Federal judge rules that admissions changes at nation’s top public school discriminate against Asian

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm reading all this as the parent of an elementary student.

Grades are very subjective as well, and also can vary widely based on the teacher a student gets. We have teachers assign above grade level status to kids doing well in on grade level work in one class while the class next door must actually take different tests to get thia distinction. Or a teacher who gives above grade level status and then straight 3s in the subject, putting kid gradewise on par with kids doing less challenging work..

Waiting to see how this all shakes out in AAP process.

True. Standardized testing will take away teacher bias. But many are opposed to it since tests can be subject to extreme prepping and not everyone can afford it either. Grades and teacher recommendations are probably the fair compromise without quotas that punish specific groups.

Standardized testing removes one type of bias and introduces another. There’s no single criteria alone that is the answer, a variety of factors ought to be considered. Some people are so invested in standardized testing though, they see it as some sort of merit-based silver bullet and have full blinders towards this sort of reliance on an ostensibly objective measure. I trust teachers more than a test to identify the kids most qualified and would benefit from TJ, but would prefer not to rely on teachers alone either. Multiple data points is a good thing, which goes for AAP, TJ, college, job hiring, or almost any sort of human selection process really.

Right, so the best plan would be a holistic evaluation including grades, teacher recommendations, essays, and a standardized test. The old system was bad because the standardized test was too strongly used as a gatekeeper for semifinalist status. The new system is bad because it is too sparse. Thankfully, there is a pretty broad middle ground between the old system and the new one.

This is basically what colleges do and it seems to be working well for them! I agree that old system needs to be changed, but the new system is full of holes and glaring apparent who they intended to penalize right from the start - academic focused kids, going to aap centers and living specific neighborhoods. No matter where your politics land, its not fair to these kids. However on the plus side, its easier to stand out in the base school, which helps in college admissions.

Elite colleges are moving away from standardized exams as a requirement. An approach that could work for TJ is optional exam submission - there are no end of excellent exams that students can take on their own that could be used as a piece of a portfolio. SSAT comes to mind, in addition to all of the competitions. This would allow TJ to set aside a few spaces for the kids who truly are phenomenal test takers, as a few of them would have significant value to the school environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

Right, we don't need cookie-cutter applicants. We need to accept the best and the brightest period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

Right, we need Korean americans, Chinese americans, Indian americans, Muslim americans, Bangladesh americans, Ukranian americans, Russian americans, Nigerian americans, Haitian americans, Kenyan americans, Jamaican americans, Hindu americans, Buddihist americans, Christian americans, Taiwanese americans, Somalian americans, Iranian americans, Iraqi americans, Lebanese americans, Mexican americans, mixed race americans, white americans, Jewish americans, Pakistani americans etc. You are likely to find most if not all of the diverse group of TJ students listed above on any given day. Don't just callisify students as "Asian" or "Black" etc. TJ is one of the most diverse school I have ever encountered in my life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

Right, we need Korean americans, Chinese americans, Indian americans, Muslim americans, Bangladesh americans, Ukranian americans, Russian americans, Nigerian americans, Haitian americans, Kenyan americans, Jamaican americans, Hindu americans, Buddihist americans, Christian americans, Taiwanese americans, Somalian americans, Iranian americans, Iraqi americans, Lebanese americans, Mexican americans, mixed race americans, white americans, Jewish americans, Pakistani americans etc. You are likely to find most if not all of the diverse group of TJ students listed above on any given day. Don't just callisify students as "Asian" or "Black" etc. TJ is one of the most diverse school I have ever encountered in my life.

And even more communities with this most recent class. Plus, untapped talent in EL, SN, low-income, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

Right, we need Korean americans, Chinese americans, Indian americans, Muslim americans, Bangladesh americans, Ukranian americans, Russian americans, Nigerian americans, Haitian americans, Kenyan americans, Jamaican americans, Hindu americans, Buddihist americans, Christian americans, Taiwanese americans, Somalian americans, Iranian americans, Iraqi americans, Lebanese americans, Mexican americans, mixed race americans, white americans, Jewish americans, Pakistani americans etc. You are likely to find most if not all of the diverse group of TJ students listed above on any given day. Don't just callisify students as "Asian" or "Black" etc. TJ is one of the most diverse school I have ever encountered in my life.

And even more communities with this most recent class. Plus, untapped talent in EL, SN, low-income, etc.

Name 3 high schools in the Fairfax county that are MORE diverse than TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

Right, we need Korean americans, Chinese americans, Indian americans, Muslim americans, Bangladesh americans, Ukranian americans, Russian americans, Nigerian americans, Haitian americans, Kenyan americans, Jamaican americans, Hindu americans, Buddihist americans, Christian americans, Taiwanese americans, Somalian americans, Iranian americans, Iraqi americans, Lebanese americans, Mexican americans, mixed race americans, white americans, Jewish americans, Pakistani americans etc. You are likely to find most if not all of the diverse group of TJ students listed above on any given day. Don't just callisify students as "Asian" or "Black" etc. TJ is one of the most diverse school I have ever encountered in my life.

And even more communities with this most recent class. Plus, untapped talent in EL, SN, low-income, etc.

Name 3 high schools in the Fairfax county that are MORE diverse than TJ.

Seems like you misunderstood my point.

TJ class of 2025 is more diverse than TJ class of 2024. More communities across NoVA (all FCPS middle schools), more EL, more SN, more low-income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

Right, we need Korean americans, Chinese americans, Indian americans, Muslim americans, Bangladesh americans, Ukranian americans, Russian americans, Nigerian americans, Haitian americans, Kenyan americans, Jamaican americans, Hindu americans, Buddihist americans, Christian americans, Taiwanese americans, Somalian americans, Iranian americans, Iraqi americans, Lebanese americans, Mexican americans, mixed race americans, white americans, Jewish americans, Pakistani americans etc. You are likely to find most if not all of the diverse group of TJ students listed above on any given day. Don't just callisify students as "Asian" or "Black" etc. TJ is one of the most diverse school I have ever encountered in my life.

And even more communities with this most recent class. Plus, untapped talent in EL, SN, low-income, etc.

Name 3 high schools in the Fairfax county that are MORE diverse than TJ.

Seems like you misunderstood my point.

TJ class of 2025 is more diverse than TJ class of 2024. More communities across NoVA (all FCPS middle schools), more EL, more SN, more low-income.

Name 3 HS in Fairfax MORE diverse than TJ 2025, 2024, 2023 etc. Let's leave 2026 out for now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

Right, we need Korean americans, Chinese americans, Indian americans, Muslim americans, Bangladesh americans, Ukranian americans, Russian americans, Nigerian americans, Haitian americans, Kenyan americans, Jamaican americans, Hindu americans, Buddihist americans, Christian americans, Taiwanese americans, Somalian americans, Iranian americans, Iraqi americans, Lebanese americans, Mexican americans, mixed race americans, white americans, Jewish americans, Pakistani americans etc. You are likely to find most if not all of the diverse group of TJ students listed above on any given day. Don't just callisify students as "Asian" or "Black" etc. TJ is one of the most diverse school I have ever encountered in my life.

And even more communities with this most recent class. Plus, untapped talent in EL, SN, low-income, etc.

Name 3 high schools in the Fairfax county that are MORE diverse than TJ.

Seems like you misunderstood my point.

TJ class of 2025 is more diverse than TJ class of 2024. More communities across NoVA (all FCPS middle schools), more EL, more SN, more low-income.

Name 3 HS in Fairfax MORE diverse than TJ 2025, 2024, 2023 etc. Let's leave 2026 out for now.

Why? Doesn't apply to my point: "We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm reading all this as the parent of an elementary student.

Grades are very subjective as well, and also can vary widely based on the teacher a student gets. We have teachers assign above grade level status to kids doing well in on grade level work in one class while the class next door must actually take different tests to get thia distinction. Or a teacher who gives above grade level status and then straight 3s in the subject, putting kid gradewise on par with kids doing less challenging work..

Waiting to see how this all shakes out in AAP process.

True. Standardized testing will take away teacher bias. But many are opposed to it since tests can be subject to extreme prepping and not everyone can afford it either. Grades and teacher recommendations are probably the fair compromise without quotas that punish specific groups.

Actually I would support a massive tax increase to make sure everyone who wants test prep and is willing to put their butt in a seat and grind it out can do so. That’s the real answer, not taking away one of the best objective tools we have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

Mere participation in STEM ECs shouldn't matter. High levels of success in a STEM based EC should. Kids who qualify for AIME in middle school, win first place at Science Olympiad states, or the like are showing that they are elite talents.

OR, that they have parents willing to supply enormous amounts of time, energy, and money who also have the right connections to match their kids up with amazing mentors.

Nope. That doesn't amount to much if the kids themselves don't spend incredible amounts of time and energy on getting better.

At some point America (mainly the lazy white population who tends to believe in innate IQ) will have to come to terms with the fact that hard work vastly outperforms any kind of innate ability or economical advantage. Face it ladies: Your kids will have to make a choice whether to work hard or not, if they want to truly compete, if they choose not to work hard, they will be held back. If they want to do travel and do sports, great, that's their choice. If they want to become great at academics, wonderful. If both, fantastic.. if they can handle it. But what they can't do is pretend that they are awesome without putting in an iota of effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

Mere participation in STEM ECs shouldn't matter. High levels of success in a STEM based EC should. Kids who qualify for AIME in middle school, win first place at Science Olympiad states, or the like are showing that they are elite talents.

OR, that they have parents willing to supply enormous amounts of time, energy, and money who also have the right connections to match their kids up with amazing mentors.

Nope. That doesn't amount to much if the kids themselves don't spend incredible amounts of time and energy on getting better.

At some point America (mainly the lazy white population who tends to believe in innate IQ) will have to come to terms with the fact that hard work vastly outperforms any kind of innate ability or economical advantage. Face it ladies: Your kids will have to make a choice whether to work hard or not, if they want to truly compete, if they choose not to work hard, they will be held back. If they want to do travel and do sports, great, that's their choice. If they want to become great at academics, wonderful. If both, fantastic.. if they can handle it. But what they can't do is pretend that they are awesome without putting in an iota of effort.

Well well, someone finally said it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

Mere participation in STEM ECs shouldn't matter. High levels of success in a STEM based EC should. Kids who qualify for AIME in middle school, win first place at Science Olympiad states, or the like are showing that they are elite talents.

OR, that they have parents willing to supply enormous amounts of time, energy, and money who also have the right connections to match their kids up with amazing mentors.

Nope. That doesn't amount to much if the kids themselves don't spend incredible amounts of time and energy on getting better.

At some point America (mainly the lazy white population who tends to believe in innate IQ) will have to come to terms with the fact that hard work vastly outperforms any kind of innate ability or economical advantage. Face it ladies: Your kids will have to make a choice whether to work hard or not, if they want to truly compete, if they choose not to work hard, they will be held back. If they want to do travel and do sports, great, that's their choice. If they want to become great at academics, wonderful. If both, fantastic.. if they can handle it. But what they can't do is pretend that they are awesome without putting in an iota of effort.

Well they will still do "private one on one" preps and tutoring in "private" at up to $250 an hour so that their snowflakes can compete with those darn Asian kids while screaming Asians cheat, Asians prep too much etc. while pretending they don't prep and they don't do outside tutoring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

DP. The trouble here is that many of those specific ECs have been historically seen as tickets to TJ because they theoretically provide evidence of “passion for STEM”. They were part of a very narrow path that families could rely on to position their children for the TJ admissions process as well as possible.

But when you have a very narrow path that is successful, you end up with a significant percentage of the students who enter TJ with VERY similar backgrounds and resumes because so many families have tried to optimize their child’s application in the same way.

It might make some sense to have this sort of process for a class of 100-150, like at a Blair in Maryland. But for a class of 550, you have to have more diverse interests and goals and backgrounds or you end up with a hyper-competitive environment where too many students are pursuing the same endpoint.

Exactly. We benefit from having diverse STEM talent from across the county, not just cookie-cutter applicants who are all following the same TJ checklist.

By definition, all candidates selected based on some set of criteria are going to conform to such criteria and are "cookie-cutter" in that respect. Therefore, one can only conclude that you don't like the current set of "cookie-cutter" candidates because you don't like the color of their skin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it acceptable, within the applicants for a particular school, to rank based on extracurriculars like MathCounts, AMC 8, AMC 10, Science Olympiad, Robotics, FLL, etc?

We live in a different jurisdiction, but I cannot process why choice of EC would be a factor? Almost nobody in the top academic classes at our school does those contests. It's a "thing" with some kids who don't have otherwise busy schedules, but it is not a marker of the brightest students by a long shot. It a choice about how to spend your free time.

Mere participation in STEM ECs shouldn't matter. High levels of success in a STEM based EC should. Kids who qualify for AIME in middle school, win first place at Science Olympiad states, or the like are showing that they are elite talents.

OR, that they have parents willing to supply enormous amounts of time, energy, and money who also have the right connections to match their kids up with amazing mentors.

Nope. That doesn't amount to much if the kids themselves don't spend incredible amounts of time and energy on getting better.

At some point America (mainly the lazy white population who tends to believe in innate IQ) will have to come to terms with the fact that hard work vastly outperforms any kind of innate ability or economical advantage. Face it ladies: Your kids will have to make a choice whether to work hard or not, if they want to truly compete, if they choose not to work hard, they will be held back. If they want to do travel and do sports, great, that's their choice. If they want to become great at academics, wonderful. If both, fantastic.. if they can handle it. But what they can't do is pretend that they are awesome without putting in an iota of effort.

Well they will still do "private one on one" preps and tutoring in "private" at up to $250 an hour so that their snowflakes can compete with those darn Asian kids while screaming Asians cheat, Asians prep too much etc. while pretending they don't prep and they don't do outside tutoring.

Wait - I thought racist tropes were bad.