TJ admissions change from Merit to Essay impact to Asian American Students

[Anonymous]

The big reveal was… kids went to test prep? Wow….

And poor kids now get points because their parents have bad jobs? Same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Multiple articles were posted that discuss this as well as dozens of first-hand accounts. That's concrete evidence!

Congratulations. You've managed to prove people were worried that affluent kids would have an unfair advantage in TJ admissions. You haven't provided a single shred of evidence about people buying the test, but you're obviously not posting in good faith.

Troll 101. Assert something. When challenged, insist that it was all over the news and everyone knows it happened. When asked for a source, cite dcum. When challenged again on that, provide articles proving something completely different. Then reiterate that you've provided evidence. Keep repeating yourself ad nauseam. Eventually, the thread dies because people get bored with engaging with someone who is obviously arguing in bad faith. At some later time, cite this thread as evidence that "everyone is saying" there was a cheating scandal and test buying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. There absolutely was public concern about the TJ test prep industry. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/
“ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan.

Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.”

It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes.

They seem to have gotten pretty good at prepping for the essay portion now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

Yes, they were paying for access to actual test questions that had been obtained by debriefing students over a period of years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

You keep moving the goalposts and arguing against a strawman. It was put forth that there was a huge cheating scandal, people were buying the test, and it was all over the news. It was also put forth that the "cheating scandal" was the main reason for the TJ admissions change. Seriously, pony up some actual evidence of this, or stop yapping. The only evidence that was provided is that people were concerned that test prep was skewing the results, and that affluent kids had an advantage. There's also a bit of hearsay that some questions on the Quant Q were the same as some practiced at Curie. I still haven't seen any evidence of a "cheating scandal," "kids (literally) buying the test," and this being "all over the news."

FWIW, Amazon sells Quant Q practice books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

You keep moving the goalposts and arguing against a strawman. It was put forth that there was a huge cheating scandal, people were buying the test, and it was all over the news. It was also put forth that the "cheating scandal" was the main reason for the TJ admissions change. Seriously, pony up some actual evidence of this, or stop yapping. The only evidence that was provided is that people were concerned that test prep was skewing the results, and that affluent kids had an advantage. There's also a bit of hearsay that some questions on the Quant Q were the same as some practiced at Curie. I still haven't seen any evidence of a "cheating scandal," "kids (literally) buying the test," and this being "all over the news."

FWIW, Amazon sells Quant Q practice books.

I’m a DP. As posted many times before, TJ kids described how Curie obtained and shared test questions.

Amazon sells Nazi handbooks. Doesn’t mean you should buy one.

Bottom line, FCPS wanted a way to fairly assess kids across the county without fueling a $$$$ test prep industry, giving affluent families a huge advantage.

Parents pushing their kids to prep are why we can’t have nice things.

[Anonymous]

Anyway, the new race-blind admissions process does not discriminate, which is demonstrated by the enrollment.

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian student still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian student are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

Asian students are doing just fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

You keep moving the goalposts and arguing against a strawman. It was put forth that there was a huge cheating scandal, people were buying the test, and it was all over the news. It was also put forth that the "cheating scandal" was the main reason for the TJ admissions change. Seriously, pony up some actual evidence of this, or stop yapping. The only evidence that was provided is that people were concerned that test prep was skewing the results, and that affluent kids had an advantage. There's also a bit of hearsay that some questions on the Quant Q were the same as some practiced at Curie. I still haven't seen any evidence of a "cheating scandal," "kids (literally) buying the test," and this being "all over the news."

FWIW, Amazon sells Quant Q practice books.

I’m a DP. As posted many times before, TJ kids described how Curie obtained and shared test questions.

Amazon sells Nazi handbooks. Doesn’t mean you should buy one.

Bottom line, FCPS wanted a way to fairly assess kids across the county without fueling a $$$$ test prep industry, giving affluent families a huge advantage.

Parents pushing their kids to prep are why we can’t have nice things.

So when they removed the test, they did that. So why the experience factors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

You keep moving the goalposts and arguing against a strawman. It was put forth that there was a huge cheating scandal, people were buying the test, and it was all over the news. It was also put forth that the "cheating scandal" was the main reason for the TJ admissions change. Seriously, pony up some actual evidence of this, or stop yapping. The only evidence that was provided is that people were concerned that test prep was skewing the results, and that affluent kids had an advantage. There's also a bit of hearsay that some questions on the Quant Q were the same as some practiced at Curie. I still haven't seen any evidence of a "cheating scandal," "kids (literally) buying the test," and this being "all over the news."

FWIW, Amazon sells Quant Q practice books.

I’m a DP. As posted many times before, TJ kids described how Curie obtained and shared test questions.

Amazon sells Nazi handbooks. Doesn’t mean you should buy one.

Bottom line, FCPS wanted a way to fairly assess kids across the county without fueling a $$$$ test prep industry, giving affluent families a huge advantage.

Parents pushing their kids to prep are why we can’t have nice things.

So when they removed the test, they did that. So why the experience factors?

To address systemic inequalities.

For the class of 2024 less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

You keep moving the goalposts and arguing against a strawman. It was put forth that there was a huge cheating scandal, people were buying the test, and it was all over the news. It was also put forth that the "cheating scandal" was the main reason for the TJ admissions change. Seriously, pony up some actual evidence of this, or stop yapping. The only evidence that was provided is that people were concerned that test prep was skewing the results, and that affluent kids had an advantage. There's also a bit of hearsay that some questions on the Quant Q were the same as some practiced at Curie. I still haven't seen any evidence of a "cheating scandal," "kids (literally) buying the test," and this being "all over the news."

FWIW, Amazon sells Quant Q practice books.

I’m a DP. As posted many times before, TJ kids described how Curie obtained and shared test questions.

Amazon sells Nazi handbooks. Doesn’t mean you should buy one.

Bottom line, FCPS wanted a way to fairly assess kids across the county without fueling a $$$$ test prep industry, giving affluent families a huge advantage.

Parents pushing their kids to prep are why we can’t have nice things.

So when they removed the test, they did that. So why the experience factors?

To address systemic inequalities.

For the class of 2024 less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families.

Right but removing the test removes the economic advantage. No need for more supports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

You keep moving the goalposts and arguing against a strawman. It was put forth that there was a huge cheating scandal, people were buying the test, and it was all over the news. It was also put forth that the "cheating scandal" was the main reason for the TJ admissions change. Seriously, pony up some actual evidence of this, or stop yapping. The only evidence that was provided is that people were concerned that test prep was skewing the results, and that affluent kids had an advantage. There's also a bit of hearsay that some questions on the Quant Q were the same as some practiced at Curie. I still haven't seen any evidence of a "cheating scandal," "kids (literally) buying the test," and this being "all over the news."

FWIW, Amazon sells Quant Q practice books.

I’m a DP. As posted many times before, TJ kids described how Curie obtained and shared test questions.

Amazon sells Nazi handbooks. Doesn’t mean you should buy one.

Bottom line, FCPS wanted a way to fairly assess kids across the county without fueling a $$$$ test prep industry, giving affluent families a huge advantage.

Parents pushing their kids to prep are why we can’t have nice things.

So when they removed the test, they did that. So why the experience factors?

To address systemic inequalities.

For the class of 2024 less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families.

I'd be curious to know what percentage of applicants were even from economically disadvantaged families, to begin with. I can only speculate but if I were toguess it's much lower than the county's median rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So there's still not a single shred of evidence of a cheating scandal or people buying the test. No one is able to post a single news article or any real proof. Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

Don’t be obtuse. No one was literally paying money and getting the test in return. They were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) provided access to previous/example test questions on a test that shouldn’t be prepped for. It was shady AF as many people, including former students who did the prep, have noted.

You keep moving the goalposts and arguing against a strawman. It was put forth that there was a huge cheating scandal, people were buying the test, and it was all over the news. It was also put forth that the "cheating scandal" was the main reason for the TJ admissions change. Seriously, pony up some actual evidence of this, or stop yapping. The only evidence that was provided is that people were concerned that test prep was skewing the results, and that affluent kids had an advantage. There's also a bit of hearsay that some questions on the Quant Q were the same as some practiced at Curie. I still haven't seen any evidence of a "cheating scandal," "kids (literally) buying the test," and this being "all over the news."

FWIW, Amazon sells Quant Q practice books.

There's evidence provided in this thread.Numerous first-hand accounts and multiple news sources. Not sure why you keep ignoring it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyway, the new race-blind admissions process does not discriminate, which is demonstrated by the enrollment.

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian student still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian student are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

Asian students are doing just fine.

Admissions demographics are mostly just proportional to the applications they receive. Some groups apply in higher numbers than others. It's the way it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

To address systemic inequalities.

For the class of 2024 less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families.

Right but removing the test removes the economic advantage. No need for more supports.

We should be addressing systemic inequalities. But if FCPS wanted to do that, it involves a lot of extra support and enrichment for the lower-income portion of our population, especially at the elementary level. It's astounding that the answer became 'get rid of a test' instead of "make sure that all population had access to previous years' questions and free prep for low-income students."

The problem is it's just hard to level kids whose parents do things like read to them when they're young and those who don't/can't.