TJ Falls to 14th in the Nation Per US News

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

Tell me you don't understand how SATs are scored without telling me you don't understand how SATs are scored.

Why would test scores drop so much for TJ but not for any other high schools?

Here is a chart of SAT scores over time. Based on this chart, someone who didn't know about the pandemic would never be able to guess a pandemic occurred.
This is by design. SATs are not curved within an administration but they are equated across administrations so you are not likely to see large jumps in median scores from one administration of the test to the next. SAT scores can and do drift but there shouldn't be any sudden drops or rises without a recentering or something.

https://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-scores-over-time

Citation for “any” other school?

See the link.
There was no COVID effect.
Even if you provided an example of a single school that saw a large decline the fact remains that the drop is not the result of COVID because the AVERAGE DIDN'T CHANGE.

This is what we call pettifoggery. Asking people to prove unimportant details that wouldn't even undermine the argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

And the advance pass SOL rates fell dramatically only for TJ and no other high schools.
There is really no counterargument to the facts.

You can argue that the school is still better off with lower quality students because the benefits of going from 2% black kids to 4% black kids in the entering class justifies the reduction in the academic quality of the other 98% of kids; but you can't argue that there has been a reduction in academic quality because there clearly has.

And by “no other HSs” you mean Langley and McLean?

The average for the USA, the entire country, didn't change. If covid pushed lower scores then you would expect the average scores to drop but they don't.
Scores dropped because the kids selected under the new system are not as smart as the kids selected under the old system.
The kids selected under the old system were a LOT smarter.
Like a standard deviation's worth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

+100

Mostly people with kids that have lazy parents that want to use a measuring stick that doesn't make them look like shitty parents for letting their kids spend all day on instagram.

Tests measure a thing worth measuring and for most of the world, a test (or series of tests) is the primary or ONLY metric used to determine college admissions.

You mistake the point. If TJ test scores drop from 99th percentile to 97th percentile while also increasing geographic, racial and SES diversity, that's a win for all students. The test scores did not drop from 99th percentile to 60th percentile, for example.

The average FCPS high school is above the 60th percentile.

It went from the 99th percentile to something closer to the 94th percentile. That is the equivalent of going from 1530 (TJ old average SAT) to 1410. That is like the difference between Harvard and University of Miami (no disrespect intended to the University of Miami).

But at least you are willing to admit we are sacrificing at least a standard deviations worth of selectivity in order to achieve the desired diversity.
We can discuss whether or not this is a tradeoff that we want to make but there is no discussion to be had when the main proponents on your side deny the facts.

I see no evidence to back up your claim of SAT or PSAT scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

And the advance pass SOL rates fell dramatically only for TJ and no other high schools.
There is really no counterargument to the facts.

You can argue that the school is still better off with lower quality students because the benefits of going from 2% black kids to 4% black kids in the entering class justifies the reduction in the academic quality of the other 98% of kids; but you can't argue that there has been a reduction in academic quality because there clearly has.

And by “no other HSs” you mean Langley and McLean?

The average for the USA, the entire country, didn't change. If covid pushed lower scores then you would expect the average scores to drop but they don't.
Scores dropped because the kids selected under the new system are not as smart as the kids selected under the old system.
The kids selected under the old system were a LOT smarter.
Like a standard deviation's worth.

Or, they’re just as smart but haven’t spent lots of time in test prep classes learning all the tips and tricks for taking standardized tests. Maybe spent they’re time in more worthwhile pursuits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

And the advance pass SOL rates fell dramatically only for TJ and no other high schools.
There is really no counterargument to the facts.

You can argue that the school is still better off with lower quality students because the benefits of going from 2% black kids to 4% black kids in the entering class justifies the reduction in the academic quality of the other 98% of kids; but you can't argue that there has been a reduction in academic quality because there clearly has.

And by “no other HSs” you mean Langley and McLean?

The average for the USA, the entire country, didn't change. If covid pushed lower scores then you would expect the average scores to drop but they don't.
Scores dropped because the kids selected under the new system are not as smart as the kids selected under the old system.
The kids selected under the old system were a LOT smarter.
Like a standard deviation's worth.

Or, they’re just as smart but haven’t spent lots of time in test prep classes learning all the tips and tricks for taking standardized tests. Maybe spent they’re time in more worthwhile pursuits.

Ugh, their, not they’re. Silly autocorrect

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

You make it sound like performance on standardized tests are somehow divorced from anything relevant to our discussion.
Standardized test scores does more than measure the ability to take standardized tests, these kinds of standardized tests usually measure cognitive ability.
This is just evidence that we are not selecting for the students with the most cognitive ability.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

Still waiting. I have explained previously why those don't say what you think they say. You never actually went and read them with an eye toward distinguishing between (1) studying and learning concepts for application to similar but different problems, and (2) knowing the precise questions that would be asked in advance and corresponding answers.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

Being exposed to concepts and similar problems and then applying that learning to solve different problems is not the same as knowing the exact questions that will be asked and memorizing the answers. The former occurred, happens everywhere, and is the basis for all learning. It is not a problem. The latter would be a problem, but there is no evidence that EVER occurred. Why is this simple distinction so hard for so many people to understand?

There was plenty of evidence that people were buying access to the test. Seriously, stop with the gaslighting. There have been literally hundreds of first hand accounts posted here.

"Literally hundreds." Provide just one. The burden is on you! Do it!!

That's easy there's a dozen pages of this in this thread alone. Just scroll back...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

You make it sound like performance on standardized tests are somehow divorced from anything relevant to our discussion.
Standardized test scores does more than measure the ability to take standardized tests, these kinds of standardized tests usually measure cognitive ability.
This is just evidence that we are not selecting for the students with the most cognitive ability.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

Still waiting. I have explained previously why those don't say what you think they say. You never actually went and read them with an eye toward distinguishing between (1) studying and learning concepts for application to similar but different problems, and (2) knowing the precise questions that would be asked in advance and corresponding answers.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

Being exposed to concepts and similar problems and then applying that learning to solve different problems is not the same as knowing the exact questions that will be asked and memorizing the answers. The former occurred, happens everywhere, and is the basis for all learning. It is not a problem. The latter would be a problem, but there is no evidence that EVER occurred. Why is this simple distinction so hard for so many people to understand?

There was plenty of evidence that people were buying access to the test. Seriously, stop with the gaslighting. There have been literally hundreds of first hand accounts posted here.

"Literally hundreds." Provide just one. The burden is on you! Do it!!

That's easy there's a dozen pages of this in this thread alone. Just scroll back...

Nope. Try again. I have explained previously why those don't say what you think they say. You never actually read the links with an eye toward distinguishing between (1) studying and learning concepts to apply to similar but different questions, and (2) knowing the exact questions and answers before taking the test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

And the advance pass SOL rates fell dramatically only for TJ and no other high schools.
There is really no counterargument to the facts.

You can argue that the school is still better off with lower quality students because the benefits of going from 2% black kids to 4% black kids in the entering class justifies the reduction in the academic quality of the other 98% of kids; but you can't argue that there has been a reduction in academic quality because there clearly has.

And by “no other HSs” you mean Langley and McLean?

The average for the USA, the entire country, didn't change. If covid pushed lower scores then you would expect the average scores to drop but they don't.
Scores dropped because the kids selected under the new system are not as smart as the kids selected under the old system.
The kids selected under the old system were a LOT smarter.
Like a standard deviation's worth.

Or, they’re just as smart but haven’t spent lots of time in test prep classes learning all the tips and tricks for taking standardized tests. Maybe spent they’re time in more worthwhile pursuits.

Are you for real? I respect that there are many important things in life beyond academic success. But when the subject matter is literally which kids should be selected for a school devoted to serving kids showing high academic aptitude and achievement, you are really going off the rails when you criticize the pursuit of academic success at the expense of other activities. It's totally cool if some kids (and their parents) prefer to pursue non-academic activities at the expense of academics. TJ may not be for them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

Tell me you don't understand how SATs are scored without telling me you don't understand how SATs are scored.

Why would test scores drop so much for TJ but not for any other high schools?

Here is a chart of SAT scores over time. Based on this chart, someone who didn't know about the pandemic would never be able to guess a pandemic occurred.
This is by design. SATs are not curved within an administration but they are equated across administrations so you are not likely to see large jumps in median scores from one administration of the test to the next. SAT scores can and do drift but there shouldn't be any sudden drops or rises without a recentering or something.

https://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-scores-over-time

Citation for “any” other school?

See the link.
There was no COVID effect.
Even if you provided an example of a single school that saw a large decline the fact remains that the drop is not the result of COVID because the AVERAGE DIDN'T CHANGE.

This is what we call pettifoggery. Asking people to prove unimportant details that wouldn't even undermine the argument.

The comment was “not for any other high schools“, not the average. Very different.

This is what we call misleading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

You make it sound like performance on standardized tests are somehow divorced from anything relevant to our discussion.
Standardized test scores does more than measure the ability to take standardized tests, these kinds of standardized tests usually measure cognitive ability.
This is just evidence that we are not selecting for the students with the most cognitive ability.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

Still waiting. I have explained previously why those don't say what you think they say. You never actually went and read them with an eye toward distinguishing between (1) studying and learning concepts for application to similar but different problems, and (2) knowing the precise questions that would be asked in advance and corresponding answers.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

Being exposed to concepts and similar problems and then applying that learning to solve different problems is not the same as knowing the exact questions that will be asked and memorizing the answers. The former occurred, happens everywhere, and is the basis for all learning. It is not a problem. The latter would be a problem, but there is no evidence that EVER occurred. Why is this simple distinction so hard for so many people to understand?

There was plenty of evidence that people were buying access to the test. Seriously, stop with the gaslighting. There have been literally hundreds of first hand accounts posted here.

"Literally hundreds." Provide just one. The burden is on you! Do it!!

That's easy there's a dozen pages of this in this thread alone. Just scroll back...

I just did that and there are literally dozens of posts in this and other recent threads. The problem is when you jump through that posters hoops you're just playing a fools game. Nothing you provide will ever suffice. Besides, the issue has been covered and everyone already knows that it went on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The success that TJ kids had on the old TJ entrance exam was followed by similar success on the PSAT, SAT/ACT, and APs, indicating that their success was real and based on aptitude and hard work. The latter are qualities which we should be lauding.

The same can be said about the kids getting now. Except it's less toxic since they got rid of the cheaters.

But the kids getting in now are scoring over 100 points lower on the PSAT and scoring advance pass at much lower rates than students admitted under previous classes.

Test scores have been down across the board since the pandemic. This has nothing to do with TJ. You will have to try harder.

Tell me you don't understand how SATs are scored without telling me you don't understand how SATs are scored.

Why would test scores drop so much for TJ but not for any other high schools?

Here is a chart of SAT scores over time. Based on this chart, someone who didn't know about the pandemic would never be able to guess a pandemic occurred.
This is by design. SATs are not curved within an administration but they are equated across administrations so you are not likely to see large jumps in median scores from one administration of the test to the next. SAT scores can and do drift but there shouldn't be any sudden drops or rises without a recentering or something.

https://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-scores-over-time

Citation for “any” other school?

See the link.
There was no COVID effect.
Even if you provided an example of a single school that saw a large decline the fact remains that the drop is not the result of COVID because the AVERAGE DIDN'T CHANGE.

This is what we call pettifoggery. Asking people to prove unimportant details that wouldn't even undermine the argument.

The comment was “not for any other high schools“, not the average. Very different.

This is what we call misleading.

It's a well known fact that test scores are down across the nation after the pandemic and it will take many years to make up the lost ground. It's laughable that this poster is trying to blame a national problem, COVID learning loss, on TJ's selection process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

You make it sound like performance on standardized tests are somehow divorced from anything relevant to our discussion.
Standardized test scores does more than measure the ability to take standardized tests, these kinds of standardized tests usually measure cognitive ability.
This is just evidence that we are not selecting for the students with the most cognitive ability.

Or exposure to the test questions!

And you act like it's a bad thing to practice or study? Is it cheating to take a math test after *GASP* being exposed to similar problems in class? A test that measures some level of baseline ability plus the ability to prepare seems like quite a valuable tool for gauging future success . . .

A bunch of bots spouting nonsense here.

So true! Memorizing the test answers so much easier than having to work hard. I wish you could buy your way into to TJ now. It was so much less hassle when you could buy the test than having to be one of the top students.

Being exposed to concepts and similar problems and then applying that learning to solve different problems is not the same as knowing the exact questions that will be asked and memorizing the answers. The former occurred, happens everywhere, and is the basis for all learning. It is not a problem. The latter would be a problem, but there is no evidence that EVER occurred. Why is this simple distinction so hard for so many people to understand?

It is difficult to understand because of confirmation bias.
They don't want to believe that some groups can have more cognitive ability and academic merit than other groups.
Asians believe that cognitive ability can be improved with hard work and study, white people seem to believe that it is an immutable trait and if you are measuring something that can be improved through hard work and study, then you are measuring the wrong thing.

DP. This is not a question of what white and Asian people believe.

The purpose of the Quant-Q exam is to measure a student's ability to quickly develop a solution to a problem of a type they've never seen before. It doesn't matter whether or not you believe that "cognitive ability can be improved with hard work and study". What matters is that the kids who went to Curie (and probably other prep centers, some of which, unlike Curie, serve kids not of South Asian descent) had seen the problem types, and sometimes the exact questions before. Which made the Quant-Q objectively not only useless, but in fact a tool that was used to select the wrong students. And indeed, probably kept a lot of deserving low-income Asian students out of the semifinalist pool altogether!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”

5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

I guess that settles it.

For now.
There is a difference between SCOTUS no granting certiori and SCOTUS saying this is permissible.
But to be fair, SCOTUS does seem to be deferring to all race blind processes, even when the intent and purpose behind the process was racist. See voter ID laws, literacy exams, poll taxes, grandfather clauses.

Yes, SCOTUS dismissed the TJ case since it was laughable even to them and people using the term discrimination seem confused.

* Asians make up the majority of TJ students
* Selection is race blind
* The changes to the process mainly benefited low-income Asians.
* The court ruled there was no discrimination.

SCOTUS does not usually divulge the reason for not taking a case, but not taking a case is never a comment on the merits and it certainly doesn't imply that the case is laughable. In this case there was a rare dissent from the denial of cert by justice alito (joined by thomas).

By the standards of the 4th circuit, intentional racial discrimination against a racial group would be permissible as long as the discrimination did not result in reducing their success rate below other racial groups. This is pretty clearly an error in law but SCOTUS seemed reluctant to take on another affirmative action case so soon after the harvard case which created so much acrimony between the justices on the court.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-170_7l48.pdf

Alito is quite skilled at misrepresenting judicial opinions. Heytens' opinion in the Fourth Circuit appeal correctly asserted that the burden laid with the Coalition to prove intentional discrimination, and that they failed to do so. He also noted as a matter of settled fact that the policy failed to discriminate against Asian-Americans even if it was FCPS' intent to do so.

He also noted (again, correctly) that there was far greater evidence to suggest that the previous policy was discriminatory to Black, Hispanic, and low-income students and that disallowing the removal of such disparate impact would amount to nullifying any attempt to rectify existing injustices on the grounds that they disparately impacted the previously privileged group.

An example I hear frequently is that it would be tantamount to a men's rights group suing the University of Virginia back in 1970 for beginning to admit women on the grounds that men would be disproportionately impacted.

FCPS made a change in admissions policy that ended the effective embargo against economically disadvantaged students - and whaddya know, the rich folks came in and tried to turn it into the second coming of Massive Resistance. Shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

4. TJ STUDENTS ACKNOWLEDGED UNFAIR ADVANTAGE
TH students and others have acknowledged the unfair advantage that money can buy.

https://www.tjtoday.org/29411/features/students-divided-on-proposed-changes-to-admissions-process/
“ “Personally, TJ admissions was not a challenge to navigate. I had a sibling who attended before me. However, a lot of resources needed to navigate admissions cost money. That is an unfair advantage given to more economically advantaged students,” junior Vivi Rao said. ”

5. TJ STUDENTS ADMIT SHARING QUANT-Q QUESTIONS
TJ students admitted both on DCUM and on Facebook, anonymously and with real name, that they shared quant-q test questions with a test prep company or they saw nearly identical questions on the test.
https://www.facebook.com/tjvents
Thread started July 11, 2020

I have screenshots but won’t share because they have student names on them.

https://www.tjtoday.org/23143/showcase/the-children-left-behind/
“ Families with more money can afford to give children that extra edge by signing them up for whatever prep classes they can find. They can pay money to tutoring organizations to teach their children test-taking skills, “skills learned outside of school,” and to access a cache of previous and example prompts, as I witnessed when I took TJ prep; even if prompts become outdated by test changes, even access to old prompts enables private tutoring pupils to gain an upper edge over others: pupils become accustomed to the format of the writing sections and gain an approximate idea of what to expect.”




6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

SCOTUS left ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/

I guess that settles it.

For now.
There is a difference between SCOTUS no granting certiori and SCOTUS saying this is permissible.
But to be fair, SCOTUS does seem to be deferring to all race blind processes, even when the intent and purpose behind the process was racist. See voter ID laws, literacy exams, poll taxes, grandfather clauses.

Yes, SCOTUS dismissed the TJ case since it was laughable even to them and people using the term discrimination seem confused.

* Asians make up the majority of TJ students
* Selection is race blind
* The changes to the process mainly benefited low-income Asians.
* The court ruled there was no discrimination.

SCOTUS does not usually divulge the reason for not taking a case, but not taking a case is never a comment on the merits and it certainly doesn't imply that the case is laughable. In this case there was a rare dissent from the denial of cert by justice alito (joined by thomas).

By the standards of the 4th circuit, intentional racial discrimination against a racial group would be permissible as long as the discrimination did not result in reducing their success rate below other racial groups. This is pretty clearly an error in law but SCOTUS seemed reluctant to take on another affirmative action case so soon after the harvard case which created so much acrimony between the justices on the court.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-170_7l48.pdf

Alito is quite skilled at misrepresenting judicial opinions. Heytens' opinion in the Fourth Circuit appeal correctly asserted that the burden laid with the Coalition to prove intentional discrimination, and that they failed to do so. He also noted as a matter of settled fact that the policy failed to discriminate against Asian-Americans even if it was FCPS' intent to do so.

He also noted (again, correctly) that there was far greater evidence to suggest that the previous policy was discriminatory to Black, Hispanic, and low-income students and that disallowing the removal of such disparate impact would amount to nullifying any attempt to rectify existing injustices on the grounds that they disparately impacted the previously privileged group.

An example I hear frequently is that it would be tantamount to a men's rights group suing the University of Virginia back in 1970 for beginning to admit women on the grounds that men would be disproportionately impacted.

FCPS made a change in admissions policy that ended the effective embargo against economically disadvantaged students - and whaddya know, the rich folks came in and tried to turn it into the second coming of Massive Resistance. Shameful.

Thank you for clearing this up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A bit tautological... yes, if we want to maximize the average standardized test scores of the attending students we should select/admit students who have the highest standardized test scores. The point is not everyone agrees that maximizing the average standardized test scores of the student body is the primary purpose of the school.

+100

Mostly people with kids that have lazy parents that want to use a measuring stick that doesn't make them look like shitty parents for letting their kids spend all day on instagram.

Tests measure a thing worth measuring and for most of the world, a test (or series of tests) is the primary or ONLY metric used to determine college admissions.

You mistake the point. If TJ test scores drop from 99th percentile to 97th percentile while also increasing geographic, racial and SES diversity, that's a win for all students. The test scores did not drop from 99th percentile to 60th percentile, for example.

The average FCPS high school is above the 60th percentile.

It went from the 99th percentile to something closer to the 94th percentile. That is the equivalent of going from 1530 (TJ old average SAT) to 1410. That is like the difference between Harvard and University of Miami (no disrespect intended to the University of Miami).

But at least you are willing to admit we are sacrificing at least a standard deviations worth of selectivity in order to achieve the desired diversity.
We can discuss whether or not this is a tradeoff that we want to make but there is no discussion to be had when the main proponents on your side deny the facts.

I see no evidence to back up your claim of SAT or PSAT scores.

And if he did, would it change your mind about anything?

I think most people here just have their minds made up and will voice their opinions in the voting booths.