometry though. I know great STEM kids who ended up in Alg I honors in 8th. And by requiring Geometry we’ll get parents pushing more kids to take it too soon. Bad consequence.

Maybe this will help you. If you take Algebra I in 8th the base school can generally meet all the math needs. TJ should be for the most advanced students who have a harder time getting their needs met at a base school.

Not universally true. There are various reasons why kids may end up in Alg I. I wouldn’t want to eliminate 100% of those kids.

And do we want parents to push their kids into geometry any more than they already do? As we’ve seen, they will do anything to get their kids in. We already have way more kids in Geometry than should be there.

DP, you can't obtain perfect. Requiring that we sacrifice the 99% so that we chase after that 1% is irrational foolishness.

I also don’t like encouraging parents to push their kids into geometry prematurely.

I don't like encouraging parents to push their kids who aren't smart at STEM into schools like TJ.
Algebra I in 7th is NOT a high bar. Smart kids all over the world do fine with it. If a kid can't hack algebra in 7th, that kid is at best somewhat above average. About 10% of FCPS kids take Algebra in 7th and are fine with it. There is no reason to dip down into the pool of kids who are slightly above average in math for a magnet STEM school.

I'd rather see kids get pushed into geometry prematurely, struggle, and get bad grades in their middle schools than see them pushed into TJ, where they will struggle and wash out of the school. Overaccelerated kids who get bad grades in middle school can expunge the grade and retake the class the following year. Kids who wash out of TJ can't really recover from that.

One of my kids friends who was actually from AAP, couldn't qualify for Algebra I 7th grade and got a B+ in 8th grade Algebra I in 8th grade along with couple of other B+/A- etc, made it to TJ. I presume the kid had impressive and creative essays. There are several other kids perfect GPAs, stem electives, plenty of after school activities, some of those who took Algebra 2 or even Pre-cal in 8th, couldn't get into TJ. May be their essays weren't as impressive, but is it fair? Not sure, but I am sure some of you think that its perfectly fair and every smart kid should be able to write stellar essays and do not accept that stem smartness doesn't always translate into creating writing abilities. Anyways!

It this is true i.e. the AAP kid who couldn’t get into algebra I in 7th grade and got B+ in 8th shouldn’t be preferred over a strait A students. It’s totally wrong and pretty much sumps what’s wrong new process. I have heard similar stories, kids with wealthy parents, who struggled in math and sconce were able to get in. Those who like the new process will keep defending it no matter ho many examples we throw at them!

They either lied about ED or did really well on the essay/portrait.

I think they did well in essays as one of them I talked to didn’t appear like they would not lie about such a thing. They weren’t particularly interested in TJ, but happy to have gotten in, though a bit surprised. But do you honestly think essays should have so much importance? As someone calculated whole gpa (max -min) would would make 37.5 points difference (0.5 * 75), while how well you write SPS and science essay/prompt can make a whopping 480 points difference. Is this really a good strategy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there should be a boost for Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade because I think it only increases the math acceleration race that is not healthy. How many of the kids in those classes are there because their parents want them at TJ and how many are there because they love math and are naturally good at math?

Who cares why the kids are in those classes? If they're taking Algebra II or Pre-Calc in 8th and have earned As in all of their math classes, they're undoubtedly more qualified to handle TJ math than kids who are only taking Algebra I in 8th and have not yet been graded on any math of any real substance. Those kids are also undoubtedly naturally good at math, as they would not be capable of earning As in such accelerated classes. I'd take the kid who has proven math ability over the kid who hasn't yet demonstrated any math ability.

I do.

There are kids who are not accepted into TJ that confuse people and I would bet that those are kids who wrote in their essay that they don't want to attend TJ. They can't tell their parents that because their parents are so focused on TJ. They can't tank their classes because it would cause a problem at home. So they write that they don't want to attend TJ in the timed essay that their parents will not see.

That tells me that there are kids who are checking off all the boxes but are not interested in TJ. Which leads me to wonder why they are in Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade. Sure, they seem to be up to the task but they are not taking the class because they want to take the classes.

While I think that is a small percentage of the kids applying, it happens. Just like there are kids who go to TJ because their parents bribe them to attend. It is a small percentage of the kids who attend but it happens.

When I see the parents of a 2nd grader worried about what they need to do so their kid can go to TJ, I know that is the parent talking and not the kid.

TJ should be a decision made by the kid because they want that type of program and experience, not because the parents want it for the kid.

I think I saw a similar post earlier and I assume its the same person - So how sure are you about this? Are you a current/former TJ faculty? Did you actually grade any essays? I can't vouch other kids, but at least in our case, we have long accepted and moved on from TJ, but my kid is unable to do so. She couldn't digest why her perfect GPA, always outshined others in classes, stem electives/activities, awards etc couldn't secure admission but others who barely had anything to say for themselves got in. The only comfort she has is there are many others from her school, some of them are better than her in her opinion also didn't get in and they are all equally disappointed. Its wrong to assume that everyone of them wrote in their essays that they didn't want TJ, even if they could lie to parents, but its easy for kids to sense interest in each other ex: they tend to pair up with other kids who are equally motivated so one kid will not be a drag on others in group etc. Btw, you can easily understand if the kid is really interested or doing it because of parents. I can very easily see if my DD is doing something (academics or otherwise) out of interest or because I pushed to do. If you can't see in your kid, then you probably don't understand your kid well enough. Sorry for being sarcastic

The poster you refer to graduated from TJ in the late 90s and therefore she is an expert on all things TJ. She is very unhappy with the manner in which TJ has evolved. As per her, all kids from the top feeder schools are only admitted because they are prepped and Curie gave them all the answers. The really smart kids (and smartness cannot be measured by Math advancement) live in other parts of the County and the reform has helped bring them to the fore. Per her, all parents from the top feeder schools are toxic who don’t have a clue how to raise well rounded kids. She tries to not be overt with her racial animus but everyone can see through that.

If you challenge her on any objective criteria, she will accuse you of looking down on the underprivileged kids (starting her commentary with Gross or Disgusting). Her imprint is on every TJ discussion and there is nothing constructive. But she believes herself to be very knowledgeable and that parents thank her for her great inputs.

And when she reads this, she will respond with a Bingo.

Heh - I'm pretty sure this comment is referring to me. I'm the one many of you call "the savior". And I didn't write that comment. Believe it or not, there are MANY people on this forum who disagree with the status-quo crowd. But I'm glad to know I'm living rent-free in your head. It's interesting - you got some facts about me right, and other ones wrong. I suspect that you genuinely believe that all of these pro-reform posters are the same person... does that help you sleep at night, thinking that there are fewer of us than there really are?

When you hire at your company do you hire the best applicant or the one the deserves it...

I’ll be honest. I do not always hire the most technically proficient. I hire the one that can do the job, but also can get along with others and advance the mission of the company. I work in tech. You can be a great coder, but if you are arrogant, can’t see other points of view, or work with others, you will fail in the workplace.

Not sure this is necessary analogous to high school entrance selections, but I do believe the highest test scores are not the only attributes needed for success. I think success requires a holistic approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there should be a boost for Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade because I think it only increases the math acceleration race that is not healthy. How many of the kids in those classes are there because their parents want them at TJ and how many are there because they love math and are naturally good at math?

Who cares why the kids are in those classes? If they're taking Algebra II or Pre-Calc in 8th and have earned As in all of their math classes, they're undoubtedly more qualified to handle TJ math than kids who are only taking Algebra I in 8th and have not yet been graded on any math of any real substance. Those kids are also undoubtedly naturally good at math, as they would not be capable of earning As in such accelerated classes. I'd take the kid who has proven math ability over the kid who hasn't yet demonstrated any math ability.

I do.

There are kids who are not accepted into TJ that confuse people and I would bet that those are kids who wrote in their essay that they don't want to attend TJ. They can't tell their parents that because their parents are so focused on TJ. They can't tank their classes because it would cause a problem at home. So they write that they don't want to attend TJ in the timed essay that their parents will not see.

That tells me that there are kids who are checking off all the boxes but are not interested in TJ. Which leads me to wonder why they are in Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade. Sure, they seem to be up to the task but they are not taking the class because they want to take the classes.

While I think that is a small percentage of the kids applying, it happens. Just like there are kids who go to TJ because their parents bribe them to attend. It is a small percentage of the kids who attend but it happens.

When I see the parents of a 2nd grader worried about what they need to do so their kid can go to TJ, I know that is the parent talking and not the kid.

TJ should be a decision made by the kid because they want that type of program and experience, not because the parents want it for the kid.

I think I saw a similar post earlier and I assume its the same person - So how sure are you about this? Are you a current/former TJ faculty? Did you actually grade any essays? I can't vouch other kids, but at least in our case, we have long accepted and moved on from TJ, but my kid is unable to do so. She couldn't digest why her perfect GPA, always outshined others in classes, stem electives/activities, awards etc couldn't secure admission but others who barely had anything to say for themselves got in. The only comfort she has is there are many others from her school, some of them are better than her in her opinion also didn't get in and they are all equally disappointed. Its wrong to assume that everyone of them wrote in their essays that they didn't want TJ, even if they could lie to parents, but its easy for kids to sense interest in each other ex: they tend to pair up with other kids who are equally motivated so one kid will not be a drag on others in group etc. Btw, you can easily understand if the kid is really interested or doing it because of parents. I can very easily see if my DD is doing something (academics or otherwise) out of interest or because I pushed to do. If you can't see in your kid, then you probably don't understand your kid well enough. Sorry for being sarcastic

The poster you refer to graduated from TJ in the late 90s and therefore she is an expert on all things TJ. She is very unhappy with the manner in which TJ has evolved. As per her, all kids from the top feeder schools are only admitted because they are prepped and Curie gave them all the answers. The really smart kids (and smartness cannot be measured by Math advancement) live in other parts of the County and the reform has helped bring them to the fore. Per her, all parents from the top feeder schools are toxic who don’t have a clue how to raise well rounded kids. She tries to not be overt with her racial animus but everyone can see through that.

If you challenge her on any objective criteria, she will accuse you of looking down on the underprivileged kids (starting her commentary with Gross or Disgusting). Her imprint is on every TJ discussion and there is nothing constructive. But she believes herself to be very knowledgeable and that parents thank her for her great inputs.

And when she reads this, she will respond with a Bingo.

Heh - I'm pretty sure this comment is referring to me. I'm the one many of you call "the savior". And I didn't write that comment. Believe it or not, there are MANY people on this forum who disagree with the status-quo crowd. But I'm glad to know I'm living rent-free in your head. It's interesting - you got some facts about me right, and other ones wrong. I suspect that you genuinely believe that all of these pro-reform posters are the same person... does that help you sleep at night, thinking that there are fewer of us than there really are?

When you hire at your company do you hire the best applicant or the one the deserves it...

I’ll be honest. I do not always hire the most technically proficient. I hire the one that can do the job, but also can get along with others and advance the mission of the company. I work in tech. You can be a great coder, but if you are arrogant, can’t see other points of view, or work with others, you will fail in the workplace.

Not sure this is necessary analogous to high school entrance selections, but I do believe the highest test scores are not the only attributes needed for success. I think success requires a holistic approach.

The point is you don't care about where they are from or what they look like you care about their actual talent. The whole focus on SES status, and locations is a complete farce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there should be a boost for Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade because I think it only increases the math acceleration race that is not healthy. How many of the kids in those classes are there because their parents want them at TJ and how many are there because they love math and are naturally good at math?

Who cares why the kids are in those classes? If they're taking Algebra II or Pre-Calc in 8th and have earned As in all of their math classes, they're undoubtedly more qualified to handle TJ math than kids who are only taking Algebra I in 8th and have not yet been graded on any math of any real substance. Those kids are also undoubtedly naturally good at math, as they would not be capable of earning As in such accelerated classes. I'd take the kid who has proven math ability over the kid who hasn't yet demonstrated any math ability.

I do.

There are kids who are not accepted into TJ that confuse people and I would bet that those are kids who wrote in their essay that they don't want to attend TJ. They can't tell their parents that because their parents are so focused on TJ. They can't tank their classes because it would cause a problem at home. So they write that they don't want to attend TJ in the timed essay that their parents will not see.

That tells me that there are kids who are checking off all the boxes but are not interested in TJ. Which leads me to wonder why they are in Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade. Sure, they seem to be up to the task but they are not taking the class because they want to take the classes.

While I think that is a small percentage of the kids applying, it happens. Just like there are kids who go to TJ because their parents bribe them to attend. It is a small percentage of the kids who attend but it happens.

When I see the parents of a 2nd grader worried about what they need to do so their kid can go to TJ, I know that is the parent talking and not the kid.

TJ should be a decision made by the kid because they want that type of program and experience, not because the parents want it for the kid.

I think I saw a similar post earlier and I assume its the same person - So how sure are you about this? Are you a current/former TJ faculty? Did you actually grade any essays? I can't vouch other kids, but at least in our case, we have long accepted and moved on from TJ, but my kid is unable to do so. She couldn't digest why her perfect GPA, always outshined others in classes, stem electives/activities, awards etc couldn't secure admission but others who barely had anything to say for themselves got in. The only comfort she has is there are many others from her school, some of them are better than her in her opinion also didn't get in and they are all equally disappointed. Its wrong to assume that everyone of them wrote in their essays that they didn't want TJ, even if they could lie to parents, but its easy for kids to sense interest in each other ex: they tend to pair up with other kids who are equally motivated so one kid will not be a drag on others in group etc. Btw, you can easily understand if the kid is really interested or doing it because of parents. I can very easily see if my DD is doing something (academics or otherwise) out of interest or because I pushed to do. If you can't see in your kid, then you probably don't understand your kid well enough. Sorry for being sarcastic

The poster you refer to graduated from TJ in the late 90s and therefore she is an expert on all things TJ. She is very unhappy with the manner in which TJ has evolved. As per her, all kids from the top feeder schools are only admitted because they are prepped and Curie gave them all the answers. The really smart kids (and smartness cannot be measured by Math advancement) live in other parts of the County and the reform has helped bring them to the fore. Per her, all parents from the top feeder schools are toxic who don’t have a clue how to raise well rounded kids. She tries to not be overt with her racial animus but everyone can see through that.

If you challenge her on any objective criteria, she will accuse you of looking down on the underprivileged kids (starting her commentary with Gross or Disgusting). Her imprint is on every TJ discussion and there is nothing constructive. But she believes herself to be very knowledgeable and that parents thank her for her great inputs.

And when she reads this, she will respond with a Bingo.

Heh - I'm pretty sure this comment is referring to me. I'm the one many of you call "the savior". And I didn't write that comment. Believe it or not, there are MANY people on this forum who disagree with the status-quo crowd. But I'm glad to know I'm living rent-free in your head. It's interesting - you got some facts about me right, and other ones wrong. I suspect that you genuinely believe that all of these pro-reform posters are the same person... does that help you sleep at night, thinking that there are fewer of us than there really are?

When you hire at your company do you hire the best applicant or the one the deserves it...

I’ll be honest. I do not always hire the most technically proficient. I hire the one that can do the job, but also can get along with others and advance the mission of the company. I work in tech. You can be a great coder, but if you are arrogant, can’t see other points of view, or work with others, you will fail in the workplace.

Not sure this is necessary analogous to high school entrance selections, but I do believe the highest test scores are not the only attributes needed for success. I think success requires a holistic approach.

The point is you don't care about where they are from or what they look like you care about their actual talent. The whole focus on SES status, and locations is a complete farce.

You are actually incorrect. Do you work? It’s all about DEI in the private sector. I worked at a tech company with a black coding mentorship program to increase the number of African Americans among the dev staff. My company is obsessed with board diversity right now. I’m not sure if or where you work, but it is very much about hiring diverse candidates with skills. If their skills have weaknesses, employers are willing to skill them up. I’d be curious where you work that does not care about diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:improve the qualification bar then:

minimum requirement: Geometry HN, weighted GPA 3.8+
give extra credits for national awards, state awards and regional awards
use teacher's recommendation (better let the teacher mark a recommendation score to make it easier for calculation)
remove geographic quota. let's be fair. It's all about academic merit.

Even better

HN Geometry req
Use Unweighted GPA from STEM classes
Do Not use teacher recs they are unreliable and have shown to be racially biased
Add hard geographic quotas proportional to the region's population

I like this.

If there aren’t enough qualified applicants then put those spots into pool for remaining applicants.

I’m torn on Geometry though. I know great STEM kids who ended up in Alg I honors in 8th. And by requiring Geometry we’ll get parents pushing more kids to take it too soon. Bad consequence.

Maybe this will help you. If you take Algebra I in 8th the base school can generally meet all the math needs. TJ should be for the most advanced students who have a harder time getting their needs met at a base school.

Not universally true. There are various reasons why kids may end up in Alg I. I wouldn’t want to eliminate 100% of those kids.

And do we want parents to push their kids into geometry any more than they already do? As we’ve seen, they will do anything to get their kids in. We already have way more kids in Geometry than should be there.

DP, you can't obtain perfect. Requiring that we sacrifice the 99% so that we chase after that 1% is irrational foolishness.

I also don’t like encouraging parents to push their kids into geometry prematurely.

I don't like encouraging parents to push their kids who aren't smart at STEM into schools like TJ.
Algebra I in 7th is NOT a high bar. Smart kids all over the world do fine with it. If a kid can't hack algebra in 7th, that kid is at best somewhat above average. About 10% of FCPS kids take Algebra in 7th and are fine with it. There is no reason to dip down into the pool of kids who are slightly above average in math for a magnet STEM school.

I'd rather see kids get pushed into geometry prematurely, struggle, and get bad grades in their middle schools than see them pushed into TJ, where they will struggle and wash out of the school. Overaccelerated kids who get bad grades in middle school can expunge the grade and retake the class the following year. Kids who wash out of TJ can't really recover from that.

One of my kids friends who was actually from AAP, couldn't qualify for Algebra I 7th grade and got a B+ in 8th grade Algebra I in 8th grade along with couple of other B+/A- etc, made it to TJ. I presume the kid had impressive and creative essays. There are several other kids perfect GPAs, stem electives, plenty of after school activities, some of those who took Algebra 2 or even Pre-cal in 8th, couldn't get into TJ. May be their essays weren't as impressive, but is it fair? Not sure, but I am sure some of you think that its perfectly fair and every smart kid should be able to write stellar essays and do not accept that stem smartness doesn't always translate into creating writing abilities. Anyways!

It this is true i.e. the AAP kid who couldn’t get into algebra I in 7th grade and got B+ in 8th shouldn’t be preferred over a strait A students. It’s totally wrong and pretty much sumps what’s wrong new process. I have heard similar stories, kids with wealthy parents, who struggled in math and sconce were able to get in. Those who like the new process will keep defending it no matter ho many examples we throw at them!

It is like people defending unfettered gun access in the face of children dying. You can't argue with idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there should be a boost for Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade because I think it only increases the math acceleration race that is not healthy. How many of the kids in those classes are there because their parents want them at TJ and how many are there because they love math and are naturally good at math?

Who cares why the kids are in those classes? If they're taking Algebra II or Pre-Calc in 8th and have earned As in all of their math classes, they're undoubtedly more qualified to handle TJ math than kids who are only taking Algebra I in 8th and have not yet been graded on any math of any real substance. Those kids are also undoubtedly naturally good at math, as they would not be capable of earning As in such accelerated classes. I'd take the kid who has proven math ability over the kid who hasn't yet demonstrated any math ability.

I do.

There are kids who are not accepted into TJ that confuse people and I would bet that those are kids who wrote in their essay that they don't want to attend TJ. They can't tell their parents that because their parents are so focused on TJ. They can't tank their classes because it would cause a problem at home. So they write that they don't want to attend TJ in the timed essay that their parents will not see.

That tells me that there are kids who are checking off all the boxes but are not interested in TJ. Which leads me to wonder why they are in Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade. Sure, they seem to be up to the task but they are not taking the class because they want to take the classes.

While I think that is a small percentage of the kids applying, it happens. Just like there are kids who go to TJ because their parents bribe them to attend. It is a small percentage of the kids who attend but it happens.

When I see the parents of a 2nd grader worried about what they need to do so their kid can go to TJ, I know that is the parent talking and not the kid.

TJ should be a decision made by the kid because they want that type of program and experience, not because the parents want it for the kid.

I think I saw a similar post earlier and I assume its the same person - So how sure are you about this? Are you a current/former TJ faculty? Did you actually grade any essays? I can't vouch other kids, but at least in our case, we have long accepted and moved on from TJ, but my kid is unable to do so. She couldn't digest why her perfect GPA, always outshined others in classes, stem electives/activities, awards etc couldn't secure admission but others who barely had anything to say for themselves got in. The only comfort she has is there are many others from her school, some of them are better than her in her opinion also didn't get in and they are all equally disappointed. Its wrong to assume that everyone of them wrote in their essays that they didn't want TJ, even if they could lie to parents, but its easy for kids to sense interest in each other ex: they tend to pair up with other kids who are equally motivated so one kid will not be a drag on others in group etc. Btw, you can easily understand if the kid is really interested or doing it because of parents. I can very easily see if my DD is doing something (academics or otherwise) out of interest or because I pushed to do. If you can't see in your kid, then you probably don't understand your kid well enough. Sorry for being sarcastic

The poster you refer to graduated from TJ in the late 90s and therefore she is an expert on all things TJ. She is very unhappy with the manner in which TJ has evolved. As per her, all kids from the top feeder schools are only admitted because they are prepped and Curie gave them all the answers. The really smart kids (and smartness cannot be measured by Math advancement) live in other parts of the County and the reform has helped bring them to the fore. Per her, all parents from the top feeder schools are toxic who don’t have a clue how to raise well rounded kids. She tries to not be overt with her racial animus but everyone can see through that.

If you challenge her on any objective criteria, she will accuse you of looking down on the underprivileged kids (starting her commentary with Gross or Disgusting). Her imprint is on every TJ discussion and there is nothing constructive. But she believes herself to be very knowledgeable and that parents thank her for her great inputs.

And when she reads this, she will respond with a Bingo.

Heh - I'm pretty sure this comment is referring to me. I'm the one many of you call "the savior". And I didn't write that comment. Believe it or not, there are MANY people on this forum who disagree with the status-quo crowd. But I'm glad to know I'm living rent-free in your head. It's interesting - you got some facts about me right, and other ones wrong. I suspect that you genuinely believe that all of these pro-reform posters are the same person... does that help you sleep at night, thinking that there are fewer of us than there really are?

When you hire at your company do you hire the best applicant or the one the deserves it...

I’ll be honest. I do not always hire the most technically proficient. I hire the one that can do the job, but also can get along with others and advance the mission of the company. I work in tech. You can be a great coder, but if you are arrogant, can’t see other points of view, or work with others, you will fail in the workplace.

Not sure this is necessary analogous to high school entrance selections, but I do believe the highest test scores are not the only attributes needed for success. I think success requires a holistic approach.

The point is you don't care about where they are from or what they look like you care about their actual talent. The whole focus on SES status, and locations is a complete farce.

You are actually incorrect. Do you work? It’s all about DEI in the private sector. I worked at a tech company with a black coding mentorship program to increase the number of African Americans among the dev staff. My company is obsessed with board diversity right now. I’m not sure if or where you work, but it is very much about hiring diverse candidates with skills. If their skills have weaknesses, employers are willing to skill them up. I’d be curious where you work that does not care about diversity.

Large companies have to do political posturing. Small companies only care about performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:improve the qualification bar then:

minimum requirement: Geometry HN, weighted GPA 3.8+
give extra credits for national awards, state awards and regional awards
use teacher's recommendation (better let the teacher mark a recommendation score to make it easier for calculation)
remove geographic quota. let's be fair. It's all about academic merit.

Even better

HN Geometry req
Use Unweighted GPA from STEM classes
Do Not use teacher recs they are unreliable and have shown to be racially biased
Add hard geographic quotas proportional to the region's population

I like this.

If there aren’t enough qualified applicants then put those spots into pool for remaining applicants.

I’m torn on Geometry though. I know great STEM kids who ended up in Alg I honors in 8th. And by requiring Geometry we’ll get parents pushing more kids to take it too soon. Bad consequence.

Maybe this will help you. If you take Algebra I in 8th the base school can generally meet all the math needs. TJ should be for the most advanced students who have a harder time getting their needs met at a base school.

Not universally true. There are various reasons why kids may end up in Alg I. I wouldn’t want to eliminate 100% of those kids.

And do we want parents to push their kids into geometry any more than they already do? As we’ve seen, they will do anything to get their kids in. We already have way more kids in Geometry than should be there.

DP, you can't obtain perfect. Requiring that we sacrifice the 99% so that we chase after that 1% is irrational foolishness.

I also don’t like encouraging parents to push their kids into geometry prematurely.

I don't like encouraging parents to push their kids who aren't smart at STEM into schools like TJ.
Algebra I in 7th is NOT a high bar. Smart kids all over the world do fine with it. If a kid can't hack algebra in 7th, that kid is at best somewhat above average. About 10% of FCPS kids take Algebra in 7th and are fine with it. There is no reason to dip down into the pool of kids who are slightly above average in math for a magnet STEM school.

I'd rather see kids get pushed into geometry prematurely, struggle, and get bad grades in their middle schools than see them pushed into TJ, where they will struggle and wash out of the school. Overaccelerated kids who get bad grades in middle school can expunge the grade and retake the class the following year. Kids who wash out of TJ can't really recover from that.

One of my kids friends who was actually from AAP, couldn't qualify for Algebra I 7th grade and got a B+ in 8th grade Algebra I in 8th grade along with couple of other B+/A- etc, made it to TJ. I presume the kid had impressive and creative essays. There are several other kids perfect GPAs, stem electives, plenty of after school activities, some of those who took Algebra 2 or even Pre-cal in 8th, couldn't get into TJ. May be their essays weren't as impressive, but is it fair? Not sure, but I am sure some of you think that its perfectly fair and every smart kid should be able to write stellar essays and do not accept that stem smartness doesn't always translate into creating writing abilities. Anyways!

It this is true i.e. the AAP kid who couldn’t get into algebra I in 7th grade and got B+ in 8th shouldn’t be preferred over a strait A students. It’s totally wrong and pretty much sumps what’s wrong new process. I have heard similar stories, kids with wealthy parents, who struggled in math and sconce were able to get in. Those who like the new process will keep defending it no matter ho many examples we throw at them!

It is like people defending unfettered gun access in the face of children dying. You can't argue with idiots.

The small minded progressives and the crazy gun loving right wingers are all the same. Just thinking about their own narrow interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think there should be a boost for Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade because I think it only increases the math acceleration race that is not healthy. How many of the kids in those classes are there because their parents want them at TJ and how many are there because they love math and are naturally good at math?

Who cares why the kids are in those classes? If they're taking Algebra II or Pre-Calc in 8th and have earned As in all of their math classes, they're undoubtedly more qualified to handle TJ math than kids who are only taking Algebra I in 8th and have not yet been graded on any math of any real substance. Those kids are also undoubtedly naturally good at math, as they would not be capable of earning As in such accelerated classes. I'd take the kid who has proven math ability over the kid who hasn't yet demonstrated any math ability.

I do.

There are kids who are not accepted into TJ that confuse people and I would bet that those are kids who wrote in their essay that they don't want to attend TJ. They can't tell their parents that because their parents are so focused on TJ. They can't tank their classes because it would cause a problem at home. So they write that they don't want to attend TJ in the timed essay that their parents will not see.

That tells me that there are kids who are checking off all the boxes but are not interested in TJ. Which leads me to wonder why they are in Algebra II or Pre Calc in 8th grade. Sure, they seem to be up to the task but they are not taking the class because they want to take the classes.

While I think that is a small percentage of the kids applying, it happens. Just like there are kids who go to TJ because their parents bribe them to attend. It is a small percentage of the kids who attend but it happens.

When I see the parents of a 2nd grader worried about what they need to do so their kid can go to TJ, I know that is the parent talking and not the kid.

TJ should be a decision made by the kid because they want that type of program and experience, not because the parents want it for the kid.

I think I saw a similar post earlier and I assume its the same person - So how sure are you about this? Are you a current/former TJ faculty? Did you actually grade any essays? I can't vouch other kids, but at least in our case, we have long accepted and moved on from TJ, but my kid is unable to do so. She couldn't digest why her perfect GPA, always outshined others in classes, stem electives/activities, awards etc couldn't secure admission but others who barely had anything to say for themselves got in. The only comfort she has is there are many others from her school, some of them are better than her in her opinion also didn't get in and they are all equally disappointed. Its wrong to assume that everyone of them wrote in their essays that they didn't want TJ, even if they could lie to parents, but its easy for kids to sense interest in each other ex: they tend to pair up with other kids who are equally motivated so one kid will not be a drag on others in group etc. Btw, you can easily understand if the kid is really interested or doing it because of parents. I can very easily see if my DD is doing something (academics or otherwise) out of interest or because I pushed to do. If you can't see in your kid, then you probably don't understand your kid well enough. Sorry for being sarcastic

The poster you refer to graduated from TJ in the late 90s and therefore she is an expert on all things TJ. She is very unhappy with the manner in which TJ has evolved. As per her, all kids from the top feeder schools are only admitted because they are prepped and Curie gave them all the answers. The really smart kids (and smartness cannot be measured by Math advancement) live in other parts of the County and the reform has helped bring them to the fore. Per her, all parents from the top feeder schools are toxic who don’t have a clue how to raise well rounded kids. She tries to not be overt with her racial animus but everyone can see through that.

If you challenge her on any objective criteria, she will accuse you of looking down on the underprivileged kids (starting her commentary with Gross or Disgusting). Her imprint is on every TJ discussion and there is nothing constructive. But she believes herself to be very knowledgeable and that parents thank her for her great inputs.

And when she reads this, she will respond with a Bingo.

Heh - I'm pretty sure this comment is referring to me. I'm the one many of you call "the savior". And I didn't write that comment. Believe it or not, there are MANY people on this forum who disagree with the status-quo crowd. But I'm glad to know I'm living rent-free in your head. It's interesting - you got some facts about me right, and other ones wrong. I suspect that you genuinely believe that all of these pro-reform posters are the same person... does that help you sleep at night, thinking that there are fewer of us than there really are?

When you hire at your company do you hire the best applicant or the one the deserves it...

I’ll be honest. I do not always hire the most technically proficient. I hire the one that can do the job, but also can get along with others and advance the mission of the company. I work in tech. You can be a great coder, but if you are arrogant, can’t see other points of view, or work with others, you will fail in the workplace.

Not sure this is necessary analogous to high school entrance selections, but I do believe the highest test scores are not the only attributes needed for success. I think success requires a holistic approach.

The point is you don't care about where they are from or what they look like you care about their actual talent. The whole focus on SES status, and locations is a complete farce.

You are actually incorrect. Do you work? It’s all about DEI in the private sector. I worked at a tech company with a black coding mentorship program to increase the number of African Americans among the dev staff. My company is obsessed with board diversity right now. I’m not sure if or where you work, but it is very much about hiring diverse candidates with skills. If their skills have weaknesses, employers are willing to skill them up. I’d be curious where you work that does not care about diversity.

Large companies have to do political posturing. Small companies only care about performance.

Large companies can afford tokenism.

[Anonymous]

Now that the deadline has passed, it will be interesting to see how things play out. I don't expect TJ to release updated statistics right away, so we can probably only speculate for now - although they will likely eventually be forced to do so. This whole process was presumably not something they initiated voluntarily, but only because they felt that they were forced to do so.

The Post article says roughly 33% ED among admits, which is roughly 181 students. If, say, 2/3 of them are genuinely ED and were able to provide documentation, that means 60 are not. Given how competitive admissions are, I wouldn't be surprised if almost all of those 60 lose their seats once they lose the wrongly awarded experience factor points. That means roughly 60 seats open up.

It makes sense for them to combine this process with the first round of admits from the wait pool. Even with a yield as high as 90%, which seems unlikely, 55 admits will have declined their seats.

That makes a total of perhaps 115 newly available seats. I suspect they will want to fill as many of those seats with ED applicants as they can.

Of course, this is all just spitballing, and if anyone has insight into more accurate numbers I'd love to hear it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When you hire at your company do you hire the best applicant or the one the deserves it...

The county's mission is to educate the public and was funded by taxes so your analogy doesn't stand up. However, it can also be argued they are selecting the best especially since they made an effort to negate the effects of these expensive prep schools which skewing admission to make mediocre applicants appear gifted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When you hire at your company do you hire the best applicant or the one the deserves it...

The county's mission is to educate the public and was funded by taxes so your analogy doesn't stand up. However, it can also be argued they are selecting the best especially since they made an effort to negate the effects of these expensive prep schools which skewing admission to make mediocre applicants appear gifted.

after so many discussions, there are still people using the prep test as the excuse. It is the looser's logic.
It is ok to cancel the prep test. The capable kids are still capable. They only fail with the ugly geographic quota admission policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that the deadline has passed, it will be interesting to see how things play out. I don't expect TJ to release updated statistics right away, so we can probably only speculate for now - although they will likely eventually be forced to do so. This whole process was presumably not something they initiated voluntarily, but only because they felt that they were forced to do so.

The Post article says roughly 33% ED among admits, which is roughly 181 students. If, say, 2/3 of them are genuinely ED and were able to provide documentation, that means 60 are not. Given how competitive admissions are, I wouldn't be surprised if almost all of those 60 lose their seats once they lose the wrongly awarded experience factor points. That means roughly 60 seats open up.

It makes sense for them to combine this process with the first round of admits from the wait pool. Even with a yield as high as 90%, which seems unlikely, 55 admits will have declined their seats.

That makes a total of perhaps 115 newly available seats. I suspect they will want to fill as many of those seats with ED applicants as they can.

Of course, this is all just spitballing, and if anyone has insight into more accurate numbers I'd love to hear it!

Or go down the waitlist based on updated scores - removing ED bonus points for those unable to document FARM.

Or I wonder if people who aren't ED are just bumped from the waitlist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now that the deadline has passed, it will be interesting to see how things play out. I don't expect TJ to release updated statistics right away, so we can probably only speculate for now - although they will likely eventually be forced to do so. This whole process was presumably not something they initiated voluntarily, but only because they felt that they were forced to do so.

The Post article says roughly 33% ED among admits, which is roughly 181 students. If, say, 2/3 of them are genuinely ED and were able to provide documentation, that means 60 are not. Given how competitive admissions are, I wouldn't be surprised if almost all of those 60 lose their seats once they lose the wrongly awarded experience factor points. That means roughly 60 seats open up.

It makes sense for them to combine this process with the first round of admits from the wait pool. Even with a yield as high as 90%, which seems unlikely, 55 admits will have declined their seats.

That makes a total of perhaps 115 newly available seats. I suspect they will want to fill as many of those seats with ED applicants as they can.

Of course, this is all just spitballing, and if anyone has insight into more accurate numbers I'd love to hear it!

Or go down the waitlist based on updated scores - removing ED bonus points for those unable to document FARM.

Or I wonder if people who aren't ED are just bumped from the waitlist.

I prefer to remove them completely. If someone knowingly and unethically lied about being poor, it’s cheating and needs to be punished. However, I am still on the edge of this is the kids fault ir parents and kids shouldn’t be punished for parents. let’s see what happens!