Forum Index
»
Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)
Court: TJ's New Admission Policy Does Not Discriminate
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Oh boy, this is really going to piss off all the Annandale Asians.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/05/23/thomas-jefferson-admissions-policy-upheld/ |
Anonymous
| Who would possibly think the new policy discriminates? Families are free to choose where to live knowing the policy exists. If they want to continue to cram into the same three middle schools, that’s on them. |
Anonymous
| It will be appealed, I'm guessing. |
Anonymous
| Just remember, K is the new first grade. |
Anonymous
| They don't Xiao Mei. Shameful. |
Anonymous
| Firewall. Please summarize |
Anonymous
4th circuit ruled in favor of FCPS. 2 to 1 from the judges. I have not read the opinion--just the article. But, these kinds of things usually move up in appeals. Not sure what happens next. |
Anonymous
|
from WAPO:
“The challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students and that the Coalition cannot establish that the Board adopted its race-neutral policy with any discriminatory intent,” the 4th Circuit opinion, written by Judge Robert B. King, reads." |
Anonymous
| The Asians had cornered the TJ admissions process and started complaining when FCPS attempted to encourage more white and black students. The Asinas claimed this was discrimination against them. The court saw through the BS. |
Anonymous
The SB was upset that more Asians were getting in than Blacks and Browns. So, they changed the rules so that the selection would be based on middle school rather than countywide achievement percentages. In other words, some schools can send kids scoring much lower percentages on tests. And, of course, the tests have changed. The irony is that the SB in times passed changed the process so that more minorities would get in --they just didn't get the minorities they wanted. |
Anonymous
| The original plan the school board and admin came up with would have discriminated but I thought the revised plan was a little more cautious. |
Anonymous
That's a bit strong. But the revised plan is not discriminatory, the 4th Circuit agrees with you there. |
Anonymous
The quant test was removed so I am not sure what you are getting at. They moved to a policy that allows for kids from all FCPS MS to attend a County school. |
Anonymous
|
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
This is the full opinion if anyone is interested. |
Anonymous
| A main argument in the finding is that not only are Asian students still disproportionate to their share of the population, but the admittance rate for Asian students is higher than for other groups. Therefore, it is not discriminatory against Asians. The counterargument is that relative to the old policy, there are fewer Asian students. |