Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The projected data shows how this model would shift the balance from Asian community to white community leaving some few crumbs for other Black and Hispanic communities. Wow! Nice political approach! If white men dominates then, it is a balanced community.

Divide and conquer attitude!

Wow, this plan truly does leave crumbs for the underrepresented minorities. How can anyone think this is the solution? Isn't the goal to increase black and Latinx enrollment? Why can't they just admit the kids who complete the Young Scholars program and call it a day? Why is this so hard?

This is what I'd like to see. Young Scholars taking a more dominant role. And leaving most of the current process as is with small tweaks.

Anonymous wrote:+1


LOL - the "28%" sounds so much like "but what about her emails???!!!"

Fix it. Don't throw it out.

What test prep company sponsored 28% of students admitted?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under both of these proposals, every application will be read for a "holistic review." How are they going to manage the hours and staff required for that given that they aren't even going to make a final decision on the process until sometime in December and there is no test to weed out half the applicants?

If I were cynical, I would suggest that the "holistic review" will be purely demographic data and take almost no time at all.

+1. No doubt. Absolutely, no doubt.

Yep. They don't have the mental ability to do anything else..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another new doc:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BVF4EB0B2C63/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf

I read this and it seems 1/2 baked. Why did they only include information about 8th graders in FCPS? The applicant pool includes 8th graders from LCPS, PWCPS, FCCPS, and APS. Too much work to ask these counties for this basic information?

According to some posters the applicant pool also includes middle schoolers from India as well

They likely mistake Indian Americans for Indians. We have had morons innocently ask how the "Asian" Debate and Model UN TJ kids beat the (supposedly all-white) Langley or McLean teams!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another new doc:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BVF4EB0B2C63/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf

I read this and it seems 1/2 baked. Why did they only include information about 8th graders in FCPS? The applicant pool includes 8th graders from LCPS, PWCPS, FCCPS, and APS. Too much work to ask these counties for this basic information?

According to some posters the applicant pool also includes middle schoolers from India as well

Anonymous wrote:The TJ meeting scheduled for tomorrow has been postponed to a later date.

When is the meeting now?

Here's the link to the SIS computer problems for the Class of 2018.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/357450.page

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another new doc:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BVF4EB0B2C63/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf

I read this and it seems 1/2 baked. Why did they only include information about 8th graders in FCPS? The applicant pool includes 8th graders from LCPS, PWCPS, FCCPS, and APS. Too much work to ask these counties for this basic information?

I started to read the above link, and I saw the following:-

Class of 2018 (SY 2012-13): During this admissions cycle, FCPS made two substantive changes to the
admissions process: (a) shift to holistic review; and (b) proctoring the completion of the Student
Information Sheet (SIS). The change in the review process moved away from a ranking of applicants
with composite scores (based on individually scored components in the application process) to a
holistic review of all application components. The shift in procedure was the result of changes made
by the School Board to FCPS Policy 3355
(https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9BHHQF4997CB/$file/P3355.pdf).
Implementation of a proctored Student Information Sheet (SIS), which had previously been included
in the application materials submitted by students, was undertaken to ensure that applicants did
not receive assistance when completing the SIS. These changes impacted the Class of 2018 to the
present.

My kid was in the Class of 2018. The proctored SIS was an absolute disaster with computer systems failing at multiple testing sites. The testing session had to be abandoned. (check old DCUM threads) The applicants ended up doing the Student Info Sheets at home, so this part of the report may need revision. Maybe they achieved proctored SIS sheets for the Class of 2019.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under both of these proposals, every application will be read for a "holistic review." How are they going to manage the hours and staff required for that given that they aren't even going to make a final decision on the process until sometime in December and there is no test to weed out half the applicants?

If I were cynical, I would suggest that the "holistic review" will be purely demographic data and take almost no time at all.

I'm the PP who asked the question. I'm also cynical and believe that they will lean heavily on demographic data. But even if that's true they will still have to distinguish among the kids within each demographic group.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Under both of these proposals, every application will be read for a "holistic review." How are they going to manage the hours and staff required for that given that they aren't even going to make a final decision on the process until sometime in December and there is no test to weed out half the applicants?

If I were cynical, I would suggest that the "holistic review" will be purely demographic data and take almost no time at all.

+1. No doubt. Absolutely, no doubt.

Anonymous wrote:Under both of these proposals, every application will be read for a "holistic review." How are they going to manage the hours and staff required for that given that they aren't even going to make a final decision on the process until sometime in December and there is no test to weed out half the applicants?

If I were cynical, I would suggest that the "holistic review" will be purely demographic data and take almost no time at all.

Under both of these proposals, every application will be read for a "holistic review." How are they going to manage the hours and staff required for that given that they aren't even going to make a final decision on the process until sometime in December and there is no test to weed out half the applicants?

Anonymous wrote:The projected data shows how this model would shift the balance from Asian community to white community leaving some few crumbs for other Black and Hispanic communities. Wow! Nice political approach! If white men dominates then, it is a balanced community.

Divide and conquer attitude!

Wow, this plan truly does leave crumbs for the underrepresented minorities. How can anyone think this is the solution? Isn't the goal to increase black and Latinx enrollment? Why can't they just admit the kids who complete the Young Scholars program and call it a day? Why is this so hard?

Anonymous wrote:Another new doc:

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BVF4EB0B2C63/$file/TJ%20White%20Paper%2011.17.2020.pdf

I read this and it seems 1/2 baked. Why did they only include information about 8th graders in FCPS? The applicant pool includes 8th graders from LCPS, PWCPS, FCCPS, and APS. Too much work to ask these counties for this basic information?