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

[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: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.

Because the accounts and news sources show nothing of the "cheating" and "test buying" as the lie you keep on spreading.

DP.

We do know that affluent families were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) acquired and 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.

And, we do know that FCPS wanted a way to fairly assess kids across the county without fueling a $$$$ test prep industry, giving affluent families a huge, unfair advantage.

The admissions process keeps changing because parents keep trying to game the system.

This claim is completely BS, Donald!

Places like Kaplan, Princeton, College Board, Barron's, etc. have released sample and past exam questions for decades. TJ never has prohibited students from talking about exam questions from their memory. Also, most affluent families in Fairfax are not Asian. If money can make the difference, there should be way more white students admitted in the old system than in the new system.

The biggest beneficiaries of the new admissions process are students from low-income Asian families.


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.”

Please stop posting articles that do nothing to prove your points.

My points were:
1. non-affluent Asian students benefitted from the change

2. Quant-Q, intentionally did NOT release materials to the public - very different than SAT, ACT, etc.

3. for years, they have been looking for ways to avoid some kids having an unfair advance with test-prep

Either Quant-Q or you were lying. A 5-second search on Amazon gave me more than 15 books with Quant-Q questions. You don't have to be affluent to spend 10-20 bucks on a book. There is no evidence that low-income Asian students need/benefit from the change.

None of those were based on materials provided by the Quant-Q creator, Insight Assessment. And, based on the NDAs, all of those books are likely unethically, or even potentially illegally, developed.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
"Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s)."

"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."

While they have copyright notices and requirement not to duplicate or publish testing material, the part quoted here appears to be about protecting the design of the test from a computer programming standpoint, and not the test materials.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

Because the accounts and news sources show nothing of the "cheating" and "test buying" as the lie you keep on spreading.

DP.

We do know that affluent families were paying for $$$$ prep that (unethically) acquired and 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.

And, we do know that FCPS wanted a way to fairly assess kids across the county without fueling a $$$$ test prep industry, giving affluent families a huge, unfair advantage.

The admissions process keeps changing because parents keep trying to game the system.

This claim is completely BS, Donald!

Places like Kaplan, Princeton, College Board, Barron's, etc. have released sample and past exam questions for decades. TJ never has prohibited students from talking about exam questions from their memory. Also, most affluent families in Fairfax are not Asian. If money can make the difference, there should be way more white students admitted in the old system than in the new system.

The biggest beneficiaries of the new admissions process are students from low-income Asian families.


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.”

Please stop posting articles that do nothing to prove your points.

My points were:
1. non-affluent Asian students benefitted from the change

2. Quant-Q, intentionally did NOT release materials to the public - very different than SAT, ACT, etc.

3. for years, they have been looking for ways to avoid some kids having an unfair advance with test-prep

Either Quant-Q or you were lying. A 5-second search on Amazon gave me more than 15 books with Quant-Q questions. You don't have to be affluent to spend 10-20 bucks on a book. There is no evidence that low-income Asian students need/benefit from the change.

None of those were based on materials provided by the Quant-Q creator, Insight Assessment. And, based on the NDAs, all of those books are likely unethically, or even potentially illegally, developed.

https://insightassessment.com/policies/
"Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement
By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s)."

"Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind."

Ok. Do you have any evidence that test prep centers used the materials from Quant-Q? or do we have to take your words that somehow students stole the questions for them?

TJ students admitted it.

So, TJ students came to you and admitted it. Also, even if it was a real problem, FCPS could easily solve it by incorporating rules prohibiting students from discussing exam information or materials. This is a common practice used by organizations administering exams across different time zones. FCPS has done that because it's not a real problem.

No, several students shared online. Which you would know if you actually did go back and read all of the old threads.

The students agreed not to share test content/format before they took the test. How would have more rules helped?

Some parents will always look for ways to cheat the system.

This is your evidence and you want people to take you seriously. Even if it's the case, FCPS should enforce their rules the same way as they are doing with their code of ethics and conduct. They can even sue those test prep centers for using infringed materials. It's obvious to me that this was not a widespread problem as you claim.

In the off chance that you’re not just being oppositional and you really do want to learn more, get back to us after you go back and re-read the many threads.

Then maybe you won’t sound so ignorant.

But the threads don’t point to anything. It’s just anonymous posts. No links to the coveted Facebook posts, no articles about cheating on the admissions test, no links about a scandal.

It’s entirely circular.

There were definitely links to the FB posts. You’re clearly not reading the threads.

You remind me of the open school crazies who didn’t even have kids in school at the time but were very loud and very clueless.

So post them here. The links. Right here.

So won’t read the many threads of this old, beat-to-death topic AND you want others to dig up links for you?

I just googled and found some links in the first couple of results.

If your kid is as lazy as you are TJ doesn’t seem likely.

So, you supposedly found some links proving what you said, but you refuse to post them? Sounds legit.

You're the one who made the claim that it has been proven and that there are links to reputable sources indicating what you've claimed. The burden is on you to provide that proof. Right here, post a link to a news article. If you won't, you're admitting that you can't.

No, I never made that claim. You are confusing posters.

It takes 2 seconds to google to find the FB links. You really don’t care about them; you just want to be oppositional.

You could end the debate right now if you post those links that you found in 2 seconds. Why won't you?

Because I have already posted it (again) recently. And I’m not your Google btch.

The rest of us all know what went down. You’re the clueless one here. Put in the 2-sec of work if you actually want the info. I’m guessing you don’t.

Except that you haven't. You're unwilling to post it because you're a liar and full of shit.

You are one lazy B.

https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Adcurbanmom.com+quant-q+facebook

That's just a list of dcum threads about TJ. Sheesh. Are you really so dumb that you don't understand the difference between proof and anonymous message board threads?

You can't click on the link and scroll down? JFC.

Thanks for proving that you're the "test buying troll," and you're not at all presenting anything in good faith. JFC. It's a link containing a list of dcum threads. Each thread is just randos anonymously blathering. It is proof of nothing.

No wonder your kids couldn't get into TJ.

No wonder your Alg 1 kid needs a handout seat at TJ LMAO

[Anonymous]

Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

It’s not just design. I reposted the language again on that thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

The TJ cheating scandal was discussed at length here and elsewhere.
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/912482.page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

No one knows about this fictitious story, but for this one poster who appears afraid of naming the prep center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

No one knows about this fictitious story, but for this one poster who appears afraid of naming the prep center.

It’s no big secret. Curie and probably other test prep companies.

Details in the roundup thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

No one knows about this fictitious story, but for this one poster who appears afraid of naming the prep center.

Why do you think only one poster is posting about this? I can guarantee that there is more than one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

No one knows about this fictitious story, but for this one poster who appears afraid of naming the prep center.

It’s no big secret. Curie and probably other test prep companies.

Details in the roundup thread.

Which Curie? Is it Curie Learning that continues to send the same hundred each year, even after admissions change? How is that possible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

No one knows about this fictitious story, but for this one poster who appears afraid of naming the prep center.

It’s no big secret. Curie and probably other test prep companies.

Details in the roundup thread.

Which Curie? Is it Curie Learning that continues to send the same hundred each year, even after admissions change? How is that possible?

Well, this entire Curie mention seems like either a brilliant marketing tactic or a fictional story made up by a delusional Curie loather. Most likely the latter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any parents of kids who took the Quant Q during the years the school wàs using it who could ask their kids if they signed an NDA before taking the test?

My kid was already at TJ when they changed to the Quant Q. He remembers talk about the applicants having to sign a statement but says he cant remember for certain and can’t swear to it. He does remember having to sign honor code statements when taking certain tests in classes and that some teachers collected tests after kids saw their scores and talked to the kids about not sharing questions with anyone, inside or outside the school.

On the roundup thread I posted a link and language that test takers agree to before the test.

As I posted above, that language was not about test questions but the design.

Regardless,it's clear that many test takers reported these questions back to the prep center to help improve their question bank.

who are the test takers? what's the prep center?

No one knows about this fictitious story, but for this one poster who appears afraid of naming the prep center.

It’s no big secret. Curie and probably other test prep companies.

Details in the roundup thread.

Which Curie? Is it Curie Learning that continues to send the same hundred each year, even after admissions change? How is that possible?

It is easier to prepkids for an essay.