TJ admissions now verifying free and reduced price meal status for successful 2026 applicants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids friend, who has been in AAP, couldn't get into algebra I in 7th, got few B+, A-s, got in to TJ, has wealth/educated parents, openly admitted to friends that he lied about all sorts of things on the portrait sheet as he and his parents know there is not going to be validation of anything they claim in the essays. May be this other kid is better at articulating things, but there is no way this kid should be preferred over a straight A students from the same school with demonstrable stem achievements, just based on few less than perfect lines in an essay. There are few that defend the new process to death, probably never didn't have their kids go through such unexpected rejections.

I had a friend who criticized so much about insurance companies covering for pre-existing conditions, how it gets expensive for everyone, country will break down, blah blah, but once someone in the family diagnosed with a serious medical condition, realized that it could happen to anyone. So, no one realizes until it hurts.

The old process is bad, but new process is far worse.

And you don't think that there were kids who exaggerated or lied in essays in years past? No system is going to prevent all forms of abuse. Do you think that a high percentage of kids lied in their portrait essay?

Your kid might have been rejected under the old system because there are far more applicants then there are seats. And there are a lot of kids with the high test scores and grades and STEM activities. There is no guarantee that your kid would have been accepted. You can feel free to hold on to your perceived injustice over the essay but the reality is that many kids are denied entrance. And those kids who were from under represented schools that got a spot because of the 1.5% distribution come from schools that have been disadvantaged in the application process because they don't have STEM activities after school or they couldn't afford STEM extra activities or they didn't know about them because their parents are not on top of all things STEM.

Well, it matters a lot more now because SPS and science essay carry 600 points, where GPA can only make a difference of 37.5 points (since min req is 3.5 and max is 4.0, scaled to 300). I hope you understand why essays are so critical in the new process and even some seemingly innocent typos or minor grammatical mistakes made in hurry (by less prepared) can potentially cost a lot depending on who is grading the essays and how much tolerant they are about the mistakes.

Unlike multiple choice questions, essay grading is very subjective. Forget essays, my kids school had two math teachers for geometry HN and one is known to be very strict and cuts as much as half the marks for missing a single step or symbol, while other teacher ignores these things and only focuses on whether the kids really understood the problem. I see the merits in both approaches, but if the math score determines who gets the brownie at the end, then which class would you rather be?

The bolded is a key issue. With 2500+ applications, there's no way that the same panel of two graders is handling everyone's SPS or everyone's problem solving essay. The final point totals for any applicant may be determined more by whether they had the luck of the draw and got lenient graders vs. tough graders. There's also most likely some degree of "olympic scoring," wherein the first kids reviewed end up with relatively lower scores than they rightfully deserved.

I'd prefer a lottery over the current process. It would be equally random, but at least the rejections would no longer feel quite so personal for the high achieving kids who ought to have been accepted.

I would prefer a lottery 1000 times over the current process. Whatever the outcome is, we will at least know it will be fair and not biased towards or against anyone or school in particular. Its not just mistakes, its style of writing too. When you are not looking for fixed set of points (like answers to questions in actual course work), perception of the grader matters a lot. I might like particular kids choice of words and how they are expressed compared to another. This is evident with choice of books we read too i.e., I might like one author more appealing to my taste compared to different author even in the same genre. You may be smartest person in the room, but if the person who grades does't like the way you express things, you are screwed!

When these essays carry so much weight (600 points?) even tiny differences in perception gets exaggerated quite a lot! Its a shame that grades and other extra curricular activities (even within the same school) took such a low seat compared to the essays.

This is truly a remarkable turn from the status quo crowd who previously were hell-bent on accepting anything other than the lottery.

They are making the case that now their children are feeling personally rejected by this process - but in reality, it is they as parents who are feeling rejected because they have so much personally invested in getting their kid into TJ as some sort of cultural status symbol.

Now they are claiming that TJ is somehow devalued for them because selection may not carry the same value within their community as it used to... and perhaps that's a REALLY, REALLY good thing for everyone's mental health.

But if it's still highly ranked by news outlets and that prestige is still there, get ready for the parade of sour grapes.

PP here, just fyi - I have always been against and very vocal opponent of the new process even from the get-go last year when my kid was in the 7th grade. I even wrote several letters to school board expressing concerns over how the 'proposed' process discriminates against the AAP center schools (before any of the court cases and the point system was revealed). I attended the virtual town halls and expressed my discomfort in chats, talks etc. Of course, all my concerns were simply ignored and not received a single response to any of them from anyone. I sincerely hope you understand that I gain nothing here from complaining as my kid has pretty much made up mind that about going to base HS. Why I am still invested, well, I at least want the process be fixed for future kids.

Highly ranked, sure, but lets talk about this in few years.

It doesn't discriminate against the AAP center schools - at least, now that the redundant "underrepresented schools" experience factor has been removed from consideration. AAP center school kids are competing for essentially the same number of seats that students from any other school are.

What the new process no longer does is discriminate as severely IN FAVOR OF AAP center schools. It now gives students who don't attend those schools a real chance in the process - and heroes in classes above them who have successfully matriculated to and attended TJ and can help them determine if it's the right fit.

Removal of an advantage is not discrimination, any more than turning an all-male school into a coed school doesn't discriminate against male students.

This is blatantly misleading. If it's what the defenders of the admissions change think passes as sound logic, better to just shut down TJHSST and return TJ to use as another base school.

This is the ultimate on sour grapes: if I can’t have it, then no one else should get it either.

It's not sour grapes. It's the recognition that the defenders of the admissions change will resort to ridiculous arguments, such as the notion that AAP and non-AAP students are equally qualified to attend what is ostensibly the county's most rigorous STEM-oriented high school. Why not allow TJ to revert to its original use as a local high school rather than pretend it's something that it's not? That's just common sense.

“If we can’t have it, nobody should.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids friend, who has been in AAP, couldn't get into algebra I in 7th, got few B+, A-s, got in to TJ, has wealth/educated parents, openly admitted to friends that he lied about all sorts of things on the portrait sheet as he and his parents know there is not going to be validation of anything they claim in the essays. May be this other kid is better at articulating things, but there is no way this kid should be preferred over a straight A students from the same school with demonstrable stem achievements, just based on few less than perfect lines in an essay. There are few that defend the new process to death, probably never didn't have their kids go through such unexpected rejections.

I had a friend who criticized so much about insurance companies covering for pre-existing conditions, how it gets expensive for everyone, country will break down, blah blah, but once someone in the family diagnosed with a serious medical condition, realized that it could happen to anyone. So, no one realizes until it hurts.

The old process is bad, but new process is far worse.

And you don't think that there were kids who exaggerated or lied in essays in years past? No system is going to prevent all forms of abuse. Do you think that a high percentage of kids lied in their portrait essay?

Your kid might have been rejected under the old system because there are far more applicants then there are seats. And there are a lot of kids with the high test scores and grades and STEM activities. There is no guarantee that your kid would have been accepted. You can feel free to hold on to your perceived injustice over the essay but the reality is that many kids are denied entrance. And those kids who were from under represented schools that got a spot because of the 1.5% distribution come from schools that have been disadvantaged in the application process because they don't have STEM activities after school or they couldn't afford STEM extra activities or they didn't know about them because their parents are not on top of all things STEM.

Well, it matters a lot more now because SPS and science essay carry 600 points, where GPA can only make a difference of 37.5 points (since min req is 3.5 and max is 4.0, scaled to 300). I hope you understand why essays are so critical in the new process and even some seemingly innocent typos or minor grammatical mistakes made in hurry (by less prepared) can potentially cost a lot depending on who is grading the essays and how much tolerant they are about the mistakes.

Unlike multiple choice questions, essay grading is very subjective. Forget essays, my kids school had two math teachers for geometry HN and one is known to be very strict and cuts as much as half the marks for missing a single step or symbol, while other teacher ignores these things and only focuses on whether the kids really understood the problem. I see the merits in both approaches, but if the math score determines who gets the brownie at the end, then which class would you rather be?

The bolded is a key issue. With 2500+ applications, there's no way that the same panel of two graders is handling everyone's SPS or everyone's problem solving essay. The final point totals for any applicant may be determined more by whether they had the luck of the draw and got lenient graders vs. tough graders. There's also most likely some degree of "olympic scoring," wherein the first kids reviewed end up with relatively lower scores than they rightfully deserved.

I'd prefer a lottery over the current process. It would be equally random, but at least the rejections would no longer feel quite so personal for the high achieving kids who ought to have been accepted.

I would prefer a lottery 1000 times over the current process. Whatever the outcome is, we will at least know it will be fair and not biased towards or against anyone or school in particular. Its not just mistakes, its style of writing too. When you are not looking for fixed set of points (like answers to questions in actual course work), perception of the grader matters a lot. I might like particular kids choice of words and how they are expressed compared to another. This is evident with choice of books we read too i.e., I might like one author more appealing to my taste compared to different author even in the same genre. You may be smartest person in the room, but if the person who grades does't like the way you express things, you are screwed!

When these essays carry so much weight (600 points?) even tiny differences in perception gets exaggerated quite a lot! Its a shame that grades and other extra curricular activities (even within the same school) took such a low seat compared to the essays.

This is truly a remarkable turn from the status quo crowd who previously were hell-bent on accepting anything other than the lottery.

They are making the case that now their children are feeling personally rejected by this process - but in reality, it is they as parents who are feeling rejected because they have so much personally invested in getting their kid into TJ as some sort of cultural status symbol.

Now they are claiming that TJ is somehow devalued for them because selection may not carry the same value within their community as it used to... and perhaps that's a REALLY, REALLY good thing for everyone's mental health.

But if it's still highly ranked by news outlets and that prestige is still there, get ready for the parade of sour grapes.

PP here, just fyi - I have always been against and very vocal opponent of the new process even from the get-go last year when my kid was in the 7th grade. I even wrote several letters to school board expressing concerns over how the 'proposed' process discriminates against the AAP center schools (before any of the court cases and the point system was revealed). I attended the virtual town halls and expressed my discomfort in chats, talks etc. Of course, all my concerns were simply ignored and not received a single response to any of them from anyone. I sincerely hope you understand that I gain nothing here from complaining as my kid has pretty much made up mind that about going to base HS. Why I am still invested, well, I at least want the process be fixed for future kids.

Highly ranked, sure, but lets talk about this in few years.

It doesn't discriminate against the AAP center schools - at least, now that the redundant "underrepresented schools" experience factor has been removed from consideration. AAP center school kids are competing for essentially the same number of seats that students from any other school are.

What the new process no longer does is discriminate as severely IN FAVOR OF AAP center schools. It now gives students who don't attend those schools a real chance in the process - and heroes in classes above them who have successfully matriculated to and attended TJ and can help them determine if it's the right fit.

Removal of an advantage is not discrimination, any more than turning an all-male school into a coed school doesn't discriminate against male students.

Again I call your attention to what is happening in San Francisco where the progressives tripped over their own "good motives" and led the city to absolute dysfunction.

It is obvious to everyone that this new TJ admissions process is broken (and that is not a call to reinstate the previous broken process) but the defenders of this "reform" will go lengths to justify why it is the best thing since sliced bread.

Acknowledge this reform is effed up and go back to the drawing board. And that does not mean bring the previous process back.

Do read the Atlantic link shared in the Politics forum - written by a lifelong SFO resident and democrat. You can see our future there...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/...sco-became-failed-city/661199/

Some political hacks are really working overtime to push this narrative on multiple boards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids friend, who has been in AAP, couldn't get into algebra I in 7th, got few B+, A-s, got in to TJ, has wealth/educated parents, openly admitted to friends that he lied about all sorts of things on the portrait sheet as he and his parents know there is not going to be validation of anything they claim in the essays. May be this other kid is better at articulating things, but there is no way this kid should be preferred over a straight A students from the same school with demonstrable stem achievements, just based on few less than perfect lines in an essay. There are few that defend the new process to death, probably never didn't have their kids go through such unexpected rejections.

I had a friend who criticized so much about insurance companies covering for pre-existing conditions, how it gets expensive for everyone, country will break down, blah blah, but once someone in the family diagnosed with a serious medical condition, realized that it could happen to anyone. So, no one realizes until it hurts.

The old process is bad, but new process is far worse.

And you don't think that there were kids who exaggerated or lied in essays in years past? No system is going to prevent all forms of abuse. Do you think that a high percentage of kids lied in their portrait essay?

Your kid might have been rejected under the old system because there are far more applicants then there are seats. And there are a lot of kids with the high test scores and grades and STEM activities. There is no guarantee that your kid would have been accepted. You can feel free to hold on to your perceived injustice over the essay but the reality is that many kids are denied entrance. And those kids who were from under represented schools that got a spot because of the 1.5% distribution come from schools that have been disadvantaged in the application process because they don't have STEM activities after school or they couldn't afford STEM extra activities or they didn't know about them because their parents are not on top of all things STEM.

Well, it matters a lot more now because SPS and science essay carry 600 points, where GPA can only make a difference of 37.5 points (since min req is 3.5 and max is 4.0, scaled to 300). I hope you understand why essays are so critical in the new process and even some seemingly innocent typos or minor grammatical mistakes made in hurry (by less prepared) can potentially cost a lot depending on who is grading the essays and how much tolerant they are about the mistakes.

Unlike multiple choice questions, essay grading is very subjective. Forget essays, my kids school had two math teachers for geometry HN and one is known to be very strict and cuts as much as half the marks for missing a single step or symbol, while other teacher ignores these things and only focuses on whether the kids really understood the problem. I see the merits in both approaches, but if the math score determines who gets the brownie at the end, then which class would you rather be?

The bolded is a key issue. With 2500+ applications, there's no way that the same panel of two graders is handling everyone's SPS or everyone's problem solving essay. The final point totals for any applicant may be determined more by whether they had the luck of the draw and got lenient graders vs. tough graders. There's also most likely some degree of "olympic scoring," wherein the first kids reviewed end up with relatively lower scores than they rightfully deserved.

I'd prefer a lottery over the current process. It would be equally random, but at least the rejections would no longer feel quite so personal for the high achieving kids who ought to have been accepted.

I would prefer a lottery 1000 times over the current process. Whatever the outcome is, we will at least know it will be fair and not biased towards or against anyone or school in particular. Its not just mistakes, its style of writing too. When you are not looking for fixed set of points (like answers to questions in actual course work), perception of the grader matters a lot. I might like particular kids choice of words and how they are expressed compared to another. This is evident with choice of books we read too i.e., I might like one author more appealing to my taste compared to different author even in the same genre. You may be smartest person in the room, but if the person who grades does't like the way you express things, you are screwed!

When these essays carry so much weight (600 points?) even tiny differences in perception gets exaggerated quite a lot! Its a shame that grades and other extra curricular activities (even within the same school) took such a low seat compared to the essays.

This is truly a remarkable turn from the status quo crowd who previously were hell-bent on accepting anything other than the lottery.

They are making the case that now their children are feeling personally rejected by this process - but in reality, it is they as parents who are feeling rejected because they have so much personally invested in getting their kid into TJ as some sort of cultural status symbol.

Now they are claiming that TJ is somehow devalued for them because selection may not carry the same value within their community as it used to... and perhaps that's a REALLY, REALLY good thing for everyone's mental health.

But if it's still highly ranked by news outlets and that prestige is still there, get ready for the parade of sour grapes.

PP here, just fyi - I have always been against and very vocal opponent of the new process even from the get-go last year when my kid was in the 7th grade. I even wrote several letters to school board expressing concerns over how the 'proposed' process discriminates against the AAP center schools (before any of the court cases and the point system was revealed). I attended the virtual town halls and expressed my discomfort in chats, talks etc. Of course, all my concerns were simply ignored and not received a single response to any of them from anyone. I sincerely hope you understand that I gain nothing here from complaining as my kid has pretty much made up mind that about going to base HS. Why I am still invested, well, I at least want the process be fixed for future kids.

Highly ranked, sure, but lets talk about this in few years.

It doesn't discriminate against the AAP center schools - at least, now that the redundant "underrepresented schools" experience factor has been removed from consideration. AAP center school kids are competing for essentially the same number of seats that students from any other school are.

What the new process no longer does is discriminate as severely IN FAVOR OF AAP center schools. It now gives students who don't attend those schools a real chance in the process - and heroes in classes above them who have successfully matriculated to and attended TJ and can help them determine if it's the right fit.

Removal of an advantage is not discrimination, any more than turning an all-male school into a coed school doesn't discriminate against male students.

This is blatantly misleading. If it's what the defenders of the admissions change think passes as sound logic, better to just shut down TJHSST and return TJ to use as another base school.

Care to be specific about how you think it's misleading?

DP, but it's misleading because it suggests that AAP centers and non-centers are on equal footing and that this is somehow fair to all. In reality, though, there is effectively now a disadvantage to being at an AAP center, at least if one's goal is admission to TJ.

AAP courses are more difficult than non-AAP courses without greater weight in the GPA calculations. Also, AAP students are competing against their same-school peers, which is a more difficult pool than the pool of same-school peers at non-center schools.

Those who think the demographics of TJ should mirror the demographics of FCPS will be happy to see more Gen Ed kids and fewer AAP kids admitted. Those who truly understand the mission of Governor's Schools will not.

Unless this part of the process changes, we will soon see students leaving AAP for 8th grade to return to their base schools. What a perverse incentive to have created...

There is EqUaL oPpoRtUniTy from each middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids friend, who has been in AAP, couldn't get into algebra I in 7th, got few B+, A-s, got in to TJ, has wealth/educated parents, openly admitted to friends that he lied about all sorts of things on the portrait sheet as he and his parents know there is not going to be validation of anything they claim in the essays. May be this other kid is better at articulating things, but there is no way this kid should be preferred over a straight A students from the same school with demonstrable stem achievements, just based on few less than perfect lines in an essay. There are few that defend the new process to death, probably never didn't have their kids go through such unexpected rejections.

I had a friend who criticized so much about insurance companies covering for pre-existing conditions, how it gets expensive for everyone, country will break down, blah blah, but once someone in the family diagnosed with a serious medical condition, realized that it could happen to anyone. So, no one realizes until it hurts.

The old process is bad, but new process is far worse.

And you don't think that there were kids who exaggerated or lied in essays in years past? No system is going to prevent all forms of abuse. Do you think that a high percentage of kids lied in their portrait essay?

Your kid might have been rejected under the old system because there are far more applicants then there are seats. And there are a lot of kids with the high test scores and grades and STEM activities. There is no guarantee that your kid would have been accepted. You can feel free to hold on to your perceived injustice over the essay but the reality is that many kids are denied entrance. And those kids who were from under represented schools that got a spot because of the 1.5% distribution come from schools that have been disadvantaged in the application process because they don't have STEM activities after school or they couldn't afford STEM extra activities or they didn't know about them because their parents are not on top of all things STEM.

Well, it matters a lot more now because SPS and science essay carry 600 points, where GPA can only make a difference of 37.5 points (since min req is 3.5 and max is 4.0, scaled to 300). I hope you understand why essays are so critical in the new process and even some seemingly innocent typos or minor grammatical mistakes made in hurry (by less prepared) can potentially cost a lot depending on who is grading the essays and how much tolerant they are about the mistakes.

Unlike multiple choice questions, essay grading is very subjective. Forget essays, my kids school had two math teachers for geometry HN and one is known to be very strict and cuts as much as half the marks for missing a single step or symbol, while other teacher ignores these things and only focuses on whether the kids really understood the problem. I see the merits in both approaches, but if the math score determines who gets the brownie at the end, then which class would you rather be?

The bolded is a key issue. With 2500+ applications, there's no way that the same panel of two graders is handling everyone's SPS or everyone's problem solving essay. The final point totals for any applicant may be determined more by whether they had the luck of the draw and got lenient graders vs. tough graders. There's also most likely some degree of "olympic scoring," wherein the first kids reviewed end up with relatively lower scores than they rightfully deserved.

I'd prefer a lottery over the current process. It would be equally random, but at least the rejections would no longer feel quite so personal for the high achieving kids who ought to have been accepted.

I would prefer a lottery 1000 times over the current process. Whatever the outcome is, we will at least know it will be fair and not biased towards or against anyone or school in particular. Its not just mistakes, its style of writing too. When you are not looking for fixed set of points (like answers to questions in actual course work), perception of the grader matters a lot. I might like particular kids choice of words and how they are expressed compared to another. This is evident with choice of books we read too i.e., I might like one author more appealing to my taste compared to different author even in the same genre. You may be smartest person in the room, but if the person who grades does't like the way you express things, you are screwed!

When these essays carry so much weight (600 points?) even tiny differences in perception gets exaggerated quite a lot! Its a shame that grades and other extra curricular activities (even within the same school) took such a low seat compared to the essays.

This is truly a remarkable turn from the status quo crowd who previously were hell-bent on accepting anything other than the lottery.

They are making the case that now their children are feeling personally rejected by this process - but in reality, it is they as parents who are feeling rejected because they have so much personally invested in getting their kid into TJ as some sort of cultural status symbol.

Now they are claiming that TJ is somehow devalued for them because selection may not carry the same value within their community as it used to... and perhaps that's a REALLY, REALLY good thing for everyone's mental health.

But if it's still highly ranked by news outlets and that prestige is still there, get ready for the parade of sour grapes.

PP here, just fyi - I have always been against and very vocal opponent of the new process even from the get-go last year when my kid was in the 7th grade. I even wrote several letters to school board expressing concerns over how the 'proposed' process discriminates against the AAP center schools (before any of the court cases and the point system was revealed). I attended the virtual town halls and expressed my discomfort in chats, talks etc. Of course, all my concerns were simply ignored and not received a single response to any of them from anyone. I sincerely hope you understand that I gain nothing here from complaining as my kid has pretty much made up mind that about going to base HS. Why I am still invested, well, I at least want the process be fixed for future kids.

Highly ranked, sure, but lets talk about this in few years.

It doesn't discriminate against the AAP center schools - at least, now that the redundant "underrepresented schools" experience factor has been removed from consideration. AAP center school kids are competing for essentially the same number of seats that students from any other school are.

What the new process no longer does is discriminate as severely IN FAVOR OF AAP center schools. It now gives students who don't attend those schools a real chance in the process - and heroes in classes above them who have successfully matriculated to and attended TJ and can help them determine if it's the right fit.

Removal of an advantage is not discrimination, any more than turning an all-male school into a coed school doesn't discriminate against male students.

Lol. Are you the school board???

AAP is the academic recognition. TJ should offer admission to top AAP students. For Non-AAP students, please be qualified for AAP first.

Nope.

AAP is NOT the gatekeeper for TJ.

GMAFB.

[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:My kids friend, who has been in AAP, couldn't get into algebra I in 7th, got few B+, A-s, got in to TJ, has wealth/educated parents, openly admitted to friends that he lied about all sorts of things on the portrait sheet as he and his parents know there is not going to be validation of anything they claim in the essays. May be this other kid is better at articulating things, but there is no way this kid should be preferred over a straight A students from the same school with demonstrable stem achievements, just based on few less than perfect lines in an essay. There are few that defend the new process to death, probably never didn't have their kids go through such unexpected rejections.

I had a friend who criticized so much about insurance companies covering for pre-existing conditions, how it gets expensive for everyone, country will break down, blah blah, but once someone in the family diagnosed with a serious medical condition, realized that it could happen to anyone. So, no one realizes until it hurts.

The old process is bad, but new process is far worse.

And you don't think that there were kids who exaggerated or lied in essays in years past? No system is going to prevent all forms of abuse. Do you think that a high percentage of kids lied in their portrait essay?

Your kid might have been rejected under the old system because there are far more applicants then there are seats. And there are a lot of kids with the high test scores and grades and STEM activities. There is no guarantee that your kid would have been accepted. You can feel free to hold on to your perceived injustice over the essay but the reality is that many kids are denied entrance. And those kids who were from under represented schools that got a spot because of the 1.5% distribution come from schools that have been disadvantaged in the application process because they don't have STEM activities after school or they couldn't afford STEM extra activities or they didn't know about them because their parents are not on top of all things STEM.

Well, it matters a lot more now because SPS and science essay carry 600 points, where GPA can only make a difference of 37.5 points (since min req is 3.5 and max is 4.0, scaled to 300). I hope you understand why essays are so critical in the new process and even some seemingly innocent typos or minor grammatical mistakes made in hurry (by less prepared) can potentially cost a lot depending on who is grading the essays and how much tolerant they are about the mistakes.

Unlike multiple choice questions, essay grading is very subjective. Forget essays, my kids school had two math teachers for geometry HN and one is known to be very strict and cuts as much as half the marks for missing a single step or symbol, while other teacher ignores these things and only focuses on whether the kids really understood the problem. I see the merits in both approaches, but if the math score determines who gets the brownie at the end, then which class would you rather be?

The bolded is a key issue. With 2500+ applications, there's no way that the same panel of two graders is handling everyone's SPS or everyone's problem solving essay. The final point totals for any applicant may be determined more by whether they had the luck of the draw and got lenient graders vs. tough graders. There's also most likely some degree of "olympic scoring," wherein the first kids reviewed end up with relatively lower scores than they rightfully deserved.

I'd prefer a lottery over the current process. It would be equally random, but at least the rejections would no longer feel quite so personal for the high achieving kids who ought to have been accepted.

I would prefer a lottery 1000 times over the current process. Whatever the outcome is, we will at least know it will be fair and not biased towards or against anyone or school in particular. Its not just mistakes, its style of writing too. When you are not looking for fixed set of points (like answers to questions in actual course work), perception of the grader matters a lot. I might like particular kids choice of words and how they are expressed compared to another. This is evident with choice of books we read too i.e., I might like one author more appealing to my taste compared to different author even in the same genre. You may be smartest person in the room, but if the person who grades does't like the way you express things, you are screwed!

When these essays carry so much weight (600 points?) even tiny differences in perception gets exaggerated quite a lot! Its a shame that grades and other extra curricular activities (even within the same school) took such a low seat compared to the essays.

This is truly a remarkable turn from the status quo crowd who previously were hell-bent on accepting anything other than the lottery.

They are making the case that now their children are feeling personally rejected by this process - but in reality, it is they as parents who are feeling rejected because they have so much personally invested in getting their kid into TJ as some sort of cultural status symbol.

Now they are claiming that TJ is somehow devalued for them because selection may not carry the same value within their community as it used to... and perhaps that's a REALLY, REALLY good thing for everyone's mental health.

But if it's still highly ranked by news outlets and that prestige is still there, get ready for the parade of sour grapes.

PP here, just fyi - I have always been against and very vocal opponent of the new process even from the get-go last year when my kid was in the 7th grade. I even wrote several letters to school board expressing concerns over how the 'proposed' process discriminates against the AAP center schools (before any of the court cases and the point system was revealed). I attended the virtual town halls and expressed my discomfort in chats, talks etc. Of course, all my concerns were simply ignored and not received a single response to any of them from anyone. I sincerely hope you understand that I gain nothing here from complaining as my kid has pretty much made up mind that about going to base HS. Why I am still invested, well, I at least want the process be fixed for future kids.

Highly ranked, sure, but lets talk about this in few years.

It doesn't discriminate against the AAP center schools - at least, now that the redundant "underrepresented schools" experience factor has been removed from consideration. AAP center school kids are competing for essentially the same number of seats that students from any other school are.

What the new process no longer does is discriminate as severely IN FAVOR OF AAP center schools. It now gives students who don't attend those schools a real chance in the process - and heroes in classes above them who have successfully matriculated to and attended TJ and can help them determine if it's the right fit.

Removal of an advantage is not discrimination, any more than turning an all-male school into a coed school doesn't discriminate against male students.

This is blatantly misleading. If it's what the defenders of the admissions change think passes as sound logic, better to just shut down TJHSST and return TJ to use as another base school.

This is the ultimate on sour grapes: if I can’t have it, then no one else should get it either.

It's not sour grapes. It's the recognition that the defenders of the admissions change will resort to ridiculous arguments, such as the notion that AAP and non-AAP students are equally qualified to attend what is ostensibly the county's most rigorous STEM-oriented high school. Why not allow TJ to revert to its original use as a local high school rather than pretend it's something that it's not? That's just common sense.

“If we can’t have it, nobody should.”

If this was an attempt at a paraphrase, you failed miserably. Again.

[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:My kids friend, who has been in AAP, couldn't get into algebra I in 7th, got few B+, A-s, got in to TJ, has wealth/educated parents, openly admitted to friends that he lied about all sorts of things on the portrait sheet as he and his parents know there is not going to be validation of anything they claim in the essays. May be this other kid is better at articulating things, but there is no way this kid should be preferred over a straight A students from the same school with demonstrable stem achievements, just based on few less than perfect lines in an essay. There are few that defend the new process to death, probably never didn't have their kids go through such unexpected rejections.

I had a friend who criticized so much about insurance companies covering for pre-existing conditions, how it gets expensive for everyone, country will break down, blah blah, but once someone in the family diagnosed with a serious medical condition, realized that it could happen to anyone. So, no one realizes until it hurts.

The old process is bad, but new process is far worse.

And you don't think that there were kids who exaggerated or lied in essays in years past? No system is going to prevent all forms of abuse. Do you think that a high percentage of kids lied in their portrait essay?

Your kid might have been rejected under the old system because there are far more applicants then there are seats. And there are a lot of kids with the high test scores and grades and STEM activities. There is no guarantee that your kid would have been accepted. You can feel free to hold on to your perceived injustice over the essay but the reality is that many kids are denied entrance. And those kids who were from under represented schools that got a spot because of the 1.5% distribution come from schools that have been disadvantaged in the application process because they don't have STEM activities after school or they couldn't afford STEM extra activities or they didn't know about them because their parents are not on top of all things STEM.

Well, it matters a lot more now because SPS and science essay carry 600 points, where GPA can only make a difference of 37.5 points (since min req is 3.5 and max is 4.0, scaled to 300). I hope you understand why essays are so critical in the new process and even some seemingly innocent typos or minor grammatical mistakes made in hurry (by less prepared) can potentially cost a lot depending on who is grading the essays and how much tolerant they are about the mistakes.

Unlike multiple choice questions, essay grading is very subjective. Forget essays, my kids school had two math teachers for geometry HN and one is known to be very strict and cuts as much as half the marks for missing a single step or symbol, while other teacher ignores these things and only focuses on whether the kids really understood the problem. I see the merits in both approaches, but if the math score determines who gets the brownie at the end, then which class would you rather be?

The bolded is a key issue. With 2500+ applications, there's no way that the same panel of two graders is handling everyone's SPS or everyone's problem solving essay. The final point totals for any applicant may be determined more by whether they had the luck of the draw and got lenient graders vs. tough graders. There's also most likely some degree of "olympic scoring," wherein the first kids reviewed end up with relatively lower scores than they rightfully deserved.

I'd prefer a lottery over the current process. It would be equally random, but at least the rejections would no longer feel quite so personal for the high achieving kids who ought to have been accepted.

I would prefer a lottery 1000 times over the current process. Whatever the outcome is, we will at least know it will be fair and not biased towards or against anyone or school in particular. Its not just mistakes, its style of writing too. When you are not looking for fixed set of points (like answers to questions in actual course work), perception of the grader matters a lot. I might like particular kids choice of words and how they are expressed compared to another. This is evident with choice of books we read too i.e., I might like one author more appealing to my taste compared to different author even in the same genre. You may be smartest person in the room, but if the person who grades does't like the way you express things, you are screwed!

When these essays carry so much weight (600 points?) even tiny differences in perception gets exaggerated quite a lot! Its a shame that grades and other extra curricular activities (even within the same school) took such a low seat compared to the essays.

This is truly a remarkable turn from the status quo crowd who previously were hell-bent on accepting anything other than the lottery.

They are making the case that now their children are feeling personally rejected by this process - but in reality, it is they as parents who are feeling rejected because they have so much personally invested in getting their kid into TJ as some sort of cultural status symbol.

Now they are claiming that TJ is somehow devalued for them because selection may not carry the same value within their community as it used to... and perhaps that's a REALLY, REALLY good thing for everyone's mental health.

But if it's still highly ranked by news outlets and that prestige is still there, get ready for the parade of sour grapes.

PP here, just fyi - I have always been against and very vocal opponent of the new process even from the get-go last year when my kid was in the 7th grade. I even wrote several letters to school board expressing concerns over how the 'proposed' process discriminates against the AAP center schools (before any of the court cases and the point system was revealed). I attended the virtual town halls and expressed my discomfort in chats, talks etc. Of course, all my concerns were simply ignored and not received a single response to any of them from anyone. I sincerely hope you understand that I gain nothing here from complaining as my kid has pretty much made up mind that about going to base HS. Why I am still invested, well, I at least want the process be fixed for future kids.

Highly ranked, sure, but lets talk about this in few years.

It doesn't discriminate against the AAP center schools - at least, now that the redundant "underrepresented schools" experience factor has been removed from consideration. AAP center school kids are competing for essentially the same number of seats that students from any other school are.

What the new process no longer does is discriminate as severely IN FAVOR OF AAP center schools. It now gives students who don't attend those schools a real chance in the process - and heroes in classes above them who have successfully matriculated to and attended TJ and can help them determine if it's the right fit.

Removal of an advantage is not discrimination, any more than turning an all-male school into a coed school doesn't discriminate against male students.

This is blatantly misleading. If it's what the defenders of the admissions change think passes as sound logic, better to just shut down TJHSST and return TJ to use as another base school.

Care to be specific about how you think it's misleading?

DP, but it's misleading because it suggests that AAP centers and non-centers are on equal footing and that this is somehow fair to all. In reality, though, there is effectively now a disadvantage to being at an AAP center, at least if one's goal is admission to TJ.

AAP courses are more difficult than non-AAP courses without greater weight in the GPA calculations. Also, AAP students are competing against their same-school peers, which is a more difficult pool than the pool of same-school peers at non-center schools.

Those who think the demographics of TJ should mirror the demographics of FCPS will be happy to see more Gen Ed kids and fewer AAP kids admitted. Those who truly understand the mission of Governor's Schools will not.

Unless this part of the process changes, we will soon see students leaving AAP for 8th grade to return to their base schools. What a perverse incentive to have created...

There is EqUaL oPpoRtUniTy from each middle school.

I am not sure what you are trying prove with your font choice, but I hope you do realize that center schools do in fact represent the entire region unlike base middle schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. "Decimate" probably would have been more accurate than "cap." Their intent was obvious.

For class of 2025, there were 42 fewer kids admitted from previously "well"-represented MSs than in 2024.

“Decimate”?

42 is much worse than decimate, which means reduce by 10%.

It’s exactly 10%. And the modern definition in English means a large percentage.

Where in the heck are you pullling your data from

https://www.fcag.org/tjstatistics.shtml

The big 4 2024/2025

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Overall 204 to 114 a 43% Decrease

Carson and Longfellow are basically sending more highly qualified STEM kids to their base school vs TJ

Can anyone explain how a 43% drop from the best middle schools is a good thing for a school designed for the best?????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids friend, who has been in AAP, couldn't get into algebra I in 7th, got few B+, A-s, got in to TJ, has wealth/educated parents, openly admitted to friends that he lied about all sorts of things on the portrait sheet as he and his parents know there is not going to be validation of anything they claim in the essays. May be this other kid is better at articulating things, but there is no way this kid should be preferred over a straight A students from the same school with demonstrable stem achievements, just based on few less than perfect lines in an essay. There are few that defend the new process to death, probably never didn't have their kids go through such unexpected rejections.

I had a friend who criticized so much about insurance companies covering for pre-existing conditions, how it gets expensive for everyone, country will break down, blah blah, but once someone in the family diagnosed with a serious medical condition, realized that it could happen to anyone. So, no one realizes until it hurts.

The old process is bad, but new process is far worse.

And you don't think that there were kids who exaggerated or lied in essays in years past? No system is going to prevent all forms of abuse. Do you think that a high percentage of kids lied in their portrait essay?

Your kid might have been rejected under the old system because there are far more applicants then there are seats. And there are a lot of kids with the high test scores and grades and STEM activities. There is no guarantee that your kid would have been accepted. You can feel free to hold on to your perceived injustice over the essay but the reality is that many kids are denied entrance. And those kids who were from under represented schools that got a spot because of the 1.5% distribution come from schools that have been disadvantaged in the application process because they don't have STEM activities after school or they couldn't afford STEM extra activities or they didn't know about them because their parents are not on top of all things STEM.

Well, it matters a lot more now because SPS and science essay carry 600 points, where GPA can only make a difference of 37.5 points (since min req is 3.5 and max is 4.0, scaled to 300). I hope you understand why essays are so critical in the new process and even some seemingly innocent typos or minor grammatical mistakes made in hurry (by less prepared) can potentially cost a lot depending on who is grading the essays and how much tolerant they are about the mistakes.

Unlike multiple choice questions, essay grading is very subjective. Forget essays, my kids school had two math teachers for geometry HN and one is known to be very strict and cuts as much as half the marks for missing a single step or symbol, while other teacher ignores these things and only focuses on whether the kids really understood the problem. I see the merits in both approaches, but if the math score determines who gets the brownie at the end, then which class would you rather be?

The bolded is a key issue. With 2500+ applications, there's no way that the same panel of two graders is handling everyone's SPS or everyone's problem solving essay. The final point totals for any applicant may be determined more by whether they had the luck of the draw and got lenient graders vs. tough graders. There's also most likely some degree of "olympic scoring," wherein the first kids reviewed end up with relatively lower scores than they rightfully deserved.

I'd prefer a lottery over the current process. It would be equally random, but at least the rejections would no longer feel quite so personal for the high achieving kids who ought to have been accepted.

I would prefer a lottery 1000 times over the current process. Whatever the outcome is, we will at least know it will be fair and not biased towards or against anyone or school in particular. Its not just mistakes, its style of writing too. When you are not looking for fixed set of points (like answers to questions in actual course work), perception of the grader matters a lot. I might like particular kids choice of words and how they are expressed compared to another. This is evident with choice of books we read too i.e., I might like one author more appealing to my taste compared to different author even in the same genre. You may be smartest person in the room, but if the person who grades does't like the way you express things, you are screwed!

When these essays carry so much weight (600 points?) even tiny differences in perception gets exaggerated quite a lot! Its a shame that grades and other extra curricular activities (even within the same school) took such a low seat compared to the essays.

This is truly a remarkable turn from the status quo crowd who previously were hell-bent on accepting anything other than the lottery.

They are making the case that now their children are feeling personally rejected by this process - but in reality, it is they as parents who are feeling rejected because they have so much personally invested in getting their kid into TJ as some sort of cultural status symbol.

Now they are claiming that TJ is somehow devalued for them because selection may not carry the same value within their community as it used to... and perhaps that's a REALLY, REALLY good thing for everyone's mental health.

But if it's still highly ranked by news outlets and that prestige is still there, get ready for the parade of sour grapes.

PP here, just fyi - I have always been against and very vocal opponent of the new process even from the get-go last year when my kid was in the 7th grade. I even wrote several letters to school board expressing concerns over how the 'proposed' process discriminates against the AAP center schools (before any of the court cases and the point system was revealed). I attended the virtual town halls and expressed my discomfort in chats, talks etc. Of course, all my concerns were simply ignored and not received a single response to any of them from anyone. I sincerely hope you understand that I gain nothing here from complaining as my kid has pretty much made up mind that about going to base HS. Why I am still invested, well, I at least want the process be fixed for future kids.

Highly ranked, sure, but lets talk about this in few years.

It doesn't discriminate against the AAP center schools - at least, now that the redundant "underrepresented schools" experience factor has been removed from consideration. AAP center school kids are competing for essentially the same number of seats that students from any other school are.

What the new process no longer does is discriminate as severely IN FAVOR OF AAP center schools. It now gives students who don't attend those schools a real chance in the process - and heroes in classes above them who have successfully matriculated to and attended TJ and can help them determine if it's the right fit.

Removal of an advantage is not discrimination, any more than turning an all-male school into a coed school doesn't discriminate against male students.

Again I call your attention to what is happening in San Francisco where the progressives tripped over their own "good motives" and led the city to absolute dysfunction.

It is obvious to everyone that this new TJ admissions process is broken (and that is not a call to reinstate the previous broken process) but the defenders of this "reform" will go lengths to justify why it is the best thing since sliced bread.

Acknowledge this reform is effed up and go back to the drawing board. And that does not mean bring the previous process back.

Do read the Atlantic link shared in the Politics forum - written by a lifelong SFO resident and democrat. You can see our future there...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/...sco-became-failed-city/661199/

Some political hacks are really working overtime to push this narrative on multiple boards.

The truth is omnipresent.

The end of the virtue signaling dimwit progressives is nigh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. "Decimate" probably would have been more accurate than "cap." Their intent was obvious.

For class of 2025, there were 42 fewer kids admitted from previously "well"-represented MSs than in 2024.

“Decimate”?

42 is much worse than decimate, which means reduce by 10%.

It’s exactly 10%. And the modern definition in English means a large percentage.

Where in the heck are you pullling your data from

https://www.fcag.org/tjstatistics.shtml

The big 4 2024/2025

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Overall 204 to 114 a 43% Decrease

Carson and Longfellow are basically sending more highly qualified STEM kids to their base school vs TJ

Can anyone explain how a 43% drop from the best middle schools is a good thing for a school designed for the best?????

From the FCAG data.

2025 2024 delta % change

underrep school 169 27 142 526%
well/over rep 366 408 -42 -10%
private 15 51 -36 -71%

Underrepresented schools
https://www.fcag.org/Underrepresented%20Schools.xlsx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. "Decimate" probably would have been more accurate than "cap." Their intent was obvious.

For class of 2025, there were 42 fewer kids admitted from previously "well"-represented MSs than in 2024.

“Decimate”?

42 is much worse than decimate, which means reduce by 10%.

It’s exactly 10%. And the modern definition in English means a large percentage.

Where in the heck are you pullling your data from

https://www.fcag.org/tjstatistics.shtml

The big 4 2024/2025

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Overall 204 to 114 a 43% Decrease

Carson and Longfellow are basically sending more highly qualified STEM kids to their base school vs TJ

Can anyone explain how a 43% drop from the best middle schools is a good thing for a school designed for the best?????

From the FCAG data.

2025 2024 delta % change

underrep school 169 27 142 526%
well/over rep 366 408 -42 -10%
private 15 51 -36 -71%

Underrepresented schools
https://www.fcag.org/Underrepresented%20Schools.xlsx

And are you responding to the PP who is referring to the 4 big feeders? Or commingling data with schools beyond the 4 to get your desired outcome? #DATAMANIPULATION

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. "Decimate" probably would have been more accurate than "cap." Their intent was obvious.

For class of 2025, there were 42 fewer kids admitted from previously "well"-represented MSs than in 2024.

“Decimate”?

42 is much worse than decimate, which means reduce by 10%.

It’s exactly 10%. And the modern definition in English means a large percentage.

Where in the heck are you pullling your data from

https://www.fcag.org/tjstatistics.shtml

The big 4 2024/2025

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Overall 204 to 114 a 43% Decrease

Carson and Longfellow are basically sending more highly qualified STEM kids to their base school vs TJ

Can anyone explain how a 43% drop from the best middle schools is a good thing for a school designed for the best?????

From the FCAG data.

2025 2024 delta % change

underrep school 169 27 142 526%
well/over rep 366 408 -42 -10%
private 15 51 -36 -71%

Underrepresented schools
https://www.fcag.org/Underrepresented%20Schools.xlsx

And are you responding to the PP who is referring to the 4 big feeders? Or commingling data with schools beyond the 4 to get your desired outcome? #DATAMANIPULATION

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Not PP, but you're just focusing on different schools. FCPS doesn't treat what you refer to as the "4 big feeders" as a separate category for any purposes, but does have a concept of "under-represented schools" that includes 10 of the county's middle/secondary schools and gave a boost to students applying from those schools for the Class of 2025.

[Anonymous]

I am not sure if the so called defenders/saviors of the new process refuse to get it simply don’t understand that AAP center kids actually do come from all across the region and if center schools do not exist, majority of these kids will in fact go back to so called under represented schools. Is this not a common knowledge?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. "Decimate" probably would have been more accurate than "cap." Their intent was obvious.

For class of 2025, there were 42 fewer kids admitted from previously "well"-represented MSs than in 2024.

“Decimate”?

42 is much worse than decimate, which means reduce by 10%.

It’s exactly 10%. And the modern definition in English means a large percentage.

Where in the heck are you pullling your data from

https://www.fcag.org/tjstatistics.shtml

The big 4 2024/2025

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Overall 204 to 114 a 43% Decrease

Carson and Longfellow are basically sending more highly qualified STEM kids to their base school vs TJ

Can anyone explain how a 43% drop from the best middle schools is a good thing for a school designed for the best?????

From the FCAG data.

2025 2024 delta % change

underrep school 169 27 142 526%
well/over rep 366 408 -42 -10%
private 15 51 -36 -71%

Underrepresented schools
https://www.fcag.org/Underrepresented%20Schools.xlsx

And are you responding to the PP who is referring to the 4 big feeders? Or commingling data with schools beyond the 4 to get your desired outcome? #DATAMANIPULATION

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Not PP, but you're just focusing on different schools. FCPS doesn't treat what you refer to as the "4 big feeders" as a separate category for any purposes, but does have a concept of "under-represented schools" that includes 10 of the county's middle/secondary schools and gave a boost to students applying from those schools for the Class of 2025.

There are no additional points to under repressed schools, but every middle school including the center schools that cover the entire region unlike base schools get the same 1.5% quota. I am not sure many in this forum really understand that if center schools do not exist center kids will go back to their base schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. "Decimate" probably would have been more accurate than "cap." Their intent was obvious.

For class of 2025, there were 42 fewer kids admitted from previously "well"-represented MSs than in 2024.

“Decimate”?

42 is much worse than decimate, which means reduce by 10%.

It’s exactly 10%. And the modern definition in English means a large percentage.

Where in the heck are you pullling your data from

https://www.fcag.org/tjstatistics.shtml

The big 4 2024/2025

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Overall 204 to 114 a 43% Decrease

Carson and Longfellow are basically sending more highly qualified STEM kids to their base school vs TJ

Can anyone explain how a 43% drop from the best middle schools is a good thing for a school designed for the best?????

From the FCAG data.

2025 2024 delta % change

underrep school 169 27 142 526%
well/over rep 366 408 -42 -10%
private 15 51 -36 -71%

Underrepresented schools
https://www.fcag.org/Underrepresented%20Schools.xlsx

And are you responding to the PP who is referring to the 4 big feeders? Or commingling data with schools beyond the 4 to get your desired outcome? #DATAMANIPULATION

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Not PP, but you're just focusing on different schools. FCPS doesn't treat what you refer to as the "4 big feeders" as a separate category for any purposes, but does have a concept of "under-represented schools" that includes 10 of the county's middle/secondary schools and gave a boost to students applying from those schools for the Class of 2025.

There are no additional points to under repressed schools, but every middle school including the center schools that cover the entire region unlike base schools get the same 1.5% quota. I am not sure many in this forum really understand that if center schools do not exist center kids will go back to their base schools.

For the Class of 2025, attending a "historically underrepresented school" gave you an "experience factor" boost.

That wouldn't affect the kids getting into TJ from a middle school based on the 1.5% quota, but would advantage students being admitted from the remaining pool of applicants.

I think people realize that, in many cases, kids will go back to their base schools if the center schools no longer exist (this doesn't apply to AAP centers like Cooper and Longfellow that don't have kids who reside outside the base boundaries).

But it's a big goal for them to say the number of kids getting into TJ from, say, Carson is declining. Whether some of those same kids would get into TJ from Franklin if the AAP center at Carson was eliminated and the number of seats allocated to Franklin increased doesn't really matter to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Fair enough. "Decimate" probably would have been more accurate than "cap." Their intent was obvious.

For class of 2025, there were 42 fewer kids admitted from previously "well"-represented MSs than in 2024.

“Decimate”?

42 is much worse than decimate, which means reduce by 10%.

It’s exactly 10%. And the modern definition in English means a large percentage.

Where in the heck are you pullling your data from

https://www.fcag.org/tjstatistics.shtml

The big 4 2024/2025

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Overall 204 to 114 a 43% Decrease

Carson and Longfellow are basically sending more highly qualified STEM kids to their base school vs TJ

Can anyone explain how a 43% drop from the best middle schools is a good thing for a school designed for the best?????

From the FCAG data.

2025 2024 delta % change

underrep school 169 27 142 526%
well/over rep 366 408 -42 -10%
private 15 51 -36 -71%

Underrepresented schools
https://www.fcag.org/Underrepresented%20Schools.xlsx

And are you responding to the PP who is referring to the 4 big feeders? Or commingling data with schools beyond the 4 to get your desired outcome? #DATAMANIPULATION

Carson 82 down to 42
Longfellow 57 down to 28
Rocky Run 32 down to 24
Cooper 33 down to 20

Not PP, but you're just focusing on different schools. FCPS doesn't treat what you refer to as the "4 big feeders" as a separate category for any purposes, but does have a concept of "under-represented schools" that includes 10 of the county's middle/secondary schools and gave a boost to students applying from those schools for the Class of 2025.

There are no additional points to under repressed schools, but every middle school including the center schools that cover the entire region unlike base schools get the same 1.5% quota. I am not sure many in this forum really understand that if center schools do not exist center kids will go back to their base schools.

That will indeed happen. Also, Asians (who disproportionately value TJ prestige) will spread out by renting places in the underrepresented MS boundaries. It is already happening as evidenced by Asian enrollment up from 54% to 60%. It will be back to 70%+ in the next couple of years. People willing to maximize advantage (aka "gamers") will do new things (throw $$$ to prep for essays for one) to get in the inside lane.

Again the law of unintended consequences.

In 4 years -

1. TJ will be 70% Asian - a good school but with a middling cohort of STEM students
2.McLean, et al will be at par with TJ in the quality of students given that non-experience factor kids will stay on. This in turn will deter future generations of McLean students to not even consider TJ as an option. This will feed into reinforcing #1 above
3. Over time TJ will be an above average predominantly Asian school but will not be competing with the best of the best (which is fine, really)

We will be back to square 1. Honestly as a McLean resident - this is a great outcome. Our local school will be better unless the progressives start envying the success and start talking of bussing (not being a scaremonger but I dont trust anyone on this school board)