Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

I wonder what the second question is actually asking. What consistututes currently receiving meals? That you picked up the free meal once this school year? You pick them up one or more times a week?

Another example of how the TJ Admissions office wrote terrible questions to evaluate "economically disadvantaged".

From the application:
"Are you eligible for free meals? Yes No

Are you currently receiving free meals? Yes No"

I would assume sometime recently - within the last month or so.

That is your assumption. Someone else could read it entirely different. There are multiple ways to interpret the meals questions. That’s why so many people are angry at the TJ admissions office.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

I wonder what the second question is actually asking. What consistututes currently receiving meals? That you picked up the free meal once this school year? You pick them up one or more times a week?

Another example of how the TJ Admissions office wrote terrible questions to evaluate "economically disadvantaged".

From the application:
"Are you eligible for free meals? Yes No

Are you currently receiving free meals? Yes No"

I would assume sometime recently - within the last month or so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

I wonder what the second question is actually asking. What consistututes currently receiving meals? That you picked up the free meal once this school year? You pick them up one or more times a week?

Another example of how the TJ Admissions office wrote terrible questions to evaluate "economically disadvantaged".

From the application:
"Are you eligible for free meals? Yes No

Are you currently receiving free meals? Yes No"

I would assume sometime recently - within the last month or so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

I'd assume all of them since lying would be dishonest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

I wonder what the second question is actually asking. What consistututes currently receiving meals? That you picked up the free meal once this school year? You pick them up one or more times a week?

Another example of how the TJ Admissions office wrote terrible questions to evaluate "economically disadvantaged".

Anonymous wrote:Give the underprivileged vouchers to take prep courses and compete on equal footing with everyone else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

I wonder what the second question is actually asking. What consistututes currently receiving meals? That you picked up the free meal once this school year? You pick them up one or more times a week?

Another example of how the TJ Admissions office wrote terrible questions to evaluate "economically disadvantaged".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

I wonder what the second question is actually asking. What consistututes currently receiving meals? That you picked up the free meal once this school year? You pick them up one or more times a week?

Another example of how the TJ Admissions office wrote terrible questions to evaluate "economically disadvantaged".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

How many said “yes” that they were actively receiving free meals? The second question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Exactly. If you ask better questions, you get better data. That's how it works.

If the TJ Admissions office is going to give 90 experience points, they should actually write a question that everyone agrees on how it should be answered.

For the class of 2025, 387 applicants checked "Yes" to one or both of the meals questions. Of those applicants, 35.7% (n=138) were admitted. There were 2,647 applicants that did not check "Yes" to either question. Of these applicants, 15.6% (n=412) were admitted. Checking "Yes" to the meals questions gives a tremendous advantage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

The way it was worded everyone could have answered yes. It would be easy enough to verify.

Not really people knew they were lying and should be disqualified if they answered yes when financially they don’t qualify.

OR

THE TJ ADMISSIONS OFFICE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW TO WRITE THESE KINDS OF QUESTIONS.

Seriously. Did they not have ANYONE with half a brain read the meals questions ahead of time?

I was wondering if the question was purposely worded the way it was. That way the admissions office could claim “economic diversity” wink wink nod nod.

I’ve wondered this as well. Would not surprise me. It was pointed out to the admissions office and they choose not to fix or address it.

Wasn't lunch free for everyone?

Yes. The question is more appropriate for years were lunch isn't free for everyone because it identifies kids who have been at an economic disadvantage and less likely to have had some of the extra curriculars that other kids have done. COVID funds have been used to make lunch free for everyone so some people felt they were being clever by saying that they qualified for free meals. It wasn't a lie, because everyone was eligible for free meals, but it is not what the admissions people were looking for. Legally allowable, ethically questionable but some folks don't care because they see it as a way of increasing their chance to be selected for TJ and that is all that matters to them. Because the TJ Admissions folks won't see through that BS when they are looking at the candidates from MS that feed into the high SES high schools and see that the number of kids "eligible for free meals" applying for TJ is far higher then the number of FARMS kids attending those MS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And it's ironic that you'd use inflammatory rhetoric to attack those trying to preserve what they saw as a merit-based process when the current School Board could just as readily be accused of doing its utmost to tear the place apart by favoring students with "experience factors" that are a soft proxy for race and lower SES.

Or pretending to use experience factors. They are using a question that every student can answer yes and get those experience factors.
They just want to be seen as taking more low-income kids, knowing that they are just taking high-income kids who checked the box.

+1. The free meals question should have been thrown out.

I heard they checked this and disqualified anyone who lied.

If they have lied on the application, what is the guarantee they haven't gotten outside help in writing essay answers using some high schoolers or parents themselves helping the kids. It is unethical and should be disqualified. It is FCPS making admission decision and they know who are in the meals program and who are not.

That's why the essays should be proctored but even that may be unfair when you consider many kids take classes on exactly how to write these. This also confers an unfair advantage to them over anyone who did not spend the time and money on third party help.