TJ is so done...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I don’t get this. Everyone says TJ students will not be desirable to colleges if admissions to TJ takes more than standardized tests and hard core Mathcounts and Science Olympiad into their decision making. But colleges say they want more then one dimensional over achievers. They want kids with more dimension and life experience points etc. so won’t a change inTJ admissions better align with what the top colleges say they want?

Yes, and this will be the part that drives the status quo crowd the most crazy. All of a sudden, you’re going to start seeing higher percentages of TJ kids admitted to Ivies and other top schools. Because the old admissions process incentivized the wrong kind of behavior for creating attractive students and leaders.

TJ students already had the highest Ivy admissions in the country of any high school— public or private. With almost not athlete or legacy bump. They had hit the ceiling on admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's starting to sound a lot like the old trope of trying to make people ashamed of being smart. My parents weren't exactly what I'd call wealthy, but they prioritized their spending by buying textbooks for me to practice from. The people complaining about tiger moms are being terrible

+1

+1
It's essentially an affirmation action policy, which is obviously racist. It's amazing that athletics haven't been impacted by the "equity" sickos.

That's amazing since admissions are race-blind. It's like magic!

Never underestimate the bitterness of parents who feel entitled to gaming the system.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's starting to sound a lot like the old trope of trying to make people ashamed of being smart. My parents weren't exactly what I'd call wealthy, but they prioritized their spending by buying textbooks for me to practice from. The people complaining about tiger moms are being terrible

+1

+1
It's essentially an affirmation action policy, which is obviously racist. It's amazing that athletics haven't been impacted by the "equity" sickos.

That's amazing since admissions are race-blind. It's like magic!

Google Disparate Impact. Report Back.

If you have hard quotas from schools and socioeconomic groups where Asian students are not, you get fewer Asians. A TJ parent ran a simulation based on racial composition and SES of schools and ended up very close to the actual demographics of the incoming class.

“We’re tired of tiger parent parenting amd prep (which we stereotype as. Ding Asian things), so we are going to stop taking most kids who app,y from the heavily Asian AAP Centers and force most kids to come from crappy MSs with very few Asians, achieved by a hard quota. Then, we are going to devalue advanced math, which most Asians take” is also illegal.

Even the Judge who ruled against the SB in the motion to dismiss the litigation against them said they were fooling anyone and this was clearly an attempt to decrease Asian students. The issue is whether artificially depressing Asian eligibility is illegal. (It should be).

— white parent.

+1. White parent.

DP. A drop by 20 points in terms of Asian representation pretty much tells it all. I’m all in favor of adding another TJ-like school. Goodness knows the county could fill it. But wow, the drop is staggering and the judge is right in what he said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's starting to sound a lot like the old trope of trying to make people ashamed of being smart. My parents weren't exactly what I'd call wealthy, but they prioritized their spending by buying textbooks for me to practice from. The people complaining about tiger moms are being terrible

+1

+1
It's essentially an affirmation action policy, which is obviously racist. It's amazing that athletics haven't been impacted by the "equity" sickos.

That's amazing since admissions are race-blind. It's like magic!

Sure. First, you impose geographic minimums to save seats for kids from “traditionally underrepresented schools.” Then you give bonus points to applicants with certain “experience factors” like being FARMS. If applicants had to have blue eyes and pee standing up that would technically be race and gender blind.

An example of why your analogy is off is there are poor Vietnamese students in eastern Fairfax. They attend underrepresented schools and have experience factors. Are they not the right kind of Asian for you? Do you only champion the cause of Asians who can afford prep classes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's starting to sound a lot like the old trope of trying to make people ashamed of being smart. My parents weren't exactly what I'd call wealthy, but they prioritized their spending by buying textbooks for me to practice from. The people complaining about tiger moms are being terrible

+1

+1
It's essentially an affirmation action policy, which is obviously racist. It's amazing that athletics haven't been impacted by the "equity" sickos.

That's amazing since admissions are race-blind. It's like magic!

Google Disparate Impact. Report Back.

If you have hard quotas from schools and socioeconomic groups where Asian students are not, you get fewer Asians. A TJ parent ran a simulation based on racial composition and SES of schools and ended up very close to the actual demographics of the incoming class.

“We’re tired of tiger parent parenting amd prep (which we stereotype as. Ding Asian things), so we are going to stop taking most kids who app,y from the heavily Asian AAP Centers and force most kids to come from crappy MSs with very few Asians, achieved by a hard quota. Then, we are going to devalue advanced math, which most Asians take” is also illegal.

Even the Judge who ruled against the SB in the motion to dismiss the litigation against them said they were fooling anyone and this was clearly an attempt to decrease Asian students. The issue is whether artificially depressing Asian eligibility is illegal. (It should be).

— white parent.

+1. White parent.

DP. A drop by 20 points in terms of Asian representation pretty much tells it all. I’m all in favor of adding another TJ-like school. Goodness knows the county could fill it. But wow, the drop is staggering and the judge is right in what he said.

Refusing to dismiss the case is one thing. Let's see how the trial on the substance goes. There are no barriers to entry for Asians in any of the geographic regions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's starting to sound a lot like the old trope of trying to make people ashamed of being smart. My parents weren't exactly what I'd call wealthy, but they prioritized their spending by buying textbooks for me to practice from. The people complaining about tiger moms are being terrible

+1

+1
It's essentially an affirmation action policy, which is obviously racist. It's amazing that athletics haven't been impacted by the "equity" sickos.

That's amazing since admissions are race-blind. It's like magic!

Sure. First, you impose geographic minimums to save seats for kids from “traditionally underrepresented schools.” Then you give bonus points to applicants with certain “experience factors” like being FARMS. If applicants had to have blue eyes and pee standing up that would technically be race and gender blind.

An example of why your analogy is off is there are poor Vietnamese students in eastern Fairfax. They attend underrepresented schools and have experience factors. Are they not the right kind of Asian for you? Do you only champion the cause of Asians who can afford prep classes?

That’s fine. But, poor Vietnamese kids clearly didn’t get in in significant numbers. Because there was a 21 point drop in Asians admitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's starting to sound a lot like the old trope of trying to make people ashamed of being smart. My parents weren't exactly what I'd call wealthy, but they prioritized their spending by buying textbooks for me to practice from. The people complaining about tiger moms are being terrible

+1

+1
It's essentially an affirmation action policy, which is obviously racist. It's amazing that athletics haven't been impacted by the "equity" sickos.

That's amazing since admissions are race-blind. It's like magic!

Google Disparate Impact. Report Back.

If you have hard quotas from schools and socioeconomic groups where Asian students are not, you get fewer Asians. A TJ parent ran a simulation based on racial composition and SES of schools and ended up very close to the actual demographics of the incoming class.

“We’re tired of tiger parent parenting amd prep (which we stereotype as. Ding Asian things), so we are going to stop taking most kids who app,y from the heavily Asian AAP Centers and force most kids to come from crappy MSs with very few Asians, achieved by a hard quota. Then, we are going to devalue advanced math, which most Asians take” is also illegal.

Even the Judge who ruled against the SB in the motion to dismiss the litigation against them said they were fooling anyone and this was clearly an attempt to decrease Asian students. The issue is whether artificially depressing Asian eligibility is illegal. (It should be).

— white parent.

+1. White parent.

DP. A drop by 20 points in terms of Asian representation pretty much tells it all. I’m all in favor of adding another TJ-like school. Goodness knows the county could fill it. But wow, the drop is staggering and the judge is right in what he said.

Refusing to dismiss the case is one thing. Let's see how the trial on the substance goes. There are no barriers to entry for Asians in any of the geographic regions.

It’s clearly a disparate impact of a minority group under any test. And the SB wasn’t shy about saying in meetings they wanted fewer Asian kids. So intent is there. Not that it needs to be for disparate impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's starting to sound a lot like the old trope of trying to make people ashamed of being smart. My parents weren't exactly what I'd call wealthy, but they prioritized their spending by buying textbooks for me to practice from. The people complaining about tiger moms are being terrible

+1

+1
It's essentially an affirmation action policy, which is obviously racist. It's amazing that athletics haven't been impacted by the "equity" sickos.

That's amazing since admissions are race-blind. It's like magic!

Google Disparate Impact. Report Back.

If you have hard quotas from schools and socioeconomic groups where Asian students are not, you get fewer Asians. A TJ parent ran a simulation based on racial composition and SES of schools and ended up very close to the actual demographics of the incoming class.

“We’re tired of tiger parent parenting amd prep (which we stereotype as. Ding Asian things), so we are going to stop taking most kids who app,y from the heavily Asian AAP Centers and force most kids to come from crappy MSs with very few Asians, achieved by a hard quota. Then, we are going to devalue advanced math, which most Asians take” is also illegal.

Even the Judge who ruled against the SB in the motion to dismiss the litigation against them said they were fooling anyone and this was clearly an attempt to decrease Asian students. The issue is whether artificially depressing Asian eligibility is illegal. (It should be).

— white parent.

+1. White parent.

DP. A drop by 20 points in terms of Asian representation pretty much tells it all. I’m all in favor of adding another TJ-like school. Goodness knows the county could fill it. But wow, the drop is staggering and the judge is right in what he said.

Refusing to dismiss the case is one thing. Let's see how the trial on the substance goes. There are no barriers to entry for Asians in any of the geographic regions.

It’s clearly a disparate impact of a minority group under any test. And the SB wasn’t shy about saying in meetings they wanted fewer Asian kids. So intent is there. Not that it needs to be for disparate impact.

It is a clearly articulated racist fight against a group that has been determined to be the wrong minority as it doesn't have enough votes. With stated intent and institutional malice. Long live the tyranny of democracy.

[Anonymous]

Asian Americans are not URM in TJ admissions. They are over represented. When efforts made to increase URM numbers are successful the numbers of over represented groups will decrease. That’s math. It’s not a conspiracy against Asian Americans.

Unless Asian Americans become under represented they should not complain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asian Americans are not URM in TJ admissions. They are over represented. When efforts made to increase URM numbers are successful the numbers of over represented groups will decrease. That’s math. It’s not a conspiracy against Asian Americans.

Unless Asian Americans become under represented they should not complain.

If your success in a merit-based outcome is artificially reduced to conform to the level of success of the majority race, you should not complain? That's a bold take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asian Americans are not URM in TJ admissions. They are over represented. When efforts made to increase URM numbers are successful the numbers of over represented groups will decrease. That’s math. It’s not a conspiracy against Asian Americans.

Unless Asian Americans become under represented they should not complain.

If your success in a merit-based outcome is artificially reduced to conform to the level of success of the majority race, you should not complain? That's a bold take.

If a merit based process fir a public school magnet school doesn’t mirror the demographics of the county the URMs have ever right to complain and sue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I don’t get this. Everyone says TJ students will not be desirable to colleges if admissions to TJ takes more than standardized tests and hard core Mathcounts and Science Olympiad into their decision making. But colleges say they want more then one dimensional over achievers. They want kids with more dimension and life experience points etc. so won’t a change inTJ admissions better align with what the top colleges say they want?

Many top colleges ask for the kid’s AMC scores, AIME scores, and USAMO scores. Scoring highly in prestigious math competitions is a huge boon for being admitted to MIT, the Harvard math department, etc.

[Anonymous]

Huh. TJ doesn’t offer a “Math” research lab. So why do I care about math competition scores. I think applied science programs would be a better analogy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asian Americans are not URM in TJ admissions. They are over represented. When efforts made to increase URM numbers are successful the numbers of over represented groups will decrease. That’s math. It’s not a conspiracy against Asian Americans.

Unless Asian Americans become under represented they should not complain.

If your success in a merit-based outcome is artificially reduced to conform to the level of success of the majority race, you should not complain? That's a bold take.

If a merit based process fir a public school magnet school doesn’t mirror the demographics of the county the URMs have ever right to complain and sue.

Anyone can sue. Whether they can win is another issue. Right now the Asian-American community has a better case to challenge the recent changes than URMs have to challenge the prior system. There's no federal or Constitutional requirement that merit be redefined to lead to equal outcomes for different demographic cohorts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asian Americans are not URM in TJ admissions. They are over represented. When efforts made to increase URM numbers are successful the numbers of over represented groups will decrease. That’s math. It’s not a conspiracy against Asian Americans.

Unless Asian Americans become under represented they should not complain.

If your success in a merit-based outcome is artificially reduced to conform to the level of success of the majority race, you should not complain? That's a bold take.

If a merit based process fir a public school magnet school doesn’t mirror the demographics of the county the URMs have ever right to complain and sue.

Anyone can sue. Whether they can win is another issue. Right now the Asian-American community has a better case to challenge the recent changes than URMs have to challenge the prior system. There's no federal or Constitutional requirement that merit be redefined to lead to equal outcomes for different demographic cohorts.

There is no federal or Constitutional requirement that merit cannot be redefined.