Young Scholars Admittance
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
But including everyone into these special enrichment activities doesn’t inhibit their college aspirations. But alas, this thread is littered with excuses for obvious discrimination. We can just throw this one on with the rest. |
Anonymous
| anyone think this is a prelude to Miyares investigating the program? |
Anonymous
|
It’s bonkers that people are complaining about early intervention to help talented kids succeed academically when they might not have as much of a chance on their own.
I am very against the TJ admissions changed and test optional policies because those try to rig admissions to ensure certain outcomes. This is helping achieve positive outcomes through honest measures! These coalition for TJ folks have lost the plot. |
Anonymous
I am guessing, and it is only a guess, that the schools that have a larger Young Scholars program in FCPS probably don't have a very large or active PTA. Our school has an active PTA that offers a wide variety of extra curricular activities, although it has been slow to restart after COVID. My kid had the option to join coding club, robotics club, chess club, and the like as an after school activity. There are other STEM options that are regularly announced and advertised in the area. Kids who are interested in STEM have a ton of opportunities. I don't even know if our school has a Young Scholars program. We are not a high FARMs or ESOL school with a high white and Asian population. One parent asked about Young Scholars at the AAP meeting when my kid was n second grade but the AART said that the school did not have a program since do few of the kids would meet the criteria for inclusion based on how the County runs the program. DS participates in math and science enrichment. He has plenty of friends who do the same thing. I would bet that what he does is a higher quality program then what the county could provide. I would guess that the Young Scholars program is active at the Title 1 schools, were there are fewer opportunities for all of the kids, and at the near Title 1 schools. It sounds like the program is open to a wide variety of kids so ask about it. |
Anonymous
You would be right. My DC was in YS at a Title 1 school. Because we were Title 1, there was a full time AART. Because there wasn't a LLIV program, the AART had a robust YS program to compensate. I don't think YS is a one size fits all program. We had a Summer Science Academy that was awesome. That was funded through a grant of some sort that I think came from a private company in the area. I guess my point is that depending on the situation at each school, YS can be very different, but the admission criteria is standard. At the risk of sounding smug, I'll say that we are not low income but a biracial family. It was really nice to see my kid hanging out with other inquisitive minds, doing a fun project in the community, and learning from a very young age that great people come from all different walks of life. Fun fact: DC didn't experience racism until later on at a high SES elementary school. Turns out a higher income school population with more access to just about everything didn't result in a better education. It was worse. |
Anonymous
+1 million. I'm a PP but this is exactly what we should be doing. If you front load services at younger ages, there's no argument to change later policies in the name of equity. This is exactly what Coalition for TJ should support. |
Anonymous
Wow, what school is your child at that you have so many amazing clubs? Our school is not Title I, but it's very diverse - maybe 25% FARMS, and we have none of these clubs. The PTA works with a company to do enrichment classes in the fall and spring and that's it. Once four or five years ago they had a math night and a science fair, but it was once. |
Anonymous
This. Our school has a chess club and this is it. |
Anonymous
When it started, Young Scholars had as one of its stated goals as gaining more admissions to TJ for URM students. TJ was back then an admission by mostly objective standard school, so I don't see how encouraging students to reach higher or think differently was objectionable. The real challenge, and I suspect that it remains, is that a student has to do very well in algebra in 7th or 8th grade. The system was simply not generating enough candidates. It strikes me this is still the case or there would not be a need to alter admissions criteria as is being done today. I have surmised at times that the algebra metric is too simplistic but I have been told it is an excellent marker. Academic disparities are really a tough challenge. I do support the notion that the earlier the intervention, the better. I did as well as one could do at a top law school, and was the law review editor. Oddly, I came from a poor background but talked my way into a honors program in a so-called prestige undergrad school which was so brutal it made the Socratic method in law school seem like a relative layup. I actually cringed at this teaching method because it was clear to me that some awfully bright people (i.e., smarter than I was) just didn't have that kind of learning style. But the rules of the game at top law schools have been set in place for decades, at least for first year study, which is all that matters. Even the most progressive professors were law review types at Harvard or Yale and they teach the way they were taught, no matter their politics. The Dean of the School approached me (an incredible guy) and a few of my colleagues to run seminars to first year URM students on how to take tests. I gladly did it, but found the results disappointing. The kids in the seminar by the way were in general far more interesting than the typical I am in law school because its what my family wants types, and it was a joy to work with them. The problem is that graduate school is way too late to make up for deficiencies (and the disparities associated with the group, with a few exceptions who I knew well and who had no need to attend the seminars, were just too large). I do hold out the possibility that my teaching was mediocre but one of my law review colleagues was a URM who led the FBI in their training regime. She was the best student and teacher I have ever come across in any field. It seems obvious to state that graduate school was too late to fix these challenges but I think the point is that whatever can be done much earlier is worth trying, subject to reasonable accountability measures. There were a few conservative students (and I was a centrist) who objected to these seminars and I told them that were simply being petty to complain. The program did not impact them in any way, and even if not successful, it certainly made us question as to how to get better at the endeavor of helping others to get better. Griping about the kids opportunities with these seminars is also reflective of zero sum thinking, which is not the way the world works. These kids gains didn't detract from what I could do. I know this is way too much detail, but it gives one an idea of what getting people to accelerate in learning entails. The professors in the seminar wanted us to use past exams as a teaching tool. The exams were in the law library so it was no great secret. I objected to this method - although it sounds crazy - because how can seeing past exams hurt? My observation was that these diligent kids who wanted to catch up (after all, most of them had a lifetime worth of lifestyle choking student loans) would memorize the exams as this is what worked in undergrad - and not drill down on the relentless questioning and issue spotting and think on your feet ability required to do well on tests. The endless so what? of the Socratic method. I wanted a much simplified group of fact patterns - very simplified - to get at the method behind what law schools teach. These students with teaching to full past exams would react to new elaborate fact patterns on the actual test by attempting to memorize it just as they did in the seminar. This was no way to get through these tests because virtually everyone who did this would run out of time. You just can't score well if you can't finish the test - scores of points are missed. I did not test this view empirically, but I think i was right. Even if I wasn't it reminded me of the importance of listening to teachers carefully and listen to their front line inputs. My own kids did as well as any students could possibly do in FCPS and while I was in no state to reach their academic levels I was very supportive of their teachers. I hope Young Scholars has the mindset to look at their work critically while being supportive. |
Anonymous
It's entirely possible this is discrimination based on race, but nothing will be done unless someone sues FCPS and brings it to the courts. Any volunteers? Didn't think so. |
Anonymous
The Attorney General has taken this up: https://www.oag.state.va.us/media-center/news-releases/2548-march-9th-2022-attorney-general-miyares-demands-fairfax-county-middle-school-stop-racially-discriminating-against-children |
Anonymous
Which program was this, and how did you talk your way into it? |
Anonymous
But Young Scholars isn't for kids with IEPs, it's for URMs. If she sits through the IEP process for a white or asian student and sees how unfair FCPS is to them, how would it justify the existence of special programming that student will never have access to? |
Anonymous
Yeah their mistake was stating students if a certain race and ethnicity could be included but others would be excluded. They are supposed to stick with more neutral high level language to convey this. |
Anonymous
Young Scholars DOES have kids with IEPs. |