Has the Coalition for TJ (or any other groups) considered another lawsuit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:C4TJ's case was a joke. It had no merit.

And yet it won at trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child did not make it through the lottery process. However, in 9th grade one kind teacher at base HS encouraged my child to apply to TJ, wrote a recommendation letter for sophomore admissions. Child got in and having a great experience at TJ.

The current freshman process is broken and is missing many students who would benefit from TJ.

The froshmores are generally more qualified on average than the freshmen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Those kids develop real skills and ability through effort and diligence at places like Curie. Do we negate that effort and diligence in an attempt try and suss out "natural ability?"

Well I’d say yes. I think the effort should be to pick the most math and science oriented kids who are mainly relying on the schools for those subjects not give a leg up mainly to families that decided to investment in years of outside math prep (or “studying”/classes - whatever you want to call it) to accelerate their kids beyond the school’s various pathways for that. I just am of the view that a kid who is great at math and in accelerated classes (such as geometry in 8th) should not be disadvantaged for not having done outside prep / classes.

In what way is the current method any better at picking the kids you want than the old method?

And why should kids who don't do extra work be insulated from competition against kids that do more work?
We don't do this in even less consequential aspects of their lives like sports or music. Why would we ignore differences in academic ability based on actual work done.

I’m not saying the new process is perfect. But the old process seemed to mainly work for kids willing to prep / do outside math stuff beyond school. It should be open in my view to the great math kids who just do math in school. The current system gets us slightly closer to that but a huge problem is that it is bad at picking the top kids from within a GIVEN school.

Personally I strongly support the MS % angle and just think it needs refined a bit more.

You have a different view.

Yep. I think random is a pretty bad way to select merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Those kids develop real skills and ability through effort and diligence at places like Curie. Do we negate that effort and diligence in an attempt try and suss out "natural ability?"

Well I’d say yes. I think the effort should be to pick the most math and science oriented kids who are mainly relying on the schools for those subjects not give a leg up mainly to families that decided to investment in years of outside math prep (or “studying”/classes - whatever you want to call it) to accelerate their kids beyond the school’s various pathways for that. I just am of the view that a kid who is great at math and in accelerated classes (such as geometry in 8th) should not be disadvantaged for not having done outside prep / classes.

In what way is the current method any better at picking the kids you want than the old method?

And why should kids who don't do extra work be insulated from competition against kids that do more work?
We don't do this in even less consequential aspects of their lives like sports or music. Why would we ignore differences in academic ability based on actual work done.

I’m not saying the new process is perfect. But the old process seemed to mainly work for kids willing to prep / do outside math stuff beyond school. It should be open in my view to the great math kids who just do math in school. The current system gets us slightly closer to that but a huge problem is that it is bad at picking the top kids from within a GIVEN school.

Personally I strongly support the MS % angle and just think it needs refined a bit more.

You have a different view.

Agree. I think they should keep the MS allotments and add in more metrics for admissions - something accessible to all like SOL scores.

Any sort of test is going to run into the same objections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Academic Talent isn't relevant. You don't need to be the highest scoring student in the county to benefit from a better equipped lab.

Academic talent is the ONLY thing that is relevant. They are the only ones that need those better equipped labs and the higher level math and science courses.

WTF is your average kid going to do with a quantum physics and optics lab?
Why does the average kid need access to linear algebra (which is actually pretty widely available throughout FCPS), concrete math, number theory.

Sending a few kids that are going to be taking AP Calculus and AP Physics in their senior year is fine but about 1/3 of the kids at TJ are on this track right now. Most of those kids are getting nothing out of TJ that they would not get at their base school.

There is a huge amount of space between “average” and the tiny number of truly gifted students.

Advanced kids from around the region should have access to TJ, not just kids from a handful of wealthy feeders.

I agree, and their argument just doesn't hold up. Sure, kids whose parents have spent $20k on test prep do well on tests, but hardly matters since the kids being selected now are the very top students and typically surprass the prepsters before graduating.

Nobody spent $20K on test prep. Don't be ridiculous.

PSAT scores down 120 points at TJ and pretty much ONLY TJ.
NMSF down 50% at TJ
SOL advance pass down across the board at TJ
The math department at TJ had to send out an email to the math 4 class telling them their final exam test results were the worst they have ever seen.

They’ve sent out that same email before.

Really? When? I thought 2022 was the only time they sent that out.

1) In 2022, math teachers sent out the email to the spring Math 4 class, which would have been primarily the class of 2024 students, admitted before the admissions change.

The kids taking math 4 in the Spring of 2022 were primarily class of 2025 freshmen who came in with algebra 2.

Kids coming in with geometry take statistics in the fall and math 3 in the spring, then math 4 and 5 the following fall and spring.

Kids that come in with algebra 2 take statistics in the fall and math 4 in the spring. They frequently take math 5 over the summer so they can take calculus their sophomore year.

2) In 2012, math teachers complained about the "profound lack of preparation and readiness.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/education/620805/one-third-of-tj-freshmen-need-math-science-remediation/
“One-third of the freshmen at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology — the elite Alexandria magnet school ranked No. 2 in the nation — have been recommended for remediation in math, science or both, according to a letter obtained by The Washington Examiner.
Math teachers at “TJ” blamed slackened admissions standards and, in analyzing the admissions test, found that the typical math question reflects the standards taught to sixth-graders in Fairfax County Public Schools.”

Ah this is from the last attempt to "diversify" TJ
I'd forgotten they tried this before

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Academic Talent isn't relevant. You don't need to be the highest scoring student in the county to benefit from a better equipped lab.

Academic talent is the ONLY thing that is relevant. They are the only ones that need those better equipped labs and the higher level math and science courses.

WTF is your average kid going to do with a quantum physics and optics lab?
Why does the average kid need access to linear algebra (which is actually pretty widely available throughout FCPS), concrete math, number theory.

Sending a few kids that are going to be taking AP Calculus and AP Physics in their senior year is fine but about 1/3 of the kids at TJ are on this track right now. Most of those kids are getting nothing out of TJ that they would not get at their base school.

There is a huge amount of space between “average” and the tiny number of truly gifted students.

Advanced kids from around the region should have access to TJ, not just kids from a handful of wealthy feeders.

I agree, and their argument just doesn't hold up. Sure, kids whose parents have spent $20k on test prep do well on tests, but hardly matters since the kids being selected now are the very top students and typically surprass the prepsters before graduating.

Nobody spent $20K on test prep. Don't be ridiculous.

PSAT scores down 120 points at TJ and pretty much ONLY TJ.
NMSF down 50% at TJ
SOL advance pass down across the board at TJ
The math department at TJ had to send out an email to the math 4 class telling them their final exam test results were the worst they have ever seen.

Could it be the TJ math faculty that is actually failing? Once faced with students that are not propped up by outside “enrichment,” their math program is maybe not up to snuff?

Either that outside enrichment is as hollow and meaningless as you claim and the current students are really better than previous students (as you claim) or that outside enrichment was in fact enriching them.

The fact of the matter is that too many of those kids were getting a very thin understanding of their math courses at their middle schools. Some middle schools teach a very superficial version of some subjects because there simply isn't a critical mass of students that are prepared to tackle a more in depth curriculum. That is why you end up with feeder schools.

And if the math program at TJ is really as shoddy as you think then why are you trying so goddam hard to get racial proportionality at the school?

We are trying to get smart kids from all over the county, even kids who weren’t lucky enough to be born into affluent families, attend feeder schools, or get outside enrichment.

That's why they need a much more robust application packet, including standardized test scores, teacher recommendations, achievements, consideration of math level, courses taken, SOL scores, etc. With a bit of training in how to read the applications, it would be much easier to find kids who are truly talented, but less advantaged. It would also be easy to find and eliminate the preppers. A kid at a high FARMS school who still has high test scores (not sky high, but solid), strong teacher recommendations, and Geometry in 8th, but "worse" achievements or less polished essays should come across as a smart, but less privileged kid who belongs at TJ. A kid from a wealthier school with sky high test scores, high math level, very polished essays, but somewhat mediocre recommendations and achievements that do not match the test scores or rest of the packet should come across as a privileged prepper.

Requiring less information just makes the process random. More information with an eye to ferret out prepping and find those diamonds in the rough would ensure that the right kids are admitted to TJ.

I agree more information is better than less but implementing standardized exams and then disregarding test scores because you think you can identify privileged preppers if their recommendations don't match their test scores seems like you don't actually want to use test scores and just use recommendations.

I don't know if we should be looking for diamonds in the rough. TJ isn't built to polish diamonds in the rough. You are expected to hit the ground running and the rigor is there from the beginning. It is not a nursery for talent, it is a crucible.

A student with high test scores is a student with high test scores. Peer reviewed studies show that SAT scores are equally predictive of poor student's academic achievement as it is of wealthy student's academic achievement. We might assume some of this is because everybody "preps" for the SAT but it's weeks of prep not years. Those years of enrichment are actual learning, those kids have higher academic and cognitive ability than their less enriched peers. You might want to provide some consideration for the kids that couldn't afford the $3-5K/year it costs to get this enrichment but I don't see why a kid that was coached to high levels is any less qualified to operate at those high levels than a kid who never achieved those levels to begin with.

This is what I don't get. There is this sentiment that getting academic enrichment is somehow unfair even between families of similar means. If we are comparing FARM students and one students does extremely well because their family makes painful sacrifices to send them to enrichment, why would we want to discount their achievement because of that? If we are comparing 2 students at cooper (almost all wealthy) and one kids spends his weeknights and weekends studying to improve their academic ability and another spends his time on a high end travel basketball team, why would we penalize that kids who devoted all his time to study in the selection process of an academic institution? Haven't we already corrected for whatever unfairness there might be by using a quota system by elementary of middle school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child did not make it through the lottery process. However, in 9th grade one kind teacher at base HS encouraged my child to apply to TJ, wrote a recommendation letter for sophomore admissions. Child got in and having a great experience at TJ.

The current freshman process is broken and is missing many students who would benefit from TJ.

Did you have to take the PSAT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Academic Talent isn't relevant. You don't need to be the highest scoring student in the county to benefit from a better equipped lab.

Academic talent is the ONLY thing that is relevant. They are the only ones that need those better equipped labs and the higher level math and science courses.

WTF is your average kid going to do with a quantum physics and optics lab?
Why does the average kid need access to linear algebra (which is actually pretty widely available throughout FCPS), concrete math, number theory.

Sending a few kids that are going to be taking AP Calculus and AP Physics in their senior year is fine but about 1/3 of the kids at TJ are on this track right now. Most of those kids are getting nothing out of TJ that they would not get at their base school.

There is a huge amount of space between “average” and the tiny number of truly gifted students.

Advanced kids from around the region should have access to TJ, not just kids from a handful of wealthy feeders.

I agree, and their argument just doesn't hold up. Sure, kids whose parents have spent $20k on test prep do well on tests, but hardly matters since the kids being selected now are the very top students and typically surprass the prepsters before graduating.

Nobody spent $20K on test prep. Don't be ridiculous.

PSAT scores down 120 points at TJ and pretty much ONLY TJ.
NMSF down 50% at TJ
SOL advance pass down across the board at TJ
The math department at TJ had to send out an email to the math 4 class telling them their final exam test results were the worst they have ever seen.

They’ve sent out that same email before.

Really? When? I thought 2022 was the only time they sent that out.

1) In 2022, math teachers sent out the email to the spring Math 4 class, which would have been primarily the class of 2024 students, admitted before the admissions change.

The kids taking math 4 in the Spring of 2022 were primarily class of 2025 freshmen who came in with algebra 2.

Kids coming in with geometry take statistics in the fall and math 3 in the spring, then math 4 and 5 the following fall and spring.

Kids that come in with algebra 2 take statistics in the fall and math 4 in the spring. They frequently take math 5 over the summer so they can take calculus their sophomore year.

2) In 2012, math teachers complained about the "profound lack of preparation and readiness.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/education/620805/one-third-of-tj-freshmen-need-math-science-remediation/
“One-third of the freshmen at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology — the elite Alexandria magnet school ranked No. 2 in the nation — have been recommended for remediation in math, science or both, according to a letter obtained by The Washington Examiner.
Math teachers at “TJ” blamed slackened admissions standards and, in analyzing the admissions test, found that the typical math question reflects the standards taught to sixth-graders in Fairfax County Public Schools.”

Ah this is from the last attempt to "diversify" TJ
I'd forgotten they tried this before

Primarily class of 2024 along with the most advanced kids from class of 2025.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Academic Talent isn't relevant. You don't need to be the highest scoring student in the county to benefit from a better equipped lab.

Academic talent is the ONLY thing that is relevant. They are the only ones that need those better equipped labs and the higher level math and science courses.

WTF is your average kid going to do with a quantum physics and optics lab?
Why does the average kid need access to linear algebra (which is actually pretty widely available throughout FCPS), concrete math, number theory.

Sending a few kids that are going to be taking AP Calculus and AP Physics in their senior year is fine but about 1/3 of the kids at TJ are on this track right now. Most of those kids are getting nothing out of TJ that they would not get at their base school.

There is a huge amount of space between “average” and the tiny number of truly gifted students.

Advanced kids from around the region should have access to TJ, not just kids from a handful of wealthy feeders.

I agree, and their argument just doesn't hold up. Sure, kids whose parents have spent $20k on test prep do well on tests, but hardly matters since the kids being selected now are the very top students and typically surprass the prepsters before graduating.

Nobody spent $20K on test prep. Don't be ridiculous.

PSAT scores down 120 points at TJ and pretty much ONLY TJ.
NMSF down 50% at TJ
SOL advance pass down across the board at TJ
The math department at TJ had to send out an email to the math 4 class telling them their final exam test results were the worst they have ever seen.

Could it be the TJ math faculty that is actually failing? Once faced with students that are not propped up by outside “enrichment,” their math program is maybe not up to snuff?

Either that outside enrichment is as hollow and meaningless as you claim and the current students are really better than previous students (as you claim) or that outside enrichment was in fact enriching them.

The fact of the matter is that too many of those kids were getting a very thin understanding of their math courses at their middle schools. Some middle schools teach a very superficial version of some subjects because there simply isn't a critical mass of students that are prepared to tackle a more in depth curriculum. That is why you end up with feeder schools.

And if the math program at TJ is really as shoddy as you think then why are you trying so goddam hard to get racial proportionality at the school?

We are trying to get smart kids from all over the county, even kids who weren’t lucky enough to be born into affluent families, attend feeder schools, or get outside enrichment.

That's why they need a much more robust application packet, including standardized test scores, teacher recommendations, achievements, consideration of math level, courses taken, SOL scores, etc. With a bit of training in how to read the applications, it would be much easier to find kids who are truly talented, but less advantaged. It would also be easy to find and eliminate the preppers. A kid at a high FARMS school who still has high test scores (not sky high, but solid), strong teacher recommendations, and Geometry in 8th, but "worse" achievements or less polished essays should come across as a smart, but less privileged kid who belongs at TJ. A kid from a wealthier school with sky high test scores, high math level, very polished essays, but somewhat mediocre recommendations and achievements that do not match the test scores or rest of the packet should come across as a privileged prepper.

Requiring less information just makes the process random. More information with an eye to ferret out prepping and find those diamonds in the rough would ensure that the right kids are admitted to TJ.

I agree more information is better than less but implementing standardized exams and then disregarding test scores because you think you can identify privileged preppers if their recommendations don't match their test scores seems like you don't actually want to use test scores and just use recommendations.

I don't know if we should be looking for diamonds in the rough. TJ isn't built to polish diamonds in the rough. You are expected to hit the ground running and the rigor is there from the beginning. It is not a nursery for talent, it is a crucible.

A student with high test scores is a student with high test scores. Peer reviewed studies show that SAT scores are equally predictive of poor student's academic achievement as it is of wealthy student's academic achievement. We might assume some of this is because everybody "preps" for the SAT but it's weeks of prep not years. Those years of enrichment are actual learning, those kids have higher academic and cognitive ability than their less enriched peers. You might want to provide some consideration for the kids that couldn't afford the $3-5K/year it costs to get this enrichment but I don't see why a kid that was coached to high levels is any less qualified to operate at those high levels than a kid who never achieved those levels to begin with.

This is what I don't get. There is this sentiment that getting academic enrichment is somehow unfair even between families of similar means. If we are comparing FARM students and one students does extremely well because their family makes painful sacrifices to send them to enrichment, why would we want to discount their achievement because of that? If we are comparing 2 students at cooper (almost all wealthy) and one kids spends his weeknights and weekends studying to improve their academic ability and another spends his time on a high end travel basketball team, why would we penalize that kids who devoted all his time to study in the selection process of an academic institution? Haven't we already corrected for whatever unfairness there might be by using a quota system by elementary of middle school?

I didn't explain myself well. I don't advocate ignoring test scores in favor of recommendations. I do think that when the profile as a whole doesn't make sense, they take that into account. If a kid's test scores suggest that he's highly gifted and he's great at bragging about himself in the essay, but the actual achievements and teacher's view of the kid suggest a pretty average kid, then the test scores should be taken with a grain of salt.

If I were in charge, I would modify the process like this:
-Only 1% allocation per middle school, based on zoned school and not attending school (or better yet, eliminate MS AAP centers and instead have each school be a LLIV).
-To be eligible, kids need *all* honors and at least a 3.75 GPA. They also need to meet some baseline benchmarks for their 7th and 8th grade SOLs (offers rescinded if the 8th grade scores aren't met). It would be something like pass advanced in 7th and 8th grade math for all kids. 480+ in all other SOLs for both 7th and 8th grade. For those in the M7H in 7th and Algebra I in 8th, I'd require a 550+ SOL.
-All kids would take the PSAT 8/9. Prep materials are plentiful and free. There's also a limit to how much prep will increase one's score.
-Being in Algebra I honors in 8th would be a negative. It wouldn't be an insurmountable negative, and kids who otherwise have amazing profiles would still be admitted. Ideally, TJ would return to only having 20-30 kids enter with only Algebra I.
-Reinstitute teacher recommendations
-Give heavy weighting to the exceptional accomplishments. AIME qualification, Mathcounts State, very high placement in science olympiad, placement in USAPHO, USABO, USACO, etc. should be worth a lot
-Eliminate experience factor points, but have one of the essays be about whatever hardships or obstacles the kid needed to overcome..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child did not make it through the lottery process. However, in 9th grade one kind teacher at base HS encouraged my child to apply to TJ, wrote a recommendation letter for sophomore admissions. Child got in and having a great experience at TJ.

The current freshman process is broken and is missing many students who would benefit from TJ.

The froshmores are generally more qualified on average than the freshmen

FCPS is literally begging HS students to submit froshmore applications to backfill the spots left by freshman admits returning to their base school. Up until 2021, it's been rare for freshmen to return to their base schools due to struggling with the TJ curriculum rigor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Academic Talent isn't relevant. You don't need to be the highest scoring student in the county to benefit from a better equipped lab.

Academic talent is the ONLY thing that is relevant. They are the only ones that need those better equipped labs and the higher level math and science courses.

WTF is your average kid going to do with a quantum physics and optics lab?
Why does the average kid need access to linear algebra (which is actually pretty widely available throughout FCPS), concrete math, number theory.

Sending a few kids that are going to be taking AP Calculus and AP Physics in their senior year is fine but about 1/3 of the kids at TJ are on this track right now. Most of those kids are getting nothing out of TJ that they would not get at their base school.

There is a huge amount of space between “average” and the tiny number of truly gifted students.

Advanced kids from around the region should have access to TJ, not just kids from a handful of wealthy feeders.

I agree, and their argument just doesn't hold up. Sure, kids whose parents have spent $20k on test prep do well on tests, but hardly matters since the kids being selected now are the very top students and typically surprass the prepsters before graduating.

Nobody spent $20K on test prep. Don't be ridiculous.

PSAT scores down 120 points at TJ and pretty much ONLY TJ.
NMSF down 50% at TJ
SOL advance pass down across the board at TJ
The math department at TJ had to send out an email to the math 4 class telling them their final exam test results were the worst they have ever seen.

Could it be the TJ math faculty that is actually failing? Once faced with students that are not propped up by outside “enrichment,” their math program is maybe not up to snuff?

Either that outside enrichment is as hollow and meaningless as you claim and the current students are really better than previous students (as you claim) or that outside enrichment was in fact enriching them.

The fact of the matter is that too many of those kids were getting a very thin understanding of their math courses at their middle schools. Some middle schools teach a very superficial version of some subjects because there simply isn't a critical mass of students that are prepared to tackle a more in depth curriculum. That is why you end up with feeder schools.

And if the math program at TJ is really as shoddy as you think then why are you trying so goddam hard to get racial proportionality at the school?

We are trying to get smart kids from all over the county, even kids who weren’t lucky enough to be born into affluent families, attend feeder schools, or get outside enrichment.

That's why they need a much more robust application packet, including standardized test scores, teacher recommendations, achievements, consideration of math level, courses taken, SOL scores, etc. With a bit of training in how to read the applications, it would be much easier to find kids who are truly talented, but less advantaged. It would also be easy to find and eliminate the preppers. A kid at a high FARMS school who still has high test scores (not sky high, but solid), strong teacher recommendations, and Geometry in 8th, but "worse" achievements or less polished essays should come across as a smart, but less privileged kid who belongs at TJ. A kid from a wealthier school with sky high test scores, high math level, very polished essays, but somewhat mediocre recommendations and achievements that do not match the test scores or rest of the packet should come across as a privileged prepper.

Requiring less information just makes the process random. More information with an eye to ferret out prepping and find those diamonds in the rough would ensure that the right kids are admitted to TJ.

I agree more information is better than less but implementing standardized exams and then disregarding test scores because you think you can identify privileged preppers if their recommendations don't match their test scores seems like you don't actually want to use test scores and just use recommendations.

I don't know if we should be looking for diamonds in the rough. TJ isn't built to polish diamonds in the rough. You are expected to hit the ground running and the rigor is there from the beginning. It is not a nursery for talent, it is a crucible.

A student with high test scores is a student with high test scores. Peer reviewed studies show that SAT scores are equally predictive of poor student's academic achievement as it is of wealthy student's academic achievement. We might assume some of this is because everybody "preps" for the SAT but it's weeks of prep not years. Those years of enrichment are actual learning, those kids have higher academic and cognitive ability than their less enriched peers. You might want to provide some consideration for the kids that couldn't afford the $3-5K/year it costs to get this enrichment but I don't see why a kid that was coached to high levels is any less qualified to operate at those high levels than a kid who never achieved those levels to begin with.

This is what I don't get. There is this sentiment that getting academic enrichment is somehow unfair even between families of similar means. If we are comparing FARM students and one students does extremely well because their family makes painful sacrifices to send them to enrichment, why would we want to discount their achievement because of that? If we are comparing 2 students at cooper (almost all wealthy) and one kids spends his weeknights and weekends studying to improve their academic ability and another spends his time on a high end travel basketball team, why would we penalize that kids who devoted all his time to study in the selection process of an academic institution? Haven't we already corrected for whatever unfairness there might be by using a quota system by elementary of middle school?

I didn't explain myself well. I don't advocate ignoring test scores in favor of recommendations. I do think that when the profile as a whole doesn't make sense, they take that into account. If a kid's test scores suggest that he's highly gifted and he's great at bragging about himself in the essay, but the actual achievements and teacher's view of the kid suggest a pretty average kid, then the test scores should be taken with a grain of salt.

If I were in charge, I would modify the process like this:
-Only 1% allocation per middle school, based on zoned school and not attending school (or better yet, eliminate MS AAP centers and instead have each school be a LLIV).
-To be eligible, kids need *all* honors and at least a 3.75 GPA. They also need to meet some baseline benchmarks for their 7th and 8th grade SOLs (offers rescinded if the 8th grade scores aren't met). It would be something like pass advanced in 7th and 8th grade math for all kids. 480+ in all other SOLs for both 7th and 8th grade. For those in the M7H in 7th and Algebra I in 8th, I'd require a 550+ SOL.
-All kids would take the PSAT 8/9. Prep materials are plentiful and free. There's also a limit to how much prep will increase one's score.
-Being in Algebra I honors in 8th would be a negative. It wouldn't be an insurmountable negative, and kids who otherwise have amazing profiles would still be admitted. Ideally, TJ would return to only having 20-30 kids enter with only Algebra I.
-Reinstitute teacher recommendations
-Give heavy weighting to the exceptional accomplishments. AIME qualification, Mathcounts State, very high placement in science olympiad, placement in USAPHO, USABO, USACO, etc. should be worth a lot
-Eliminate experience factor points, but have one of the essays be about whatever hardships or obstacles the kid needed to overcome..

I support most of this but definitely not this part:
“Give heavy weighting to the exceptional accomplishments. AIME qualification, Mathcounts State, very high placement in science olympiad, placement in USAPHO, USABO, USACO, etc. should be worth a lot”

That will land us right back in the arms race of kids having to do these outside of school things to be competitive.

And I would keep the higher % per MS used now.

[Anonymous]

Shut up, OP. We know your kids only have better scores because you make them go to Sunshine Academy and Russian Math School and blah blah blah. If you didn't pay for your kid to have high test scores, they would never have gotten in.

[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:Academic Talent isn't relevant. You don't need to be the highest scoring student in the county to benefit from a better equipped lab.

Academic talent is the ONLY thing that is relevant. They are the only ones that need those better equipped labs and the higher level math and science courses.

WTF is your average kid going to do with a quantum physics and optics lab?
Why does the average kid need access to linear algebra (which is actually pretty widely available throughout FCPS), concrete math, number theory.

Sending a few kids that are going to be taking AP Calculus and AP Physics in their senior year is fine but about 1/3 of the kids at TJ are on this track right now. Most of those kids are getting nothing out of TJ that they would not get at their base school.

There is a huge amount of space between “average” and the tiny number of truly gifted students.

Advanced kids from around the region should have access to TJ, not just kids from a handful of wealthy feeders.

I agree, and their argument just doesn't hold up. Sure, kids whose parents have spent $20k on test prep do well on tests, but hardly matters since the kids being selected now are the very top students and typically surprass the prepsters before graduating.

Nobody spent $20K on test prep. Don't be ridiculous.

PSAT scores down 120 points at TJ and pretty much ONLY TJ.
NMSF down 50% at TJ
SOL advance pass down across the board at TJ
The math department at TJ had to send out an email to the math 4 class telling them their final exam test results were the worst they have ever seen.

Could it be the TJ math faculty that is actually failing? Once faced with students that are not propped up by outside “enrichment,” their math program is maybe not up to snuff?

Either that outside enrichment is as hollow and meaningless as you claim and the current students are really better than previous students (as you claim) or that outside enrichment was in fact enriching them.

The fact of the matter is that too many of those kids were getting a very thin understanding of their math courses at their middle schools. Some middle schools teach a very superficial version of some subjects because there simply isn't a critical mass of students that are prepared to tackle a more in depth curriculum. That is why you end up with feeder schools.

And if the math program at TJ is really as shoddy as you think then why are you trying so goddam hard to get racial proportionality at the school?

We are trying to get smart kids from all over the county, even kids who weren’t lucky enough to be born into affluent families, attend feeder schools, or get outside enrichment.

That's why they need a much more robust application packet, including standardized test scores, teacher recommendations, achievements, consideration of math level, courses taken, SOL scores, etc. With a bit of training in how to read the applications, it would be much easier to find kids who are truly talented, but less advantaged. It would also be easy to find and eliminate the preppers. A kid at a high FARMS school who still has high test scores (not sky high, but solid), strong teacher recommendations, and Geometry in 8th, but "worse" achievements or less polished essays should come across as a smart, but less privileged kid who belongs at TJ. A kid from a wealthier school with sky high test scores, high math level, very polished essays, but somewhat mediocre recommendations and achievements that do not match the test scores or rest of the packet should come across as a privileged prepper.

Requiring less information just makes the process random. More information with an eye to ferret out prepping and find those diamonds in the rough would ensure that the right kids are admitted to TJ.

I agree more information is better than less but implementing standardized exams and then disregarding test scores because you think you can identify privileged preppers if their recommendations don't match their test scores seems like you don't actually want to use test scores and just use recommendations.

I don't know if we should be looking for diamonds in the rough. TJ isn't built to polish diamonds in the rough. You are expected to hit the ground running and the rigor is there from the beginning. It is not a nursery for talent, it is a crucible.

A student with high test scores is a student with high test scores. Peer reviewed studies show that SAT scores are equally predictive of poor student's academic achievement as it is of wealthy student's academic achievement. We might assume some of this is because everybody "preps" for the SAT but it's weeks of prep not years. Those years of enrichment are actual learning, those kids have higher academic and cognitive ability than their less enriched peers. You might want to provide some consideration for the kids that couldn't afford the $3-5K/year it costs to get this enrichment but I don't see why a kid that was coached to high levels is any less qualified to operate at those high levels than a kid who never achieved those levels to begin with.

This is what I don't get. There is this sentiment that getting academic enrichment is somehow unfair even between families of similar means. If we are comparing FARM students and one students does extremely well because their family makes painful sacrifices to send them to enrichment, why would we want to discount their achievement because of that? If we are comparing 2 students at cooper (almost all wealthy) and one kids spends his weeknights and weekends studying to improve their academic ability and another spends his time on a high end travel basketball team, why would we penalize that kids who devoted all his time to study in the selection process of an academic institution? Haven't we already corrected for whatever unfairness there might be by using a quota system by elementary of middle school?

I didn't explain myself well. I don't advocate ignoring test scores in favor of recommendations. I do think that when the profile as a whole doesn't make sense, they take that into account. If a kid's test scores suggest that he's highly gifted and he's great at bragging about himself in the essay, but the actual achievements and teacher's view of the kid suggest a pretty average kid, then the test scores should be taken with a grain of salt.

If I were in charge, I would modify the process like this:
-Only 1% allocation per middle school, based on zoned school and not attending school (or better yet, eliminate MS AAP centers and instead have each school be a LLIV).
-To be eligible, kids need *all* honors and at least a 3.75 GPA. They also need to meet some baseline benchmarks for their 7th and 8th grade SOLs (offers rescinded if the 8th grade scores aren't met). It would be something like pass advanced in 7th and 8th grade math for all kids. 480+ in all other SOLs for both 7th and 8th grade. For those in the M7H in 7th and Algebra I in 8th, I'd require a 550+ SOL.
-All kids would take the PSAT 8/9. Prep materials are plentiful and free. There's also a limit to how much prep will increase one's score.
-Being in Algebra I honors in 8th would be a negative. It wouldn't be an insurmountable negative, and kids who otherwise have amazing profiles would still be admitted. Ideally, TJ would return to only having 20-30 kids enter with only Algebra I.
-Reinstitute teacher recommendations
-Give heavy weighting to the exceptional accomplishments. AIME qualification, Mathcounts State, very high placement in science olympiad, placement in USAPHO, USABO, USACO, etc. should be worth a lot
-Eliminate experience factor points, but have one of the essays be about whatever hardships or obstacles the kid needed to overcome..

I support most of this but definitely not this part:
“Give heavy weighting to the exceptional accomplishments. AIME qualification, Mathcounts State, very high placement in science olympiad, placement in USAPHO, USABO, USACO, etc. should be worth a lot”

That will land us right back in the arms race of kids having to do these outside of school things to be competitive.

And I would keep the higher % per MS used now.

There are very few kids at that level, and they are exceptional. It can’t turn into much of an arms race when it’s only like 20-30 kids capable of reaching that level. Those kids should be obvious admit for TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Academic Talent isn't relevant. You don't need to be the highest scoring student in the county to benefit from a better equipped lab.

Academic talent is the ONLY thing that is relevant. They are the only ones that need those better equipped labs and the higher level math and science courses.

WTF is your average kid going to do with a quantum physics and optics lab?
Why does the average kid need access to linear algebra (which is actually pretty widely available throughout FCPS), concrete math, number theory.

Sending a few kids that are going to be taking AP Calculus and AP Physics in their senior year is fine but about 1/3 of the kids at TJ are on this track right now. Most of those kids are getting nothing out of TJ that they would not get at their base school.

The model allowed an overabundance of kids who knew how to take math and science tests but couldn't string together two sentences and sure as hell couldn't articulate their thoughts in front of a group. Try taking those skills and lack thereof to 99% of jobs in the workforce. I'd rather have an A- math kid with A- social skills than an A+ math kid with D social skills. You need a balance of both in life. Grace can master calculus but can't find her way to the bus stop. Hard pass.

[Anonymous]

My kid was initially passed over for AAP in third grade. Now at TJ playing multiple sports with straight A's. Probably one of a dozen out of 500-plus. There's no one formula for capturing the best kids. Some of life is luck and positioning yourself to climb the ladder. Work smarter, not harder.