Probably not. Her essay was nearly incoherent.
Unreasoned for sure. But check out this recent article by Jay Mathews...
He asks "Why not a TJHSST for poor kids?"
Actually, TJHSST is for any kid, poor, rich or in between. Admittance is based on merit.
He proposes that there already is a TJHSST for poor kids...
"Yet there is such a place, a sixth-through-12th-grade public charter school called Preuss on the La Jolla campus of the University of California at San Diego. It admits only the children of parents who are low-income and never went to college. It has more than 800 students, 59 percent of them Hispanic, 23 percent Asian, 12 percent black and 6 percent white."
He goes on to say...
"The Advanced Placement test participation rate at the 13-year-old school is nearly equal to Jefferson’s and higher than that of any other public school in this region. Like Jefferson, 100 percent of Preuss graduates each year have at least one passing AP score, while the national average is 18.1 percent."
That is quite an exaggeration. For example, the average SAT score at Preuss is 1066, not much above the average for the whole nation. At TJHSST it is 1470, the highest or second highest in the nation. The passing rate on AP exams at Preuss is 44%, at TJHSST it is virtually 100%. And the majority of those 44% that do pass, pass with a 3, while at TJHSST the majority pass with 5's and 4's.
Preuss self reports that the admitted students are 25% in the top quartile, 50% in the middle quartiles, and 25% in the bottom quartile, according to the California State Standards exams. And the final results when they graduate? The same or even less, depending on how you look at it. Their AP performance is below the average for California. Preuss isn't getting any awards for changing outcomes.
In any event, this is a pretty poor comparison. Do we really need to compare Preuss to TJHSST?