TJ Falls to 14th in the Nation Per US News
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Anyone looking at the data would have to agree. In fact, the only people who will even argue this are those who would have us returned to the rigged corrupt previous system. |
Anonymous
| The one area TJ is stronger now that few years ago is Remedial support. |
Anonymous
The DEI been trying to malign objective measures of merit for a long time and for a brief shining moment in 2020 to 20223, they succeeded but then everyone realized that merit matters and now we are all going back to testing. if one of the arguments for getting rid of the TJ test was elimination of the test by top colleges, wouldn't the reintroduction of testing by these colleges indicate that TJ should do the same? |
Anonymous
How do you ban paid prep? And what makes you think that it makes a difference? This handwringing over the inequity of test prep is pretty nucking futz. We know that wealthy students and poor students with the same sat score have almost identical college performance. If the test scores of wealthy kids was artificially inflated by prep and didn't reflect real ability, you would expect poor kids to outperform wealthy kids if they had the same test score. But that doesn't happen. |
Anonymous
Or anyone that believed in merit. |
Anonymous
I think that's why the current process which uses objective measures like standardized test scores and grades in a race blind selection is so good compared to the test which wealthy families were able to buy access. |
Anonymous
“The DEI”? It isn’t the boogeyman. 
Public schools have different stakeholders and different objectives than top colleges. The issue with the old admissions process for TJ, a public school magnet, was that it gave too much room for wealthy kids to unethically obtain an unfair advantage. |
Anonymous
Look at how the test prep companies flaunt their outcomes. There were almost no kids from low-income families at TJ before the change so there was no way to compare. |
Anonymous
You're misinformed. The current process doesn't use standardized test scores. The selection is mostly based on essays. Additionally, experience factors are worth a huge number of points, so any kid who is FARMS, ESOL, or has an IEP gets a bunch of bonus points. |
Anonymous
+1. LOL. |
Anonymous
What standardized test scores? They eliminated testing for TJ admissions. |
Anonymous
DEI is absolutely the problem here. They didn't make the chabnges because of some testing advantage. They made the changes to achieve racial policy goals. You already know this and keep pretending it was about test prep. You are convincing noone, not even yourself. |
Anonymous
They introduces a preference for poor kids. 1/3 of the kids on free and reduced lunch got accepted compared to bout 17% admission rate overall. Before the poor kids almost never got in. You can have a preference for poor kids and still maintain merit. The problem is that you would not be replacing asian kids with white/hispanic/black kids. You would be replacing asian AND white kids with mostly poor east asian kids and some poor hispanic and poor black kids. The school is likely to have gotten more asian |
Anonymous
DEI is a good thing. I never said it was just about test prep. Here is what I said: 1. CHANGES TO TJ ADMISSIONS PROCESS FCPS has changed the TJ admissions process multiple times over the years to address systemic inequalities. https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/8W9QET68F25B/$file/Changes%20to%20TJHSST%20Admissions%20Since%202004.pdf https://www.fcag.org/tjadmissions.shtml https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/ Before the most recent change, the class of 2024 had less than 1% (0.6%) of the students came from economically-disadvantaged families. There was also very little representation from the less affluent schools. 2. CONCERN ABOUT TJ PREP INDUSTRY There was also public concern about the TJ test prep industry that led, in part, to changes in the admissions process. By reverse engineering the admissions criteria/process, prep companies offered kids an unfair advantage in admissions. In fact, back in 2017 the SB switched to quant-q, which intentionally didn’t share prep, in an effort to reduce this unfair advantage. https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/ “ “Is it gonna once again advantage those kids whose parents can pay to sign them up for special prep camps to now be prepping for science testing as well?” Megan McLaughlin asked when presented with the new plan. Admissions director Jeremy Shughart doesn’t think so. The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.” This has all been discussed countless times on DCUM. Feel free to go read old threads for more details. It was well known in my affluent area that you could greatly improve chances of admissions by paying $$$ for prep classes. 3. QUANT-Q DOESN’T RELEASE MATERIALS The company that offers Quant-Q intentionally does NOT release materials to the public - it’s very different than SAT, ACT, etc. They want to “measure your natural ability”. And test takers agreed to not share any parts of the test. https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/ “The firm that markets the math portion of the test, Quant-Q, doesn’t release materials to the public, a practice that should make them harder for test-prep schools to crack.” Based on the NDAs, any test prep books or companies that obtain and share example quant-q test questions may have been unethically, or even potentially illegally, produced. https://insightassessment.com/policies/ “Test Taker Interface User Agreement In this agreement, each person who accesses this interface is called a “user,” and whatever a user accesses is called an “instrument.” Copyright Protected: The user acknowledges that this online interface and everything in it are proprietary business property of the California Academic Press LLC and are protected by international copyrights. Except as permitted by purchased use licenses, the user agrees not to reproduce, distribute, hack, harm, limit, alter, or edit this interface or any part of any instrument or results report, table or analysis stored in, generated by, or delivered through this interface. Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement: The user agrees not to copy, disclose, describe, imitate, replicate, or mirror this interface or this instrument(s) in whole or in part for any purpose. The user agrees not to create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive instrument or instruments for a period of up to four years from the date of the user’s most recent access. Non-Disclosure and Non-Compete Agreement By accessing the Insight Assessment online testing interface or purchasing a preview pack or instrument use licenses, all clients acknowledge that the on-line interface and the testing instrument(s) it contains or displays include proprietary business information, such as but not limited to the structure of test questions or the presentation of those questions and other information displayed in conjunction with the use of this testing interface. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by purchasing a preview pack or testing licenses, the client and their organization, shall not disclose, copy, or replicate this testing interface or this testing instrument(s) in whole or in part in comparable or competitive product or interface of any kind. In the absence of a specific written agreement between the client and Insight Assessment, the client agrees that by accessing the testing instrument(s) for any purpose, including but not limited to previewing the instrument(s), the client and the client’s organization shall not create, design, develop, publish, market, or distribute any comparable or competitive testing instrument(s). By clicking the “Agree” button, the user acknowledges reading, understanding, and agreeing to abide by the statements above and by all the policies and notices posted on Insight Assessment public website(s).” "Remember that the goal of a critical thinking assessment is to measure your natural ability to think critically, so there’s no need for extensive preparation. Just be yourself and approach the assessment with a clear mind." 4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy. https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/ “ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ” 5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test. https://www.facebook.com/tjvents Thread started July 11, 2020 I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them. https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/ “ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.” 6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf Pg 7 “we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students” SCOTUS left ruling in place: https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/ 7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP: There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history. Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined. And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25). The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall): 
The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students. Asian 19% Black 14% Hispanic 21% White 17% Multiracial/Other* 13% ALL 18% 8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf page 16 "Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020." |
Anonymous
|
The School Board honored schools with teams winning VHSL state winter and spring athletic and academic championships last night:
Chantilly Lake Braddock Langley (4) McLean (3) Robinson South Lakes (2) West Springfield (3) TJHSST was not among the schools recognized. |