New TJ Lawsuit Filed 3/10/21 by Pacific Legal Foundation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tests are so easy to cheat on with the Internet it can't be stopped. That's why schools are moving away from entrance tests and SATs. TJ needed to modernize too.

So my DD took the TJ admission essay last week. After she was finished I’ve asked her if she had to turn on the camera. She said no. So I asked how would TJ know who is cheating or not. She thought about 5 sec and said “I guess I’m not getting into TJ” and we both LOL.

Yeah, I’ve heard lots of college students on spring break were hired to take the essays

Can't wait for Netflix's season 2 of Operation Varsity Blue: TJ edition.

Do you think that will be paid for by conservative billionaires like the lawsuit is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tests are so easy to cheat on with the Internet it can't be stopped. That's why schools are moving away from entrance tests and SATs. TJ needed to modernize too.

So my DD took the TJ admission essay last week. After she was finished I’ve asked her if she had to turn on the camera. She said no. So I asked how would TJ know who is cheating or not. She thought about 5 sec and said “I guess I’m not getting into TJ” and we both LOL.

Yeah, I’ve heard lots of college students on spring break were hired to take the essays

Likely by the same people who paid thousands to circumvent the old old test. Cheaters are going to cheat as long as there's something to cheat on. And when FCPS also gets rid of the essay because it's being gamed, we'll hear how racist FCPS is. SMH.

[Anonymous]

Eliminate TJ. Fund students, not systems. Let the families choose their own education format.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Eliminate TJ. Fund students, not systems. Let the families choose their own education format.

How about send all the money, not just for TJ, but for FCPS too, to parents to use at whatever school they like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

PLF is a LIBERTARIAN organization. Discrimination in education is a very small subset of the cases they take. They take cases to try and vindicate the rights of individuals from overreaching government action infringing on fundamental rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

PLF is a LIBERTARIAN organization. Discrimination in education is a very small subset of the cases they take. They take cases to try and vindicate the rights of individuals from overreaching government action infringing on fundamental rights.

Libertarian is a word that intellectually dishonest conservatives use to justify using their individual rights to deny others of theirs.

[Anonymous]

Libertarian is a word that intellectually dishonest conservatives use to justify using their individual rights to deny others of theirs.

+100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

PLF is a LIBERTARIAN organization. Discrimination in education is a very small subset of the cases they take. They take cases to try and vindicate the rights of individuals from overreaching government action infringing on fundamental rights.

Libertarian is a word that intellectually dishonest conservatives use to justify using their individual rights to deny others of theirs.

At least you agree that it is "their individual rights" being litigated. Typical Democrat with your identity politics arguing for support for overreaching by the state and dividing people into racial buckets for quotas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

PLF is a LIBERTARIAN organization. Discrimination in education is a very small subset of the cases they take. They take cases to try and vindicate the rights of individuals from overreaching government action infringing on fundamental rights.

Libertarian is a word that intellectually dishonest conservatives use to justify using their individual rights to deny others of theirs.

At least you agree that it is "their individual rights" being litigated. Typical Democrat with your identity politics arguing for support for overreaching by the state and dividing people into racial buckets for quotas.

A libertarian believes that it is their right to swing their fist no matter the situation. A reasonable person understands that their right to swing their fist ends at your nose.

Conservative governments divide people into racial buckets for quotas all the time. The most obvious forms of this are redlining and gerrymandering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

PLF is a LIBERTARIAN organization. Discrimination in education is a very small subset of the cases they take. They take cases to try and vindicate the rights of individuals from overreaching government action infringing on fundamental rights.

Libertarian is a word that intellectually dishonest conservatives use to justify using their individual rights to deny others of theirs.

At least you agree that it is "their individual rights" being litigated. Typical Democrat with your identity politics arguing for support for overreaching by the state and dividing people into racial buckets for quotas.

Do you know what a iota is? There is no quota in the new TJ admissions process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

PLF is a LIBERTARIAN organization. Discrimination in education is a very small subset of the cases they take. They take cases to try and vindicate the rights of individuals from overreaching government action infringing on fundamental rights.

Libertarian is a word that intellectually dishonest conservatives use to justify using their individual rights to deny others of theirs.

At least you agree that it is "their individual rights" being litigated. Typical Democrat with your identity politics arguing for support for overreaching by the state and dividing people into racial buckets for quotas.

Do you know what a iota is? There is no quota in the new TJ admissions process.

DP. We all know there are soft quotas in the new process and that Karen Keys Gamarra and Melanie Meren will be chewing up months on end of the School Board's time again next year if they don't like the results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Pacific Legal Foundation is a Sacramento, California-based legal organization that was established March 5, 1973 [1] to support pro-business causes. In recent years, it has taken a lead in pursuing anti-affirmative action policies.

It is the key right-wing public interest litigation firm in a network of similar organizations funded initially by Scaife Foundations money across the USA to support capitalism and oppose environmental and health activism and government regulation.

The organization has been [2] partially funded by a range of corporations and conservative foundations, including by the Koch family Claude R. Lambe Foundation in 1998.[1]

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an associate member of the State Policy Network.

State Policy Network is a Koch org.



Oh look, a lawsuit funded by rightwing billionaires to harm public education!!

Knock me over with a feather.

Not only to harm public education but also to specifically harm *gasp* Black people!!!

Well, I never.....

PLF is a LIBERTARIAN organization. Discrimination in education is a very small subset of the cases they take. They take cases to try and vindicate the rights of individuals from overreaching government action infringing on fundamental rights.

Libertarian is a word that intellectually dishonest conservatives use to justify using their individual rights to deny others of theirs.

At least you agree that it is "their individual rights" being litigated. Typical Democrat with your identity politics arguing for support for overreaching by the state and dividing people into racial buckets for quotas.

Do you know what a iota is? There is no quota in the new TJ admissions process.

DP. We all know there are soft quotas in the new process and that Karen Keys Gamarra and Melanie Meren will be chewing up months on end of the School Board's time again next year if they don't like the results.

I love it when people say things like "we all know" when you don't know anything. This is going to be a multi-year process, as it always is when there is a major change in admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

...

So why not a hybrid approach? Allocate some number (or range) of seats (100, 150, 200, etc.) to the students who seem most likely to be truly "underserved" at their base school and in greatest need the unique academic environment of TJ to thrive and reach their potential. Admit those kids on merit alone... regardless of race, base school, etc. Then for the large swath of kids who are "qualified" and "could thrive" at TJ, take the more holistic approach of looking at total contribution to the environment, including their non-STEM academics, extracurriculars, teacher recs, and so on, as well as taking a lens towards the overall diversity of the class across numerous dimensions (geographic, racial, gender, etc.) to try and put together a balanced class that should help improve the hyper-competitiveness issues, the equity and perception issues, while simultaneously not missing those most in need of TJ's targeted program.

Is there a test in your plan? If there is a test, then you are basically saying put everyone in the semi-final pool and do the holistic review they've been doing for over a decade.

It doesn't sound like the "holistic review they've been doing for over a decade" has been producing that sort of outcome (a balanced/diversified class, focused on overall contribution to the school environment)... if that's the intent, it needs to be redone. Does the current process also explicitly attempt to delineate between those who would be underserved at their base school vs. those where TJ would be more of a "nice to have" but could still thrive at base school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

...

So why not a hybrid approach? Allocate some number (or range) of seats (100, 150, 200, etc.) to the students who seem most likely to be truly "underserved" at their base school and in greatest need the unique academic environment of TJ to thrive and reach their potential. Admit those kids on merit alone... regardless of race, base school, etc. Then for the large swath of kids who are "qualified" and "could thrive" at TJ, take the more holistic approach of looking at total contribution to the environment, including their non-STEM academics, extracurriculars, teacher recs, and so on, as well as taking a lens towards the overall diversity of the class across numerous dimensions (geographic, racial, gender, etc.) to try and put together a balanced class that should help improve the hyper-competitiveness issues, the equity and perception issues, while simultaneously not missing those most in need of TJ's targeted program.

Is there a test in your plan? If there is a test, then you are basically saying put everyone in the semi-final pool and do the holistic review they've been doing for over a decade.

It doesn't sound like the "holistic review they've been doing for over a decade" has been producing that sort of outcome (a balanced/diversified class, focused on overall contribution to the school environment)... if that's the intent, it needs to be redone. Does the current process also explicitly attempt to delineate between those who would be underserved at their base school vs. those where TJ would be more of a "nice to have" but could still thrive at base school?

You're on the right track here. I think the issue is that the exam created a barrier both at the start of the old process - eliminating students based on their performance relative to others - and within the holistic review process. Remember, they took test scores into account at the second level as well. And we know this because of the statistics that the Admissions Office would push out each year in their "reality checks", where performance on the exams was significantly higher among admittees than the pool of semifinalists.

But yes - contribution to the overall environment really needs to be factor 1A along with ability to thrive in the environment. Overselecting for exam performance necessarily underselects for those overall contributions because exam prep replaces so many other quality experiences.