Anonymous wrote:People don't hate on TJ because of excellence, but it is funny how vehemently TJ supporters attack anyone who dares suggest that a student at another school might do just as well, or be just as smart, or even have an advantage getting into a top university. TJ has a higher concentration of very smart kids -- that's the nature of a magnet school -- but that doesn't mean that students who don't choose to go there are lesser beings intellectually or otherwise. That's what PP meant by hubris and it is all over this thread and any other that dares question whether TJ is the only route to success in this area.

If it works for your kid, great, but realize that other kids may choose different and for them, equally or more challenging paths.

Anonymous wrote:OK, but the problem with that premise - "two kids who are otherwise the same" - is that the top x% of the class at TJ are taking classes that are NOT available at Edison - way more advanced and unique things (including that TJ students work on a Senior Project in one of more than a dozen labs, some of which have equipment that NO other high school in the country has). Spend some time exploring TJ's website and you will understand this (links below)

http://tjpartnershipfund.org/current-needs/research-labs/

https://fcps.tjhsst.edu/coursemgmt/courses/300/

As just a few examples, Edison (link below) does not have a course in Bionanotechnology. Or Relativity, Electrodynamics & Quantum Mechanics. Or Introduction to Optics Systems and Phenomena. Or even the more plain Computational Physics.

http://www.fcps.edu/EdisonHS/departments/science.htm

Now, if you assume that TJ kids not at the top of the class are competing against top 10% of Edison kids, yes, probably top 10% of Edison kids do better than the middle third of TJ kids. But for the top of the TJ class, Edison is not going to serve them as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is true the admission office will look at the entire application and the SES and other circumstances will be considered. However, the above bolded statement is problematic. 1. The statement itself is illogical in that a kid who performed well (say top 10%) at a better regarded high school (TJ) would have had to work much more/harder to excel at such school than at a lesser regarded school (Edison). I think you should talk to TJ students or parents to get a sense of how tough it is to excel at a place like TJ. The SES factor is a separate matter and the overall SES level would be higher at TJ compared to Edison but there are many middle class or lower middle class students at TJ and there are middle class and even upper middle class students at Edison. Many of the TJ students are children of immigrant families who had to struggle as immigrant families with limited English. Only 7-8% of the TJ students come from private schools and low FARMS rate does not mean the students are wealthy, they may be middle class. 2. Colleges look at the rigor of the classes on the transcript and they want to see if the student challenged him/herself. Having taken advanced classes at TJ and excelling will not put that student at a disadvantage compared to a student who challenged him/herself and excelled at Edison. It will put the TJ student at an advantage assuming everything else are equal.

In fact, graduating in the top 10% at TJ will offer better chance at Ivy League Schools compared to graduating in the tip 10% of Edison given that about 20 to 25% of TJ graduated get accepted to Ivy League schools. I don't think one can say that about Edison.

The partial list of college acceptances for 2014:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/377204.page

You misread what PP wrote. She wrote, "take two children who are otherwise the same - i.e., test scores, grades, extracurriculars, race..." I think that assuming those factors are the same, she's probably right that the kid from Edison gets the nod.

Anonymous wrote:It is true the admission office will look at the entire application and the SES and other circumstances will be considered. However, the above bolded statement is problematic. 1. The statement itself is illogical in that a kid who performed well (say top 10%) at a better regarded high school (TJ) would have had to work much more/harder to excel at such school than at a lesser regarded school (Edison). I think you should talk to TJ students or parents to get a sense of how tough it is to excel at a place like TJ. The SES factor is a separate matter and the overall SES level would be higher at TJ compared to Edison but there are many middle class or lower middle class students at TJ and there are middle class and even upper middle class students at Edison. Many of the TJ students are children of immigrant families who had to struggle as immigrant families with limited English. Only 7-8% of the TJ students come from private schools and low FARMS rate does not mean the students are wealthy, they may be middle class. 2. Colleges look at the rigor of the classes on the transcript and they want to see if the student challenged him/herself. Having taken advanced classes at TJ and excelling will not put that student at a disadvantage compared to a student who challenged him/herself and excelled at Edison. It will put the TJ student at an advantage assuming everything else are equal.

In fact, graduating in the top 10% at TJ will offer better chance at Ivy League Schools compared to graduating in the tip 10% of Edison given that about 20 to 25% of TJ graduated get accepted to Ivy League schools. I don't think one can say that about Edison.

The partial list of college acceptances for 2014:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/377204.page

Anonymous wrote:I went to UC Berkeley and after that, an Ivy League law school (and graduated not too long ago). I have a close co-worker who went to an Ivy League for undergrad and law school and also worked for several years in the admissions office of Yale actually reviewing applications. I can tell you unequivocally that you take two children who are otherwise the same - i.e., test scores, grades, extracurriculars, race, etc. - one of them is at Edison and one is at TJ, the kid at Edison will have a better chance of being accepted. Admissions offices absolutely take account of the context in which the student was educated (realizing that not everyone is afforded the same opportunities with where they were placed in life) and a kid who performs well in a lesser regarded high school will be viewed as someone who achieved despite being in tougher circumstances, while the kid who performs well in a better regarded high school will be viewed as not having to have worked as hard to achieve.

Now, law school admissions, on the other hand, are completely different. There, great weight is given to how prestigious the undergrad school was that you attended.

Anonymous wrote:I don't know about TJ, but when I transferred to Edison from a far more competitive school in 12th grade, my class rank jumped and I got recommendations from teachers indicating that I was a special student. I can't help but think that this really helped me when I was applying to colleges/scholarships (I got into a few Ivy league schools).