Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they do the top 1.5% at the school you are attending? SOL scores for kids are attached to the school that they are attending. If you choose to move schools, you choose that as your school. That counts for everything.

You don’t have to choose to attend an AAP Center school. Parents knew this year that school choice mattered. Parents know for next year that the school matters. If you feel that the academic rigor is better at the AAP Center, then send your kid there. Appreciate that they are getting what you deem to be a better education. They probably have access to better extra curricular activities as well. If TJ is that important to you and you think you stand a better chance of getting into TJ coming from your base school, stay at the base school.

You have a choice, make your choice and accept that there are consequences for that choice.

I mean, good grief... nearly half of the spaces in each incoming TJ class are unallocated, meaning that those spaces are up for grabs to the highest-evaluated applicants once you get away from the top 1.5% at each school. So you're not even competing with the best of the best for those unallocated seats. And that's even assuming that all of the allocated seats get used, which they don't.

The more I read parents on this thread, the more convinced I am that their kids are really not THAT much different from the kids that they're trying to keep out of TJ by crying "racism".

TJ's been in session for a semester now with the Class of 2025. Where are the reports of huge numbers of students unable to cope? Where are the reports of the mass exodus of students who don't belong there? Where are the teachers talking about how they have to lower their standards to account for the lack of an exam in the admissions process? Where are the teachers talking about behavior issues that would have been eliminated with teacher recommendations?

Nothingburger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they do the top 1.5% at the school you are attending? SOL scores for kids are attached to the school that they are attending. If you choose to move schools, you choose that as your school. That counts for everything.

You don’t have to choose to attend an AAP Center school. Parents knew this year that school choice mattered. Parents know for next year that the school matters. If you feel that the academic rigor is better at the AAP Center, then send your kid there. Appreciate that they are getting what you deem to be a better education. They probably have access to better extra curricular activities as well. If TJ is that important to you and you think you stand a better chance of getting into TJ coming from your base school, stay at the base school.

You have a choice, make your choice and accept that there are consequences for that choice.

I mean, good grief... nearly half of the spaces in each incoming TJ class are unallocated, meaning that those spaces are up for grabs to the highest-evaluated applicants once you get away from the top 1.5% at each school. So you're not even competing with the best of the best for those unallocated seats. And that's even assuming that all of the allocated seats get used, which they don't.

The more I read parents on this thread, the more convinced I am that their kids are really not THAT much different from the kids that they're trying to keep out of TJ by crying "racism".

TJ's been in session for a semester now with the Class of 2025. Where are the reports of huge numbers of students unable to cope? Where are the reports of the mass exodus of students who don't belong there? Where are the teachers talking about how they have to lower their standards to account for the lack of an exam in the admissions process? Where are the teachers talking about behavior issues that would have been eliminated with teacher recommendations?

Nothingburger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they do the top 1.5% at the school you are attending? SOL scores for kids are attached to the school that they are attending. If you choose to move schools, you choose that as your school. That counts for everything.

You don’t have to choose to attend an AAP Center school. Parents knew this year that school choice mattered. Parents know for next year that the school matters. If you feel that the academic rigor is better at the AAP Center, then send your kid there. Appreciate that they are getting what you deem to be a better education. They probably have access to better extra curricular activities as well. If TJ is that important to you and you think you stand a better chance of getting into TJ coming from your base school, stay at the base school.

You have a choice, make your choice and accept that there are consequences for that choice.

I mean, good grief... nearly half of the spaces in each incoming TJ class are unallocated, meaning that those spaces are up for grabs to the highest-evaluated applicants once you get away from the top 1.5% at each school. So you're not even competing with the best of the best for those unallocated seats. And that's even assuming that all of the allocated seats get used, which they don't.

The more I read parents on this thread, the more convinced I am that their kids are really not THAT much different from the kids that they're trying to keep out of TJ by crying "racism".

TJ's been in session for a semester now with the Class of 2025. Where are the reports of huge numbers of students unable to cope? Where are the reports of the mass exodus of students who don't belong there? Where are the teachers talking about how they have to lower their standards to account for the lack of an exam in the admissions process? Where are the teachers talking about behavior issues that would have been eliminated with teacher recommendations?

Nothingburger.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they do the top 1.5% at the school you are attending? SOL scores for kids are attached to the school that they are attending. If you choose to move schools, you choose that as your school. That counts for everything.

You don’t have to choose to attend an AAP Center school. Parents knew this year that school choice mattered. Parents know for next year that the school matters. If you feel that the academic rigor is better at the AAP Center, then send your kid there. Appreciate that they are getting what you deem to be a better education. They probably have access to better extra curricular activities as well. If TJ is that important to you and you think you stand a better chance of getting into TJ coming from your base school, stay at the base school.

You have a choice, make your choice and accept that there are consequences for that choice.

I mean, good grief... nearly half of the spaces in each incoming TJ class are unallocated, meaning that those spaces are up for grabs to the highest-evaluated applicants once you get away from the top 1.5% at each school. So you're not even competing with the best of the best for those unallocated seats. And that's even assuming that all of the allocated seats get used, which they don't.

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they do the top 1.5% at the school you are attending? SOL scores for kids are attached to the school that they are attending. If you choose to move schools, you choose that as your school. That counts for everything.

You don’t have to choose to attend an AAP Center school. Parents knew this year that school choice mattered. Parents know for next year that the school matters. If you feel that the academic rigor is better at the AAP Center, then send your kid there. Appreciate that they are getting what you deem to be a better education. They probably have access to better extra curricular activities as well. If TJ is that important to you and you think you stand a better chance of getting into TJ coming from your base school, stay at the base school.

You have a choice, make your choice and accept that there are consequences for that choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let's do a thought experiment.

Prior to the recent admissions changes, year over year the demographic at TJ was basically:

73% Asian, 19% white, 5% multiracial (which usually means Asian and white), 2% Hispanic, 1% Black.

Let's pretend that the School Board implemented a policy that resulted in a demographic of:

54% Asian, 39% white, 5% multiracial, 2% Hispanic, 1% Black.

There is absolutely no chance that FCPS - or anyone in the pro-reform column - would have considered those changes successful. ABSOLUTELY NONE.

What actually happened was that FCPS implemented a policy that resulted in:

54% Asian, 22% white, 5% multiracial, 11% Hispanic, 7% Black.

If you read the above data and conjecture, and your conclusions remain:

1) TJ reform is solely about reducing the Asian population, OR
2) TJ reform is about increasing the white population;

... then there's nothing that I or anyone else can do to help you. Your delusions are baked in and you might as well put on your red hat or your puffy vest.

The fact that it affects you doesn't mean it's about you..

So basically you agreed that FCPS had a predetermined racial composition in mind before carrying out the reform? We're on the same page then because we all agree FCPS' TJ reform was based on race.

I wouldn't argue that they had specific numbers in mind. But as long as the lived experience of different racial groups in America remains as disparate as it is, it's already been established that there is educational value in having students from different backgrounds in the classroom, and yes, that includes race.

So again, the TJ reform was racially motivated. Got it.

Race and affluence. Yes, no one is denying that.

We call it equity.

Yes, it's racism in the name of equity. We all know that.

OK then, get over it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Let's do a thought experiment.

Prior to the recent admissions changes, year over year the demographic at TJ was basically:

73% Asian, 19% white, 5% multiracial (which usually means Asian and white), 2% Hispanic, 1% Black.

Let's pretend that the School Board implemented a policy that resulted in a demographic of:

54% Asian, 39% white, 5% multiracial, 2% Hispanic, 1% Black.

There is absolutely no chance that FCPS - or anyone in the pro-reform column - would have considered those changes successful. ABSOLUTELY NONE.

What actually happened was that FCPS implemented a policy that resulted in:

54% Asian, 22% white, 5% multiracial, 11% Hispanic, 7% Black.

If you read the above data and conjecture, and your conclusions remain:

1) TJ reform is solely about reducing the Asian population, OR
2) TJ reform is about increasing the white population;

... then there's nothing that I or anyone else can do to help you. Your delusions are baked in and you might as well put on your red hat or your puffy vest.

The fact that it affects you doesn't mean it's about you..

So basically you agreed that FCPS had a predetermined racial composition in mind before carrying out the reform? We're on the same page then because we all agree FCPS' TJ reform was based on race.

I wouldn't argue that they had specific numbers in mind. But as long as the lived experience of different racial groups in America remains as disparate as it is, it's already been established that there is educational value in having students from different backgrounds in the classroom, and yes, that includes race.

So again, the TJ reform was racially motivated. Got it.

Race and affluence. Yes, no one is denying that.

We call it equity.

Yes, it's racism in the name of equity. We all know that.

Anonymous wrote:^That really stinks for the gen Ed kids zoned to an AAP center. They have to compete against a bunch of AAP kids who transferred in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone focuses on race and the effect on Asians, but this really isn't about race as much as it is about socioeconomic status which are, admittedly, intertwined. If there are poor Asian kids attending Sandburg MS, then they will benefit from the policy change. It's the wealthy families in Chantilly and Great Falls pyramids that stand to lose spots, which is why there is so much vocal outrage.

DP. One reason Asians are outraged and feel targeted is the decision to award the top 1.5% spots based on attending school rather than zoned school. Most AAP eligible Asians will send their kids to the center for the stronger education. Or, they already chose to live in-bounds to a center school for the stronger academics and higher ratings. Taking the top 1.5% of the kids at a non-AAP middle school means that you're choosing among kids who deferred AAP for middle school or didn't qualify in the first place. That's going to ensure that few of those kids are Asian.

If eventually all MS have AAP and no one leaves for the center, the problem will fix itself.

This has been one of my chief complaints with TJ reform as well. The other is, since GPA is not weighted, there is no advantage to kids who took harder/honors courses and did well. Increased diversity is fine, but these two items are clearly done to remove the advantage the kids coming from academic oriented families have. This particularly affects asians and others to a lesser extent. But, I do not think it is fair to discriminate against smarter or hardworking students this way.

I would have preferred a common test that removes the teacher bias in grades, but I am not particularly upset about since it reduces (not eliminate) extensive prepping. However, its sad that so much of the grade depends on the teacher. For example, my kid barely managed to get A- in english in 7th as teacher practically didn't teach anything and favored kids who entertained the unrelated BS she used to talk during the class. However, the same kid is got almost perfect scores in every other 7th grade course and also 8th grade courses including english.

In the long run, I don't think TJ matters as much as we think. Its a lot easier to stand out in base school and get into better colleges as a result. The major we choose and to a lesser extent the college we get the 'final' degree (BS, MS etc) actually matters in career and not the HS we once attended. This is not to deny that TJ will offer better exposure/course options, but if the kid is motivated, this can easily be compensated. So, there is no need to get obsessed over TJ at this time. At least this is what we told our kid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone focuses on race and the effect on Asians, but this really isn't about race as much as it is about socioeconomic status which are, admittedly, intertwined. If there are poor Asian kids attending Sandburg MS, then they will benefit from the policy change. It's the wealthy families in Chantilly and Great Falls pyramids that stand to lose spots, which is why there is so much vocal outrage.

DP. One reason Asians are outraged and feel targeted is the decision to award the top 1.5% spots based on attending school rather than zoned school. Most AAP eligible Asians will send their kids to the center for the stronger education. Or, they already chose to live in-bounds to a center school for the stronger academics and higher ratings. Taking the top 1.5% of the kids at a non-AAP middle school means that you're choosing among kids who deferred AAP for middle school or didn't qualify in the first place. That's going to ensure that few of those kids are Asian.

If eventually all MS have AAP and no one leaves for the center, the problem will fix itself.

This has been one of my chief complaints with TJ reform as well. The other is, since GPA is not weighted, there is no advantage to kids who took harder/honors courses and did well. Increased diversity is fine, but these two items are clearly done to remove the advantage the kids coming from academic oriented families have. This particularly affects asians and others to a lesser extent. But, I do not think it is fair to discriminate against smarter or hardworking students this way.

I would have preferred a common test that removes the teacher bias in grades, but I am not particularly upset about since it reduces (not eliminate) extensive prepping. However, its sad that so much of the grade depends on the teacher. For example, my kid barely managed to get A- in english in 7th as teacher practically didn't teach anything and favored kids who entertained the unrelated BS she used to talk during the class. However, the same kid is got almost perfect scores in every other 7th grade course and also 8th grade courses including english.

In the long run, I don't think TJ matters as much as we think. Its a lot easier to stand out in base school and get into better colleges as a result. The major we choose and to a lesser extent the college we get the 'final' degree (BS, MS etc) actually matters in career and not the HS we once attended. This is not to deny that TJ will offer better exposure/course options, but if the kid is motivated, this can easily be compensated. So, there is no need to get obsessed over TJ at this time. At least this is what we told our kid.

Pro-reform poster here. This is a really smart and solid take.

The difficulty is that you can't really introduce any kind of exam without inviting a huge influence of exam prep - UNLESS you use the exam purely as a measure of competency and then throw away the scores such that a passing score qualifies you for selection but a perfect score is no better than a passing score. And of course, exam prep points to motivation on the part of the parents as well as financial resources, neither of which is a reflection on the students themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone focuses on race and the effect on Asians, but this really isn't about race as much as it is about socioeconomic status which are, admittedly, intertwined. If there are poor Asian kids attending Sandburg MS, then they will benefit from the policy change. It's the wealthy families in Chantilly and Great Falls pyramids that stand to lose spots, which is why there is so much vocal outrage.

DP. One reason Asians are outraged and feel targeted is the decision to award the top 1.5% spots based on attending school rather than zoned school. Most AAP eligible Asians will send their kids to the center for the stronger education. Or, they already chose to live in-bounds to a center school for the stronger academics and higher ratings. Taking the top 1.5% of the kids at a non-AAP middle school means that you're choosing among kids who deferred AAP for middle school or didn't qualify in the first place. That's going to ensure that few of those kids are Asian.

If eventually all MS have AAP and no one leaves for the center, the problem will fix itself.

This has been one of my chief complaints with TJ reform as well. The other is, since GPA is not weighted, there is no advantage to kids who took harder/honors courses and did well. Increased diversity is fine, but these two items are clearly done to remove the advantage the kids coming from academic oriented families have. This particularly affects asians and others to a lesser extent. But, I do not think it is fair to discriminate against smarter or hardworking students this way.

I would have preferred a common test that removes the teacher bias in grades, but I am not particularly upset about since it reduces (not eliminate) extensive prepping. However, its sad that so much of the grade depends on the teacher. For example, my kid barely managed to get A- in english in 7th as teacher practically didn't teach anything and favored kids who entertained the unrelated BS she used to talk during the class. However, the same kid is got almost perfect scores in every other 7th grade course and also 8th grade courses including english.

In the long run, I don't think TJ matters as much as we think. Its a lot easier to stand out in base school and get into better colleges as a result. The major we choose and to a lesser extent the college we get the 'final' degree (BS, MS etc) actually matters in career and not the HS we once attended. This is not to deny that TJ will offer better exposure/course options, but if the kid is motivated, this can easily be compensated. So, there is no need to get obsessed over TJ at this time. At least this is what we told our kid.

Pro-reform poster here. This is a really smart and solid take.

The difficulty is that you can't really introduce any kind of exam without inviting a huge influence of exam prep - UNLESS you use the exam purely as a measure of competency and then throw away the scores such that a passing score qualifies you for selection but a perfect score is no better than a passing score. And of course, exam prep points to motivation on the part of the parents as well as financial resources, neither of which is a reflection on the students themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone focuses on race and the effect on Asians, but this really isn't about race as much as it is about socioeconomic status which are, admittedly, intertwined. If there are poor Asian kids attending Sandburg MS, then they will benefit from the policy change. It's the wealthy families in Chantilly and Great Falls pyramids that stand to lose spots, which is why there is so much vocal outrage.

DP. One reason Asians are outraged and feel targeted is the decision to award the top 1.5% spots based on attending school rather than zoned school. Most AAP eligible Asians will send their kids to the center for the stronger education. Or, they already chose to live in-bounds to a center school for the stronger academics and higher ratings. Taking the top 1.5% of the kids at a non-AAP middle school means that you're choosing among kids who deferred AAP for middle school or didn't qualify in the first place. That's going to ensure that few of those kids are Asian.

If eventually all MS have AAP and no one leaves for the center, the problem will fix itself.

This has been one of my chief complaints with TJ reform as well. The other is, since GPA is not weighted, there is no advantage to kids who took harder/honors courses and did well. Increased diversity is fine, but these two items are clearly done to remove the advantage the kids coming from academic oriented families have. This particularly affects asians and others to a lesser extent. But, I do not think it is fair to discriminate against smarter or hardworking students this way.

I would have preferred a common test that removes the teacher bias in grades, but I am not particularly upset about since it reduces (not eliminate) extensive prepping. However, its sad that so much of the grade depends on the teacher. For example, my kid barely managed to get A- in english in 7th as teacher practically didn't teach anything and favored kids who entertained the unrelated BS she used to talk during the class. However, the same kid is got almost perfect scores in every other 7th grade course and also 8th grade courses including english.

In the long run, I don't think TJ matters as much as we think. Its a lot easier to stand out in base school and get into better colleges as a result. The major we choose and to a lesser extent the college we get the 'final' degree (BS, MS etc) actually matters in career and not the HS we once attended. This is not to deny that TJ will offer better exposure/course options, but if the kid is motivated, this can easily be compensated. So, there is no need to get obsessed over TJ at this time. At least this is what we told our kid.