Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
The fact that the cohort that failed the SOL in 10th grade is similarly sized to the cohort that failed it the next year in 11th grade suggests otherwise. That makes sense as counseling out might undermine the demographic shift that the admissions changes were designed to achieve. In the period you reference where counseling out occurred, Asian students made up roughly 70-75% of the incoming freshman class but accounted for roughly 85% of the class by senior year following the net outflow/inflow of students during high school. That may explain why FCPS/TJ changed both 9th and 10th grade admissions policies simultaneously, to minimize the chance of demographic drift occurring during high school.
There demographic shift in admissions seems pretty negligible. Sure, instead of 3% of a URM group there's now 4% which is a big improvement I guess.
The first class of the new admissions was 25% FARMs. That’s not negligible.
Yes, I had read low-income Asians were the largest beneficiary of the changes.
Correct. Given bonus points, Asians will over perform compared to their peer groups. Just like medium and high income Asians. Doesn’t mean they were the most deserving students, just means, as expected poor Asians perform better than other poor demographics just like rich Asians and middle income asians. It’s not about the money. Honestly TJ should have more Asians if it were merit based.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
The fact that the cohort that failed the SOL in 10th grade is similarly sized to the cohort that failed it the next year in 11th grade suggests otherwise. That makes sense as counseling out might undermine the demographic shift that the admissions changes were designed to achieve. In the period you reference where counseling out occurred, Asian students made up roughly 70-75% of the incoming freshman class but accounted for roughly 85% of the class by senior year following the net outflow/inflow of students during high school. That may explain why FCPS/TJ changed both 9th and 10th grade admissions policies simultaneously, to minimize the chance of demographic drift occurring during high school.
There demographic shift in admissions seems pretty negligible. Sure, instead of 3% of a URM group there's now 4% which is a big improvement I guess.
The first class of the new admissions was 25% FARMs. That’s not negligible.
Yes, I had read low-income Asians were the largest beneficiary of the changes.
Correct. Given bonus points, Asians will over perform compared to their peer groups. Just like medium and high income Asians. Doesn’t mean they were the most deserving students, just means, as expected poor Asians perform better than other poor demographics just like rich Asians and middle income asians. It’s not about the money. Honestly TJ should have more Asians if it were merit based.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
The fact that the cohort that failed the SOL in 10th grade is similarly sized to the cohort that failed it the next year in 11th grade suggests otherwise. That makes sense as counseling out might undermine the demographic shift that the admissions changes were designed to achieve. In the period you reference where counseling out occurred, Asian students made up roughly 70-75% of the incoming freshman class but accounted for roughly 85% of the class by senior year following the net outflow/inflow of students during high school. That may explain why FCPS/TJ changed both 9th and 10th grade admissions policies simultaneously, to minimize the chance of demographic drift occurring during high school.
There demographic shift in admissions seems pretty negligible. Sure, instead of 3% of a URM group there's now 4% which is a big improvement I guess.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
The fact that the cohort that failed the SOL in 10th grade is similarly sized to the cohort that failed it the next year in 11th grade suggests otherwise. That makes sense as counseling out might undermine the demographic shift that the admissions changes were designed to achieve. In the period you reference where counseling out occurred, Asian students made up roughly 70-75% of the incoming freshman class but accounted for roughly 85% of the class by senior year following the net outflow/inflow of students during high school. That may explain why FCPS/TJ changed both 9th and 10th grade admissions policies simultaneously, to minimize the chance of demographic drift occurring during high school.
There demographic shift in admissions seems pretty negligible. Sure, instead of 3% of a URM group there's now 4% which is a big improvement I guess.
The first class of the new admissions was 25% FARMs. That’s not negligible.
Yes, I had read low-income Asians were the largest beneficiary of the changes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
The fact that the cohort that failed the SOL in 10th grade is similarly sized to the cohort that failed it the next year in 11th grade suggests otherwise. That makes sense as counseling out might undermine the demographic shift that the admissions changes were designed to achieve. In the period you reference where counseling out occurred, Asian students made up roughly 70-75% of the incoming freshman class but accounted for roughly 85% of the class by senior year following the net outflow/inflow of students during high school. That may explain why FCPS/TJ changed both 9th and 10th grade admissions policies simultaneously, to minimize the chance of demographic drift occurring during high school.
There demographic shift in admissions seems pretty negligible. Sure, instead of 3% of a URM group there's now 4% which is a big improvement I guess.
The first class of the new admissions was 25% FARMs. That’s not negligible.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
The fact that the cohort that failed the SOL in 10th grade is similarly sized to the cohort that failed it the next year in 11th grade suggests otherwise. That makes sense as counseling out might undermine the demographic shift that the admissions changes were designed to achieve. In the period you reference where counseling out occurred, Asian students made up roughly 70-75% of the incoming freshman class but accounted for roughly 85% of the class by senior year following the net outflow/inflow of students during high school. That may explain why FCPS/TJ changed both 9th and 10th grade admissions policies simultaneously, to minimize the chance of demographic drift occurring during high school.
There demographic shift in admissions seems pretty negligible. Sure, instead of 3% of a URM group there's now 4% which is a big improvement I guess.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
The fact that the cohort that failed the SOL in 10th grade is similarly sized to the cohort that failed it the next year in 11th grade suggests otherwise. That makes sense as counseling out might undermine the demographic shift that the admissions changes were designed to achieve. In the period you reference where counseling out occurred, Asian students made up roughly 70-75% of the incoming freshman class but accounted for roughly 85% of the class by senior year following the net outflow/inflow of students during high school. That may explain why FCPS/TJ changed both 9th and 10th grade admissions policies simultaneously, to minimize the chance of demographic drift occurring during high school.
Anonymous wrote:In regards to the struggling students mentioned above, TJ used to counsel out struggling students, one reason they were able to keep their stats high. Is TJ still counseling out students?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did the philosophy behind the 2021-22 9th grade admissions changes also carry over to 10th and 11th grade admissions?
No, those admissions don't make headlines so those admissions are still merit based.
In 2021-22, there were a number of 10th and 11th graders that failed an SOL. In 2022-23, there were a number of 11th graders that failed an SOL. That's a new phenomenon. That's why I wondered if admissions policies changed in the upper grades beginning in 2021-22 as well.
No they didn't. So much for that conspiracy theory.
It looks like there was an 84% pass rate in chemistry in 2021-2022 That would probably be sophomores.
It doesn't look like there were any SOL failures among juniors in 2022-2023.
Seven juniors failed the English reading SOL in 2022-23.
I guess they weren't able to buy the test answers for the SOL that year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did the philosophy behind the 2021-22 9th grade admissions changes also carry over to 10th and 11th grade admissions?
No, those admissions don't make headlines so those admissions are still merit based.
In 2021-22, there were a number of 10th and 11th graders that failed an SOL. In 2022-23, there were a number of 11th graders that failed an SOL. That's a new phenomenon. That's why I wondered if admissions policies changed in the upper grades beginning in 2021-22 as well.
No they didn't. So much for that conspiracy theory.
It looks like there was an 84% pass rate in chemistry in 2021-2022 That would probably be sophomores.
It doesn't look like there were any SOL failures among juniors in 2022-2023.
Seven juniors failed the English reading SOL in 2022-23.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did the philosophy behind the 2021-22 9th grade admissions changes also carry over to 10th and 11th grade admissions?
No, those admissions don't make headlines so those admissions are still merit based.
Previously, that makes sense. Prior TJ leadership favored a more traditional approach than FCPS and used that traditional approach when admitting upper level students. But current TJ leadership is ideologically aligned with FCPS, so why wouldn't they replicate FCPS's new admission strategy for upper level students also?
Because they are not actually interested in diversity, only the appearance of diversity at their flagship magnets school.
Right now they are struggling to keep the bottom from falling out academically, so they are open to a little bit of invisible merit.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did the philosophy behind the 2021-22 9th grade admissions changes also carry over to 10th and 11th grade admissions?
No, those admissions don't make headlines so those admissions are still merit based.
In 2021-22, there were a number of 10th and 11th graders that failed an SOL. In 2022-23, there were a number of 11th graders that failed an SOL. That's a new phenomenon. That's why I wondered if admissions policies changed in the upper grades beginning in 2021-22 as well.
No they didn't. So much for that conspiracy theory.
It looks like there was an 84% pass rate in chemistry in 2021-2022 That would probably be sophomores.
It doesn't look like there were any SOL failures among juniors in 2022-2023.
Seven juniors failed the English reading SOL in 2022-23.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Did the philosophy behind the 2021-22 9th grade admissions changes also carry over to 10th and 11th grade admissions?
No, those admissions don't make headlines so those admissions are still merit based.
In 2021-22, there were a number of 10th and 11th graders that failed an SOL. In 2022-23, there were a number of 11th graders that failed an SOL. That's a new phenomenon. That's why I wondered if admissions policies changed in the upper grades beginning in 2021-22 as well.
No they didn't. So much for that conspiracy theory.
It looks like there was an 84% pass rate in chemistry in 2021-2022 That would probably be sophomores.
It doesn't look like there were any SOL failures among juniors in 2022-2023.