Race and TJ admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

Seems like some so called progressive white folks couldn't take being shown that they are not superior after all.

I know and it only cost me 2 years in $20k in prep lessons to prove it too! And now I'm so mad that my superior child is denied access to TJ!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

Seems like some so called progressive white folks couldn't take being shown that they are not superior after all.

I know and it only cost me 2 years in $20k in prep lessons to prove it too! And now I'm so mad that my superior child is denied access to TJ!

You are too lazy to even take your kids to prep classes whitey. You would rather be racist and subvert the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

Seems like some so called progressive white folks couldn't take being shown that they are not superior after all.

You're defending Cutie? Really? You think that's right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

Seems like some so called progressive white folks couldn't take being shown that they are not superior after all.

You're defending Cutie? Really? You think that's right?

I am only commenting on a change in process that the judge deemed illegal because it was racist in intent. And the changes were pushed by jealous white folks who couldn't compete. Using pandemic/equity/Curie/parents and whatever else they could think of as an excuse. Bloody shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

Seems like some so called progressive white folks couldn't take being shown that they are not superior after all.

You're defending Cutie? Really? You think that's right?

I am only commenting on a change in process that the judge deemed illegal because it was racist in intent. And the changes were pushed by jealous white folks who couldn't compete. Using pandemic/equity/Curie/parents and whatever else they could think of as an excuse. Bloody shameful.

Curie isn't an excuse. It was one of the drivers of the change.

And you're defending it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

Seems like some so called progressive white folks couldn't take being shown that they are not superior after all.

You're defending Cutie? Really? You think that's right?

What's wrong with Curie? My kids worked so hard there preopping for TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

There were many factors at play when they change the admissions. Curie was only part of it. Declining number of applicants, a very concentrated number of feeder schools, issues with the school itself including burnout and some toxicity, and more. There were also larger issues at play, including the changes in admissions at Maggie Walker and Stuy.

As a moderate (former Republican now Independent) who believes in meritocracy and also in the benefit in higher education of diversity instead of insularity (I have also seen these benefits at various jobs I've had), I think the changes are a step in the right direction. With some additional modifications, I think the change will benefit students at TJ and at all the regions' high schools.

Today's GOP is run by White Nationalists who don't have any regard for the best interests of the Asian community but will gladly use them for their own ends.

How about Democrats acknowledge and address the Asian American voice instead? Pointing at the GOP and saying they are worse doesn't inspire any confidence that Democrats actually care about Asian American issues.

It'd be one thing if TJ was an isolated issue, but it feels like every magnet school with an Asian majority was targeted, from California to Philadelphia to New York.

Stuyvesant in particular is galling considering how poor Asians are in NYC and how many of the top URMs get scouted for free rides to the privates. Well, yeah, if the top URMs are going to privates then the racial balance at your magnet schools will suffer. If Asian kids aren't allowed to be a majority at Stuyvesant then under what scenario are Asians allowed to do well?

You can't help but feel Democrats do not like seeing Asians do well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

No, seriously - we really do want objective merit. Why is that so hard for SJWs to grasp. So stop with the "experience factors" and life hurdles and non-traditional schools and get back to pure objective merit admissions. I am not looking for an unfair advantage for my kids, I just want an objective merit based admissions systems where being affluent and Asian are not considered. I am fine with resources to help kids get on the playing field, but when its time to play, I want a purely objective merit based process to take place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

I feel just the opposite. I strongly support giving all children a fair chance at these opportunities, not just those who prioritize expensive prep classes. It's clear-cut. Despite people screaming merit, what they mean is they want an unfair advantage. Now I don't think it's possible for any system to completely level the playing field but the changes seem like a good start.

No, seriously - we really do want objective merit. Why is that so hard for SJWs to grasp. So stop with the "experience factors" and life hurdles and non-traditional schools and get back to pure objective merit admissions. I am not looking for an unfair advantage for my kids, I just want an objective merit based admissions systems where being affluent and Asian are not considered. I am fine with resources to help kids get on the playing field, but when its time to play, I want a purely objective merit based process to take place.

So you want admissions to let your kid benefit from the advantages you could give them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

There were many factors at play when they change the admissions. Curie was only part of it. Declining number of applicants, a very concentrated number of feeder schools, issues with the school itself including burnout and some toxicity, and more. There were also larger issues at play, including the changes in admissions at Maggie Walker and Stuy.

As a moderate (former Republican now Independent) who believes in meritocracy and also in the benefit in higher education of diversity instead of insularity (I have also seen these benefits at various jobs I've had), I think the changes are a step in the right direction. With some additional modifications, I think the change will benefit students at TJ and at all the regions' high schools.

Diversity is great. Viciously targeting a group is not.

Thankfully, the group that was targeted was relatively small (as Judge Heytens indicated) and was targeted largely because of resource hoarding behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

There were many factors at play when they change the admissions. Curie was only part of it. Declining number of applicants, a very concentrated number of feeder schools, issues with the school itself including burnout and some toxicity, and more. There were also larger issues at play, including the changes in admissions at Maggie Walker and Stuy.

As a moderate (former Republican now Independent) who believes in meritocracy and also in the benefit in higher education of diversity instead of insularity (I have also seen these benefits at various jobs I've had), I think the changes are a step in the right direction. With some additional modifications, I think the change will benefit students at TJ and at all the regions' high schools.

Diversity is great. Viciously targeting a group is not.

Thankfully, the group that was targeted was relatively small (as Judge Heytens indicated) and was targeted largely because of resource hoarding behavior.

Read what you have written again....sounds so 1939

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

There were many factors at play when they change the admissions. Curie was only part of it. Declining number of applicants, a very concentrated number of feeder schools, issues with the school itself including burnout and some toxicity, and more. There were also larger issues at play, including the changes in admissions at Maggie Walker and Stuy.

As a moderate (former Republican now Independent) who believes in meritocracy and also in the benefit in higher education of diversity instead of insularity (I have also seen these benefits at various jobs I've had), I think the changes are a step in the right direction. With some additional modifications, I think the change will benefit students at TJ and at all the regions' high schools.

Diversity is great. Viciously targeting a group is not.

Thankfully, the group that was targeted was relatively small (as Judge Heytens indicated) and was targeted largely because of resource hoarding behavior.

“I think the public interest favors a stay given the timing and logistical constraints associated with scrapping the current admissions policy and creating a new one so close to the end of the current admissions cycle. If the district court’s order is not stayed, thousands of students and their families will be thrown into disarray for the next several months.”

It was for public interest. Where is this resource hoarding argument you refer to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

There were many factors at play when they change the admissions. Curie was only part of it. Declining number of applicants, a very concentrated number of feeder schools, issues with the school itself including burnout and some toxicity, and more. There were also larger issues at play, including the changes in admissions at Maggie Walker and Stuy.

As a moderate (former Republican now Independent) who believes in meritocracy and also in the benefit in higher education of diversity instead of insularity (I have also seen these benefits at various jobs I've had), I think the changes are a step in the right direction. With some additional modifications, I think the change will benefit students at TJ and at all the regions' high schools.

Diversity is great. Viciously targeting a group is not.

Thankfully, the group that was targeted was relatively small (as Judge Heytens indicated) and was targeted largely because of resource hoarding behavior.

I've read the opinion and dissent and I'm not sure what you're referring to?

https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/221280R1.U.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

There were many factors at play when they change the admissions. Curie was only part of it. Declining number of applicants, a very concentrated number of feeder schools, issues with the school itself including burnout and some toxicity, and more. There were also larger issues at play, including the changes in admissions at Maggie Walker and Stuy.

As a moderate (former Republican now Independent) who believes in meritocracy and also in the benefit in higher education of diversity instead of insularity (I have also seen these benefits at various jobs I've had), I think the changes are a step in the right direction. With some additional modifications, I think the change will benefit students at TJ and at all the regions' high schools.

Diversity is great. Viciously targeting a group is not.

Thankfully, the group that was targeted was relatively small (as Judge Heytens indicated) and was targeted largely because of resource hoarding behavior.

Despite your hate, this experience will make us stronger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump made many life long Republicans vote for Biden. This nonsense has made me - a life long Democrat think about the Republican party. Or should I try to push for more moderate Democrats who believe in merit and less pandering? Quite a struggle.

There were many factors at play when they change the admissions. Curie was only part of it. Declining number of applicants, a very concentrated number of feeder schools, issues with the school itself including burnout and some toxicity, and more. There were also larger issues at play, including the changes in admissions at Maggie Walker and Stuy.

As a moderate (former Republican now Independent) who believes in meritocracy and also in the benefit in higher education of diversity instead of insularity (I have also seen these benefits at various jobs I've had), I think the changes are a step in the right direction. With some additional modifications, I think the change will benefit students at TJ and at all the regions' high schools.

Diversity is great. Viciously targeting a group is not.

Thankfully, the group that was targeted was relatively small (as Judge Heytens indicated) and was targeted largely because of resource hoarding behavior.

I've read the opinion and dissent and I'm not sure what you're referring to?

https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/221280R1.U.pdf

Ignorant and lazy progressives. Can't even be bothered to put in the effort to read That's exactly why they want a subjective process.