TJ Parents and Alumni - Time to Get On Board

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why should Asian alums support this change to let themselves be replaced with white people? Serious question.

Didn't realize that anyone was going to come take our diplomas and redistribute them. Whatever shall we do...*eye roll*

Your choice to pretend not to understand is noted.

You literally said "alums" will "let themselves be replaced with white people". How does one "replace" an alumnus of the high school? Or did you believe there was a legacy clause whereby your child would automatically be accepted?

+1

Talk about racist!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Longfellow has resources to hire private companies making kits for Science Olympiad to coach their team. They spent thousands of dollars on one event and they came first in that. Is this cheating?

Yeah, Longfellow has an overly competitive set of parents. Students do 50% of work and parents do the other 50%. Add to it the sheer amount of money they throw at the program, it is clear why they win.

It is as close to cheating as possible without being illegal. Why do you think they always win? It cannot be that just Longfellow kids are good each and every year for the past 10 years if not more.

The whole Haycock, Longfellow, McLean attracts similar set of parents. They spend their children's childhood focused on winning these awards.

This unfortunately turns out to be loner kids. Nice, intelligent, bright and smart kids. But unfortunately not well adjusted and have tough time later on in life.

I for one, do not envy them. We looked deeply into this and chose to avoid this pyramid. Depends on what you value. No right answer.

I once saw a Longfellow parent draw pictures of other team's design at an invitational. Two parents tag teamed and documented every single design from competing teams. Taking pictures is not allowed, so the parents ended up doing the next best to a picture.

I was amused at that level of dedication at a kids event. I kept track of that particular event and Longfellow went on to win in 2 other competitions.

My child participated in science olympiad. Longfellow used to come at the top in many events. I always thought they must be working really hard.

I used tell my child if they want to get better they need to work harder.

This is cheating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you consider prep as cheating, do you think the class of 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 a cheater class?

Yes for all the other years EXCEPT for 2022. That is when the new Quant Q debuted. I think the kids who were in Math Counts, math competitions or just naturally good at reasoning had the advantage. Prep places didn't know what to really expect then. I think that year is probably the "purest", if there is such a thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you consider prep as cheating, do you think the class of 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 a cheater class?

Yes for all the other years EXCEPT for 2022. That is when the new Quant Q debuted. I think the kids who were in Math Counts, math competitions or just naturally good at reasoning had the advantage. Prep places didn't know what to really expect then. I think that year is probably the "purest", if there is such a thing.

That's so insulting. MY CLASS OF 2024 CHILD DID NOT PREP. Why is that so hard to believe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you consider prep as cheating, do you think the class of 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 a cheater class?

Yes for all the other years EXCEPT for 2022. That is when the new Quant Q debuted. I think the kids who were in Math Counts, math competitions or just naturally good at reasoning had the advantage. Prep places didn't know what to really expect then. I think that year is probably the "purest", if there is such a thing.

That's so insulting. MY CLASS OF 2024 CHILD DID NOT PREP. Why is that so hard to believe?

Because it's soo much easier to control the narrative if he/she did! C'mon, get with the program!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you consider prep as cheating, do you think the class of 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 a cheater class?

Yes for all the other years EXCEPT for 2022. That is when the new Quant Q debuted. I think the kids who were in Math Counts, math competitions or just naturally good at reasoning had the advantage. Prep places didn't know what to really expect then. I think that year is probably the "purest", if there is such a thing.

That's so insulting. MY CLASS OF 2024 CHILD DID NOT PREP. Why is that so hard to believe?

[i]

Let me qualify by saying that for those who may have attended prep classes during those years may have a higher percentage chance of having materials that might be construed as cheating. I thought the original posting was about prep. If your child did not do prep, why would I be calling them a 'cheater'? This only applies to those who may have had prep.

[Anonymous]

Everyone who is in TJ now and who has attended a prep is a cheater and should be apologizing. They are cheaters even if their parents signed them up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you consider prep as cheating, do you think the class of 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 a cheater class?

Yes for all the other years EXCEPT for 2022. That is when the new Quant Q debuted. I think the kids who were in Math Counts, math competitions or just naturally good at reasoning had the advantage. Prep places didn't know what to really expect then. I think that year is probably the "purest", if there is such a thing.

That's so insulting. MY CLASS OF 2024 CHILD DID NOT PREP. Why is that so hard to believe?

[i]

Let me qualify by saying that for those who may have attended prep classes during those years may have a higher percentage chance of having materials that might be construed as cheating. I thought the original posting was about prep. If your child did not do prep, why would I be calling them a 'cheater'? This only applies to those who may have had prep.

My entire white glove law firm prepped for our bar exams. OMG. Shut us down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you consider prep as cheating, do you think the class of 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 a cheater class?

Yes for all the other years EXCEPT for 2022. That is when the new Quant Q debuted. I think the kids who were in Math Counts, math competitions or just naturally good at reasoning had the advantage. Prep places didn't know what to really expect then. I think that year is probably the "purest", if there is such a thing.

That's so insulting. MY CLASS OF 2024 CHILD DID NOT PREP. Why is that so hard to believe?

[i]

Let me qualify by saying that for those who may have attended prep classes during those years may have a higher percentage chance of having materials that might be construed as cheating. I thought the original posting was about prep. If your child did not do prep, why would I be calling them a 'cheater'? This only applies to those who may have had prep.

My entire white glove law firm prepped for our bar exams. OMG. Shut us down.

Lol *shoe. Debar me based on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone who is in TJ now and who has attended a prep is a cheater and should be apologizing. They are cheaters even if their parents signed them up.

What about all the people who took a prep class but did not get in to TJ? What do you want them to do - shall they send you their apology individually?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone who is in TJ now and who has attended a prep is a cheater and should be apologizing. They are cheaters even if their parents signed them up.

What about all the people who took a prep class but did not get in to TJ? What do you want them to do - shall they send you their apology individually?

They can just say "I almost cheated". That would be good enough.

[Anonymous]

Or "I wasn't good enough at cheating"

[Anonymous]

At the end of the day, they are CHEATS!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Longfellow has resources to hire private companies making kits for Science Olympiad to coach their team. They spent thousands of dollars on one event and they came first in that. Is this cheating?

Yeah, Longfellow has an overly competitive set of parents. Students do 50% of work and parents do the other 50%. Add to it the sheer amount of money they throw at the program, it is clear why they win.

It is as close to cheating as possible without being illegal. Why do you think they always win? It cannot be that just Longfellow kids are good each and every year for the past 10 years if not more.

The whole Haycock, Longfellow, McLean attracts similar set of parents. They spend their children's childhood focused on winning these awards.

This unfortunately turns out to be loner kids. Nice, intelligent, bright and smart kids. But unfortunately not well adjusted and have tough time later on in life.

I for one, do not envy them. We looked deeply into this and chose to avoid this pyramid. Depends on what you value. No right answer.

I once saw a Longfellow parent draw pictures of other team's design at an invitational. Two parents tag teamed and documented every single design from competing teams. Taking pictures is not allowed, so the parents ended up doing the next best to a picture.

I was amused at that level of dedication at a kids event. I kept track of that particular event and Longfellow went on to win in 2 other competitions.

+1

Just guessing what they looked like.

Asian male and White female.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Longfellow has resources to hire private companies making kits for Science Olympiad to coach their team. They spent thousands of dollars on one event and they came first in that. Is this cheating?

Yeah, Longfellow has an overly competitive set of parents. Students do 50% of work and parents do the other 50%. Add to it the sheer amount of money they throw at the program, it is clear why they win.

It is as close to cheating as possible without being illegal. Why do you think they always win? It cannot be that just Longfellow kids are good each and every year for the past 10 years if not more.

The whole Haycock, Longfellow, McLean attracts similar set of parents. They spend their children's childhood focused on winning these awards.

This unfortunately turns out to be loner kids. Nice, intelligent, bright and smart kids. But unfortunately not well adjusted and have tough time later on in life.

I for one, do not envy them. We looked deeply into this and chose to avoid this pyramid. Depends on what you value. No right answer.

I once saw a Longfellow parent draw pictures of other team's design at an invitational. Two parents tag teamed and documented every single design from competing teams. Taking pictures is not allowed, so the parents ended up doing the next best to a picture.

I was amused at that level of dedication at a kids event. I kept track of that particular event and Longfellow went on to win in 2 other competitions.

I heard an anecdote at a regional SciOly event. Longfellow team bought 50 kits for a single event with one parent modeling it out it a simulator.

It is basically parents winning the medals for their kids.