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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GPA is only a small fraction of the applicant’s score. A kid with a 3.5 GPA and very strong essays will have a higher score than the kid with a 4.0 but lower scored essays. Likewise, FARMS + 3.5 has a much higher point total than non FARMS + a 4.0. Kids with Bs who are getting in aren’t the top GPAs in their school, and no schools have grade deflation. Those kids either got FARMS bonus points or had highly rated essays.

Correct. That is what the FCSB decided they wanted for the admissions policy. If they found a legal way to do it, we have to live with it or vote for candidates for the school board that have your views. Does this process lead to a better, smarter, and more gifted class? Probably not, but that isn't what the FCSB decided was what they wanted for TJHSST. They simply have a different goal for the school than you do and have decided on a criteria for admissions that supports their goals.

Only problem was that it was illegal as per federal judge. Case is still on under appeal.

What if anything is happening with the State case that was on-going (Not the Federal case)? I think it was filed in the Fairfax Circuit Court.

It was perfectly legal but a few parents used to gaming admission weren't happy and have taken them to court. It will be summarily dismissed because this holds no merit.

Yes, it's much harder to get in now since the geographic component insures all students have a shot not just those who spend $20k on prep.

The new system ensures that less qualified kids are admitted simply because they live in areas zoned to under-performing middle schools with weak student cohorts.

It is correct to say that generally speaking, many of those middle schools who are increasing their presence have weaker cohorts top to bottom. That’s not a controversial or especially valuable statement.

What is mind-numbingly myopic is to assert that the 75th kid at one of the traditional feeders is a better choice for TJ than the 2nd or 3rd kid from a school that never has historically gotten kids into TJ.

So true!

Well, we could give them a really hard admissions test and see which one does better on it.

Because, you know, test taking and regurgitation of facts are both extremely important skills in the 21st century.

\

First of all, you take a Bar Exam, Medical Boards, PE Exam, etc. to get a license still in the 21st century for a reason. A very good reason. Secondly, an admission test isn't a regurgitation of facts. Third, I know it kills your argument, but standardized test are an accurate measure of ability. Why don't you simply embrace the better argument that you don't care whether or not TJ has the best and brightest - you care that the school provides an opportunity to the highest performing students across the county. You can have that point of view and not make up this cover story of prepping and testing being poor indicators of ability and talent.

Professional exams are meant to demonstrate that you know the ins and outs of what is required to know to practice in a given field. They are meant to be regurgitation of facts and skills. They are challenging because of the amount of information that you have to retain at one time in order to pass them. Many people have to take them 2-3 times to pass their boards. They are very different then the SAT, ACT, GRE, MCAT, or the Quant test that was needed for TJ.

The tests that high school kids take for college are very easily prepped, so that kids who have more knowledge of the need to prep, where to go to get prep materials for free or low cost, or can afford prep classes and/or private tutors do far better on those exams then kids who don’t know much about the tests or how to prepare for the tests never mind paying for prep classes and tutors. This is why many colleges are moving to not requiring SATs and ACTs for admissions, they really don’t measure innate ability any more. They are more a measure of how good a school system you came through and how well prepared you are.

The Quant test for TJ was pretty much the same as the SAT. It is not an accurate measure of a kids ability because it is easily prepped and there are large groups of families willing to pay for that prep. You can see that FCPS is weighing all of these test based measures less and less. The NNAT is pretty much ignored for AAP and the CogAT has diminished in its importance. FCPS is dealing with the prepping for the CogAT by moving to a school based in-pool score so that the score for the schools where lots of kids are prepped is now higher then the scores for the kids from schools with less prep. Those less prep ES are going to be the same schools where there would be less prep for the Quant test for TJ.

The raw ability of a kid from one of the underrepresented MS is probably the same as the raw ability of the kid from Carson, Longfellow, Rocky Run and whatever other AAP Center there is. The difference is that the kid from the underrepresented MS is less likely to have been focusing on TJ their entire life unlike the kids from Carson, Longfellow, and Rocky Run whose parents have been looking at TJ since K. So the under represented kids resume is going to look different and their background skills set will be different. Your argument is that makes that kid less of a candidate then a kid who has been prepped for TJ since K or 3rd. My argument is that is BS. That kid with raw ability deserves a chance to be exposed to opportunities presented at TJ just as much as any other kid. The geographical quota gives them a better chance of having that oppertunity.

I appreciate that you took the time to write this, so I'll take a bit more time on my response.

Here is the biggest issue with your side. Carson, Longfellow, and RockyRun and the other AAP centers are basically magnets. They are pulling in the best and the brightest from multiple schools already. These kids are several standard deviations in raw ability better than any other kid especially from an underrepresented middle school BEFORE any instruction occurs. Just let that sink in. If you don't agree with that then there really is no point to continue.

So, sweetie your entire response including the last paragraph is bs woke idiot.

DP. The highlighted piece is the entire platform that your argument rests on and there exists no evidence to suggest it is correct - either in the form of actual data or anecdata.

I'm not trying to be obtuse can you clarify your argument?

In order to get into AAP you need to be at the top in terms of raw ability

My argument is that that assertion is false. Full stop.

Although there are many talented children in AAP, selection to it is fairly meaningless. Anyone who really wants their kids to attend AAP and can afford prep or private diagnosis can easily gain admission. Most kids seemed pretty average even.

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:GPA is only a small fraction of the applicant’s score. A kid with a 3.5 GPA and very strong essays will have a higher score than the kid with a 4.0 but lower scored essays. Likewise, FARMS + 3.5 has a much higher point total than non FARMS + a 4.0. Kids with Bs who are getting in aren’t the top GPAs in their school, and no schools have grade deflation. Those kids either got FARMS bonus points or had highly rated essays.

Correct. That is what the FCSB decided they wanted for the admissions policy. If they found a legal way to do it, we have to live with it or vote for candidates for the school board that have your views. Does this process lead to a better, smarter, and more gifted class? Probably not, but that isn't what the FCSB decided was what they wanted for TJHSST. They simply have a different goal for the school than you do and have decided on a criteria for admissions that supports their goals.

Only problem was that it was illegal as per federal judge. Case is still on under appeal.

What if anything is happening with the State case that was on-going (Not the Federal case)? I think it was filed in the Fairfax Circuit Court.

It was perfectly legal but a few parents used to gaming admission weren't happy and have taken them to court. It will be summarily dismissed because this holds no merit.

Yes, it's much harder to get in now since the geographic component insures all students have a shot not just those who spend $20k on prep.

The new system ensures that less qualified kids are admitted simply because they live in areas zoned to under-performing middle schools with weak student cohorts.

It is correct to say that generally speaking, many of those middle schools who are increasing their presence have weaker cohorts top to bottom. That’s not a controversial or especially valuable statement.

What is mind-numbingly myopic is to assert that the 75th kid at one of the traditional feeders is a better choice for TJ than the 2nd or 3rd kid from a school that never has historically gotten kids into TJ.

*this*

Nope try again its a STEM school and AAP are magnet centers. There are most likely 75 students at the AAP centers who are better than the #2 or #3 kid at another school from the lower half of the county performance wise.

No, AAP Centers are not magnet schools.

DP but they are magnets in the sense that many AAP centers have kids who are zoned for other base schools. And PP is absolutely right that a #75 at Carson is better qualified than a #2 or 3 at Holmes or Poe (where the much smaller cohort of strong kids is at Frost or Glasgow).

The new system is a scam intended to undermine the very idea of meritocracy, so they might as well just close this watered-down version of TJ. There is nothing this pathetic School Board, given a chance, doesn’t screw up.

Again - if you believe this, you are proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that you have NO IDEA what happens at schools like Holmes and Poe. There are phenomenal kids at all of those schools who aren't at APP centers for one reason or another. You're right that there aren't as many of them, but they are absolutely there and to suggest otherwise destroys your credibility.

Very true! And many aren't AAP centers because their parents didn't know to push or didn't spend $7k on private evaluation quackery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is about TJ admissions

We actually agree, actual genius kids from generally high SES schools should be getting in regardless of if they are in AAP or not

"Top" students at lower SES schools are nowhere close to these folks and have no business taking TJ spots

That's actually not true. The differences at best aren't negligible. I get that some people want to believe differently because it's self-serving.

last comment for a while

I'd take the top 100 at an AAP center over the top 1.5% at the lower performing middle schools. And if you are honest with yourself so would you.

I wouldn't! Typically the AAP kids are mostly just average kids with pushy parents but the top 1.5% at the less affluent schools are truly gifted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is about TJ admissions

We actually agree, actual genius kids from generally high SES schools should be getting in regardless of if they are in AAP or not

"Top" students at lower SES schools are nowhere close to these folks and have no business taking TJ spots

That's actually not true. The differences at best aren't negligible. I get that some people want to believe differently because it's self-serving.

last comment for a while

I'd take the top 100 at an AAP center over the top 1.5% at the lower performing middle schools. And if you are honest with yourself so would you.

I wouldn't! Typically the AAP kids are mostly just average kids with pushy parents but the top 1.5% at the less affluent schools are truly gifted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is about TJ admissions

We actually agree, actual genius kids from generally high SES schools should be getting in regardless of if they are in AAP or not

"Top" students at lower SES schools are nowhere close to these folks and have no business taking TJ spots

That's actually not true. The differences at best aren't negligible. I get that some people want to believe differently because it's self-serving.

last comment for a while

I'd take the top 100 at an AAP center over the top 1.5% at the lower performing middle schools. And if you are honest with yourself so would you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is about TJ admissions

We actually agree, actual genius kids from generally high SES schools should be getting in regardless of if they are in AAP or not

"Top" students at lower SES schools are nowhere close to these folks and have no business taking TJ spots

That's actually not true. The differences at best aren't negligible. I get that some people want to believe differently because it's self-serving.

Anonymous wrote:This thread is about TJ admissions

We actually agree, actual genius kids from generally high SES schools should be getting in regardless of if they are in AAP or not

"Top" students at lower SES schools are nowhere close to these folks and have no business taking TJ spots

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:GPA is only a small fraction of the applicant’s score. A kid with a 3.5 GPA and very strong essays will have a higher score than the kid with a 4.0 but lower scored essays. Likewise, FARMS + 3.5 has a much higher point total than non FARMS + a 4.0. Kids with Bs who are getting in aren’t the top GPAs in their school, and no schools have grade deflation. Those kids either got FARMS bonus points or had highly rated essays.

Correct. That is what the FCSB decided they wanted for the admissions policy. If they found a legal way to do it, we have to live with it or vote for candidates for the school board that have your views. Does this process lead to a better, smarter, and more gifted class? Probably not, but that isn't what the FCSB decided was what they wanted for TJHSST. They simply have a different goal for the school than you do and have decided on a criteria for admissions that supports their goals.

Only problem was that it was illegal as per federal judge. Case is still on under appeal.

What if anything is happening with the State case that was on-going (Not the Federal case)? I think it was filed in the Fairfax Circuit Court.

It was perfectly legal but a few parents used to gaming admission weren't happy and have taken them to court. It will be summarily dismissed because this holds no merit.

Yes, it's much harder to get in now since the geographic component insures all students have a shot not just those who spend $20k on prep.

The new system ensures that less qualified kids are admitted simply because they live in areas zoned to under-performing middle schools with weak student cohorts.

It is correct to say that generally speaking, many of those middle schools who are increasing their presence have weaker cohorts top to bottom. That’s not a controversial or especially valuable statement.

What is mind-numbingly myopic is to assert that the 75th kid at one of the traditional feeders is a better choice for TJ than the 2nd or 3rd kid from a school that never has historically gotten kids into TJ.

So true!

Well, we could give them a really hard admissions test and see which one does better on it.

Because, you know, test taking and regurgitation of facts are both extremely important skills in the 21st century.

\

First of all, you take a Bar Exam, Medical Boards, PE Exam, etc. to get a license still in the 21st century for a reason. A very good reason. Secondly, an admission test isn't a regurgitation of facts. Third, I know it kills your argument, but standardized test are an accurate measure of ability. Why don't you simply embrace the better argument that you don't care whether or not TJ has the best and brightest - you care that the school provides an opportunity to the highest performing students across the county. You can have that point of view and not make up this cover story of prepping and testing being poor indicators of ability and talent.

Because they’re not mutually exclusive ideas.

And because parents have gotten so good at posing their relatively workaday kids as “the best and brightest” that TJ hasn’t realistically had the market cornered on the best and brightest for a couple of decades now.

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:GPA is only a small fraction of the applicant’s score. A kid with a 3.5 GPA and very strong essays will have a higher score than the kid with a 4.0 but lower scored essays. Likewise, FARMS + 3.5 has a much higher point total than non FARMS + a 4.0. Kids with Bs who are getting in aren’t the top GPAs in their school, and no schools have grade deflation. Those kids either got FARMS bonus points or had highly rated essays.

Correct. That is what the FCSB decided they wanted for the admissions policy. If they found a legal way to do it, we have to live with it or vote for candidates for the school board that have your views. Does this process lead to a better, smarter, and more gifted class? Probably not, but that isn't what the FCSB decided was what they wanted for TJHSST. They simply have a different goal for the school than you do and have decided on a criteria for admissions that supports their goals.

Only problem was that it was illegal as per federal judge. Case is still on under appeal.

What if anything is happening with the State case that was on-going (Not the Federal case)? I think it was filed in the Fairfax Circuit Court.

It was perfectly legal but a few parents used to gaming admission weren't happy and have taken them to court. It will be summarily dismissed because this holds no merit.

Yes, it's much harder to get in now since the geographic component insures all students have a shot not just those who spend $20k on prep.

The new system ensures that less qualified kids are admitted simply because they live in areas zoned to under-performing middle schools with weak student cohorts.

It is correct to say that generally speaking, many of those middle schools who are increasing their presence have weaker cohorts top to bottom. That’s not a controversial or especially valuable statement.

What is mind-numbingly myopic is to assert that the 75th kid at one of the traditional feeders is a better choice for TJ than the 2nd or 3rd kid from a school that never has historically gotten kids into TJ.

So true!

Well, we could give them a really hard admissions test and see which one does better on it.

Because, you know, test taking and regurgitation of facts are both extremely important skills in the 21st century.

\

First of all, you take a Bar Exam, Medical Boards, PE Exam, etc. to get a license still in the 21st century for a reason. A very good reason. Secondly, an admission test isn't a regurgitation of facts. Third, I know it kills your argument, but standardized test are an accurate measure of ability. Why don't you simply embrace the better argument that you don't care whether or not TJ has the best and brightest - you care that the school provides an opportunity to the highest performing students across the county. You can have that point of view and not make up this cover story of prepping and testing being poor indicators of ability and talent.

Professional exams are meant to demonstrate that you know the ins and outs of what is required to know to practice in a given field. They are meant to be regurgitation of facts and skills. They are challenging because of the amount of information that you have to retain at one time in order to pass them. Many people have to take them 2-3 times to pass their boards. They are very different then the SAT, ACT, GRE, MCAT, or the Quant test that was needed for TJ.

The tests that high school kids take for college are very easily prepped, so that kids who have more knowledge of the need to prep, where to go to get prep materials for free or low cost, or can afford prep classes and/or private tutors do far better on those exams then kids who don’t know much about the tests or how to prepare for the tests never mind paying for prep classes and tutors. This is why many colleges are moving to not requiring SATs and ACTs for admissions, they really don’t measure innate ability any more. They are more a measure of how good a school system you came through and how well prepared you are.

The Quant test for TJ was pretty much the same as the SAT. It is not an accurate measure of a kids ability because it is easily prepped and there are large groups of families willing to pay for that prep. You can see that FCPS is weighing all of these test based measures less and less. The NNAT is pretty much ignored for AAP and the CogAT has diminished in its importance. FCPS is dealing with the prepping for the CogAT by moving to a school based in-pool score so that the score for the schools where lots of kids are prepped is now higher then the scores for the kids from schools with less prep. Those less prep ES are going to be the same schools where there would be less prep for the Quant test for TJ.

The raw ability of a kid from one of the underrepresented MS is probably the same as the raw ability of the kid from Carson, Longfellow, Rocky Run and whatever other AAP Center there is. The difference is that the kid from the underrepresented MS is less likely to have been focusing on TJ their entire life unlike the kids from Carson, Longfellow, and Rocky Run whose parents have been looking at TJ since K. So the under represented kids resume is going to look different and their background skills set will be different. Your argument is that makes that kid less of a candidate then a kid who has been prepped for TJ since K or 3rd. My argument is that is BS. That kid with raw ability deserves a chance to be exposed to opportunities presented at TJ just as much as any other kid. The geographical quota gives them a better chance of having that oppertunity.

I appreciate that you took the time to write this, so I'll take a bit more time on my response.

Here is the biggest issue with your side. Carson, Longfellow, and RockyRun and the other AAP centers are basically magnets. They are pulling in the best and the brightest from multiple schools already. These kids are several standard deviations in raw ability better than any other kid especially from an underrepresented middle school BEFORE any instruction occurs. Just let that sink in. If you don't agree with that then there really is no point to continue.

So, sweetie your entire response including the last paragraph is bs woke idiot.

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:

Anonymous wrote:GPA is only a small fraction of the applicant’s score. A kid with a 3.5 GPA and very strong essays will have a higher score than the kid with a 4.0 but lower scored essays. Likewise, FARMS + 3.5 has a much higher point total than non FARMS + a 4.0. Kids with Bs who are getting in aren’t the top GPAs in their school, and no schools have grade deflation. Those kids either got FARMS bonus points or had highly rated essays.

Correct. That is what the FCSB decided they wanted for the admissions policy. If they found a legal way to do it, we have to live with it or vote for candidates for the school board that have your views. Does this process lead to a better, smarter, and more gifted class? Probably not, but that isn't what the FCSB decided was what they wanted for TJHSST. They simply have a different goal for the school than you do and have decided on a criteria for admissions that supports their goals.

Only problem was that it was illegal as per federal judge. Case is still on under appeal.

What if anything is happening with the State case that was on-going (Not the Federal case)? I think it was filed in the Fairfax Circuit Court.

It was perfectly legal but a few parents used to gaming admission weren't happy and have taken them to court. It will be summarily dismissed because this holds no merit.

Yes, it's much harder to get in now since the geographic component insures all students have a shot not just those who spend $20k on prep.

The new system ensures that less qualified kids are admitted simply because they live in areas zoned to under-performing middle schools with weak student cohorts.

It is correct to say that generally speaking, many of those middle schools who are increasing their presence have weaker cohorts top to bottom. That’s not a controversial or especially valuable statement.

What is mind-numbingly myopic is to assert that the 75th kid at one of the traditional feeders is a better choice for TJ than the 2nd or 3rd kid from a school that never has historically gotten kids into TJ.

So true!

Well, we could give them a really hard admissions test and see which one does better on it.

Because, you know, test taking and regurgitation of facts are both extremely important skills in the 21st century.

\

First of all, you take a Bar Exam, Medical Boards, PE Exam, etc. to get a license still in the 21st century for a reason. A very good reason. Secondly, an admission test isn't a regurgitation of facts. Third, I know it kills your argument, but standardized test are an accurate measure of ability. Why don't you simply embrace the better argument that you don't care whether or not TJ has the best and brightest - you care that the school provides an opportunity to the highest performing students across the county. You can have that point of view and not make up this cover story of prepping and testing being poor indicators of ability and talent.

Professional exams are meant to demonstrate that you know the ins and outs of what is required to know to practice in a given field. They are meant to be regurgitation of facts and skills. They are challenging because of the amount of information that you have to retain at one time in order to pass them. Many people have to take them 2-3 times to pass their boards. They are very different then the SAT, ACT, GRE, MCAT, or the Quant test that was needed for TJ.

The tests that high school kids take for college are very easily prepped, so that kids who have more knowledge of the need to prep, where to go to get prep materials for free or low cost, or can afford prep classes and/or private tutors do far better on those exams then kids who don’t know much about the tests or how to prepare for the tests never mind paying for prep classes and tutors. This is why many colleges are moving to not requiring SATs and ACTs for admissions, they really don’t measure innate ability any more. They are more a measure of how good a school system you came through and how well prepared you are.

The Quant test for TJ was pretty much the same as the SAT. It is not an accurate measure of a kids ability because it is easily prepped and there are large groups of families willing to pay for that prep. You can see that FCPS is weighing all of these test based measures less and less. The NNAT is pretty much ignored for AAP and the CogAT has diminished in its importance. FCPS is dealing with the prepping for the CogAT by moving to a school based in-pool score so that the score for the schools where lots of kids are prepped is now higher then the scores for the kids from schools with less prep. Those less prep ES are going to be the same schools where there would be less prep for the Quant test for TJ.

The raw ability of a kid from one of the underrepresented MS is probably the same as the raw ability of the kid from Carson, Longfellow, Rocky Run and whatever other AAP Center there is. The difference is that the kid from the underrepresented MS is less likely to have been focusing on TJ their entire life unlike the kids from Carson, Longfellow, and Rocky Run whose parents have been looking at TJ since K. So the under represented kids resume is going to look different and their background skills set will be different. Your argument is that makes that kid less of a candidate then a kid who has been prepped for TJ since K or 3rd. My argument is that is BS. That kid with raw ability deserves a chance to be exposed to opportunities presented at TJ just as much as any other kid. The geographical quota gives them a better chance of having that oppertunity.

I appreciate that you took the time to write this, so I'll take a bit more time on my response.

Here is the biggest issue with your side. Carson, Longfellow, and RockyRun and the other AAP centers are basically magnets. They are pulling in the best and the brightest from multiple schools already. These kids are several standard deviations in raw ability better than any other kid especially from an underrepresented middle school BEFORE any instruction occurs. Just let that sink in. If you don't agree with that then there really is no point to continue.

So, sweetie your entire response including the last paragraph is bs woke idiot.

DP. The highlighted piece is the entire platform that your argument rests on and there exists no evidence to suggest it is correct - either in the form of actual data or anecdata.

I'm not trying to be obtuse can you clarify your argument?

In order to get into AAP you need to be at the top in terms of raw ability

My argument is that that assertion is false. Full stop.

Anonymous wrote:
DP. The highlighted piece is the entire platform that your argument rests on and there exists no evidence to suggest it is correct - either in the form of actual data or anecdata.