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

[Anonymous]

Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“It is clear that Asian-American students are disproportionately harmed by the Fairfax County School Board’s decision to overhaul TJ admissions,” Hon. Claude M Hilton, Senior Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia wrote. “Currently and in the future, Asian-American applicants are disproportionately deprived of a level playing field in competing for both allocated and unallocated seats.”

Hilton also called the school board’s process for implementing the changes “remarkably rushed and shoddy” with “a noticeable lack of public engagement and transparency.”

Looks like the FCPS board is the problem. Has the FCPS board changed since this finding in 2022?

Mr. Claude Hilton is flat out wrong, if not lying through his teeth. It's surprising a judge would state such lengths of misinformation. Either he did not look at the data and is only spitting out his opinion, or he did look at the data and does not understand how to apply basic math and proportions. In that case, perhaps he is not fit to serve as a judge.

Here are proportions proving mathematically that Asians are not "disproportionately harmed."

"Class of 2024:
The total hit rate per application was 19.14%.
355 seats were offered to Asian students, coming from 1,423 applications for a hit rate of 24.94%.
86 seats were offered to white students, coming from 595 applications for a hit rate of 14.45%.
A maximum of 9 seats were offered to Black students, coming from 160 applications for a maximum hit rate of 5.63%. The actual hit rate was likely much lower.
16 seats were offered to Hispanic students from 208 applications for a hit rate of 7.69%.

When cultural factors and compounding evidence like the Curie matter are taken into account, it is noncontroversial to assert that the previous process disproportionately favored Asian students and had a clear disparate impact on all other demographics.

Class of 2025:
The total hit rate per application was 18.13%.
299 seats were offered to Asian students from 1,535 applications for a hit rate of 19.48%. Still slightly favored, but no longer in a statistically significant manner.
123 seats were offered to white students from 726 applications for a hit rate of 16.94%. Still slightly disfavored, but again, not significantly.
39 seats were offered to Black students from 272 applications for a hit rate of 14.33%. Seems like there's still some work to be done here, but at least we're in reasonable territory.
62 seats were offered to Hispanic students from 295 applications for a hit rate of 21.02%. Favored, but only about half as much as Asians were pre-changes."

Whoever quoted my work here, thanks

is this accurate information? source?

https://www.fcps.edu/news/tjhsst-offers-admission-550-students-broadens-access-students-who-have-aptitude-stem

" Asian students continue to constitute a majority of the class at 54.36%, a decrease from 73.05% (2020-21)."

Imaging the outrage if there were to be a news release like:

"After NBA draft changes this year, African American players continue to constitute a majority of the league at 54.36%, a decrease from 71.8% ."

Can someone please explain to me why there is this pervasive subset of people who insist on bringing up the NBA as some sort of comparison with admissions processes?

Why do you think these things are even remotely comparable?

Because they need an example with a black majority.

Correct, it is to show the hypocrisy of equity.

But it… doesn’t. One entity is a private business comprised of 30 franchises who exist to win games, compete for championships and make money. The other is an educational opportunity.

You have to work a lot harder to justify any comparison between the two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

That's nonsense. From the VDOE governor's school webpage: "The Virginia Governor's School Program has been designed to assist divisions as they meet the needs of a small population of students whose learning levels are remarkably different from their age-level peers."

A kid who is a USAJMO qualifier is so far beyond the norm that they are not educable in their base school. Kids like this will run out of math classes by 10th grade. Having access to the post AP classes offered at TJ as well as the TJ math competition team likely would be the difference between making MOP/IMO or not. A kid of this caliber who is stuck at a regular school will likely have no real peer group and a miserable time socially. Since they're so far above everyone else, they'll also be set up to coast through high school and then develop imposter syndrome in college.

The goals of admitting under-resourced, but still qualified kids and the goals of admitting the outliers do not need to be mutually exclusive. There's plenty of room at TJ for both the 50 or so kids who are far above the norm and who absolutely need a place like TJ and the 500 or so bright, qualified kids who would benefit from TJ but would also be fine at the base school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

If they were a USAMO qualifier prior to TJ, you're right, they'll probably do great no matter where they end up so better off giving the TJ spot to someone for whom it will be life-changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

That's nonsense. From the VDOE governor's school webpage: "The Virginia Governor's School Program has been designed to assist divisions as they meet the needs of a small population of students whose learning levels are remarkably different from their age-level peers."

A kid who is a USAJMO qualifier is so far beyond the norm that they are not educable in their base school. Kids like this will run out of math classes by 10th grade. Having access to the post AP classes offered at TJ as well as the TJ math competition team likely would be the difference between making MOP/IMO or not. A kid of this caliber who is stuck at a regular school will likely have no real peer group and a miserable time socially. Since they're so far above everyone else, they'll also be set up to coast through high school and then develop imposter syndrome in college.

The goals of admitting under-resourced, but still qualified kids and the goals of admitting the outliers do not need to be mutually exclusive. There's plenty of room at TJ for both the 50 or so kids who are far above the norm and who absolutely need a place like TJ and the 500 or so bright, qualified kids who would benefit from TJ but would also be fine at the base school.

Larlo is in the top 1.5% of his school - already 2 standard deviations above average. I would say that puts Larlo's learning level "remarkably different from their age-level peers."

I don't think you have to worry about imposter syndrome in college for JMO Jimmy- to get to where he is, Jimmy already knows how to study and has already figured out how to study outside the "normal" classroom. For the most part, USA(J)MO kids breeze through college.

I do agree that there should be room at TJ for JMO Jimmy and Larlo. What about Larla? There are only 550 seats, after all.

[Anonymous]

The application is too sparse to say that any kid is in the top 1.5%. Top 1.5% on a very subjectively graded portrait of a graduate type essay is not the same as top 1.5%.

The problem isn't that under-resourced Larlo is getting in ahead of JMO Jimmy. It's that Privileged Pete at the same high SES school who failed to qualify for Algebra I in 7th even with tutors, is unimpressive to all teachers, and took extensive prep classes for writing his essays is getting in over JMO Jimmy.

It's also pretty absurd to suggest that TJ wouldn't be life changing for extremely high achieving outliers. The peer group alone would be like something they've never experienced in their lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
A kid who is a USAJMO qualifier is so far beyond the norm that they are not educable in their base school. Kids like this will run out of math classes by 10th grade. Having access to the post AP classes offered at TJ as well as the TJ math competition team likely would be the difference between making MOP/IMO or not.

One kid was very good in middle school, but did not qualify for mathcounts nationals or USAJMO. Went to TJ and was in MOP(a step above USAMO).

[Anonymous]

I thought this case got laughed out of court years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“It is clear that Asian-American students are disproportionately harmed by the Fairfax County School Board’s decision to overhaul TJ admissions,” Hon. Claude M Hilton, Senior Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia wrote. “Currently and in the future, Asian-American applicants are disproportionately deprived of a level playing field in competing for both allocated and unallocated seats.”

Hilton also called the school board’s process for implementing the changes “remarkably rushed and shoddy” with “a noticeable lack of public engagement and transparency.”

Looks like the FCPS board is the problem. Has the FCPS board changed since this finding in 2022?

Mr. Claude Hilton is flat out wrong, if not lying through his teeth. It's surprising a judge would state such lengths of misinformation. Either he did not look at the data and is only spitting out his opinion, or he did look at the data and does not understand how to apply basic math and proportions. In that case, perhaps he is not fit to serve as a judge.

Here are proportions proving mathematically that Asians are not "disproportionately harmed."

"Class of 2024:
The total hit rate per application was 19.14%.
355 seats were offered to Asian students, coming from 1,423 applications for a hit rate of 24.94%.
86 seats were offered to white students, coming from 595 applications for a hit rate of 14.45%.
A maximum of 9 seats were offered to Black students, coming from 160 applications for a maximum hit rate of 5.63%. The actual hit rate was likely much lower.
16 seats were offered to Hispanic students from 208 applications for a hit rate of 7.69%.

When cultural factors and compounding evidence like the Curie matter are taken into account, it is noncontroversial to assert that the previous process disproportionately favored Asian students and had a clear disparate impact on all other demographics.

Class of 2025:
The total hit rate per application was 18.13%.
299 seats were offered to Asian students from 1,535 applications for a hit rate of 19.48%. Still slightly favored, but no longer in a statistically significant manner.
123 seats were offered to white students from 726 applications for a hit rate of 16.94%. Still slightly disfavored, but again, not significantly.
39 seats were offered to Black students from 272 applications for a hit rate of 14.33%. Seems like there's still some work to be done here, but at least we're in reasonable territory.
62 seats were offered to Hispanic students from 295 applications for a hit rate of 21.02%. Favored, but only about half as much as Asians were pre-changes."

Whoever quoted my work here, thanks

is this accurate information? source?

https://www.fcps.edu/news/tjhsst-offers-admission-550-students-broadens-access-students-who-have-aptitude-stem

" Asian students continue to constitute a majority of the class at 54.36%, a decrease from 73.05% (2020-21)."

Imaging the outrage if there were to be a news release like:

"After NBA draft changes this year, African American players continue to constitute a majority of the league at 54.36%, a decrease from 71.8% ."

Huge income disparity between Asian American and African American players too. Let's look the other way, except when it comes to TJHSST

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought this case got laughed out of court years ago.

Ummm … the Asian students won and then got reversed in a 2-1 decision and have now petitioned for cert to the Supreme Court. Not quite a laughing matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“It is clear that Asian-American students are disproportionately harmed by the Fairfax County School Board’s decision to overhaul TJ admissions,” Hon. Claude M Hilton, Senior Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia wrote. “Currently and in the future, Asian-American applicants are disproportionately deprived of a level playing field in competing for both allocated and unallocated seats.”

Hilton also called the school board’s process for implementing the changes “remarkably rushed and shoddy” with “a noticeable lack of public engagement and transparency.”

Looks like the FCPS board is the problem. Has the FCPS board changed since this finding in 2022?

Mr. Claude Hilton is flat out wrong, if not lying through his teeth. It's surprising a judge would state such lengths of misinformation. Either he did not look at the data and is only spitting out his opinion, or he did look at the data and does not understand how to apply basic math and proportions. In that case, perhaps he is not fit to serve as a judge.

Here are proportions proving mathematically that Asians are not "disproportionately harmed."

"Class of 2024:
The total hit rate per application was 19.14%.
355 seats were offered to Asian students, coming from 1,423 applications for a hit rate of 24.94%.
86 seats were offered to white students, coming from 595 applications for a hit rate of 14.45%.
A maximum of 9 seats were offered to Black students, coming from 160 applications for a maximum hit rate of 5.63%. The actual hit rate was likely much lower.
16 seats were offered to Hispanic students from 208 applications for a hit rate of 7.69%.

When cultural factors and compounding evidence like the Curie matter are taken into account, it is noncontroversial to assert that the previous process disproportionately favored Asian students and had a clear disparate impact on all other demographics.

Class of 2025:
The total hit rate per application was 18.13%.
299 seats were offered to Asian students from 1,535 applications for a hit rate of 19.48%. Still slightly favored, but no longer in a statistically significant manner.
123 seats were offered to white students from 726 applications for a hit rate of 16.94%. Still slightly disfavored, but again, not significantly.
39 seats were offered to Black students from 272 applications for a hit rate of 14.33%. Seems like there's still some work to be done here, but at least we're in reasonable territory.
62 seats were offered to Hispanic students from 295 applications for a hit rate of 21.02%. Favored, but only about half as much as Asians were pre-changes."

Whoever quoted my work here, thanks

is this accurate information? source?

https://www.fcps.edu/news/tjhsst-offers-admission-550-students-broadens-access-students-who-have-aptitude-stem

" Asian students continue to constitute a majority of the class at 54.36%, a decrease from 73.05% (2020-21)."

Imaging the outrage if there were to be a news release like:

"After NBA draft changes this year, African American players continue to constitute a majority of the league at 54.36%, a decrease from 71.8% ."

Huge income disparity between Asian American and African American players too. Let's look the other way, except when it comes to TJHSST

What? Don’t follow this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

Excellent points. Very well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

Excellent points. Very well said.

Well, one of the goal for the 1.5% was to have the so called "Top kids" (aka kids who needed to be in TJ) in the system. The problem is there is no consensus on the qualification of "Top kids". Personally I would think that a kids with National level individual achievement in STEM area should be considered. Teachers recommendation would have helped here. If more and more of the Top kids are getting missed (I have no data for it except seeing it in comments) with the new selection process then there is no point in keeping the Top 1.5%, it should be lottery (at least Top kids can blame it to their luck and not ability).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

Excellent points. Very well said.

Well, one of the goal for the 1.5% was to have the so called "Top kids" (aka kids who needed to be in TJ) in the system. The problem is there is no consensus on the qualification of "Top kids". Personally I would think that a kids with National level individual achievement in STEM area should be considered. Teachers recommendation would have helped here. If more and more of the Top kids are getting missed (I have no data for it except seeing it in comments) with the new selection process then there is no point in keeping the Top 1.5%, it should be lottery (at least Top kids can blame it to their luck and not ability).

It's not to say the top kids aren't being selected. It seems a bit subjective. There are likely 2X-3X qualified applicants that simply don't get picked. The actual problem seems like there need to be more places like TJ than rethinking selection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now, the theme changes to "we do not need the best students in TJ"

DP here, but I would say that (1) objective rankings of TJ applicants don't exist, and (2) even if we could objectively rank TJ applicants, we will never agree on whether society is better served if TJ admitted a higher ranked Larla, whose UMC parents can afford outside enrichments that can substitute for TJ, or a lower ranked but still qualified Larlo, whose URM parents do not have those same resources. (abstracting from the noisy relationship between race and SES).

Several posts ago, a PP mentioned that it's sad that TJ did not admit certain USAJMO qualifiers. A counterargument is that those USAJMO qualifiers already have plenty of resources to get to where they are now - would a TJ education get these kids to MOP/IMO? Or would moving these kids to TJ just increase the math prestige of TJ? Maybe giving that seat to another qualified applicant with fewer at-home resources is better for society?

Excellent points. Very well said.

Well, one of the goal for the 1.5% was to have the so called "Top kids" (aka kids who needed to be in TJ) in the system. The problem is there is no consensus on the qualification of "Top kids". Personally I would think that a kids with National level individual achievement in STEM area should be considered. Teachers recommendation would have helped here. If more and more of the Top kids are getting missed (I have no data for it except seeing it in comments) with the new selection process then there is no point in keeping the Top 1.5%, it should be lottery (at least Top kids can blame it to their luck and not ability).

It's not to say the top kids aren't being selected. It seems a bit subjective. There are likely 2X-3X qualified applicants that simply don't get picked. The actual problem seems like there need to be more places like TJ than rethinking selection.

I think many of the posters here think that the 550 admitted students have to be unequivacolly "better" than the 2000 that were not selected. And if an admitted kid didn't have the clear and quantifiable "badges" that an unadmitted kid had, then the system is broken. I would say that most of the 2500 applicants are probably "top kids" in some way or another, whether it be through innate skill or hours of practice. So any algorithm that selects a subset of the 2500 applicant will get "top kids." We can argue about whether that algorithm is biased, but I think the arguments that the algorithm doesn't select "top kids" is invalid. Unless you want to live in a world where only Mozarts are invited to the partiy, and Salieris are turn away with disdain.

A system like NYCPS where there are multiple magnet schools would work to give all 2500 kids an opprtunity to pursue STEM. But NYCPS can do that with a million students. With only 200,000 students, FCPS doesn't have the economies of scale for that.