TJ admissions change from Merit to Essay impact to Asian American Students

[Anonymous]

Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:About 60% is a pretty strong majority for a population that is only 20% of the school area.

+1

What do you want? 100% Asian?? How much sense does that make??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Impact to Asian American students? Let's see...

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):
17-18: 1,216
18-19: 1,251
19-20: 1,293
20-21: 1,303
21-22: 1,264 **
22-23: 1,293 **
23-24: 1,275 **

Fake data, fake charts. Hope someone schools this fool with real factual data.

100% real data. Feel free to check my number.
https://schoolprofiles.fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?p=108:8
Select TJ, Demographics, Student Ethnicity.

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):
17-18: 1,216
18-19: 1,251
19-20: 1,293
20-21: 1,303
21-22: 1,264 **
22-23: 1,293 **
23-24: 1,275 **

I'd heard low-income Asian families were the biggest benefices of the new process. I guess that's proof.

It should be low income! Not just tutored kids!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

Wow. That’s a fairly dramatic change. It’s looks like the new process is being gamed by those with en-earned advantages. Shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

The expanded seat quota is to accommodate the 1.5% per middle school. There are many middle schools with extremely low numbers of Asians. Therefore you can't expect that Asians will continue to fill up the 1.5% of seats expanded per middle school, so of course it shows in the data that they do not "receive" more of those spots. It's simple math proportions.

If Asian families would move to all the middle schools where there currently are very few Asians (Whitman and Sandburg are less than 5% Asian) then we would see Asians increase in percentage again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

The expanded seat quota is to accommodate the 1.5% per middle school. There are many middle schools with extremely low numbers of Asians. Therefore you can't expect that Asians will continue to fill up the 1.5% of seats expanded per middle school, so of course it shows in the data that they do not "receive" more of those spots. It's simple math proportions.

If Asian families would move to all the middle schools where there currently are very few Asians (Whitman and Sandburg are less than 5% Asian) then we would see Asians increase in percentage again.

Asians families want to move to Whitman area, but Whitman has to start teaching beyond Algebra 1 math. A Geometry student from McLean cant move to Whitman and expected to be enrolled in lower level Algebra 1. We asked FCPS and they said they do not allow moving down to Algebra 1 especially if student already has A+ in Geometry. So we had no choice but to stay back at McLean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

The expanded seat quota is to accommodate the 1.5% per middle school. There are many middle schools with extremely low numbers of Asians. Therefore you can't expect that Asians will continue to fill up the 1.5% of seats expanded per middle school, so of course it shows in the data that they do not "receive" more of those spots. It's simple math proportions.

If Asian families would move to all the middle schools where there currently are very few Asians (Whitman and Sandburg are less than 5% Asian) then we would see Asians increase in percentage again.

Asians families want to move to Whitman area, but Whitman has to start teaching beyond Algebra 1 math. A Geometry student from McLean cant move to Whitman and expected to be enrolled in lower level Algebra 1. We asked FCPS and they said they do not allow moving down to Algebra 1 especially if student already has A+ in Geometry. So we had no choice but to stay back at McLean.

thanks for the laughter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About 60% is a pretty strong majority for a population that is only 20% of the school area.

+1

What do you want? 100% Asian?? How much sense does that make??

Off course!! There is no way non asian can be that smart!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About 60% is a pretty strong majority for a population that is only 20% of the school area.

+1

What do you want? 100% Asian?? How much sense does that make??

Authorities tell Asian American students there is a limit exclusively for them when their representation rises. But not for students of other race, even when the demographics dont match:

California State University—Los Angeles. Hispanic Students: 74% No suppression

South Carolina State University, Black Students: 95% No suppression

TJ High School for Science & Tech, Asian Students 72%, Suppressed to 54% in one year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

You’ve narrowed the y-axis to make the change look more significant that it actually was.

The average % of Asian students in the admitted class was 68% before the change and now it’s 58%. So 10% drop. And, looking at absolute numbers, the number of Asian students per admitted class went from 330 to 321.

There are NINE fewer Asian students per admitted class on average.

[Anonymous]

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):
17-18: 1,216
18-19: 1,251
19-20: 1,293
20-21: 1,303
21-22: 1,264 **
22-23: 1,293 **
23-24: 1,275 **




It’s may not be obvious from above, but aside from 2020 & 2019, there are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than any other year in the school’s history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

You’ve narrowed the y-axis to make the change look more significant that it actually was.

The average % of Asian students in the admitted class was 68% before the change and now it’s 58%. So 10% drop. And, looking at absolute numbers, the number of Asian students per admitted class went from 330 to 321.

There are NINE fewer Asian students per admitted class on average.

"Charts should convey information and make a point. We make charts to illustrate ideas that have context beyond their x- and y-axes. Forcing the y-axis to start at zero can do just as much to obscure and confuse the point as the opposite."

https://qz.com/418083/its-ok-not-to-start-your-y-axis-at-zero

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

You’ve narrowed the y-axis to make the change look more significant that it actually was.

The average % of Asian students in the admitted class was 68% before the change and now it’s 58%. So 10% drop. And, looking at absolute numbers, the number of Asian students per admitted class went from 330 to 321.

There are NINE fewer Asian students per admitted class on average.

"Charts should convey information and make a point. We make charts to illustrate ideas that have context beyond their x- and y-axes. Forcing the y-axis to start at zero can do just as much to obscure and confuse the point as the opposite."

https://qz.com/418083/its-ok-not-to-start-your-y-axis-at-zero

And zooming in so narrowly makes the change look more significant than it was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

You’ve narrowed the y-axis to make the change look more significant that it actually was.

The average % of Asian students in the admitted class was 68% before the change and now it’s 58%. So 10% drop. And, looking at absolute numbers, the number of Asian students per admitted class went from 330 to 321.

There are NINE fewer Asian students per admitted class on average.

AND you got some numbers wrong.


2022 data
https://thebullelephant.com/tjhsst-admission-stats-class-of-2022/