Anonymous wrote:This is what defending privilege looks like: https://wtop.com/education/2020/09/pta-clashes-with-va-education-secretary-on-admissions-changes/?fbclid=IwAR1GCpTcF6t3dJYljgFGtV6FsIhEHZNVyOLi6URFTzQaAfuOSEDRRwwib8Y

Shame on Asra Nomani and her privilege-hoarding buddies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For gods sake, don't force your kids into TJ or even AAP. Its interesting to see how many kids get into AAP based on admissions and parent referrals in spite of having scores well below the cut-off. Your kids will easily know if they belong in there along with teachers and peers. It can be stressful, depressing and may be demotivating when they know they can't compete or interact with other kids on an equal ground. No one wants them in their project group etc. My AAP kid says there are few kids who are consistently poor performers and rest of the kids joke that those kids parents threatened Principal to get into AAP

Same with diversity - you don't want your kid to feel inferior or treated poorly by his peers since the only reason the kid got into TJ is because of the race or geography. Also, for college admissions, its far better to get A's in regular school than C's in TJ. Kids are sensitive and easily get depressed if they perform poorly and cannot keep with the class.

Anonymous wrote:For gods sake, don't force your kids into TJ or even AAP. Its interesting to see how many kids get into AAP based on admissions and parent referrals in spite of having scores well below the cut-off. Your kids will easily know if they belong in there along with teachers and peers. It can be stressful, depressing and may be demotivating when they know they can't compete or interact with other kids on an equal ground. No one wants them in their project group etc. My AAP kid says there are few kids who are consistently poor performers and rest of the kids joke that those kids parents threatened Principal to get into AAP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of TJHSST is the right thing to do. TJ attracts a really elitist, gross set of parents and we'd be better without their kids, who can't help but parrot their parents' attitudes, polluting the educational atmosphere.

I certainly understand this perspective but still believe that it's possible to boldly improve the admissions process to improve the caliber of kids and families that arrive.

If the School Board won't take these steps, though, then yes, burn it all down as it does more harm than good in its current form.

My child is a junior at TJ, takes 4 post-AP classes this year and so much enjoys studying. So much looked forward to these challenging classes that aren’t offered at any other local high school. What harm does this do to you?

First of all, it doesn't matter what harm it does to ME, it matters what harm it does to the community. That's called giving a sh!t about other people.

The harm it does to the community is deep and destructive. You have literally thousands of families that are spending thousands of dollars every year on prep courses, placing an incredible amount of pressure on students to be able to get into a school that has extremely limited seating for the amount of interest in it.

Students feel the need to give up on their legitimate passions so that they can maximize their STEM profile, and end up less happy as a result - and many of those students don't even get into TJ after doing all of that. Kids should be able to engage in whatever productive and enjoyable activities they want when they're 10, 11, 12 years old, but right now there are only a few of them that seem to grant access to TJ.

Never mind the issues of access for underrepresented groups - the way the admissions process is currently constructed incentivizes destructive parenting behavior. Parents will always engage in destructive behavior that leads to kids hating their life and resenting their parents' choices, even to the point of suicide - but if the TJ admissions process didn't reward this type of behavior, you'd see far less of it than you do right now.

STEM professional here.

High school would have been pretty sweet if I could have spent more time doing math and science and less time studying Russian history and reading Milian Kundera. Then again most people in engineering school were... super passionate about science and engineering. Those are the type of kids who should be going to TJ, people who are passionate about... science and technology.

Create a magnet school for the performing arts, and create a magnet school for the humanities, then everyone can follow their passion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of TJHSST is the right thing to do. TJ attracts a really elitist, gross set of parents and we'd be better without their kids, who can't help but parrot their parents' attitudes, polluting the educational atmosphere.

I certainly understand this perspective but still believe that it's possible to boldly improve the admissions process to improve the caliber of kids and families that arrive.

If the School Board won't take these steps, though, then yes, burn it all down as it does more harm than good in its current form.

My child is a junior at TJ, takes 4 post-AP classes this year and so much enjoys studying. So much looked forward to these challenging classes that aren’t offered at any other local high school. What harm does this do to you?

First of all, it doesn't matter what harm it does to ME, it matters what harm it does to the community. That's called giving a sh!t about other people.

The harm it does to the community is deep and destructive. You have literally thousands of families that are spending thousands of dollars every year on prep courses, placing an incredible amount of pressure on students to be able to get into a school that has extremely limited seating for the amount of interest in it.

Students feel the need to give up on their legitimate passions so that they can maximize their STEM profile, and end up less happy as a result - and many of those students don't even get into TJ after doing all of that. Kids should be able to engage in whatever productive and enjoyable activities they want when they're 10, 11, 12 years old, but right now there are only a few of them that seem to grant access to TJ.

Never mind the issues of access for underrepresented groups - the way the admissions process is currently constructed incentivizes destructive parenting behavior. Parents will always engage in destructive behavior that leads to kids hating their life and resenting their parents' choices, even to the point of suicide - but if the TJ admissions process didn't reward this type of behavior, you'd see far less of it than you do right now.

Behold the savior telling other people how to parent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of TJHSST is the right thing to do. TJ attracts a really elitist, gross set of parents and we'd be better without their kids, who can't help but parrot their parents' attitudes, polluting the educational atmosphere.

I certainly understand this perspective but still believe that it's possible to boldly improve the admissions process to improve the caliber of kids and families that arrive.

If the School Board won't take these steps, though, then yes, burn it all down as it does more harm than good in its current form.

My child is a junior at TJ, takes 4 post-AP classes this year and so much enjoys studying. So much looked forward to these challenging classes that aren’t offered at any other local high school. What harm does this do to you?

First of all, it doesn't matter what harm it does to ME, it matters what harm it does to the community. That's called giving a sh!t about other people.

The harm it does to the community is deep and destructive. You have literally thousands of families that are spending thousands of dollars every year on prep courses, placing an incredible amount of pressure on students to be able to get into a school that has extremely limited seating for the amount of interest in it.

Students feel the need to give up on their legitimate passions so that they can maximize their STEM profile, and end up less happy as a result - and many of those students don't even get into TJ after doing all of that. Kids should be able to engage in whatever productive and enjoyable activities they want when they're 10, 11, 12 years old, but right now there are only a few of them that seem to grant access to TJ.

Never mind the issues of access for underrepresented groups - the way the admissions process is currently constructed incentivizes destructive parenting behavior. Parents will always engage in destructive behavior that leads to kids hating their life and resenting their parents' choices, even to the point of suicide - but if the TJ admissions process didn't reward this type of behavior, you'd see far less of it than you do right now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of TJHSST is the right thing to do. TJ attracts a really elitist, gross set of parents and we'd be better without their kids, who can't help but parrot their parents' attitudes, polluting the educational atmosphere.

I certainly understand this perspective but still believe that it's possible to boldly improve the admissions process to improve the caliber of kids and families that arrive.

If the School Board won't take these steps, though, then yes, burn it all down as it does more harm than good in its current form.

My child is a junior at TJ, takes 4 post-AP classes this year and so much enjoys studying. So much looked forward to these challenging classes that aren’t offered at any other local high school. What harm does this do to you?

First of all, it doesn't matter what harm it does to ME, it matters what harm it does to the community. That's called giving a sh!t about other people.

The harm it does to the community is deep and destructive. You have literally thousands of families that are spending thousands of dollars every year on prep courses, placing an incredible amount of pressure on students to be able to get into a school that has extremely limited seating for the amount of interest in it.

Students feel the need to give up on their legitimate passions so that they can maximize their STEM profile, and end up less happy as a result - and many of those students don't even get into TJ after doing all of that. Kids should be able to engage in whatever productive and enjoyable activities they want when they're 10, 11, 12 years old, but right now there are only a few of them that seem to grant access to TJ.

Never mind the issues of access for underrepresented groups - the way the admissions process is currently constructed incentivizes destructive parenting behavior. Parents will always engage in destructive behavior that leads to kids hating their life and resenting their parents' choices, even to the point of suicide - but if the TJ admissions process didn't reward this type of behavior, you'd see far less of it than you do right now.

Behold the savior telling other people how to parent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of TJHSST is the right thing to do. TJ attracts a really elitist, gross set of parents and we'd be better without their kids, who can't help but parrot their parents' attitudes, polluting the educational atmosphere.

I certainly understand this perspective but still believe that it's possible to boldly improve the admissions process to improve the caliber of kids and families that arrive.

If the School Board won't take these steps, though, then yes, burn it all down as it does more harm than good in its current form.

My child is a junior at TJ, takes 4 post-AP classes this year and so much enjoys studying. So much looked forward to these challenging classes that aren’t offered at any other local high school. What harm does this do to you?

First of all, it doesn't matter what harm it does to ME, it matters what harm it does to the community. That's called giving a sh!t about other people.

The harm it does to the community is deep and destructive. You have literally thousands of families that are spending thousands of dollars every year on prep courses, placing an incredible amount of pressure on students to be able to get into a school that has extremely limited seating for the amount of interest in it.

Students feel the need to give up on their legitimate passions so that they can maximize their STEM profile, and end up less happy as a result - and many of those students don't even get into TJ after doing all of that. Kids should be able to engage in whatever productive and enjoyable activities they want when they're 10, 11, 12 years old, but right now there are only a few of them that seem to grant access to TJ.

Never mind the issues of access for underrepresented groups - the way the admissions process is currently constructed incentivizes destructive parenting behavior. Parents will always engage in destructive behavior that leads to kids hating their life and resenting their parents' choices, even to the point of suicide - but if the TJ admissions process didn't reward this type of behavior, you'd see far less of it than you do right now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. That's why I'd like to see the gender breakdown of the people with the highest 500 or highest 1000 scores on the TJ tests. If the gender ratio of top scorers is roughly equal, but then the subjective part of the selection process is selecting more boys, that's a problem. If the gender ratio of the top scorers is heavily boy weighted, then it is what it is.

This plan does not address:

1) Girls being either discouraged from applying by other individuals or lacking interest in TJ precisely because of either the gender disparity or the disparity in how the genders are treated once at TJ

2) The fact that the exam as currently constituted is a poor measure of STEM potential - it is merely a snapshot of where the student is currently and whether or not they've been exposed to certain materials in advance (see CurieGate)

We should have removed Michael Phelps from the Olympics, because some girls were discouraged from swimming, and the race only represented where he was. There were too many other people who had even more potential, but they weren't exposed to all the training. Let's make an Olympiad for the losers.

Let's count the ways this metaphor is horrendous:

1) There are Olympics for both men and women in essentially all sports

2) The Olympics are the absolute peak of sporting excellence and are for adults - the better comparison would to the Olympics might be, say, professorships. TJ is an educational opportunity, not an educational outcome - and too many families view it as an outcome because they're desperate for the bumper sticker and the social prestige that comes with it in their community.

3) Sports are something you choose to participate in, education is not - and many students who are exceptionally talented and invested in education are currently nudged out of the process by mediocre students masquerading as talented ones through their parents' investment in these prep companies that have privileged access to material that is supposed to be secure

Essentially, Curie is like doing steroids. It's against the rules, because they have access to material that they shouldn't, and it's bad for students because of the overwhelming pressure that the investment places on them. And there are three possible outcomes from participating in Curie:

1) They would have gotten in to TJ anyway, so it was a waste of money
2) They didn't get in to TJ anyway, so it was a waste of money
3) Curie was the reason they got in, meaning they took a spot from someone who was probably more deserving and they are less likely to be successful and have an enjoyable high school experience as a consequence.

...also there is the distinct possibility of 4) The admissions process appropriately changes to make places like Curie irrelevant to getting into TJ.

Sports are separated by gender, because except for gymnastics (where the competition is different by gender) men always outdo women. You can fight for an all female TJ.

You can be as young as 14 to participate. Actually the older you are, the worse it is, except for running, where you peak around early/mid 20s, unless you're running a marathon, where you could be a bit older.

TJ is also optional, like the olympics, not mandatory like lower education. There are many talented athletes who never got the chance, but no one is fighting like crazy for the.

Just a complete failure to defend your point. The comparison with athletics is so tired by now - you lose credibility when you try to draw parallels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. That's why I'd like to see the gender breakdown of the people with the highest 500 or highest 1000 scores on the TJ tests. If the gender ratio of top scorers is roughly equal, but then the subjective part of the selection process is selecting more boys, that's a problem. If the gender ratio of the top scorers is heavily boy weighted, then it is what it is.

This plan does not address:

1) Girls being either discouraged from applying by other individuals or lacking interest in TJ precisely because of either the gender disparity or the disparity in how the genders are treated once at TJ

2) The fact that the exam as currently constituted is a poor measure of STEM potential - it is merely a snapshot of where the student is currently and whether or not they've been exposed to certain materials in advance (see CurieGate)

We should have removed Michael Phelps from the Olympics, because some girls were discouraged from swimming, and the race only represented where he was. There were too many other people who had even more potential, but they weren't exposed to all the training. Let's make an Olympiad for the losers.

Let's count the ways this metaphor is horrendous:

1) There are Olympics for both men and women in essentially all sports

2) The Olympics are the absolute peak of sporting excellence and are for adults - the better comparison would to the Olympics might be, say, professorships. TJ is an educational opportunity, not an educational outcome - and too many families view it as an outcome because they're desperate for the bumper sticker and the social prestige that comes with it in their community.

3) Sports are something you choose to participate in, education is not - and many students who are exceptionally talented and invested in education are currently nudged out of the process by mediocre students masquerading as talented ones through their parents' investment in these prep companies that have privileged access to material that is supposed to be secure

Essentially, Curie is like doing steroids. It's against the rules, because they have access to material that they shouldn't, and it's bad for students because of the overwhelming pressure that the investment places on them. And there are three possible outcomes from participating in Curie:

1) They would have gotten in to TJ anyway, so it was a waste of money
2) They didn't get in to TJ anyway, so it was a waste of money
3) Curie was the reason they got in, meaning they took a spot from someone who was probably more deserving and they are less likely to be successful and have an enjoyable high school experience as a consequence.

...also there is the distinct possibility of 4) The admissions process appropriately changes to make places like Curie irrelevant to getting into TJ.

Sports are separated by gender, because except for gymnastics (where the competition is different by gender) men always outdo women. You can fight for an all female TJ.

You can be as young as 14 to participate. Actually the older you are, the worse it is, except for running, where you peak around early/mid 20s, unless you're running a marathon, where you could be a bit older.

TJ is also optional, like the olympics, not mandatory like lower education. There are many talented athletes who never got the chance, but no one is fighting like crazy for the.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. That's why I'd like to see the gender breakdown of the people with the highest 500 or highest 1000 scores on the TJ tests. If the gender ratio of top scorers is roughly equal, but then the subjective part of the selection process is selecting more boys, that's a problem. If the gender ratio of the top scorers is heavily boy weighted, then it is what it is.

This plan does not address:

1) Girls being either discouraged from applying by other individuals or lacking interest in TJ precisely because of either the gender disparity or the disparity in how the genders are treated once at TJ

2) The fact that the exam as currently constituted is a poor measure of STEM potential - it is merely a snapshot of where the student is currently and whether or not they've been exposed to certain materials in advance (see CurieGate)

We should have removed Michael Phelps from the Olympics, because some girls were discouraged from swimming, and the race only represented where he was. There were too many other people who had even more potential, but they weren't exposed to all the training. Let's make an Olympiad for the losers.

Let's count the ways this metaphor is horrendous:

1) There are Olympics for both men and women in essentially all sports

2) The Olympics are the absolute peak of sporting excellence and are for adults - the better comparison would to the Olympics might be, say, professorships. TJ is an educational opportunity, not an educational outcome - and too many families view it as an outcome because they're desperate for the bumper sticker and the social prestige that comes with it in their community.

3) Sports are something you choose to participate in, education is not - and many students who are exceptionally talented and invested in education are currently nudged out of the process by mediocre students masquerading as talented ones through their parents' investment in these prep companies that have privileged access to material that is supposed to be secure

Essentially, Curie is like doing steroids. It's against the rules, because they have access to material that they shouldn't, and it's bad for students because of the overwhelming pressure that the investment places on them. And there are three possible outcomes from participating in Curie:

1) They would have gotten in to TJ anyway, so it was a waste of money
2) They didn't get in to TJ anyway, so it was a waste of money
3) Curie was the reason they got in, meaning they took a spot from someone who was probably more deserving and they are less likely to be successful and have an enjoyable high school experience as a consequence.

...also there is the distinct possibility of 4) The admissions process appropriately changes to make places like Curie irrelevant to getting into TJ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rid of TJHSST is the right thing to do. TJ attracts a really elitist, gross set of parents and we'd be better without their kids, who can't help but parrot their parents' attitudes, polluting the educational atmosphere.

I certainly understand this perspective but still believe that it's possible to boldly improve the admissions process to improve the caliber of kids and families that arrive.

If the School Board won't take these steps, though, then yes, burn it all down as it does more harm than good in its current form.

My child is a junior at TJ, takes 4 post-AP classes this year and so much enjoys studying. So much looked forward to these challenging classes that aren’t offered at any other local high school. What harm does this do to you?

First of all, it doesn't matter what harm it does to ME, it matters what harm it does to the community. That's called giving a sh!t about other people.

The harm it does to the community is deep and destructive. You have literally thousands of families that are spending thousands of dollars every year on prep courses, placing an incredible amount of pressure on students to be able to get into a school that has extremely limited seating for the amount of interest in it.

Students feel the need to give up on their legitimate passions so that they can maximize their STEM profile, and end up less happy as a result - and many of those students don't even get into TJ after doing all of that. Kids should be able to engage in whatever productive and enjoyable activities they want when they're 10, 11, 12 years old, but right now there are only a few of them that seem to grant access to TJ.

Never mind the issues of access for underrepresented groups - the way the admissions process is currently constructed incentivizes destructive parenting behavior. Parents will always engage in destructive behavior that leads to kids hating their life and resenting their parents' choices, even to the point of suicide - but if the TJ admissions process didn't reward this type of behavior, you'd see far less of it than you do right now.

Well, how is this different from the top colleges whose admission rate is even lower than TJ’s? Families also hire expensive counselors and build a specific profile: kids volunteer, start nonprofits, participate in other activities they don’t care about, take SAT prep classes - only to make a presentable college application. Furthermore, most of the top colleges value legacy - at least TJ doesn’t admit kids only because their parents attended TJ. Does it mean that the top colleges also do more harm than good and should be eliminated?