Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS tries desperately to admit more blacks and Hispanics by tweaking the admissions process every few years but all they end up is more unprepared students being admitted.

The numbers do not support a claim of desperate efforts, much less meaningful results.

Black

Class of 2016 - 235 applied, 7 admitted.
Class of 2017 - 199 applied, 5 admitted.
Class of 2018 - 177 applied, 10 admitted.

Hispanic

Class of 2016 - 285 applied, 13 admitted.
Class of 2017 - 253 applied, 15 admitted.
Class of 2018 - 214 applied, 8(!) admitted.

Wow, talk about discrimination based on SES! Some kids have to watch siblings instead of going to math camp. That's awful.

The admission rates for poor students as a group is stunning.

Class of 2016 - 402 applied, 6 admitted.
Class of 2017 - 314 applied, 5 admitted.
Class of 2018 - 230(!) applied, 4 admitted.

28% of FCPS kids are FARMs kids. 0.8% of the TJ class of 2018 are FARMs kids.

As dismal as the admission numbers are, the application number trend is worse. Black and Hispanic applications down 25% in only two years. FARMs applications down a whopping 43% over the same span.

Those numbers are troubling.

Anonymous wrote:The whole discussion about how many applicants of which race applied and how many of which race were accepted is not relevant. Only the most qualified and most able students should be accepted regardless of race. TJ is a national treasure that is role model for the whole country and the state. We should encourage development of more schools like TJ and encourage and promote good study habits and good teachers so that everyone regardless of race can develop and grow to their fullest potential.

Anonymous wrote:The whole discussion about how many applicants of which race applied and how many of which race were accepted is not relevant. Only the most qualified and most able students should be accepted regardless of race. TJ is a national treasure that is role model for the whole country and the state. We should encourage development of more schools like TJ and encourage and promote good study habits and good teachers so that everyone regardless of race can develop and grow to their fullest potential.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why did FCPS change things in 2006? Is that also when they changed "GT" to "AAP"?

My recollection is FCPS convened a Blue Ribbon Panel to conduct a study and find ways to increase admission of blacks and Hispanics to TJ and after the report came out in 2005 the admission process was completely overhauled from admissions based on test scores and GPA to reviewing essays, SIS, teacher recommendations in addition to test scores and GPA holistically starting with 2006. It was again changed to various weights being assigned to different components around 2010 with heavy emphasis on subjective components and then it was changed again this year to reviewing everything "holistically". Looks like they are back to square one. I am not sure when the GT was changed to AAP.

ironically, I think there were more blacks and Hispanics attending TJ prior to 2006 when the process was revamped to increase admission of blacks and Hispanics.

If the process was revamped to increase admission of blacks and Hispanics, why is this so called "holistic" process doesn't scoop up those blacks, Hispanics and FARMS who might have likely been qualified under the old system. I am very skeptical of the "advertised" policy change when the actual numbers do not support those advertised goals. From what I'm reading/hearing so far, it looks like the only thing this new policy accomplished is to excite an army of angry parents who blame affirmative action for DS/DD not getting accepted to TJ.

As for those 20 or so black/Hispanic/FARM kids who are admitted to TJ, I'm sure they fully aware that the system is allowing others to cast doubt on their abilities. They're going to have to prove (once again) that they belong from day one, with no margin of error. That's the kind of headwind these kids are probably accustomed to by now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why did FCPS change things in 2006? Is that also when they changed "GT" to "AAP"?

My recollection is FCPS convened a Blue Ribbon Panel to conduct a study and find ways to increase admission of blacks and Hispanics to TJ and after the report came out in 2005 the admission process was completely overhauled from admissions based on test scores and GPA to reviewing essays, SIS, teacher recommendations in addition to test scores and GPA holistically starting with 2006. It was again changed to various weights being assigned to different components around 2010 with heavy emphasis on subjective components and then it was changed again this year to reviewing everything "holistically". Looks like they are back to square one. I am not sure when the GT was changed to AAP.

ironically, I think there were more blacks and Hispanics attending TJ prior to 2006 when the process was revamped to increase admission of blacks and Hispanics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP. You shouldn't engage in personal attacks simply because Harvard Grad dismantled your arguments. Surely you can appreciate that most people consider a Harvard degree a bit more significant than getting into a less selective high school as an eighth grader.

Let's try to guess who posted the following "personal attack":

let's see if I can make even you understand this
people like yourself don't read very carefully, so it sometimes helps to repeat things
you seem spectacularly unqualified to offer one.

You shouldn't engage in personal commentary simply because Harvard Grad's arguments were dismantled. Surely you can appreciate that most people consider Harvard degree a bit more significant and expect not to be personally attacked if one was to poke some holes in Harvard Grad's arguments.

We should all try to be "fair and balanced" you know.

Anonymous wrote:PP. You shouldn't engage in personal attacks simply because Harvard Grad dismantled your arguments. Surely you can appreciate that most people consider a Harvard degree a bit more significant than getting into a less selective high school as an eighth grader.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I would have gotten into TJ probably, but had no interest in going (white girl). I have my friends at my school, I'm comfortable moving on with them, and I am as interested in non-STEM subjects as STEM. Also, I have a friend who left TJ after the first year because she said there was no social life.
Anyway, that was a few years ago. I got into Harvard, so clearly wasn't slacking at my home school. Calling people lazy because they don't think TJ is the best school for everyone is silly.


Just because you got into Harvard that doesn't mean you would have probably gotten into TJ. Maybe you were a legacy, development case, recruited athlete or lucky. TJ grads that move onto Harvard say Harvard is academically easier than TJ.

TJ apparently does not have a cap on Asians but Harvard does. Asians are capped at about 16 to 18% year after year even though the number of Asian applicants probably doubled in the last 10 years. Harvard would be 60% Asians if it did not have quotas on Asians. Also, your friend saying there is no social life at TJ doesn't mean there is no social life for others. Maybe she thought the academics were too rigorous and wanted less challenging environment. I am sure she didn't say on the application her main priority was an active "social life" but to challenge her self with rigorous STEM courses and participate in scientific discovery. You know, the usual stuff that goes on the application and the SIS. So, for her to say she left because of no social life is disingenuous.

No one is saying people who do not think TJ is the best school are lazy. We are all entitled to our opinions. However, it is a fact that less whites are applying and this has been significant for the last 5 or 6 years. The likely reasons were put forth as : 1) I do not want to go to school with bunch of Asians where Asians are the majority (racist attitude), 2) I do not want to study too hard and still only manage to be
above average or average in all likelihood (Not very capable/lazy or both).


No, wasn't legacy or any other "hook". Lots of kids who get into TJ don't get into Harvard. And i am pretty sure my scores would have gotten me in. Did the test and then changed my mind. Regardless, not saying it's not a great school. It is. Just not the best choice for every qualified applicant. And that doesn't make them lazy. And your logic doesn't hold. There is nothing disingenuous about saying one left TJ because it lacked a suitable social scene for that person. It was one person's experience, and you have no reason to doubt it. Love the psychic power you have that Harvard would be 60percent Asian if there were no quotas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would have gotten into TJ probably, but had no interest in going (white girl). I have my friends at my school, I'm comfortable moving on with them, and I am as interested in non-STEM subjects as STEM. Also, I have a friend who left TJ after the first year because she said there was no social life.
Anyway, that was a few years ago. I got into Harvard, so clearly wasn't slacking at my home school. Calling people lazy because they don't think TJ is the best school for everyone is silly.

Don't be so cocky and think that you would have gotten into TJ because you got into Harvard since it's likely that Asians with higher SAT scores, higher GPAs, stronger teacher recommendations, stronger essays, stronger ECs, more officer positions, more national awards and more volunteer/community service hours compared to you were rejected by Harvard.

Well, i doubt they had higher SAT scores since i had perfect scores. And no prep course (not how my parents rolled). And not URM, so don't bother with that tired old argument.

Many applicants with perfect SAT scores get rejected by Harvard, many of them Asians. And the rejected Asians did not only have perfect SAT scores and perfect GPAs so don't bother with that tired old argument they lacked in other areas.

Never said they lacked in other areas. You're making up arguments to tear them down. I simply said I was qualified, chose not to go, and wasn't lazy. Pretty sure no one (without a hook, that is) who is lazy gets into Harvard. Then people made up facts about me so they could try to dispute that example. No, it's a good example. I am SURE that many bright, hardworking TJ kids do not get into Harvard, and many of them are just as bright as I was. Not my argument. My argument is contra the posters who say that it's laziness that's causing declining applications by white students. That's not supportable based on the evidence, and my example (just one data point, but more than you've offered) disputes it.

Few observations about the above post:

1) You said "I would have gotten into TJ" not "I was qualified." There are over 2,400 applicants who thought they were qualified but were rejected. There is a big difference between I would have gotten in and I was qualified. You should be able to remember what you said. Don't backpedal now.
2) You already said you were "(white girl)" in the original post so why say you are not URM? You already said you were not URM. Again, you should be able to remember what you said.
3) You brought up the fact that you were not URM and then proceed to say "so don't bother with that tired old argument". The replying poster is mocking you by using the same phrase you have used. I hope you can see that but it looks like you don't see it.
4) You brought up the URM argument just to "tear them down" in the first place and then you attack the replying poster who has used that same point to mock you and you attack your own silly argument not even aware you used it first and that silly argument was used against you.

You need better glasses or improve your reading comprehension ability. I hope it's the former.

OK, let's see if I can make even you understand this.
1) Did you see how I said "probably"? Not backpedaling. It's in there from the beginning. Of course I can't know for sure, but I know that my scores were well above what usually people report for admitted students.
2) You are correct that I stated two things that indicated not being a URM. That's because people like yourself don't read very carefully, so it sometimes helps to repeat things where they're relevant.
3) Yes, I did see that the responding poster used the same phrase I did. I didn't see that there was any reason to note that. It didn't make any point -- they were just trying to be cute (and failing, but that's fine).
4) No, I didn't bring up the URM argument to tear it down. What PP did was to pretend I argued something I didn't argue (specifically, that I was more worthy than other students who did NOT get into Harvard) and then proceeded to respond to that argument. I did not pretend anyone made the URM argument to me. I simply anticipated and dismissed that argument as it wasn't relevant to the facts at hand.
Read quite well, thanks! Not concerned about your opinion, as you seem spectacularly unqualified to offer one.

You should stop digging. The hole is getting deeper with each additional posting. It is surprising you were admitted without any hooks given your inability to write coherent and logical sentences that are on point or provide persuasive counter arguments. Try to "anticipate and dismiss arguments that are not relevant to the facts at hand." some more.

Anonymous wrote:PP. You shouldn't engage in personal attacks simply because Harvard Grad dismantled your arguments. Surely you can appreciate that most people consider a Harvard degree a bit more significant than getting into a less selective high school as an eighth grader.

Anonymous wrote:PP. You shouldn't engage in personal attacks simply because Harvard Grad dismantled your arguments. Surely you can appreciate that most people consider a Harvard degree a bit more significant than getting into a less selective high school as an eighth grader.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I would have gotten into TJ probably, but had no interest in going (white girl). I have my friends at my school, I'm comfortable moving on with them, and I am as interested in non-STEM subjects as STEM. Also, I have a friend who left TJ after the first year because she said there was no social life.
Anyway, that was a few years ago. I got into Harvard, so clearly wasn't slacking at my home school. Calling people lazy because they don't think TJ is the best school for everyone is silly.


Just because you got into Harvard that doesn't mean you would have probably gotten into TJ. Maybe you were a legacy, development case, recruited athlete or lucky. TJ grads that move onto Harvard say Harvard is academically easier than TJ.

TJ apparently does not have a cap on Asians but Harvard does. Asians are capped at about 16 to 18% year after year even though the number of Asian applicants probably doubled in the last 10 years. Harvard would be 60% Asians if it did not have quotas on Asians. Also, your friend saying there is no social life at TJ doesn't mean there is no social life for others. Maybe she thought the academics were too rigorous and wanted less challenging environment. I am sure she didn't say on the application her main priority was an active "social life" but to challenge her self with rigorous STEM courses and participate in scientific discovery. You know, the usual stuff that goes on the application and the SIS. So, for her to say she left because of no social life is disingenuous.

No one is saying people who do not think TJ is the best school are lazy. We are all entitled to our opinions. However, it is a fact that less whites are applying and this has been significant for the last 5 or 6 years. The likely reasons were put forth as : 1) I do not want to go to school with bunch of Asians where Asians are the majority (racist attitude), 2) I do not want to study too hard and still only manage to be
above average or average in all likelihood (Not very capable/lazy or both).


No, wasn't legacy or any other "hook". Lots of kids who get into TJ don't get into Harvard. And i am pretty sure my scores would have gotten me in. Did the test and then changed my mind. Regardless, not saying it's not a great school. It is. Just not the best choice for every qualified applicant. And that doesn't make them lazy. And your logic doesn't hold. There is nothing disingenuous about saying one left TJ because it lacked a suitable social scene for that person. It was one person's experience, and you have no reason to doubt it. Love the psychic power you have that Harvard would be 60percent Asian if there were no quotas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would have gotten into TJ probably, but had no interest in going (white girl). I have my friends at my school, I'm comfortable moving on with them, and I am as interested in non-STEM subjects as STEM. Also, I have a friend who left TJ after the first year because she said there was no social life.
Anyway, that was a few years ago. I got into Harvard, so clearly wasn't slacking at my home school. Calling people lazy because they don't think TJ is the best school for everyone is silly.

Don't be so cocky and think that you would have gotten into TJ because you got into Harvard since it's likely that Asians with higher SAT scores, higher GPAs, stronger teacher recommendations, stronger essays, stronger ECs, more officer positions, more national awards and more volunteer/community service hours compared to you were rejected by Harvard.

Well, i doubt they had higher SAT scores since i had perfect scores. And no prep course (not how my parents rolled). And not URM, so don't bother with that tired old argument.

Many applicants with perfect SAT scores get rejected by Harvard, many of them Asians. And the rejected Asians did not only have perfect SAT scores and perfect GPAs so don't bother with that tired old argument they lacked in other areas.

Never said they lacked in other areas. You're making up arguments to tear them down. I simply said I was qualified, chose not to go, and wasn't lazy. Pretty sure no one (without a hook, that is) who is lazy gets into Harvard. Then people made up facts about me so they could try to dispute that example. No, it's a good example. I am SURE that many bright, hardworking TJ kids do not get into Harvard, and many of them are just as bright as I was. Not my argument. My argument is contra the posters who say that it's laziness that's causing declining applications by white students. That's not supportable based on the evidence, and my example (just one data point, but more than you've offered) disputes it.

Few observations about the above post:

1) You said "I would have gotten into TJ" not "I was qualified." There are over 2,400 applicants who thought they were qualified but were rejected. There is a big difference between I would have gotten in and I was qualified. You should be able to remember what you said. Don't backpedal now.
2) You already said you were "(white girl)" in the original post so why say you are not URM? You already said you were not URM. Again, you should be able to remember what you said.
3) You brought up the fact that you were not URM and then proceed to say "so don't bother with that tired old argument". The replying poster is mocking you by using the same phrase you have used. I hope you can see that but it looks like you don't see it.
4) You brought up the URM argument just to "tear them down" in the first place and then you attack the replying poster who has used that same point to mock you and you attack your own silly argument not even aware you used it first and that silly argument was used against you.

You need better glasses or improve your reading comprehension ability. I hope it's the former.

OK, let's see if I can make even you understand this.
1) Did you see how I said "probably"? Not backpedaling. It's in there from the beginning. Of course I can't know for sure, but I know that my scores were well above what usually people report for admitted students.
2) You are correct that I stated two things that indicated not being a URM. That's because people like yourself don't read very carefully, so it sometimes helps to repeat things where they're relevant.
3) Yes, I did see that the responding poster used the same phrase I did. I didn't see that there was any reason to note that. It didn't make any point -- they were just trying to be cute (and failing, but that's fine).
4) No, I didn't bring up the URM argument to tear it down. What PP did was to pretend I argued something I didn't argue (specifically, that I was more worthy than other students who did NOT get into Harvard) and then proceeded to respond to that argument. I did not pretend anyone made the URM argument to me. I simply anticipated and dismissed that argument as it wasn't relevant to the facts at hand.
Read quite well, thanks! Not concerned about your opinion, as you seem spectacularly unqualified to offer one.

Anonymous wrote:
Why did FCPS change things in 2006? Is that also when they changed "GT" to "AAP"?