Anonymous wrote:How many kids can even handle the workload at TJ? An extra class is a lot of additional work. Why aren't we just working to get more kids into AP and IB classes?

Anonymous wrote:If you know someone who is exceptionally well at working together with others to solve problems, maybe they could solve the problem of their low test scores? Or is that not a problem that they are good at solving?

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how miffed the SJWs will be when it turns out the less qualified kids they manage to squeeze into TJ dumb the school down and TJ’s reputation will simply be that of another middling FCPS school and not on par with the top neighborhood high schools. Then they’ll have to turn their sights on breaking up Langley, no doubt. It’s the educational equivalent of random looting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

The kids who don't have time to join afterschool clubs, participate in competitions, etc. are also unlikely to be able to devote the time required to be successful at a school like TJ. It's unfortunate, but there isn't an easy solution.

Then TJ needs to change and support the learning of these students. It's a public school, funded by tax payers. You should not need to invest thousands of dollars in tutoring etc and have a parent that knows how to work the system to be successful. The school should provide what the kids needs to thrive.

That's what a truly #1 school would do. Not just rest on the work that the parents put in.

Supporting them at TJ after they haven't shown much of anything is too late. FCPS needs to support those kids in ES and MS, but then the kids themselves have to demonstrate something by high school to merit TJ admission, other than good grades in a very inflated grading system. If a kid supposedly doesn't have time to participate in anything or demonstrate anything special, it's much more likely that the kid just isn't that motivated and isn't likely to contribute much to TJ.

It otherwise sounds like you're suggesting that TJ ought to be watered down to accommodate the kids who have never gone above and beyond and won't have time do to much homework.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

The kids who don't have time to join afterschool clubs, participate in competitions, etc. are also unlikely to be able to devote the time required to be successful at a school like TJ. It's unfortunate, but there isn't an easy solution.

Then TJ needs to change and support the learning of these students. It's a public school, funded by tax payers. You should not need to invest thousands of dollars in tutoring etc and have a parent that knows how to work the system to be successful. The school should provide what the kids needs to thrive.

That's what a truly #1 school would do. Not just rest on the work that the parents put in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

The kids who don't have time to join afterschool clubs, participate in competitions, etc. are also unlikely to be able to devote the time required to be successful at a school like TJ. It's unfortunate, but there isn't an easy solution.

Anonymous wrote:
The comment about the FARMS-heavy schools ignores the fact that for many of those students, the resource that they and their family do not have at their disposal is time. Time to join afterschool clubs, time on weekends to get to and participate in competitions, etc etc etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, and for the orchestra piece - It's not like picking kids for an orchestra or a sports team or whatever. If anything, it's like picking kids for a FRESHMEN sports team, where your program is going to develop the kids to eventually play for the varsity. And the kid who has maxed out their talent because of overprep might help you win freshmen games, but that kid's ceiling might be a lot lower than another kid who has less experience but a ton of potential. They're probably both making the team, but if you take too many of the former, your varsity will be hurting years down the road.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?

because it's another proxy for kids whose parents have been working towards TJ since they were born- it's a great compromise for them.

To the 2nd PP: No. It's because at some point, elite means elite. It means that the kid is actually performing at an extraordinarily high level. It shouldn't mean that the kid may or may not have unrealized potential that hasn't actually manifested in any way, but the kid writes a good essay and gets good grades, so good enough. For what it's worth, very few of the highly prepped kids have particularly impressive achievements, so this wouldn't actually help them. It's much easier to prep for a single standardized test than it is to achieve at very high levels on things like AMCs.

To the first PP: It doesn't have to be math or science, but the kid should demonstrate some sort of significant achievement in something. Maybe it's receiving a high placement on an essay contest or earning debate awards. For the kids who don't have means, I'm fully in favor of pushing more resources into the FARMS schools to ensure that high performing kids have the opportunity to pursue things like math contests, science olympiad, robotics, etc. At some point, though, the kids need to perform at an elite level to go to the elite school.

It's kind of like picking an orchestra. Some kids are naturally quite talented. Others have been taking private lessons for a very long time. Some only have had school lessons, but have the talent and drive to do well. Others don't. When they pick the kids for the highest orchestra, they're going to pick the kids who are the best at playing their instruments. No one is going to insist that a kid who is playing at a high level doesn't deserve the spot since he's just privileged, practices too much, and has been taking lessons for too long.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?

because it's another proxy for kids whose parents have been working towards TJ since they were born- it's a great compromise for them.

To the 2nd PP: No. It's because at some point, elite means elite. It means that the kid is actually performing at an extraordinarily high level. It shouldn't mean that the kid may or may not have unrealized potential that hasn't actually manifested in any way, but the kid writes a good essay and gets good grades, so good enough. For what it's worth, very few of the highly prepped kids have particularly impressive achievements, so this wouldn't actually help them. It's much easier to prep for a single standardized test than it is to achieve at very high levels on things like AMCs.

To the first PP: It doesn't have to be math or science, but the kid should demonstrate some sort of significant achievement in something. Maybe it's receiving a high placement on an essay contest or earning debate awards. For the kids who don't have means, I'm fully in favor of pushing more resources into the FARMS schools to ensure that high performing kids have the opportunity to pursue things like math contests, science olympiad, robotics, etc. At some point, though, the kids need to perform at an elite level to go to the elite school.

It's kind of like picking an orchestra. Some kids are naturally quite talented. Others have been taking private lessons for a very long time. Some only have had school lessons, but have the talent and drive to do well. Others don't. When they pick the kids for the highest orchestra, they're going to pick the kids who are the best at playing their instruments. No one is going to insist that a kid who is playing at a high level doesn't deserve the spot since he's just privileged, practices too much, and has been taking lessons for too long.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?

because it's another proxy for kids whose parents have been working towards TJ since they were born- it's a great compromise for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's not me that has identified standardized testing as inadequate. It's the world's top universities, which are essentially businesses tasked with acquiring and nurturing top talent.

If shunning these exams is good enough for Caltech, then it's more than good enough for TJ.

DP. Elite universities can ignore the ACT or SAT, because they have plenty of applicants with extraordinary achievements to select from. ACTs and SATs are meaningless when they get applicants who are Regeneron Science Talent Search Finalists, or kids who make it to the USA Math Olympiad, or any other notable accomplishment. They also frequently ask for things like AMC scores, and they still look at AP exam scores.

I would have no problem with TJ eliminating their entrance exams, providing that they instead looked at Mathcounts placement, AMC 8 scores, AMC 10 scores, Science Olympiad placement, etc.

Why? Not everyone has the same extracurricular opportunities or desires. Why look at things like science Olympiad placement when 1) not all teams are treated the same or perform the same, and 2) not all students who would be interested or willing to participate are able to due to family constraints?