Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the of converting TJ to 10th-12th and being able to serve 33% more students through the program on the face of it, but do wonder if there are strong arguments against this that aren’t on my radar. I’d consider any argument about needing to form community or the minor disruption of a student spending 1 year at base HS to be weak arguments, but there may be stronger ones I’m overlooking. Anyone have we’ll-reasoned arguments against this type of change?

1) You’d pretty much destroy every non-STEM extracurricular at the school - which are a significant part of the school’s culture

2) You’d eliminate a crucial adjustment year for kids to figure out how to navigate the rigor of TJ.

3) No more IBET, which, in addition to the design and tech class that introduces many students (however easily) to principles of engineering also gives them a core group of students to build networks around.

+1000 For all of these reasons, plus there's a significant number of kids (my DS was among them) who are just more than ready to get to TJ. I feel so bad for the kids who are caught up in this mess, created by a group of people who never had the kids' best interests in mind. Asra knows this better than most TJ parents.

It's beyond disgusting that she is using so many students as pawns in her political games.

It's disgusting that you would throw around words like "disgusting" so casually when things don't go your way. Grow up. Do better.

I guess you are OK if Asra uses our kids as pawns for her political Trumphumper games.

I'm not. It's disgusting.

I guess you are fine with racist SB members practicing racial discrimination against Asian students. Do better.

The current admissions policy is less racist than the previous one. The SB behaved poorly, but the admissions process itself is a step in the right direction.

And Asra is still a Trumphumper using our kids to push her GOP wedge issues.

Citation needed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Who would have though that trying to break the cycle of low income Black and Hispanic underachievement would be derided as racist.

That attempts to reduce opportunity hoarding by rich people would be called unjust.

If only Fairfax County had similar demographics to PG County, we'd be having an entirely different conversation. Imagine FCPS consisting of 60% African-Americans but 70% Asians at TJ. Then the injustice of privilege would be 100x more obvious and maybe the TJ lawsuit supporters could wrap their minds around the concept of a zero-sum game.

Anonymous wrote:
Who would have though that trying to break the cycle of low income Black and Hispanic underachievement would be derided as racist.

That attempts to reduce opportunity hoarding by rich people would be called unjust.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, they'll just use what they have without the proxy discrimination of the 1.5% and experience factors.

Why would FCPS do that given their stated goals? Lotteries are legal.

The lottery was already shot down. The school board knows they can't use it. That would cause a riot in the streets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child applied for the class of 2026. It really bothers me that whatever solution the board comes up with will be done behind closed doors and the loudest, pushiest parents will dictate what is done.

If they want to know how the parents of the class of 2026 would like to proceed, they should send a survey rather than having certain pockets of parents band together to push.

LOL, isn't it obvious how the parents of the class of 2026 would like to proceed?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the of converting TJ to 10th-12th and being able to serve 33% more students through the program on the face of it, but do wonder if there are strong arguments against this that aren’t on my radar. I’d consider any argument about needing to form community or the minor disruption of a student spending 1 year at base HS to be weak arguments, but there may be stronger ones I’m overlooking. Anyone have we’ll-reasoned arguments against this type of change?

1) You’d pretty much destroy every non-STEM extracurricular at the school - which are a significant part of the school’s culture

2) You’d eliminate a crucial adjustment year for kids to figure out how to navigate the rigor of TJ.

3) No more IBET, which, in addition to the design and tech class that introduces many students (however easily) to principles of engineering also gives them a core group of students to build networks around.

1 is false and 2 is weak (can think of equal counterarguments), 3 has some real validity though.

1 is absolutely true. Athletes are not leaving their high schools for TJ once they’ve already played there for a year, nor are performing artists.

2 is also absolutely true and crucial, especially in math and science. Freshmen Biology at TJ is a HUGE separator and the only other course that usually presents a level of challenge well above what the students are used to. Having students take that course without TJ teachers would be a catastrophic mistake.

Yep. IBET...the design and tech class is fundamental to the TJ curriculum. Freshman Biology at TJ is pretty much equivalent to AP Biology at other FCPS schools. Don’t forget about Research Statistics 1 that every TJ freshman takes First semester. It’s the first half of the AP statistics course at other FCPS schools. And Math 3 at TJ is Algebra 2 and completed in one semester vs an entire year at the other county high schools. I’d say the courses at TJ are not equivalent to a similarly titled class at base HS, they are much harder.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the of converting TJ to 10th-12th and being able to serve 33% more students through the program on the face of it, but do wonder if there are strong arguments against this that aren’t on my radar. I’d consider any argument about needing to form community or the minor disruption of a student spending 1 year at base HS to be weak arguments, but there may be stronger ones I’m overlooking. Anyone have we’ll-reasoned arguments against this type of change?

1) You’d pretty much destroy every non-STEM extracurricular at the school - which are a significant part of the school’s culture

2) You’d eliminate a crucial adjustment year for kids to figure out how to navigate the rigor of TJ.

3) No more IBET, which, in addition to the design and tech class that introduces many students (however easily) to principles of engineering also gives them a core group of students to build networks around.

+1000 For all of these reasons, plus there's a significant number of kids (my DS was among them) who are just more than ready to get to TJ. I feel so bad for the kids who are caught up in this mess, created by a group of people who never had the kids' best interests in mind. Asra knows this better than most TJ parents.

It's beyond disgusting that she is using so many students as pawns in her political games.

It's disgusting that you would throw around words like "disgusting" so casually when things don't go your way. Grow up. Do better.

I guess you are OK if Asra uses our kids as pawns for her political Trumphumper games.

I'm not. It's disgusting.

I guess you are fine with racist SB members practicing racial discrimination against Asian students. Do better.

The current admissions policy is less racist than the previous one. The SB behaved poorly, but the admissions process itself is a step in the right direction.

And Asra is still a Trumphumper using our kids to push her GOP wedge issues.

Anonymous wrote:My child applied for the class of 2026. It really bothers me that whatever solution the board comes up with will be done behind closed doors and the loudest, pushiest parents will dictate what is done.

If they want to know how the parents of the class of 2026 would like to proceed, they should send a survey rather than having certain pockets of parents band together to push.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the of converting TJ to 10th-12th and being able to serve 33% more students through the program on the face of it, but do wonder if there are strong arguments against this that aren’t on my radar. I’d consider any argument about needing to form community or the minor disruption of a student spending 1 year at base HS to be weak arguments, but there may be stronger ones I’m overlooking. Anyone have we’ll-reasoned arguments against this type of change?

1) You’d pretty much destroy every non-STEM extracurricular at the school - which are a significant part of the school’s culture

2) You’d eliminate a crucial adjustment year for kids to figure out how to navigate the rigor of TJ.

3) No more IBET, which, in addition to the design and tech class that introduces many students (however easily) to principles of engineering also gives them a core group of students to build networks around.

1 is false and 2 is weak (can think of equal counterarguments), 3 has some real validity though.

1 is absolutely true. Athletes are not leaving their high schools for TJ once they’ve already played there for a year, nor are performing artists.

2 is also absolutely true and crucial, especially in math and science. Freshmen Biology at TJ is a HUGE separator and the only other course that usually presents a level of challenge well above what the students are used to. Having students take that course without TJ teachers would be a catastrophic mistake.

Anonymous wrote:My child applied for the class of 2026. It really bothers me that whatever solution the board comes up with will be done behind closed doors and the loudest, pushiest parents will dictate what is done.

If they want to know how the parents of the class of 2026 would like to proceed, they should send a survey rather than having certain pockets of parents band together to push.

Anonymous wrote:My child applied for the class of 2026. It really bothers me that whatever solution the board comes up with will be done behind closed doors and the loudest, pushiest parents will dictate what is done.

If they want to know how the parents of the class of 2026 would like to proceed, they should send a survey rather than having certain pockets of parents band together to push.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, they'll just use what they have without the proxy discrimination of the 1.5% and experience factors.

The geographic distribution was the best part of the new admissions plan. The experience factors should certainly be left out.

It is very good in theory. In practice, the non-AAP students are having a difficult time. They are in the same classes with high performing students who can do the work. What do you think is the result?

Citation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the of converting TJ to 10th-12th and being able to serve 33% more students through the program on the face of it, but do wonder if there are strong arguments against this that aren’t on my radar. I’d consider any argument about needing to form community or the minor disruption of a student spending 1 year at base HS to be weak arguments, but there may be stronger ones I’m overlooking. Anyone have we’ll-reasoned arguments against this type of change?

1) You’d pretty much destroy every non-STEM extracurricular at the school - which are a significant part of the school’s culture

2) You’d eliminate a crucial adjustment year for kids to figure out how to navigate the rigor of TJ.

3) No more IBET, which, in addition to the design and tech class that introduces many students (however easily) to principles of engineering also gives them a core group of students to build networks around.

+1000 For all of these reasons, plus there's a significant number of kids (my DS was among them) who are just more than ready to get to TJ. I feel so bad for the kids who are caught up in this mess, created by a group of people who never had the kids' best interests in mind. Asra knows this better than most TJ parents.

It's beyond disgusting that she is using so many students as pawns in her political games.

It's disgusting that you would throw around words like "disgusting" so casually when things don't go your way. Grow up. Do better.

I guess you are OK if Asra uses our kids as pawns for her political Trumphumper games.

I'm not. It's disgusting.

I guess you are fine with racist SB members practicing racial discrimination against Asian students. Do better.

The current admissions policy is less racist than the previous one. The SB behaved poorly, but the admissions process itself is a step in the right direction.

And Asra is still a Trumphumper using our kids to push her GOP wedge issues.

I have voted for Democratic candidates far, far more often than I've voted for Republicans, but I dismiss out of hand arguments coming from anyone who uses the term "Trumphumper," because it tells me the person is just a party hack looking to sing to the choir rather than have an honest discussion.

That sh*t may work with the FCDC insiders (Kiraly, Graham, Schoradt, Hampton, Bierman, etc.) It does nothing for the rest of us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like the of converting TJ to 10th-12th and being able to serve 33% more students through the program on the face of it, but do wonder if there are strong arguments against this that aren’t on my radar. I’d consider any argument about needing to form community or the minor disruption of a student spending 1 year at base HS to be weak arguments, but there may be stronger ones I’m overlooking. Anyone have we’ll-reasoned arguments against this type of change?

1) You’d pretty much destroy every non-STEM extracurricular at the school - which are a significant part of the school’s culture

2) You’d eliminate a crucial adjustment year for kids to figure out how to navigate the rigor of TJ.

3) No more IBET, which, in addition to the design and tech class that introduces many students (however easily) to principles of engineering also gives them a core group of students to build networks around.

+1000 For all of these reasons, plus there's a significant number of kids (my DS was among them) who are just more than ready to get to TJ. I feel so bad for the kids who are caught up in this mess, created by a group of people who never had the kids' best interests in mind. Asra knows this better than most TJ parents.

It's beyond disgusting that she is using so many students as pawns in her political games.

It's disgusting that you would throw around words like "disgusting" so casually when things don't go your way. Grow up. Do better.

I guess you are OK if Asra uses our kids as pawns for her political Trumphumper games.

I'm not. It's disgusting.

I guess you are fine with racist SB members practicing racial discrimination against Asian students. Do better.

The current admissions policy is less racist than the previous one. The SB behaved poorly, but the admissions process itself is a step in the right direction.

And Asra is still a Trumphumper using our kids to push her GOP wedge issues.

I have voted for Democratic candidates far, far more often than I've voted for Republicans, but I dismiss out of hand arguments coming from anyone who uses the term "Trumphumper," because it tells me the person is just a party hack looking to sing to the choir rather than have an honest discussion.

That sh*t may work with the FCDC insiders (Kiraly, Graham, Schoradt, Hampton, Bierman, etc.) It does nothing for the rest of us.