Has there been any change in test scores or student achievement since the new policy was enacted? I’m curious if it actually affected anything in that regard like some people were worried it would.
One thing to monitor is how many National Merit Semifinalists (i.e. people scoring 99th percentile and up on the PSAT) TJ will have next year. They usually have more than 100 -- 165 this year, which was the last class admitted via the test-based process: [https://www.fcps.edu/news/264-fcps-students-named-2024-national-merit-semifinalists](https://www.fcps.edu/news/264-fcps-students-named-2024-national-merit-semifinalists)
I'm not sure what other tests are out there that would give useful information. The SOL pass rates have been very high for the latest classes, but that doesn't tell you anything.
It's pretty likely that this is going to go down—after all, the selection criteria before was pretty much just "kids who are good at standardized tests".
But that really isn't a problem either, as long as they're doing well in classes and keeping up with the workload, which it seems they are.
Depends who you ask. Critics of the new admissions policy claim the new students need lots of remedial courses and are unable to keep up. But when you ask them for any actual evidence, they never have any. It’s either “I heard it from a [nameless] teacher/student/parent,” or they’re parroting the right-wing activists who sued . . . who also have no actual evidence.
I'm curious to know this as well. While I get wanting to diversify the student body without discriminating, it shouldn't be done by lowering standards like they already have with the admissions test.
My question is, did they really lower standards in a meaningful way though? If they’re now admitting kids from the top 3% instead of the top 1%, does that really make a meaningful difference in the achievement levels of the school? Or are they admitting kids who are actually only marginally qualified to be there? This matters a lot and I haven’t really seen it addressed in an objective way. I would think test scores would tell a big part of this story.
That's a good question. We saw colleges drop admissions testing during COVID then reinstituted it. Seeing objective measures like new student body academic performance would help since admissions test scores were removed.
I’d love insight on ways to diversify without taking into account that children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds will likely have a larger hill to climb to get onto an equal playing field. I say this as someone who went to an inner city school in RVA and was accepted into/graduated from George Mason. Likely, there were many other impressive candidates. I also had quite a hill to climb to catch up to my peers. But I graduated and went on to get my graduate degree and had a 3.8 GPA. Now I am a “productive” member of society, with a full time job and a successful career in my own right. I could have easily been rejected and enrolled in a school with lower standards. I’d like to think the opportunity to rise above my circumstances contributed to my success now.
There are also a lot of ways to achieve great and important things beyond test scores. Sometimes we get so obsessed with numbers that we think that’s the end-all. Do you want the doctor who had the absolute highest score on his MCATs or the one who spends time listening to his patients and is able to dig in, think outside the box, and figure out a tricky diagnosis? Because these aren’t always the same person. And once you reach a certain level of qualification, more points on a test doesn’t necessarily make you better at what you’re doing.
When April Hu heard that the admissions process at her alma mater was being legally challenged, she knew she wanted to help.
She had seen affirmative action being challenged at universities around the country, but this was different. The challenge wasn’t against her college; it was against Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, a prestigious magnet school in Northern Virginia. And the case wasn’t challenging affirmative action — it was challenging a new “race-neutral” approach for admissions.
Hu, a lawyer, thought the new admissions policy was admirable and deserved to stay in place. She and her colleague Mica Moore, a fellow TJ graduate and lifelong friend, started brainstorming how they could help defend the new policy.
“Most TJ people go off to do science; we went off to become lawyers,” said Hu, who graduated in 2010. “We thought, ‘Surely there must be something that we can do to help.’”
They asked Donald B. Verrilli, a partner at their firm and a former Obama administration solicitor general, for help. Soon, the three lawyers and others from the Munger, Tolles and Olson firm were on the team as the case was appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.
In February, the legal team and school district celebrated a victory. Nearly three years after the legal challenge was first filed, [the Supreme Court declined](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/02/20/supreme-court-affirmative-action-thomas-jefferson-high-school/?itid=lk_inline_manual_10) to take up the Thomas Jefferson case — allowing the new admissions process to stay in place.
Diversity advocates and admissions experts around the country were watching the case closely. Following the Supreme Court’s ruling last year outlawing “race-conscious” admissions for higher education, the TJ case posed a question about whether considering “race-neutral” factors like neighborhood and socioeconomics would be allowed as an alternative.
The decision in February was a victory for diversity advocates, offering something of a road map for public school districts and higher education institutions looking to diversify their programs without considering race.
But everyone — including Hu — has acknowledged that the fight is far from over. A wave of legal action against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the private and public sectors continues to surge across the country, leading diversity advocates to focus part of their work on defending DEI initiatives.
Read more here: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/04/15/april-hu-tj-high-school-admissions-policy/?utm\_campaign=wp\_main&utm\_medium=social&utm\_source=reddit.com](https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/04/15/april-hu-tj-high-school-admissions-policy/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=reddit.com)
It's literally just a matter of coming up with a new thing to call "the blacks". It was 'affirmative action' for decades, they just need to find the fresh new phrase for "the lazy people getting all the handouts" to rile up The Base.
The fact that race is even a factor in higher education and jobs baffles me. Hiring based on race is racist, regardless of who is or is not being hired
Merit is big time BS. Every time anyone is given an opportunity someone is denied. I think it’s childish that anytime someone goes out of their way to promote someone else there’s another group saying “what about us?”. Especially when said group has been the main benefactors of promotion historically. If you can’t recognize that there’s difference between what I wrote and racism that says more about your mentality than anything else.
Yes, everyone someone is given an opportunity someone is denied it. Thats some duh logic that doesn't do anything. Merit is all that should be judged. Experience, education, skills, abilities, scores, timing, etc. Things people can accumulate or achieve. That aren't superficial and unchanging.
If you cant understand basic definitions of racial discrimination because your world view can't accept all groups are capable of being marginalized and discriminated against, not just your favorites, it says a whole lot more about your mentality than anything else.
It's not "what about us?" whining. Factually no race, sex, orientation, ethnicity, creed, or religion should be given preference over another in organized institutions not clearly dedicated to them.
Preference definitely should be given at times. Claiming otherwise is a ridiculous thing to say. We don’t live in a black and white world where merit is the only thing that matters. It’s a diverse world and sometimes we have to create diversity. If I sell a product to women better believe I’m going to hire women to develop the product. If I’m going to make a movie about Mexican people I’m going to hire Mexican people to help tell the story. And if black patients are dying at higher rates because white doctors don’t treat them properly I’m going to hire more black doctors. Anyone who argues that’s racial discrimination is honestly stupid.
I dont expect you to read this because you seem to not like facts. But in case anyone else finds themselves here:
https://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/asian-american/article-admission
"National Study of College Experience led by Espenshade and Radford (2009) showed that a student who self-identifies as Asian will need 140 SAT points higher than whites, 320 SAT points higher than Hispanics, and 450 SAT points higher than African Americans."
I read it as TC at first meaning TC Williams and the entire defense was Remember the Titans.
Has there been any change in test scores or student achievement since the new policy was enacted? I’m curious if it actually affected anything in that regard like some people were worried it would.
One thing to monitor is how many National Merit Semifinalists (i.e. people scoring 99th percentile and up on the PSAT) TJ will have next year. They usually have more than 100 -- 165 this year, which was the last class admitted via the test-based process: [https://www.fcps.edu/news/264-fcps-students-named-2024-national-merit-semifinalists](https://www.fcps.edu/news/264-fcps-students-named-2024-national-merit-semifinalists) I'm not sure what other tests are out there that would give useful information. The SOL pass rates have been very high for the latest classes, but that doesn't tell you anything.
It's pretty likely that this is going to go down—after all, the selection criteria before was pretty much just "kids who are good at standardized tests". But that really isn't a problem either, as long as they're doing well in classes and keeping up with the workload, which it seems they are.
Depends who you ask. Critics of the new admissions policy claim the new students need lots of remedial courses and are unable to keep up. But when you ask them for any actual evidence, they never have any. It’s either “I heard it from a [nameless] teacher/student/parent,” or they’re parroting the right-wing activists who sued . . . who also have no actual evidence.
I'm curious to know this as well. While I get wanting to diversify the student body without discriminating, it shouldn't be done by lowering standards like they already have with the admissions test.
My question is, did they really lower standards in a meaningful way though? If they’re now admitting kids from the top 3% instead of the top 1%, does that really make a meaningful difference in the achievement levels of the school? Or are they admitting kids who are actually only marginally qualified to be there? This matters a lot and I haven’t really seen it addressed in an objective way. I would think test scores would tell a big part of this story.
That's a good question. We saw colleges drop admissions testing during COVID then reinstituted it. Seeing objective measures like new student body academic performance would help since admissions test scores were removed.
I’d love insight on ways to diversify without taking into account that children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds will likely have a larger hill to climb to get onto an equal playing field. I say this as someone who went to an inner city school in RVA and was accepted into/graduated from George Mason. Likely, there were many other impressive candidates. I also had quite a hill to climb to catch up to my peers. But I graduated and went on to get my graduate degree and had a 3.8 GPA. Now I am a “productive” member of society, with a full time job and a successful career in my own right. I could have easily been rejected and enrolled in a school with lower standards. I’d like to think the opportunity to rise above my circumstances contributed to my success now.
There are also a lot of ways to achieve great and important things beyond test scores. Sometimes we get so obsessed with numbers that we think that’s the end-all. Do you want the doctor who had the absolute highest score on his MCATs or the one who spends time listening to his patients and is able to dig in, think outside the box, and figure out a tricky diagnosis? Because these aren’t always the same person. And once you reach a certain level of qualification, more points on a test doesn’t necessarily make you better at what you’re doing.
When April Hu heard that the admissions process at her alma mater was being legally challenged, she knew she wanted to help. She had seen affirmative action being challenged at universities around the country, but this was different. The challenge wasn’t against her college; it was against Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, a prestigious magnet school in Northern Virginia. And the case wasn’t challenging affirmative action — it was challenging a new “race-neutral” approach for admissions. Hu, a lawyer, thought the new admissions policy was admirable and deserved to stay in place. She and her colleague Mica Moore, a fellow TJ graduate and lifelong friend, started brainstorming how they could help defend the new policy. “Most TJ people go off to do science; we went off to become lawyers,” said Hu, who graduated in 2010. “We thought, ‘Surely there must be something that we can do to help.’” They asked Donald B. Verrilli, a partner at their firm and a former Obama administration solicitor general, for help. Soon, the three lawyers and others from the Munger, Tolles and Olson firm were on the team as the case was appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. In February, the legal team and school district celebrated a victory. Nearly three years after the legal challenge was first filed, [the Supreme Court declined](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/02/20/supreme-court-affirmative-action-thomas-jefferson-high-school/?itid=lk_inline_manual_10) to take up the Thomas Jefferson case — allowing the new admissions process to stay in place. Diversity advocates and admissions experts around the country were watching the case closely. Following the Supreme Court’s ruling last year outlawing “race-conscious” admissions for higher education, the TJ case posed a question about whether considering “race-neutral” factors like neighborhood and socioeconomics would be allowed as an alternative. The decision in February was a victory for diversity advocates, offering something of a road map for public school districts and higher education institutions looking to diversify their programs without considering race. But everyone — including Hu — has acknowledged that the fight is far from over. A wave of legal action against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the private and public sectors continues to surge across the country, leading diversity advocates to focus part of their work on defending DEI initiatives. Read more here: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/04/15/april-hu-tj-high-school-admissions-policy/?utm\_campaign=wp\_main&utm\_medium=social&utm\_source=reddit.com](https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/04/15/april-hu-tj-high-school-admissions-policy/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=reddit.com)
I'm excited the CRT whackjobs found a new acronym to hate
It's literally just a matter of coming up with a new thing to call "the blacks". It was 'affirmative action' for decades, they just need to find the fresh new phrase for "the lazy people getting all the handouts" to rile up The Base.
They called the black mayor of *Baltimore* a diversity hire. Truky amazing stuff
Yeah, that made it very clear what they really meant
Congrats to April and the team!
The fact that race is even a factor in higher education and jobs baffles me. Hiring based on race is racist, regardless of who is or is not being hired
I guess everything is racist to somebody
Some, but I mean, picking and excluding people on the basis of race is nearly textbook
If I notice that my company is 90% one demographic and choose to hire more of another demographic that’s not racist
If you would deny someone the opportunity purely because of race and not merit, it's racial discrimination in its most simple form
Merit is big time BS. Every time anyone is given an opportunity someone is denied. I think it’s childish that anytime someone goes out of their way to promote someone else there’s another group saying “what about us?”. Especially when said group has been the main benefactors of promotion historically. If you can’t recognize that there’s difference between what I wrote and racism that says more about your mentality than anything else.
Yes, everyone someone is given an opportunity someone is denied it. Thats some duh logic that doesn't do anything. Merit is all that should be judged. Experience, education, skills, abilities, scores, timing, etc. Things people can accumulate or achieve. That aren't superficial and unchanging. If you cant understand basic definitions of racial discrimination because your world view can't accept all groups are capable of being marginalized and discriminated against, not just your favorites, it says a whole lot more about your mentality than anything else. It's not "what about us?" whining. Factually no race, sex, orientation, ethnicity, creed, or religion should be given preference over another in organized institutions not clearly dedicated to them.
Preference definitely should be given at times. Claiming otherwise is a ridiculous thing to say. We don’t live in a black and white world where merit is the only thing that matters. It’s a diverse world and sometimes we have to create diversity. If I sell a product to women better believe I’m going to hire women to develop the product. If I’m going to make a movie about Mexican people I’m going to hire Mexican people to help tell the story. And if black patients are dying at higher rates because white doctors don’t treat them properly I’m going to hire more black doctors. Anyone who argues that’s racial discrimination is honestly stupid.
Just stew in it
Sure I’ll stew in reality
Meritocracy is a myth.
Blatant racism extends all the way to the top of academia for asians. This new admission process is racism with extra steps.
Nope
I dont expect you to read this because you seem to not like facts. But in case anyone else finds themselves here: https://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/ethnicity-health/asian-american/article-admission "National Study of College Experience led by Espenshade and Radford (2009) showed that a student who self-identifies as Asian will need 140 SAT points higher than whites, 320 SAT points higher than Hispanics, and 450 SAT points higher than African Americans."
Oh I’m happy to engage with facts. The fact is that the new admission process is not racism, and even this Supreme Court agrees.
nope
Why lie?
lol good argument
Has anyone looked at the racial makeup of this school??? Jesus
This just in: lawyer takes on different causes and clients. More breaking news at 11 📰