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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi, Omeish, are you running for re-election this year? You also said the battle of Iwo Jima was evil. So, I bet you are not anti-Asian.

This is important. The Coalition loves to prop up that "anti-Asian lol" quote from Omeish as a smoking gun... but with respect to this case it's actually the complete opposite. What she said was that Brabrand's Merit Lottery proposal and his rhetoric justifying it had an anti-Asian feel to it. Cannot imagine a more clear indicator that the School Board was sensitive to concerns about how the process would play out with Asian families as they worked to create greater accessibility for low-income families.

...nice try. But rather than addressing the actual question, you decided to bring up something out of context that she may or may not have said in another forum. Stricken for irrelevance and hearsay.

hearsay?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11795133/Controversial-member-woke-Virginia-school-board-slams-Battle-Iwo-Jima-evil.html

" Then, late last year, as the school district faced a federal class action suit For violating disabled students' rights, private text messages revealed Omeish also acknowledged anti-Asian bias in the admissions process for

'I mean there has been an anti asian feel underlying some of this, hate to say it lol,' Omeish texted a fellow board member in fall of 2020. 'They're discriminated against in this process too.' "

Hearsay refers to the Iwo Jima quote. The quote you reference is what I've been talking about and is Omeish telling her colleague that Brabrand's Merit Lottery proposal - which was not adopted and which the School Board voted down - was discriminatory against Asians.

Intent to lower Asian numbers did not change and that is problematic.

You're largely correct on that point. The School Board did not have an intent to, as you so inelegantly state, "lower Asian numbers". Their intent from the jump was to increase access for students of economic disadvantage and students from underrepresented schools. Some had been vocal about their desire to see a significant increase in the representation of Black and Hispanic students - this is not the same as a desire to see a lower percentage of Asian students.

Admission to elite school is a zero sum game as noted by the SCOTUS.

1) That doesn't matter.

2) In the case of TJ, it actually wasn't a zero-sum game because when FCPS changed the admissions process they actually increased the number of students in each class, which dramatically lowered the actual impact on the raw number of Asian students admitted in each class.

And the School Board then achieved their goal of reducing Asian student number at TJ by having about 24-27% fewer Asian students admitted in the following respective years.

Comparing the class of 2024 and class of 2025 admits, the # of Asian students went down 15.8%.

Have you accounted for the increase in class size from 480 to 550

The PP said reducing the student number, not the student percentage.

From 355 to 299 = 15.8% reduction.

So from 355/480 to 299/550, or from 74% to 54%.

Right. So PP was incorrect. The number of Asian students decreased by 15.8% and the percentage dropped from 74% to 54%. I'm guessing they added the seats to absorb some of the impacts.

Since racial quotas and racial manipulations at schools were abolished in 70s, is this the first instance where certain segment of student body has been suppressed by 20 percentage points (from 74% to 54%) just because of their Asian American race?

The admissions changes weren’t race-based, but they did alter the racial mix-up.

The changes primarily:
> increased the % of students from all over the county; every single MS is now represented

> increased the % of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds

> increased % of female students

> decreased the % private school students

I believe it also increased the % of kids with SNs but I don’t have the #s on that.

But are they qualified or did they take spots from more qualified applicants?

Both can be true. They are qualified and there are likely more qualified applicants who didn't get a spot. That's how every selective school at every level works.

Most qualified should be admitted - didn't you hear about the new Supreme Court ruling reinforcing merit and ruling use of race to be unconstitutional?

Can you point to the line in the supreme court decision saying that the most qualified applicants have to be admitted?

Can you point to the part where I said "the supreme court decision says that the most qualified applicants have to be admitted"?

You said most qualified students should be admitted and then referenced the supreme court which said nothing about requiring the most qualified applicants to be admitted. Like it or not, geographic diversity is here to stay and if that means that some of the most qualified applicants don't get in, oh well

The geographic diversity does take away spots from more qualified candidates who are borderline, though the increase in class size reduces this a bit.
However, the most qualified students not getting in is caused more by other changes and not the geographic diversity. Top students are not being selected in favor of less qualified students at the same school.

It should give them practice for when they don't get into their dream college even though they are 'most qualified'

They will at least have the possibility of other good schools for college. The base school does not offer the classes that TJ does, and these kids are the ones most able to take advantage of what TJ has. Maybe at base school they will do dual enrollment at a community college, while TJ has advanced classes in school with other high schoolers.

That will happen every year under every conceivable policy. There are more kids qualified to attend TJ than there are seats at TJ

The TJ Director of Admissions has been quite public about stating that he could very easily fill 3-4 classes of students every year with students that are extremely well-qualified to go to TJ. He's been saying this for a decade.

What's happening now is that a slightly (and I emphasize slightly) different group of those kids are now being admitted to the school. There are a lot of factors that go into being an excellent contributor to the nation's top public school (which TJ will remain regardless of what any rankings say), and choosing to emphasize a slightly different mix of those factors shouldn't be controversial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi, Omeish, are you running for re-election this year? You also said the battle of Iwo Jima was evil. So, I bet you are not anti-Asian.

This is important. The Coalition loves to prop up that "anti-Asian lol" quote from Omeish as a smoking gun... but with respect to this case it's actually the complete opposite. What she said was that Brabrand's Merit Lottery proposal and his rhetoric justifying it had an anti-Asian feel to it. Cannot imagine a more clear indicator that the School Board was sensitive to concerns about how the process would play out with Asian families as they worked to create greater accessibility for low-income families.

...nice try. But rather than addressing the actual question, you decided to bring up something out of context that she may or may not have said in another forum. Stricken for irrelevance and hearsay.

hearsay?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11795133/Controversial-member-woke-Virginia-school-board-slams-Battle-Iwo-Jima-evil.html

" Then, late last year, as the school district faced a federal class action suit For violating disabled students' rights, private text messages revealed Omeish also acknowledged anti-Asian bias in the admissions process for

'I mean there has been an anti asian feel underlying some of this, hate to say it lol,' Omeish texted a fellow board member in fall of 2020. 'They're discriminated against in this process too.' "

Hearsay refers to the Iwo Jima quote. The quote you reference is what I've been talking about and is Omeish telling her colleague that Brabrand's Merit Lottery proposal - which was not adopted and which the School Board voted down - was discriminatory against Asians.

Intent to lower Asian numbers did not change and that is problematic.

You're largely correct on that point. The School Board did not have an intent to, as you so inelegantly state, "lower Asian numbers". Their intent from the jump was to increase access for students of economic disadvantage and students from underrepresented schools. Some had been vocal about their desire to see a significant increase in the representation of Black and Hispanic students - this is not the same as a desire to see a lower percentage of Asian students.

Admission to elite school is a zero sum game as noted by the SCOTUS.

1) That doesn't matter.

2) In the case of TJ, it actually wasn't a zero-sum game because when FCPS changed the admissions process they actually increased the number of students in each class, which dramatically lowered the actual impact on the raw number of Asian students admitted in each class.

And the School Board then achieved their goal of reducing Asian student number at TJ by having about 24-27% fewer Asian students admitted in the following respective years.

Comparing the class of 2024 and class of 2025 admits, the # of Asian students went down 15.8%.

Have you accounted for the increase in class size from 480 to 550

The PP said reducing the student number, not the student percentage.

From 355 to 299 = 15.8% reduction.

So from 355/480 to 299/550, or from 74% to 54%.

Right. So PP was incorrect. The number of Asian students decreased by 15.8% and the percentage dropped from 74% to 54%. I'm guessing they added the seats to absorb some of the impacts.

Since racial quotas and racial manipulations at schools were abolished in 70s, is this the first instance where certain segment of student body has been suppressed by 20 percentage points (from 74% to 54%) just because of their Asian American race?

The admissions changes weren’t race-based, but they did alter the racial mix-up.

The changes primarily:
> increased the % of students from all over the county; every single MS is now represented

> increased the % of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds

> increased % of female students

> decreased the % private school students

I believe it also increased the % of kids with SNs but I don’t have the #s on that.

But are they qualified or did they take spots from more qualified applicants?

Both can be true. They are qualified and there are likely more qualified applicants who didn't get a spot. That's how every selective school at every level works.

Most qualified should be admitted - didn't you hear about the new Supreme Court ruling reinforcing merit and ruling use of race to be unconstitutional?

Can you point to the line in the supreme court decision saying that the most qualified applicants have to be admitted?

Can you point to the part where I said "the supreme court decision says that the most qualified applicants have to be admitted"?

You said most qualified students should be admitted and then referenced the supreme court which said nothing about requiring the most qualified applicants to be admitted. Like it or not, geographic diversity is here to stay and if that means that some of the most qualified applicants don't get in, oh well

The geographic diversity does take away spots from more qualified candidates who are borderline, though the increase in class size reduces this a bit.
However, the most qualified students not getting in is caused more by other changes and not the geographic diversity. Top students are not being selected in favor of less qualified students at the same school.

It should give them practice for when they don't get into their dream college even though they are 'most qualified'

They will at least have the possibility of other good schools for college. The base school does not offer the classes that TJ does, and these kids are the ones most able to take advantage of what TJ has. Maybe at base school they will do dual enrollment at a community college, while TJ has advanced classes in school with other high schoolers.

That will happen every year under every conceivable policy. There are more kids qualified to attend TJ than there are seats at TJ [/quote

Sure, but there are not 550 who are most able to take advantage of the top classes at TJ. That group is probably closer to 100.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi, Omeish, are you running for re-election this year? You also said the battle of Iwo Jima was evil. So, I bet you are not anti-Asian.

This is important. The Coalition loves to prop up that "anti-Asian lol" quote from Omeish as a smoking gun... but with respect to this case it's actually the complete opposite. What she said was that Brabrand's Merit Lottery proposal and his rhetoric justifying it had an anti-Asian feel to it. Cannot imagine a more clear indicator that the School Board was sensitive to concerns about how the process would play out with Asian families as they worked to create greater accessibility for low-income families.

...nice try. But rather than addressing the actual question, you decided to bring up something out of context that she may or may not have said in another forum. Stricken for irrelevance and hearsay.

hearsay?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11795133/Controversial-member-woke-Virginia-school-board-slams-Battle-Iwo-Jima-evil.html

" Then, late last year, as the school district faced a federal class action suit For violating disabled students' rights, private text messages revealed Omeish also acknowledged anti-Asian bias in the admissions process for

'I mean there has been an anti asian feel underlying some of this, hate to say it lol,' Omeish texted a fellow board member in fall of 2020. 'They're discriminated against in this process too.' "

Hearsay refers to the Iwo Jima quote. The quote you reference is what I've been talking about and is Omeish telling her colleague that Brabrand's Merit Lottery proposal - which was not adopted and which the School Board voted down - was discriminatory against Asians.

Intent to lower Asian numbers did not change and that is problematic.

You're largely correct on that point. The School Board did not have an intent to, as you so inelegantly state, "lower Asian numbers". Their intent from the jump was to increase access for students of economic disadvantage and students from underrepresented schools. Some had been vocal about their desire to see a significant increase in the representation of Black and Hispanic students - this is not the same as a desire to see a lower percentage of Asian students.

Admission to elite school is a zero sum game as noted by the SCOTUS.

1) That doesn't matter.

2) In the case of TJ, it actually wasn't a zero-sum game because when FCPS changed the admissions process they actually increased the number of students in each class, which dramatically lowered the actual impact on the raw number of Asian students admitted in each class.

And the School Board then achieved their goal of reducing Asian student number at TJ by having about 24-27% fewer Asian students admitted in the following respective years.

Comparing the class of 2024 and class of 2025 admits, the # of Asian students went down 15.8%.

Have you accounted for the increase in class size from 480 to 550

The PP said reducing the student number, not the student percentage.

From 355 to 299 = 15.8% reduction.

So from 355/480 to 299/550, or from 74% to 54%.

Right. So PP was incorrect. The number of Asian students decreased by 15.8% and the percentage dropped from 74% to 54%. I'm guessing they added the seats to absorb some of the impacts.

Since racial quotas and racial manipulations at schools were abolished in 70s, is this the first instance where certain segment of student body has been suppressed by 20 percentage points (from 74% to 54%) just because of their Asian American race?

The admissions changes weren’t race-based, but they did alter the racial mix-up.

The changes primarily:
> increased the % of students from all over the county; every single MS is now represented

> increased the % of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds

> increased % of female students

> decreased the % private school students

I believe it also increased the % of kids with SNs but I don’t have the #s on that.

But are they qualified or did they take spots from more qualified applicants?

Both can be true. They are qualified and there are likely more qualified applicants who didn't get a spot. That's how every selective school at every level works.

Most qualified should be admitted - didn't you hear about the new Supreme Court ruling reinforcing merit and ruling use of race to be unconstitutional?

Can you point to the line in the supreme court decision saying that the most qualified applicants have to be admitted?

Can you point to the part where I said "the supreme court decision says that the most qualified applicants have to be admitted"?

You said most qualified students should be admitted and then referenced the supreme court which said nothing about requiring the most qualified applicants to be admitted. Like it or not, geographic diversity is here to stay and if that means that some of the most qualified applicants don't get in, oh well

The geographic diversity does take away spots from more qualified candidates who are borderline, though the increase in class size reduces this a bit.
However, the most qualified students not getting in is caused more by other changes and not the geographic diversity. Top students are not being selected in favor of less qualified students at the same school.

It should give them practice for when they don't get into their dream college even though they are 'most qualified'

They will at least have the possibility of other good schools for college. The base school does not offer the classes that TJ does, and these kids are the ones most able to take advantage of what TJ has. Maybe at base school they will do dual enrollment at a community college, while TJ has advanced classes in school with other high schoolers.

That will happen every year under every conceivable policy. There are more kids qualified to attend TJ than there are seats at TJ [/quote

Sure, but there are not 550 who are most able to take advantage of the top classes at TJ. That group is probably closer to 100.

No, that group is more like a thousand.

[Anonymous]

I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

[Anonymous]

What do you expect from an elite school like TJ? If a kid can not handle the most rigorous STEM courses, he or she should bow out and stay at base schools.

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

[Anonymous]

Why are people taking so many post-AP courses in high school anyway? If TJ is only for students ready to do college work, why not call it what it is, a junior college? Then kids can apply out as transfer students (which, honestly, is what they are).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect from an elite school like TJ? If a kid can not handle the most rigorous STEM courses, he or she should bow out and stay at base schools.

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

I think you missed the point here. We don’t need parents inappropriately pushing their kids.

[Anonymous]

In many perspectives, TJ students are much better than those in most colleges. In fact, many TJ students accumulated enough AP credits and went on to graduate in three years to earn their college degrees.

Anonymous wrote:Why are people taking so many post-AP courses in high school anyway? If TJ is only for students ready to do college work, why not call it what it is, a junior college? Then kids can apply out as transfer students (which, honestly, is what they are).

[Anonymous]

You do not have to push your kids if they intend to stay at their base schools.

Just like there is no need to push any basketball player if NBA is not the goal. But I know a lot of parents are very serious about travel sports while blaming other parents for focusing too much on academics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect from an elite school like TJ? If a kid can not handle the most rigorous STEM courses, he or she should bow out and stay at base schools.

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

I think you missed the point here. We don’t need parents inappropriately pushing their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect from an elite school like TJ? If a kid can not handle the most rigorous STEM courses, he or she should bow out and stay at base schools.

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

I think you missed the point here. We don’t need parents inappropriately pushing their kids.

AAP already provides a method to evaluate the most capable FCPS students and is available to all through multiple identification approaches.

It doesn’t make sense to select kids at a base school over a center kid who lives in the same neighborhood and is part of the base catchment area. This assumes both show similar baseline stats but one is in advanced math and Level IV.

Just seems silly as the base school kid had the same opportunities, evaluations and as the AAP student. More than likely also live down the street from each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

Maybe so, but that still isn't the group I'm talking about. Even within those classes many are not capable, perhaps because of the parents' pushing that you are talking about.
There are many kids taking algebra 2 in 8th grade, especially with summer geometry. Many of them will be on a higher track but only some of those kids are really capable of handling the highest classes. This is where teacher recommendations would be useful.

As it is kids who qualified for USAJMO in 7th grade are not getting accepted, and this is about a few 7th graders in the whole county, less than 100 around the whole country for this top students thru 10th grade in math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

Maybe so, but that still isn't the group I'm talking about. Even within those classes many are not capable, perhaps because of the parents' pushing that you are talking about.
There are many kids taking algebra 2 in 8th grade, especially with summer geometry. Many of them will be on a higher track but only some of those kids are really capable of handling the highest classes. This is where teacher recommendations would be useful.

As it is kids who qualified for USAJMO in 7th grade are not getting accepted, and this is about a few 7th graders in the whole county, less than 100 around the whole country for this top students thru 10th grade in math.

The kids who qualify for USAJMO in 7th should definitely be accepted TJ. In fact, any kid who makes USA(J)MO in any grade should have the chance to take advantage of TJ's offerings. There are fewer than 10 such qualifiers in FCPS each year. More and more of them will come from a high school other than TJ. I say any kid who makes AIME in middle school should be auto-accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect from an elite school like TJ? If a kid can not handle the most rigorous STEM courses, he or she should bow out and stay at base schools.

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

I think you missed the point here. We don’t need parents inappropriately pushing their kids.

who is "We"? so this "We" decides what is appropriate and inappropriate parenting? how can parents contact "We" to get limits of parenting before "We" calls it pushing?

[Anonymous]

Apparently, "we" are the well-connected parents, whose wealthy but not-so-bright kids are losing to their hardworking middle-class classmates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect from an elite school like TJ? If a kid can not handle the most rigorous STEM courses, he or she should bow out and stay at base schools.

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

I think you missed the point here. We don’t need parents inappropriately pushing their kids.

who is "We"? so this "We" decides what is appropriate and inappropriate parenting? how can parents contact "We" to get limits of parenting before "We" calls it pushing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect from an elite school like TJ? If a kid can not handle the most rigorous STEM courses, he or she should bow out and stay at base schools.

Anonymous wrote:I see a lot of folks on this forum making the assertion that only students who are able to take TJ’s most advanced classes should be admitted, or that those students should be considered first for admission before considering anyone else.

If FCPS were to do this, it would incentivize parents to - frequently inappropriately - push their children into more and more advanced classes in order to optimize their admissions prospects, and not necessarily because it’s in the kid’s best academic interests.

This point alone should be adequate to bury that pernicious narrative.

I think you missed the point here. We don’t need parents inappropriately pushing their kids.

AAP already provides a method to evaluate the most capable FCPS students and is available to all through multiple identification approaches.

It doesn’t make sense to select kids at a base school over a center kid who lives in the same neighborhood and is part of the base catchment area. This assumes both show similar baseline stats but one is in advanced math and Level IV.

Just seems silly as the base school kid had the same opportunities, evaluations and as the AAP student. More than likely also live down the street from each other.

LIV isn't a criteria for TJ.