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: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.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yes, those are the only two options.

[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?

Curie is a math, science and English enrichment program. We heard it is very rigorous. They offer summer classes in Robotics and CS, which is what DD is enrolled in. We are considering full year program starting in fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Curie is a math, science and English enrichment program. We heard it is very rigorous. They offer summer classes in Robotics and CS, which is what DD is enrolled in. We are considering full year program starting in fall.

Many Curie customers kids get into TJ. This sort of enrichment is wonderful if you can afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As I've said many times, I do not care how much success Curie has in separating Indian families from their hard-earned money in an attempt to keep up with the rest of their community and get a leg up on everyone else.

All I care about is that that behavior is not specifically rewarded by the TJ Admissions process, and inarguably it no longer is. We won, and the Supreme Court ended the conversation earlier this year. And if Curie won too because of greater exposure, that's fine. I genuinely don't care.

Kids from disadvantaged economic circumstances now have access to TJ where they didn't before - to include plenty of Asian kids. As long as that is the case, I will consider my personal crusade a success and there's nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As I've said many times, I do not care how much success Curie has in separating Indian families from their hard-earned money in an attempt to keep up with the rest of their community and get a leg up on everyone else.

All I care about is that that behavior is not specifically rewarded by the TJ Admissions process, and inarguably it no longer is. We won, and the Supreme Court ended the conversation earlier this year. And if Curie won too because of greater exposure, that's fine. I genuinely don't care.

Kids from disadvantaged economic circumstances now have access to TJ where they didn't before - to include plenty of Asian kids. As long as that is the case, I will consider my personal crusade a success and there's nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

Still rewarded because now they are doing essay prep. However, this may be more generally accessible, and not a test that is booked as unpreppable. If anything. I have observed correlation with attending Curie has gone up at our school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As I've said many times, I do not care how much success Curie has in separating Indian families from their hard-earned money in an attempt to keep up with the rest of their community and get a leg up on everyone else.

All I care about is that that behavior is not specifically rewarded by the TJ Admissions process, and inarguably it no longer is. We won, and the Supreme Court ended the conversation earlier this year. And if Curie won too because of greater exposure, that's fine. I genuinely don't care.

Kids from disadvantaged economic circumstances now have access to TJ where they didn't before - to include plenty of Asian kids. As long as that is the case, I will consider my personal crusade a success and there's nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

Wow. Congratulations.

Now let me share some of my own humble agendas which might have fallen short.

For one, I'd like to avoid living in a world where - due to the lack of clarity to, objectivity of, and respect for the standards for high intellect - meaningful decision-making has devolved into a competition over who can out-stupid everyone else. (Checks the latest political and election news) I suppose we haven't succeeded.

Two, I'd hate it if people with a history of prejudice get comfortable with this idea of success - that they can take shallow measures that look like they solve a problem which only exists due of their own behavior, and use that to make themselves feel like they've been doing right all along. That they're the ones who's opinions on equity everyone else should be heeding. (Checks the latest war news) It doesn't look like we're doing well on this front.

Three, as the parent of an elementary kid in AAP, the process for AAP selection seemed unintuitively subjective and uncertain. I can think of a number of times when my child received what I considered bad advice from teachers regarding academic goals, ostensibly to support the framework of so-called equity. I'd be concerned that this is part of a wider trend, especially since TJ admissions is something which looms in the not-too-distant future for us. (Checks MATHCOUNTS news) I don't think my concerns have been allayed.

Finally, let's talk about the TJ court case. In context, the ruling was that, although the admissions changes were without doubt spearheaded by an obvious racist with unambiguously racist intentions, they could legitimately be interpreted as an attempt to solve a legitimate problem. The court naturally would not have held an opinion about whether the strategy used was an effective or reasonable way to solve the problem. It would be deeply unusual and awkward, then, if someone were to hold this ruling up as a way to say that they're better than everyone else. (Reads this forum) Never mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Curie is a math, science and English enrichment program. We heard it is very rigorous. They offer summer classes in Robotics and CS, which is what DD is enrolled in. We are considering full year program starting in fall.

Curie is cheaper than Kumon but curriculum is very difficult for average students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As I've said many times, I do not care how much success Curie has in separating Indian families from their hard-earned money in an attempt to keep up with the rest of their community and get a leg up on everyone else.

All I care about is that that behavior is not specifically rewarded by the TJ Admissions process, and inarguably it no longer is. We won, and the Supreme Court ended the conversation earlier this year. And if Curie won too because of greater exposure, that's fine. I genuinely don't care.

Kids from disadvantaged economic circumstances now have access to TJ where they didn't before - to include plenty of Asian kids. As long as that is the case, I will consider my personal crusade a success and there's nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

Wow. Congratulations.

Now let me share some of my own humble agendas which might have fallen short.

For one, I'd like to avoid living in a world where - due to the lack of clarity to, objectivity of, and respect for the standards for high intellect - meaningful decision-making has devolved into a competition over who can out-stupid everyone else. (Checks the latest political and election news) I suppose we haven't succeeded.

Two, I'd hate it if people with a history of prejudice get comfortable with this idea of success - that they can take shallow measures that look like they solve a problem which only exists due of their own behavior, and use that to make themselves feel like they've been doing right all along. That they're the ones who's opinions on equity everyone else should be heeding. (Checks the latest war news) It doesn't look like we're doing well on this front.

Three, as the parent of an elementary kid in AAP, the process for AAP selection seemed unintuitively subjective and uncertain. I can think of a number of times when my child received what I considered bad advice from teachers regarding academic goals, ostensibly to support the framework of so-called equity. I'd be concerned that this is part of a wider trend, especially since TJ admissions is something which looms in the not-too-distant future for us. (Checks MATHCOUNTS news) I don't think my concerns have been allayed.

Finally, let's talk about the TJ court case. In context, the ruling was that, although the admissions changes were without doubt spearheaded by an obvious racist with unambiguously racist intentions, they could legitimately be interpreted as an attempt to solve a legitimate problem. The court naturally would not have held an opinion about whether the strategy used was an effective or reasonable way to solve the problem. It would be deeply unusual and awkward, then, if someone were to hold this ruling up as a way to say that they're better than everyone else. (Reads this forum) Never mind.

Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As I've said many times, I do not care how much success Curie has in separating Indian families from their hard-earned money in an attempt to keep up with the rest of their community and get a leg up on everyone else.

All I care about is that that behavior is not specifically rewarded by the TJ Admissions process, and inarguably it no longer is. We won, and the Supreme Court ended the conversation earlier this year. And if Curie won too because of greater exposure, that's fine. I genuinely don't care.

Kids from disadvantaged economic circumstances now have access to TJ where they didn't before - to include plenty of Asian kids. As long as that is the case, I will consider my personal crusade a success and there's nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

This is exactly why they need a more robust application that holistically evaluates courses taken, test scores, teacher recommendations, grades, essays, and achievements, but still with regional allocation of spots. The easiest way to find the overly prepped kids is to look for the ones with inconsistent packets. If a kid at a high SES school has extremely high grades and test scores, as well as very polished essays, but the kid's actual achievements and teacher recommendations point to a kid who is at best above average, then it's a pretty strong indicator that the kid is overly prepped. Likewise, if the kid is taking Algebra II or pre-calc in 8th grade, but hasn't managed to accomplish anything in AMCs or Mathcounts, and doesn't have a teacher that is raving about the kid, then the kid is likely a product of prep and not talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

As I've said many times, I do not care how much success Curie has in separating Indian families from their hard-earned money in an attempt to keep up with the rest of their community and get a leg up on everyone else.

All I care about is that that behavior is not specifically rewarded by the TJ Admissions process, and inarguably it no longer is. We won, and the Supreme Court ended the conversation earlier this year. And if Curie won too because of greater exposure, that's fine. I genuinely don't care.

Kids from disadvantaged economic circumstances now have access to TJ where they didn't before - to include plenty of Asian kids. As long as that is the case, I will consider my personal crusade a success and there's nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

Wow. Congratulations.

Now let me share some of my own humble agendas which might have fallen short.

For one, I'd like to avoid living in a world where - due to the lack of clarity to, objectivity of, and respect for the standards for high intellect - meaningful decision-making has devolved into a competition over who can out-stupid everyone else. (Checks the latest political and election news) I suppose we haven't succeeded.

Two, I'd hate it if people with a history of prejudice get comfortable with this idea of success - that they can take shallow measures that look like they solve a problem which only exists due of their own behavior, and use that to make themselves feel like they've been doing right all along. That they're the ones who's opinions on equity everyone else should be heeding. (Checks the latest war news) It doesn't look like we're doing well on this front.

Three, as the parent of an elementary kid in AAP, the process for AAP selection seemed unintuitively subjective and uncertain. I can think of a number of times when my child received what I considered bad advice from teachers regarding academic goals, ostensibly to support the framework of so-called equity. I'd be concerned that this is part of a wider trend, especially since TJ admissions is something which looms in the not-too-distant future for us. (Checks MATHCOUNTS news) I don't think my concerns have been allayed.

Finally, let's talk about the TJ court case. In context, the ruling was that, although the admissions changes were without doubt spearheaded by an obvious racist with unambiguously racist intentions, they could legitimately be interpreted as an attempt to solve a legitimate problem. The court naturally would not have held an opinion about whether the strategy used was an effective or reasonable way to solve the problem. It would be deeply unusual and awkward, then, if someone were to hold this ruling up as a way to say that they're better than everyone else. (Reads this forum) Never mind.

DP. I have two kids in AAP and one going to TJ this fall. We don't have Math counts or Matt club or anything like that, not would DC have been interested in doing any of that. I can't say I think these competitions have anything to do with anything, especially wrt talent or being deserving of being admitted to a magnet school.

I'm sorry that you're discouraged about merit and meritocracy. I don't think your fears are well-founded. The good kids will do well. When good programs do not admit some kids, they will succeed somewhere else.

Fwiw, I think there are problems with the new admissions process and with geographic admissions generally (I grew up in Texas and witnessed the good and bad there). But there were problems with the old admissions process that merited fixing, or at least changing. So overall I think this is better. In time, the process will change again. And we'll see then what ia new admissions process ooks like.

[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: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.

As I've said many times, I do not care how much success Curie has in separating Indian families from their hard-earned money in an attempt to keep up with the rest of their community and get a leg up on everyone else.

All I care about is that that behavior is not specifically rewarded by the TJ Admissions process, and inarguably it no longer is. We won, and the Supreme Court ended the conversation earlier this year. And if Curie won too because of greater exposure, that's fine. I genuinely don't care.

Kids from disadvantaged economic circumstances now have access to TJ where they didn't before - to include plenty of Asian kids. As long as that is the case, I will consider my personal crusade a success and there's nothing you can do to convince me otherwise.

Wow. Congratulations.

Now let me share some of my own humble agendas which might have fallen short.

For one, I'd like to avoid living in a world where - due to the lack of clarity to, objectivity of, and respect for the standards for high intellect - meaningful decision-making has devolved into a competition over who can out-stupid everyone else. (Checks the latest political and election news) I suppose we haven't succeeded.

Two, I'd hate it if people with a history of prejudice get comfortable with this idea of success - that they can take shallow measures that look like they solve a problem which only exists due of their own behavior, and use that to make themselves feel like they've been doing right all along. That they're the ones who's opinions on equity everyone else should be heeding. (Checks the latest war news) It doesn't look like we're doing well on this front.

Three, as the parent of an elementary kid in AAP, the process for AAP selection seemed unintuitively subjective and uncertain. I can think of a number of times when my child received what I considered bad advice from teachers regarding academic goals, ostensibly to support the framework of so-called equity. I'd be concerned that this is part of a wider trend, especially since TJ admissions is something which looms in the not-too-distant future for us. (Checks MATHCOUNTS news) I don't think my concerns have been allayed.

Finally, let's talk about the TJ court case. In context, the ruling was that, although the admissions changes were without doubt spearheaded by an obvious racist with unambiguously racist intentions, they could legitimately be interpreted as an attempt to solve a legitimate problem. The court naturally would not have held an opinion about whether the strategy used was an effective or reasonable way to solve the problem. It would be deeply unusual and awkward, then, if someone were to hold this ruling up as a way to say that they're better than everyone else. (Reads this forum) Never mind.

DP. I have two kids in AAP and one going to TJ this fall. We don't have Math counts or Matt club or anything like that, not would DC have been interested in doing any of that. I can't say I think these competitions have anything to do with anything, especially wrt talent or being deserving of being admitted to a magnet school.

I'm sorry that you're discouraged about merit and meritocracy. I don't think your fears are well-founded. The good kids will do well. When good programs do not admit some kids, they will succeed somewhere else.

Fwiw, I think there are problems with the new admissions process and with geographic admissions generally (I grew up in Texas and witnessed the good and bad there). But there were problems with the old admissions process that merited fixing, or at least changing. So overall I think this is better. In time, the process will change again. And we'll see then what ia new admissions process ooks like.

+1 Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think a poster on this or another recent thread got it right when they noted that TJ is kept alive because the School Board has decided that it wants a more diverse group of students to enjoy the reputational benefit of having attended TJ. The challenge is that the reputational benefit will dissipate over time if the school can't maintain the same rigor and high standards as in the past. So it's a race against time to capitalize on TJ's past glories before they are truly a thing of the past.

Confident that the Asian students in the top half will anyway uphold stellar academic records and win competitive stem awards for fcps news release publicity, the school board has figured out that the bottom half can be filled with algebra 1 students to get the predetermined diversity chart.

How do you know you are getting the most qualified asians when the merit filter is so diluted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People act as though MIT didn't also change their admissions policies over the years. They had a tons of suicides and lawsuits over them. They made a concerted effort to not take lopsided kids with no life. Didn't impact their rankings at all.

It doesn't hurt relative ratings when everyone is making the same compromises.

With that said MIT's push for more women resulted in an increase in mostly asian women.

The push for racial diversity has meant a lot more immigrants or the children of immigrants.

It's basically affirmative action for the children of non-asian immigrants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People act as though MIT didn't also change their admissions policies over the years. They had a tons of suicides and lawsuits over them. They made a concerted effort to not take lopsided kids with no life. Didn't impact their rankings at all.

It doesn't hurt relative ratings when everyone is making the same compromises.

With that said MIT's push for more women resulted in an increase in mostly asian women.

The push for racial diversity has meant a lot more immigrants or the children of immigrants.

It's basically affirmative action for the children of non-asian immigrants.

Asian students from low-income families benefited the most from the most recent TJ changes.

Women were also better represented.