How does one prep place account for 25% of TJ Admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what the list from this prep place will look like for the class of 2025?

Stop the obsession with that place. Just because your kid did not cut it and does not have the chops should not make you so bitter. Enjoy life a little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not call any kid who scores well on the TJ exam, with or without prep, mediocre. The kids who are prepping are working hard to learn challenging material in order to do well on the test. That is impressive on its own. I can question if the kid is there because the kid really wants it or there because the parent really wants it but I will not question the effort and intelligence of a kid who does well on that exam.

I would imagine any kid that applied themselves to a year long prep class would apply themselves to their class work and do just fine at TJ.

I did not get how much math classes can be fun for a kid. I thought you all were crazy but this year we offered DS the choice to take AoPS classes or not. He decided to give the math a go and is loving it. I don't get it but I am not a math person. I was a history and social studies geek and loved working as a tour guide at the State House and participating in Government based programs in MS and HS so I don't know why the math class love is so foreign to me. We are actually working with some other interested families in starting a STEM Scouts program next year.

I think we can discuss admissions and test or no test without questioning the kids intelligence or ability. The conversation, for me, is identifying kids with similar intelligence and ability in underrepresented communities and providing them with the opportunity to attend TJ and shine. It would be nice if they could expand the class size at TJ to include the top 2% students from the underrepresented schools and not impact the current numbers. It sounds like TJ has the space for more students.

TJ's Class of 2025 is expected to be 550, as opposed to 480. The school can absolutely handle a higher volume with no difficulty. 2200 should be just fine a few years down the road, and will make a huge difference in the school's offerings outside of the STEM realm.

The drop back numbers this year will be epic. The class number will be closer to baseline by spring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what the list from this prep place will look like for the class of 2025?

I wonder what you will do if they actually shut down that place!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what the list from this prep place will look like for the class of 2025?

I wonder what you will do if they actually shut down that place!

Epic! LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The drop back numbers this year will be epic. The class number will be closer to baseline by spring.

Perhaps there will be pressure on teachers to go easy on the kids to prevent this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This "prep" for SAT making a real difference in scores myth has been debunked countless times. The SATs are unquestionably a good proxy for aptitude and success.

SAT has changed from an aptitude test to an achievement test. For example, the analogies are gone. The math section has many more questions from advanced math and less of those 'which of these are true' questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you really taught at 3 universities, you should be able to concede that SAT scores are typically a good indicator of future performance in the classroom as well.

There are studies that show this not be the case. The issue is that at any university, the SAT range is pretty small. Within this range, SAT may make little difference, while someone scoring 600 vs 1400 makes a lot of difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
So the East Asian cohort in the US is representative of the EA population as a whole but the South Asian population is not? Explain that logic to me? Do they get a brain transplant once they reach Ellis Island..

More intelligent people are emigrating. Meanwhile China sent many immigrants 100 years ago who may have been lower than average for China.

The recent immigrants may be more intelligent, but because the baseline is higher it doesn't make as much of a difference for East Asians.
If you have been to India, you might have seen the difference between immigrants to the US and native Indians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the other threads, there appears to be some disagreement over in the ethics of prepping. However, there appears to be a prep place with an incredibly high TJ placement success rate that may have crossed the line.

To see for yourself, go to the TJ Vents FB Page. Find the post from July 11th. Read the comments. The student in the Vent and the students in the comments section are talking about a prep place that charges $4,000 and gives the students the test ahead of time. One student in the comments stated that the Quant Q for the class of 2023 was identical to the Quant Q for the class of 2022. It’s clear that they are talking about the Curie Learning Center (“curie” one student states.)

I went to find out more about this place. Apparently Curie Learning Center posted on their FB page on 8/17 that they had 133 students admitted to TJ. And posted the names so unlikely they are making it up. (Also posted AOS/AET names/numbers.)

Wow. So there were 133 students admitted this year that prepped at a place that multiple current students say had a copy of at least one section of the test in prior years.

Just how does one test prep place account for over 25% of the TJHSST class of 2024 admissions? (Are they possibly that good at prep?)

There is no magic here and no one knows the test questions in advance, it is just the effort put in by the kids. I know several kids who went there and it appears like less than a quarter of the kids who go there get into TJ/AOS/AET, but as you might expect they would not publish ratio/percent of total kids who get in Almost all the kids who go there are already in FCPS AAP or LCPS GT program from well educated asian parents often with science background and lots of support for kids education. So, the bar is not very high for the kids. In addition, many of these kids start enrichment as early as 4th grade and they generally do well in their class and I heard pretty much every kid takes Algebra I in 7th grade. I think there is also a placement test for the program and only the kids who qualify are offered the full TJ prep and not every kid qualifies. If the kid doesn't have it in him/her or not willing to put in the effort, it is less likely to get into TJ and I know quite a few of the kids who went to this program and did not get in.

Does this inviolve 20+ hours of prep per week?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The drop back numbers this year will be epic. The class number will be closer to baseline by spring.

Perhaps there will be pressure on teachers to go easy on the kids to prevent this?

I think the new crop of admits will be smarter though less prepped so in the long run should do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So the East Asian cohort in the US is representative of the EA population as a whole but the South Asian population is not? Explain that logic to me? Do they get a brain transplant once they reach Ellis Island..

More intelligent people are emigrating. Meanwhile China sent many immigrants 100 years ago who may have been lower than average for China.

The recent immigrants may be more intelligent, but because the baseline is higher it doesn't make as much of a difference for East Asians.
If you have been to India, you might have seen the difference between immigrants to the US and native Indians.

VERY VERY VERY few Chinese-Americans in the USA, and especially in this area, are descendants of the early immigrants who came to work here on the railroads and mines and in small businesses.

[Anonymous]

Prepping doesn't end in middle school. People who make plans regarding coursework, majors, professors, study groups, internships, networks, etc etc etc etc are the ones who really get ahead in life. There were kids at my college who took course catalogue and met with multiple people to game exactly which courses to take based on how testing works, who had course previously, etc.

Consider law school exams. 1 test at end of semester, designed to be hard to complete in time allotted. The point is that is what real life is like. You have your day in court or hearing, and it's a race always trying to get everything done in time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So the East Asian cohort in the US is representative of the EA population as a whole but the South Asian population is not? Explain that logic to me? Do they get a brain transplant once they reach Ellis Island..

More intelligent people are emigrating. Meanwhile China sent many immigrants 100 years ago who may have been lower than average for China.

The recent immigrants may be more intelligent, but because the baseline is higher it doesn't make as much of a difference for East Asians.
If you have been to India, you might have seen the difference between immigrants to the US and native Indians.

VERY VERY VERY few Chinese-Americans in the USA, and especially in this area, are descendants of the early immigrants who came to work here on the railroads and mines and in small businesses.

+ 1. The PP you are responding to is stuck on his IQ thesis about Chinese being more intelligent. China is a successful country mainly because they stole IP from the West, stole land from minorities and as a communist dictatorship, keeps a tight leash on reproduction, education and indoctrination. Even a simple "random" IQ test will have to be approved by 5 levels of bureaucracy at which point it's not random any longer. You can walk into any part of India or Sri Lanka, test anyone for a handful of candy, and publish whatever you want. No one cares.

Of all the races I've worked with, I have not seen any group to be exceptionally more intelligent than another. Some have stronger skills in one area vs. others. Most compensate for any lack of skills very effectively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The drop back numbers this year will be epic. The class number will be closer to baseline by spring.

Perhaps there will be pressure on teachers to go easy on the kids to prevent this?

Doubt it. It's been tried and there was immense pushback from the teachers.

However, I don't necessarily agree that the selected kids are doomed to fail. Do they and parents need to adjust their expectations as to the amount of work and time commitment? Of course. But once they get used to it, they will shine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This "prep" for SAT making a real difference in scores myth has been debunked countless times. The SATs are unquestionably a good proxy for aptitude and success.

SAT has changed from an aptitude test to an achievement test. For example, the analogies are gone. The math section has many more questions from advanced math and less of those 'which of these are true' questions.

What?? When did that happen?