Cheating Scandal Triggering TJ Change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

IQ tests are not supposed to be prepped for either. The information is not useful if the test taker has seen the questions before, so they are also “secret.”

I’m surprised that an adult who appears to be interested in education cannot seem to understand why a test that can’t be prepped for would be useful in determining which applicants would be good matches for a school like TJ. A school like TJ will most benefit students who can think on their feet, not students who have been spoon fed information which they then memorized.

If you think rote memorization is how you think test prep works then you are not talking about the sort of standardized exams we are discussing on this page.
"Thinking on their feet is" also highly correlated to IQ.
You can't really prep for the substance of an IQ test but you can learn things like time management, process of elimination, when and how to guess.
IQ tests don't rely on ignorance of the test to be effective.
An IQ test is not a memory test, but memory is definitely an aspect of IQ.
But they don't actually want an IQ test, they would not get the results they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

IQ tests are not supposed to be prepped for either. The information is not useful if the test taker has seen the questions before, so they are also “secret.”

I’m surprised that an adult who appears to be interested in education cannot seem to understand why a test that can’t be prepped for would be useful in determining which applicants would be good matches for a school like TJ. A school like TJ will most benefit students who can think on their feet, not students who have been spoon fed information which they then memorized.

DP. Kids who are the best fit for TJ are going to be the ones who can think on their feet, but also have a lot of discipline and work ethic. It would be more ideal to have a TJ test similar to AMC 10, where both a lot of self-studying and prep as well as native intelligence are needed to earn high scores.

I do agree with you that a test that cannot be prepped for would be useful for measuring raw aptitude. I also think it's naive to think that any test can't be prepped for and that any test wouldn't have information leak out one way or another. There's a reason that they need to constantly rewrite and re-norm the WISC, and there's a reason that the scores drift upward pretty drastically at the end of each cycle. It's not that kids are getting that much smarter over the span of 10 years. It's that the novel tasks end up leaking out and becoming not so novel.

The problem with an AMC 10 type of test is that the racial disparity would increase and the entire point of every reform of TJ admissions has been to increase racial diversity.
Better to let everyone know the format and question type. It levels the playing field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

IQ tests are not supposed to be prepped for either. The information is not useful if the test taker has seen the questions before, so they are also “secret.”

I’m surprised that an adult who appears to be interested in education cannot seem to understand why a test that can’t be prepped for would be useful in determining which applicants would be good matches for a school like TJ. A school like TJ will most benefit students who can think on their feet, not students who have been spoon fed information which they then memorized.

DP. Kids who are the best fit for TJ are going to be the ones who can think on their feet, but also have a lot of discipline and work ethic. It would be more ideal to have a TJ test similar to AMC 10, where both a lot of self-studying and prep as well as native intelligence are needed to earn high scores.

I do agree with you that a test that cannot be prepped for would be useful for measuring raw aptitude. I also think it's naive to think that any test can't be prepped for and that any test wouldn't have information leak out one way or another. There's a reason that they need to constantly rewrite and re-norm the WISC, and there's a reason that the scores drift upward pretty drastically at the end of each cycle. It's not that kids are getting that much smarter over the span of 10 years. It's that the novel tasks end up leaking out and becoming not so novel.

Supremely pro-reform poster here who is much happier with the current admissions process than the old one.

I think the point mentioned above here has a lot of merit - and I mean that in the actual sense of the word, not the contrived "the only thing that matters are measurables" sense.

Where I could get behind the use of either a standardized exam or optional exam submissions is if those scores are:

a) not publicly available, even through FOIA; and
b) used as part of a genuinely holistic process, such that (for example) a FARMS student achieving a 93 on such an exam would be rated higher than a non-FARMS student getting a 94.

[Anonymous]

all the current admissions process has done is increase the previously admitted 20+ lower level math algebra 1 applicants to about 190+, half of them struggle with poor grades and other half return to base school in first year, and some of those slots are backfilled with froshmore merit applicants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

IQ tests are not supposed to be prepped for either. The information is not useful if the test taker has seen the questions before, so they are also “secret.”

I’m surprised that an adult who appears to be interested in education cannot seem to understand why a test that can’t be prepped for would be useful in determining which applicants would be good matches for a school like TJ. A school like TJ will most benefit students who can think on their feet, not students who have been spoon fed information which they then memorized.

DP. Kids who are the best fit for TJ are going to be the ones who can think on their feet, but also have a lot of discipline and work ethic. It would be more ideal to have a TJ test similar to AMC 10, where both a lot of self-studying and prep as well as native intelligence are needed to earn high scores.

I do agree with you that a test that cannot be prepped for would be useful for measuring raw aptitude. I also think it's naive to think that any test can't be prepped for and that any test wouldn't have information leak out one way or another. There's a reason that they need to constantly rewrite and re-norm the WISC, and there's a reason that the scores drift upward pretty drastically at the end of each cycle. It's not that kids are getting that much smarter over the span of 10 years. It's that the novel tasks end up leaking out and becoming not so novel.

Supremely pro-reform poster here who is much happier with the current admissions process than the old one.

I think the point mentioned above here has a lot of merit - and I mean that in the actual sense of the word, not the contrived "the only thing that matters are measurables" sense.

Where I could get behind the use of either a standardized exam or optional exam submissions is if those scores are:

a) not publicly available, even through FOIA; and
b) used as part of a genuinely holistic process, such that (for example) a FARMS student achieving a 93 on such an exam would be rated higher than a non-FARMS student getting a 94.

So you want to use an unmeasurable standard of merit?

Whenever I hear people say they don't want objective measures of merit, it really just sounds like they just want absolute discretion to choose whoever they want.

Why don't you want test scores to be public?
Transparency is usually something you want more of not less.
If you have to hide facts to support your goals, perhaps you should have different goals.

We can give FARM student explicit test bonuses, no need to be holistic.
We know how to select for poverty without abandoning objective measures of merit.
The problem is that when we do this we end up with a pot of poor asians and that is not the kind of diversity they are looking for.
That's what happened in every other jurisdiction that thought that SES was the pathway to more black and hispanic kids. They got more black and hispanic kids but it was mostly at the expense of white students rather than the over-represented demographics (sure you swapped out a bunch of wealthier asians for poorer asians but you also swapped out wealthy white kids for poor asians).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:all the current admissions process has done is increase the previously admitted 20+ lower level math algebra 1 applicants to about 190+, half of them struggle with poor grades and other half return to base school in first year, and some of those slots are backfilled with froshmore merit applicants?

To be fair the froshmore applicants are selected on merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

IQ tests are not supposed to be prepped for either. The information is not useful if the test taker has seen the questions before, so they are also “secret.”

I’m surprised that an adult who appears to be interested in education cannot seem to understand why a test that can’t be prepped for would be useful in determining which applicants would be good matches for a school like TJ. A school like TJ will most benefit students who can think on their feet, not students who have been spoon fed information which they then memorized.

DP. Kids who are the best fit for TJ are going to be the ones who can think on their feet, but also have a lot of discipline and work ethic. It would be more ideal to have a TJ test similar to AMC 10, where both a lot of self-studying and prep as well as native intelligence are needed to earn high scores.

I do agree with you that a test that cannot be prepped for would be useful for measuring raw aptitude. I also think it's naive to think that any test can't be prepped for and that any test wouldn't have information leak out one way or another. There's a reason that they need to constantly rewrite and re-norm the WISC, and there's a reason that the scores drift upward pretty drastically at the end of each cycle. It's not that kids are getting that much smarter over the span of 10 years. It's that the novel tasks end up leaking out and becoming not so novel.

Supremely pro-reform poster here who is much happier with the current admissions process than the old one.

I think the point mentioned above here has a lot of merit - and I mean that in the actual sense of the word, not the contrived "the only thing that matters are measurables" sense.

Where I could get behind the use of either a standardized exam or optional exam submissions is if those scores are:

a) not publicly available, even through FOIA; and
b) used as part of a genuinely holistic process, such that (for example) a FARMS student achieving a 93 on such an exam would be rated higher than a non-FARMS student getting a 94.

So you want to use an unmeasurable standard of merit?

Whenever I hear people say they don't want objective measures of merit, it really just sounds like they just want absolute discretion to choose whoever they want.

Why don't you want test scores to be public?
Transparency is usually something you want more of not less.
If you have to hide facts to support your goals, perhaps you should have different goals.

We can give FARM student explicit test bonuses, no need to be holistic.
We know how to select for poverty without abandoning objective measures of merit.
The problem is that when we do this we end up with a pot of poor asians and that is not the kind of diversity they are looking for.
That's what happened in every other jurisdiction that thought that SES was the pathway to more black and hispanic kids. They got more black and hispanic kids but it was mostly at the expense of white students rather than the over-represented demographics (sure you swapped out a bunch of wealthier asians for poorer asians but you also swapped out wealthy white kids for poor asians).

PP. You're not entirely wrong. Yes, admissions officers should have the freedom to select "whoever they want" - it is quite literally their job to bring in a class of new students that will (as a collective group, not as individuals) further the ambitions of the school, whatever they are.

There should never be a situation where a student can simply check off a list of achievements and be guaranteed admission to an elite academic opportunity. Just like people who hire talent to fill jobs have discretion in their selection processes, so too should admissions officers.

Objectivity and rubrics tend to create homogenous selection pools. Homogeneity in elite academic environments is undesirable - that's not up for debate. The TJ students of today exist in a school that serves students from disadvantaged backgrounds, which furthers their STEM education by requiring them to be aware that such people exist and have problems that can be solved through STEM application. The TJ students of yesterday did not exist in a school that served such students, and that's probably a big reason why a major criticism of TJ is a relatively underwhelming number of alums who have actually changed the world in meaningful ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

This is not obvious at all especially since selection is race-blind and using race is illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all the current admissions process has done is increase the previously admitted 20+ lower level math algebra 1 applicants to about 190+, half of them struggle with poor grades and other half return to base school in first year, and some of those slots are backfilled with froshmore merit applicants?

To be fair the froshmore applicants are selected on merit.

Yes, they pick the top kids from each school instead of using a bogus test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:all the current admissions process has done is increase the previously admitted 20+ lower level math algebra 1 applicants to about 190+, half of them struggle with poor grades and other half return to base school in first year, and some of those slots are backfilled with froshmore merit applicants?

Not sure about that but the old process limited selection mostly to a small set of wealthy feeders where families could afford test prep. Now at least we get the top kids from many schools and not the 3rd rate preppers from a few wealthy schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

IQ tests are not supposed to be prepped for either. The information is not useful if the test taker has seen the questions before, so they are also “secret.”

I’m surprised that an adult who appears to be interested in education cannot seem to understand why a test that can’t be prepped for would be useful in determining which applicants would be good matches for a school like TJ. A school like TJ will most benefit students who can think on their feet, not students who have been spoon fed information which they then memorized.

DP. Kids who are the best fit for TJ are going to be the ones who can think on their feet, but also have a lot of discipline and work ethic. It would be more ideal to have a TJ test similar to AMC 10, where both a lot of self-studying and prep as well as native intelligence are needed to earn high scores.

I do agree with you that a test that cannot be prepped for would be useful for measuring raw aptitude. I also think it's naive to think that any test can't be prepped for and that any test wouldn't have information leak out one way or another. There's a reason that they need to constantly rewrite and re-norm the WISC, and there's a reason that the scores drift upward pretty drastically at the end of each cycle. It's not that kids are getting that much smarter over the span of 10 years. It's that the novel tasks end up leaking out and becoming not so novel.

Supremely pro-reform poster here who is much happier with the current admissions process than the old one.

I think the point mentioned above here has a lot of merit - and I mean that in the actual sense of the word, not the contrived "the only thing that matters are measurables" sense.

Where I could get behind the use of either a standardized exam or optional exam submissions is if those scores are:

a) not publicly available, even through FOIA; and
b) used as part of a genuinely holistic process, such that (for example) a FARMS student achieving a 93 on such an exam would be rated higher than a non-FARMS student getting a 94.

So you want to use an unmeasurable standard of merit?

Whenever I hear people say they don't want objective measures of merit, it really just sounds like they just want absolute discretion to choose whoever they want.

Why don't you want test scores to be public?
Transparency is usually something you want more of not less.
If you have to hide facts to support your goals, perhaps you should have different goals.

We can give FARM student explicit test bonuses, no need to be holistic.
We know how to select for poverty without abandoning objective measures of merit.
The problem is that when we do this we end up with a pot of poor asians and that is not the kind of diversity they are looking for.
That's what happened in every other jurisdiction that thought that SES was the pathway to more black and hispanic kids. They got more black and hispanic kids but it was mostly at the expense of white students rather than the over-represented demographics (sure you swapped out a bunch of wealthier asians for poorer asians but you also swapped out wealthy white kids for poor asians).

PP. You're not entirely wrong. Yes, admissions officers should have the freedom to select "whoever they want" - it is quite literally their job to bring in a class of new students that will (as a collective group, not as individuals) further the ambitions of the school, whatever they are.

And when those admissions officers are primarily driven by concerns about racial diversity rather than merit?

There should never be a situation where a student can simply check off a list of achievements and be guaranteed admission to an elite academic opportunity. Just like people who hire talent to fill jobs have discretion in their selection processes, so too should admissions officers.

Except that is exactly the way many elite universities work. Most universities don't care about your summer in argentina working ancient ruins for your dad's college roommate. They want to know if you have the academic chops to excel and add to the academic conversation at the academic institution.

Admissions to the best high schools in NYC are decided by your score on a single Admissions test (the same one that they used to use for TJ. Unlike TJ, the majority of the students at these high schools are on free/reduced lunch. But like TJ they were overwhelmingly asian and the board of education tried to do the same thing FCPS did but were unsuccessful so stuiyvesant is still a merit based institution.

Objectivity and rubrics tend to create homogenous selection pools. Homogeneity in elite academic environments is undesirable - that's not up for debate.

Why not?
That seems to be the least supportable statement that you make.

The TJ students of today exist in a school that serves students from disadvantaged backgrounds, which furthers their STEM education by requiring them to be aware that such people exist and have problems that can be solved through STEM application. The TJ students of yesterday did not exist in a school that served such students, and that's probably a big reason why a major criticism of TJ is a relatively underwhelming number of alums who have actually changed the world in meaningful ways.

We know how to select for poverty without abandoning merit. We have known how to do this since WWII if not sooner.
We don't have to abandon merit to achieve socioeconomic diversity.
The problem is that if you gave a preference to the poor kids and maintained a merit filter, you would be replacing middle class white kids with poor asian kids with a small increase in black and hispanic kids.

If you've been justifyiung your support for this racist decision to change the admissiosn process based on opportunity for the poor, then you should probably rethink your rationale.
The only reason they eliminated the test was to get tiny bit more racial diversity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The $$$ test prep industry was aggravating the disparity in representation at TJ.

It wasn't the only issue, but it certainly was easier to address than the long-term effects of redlining.

What were the long term effects of redlining?

The population of non whites in fairfax was tiny
88k white, 9.7K blacks and no separately measurable hispanics to speak of in 1950 (also 100 asians and 40 all others combined)
260K white, 13.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1960 (also 900 asians and 94 all others combined)
435K white, 15.8K blacks and no measurable hispanic population in 1970 (also 2200 asians and 1100 all others combined)
539K white, 36K black , 26K all other minority combined in 1980.

How did they redline against the hispanics that weren't here?
And why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asians?

It wasn't test prep that was aggravating racial disparity at tj. It was any sort of merit based testing. For a few years people got it in their heads that tests were racist.

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

Expensive test prep certainly aggravated the disparity. Look at the results from the test prep companies.

So how did they redline against hispanics that weren't here?
Why didn't they redline against the largest non-black minority group, asian?

Redlining is just one example of how systemic racism still affects people today. There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.

The only example presented was redlining and that seems like a stretch because of the demographics of fairfax during the redlining period.

So what systemic racism limited opportunities for brown immigrants of latin american descent but did not limit opportunities for the brown immigrants of indian descent?
They are both immigrant groups.
Systemic racism did not make the indian immigrants welathy and the hispanic immigrants poor.
Systemic racism did not make one group of parents well educated and the other not.
What is the racist system here that elevates asians ABOVE whites in academics and suppresses all other groups?
Why do racist systems seem to like indians so much?

Here is what I originally wrote but lost that comment and missed that part when I rushed to retype.
“it certainly was easier to address than, say, the long-term effects of redlining.”

And I never said all disparities are due to systemic racism. Here is what I said:
“There are many ways that people end up with limited opportunities.”


There are many, big issues in our society that aren’t easily fixed in a public school admissions process. BUT they can certainly try to reduce disparities caused by expensive test prep.

And it turns out that you are completely wrong about testing.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

??
I didn’t say anything about testing.

Testing with equal opportunity to prep is ideal.

It’s the $$$$ test prep that is inequitable.

unfortunately that doesn't exist and people will always find a way to game the system

Seriously don't let yourself off that easy. Khan academy books are like $20, the videos are free.

and are not even in the same league compared to what the prep centers offer (actual test answers)

We've gone over this. You are lying.
When pushed on this all we get is that some test prep centers asked previous students about the questions on the test they just took. If they published the test questions, then they wouldn't have this advantage.

There is nothing in those expensive test prep courses that you don't see on khan academy. What the expensive test prep courses give you is a lot of handholding and walking you through stuff. This does make test prep easier but there is no secret sauce at those test prep centers.

You get more useful information about how an applicant fits into a school that values innovation if they take a test for which they can’t prep.

First of all, the school obviously values skin color more than "innovation"
Otherwise they wouldn't have made the change they did.

Second, how does a secret test measure innovation any better than an IQ test?
Things like creativity and innovation correlate pretty well with IQ.
We know how to measure IQ, we don't need to ambush people on tests to measure it.

This is not obvious at all especially since selection is race-blind and using race is illegal.

The test scores say it's obvious.
It is just as legal as literacy tests were before the civil rights act.
It is just as legal as poll taxes were before the 24th amendment.
There was a racist intent behind each of those things but it required legislation and even a constitutional amendment to make them illegal.
We are hoping that the 14th amendment will be interpreted to forbid racially driven policies like this one.

You solve nothing by forcing black and hispanic people into places they couild not get into on their own.
Fix the pipeline.
Stop blocking every goddang school redistricting that puts poor, black or hispanic kids in your pyramid.
Create opportunities and well regulated charter schools on the east side of fairfax.
Stop trying to assuage your white guilt on the ashes of asian dreams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all the current admissions process has done is increase the previously admitted 20+ lower level math algebra 1 applicants to about 190+, half of them struggle with poor grades and other half return to base school in first year, and some of those slots are backfilled with froshmore merit applicants?

To be fair the froshmore applicants are selected on merit.

Yes, they pick the top kids from each school instead of using a bogus test.

Even assuming that each school has enough kids that are qualified for TJ, you aren't even selecting the top kids from each school.
You need the test to do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all the current admissions process has done is increase the previously admitted 20+ lower level math algebra 1 applicants to about 190+, half of them struggle with poor grades and other half return to base school in first year, and some of those slots are backfilled with froshmore merit applicants?

Not sure about that but the old process limited selection mostly to a small set of wealthy feeders where families could afford test prep. Now at least we get the top kids from many schools and not the 3rd rate preppers from a few wealthy schools.

And yet somehow the academic quality of the students has plummeted.
PSAT scores are down over 100 points and we have to see what the sat scores look like but I doubt it will be much better.
Almost the entire science and math team contingents from virginia used to be from TJ. This is not the case anymore.
The top scorers on AMC 10 used to be from Tj, none of the top 10 were in 2025

You have traded off any semblance of merit for a dozen more black kids in the class of 2028.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:all the current admissions process has done is increase the previously admitted 20+ lower level math algebra 1 applicants to about 190+, half of them struggle with poor grades and other half return to base school in first year, and some of those slots are backfilled with froshmore merit applicants?

To be fair the froshmore applicants are selected on merit.

Yes, they pick the top kids from each school instead of using a bogus test.

Even assuming that each school has enough kids that are qualified for TJ, you aren't even selecting the top kids from each school.
You need the test to do that.

What do you think grades are based on? It's tests and they give us a much more complete picture than a corrupted QuantQ.