A US District Court Judge in Virginia has ordered TJ to cease using its new admissions system

Parents Forum
166

Isn’t every school in the US a ‘math school’ then as every school teaches math? Math talent is also developed.

The best of the best in basketball aren’t finding what they need in public schools so now go to private academies to develop their basketball talent, often hobbling together an academic program. I don’t think we want the great math talent to go private, but many do. If the math talent stays in the public schools, they may get very very good (just like a lot of basketball players playing for a public school team will get very very good) but the the elite will go private.

3 Likes
167

I would would hope every school is a “math school” where math talent can be developed, but some posters don’t seem to think that this is the case. The argument here seems to be that allowing even the top 1.5% percent of students from the poor schools with more URMs would “degrade” the educational experience of the kids from wealthier schools with less URMs.

Am I the only one who hears echoes of similar arguments from the the not too distant past?

As for basketball, I disagree with you that the top talent has to develop at a basketball “Academy” which “hobbles together an academic program,” but it isn’t worth getting into. Being adequately prepared to thrive at TJ after eighth grade is in no way comparable to being able to thrive in the NBA.

1 Like
168

If TJ (and/or additional super-advanced schools or programs) were large enough to be non-competitively opened to all who meet basic criteria to indicate likelihood of benefiting from more advanced curricular offerings not available at the regular schools, would there be as much complaining or lawsuits directed at TJ – or against inequality in K-8?

169

Some specific numbers about how admissions changed among the 2 systems are below. There are clearly some huge differences in which applicants are most likely to be admitted under the 2 admission systems. Low SES and English 2nd language are two of the experience factors that give a boost under the new system, which explains why they are among the most likely to be admitted groups. Low SES was the group with the largest change, increasing from 0.6% of admits in class of 2024 to 25% of admits in class of 2025. Similarly private school kids were one of the hardest hit groups, dropping from 11% of admits to 3% of admits. The lawsuit emphasizes race, which also shows large differences. Asian students dropped from 73% of admits to 54%. And URM increased from 4% of admits to 18%.

I can see why the administration and certain groups would favor the new demographic distribution, with much increased representation of lower SES + URMs. And significantly decreased representation of Asian students and private school kids. Whether this is equitable, legal, or desirable is a different issue.

Class of 2024: Old Admission System
Mean GPA of Applicants = ~3.9/4.0, Admits = ~3.95/4.0

(More Likely to be Admitted Groups)
Asian – 56% of Applicants, 73% of Admits
Private School – 7% of Applicants, 11% of Admits
Male – 54% of Applicants, 58% of Admits

(Less Likely to be Admitted Groups)
Low SES – ?% of Applicants, 0.6% of Admits
Black – 6% of Applicants, 1% of Admits
Hispanic – 8% of Applicants, 3% of Admits
White – 23% of Applicants, 18% of Admits
Female – 45% of Applicants, 41% of Admits

Class of 2025: New Admission System
Mean GPA of Applicants = 3.91/4.0, Admits = 3.95/4.0

(More Likely to be Admitted Groups)
Low SES – 13% of Applicants, 25% of Admits
English 2nd Language – 4% of Applicants, 7% of Admits
Hispanic – 9.7% of Applicants, 11.3% of Admits
Asian – 51% of Applicants, 54% of Admits

(Less Likely to be Admitted Groups)
Private School – 5% of Applicants, 3% of Admits
2+ Races – 7% of Applicants, 5% of Admits
Black – 9% of Applicants, 7% of Admits

TJ does offer a variety of highly advanced courses in math, science, and various other fields that students are unlikely to find at their home school. These include courses like Differential Equations, Neurobiology, Organic Chemistry, Parallel Computing, and Machine Learning. However, these courses are not required and most students do not take them. It’s my understanding that the majority of students do not take courses above AP level. TJ requires seniors to take at least 2 AP courses, and requires that all students take calculus.
I don’t know if their AP classes are cover more or different material than other HSs, but TJ students tend to average much higher scores than other HSs. TJ also has various other unique requirements and opportunities not found in traditional HSs. For example, they require all students to do an original experimental research project in one of 13 off site laboratories and have various ways of supporting students’ research, including mentorship.

I don’t think the focus should be on getting the pinnacle of highest 99th percentile test score and/or 3.95+ GPA or whether kids who are slightly below such stats will slow down the class pace. I’d focus more on things like which students would truly benefit from the unique opportunities TJ provides that would not be possible in their home school. This includes things like which kids are likely to take advantage of TJ’s unique classes that are not available in their home school, who would benefi from the unique research opportunities/requirements, who would benefit from a class full of high achieving peers, etc. Unfortunately these types of criteria are more difficult to evaluate well than comparing GPA or score stats.

3 Likes
170

Forget about NBA players. How about comparing with college players or high school players? Nature ensures there’s diversity of talents (and a few prodigies) in every field. Some in basketball, some in math, and so on. The best thing a society can do is to let kids develop their natural talents and pursue their interests in whatever fields their talents and interests happen to intersect. Artificial interference in the way nature works impedes human progress and it will ultimately fail. Always.

4 Likes
171

We are talking about allowing the top 8th graders from poorer schools with more URMs into a school with top students from richer schools and less URMs.

You equate that with “artificial interference in the way nature works.”

It would be unproductive for me to converse with you further.

3 Likes
172

You seem to view the issue through the lens of URM representation. I don’t. The majority of the beneficiaries of the change made by Fairfax school board last year were actually white. According to the judge, the change was purposely intended to reduce Asian American students, and thus increasing the proportions of students of other races. Not the other way around. That seems to fit the definition of racism and discrimination.

The primary reason, I believe, that schools like TJ attract a greater proportion of Asian Americans is because they, not unlike Jews in earlier generations, feel they face fewer impediments and discrimination in STEM, where merits are more valued and can be more objectively measured.

9 Likes
173

I posted the specific changes in my earlier post, which are summarized below. Note that both Black students and Hispanic students gained more spots than White students. However, by far the biggest winners of the new system were low SES kids, with a >4000% increase from 0.6% of admits to 25% of admits. No other group comes close. Giving a strong boost for low SES is a classic method of increasing URM enrollment when legally not allowed to consider race. URMs usually average substantially lower scores than other races, and significantly lower GPA; so going by stats URMs are still going to suffer. However, URMs average a larger portion of low income than other races, so the more boost you give to low income, the more URMs gain in relation to other races, including White students. I expect this relates to why URMs had larger gains than White students under the new system.

This is also not inconsistent with administration goals, who had expressed concern about the number of Black students previously being listed as too low to report – near 0 in some years. In the article, the TJ representation does not deny trying to increase URM enrollment, with comments like, “The school system also argued that efforts to increase Black and Hispanic representation are legally permissible as long as the school board had not demonstrated a desire to harm Asian Americans.”

Gained Spots
Low SES – Increased by 4080% from 0.6% to 25.1% (24.5 percentage point increase)
Black – Increased by 490% from 1.2% to 7.1% (5.9 percentage point increase)
Hispanic – Increased by 240% from 3.3% to 11.3% (8.0 percentage point increase)
White – Increased by 26% from 17.7% to 22.3% (4.6 percentage point increase)
Female – Increased by 10% from 41.8% to 46.0% (4.2 percentage point increase)

5 Likes
174

As long as there is scarcity created by the special school / program having a fixed size that is smaller than would accommodate all students who could use and benefit from the special programs not available in regular schools, it will always be a zero-sum competitive / cutthroat game played out in lawsuits and politics.

Immigration selects for Asian immigrants who are highly educated and disproportionately in STEM. Kids of highly educated people in STEM pursuing STEM at a high level, who would have thought that?

Anyone check whether the non-Asian students at TJ include a disproportionate number of kids of immigrants who originally came on PhD student or skilled worker visas?

5 Likes
175

At TJ, whites, by definition, are URMs too. So what? It’s a merit-based magnet school. One’s skin color shouldn’t matter. Asian Americans have even greater representation in many fields in STEM, not because they enjoy some socioeconomic advantage. They’re everywhere in Silicon Valley, in academia, etc. In last year’s Putnam competition, all winners were Asian Americans. The same in 2019 (no competition in 2020 because of the pandemic). Nearly all top winners in IMO, IPhO, USACO, etc. for many years were Asians. They obviously have put greater effort into various fields in STEM. Why shouldn’t they be rewarded?

11 Likes
176

For those curious, here is a link to the actual opinion:

There is room for disagreement as to whether the revised TJ plan was legally sound, and (misguided or not) the judicial trend is toward disallowing anything that takes race into account in any way. But at least let’s not misrepresent or misunderstand what the case was about. For example . . .

  • By far, URM and low SES students received the most admissions benefit by the plan, not white students as has been claimed here. (See @Data10’s excellent summary above.)

  • Contrary to what has been claimed here, the Board did not think there were "too many Asian Americans at TJ.” As the court discussed at great length, the intent of the plan was to increase the representation of URM students from a broader swath of the District, so that the school would more closely match the demographics of the district. In short, the intention was to provide access to more URMs, not to punish Asian-Americans. Here is how the judge summarized this in the opinion. “The Board’s policy was designed to increase Black and Hispanic enrollment, which would, by necessity, decrease the representation of our Asian-Americans at TJ.” The Board was especially concerned by are report on JT’s Class of 2024 which indicated that “the number of admitted black students was too small to be reported.” This in a district with 20% Black students.

  • White students are not considered URM’s by TJ.

  • Contrary what has been suggested here, those attending TJ pre-plan (almost 75% of whom were Asian) had a significant socioeconomic advantage over the URM students from the poorer areas of the district. To give an idea of the extent of that advantage, changing the policy increased the number of low SES students by 4080%. The school went from having only a few low SES kids to having around 25%.

Setting aside the debatable legal issues, this has been a disheartening thread. At the very least, there are a heck of a lot of unjustified (and sometimes offensive) views about what are very likely some pretty outstanding kids. No matter the wealth of your school or the percentage of URM’s, being in the top 1.5% is an impressive accomplishment. Yet posts have gone so far as to claim it is somehow an affront against nature if the top kids from the wealthier schools have to attend a high school with these kids. Here are just some of the examples from the discussion . . .

  • . . . admitting them will “degrade” the quality of the school . . .
  • . . . even their top 1.5% of students would be at the bottom of the better schools . . .
  • . . . they’ve got their own schools where they can learn math, they shouldn’t ruin TJ . . .
  • . . . we work harder and deserve it more . . .
  • . . . they’ll slow the students down . . .
  • . . . we are so advanced that taking classes with them would be wasting our time . . .
  • . . . just look at this list of all the great things we have accomplished . . .
  • . . . some people are gifted in basketball, some people are gifted in math . . .
  • . . . we are not represented in their basketball Academies, why should they be represented in our academic magnets? . . .
  • . . . even if they are smart enough, most won’t put forth the time/effort to catch up . . .
  • . . . We have overcome obstacles and get admitted, so it’s not about discrimination . . .
  • . . . if top students from these school are allowed in, global competitiveness will suffer . . .
  • . . . any “artificial interference in the way nature works impedes human progress and it will ultimately fail” . . .

Segregationists made these same arguments mid last century. It is heartbreaking to see these same arguments in this context.

11 Likes
177

I found the comments you listed very troubling also, thank you for your post.

We are a military family that lived in Fairfax County briefly 5 years ago when my son was in 8th grade and took the test. The whole process and the attitudes of some of the families were eye-opening. Several moms in front of me during the interest meeting discussed moving to the district for the purpose of TJ admissions and the extensive prep classes their children had attended. I hope efforts to tap into a pool of talent that represents the district are continued.

4 Likes
178

“Segregationists”? Isn’t the purpose of magnet schools like TJ to “segregate”, so some students can learn more at faster pace than others? Should we do away with these schools altogether?

Why can’t we look at these students individually, rather than grouping them together by racial characteristics? If a system is merit-based, there’s going to be overrepresentation or underrepresentation by one group or another. If we want individuals to develop their talents as fully as possible, we should treat them as individuals. By grouping individuals together, we also tend to stereotype them. I’ve known quite a number of Asian American students over the years and few of them fit the common stereotypes portrayed by some. These stereotypes have their roots in racism.

4 Likes
179

I think it might be useful to compare TJ to Stuy. In terms of race composition, they appear very similar (numbers from schooldigger.com, exact numbers vary based upon source, but the story doesn’t change).

  • Stuy is 72% Asian, 18% White, 4% Hispanic, and 1% Black
  • TJ is 72% Asian, 18% white, 3% Hispanic, and 2% Black

While both have come under attack for their large Asian population, to me Stuy’s demographics are more defensible than TJ’s and that’s because about 48% of Stuy’s students receive free or reduced lunch, whereas only about 2% of TJ’s students do. While the percentage of Stuy’s students receiving subsidized lunches is certainly lower than NYC as a whole, it also clear that admittance to Stuy is available to all income levels. On the other hand, it appears that TJ’s selection process effectively bars students from lower income families.

I said earlier that I believe that talent is widely dispersed across race and income groups. The NYC exam schools like Stuy attempt to find this talent through their exam, the SHSAT. But exams like this test for a combination of both talent and preparation, and we can see that many Asian families put an emphasis on this preparation.

There are a few points I want to make regarding preparation. First, we should separate out long-term prep from test prep. Long-term prep is building skills over many years, ideally through school rather than through extra-cost after school enrichment programs. On the other hand, test-prep is preparation done specifically for the test, perhaps over a few months.

Second, I believe that long-term prep is far more important than test prep. The kids who thrive at places like TJ and Stuy mostly come from environments that encouraged learning math and science well beyond the normal school curriculum.

Third, I believe extensive test prep only affects students at the margins. No amount of test prep is going to take an average or below math student and allow them to thrive at Stuy or TJ even if they got in. Likewise, the really exceptional students don’t need to spend much time on test prep; once they learn the mechanics of the test through a few practice tests, they are all set.

To me the central issue is that high quality long-term prep is not available to all. This is why I made my earlier suggestion that for low SES families that want to send their kids to TJ, that free high quality instruction be available from 6th grade. That gives the talented kids across all race and income groups enough time to build the skills needed to actually learn the underlying material, rather than just attempt to cram for it.

5 Likes
180

While I agree with your premise that better preparation is key, that presupposes students and parents are interested in, or at least willing to engage in such preparation for a math academy. Khan Academy is free and has been available for years to provide such preparation. Some parents avail themselves of this and other free resources to require their children to prepare; others do not. Some are more motivated to do so; some are not. I suppose Fairfax could offer after school or Saturday classes of extra math prep, but that would also encounter the usual objections from all about missing sports, religious class, extracurriculars, family time, etc.

2 Likes
181

My view is that the government is responsible for providing equal opportunity, not ensuring equal outcomes. The skewed income demographics of TJ suggest that the opportunities are not equal, hence my suggestion of making high quality instruction readily available to those that want to use it. I don’t know how many will make good use of it.

1 Like
182

I’m not happy with this outcome and I hope Fairfax County wins its appeal.

I don’t see how broadening the opportunity for low-income URM kids to get access to TJ is a bad thing I suspect the kids the benefited from the change in policy are kids whose families couldn’t either (1) afford high-priced test prep or (2) get their kids to classes because of working multiple jobs.

2 Likes
183

Exactly, my observation in my child’s middle school as well. For those who aren’t naturally gifted are really suffering from these competitiveness and cramming process.

Last time when I mentioned about tutors, I got a lot of feedbacks even though I just shared my observations.

Overall, the competition for the top colleges has extended to middle school. (or even earlier) For some families, it is not even about kids’ education but about getting into the "
right" colleges, getting into the “right” majors, (not just math, lot of kids compete for coding as well). Those “checkbox” will at least steer their children to the “right” career and potentially monetary success in the future.

2 Likes
184

This is the part I am really curious as well. There were debate about sending kids to competitive high school with advanced curriculums or less competitive high school where their kids can easily stand out. Most of time, I see response for former not sure why.

2 Likes
185

The debate about the reason those students admitted to TJ because nature or nurture sounds familiar.

I am not sure how many of you have children excelled in sports as well. In club sports, the kind of competition is just as intense. And often time, I heard not-so-friendly comments about the star players in sports too. Things like

  • he/she is good because he or she just has expensive private coach
  • he/she is good because he or she started at early age (it seems pretty common to see kids compete above their age group in sports)
  • he/she is good because his family literally build a tennis court or soccer field in their backyard…

Lot of these. All these sounds just so similar to those comments comparing who’s naturally good or who just works exceptionally hard…Does it matter? It is unfair to speculate those. Imo. Just hope those children who excel in the fields they love continue to grow and shine in the fields they love.

1 Like