$24 billion NYC public schools only accepted 7 black students (of 895) to top magnet high schoool

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way to correct this is to take a more holistic approach to admissions instead of relying so much on a test. And, yes, this may result in the rejection of some qualified Asian students, but there are plenty of other top NYC high schools for them to excel at. And, at the end of the day, this is just high school, not college. It is not going to be the end all be all of anyone’s life. I am of the camp that it is better for college admissions to stand out and be the special person at a lesser school than to be in the middle of the pack at a school like Stuyvesant.

I'm reposting a comment from several pages earlier:

"Looking at admissions, saying “hmmm there are too many Asians” and then changing the system so that we get fewer Asians is the definition of institutional racism. Can’t wait until affirmative action is struck down and we can stop this diversity BS."

Do you not see that?

No. Change the system because kids that can handle the work are not getting in. Grow the program, let more kids in, even more Asians.

Have a minimum requirement and take all students that meet that requirement.

[Anonymous]

THis is a huge story about nothing.

https://nypost.com/2018/06/09/how-nonprofits-are-boosting-nycs-brightest-minority-students/

this is why there are only 7 at stuy.

Just as I suspected (and i might've posted this on here before).

If you are poor and URM and good enought for stuy, you are going to get into a better elite private for free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since in the end effort accounts for much more success than underlying potential, it seems like we should be aiming to target the hard workers, frankly.

In what world is that true?

In most of free and capitalistic Planet Earth.

Certainly not in Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, and many other sh*tholes.

So you'd rather have the surgeon who works really hard but incompetent over the surgeon who is lazy but competent? I can't think of a high-stakes career where it's more important to "work hard" than to actually be capable.

Exactly many great engineers are lazy, they will spend a whole year designing something to make their life easier.

A family friend was so annoyed by turning a pepper mill he invented the electric pepper mill... live in nantucket... never worked again, very lazy.

1. Nobody becomes an engineer if they are truly lazy.
2. Yay....let's extrapolate one irrelevant anecdote to validate the idiotic premise.

You don't know many engineers do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since in the end effort accounts for much more success than underlying potential, it seems like we should be aiming to target the hard workers, frankly.

In what world is that true?

In most of free and capitalistic Planet Earth.

Certainly not in Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, and many other sh*tholes.

So you'd rather have the surgeon who works really hard but incompetent over the surgeon who is lazy but competent? I can't think of a high-stakes career where it's more important to "work hard" than to actually be capable.

Exactly many great engineers are lazy, they will spend a whole year designing something to make their life easier.

A family friend was so annoyed by turning a pepper mill he invented the electric pepper mill... live in nantucket... never worked again, very lazy.

1. Nobody becomes an engineer if they are truly lazy.
2. Yay....let's extrapolate one irrelevant anecdote to validate the idiotic premise.

You don't know many engineers do you.

+1

-engineer

[Anonymous]

Athena Stenor, whose parents emigrated from Haiti, moved to Brooklyn in sixth grade from Florida. But she “wasn’t challenged” at IS 211 in Canarsie, she said: “My mom was tired of me being done with my homework in a half-hour.”

After joining Prep, she was accepted to Stuyvesant HS — the most coveted specialized school — but took a scholarship at Phillips Exeter Academy, a top-flight New Hampshire boarding school — and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s alma mater. Now a senior, she’ll attend Yale in the fall to study chemical engineering.

Black and Hispanic students make up only 4 percent of Stuyvesant’s 3,336 students, but 10 to 15 percent at many top private schools.

.....

the stuy story is debunked.

the sad thing is, the first person to make this comment in the media/twitter was Steve Sailer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:THis is a huge story about nothing.

https://nypost.com/2018/06/09/how-nonprofits-are-boosting-nycs-brightest-minority-students/

this is why there are only 7 at stuy.

Just as I suspected (and i might've posted this on here before).

If you are poor and URM and good enought for stuy, you are going to get into a better elite private for free.

Did you even read the article you posted? Here's the last sentence, a quote from a graduate of one of the nonprofits discussed that prepares minority students for private schools:

“There is no way private programs like Prep can ever be a substitute for the obligations New York City has to meet the needs of all its students,” she said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:THis is a huge story about nothing.

https://nypost.com/2018/06/09/how-nonprofits-are-boosting-nycs-brightest-minority-students/

this is why there are only 7 at stuy.

Just as I suspected (and i might've posted this on here before).

If you are poor and URM and good enought for stuy, you are going to get into a better elite private for free.

Did you even read the article you posted? Here's the last sentence, a quote from a graduate of one of the nonprofits discussed that prepares minority students for private schools:

“There is no way private programs like Prep can ever be a substitute for the obligations New York City has to meet the needs of all its students,” she said.

Don't conflate the obligations NYC has to meet the needs of its students with dumbing down stuy.
BTW, why does stuy always get all the blame for this but never hunter?

I have my own suspicions on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The "pool" in NYC is going to be heavily Asian no matter what. The stats at the "less competitive" magnets right now support this.

PP. Fair enough--I was just trying to think of a way to make the pool a bit more diverse, while also trying to scoop up a few more of the promising black/Latino kids. Perhaps the metrics would need to be shifted a bit, or allow additional, weighted metrics, in order to achieve more diversity in the pool. Just brainstorming.

I hear a lot about the "promising black/Latino kids" who are left behind. What about the vast pool of "promising Asian-American" who are left behind? Heck, what about the "proven Asian-American" who are left behind? There are vastly more Asian-American students who are rejected inspite of having all the credentials, drive and promise that other races who are chosen. The racism and the disregard shown towards the Asian-Americans by Whites as well as URMs is breathtaking in its arrogance, entitlement and blindness.

Oh, boo hoo. You are making this about anti-Asian racism when the school being discussed is over 70% Asian? Would you like this and all of the other schools of this nature to be 100% Asian? Just because a kid is Asian and does well on a test does not entitle him or her to go to any school they want. Welcome to the real world.

Of course they should! Why not? If a child is demonstrably smart, regardless of race, yes, they deserve to go to any school they want. Signed, non-Asian parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“This is actually tricky -
Admission to Stuyvesant is determined by a single test avail to all middle school students in NYC.There are no soft criteria-no interviews,no legacy favoritism, no strings to be pulled. It’s all abt test score which determines if you can handle academics.”

- Stephanie Ruhle, MSNBC

This. Admission is solely based on this one test. The test is blind to everything else like race. Stuyvesant has been majority Asian for the past 40+ yrs and periodically there has been an uproar about the lack of blacks and Hispanics. Nothing has changed and doubtful it ever will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:THis is a huge story about nothing.

https://nypost.com/2018/06/09/how-nonprofits-are-boosting-nycs-brightest-minority-students/

this is why there are only 7 at stuy.

Just as I suspected (and i might've posted this on here before).

If you are poor and URM and good enought for stuy, you are going to get into a better elite private for free.

Did you even read the article you posted? Here's the last sentence, a quote from a graduate of one of the nonprofits discussed that prepares minority students for private schools:

“There is no way private programs like Prep can ever be a substitute for the obligations New York City has to meet the needs of all its students,” she said.

Don't conflate the obligations NYC has to meet the needs of its students with dumbing down stuy.
BTW, why does stuy always get all the blame for this but never hunter?

I have my own suspicions on that.

Hunter is majority white and their kids are admitted in K based on an IQ test, observation, etc. similar to a private K. Not immigrant friendly. It’s a school favored by upper middle class, education sophisticated whites who speak English at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way to correct this is to take a more holistic approach to admissions instead of relying so much on a test. And, yes, this may result in the rejection of some qualified Asian students, but there are plenty of other top NYC high schools for them to excel at. And, at the end of the day, this is just high school, not college. It is not going to be the end all be all of anyone’s life. I am of the camp that it is better for college admissions to stand out and be the special person at a lesser school than to be in the middle of the pack at a school like Stuyvesant.

I'm reposting a comment from several pages earlier:

"Looking at admissions, saying “hmmm there are too many Asians” and then changing the system so that we get fewer Asians is the definition of institutional racism. Can’t wait until affirmative action is struck down and we can stop this diversity BS."

Do you not see that?

No. Change the system because kids that can handle the work are not getting in. Grow the program, let more kids in, even more Asians.

Have a minimum requirement and take all students that meet that requirement.

This most recent opinion I can agree with the spirit, but it's easier said than done. It's a thin line between giving all kids more opportunity, and simply watering down the best programs. I hope that's not what NYC does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:THis is a huge story about nothing.

https://nypost.com/2018/06/09/how-nonprofits-are-boosting-nycs-brightest-minority-students/

this is why there are only 7 at stuy.

Just as I suspected (and i might've posted this on here before).

If you are poor and URM and good enough for stuy, you are going to get into a better elite private for free.

Amazing. This is the same as what I see in MCPS. The top Black athletes in HS get poached by private schools in DMV after MS, and they get free HS education.

I had heard this from a friend who was a coach in WMHS a few years back.
Whenever the economy goes in a slump, full paying parents in private schools start to transfer their students to public schools. During those years, private schools are less apt to recruit black athletes with promise of free education, because their regular admission numbers are down. Invariably, the public schools gain really strong athletes in those years. All the times when the poor HS like Watkins Mill HS has done well, it has been because the private schools have not recruited these athletes enmasse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way to correct this is to take a more holistic approach to admissions instead of relying so much on a test. And, yes, this may result in the rejection of some qualified Asian students, but there are plenty of other top NYC high schools for them to excel at. And, at the end of the day, this is just high school, not college. It is not going to be the end all be all of anyone’s life. I am of the camp that it is better for college admissions to stand out and be the special person at a lesser school than to be in the middle of the pack at a school like Stuyvesant.

I'm reposting a comment from several pages earlier:

"Looking at admissions, saying “hmmm there are too many Asians” and then changing the system so that we get fewer Asians is the definition of institutional racism. Can’t wait until affirmative action is struck down and we can stop this diversity BS."

Do you not see that?

No. Change the system because kids that can handle the work are not getting in. Grow the program, let more kids in, even more Asians.

Have a minimum requirement and take all students that meet that requirement.

Great idea....let’s lower admissions standards. And given that those kids can’t even handle passing the bar on the entrance exam, what evidence do you have that they could handle the work once admitted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way to correct this is to take a more holistic approach to admissions instead of relying so much on a test. And, yes, this may result in the rejection of some qualified Asian students, but there are plenty of other top NYC high schools for them to excel at. And, at the end of the day, this is just high school, not college. It is not going to be the end all be all of anyone’s life. I am of the camp that it is better for college admissions to stand out and be the special person at a lesser school than to be in the middle of the pack at a school like Stuyvesant.

I'm reposting a comment from several pages earlier:

"Looking at admissions, saying “hmmm there are too many Asians” and then changing the system so that we get fewer Asians is the definition of institutional racism. Can’t wait until affirmative action is struck down and we can stop this diversity BS."

Do you not see that?

No. Change the system because kids that can handle the work are not getting in. Grow the program, let more kids in, even more Asians.

Have a minimum requirement and take all students that meet that requirement.

Great idea....let’s lower admissions standards. And given that those kids can’t even handle passing the bar on the entrance exam, what evidence do you have that they could handle the work once admitted?

I am not sure where you read..."lower the admissions standards"... there has to be a minimum score that kids get that shows they can handle the work.

Let's say ... out of 100 anything above a 93. So these poor kids that study 45 hours a week starting at 5 years old to get 100 just in case ... because they have to get the tippy top score.. could actually have lives. Do you think that kids that get top scores from test prep from the time they are 5 would not have been able to handle the work if they had not test prepped and were just really smart kids?

Do you think there is not 1 kid that did not get admitted that could handle the work?

It's weird because this method would actually favor Asians. But you don't like it. It seems like you don't really care about letting more Asians in as long as you can keep certain kids out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way to correct this is to take a more holistic approach to admissions instead of relying so much on a test. And, yes, this may result in the rejection of some qualified Asian students, but there are plenty of other top NYC high schools for them to excel at. And, at the end of the day, this is just high school, not college. It is not going to be the end all be all of anyone’s life. I am of the camp that it is better for college admissions to stand out and be the special person at a lesser school than to be in the middle of the pack at a school like Stuyvesant.

I'm reposting a comment from several pages earlier:

"Looking at admissions, saying “hmmm there are too many Asians” and then changing the system so that we get fewer Asians is the definition of institutional racism. Can’t wait until affirmative action is struck down and we can stop this diversity BS."

Do you not see that?

No. Change the system because kids that can handle the work are not getting in. Grow the program, let more kids in, even more Asians.

Have a minimum requirement and take all students that meet that requirement.

This most recent opinion I can agree with the spirit, but it's easier said than done. It's a thin line between giving all kids more opportunity, and simply watering down the best programs. I hope that's not what NYC does.

Why would it be "watered down" if every QUALIFIED student is admitted.