TJ Discrimination Case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

Any non-Asians that optimize their children's life experience towards admissions to colleges?

1) We’re not talking about colleges here, we’re talking about TJ, and that phenomenon is - while not exclusively - overwhelmingly Asian, and specifically South Asian. This is not a controversial statement.

2) Academic prestige is ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more important to Asian families than it is to families of any other ethnic or racial demographic. This is also not a controversial statement.

Lord! Your agreeing with your own statement doesn't make it right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

Any non-Asians that optimize their children's life experience towards admissions to colleges?

That doesn't count.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

Any non-Asians that optimize their children's life experience towards admissions to colleges?

1) We’re not talking about colleges here, we’re talking about TJ, and that phenomenon is - while not exclusively - overwhelmingly Asian, and specifically South Asian. This is not a controversial statement.

2) Academic prestige is ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more important to Asian families than it is to families of any other ethnic or racial demographic. This is also not a controversial statement.

Lord! Your agreeing with your own statement doesn't make it right.

It being right is what makes it right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

It's amazing how you can spew bigoted anti-Asian remarks on this forum with no repercussions.

They're not "remarks" - more like "observations" and "experiences". For them to be classified as "bigoted" they'd probably have to be false - but the application numbers and the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into the TJ prep industrial complex that is narrowly tailored to serve subsets of the Asian community (Curie, Sunshine, etc) prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, there are white folks who do the same damn thing, and it's equally contemptible. But not NEARLY in as massive numbers, and the TJ bumper sticker isn't anywhere close to as valued in those communities.

Oh, so this phenomenon is unique to TJ and Asians? Please. What about the college admissions cheating scandal and the overall college rat race, the sports hook, the fake essays, the billion dollar testing industry, and ridiculous parent behavior when it comes to all of these things? This is not Asian, this is a UMC human phenomenon.

The phenomenon with respect to TJ is nearly unique to Asians, yes. And that's all I'm concerned with because it's all I'm connected to.

Everything you mentioned up there is hugely problematic with the exception of sports - those are critical to the economy of colleges because of their impact on donations, applications, and overall interest in the school - and needs a solution.

But with respect to TJ, the trendline over the past 25-30 years is inarguable if you've been around long enough to see it.

For football and basketball you might have a point, but rich/UMC families use sports as a backdoor into the Ivies. Sports like crew, polo, squash and other obscure sports act as “affirmative action” for affluent kids. They are often white. The idea that they generate interest and donations for the school is the same rationale for keeping legacy admissions. They are both problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

It's amazing how you can spew bigoted anti-Asian remarks on this forum with no repercussions.

They're not "remarks" - more like "observations" and "experiences". For them to be classified as "bigoted" they'd probably have to be false - but the application numbers and the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into the TJ prep industrial complex that is narrowly tailored to serve subsets of the Asian community (Curie, Sunshine, etc) prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, there are white folks who do the same damn thing, and it's equally contemptible. But not NEARLY in as massive numbers, and the TJ bumper sticker isn't anywhere close to as valued in those communities.

Oh, so this phenomenon is unique to TJ and Asians? Please. What about the college admissions cheating scandal and the overall college rat race, the sports hook, the fake essays, the billion dollar testing industry, and ridiculous parent behavior when it comes to all of these things? This is not Asian, this is a UMC human phenomenon.

The phenomenon with respect to TJ is nearly unique to Asians, yes. And that's all I'm concerned with because it's all I'm connected to.

Everything you mentioned up there is hugely problematic with the exception of sports - those are critical to the economy of colleges because of their impact on donations, applications, and overall interest in the school - and needs a solution.

But with respect to TJ, the trendline over the past 25-30 years is inarguable if you've been around long enough to see it.

For football and basketball you might have a point, but rich/UMC families use sports as a backdoor into the Ivies. Sports like crew, polo, squash and other obscure sports act as “affirmative action” for affluent kids. They are often white. The idea that they generate interest and donations for the school is the same rationale for keeping legacy admissions. They are both problematic.

I don’t necessarily disagree with the idea that they’re problematic on some level, but at the same time those athletes, no matter the sport, stay connected through their sport and often end up in high-dollar professions in part because of their sport. Networking etc etc. And that drives donations, and donations drive endowments, and endowments pay for operating costs. It’s a business, and the sooner people get that, the easier it is to stomach. l

But remember, the product that the Ivies are selling is NOT education, it’s prestige. Care more about education and less about prestige and you and your children will live much happier lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

It's amazing how you can spew bigoted anti-Asian remarks on this forum with no repercussions.

They're not "remarks" - more like "observations" and "experiences". For them to be classified as "bigoted" they'd probably have to be false - but the application numbers and the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into the TJ prep industrial complex that is narrowly tailored to serve subsets of the Asian community (Curie, Sunshine, etc) prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, there are white folks who do the same damn thing, and it's equally contemptible. But not NEARLY in as massive numbers, and the TJ bumper sticker isn't anywhere close to as valued in those communities.

Oh, so this phenomenon is unique to TJ and Asians? Please. What about the college admissions cheating scandal and the overall college rat race, the sports hook, the fake essays, the billion dollar testing industry, and ridiculous parent behavior when it comes to all of these things? This is not Asian, this is a UMC human phenomenon.

The phenomenon with respect to TJ is nearly unique to Asians, yes. And that's all I'm concerned with because it's all I'm connected to.

Everything you mentioned up there is hugely problematic with the exception of sports - those are critical to the economy of colleges because of their impact on donations, applications, and overall interest in the school - and needs a solution.

But with respect to TJ, the trendline over the past 25-30 years is inarguable if you've been around long enough to see it.

For football and basketball you might have a point, but rich/UMC families use sports as a backdoor into the Ivies. Sports like crew, polo, squash and other obscure sports act as “affirmative action” for affluent kids. They are often white. The idea that they generate interest and donations for the school is the same rationale for keeping legacy admissions. They are both problematic.

DP. Let me ask a broader question.

Why, precisely, are things such as legacy admissions and athletic set-asides problematic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

It's amazing how you can spew bigoted anti-Asian remarks on this forum with no repercussions.

They're not "remarks" - more like "observations" and "experiences". For them to be classified as "bigoted" they'd probably have to be false - but the application numbers and the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into the TJ prep industrial complex that is narrowly tailored to serve subsets of the Asian community (Curie, Sunshine, etc) prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, there are white folks who do the same damn thing, and it's equally contemptible. But not NEARLY in as massive numbers, and the TJ bumper sticker isn't anywhere close to as valued in those communities.

Oh, so this phenomenon is unique to TJ and Asians? Please. What about the college admissions cheating scandal and the overall college rat race, the sports hook, the fake essays, the billion dollar testing industry, and ridiculous parent behavior when it comes to all of these things? This is not Asian, this is a UMC human phenomenon.

The phenomenon with respect to TJ is nearly unique to Asians, yes. And that's all I'm concerned with because it's all I'm connected to.

Everything you mentioned up there is hugely problematic with the exception of sports - those are critical to the economy of colleges because of their impact on donations, applications, and overall interest in the school - and needs a solution.

But with respect to TJ, the trendline over the past 25-30 years is inarguable if you've been around long enough to see it.

For football and basketball you might have a point, but rich/UMC families use sports as a backdoor into the Ivies. Sports like crew, polo, squash and other obscure sports act as “affirmative action” for affluent kids. They are often white. The idea that they generate interest and donations for the school is the same rationale for keeping legacy admissions. They are both problematic.

DP. Let me ask a broader question.

Why, precisely, are things such as legacy admissions and athletic set-asides problematic?

Pretty easy, legacy admissions is essentially favoritism since often legacy admits don't have to show anywhere as much rigor in the process as other applicants. As for athletic shoo ins, it shows that colleges prioritize sports and $$ over education (while there are exceptions, very many of the athletes are not into learning; they've been busy with sports their whole life).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

It's amazing how you can spew bigoted anti-Asian remarks on this forum with no repercussions.

They're not "remarks" - more like "observations" and "experiences". For them to be classified as "bigoted" they'd probably have to be false - but the application numbers and the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into the TJ prep industrial complex that is narrowly tailored to serve subsets of the Asian community (Curie, Sunshine, etc) prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, there are white folks who do the same damn thing, and it's equally contemptible. But not NEARLY in as massive numbers, and the TJ bumper sticker isn't anywhere close to as valued in those communities.

Oh, so this phenomenon is unique to TJ and Asians? Please. What about the college admissions cheating scandal and the overall college rat race, the sports hook, the fake essays, the billion dollar testing industry, and ridiculous parent behavior when it comes to all of these things? This is not Asian, this is a UMC human phenomenon.

The phenomenon with respect to TJ is nearly unique to Asians, yes. And that's all I'm concerned with because it's all I'm connected to.

Everything you mentioned up there is hugely problematic with the exception of sports - those are critical to the economy of colleges because of their impact on donations, applications, and overall interest in the school - and needs a solution.

But with respect to TJ, the trendline over the past 25-30 years is inarguable if you've been around long enough to see it.

For football and basketball you might have a point, but rich/UMC families use sports as a backdoor into the Ivies. Sports like crew, polo, squash and other obscure sports act as “affirmative action” for affluent kids. They are often white. The idea that they generate interest and donations for the school is the same rationale for keeping legacy admissions. They are both problematic.

DP. Let me ask a broader question.

Why, precisely, are things such as legacy admissions and athletic set-asides problematic?

Pretty easy, legacy admissions is essentially favoritism since often legacy admits don't have to show anywhere as much rigor in the process as other applicants. As for athletic shoo ins, it shows that colleges prioritize sports and $$ over education (while there are exceptions, very many of the athletes are not into learning; they've been busy with sports their whole life).

So what?

I mean, seriously, so what? In the case of legacies, schools are prioritizing taking care of their alumni by giving preferential treatment to their children to secure donations. In the case of athletics, schools are deciding that being competitive in those sports are important enough that they’re going to get preference in admissions.

My guess is that your argument is that those things SHOULDN’T be important to these prestigious institutions.

But they are. So the key question becomes - if you disagree with their priorities, why are you still obsessed with getting your kids in there? And the answer, invariably, is your thirst for prestige. But that means you have to play the game you’re in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

It's amazing how you can spew bigoted anti-Asian remarks on this forum with no repercussions.

They're not "remarks" - more like "observations" and "experiences". For them to be classified as "bigoted" they'd probably have to be false - but the application numbers and the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into the TJ prep industrial complex that is narrowly tailored to serve subsets of the Asian community (Curie, Sunshine, etc) prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, there are white folks who do the same damn thing, and it's equally contemptible. But not NEARLY in as massive numbers, and the TJ bumper sticker isn't anywhere close to as valued in those communities.

Oh, so this phenomenon is unique to TJ and Asians? Please. What about the college admissions cheating scandal and the overall college rat race, the sports hook, the fake essays, the billion dollar testing industry, and ridiculous parent behavior when it comes to all of these things? This is not Asian, this is a UMC human phenomenon.

The phenomenon with respect to TJ is nearly unique to Asians, yes. And that's all I'm concerned with because it's all I'm connected to.

Everything you mentioned up there is hugely problematic with the exception of sports - those are critical to the economy of colleges because of their impact on donations, applications, and overall interest in the school - and needs a solution.

But with respect to TJ, the trendline over the past 25-30 years is inarguable if you've been around long enough to see it.

For football and basketball you might have a point, but rich/UMC families use sports as a backdoor into the Ivies. Sports like crew, polo, squash and other obscure sports act as “affirmative action” for affluent kids. They are often white. The idea that they generate interest and donations for the school is the same rationale for keeping legacy admissions. They are both problematic.

DP. Let me ask a broader question.

Why, precisely, are things such as legacy admissions and athletic set-asides problematic?

Pretty easy, legacy admissions is essentially favoritism since often legacy admits don't have to show anywhere as much rigor in the process as other applicants. As for athletic shoo ins, it shows that colleges prioritize sports and $$ over education (while there are exceptions, very many of the athletes are not into learning; they've been busy with sports their whole life).

So what?

I mean, seriously, so what? In the case of legacies, schools are prioritizing taking care of their alumni by giving preferential treatment to their children to secure donations. In the case of athletics, schools are deciding that being competitive in those sports are important enough that they’re going to get preference in admissions.

My guess is that your argument is that those things SHOULDN’T be important to these prestigious institutions.

But they are. So the key question becomes - if you disagree with their priorities, why are you still obsessed with getting your kids in there? And the answer, invariably, is your thirst for prestige. But that means you have to play the game you’re in.

Exactly right, I disagree with the premise of colleges being primarily a business and secondarily an avenue for education; I think it's a terrible thing for our society and leads to messed up kids and families. I don't personally give a hoot about prestige, but if you look at top institutions, they obviously also provide an excellent education in many of their programs, if they didn't, they wouldn't have become prestigious. So yes, I think it's ridiculous that a large percentage of admits are not for education reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Exactly right, I disagree with the premise of colleges being primarily a business and secondarily an avenue for education; I think it's a terrible thing for our society

They are sports teams combined with hedge funds that teach some classes on the side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

They started dominating admissions because they became obsessed with TJ as a status symbol and started optimizing their children's life experience - through both ethical and unethical means - to maximize their likelihood of admission. Given that this is a deeply unhealthy behavior on many levels, it became critical for FCPS to make the admissions process as opaque as possible so as to disincentivize parents from engaging in this death spiral.

It's amazing how you can spew bigoted anti-Asian remarks on this forum with no repercussions.

They're not "remarks" - more like "observations" and "experiences". For them to be classified as "bigoted" they'd probably have to be false - but the application numbers and the tens of millions of dollars that have been poured into the TJ prep industrial complex that is narrowly tailored to serve subsets of the Asian community (Curie, Sunshine, etc) prove me right beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Now, there are white folks who do the same damn thing, and it's equally contemptible. But not NEARLY in as massive numbers, and the TJ bumper sticker isn't anywhere close to as valued in those communities.

Oh, so this phenomenon is unique to TJ and Asians? Please. What about the college admissions cheating scandal and the overall college rat race, the sports hook, the fake essays, the billion dollar testing industry, and ridiculous parent behavior when it comes to all of these things? This is not Asian, this is a UMC human phenomenon.

The phenomenon with respect to TJ is nearly unique to Asians, yes. And that's all I'm concerned with because it's all I'm connected to.

Everything you mentioned up there is hugely problematic with the exception of sports - those are critical to the economy of colleges because of their impact on donations, applications, and overall interest in the school - and needs a solution.

But with respect to TJ, the trendline over the past 25-30 years is inarguable if you've been around long enough to see it.

For football and basketball you might have a point, but rich/UMC families use sports as a backdoor into the Ivies. Sports like crew, polo, squash and other obscure sports act as “affirmative action” for affluent kids. They are often white. The idea that they generate interest and donations for the school is the same rationale for keeping legacy admissions. They are both problematic.

DP. Let me ask a broader question.

Why, precisely, are things such as legacy admissions and athletic set-asides problematic?

Pretty easy, legacy admissions is essentially favoritism since often legacy admits don't have to show anywhere as much rigor in the process as other applicants. As for athletic shoo ins, it shows that colleges prioritize sports and $$ over education (while there are exceptions, very many of the athletes are not into learning; they've been busy with sports their whole life).

So what?

I mean, seriously, so what? In the case of legacies, schools are prioritizing taking care of their alumni by giving preferential treatment to their children to secure donations. In the case of athletics, schools are deciding that being competitive in those sports are important enough that they’re going to get preference in admissions.

My guess is that your argument is that those things SHOULDN’T be important to these prestigious institutions.

But they are. So the key question becomes - if you disagree with their priorities, why are you still obsessed with getting your kids in there? And the answer, invariably, is your thirst for prestige. But that means you have to play the game you’re in.

Exactly right, I disagree with the premise of colleges being primarily a business and secondarily an avenue for education; I think it's a terrible thing for our society and leads to messed up kids and families. I don't personally give a hoot about prestige, but if you look at top institutions, they obviously also provide an excellent education in many of their programs, if they didn't, they wouldn't have become prestigious. So yes, I think it's ridiculous that a large percentage of admits are not for education reasons.

So either play the game or don’t.

They would cease to exist if not for the way that they exist. So either play the game or don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

It wasn't exactly "objective" since people found ways to subvert it by buying tests and seeking outside enrichment for $$$$ to give them an edge.

#fakenews

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the TJ students admitted under the new admissions process are just a bad fit. Whether it is lacking intelligence, motivation, preparation, or work ethic, it doesn't matter.

Sadly, even more, admitted under the old process, struggled to keep up. All that prep made average kids appear gifted who once at TJ just couldn't hack it.

You are deeply committed to the notion that the new admissions process is leading to happier students and better results, despite the lack of evidence to support that.

One could just as easily speculate - and it is speculation at this point - that the new admissions process will lead to a reduction in TJ's academic standards and more kids who struggle to keep up even with less rigor.

At least the kids you disparage so much worked hard to keep up and please their parents. One suspects many current students applied on a lark, were admitted to fill middle school quotas, and over time will contribute to TJ's just becoming another FCPS high school, although one with better labs and stronger academics than schools like Annandale, Lewis, and Mount Vernon.

DP, agree with this. If one looks at the top TJ kids, ALL of them work very hard, it's not like "Oh, they're so gifted they don't need to strive as much as the rest". This is such a silly American misconception that one is born gifted thus they don't need to work as hard as others who are not. The PPs who keep claiming that the kids who work hard only 'appear gifted' will have to prove their silly claim by 1) defining what the heck they're talking about when using the word 'gifted' and 2) showing how they know that kids who work hard are not 'gifted' by their definition. The data at TJ is very much like the data at other base schools: the kids who work hard, are dedicated, and passionate, do very well. It's as simple as that; those qualities lead to success. It has nothing to do with the suggestion that normal kids with above qualities and no learning issues cannot somehow cut it at TJ.

It is a silly notion to not believe that some kids are indeed smarter than others, and much smarter, without actually having to try that hard. I work in an industry that attracts a lot of really bright people, but everyone knows who the really, really, smart people are. They are the ones who have photographic memories and the ability to think, reason and cut through the weeds much faster than others.

They produce massive quantities of high-quality work quickly and efficiently. They also manage to have families that they spend time with, coach their kid's soccer team, and do things like community theater or partake in juried photography exhibitions in their spare time. They aren't on anti-depressants and they don't take drugs to increase their stamina. They just have a ton of stamina because the act of living doesn't wear them out. They have energy at the end of the day because everything is just easier for them.

Some people just have a greater capacity than others, it's not about being more organized or working harder, they are just brilliant. You know it when you see it.

As an adult, I know who I want on my team, and trust me it isn't the guy who stays up all night long burning the midnight oil, night after night, after night. Because inevitably they crash and burn...when one week rolls into the next, and the next, and they are just keeping up. So they quit and decide to stay home with the kids, or they get a gov't job or teach... all things they could have done without having to go through the experience of pushing themselves past exhaustion and then burning out and flaming out.

I've seen your now adult kids in the workplace and it isn't pretty.

Churn and burn baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the TJ students admitted under the new admissions process are just a bad fit. Whether it is lacking intelligence, motivation, preparation, or work ethic, it doesn't matter.

Sadly, even more, admitted under the old process, struggled to keep up. All that prep made average kids appear gifted who once at TJ just couldn't hack it.

You are deeply committed to the notion that the new admissions process is leading to happier students and better results, despite the lack of evidence to support that.

One could just as easily speculate - and it is speculation at this point - that the new admissions process will lead to a reduction in TJ's academic standards and more kids who struggle to keep up even with less rigor.

At least the kids you disparage so much worked hard to keep up and please their parents. One suspects many current students applied on a lark, were admitted to fill middle school quotas, and over time will contribute to TJ's just becoming another FCPS high school, although one with better labs and stronger academics than schools like Annandale, Lewis, and Mount Vernon.

DP, agree with this. If one looks at the top TJ kids, ALL of them work very hard, it's not like "Oh, they're so gifted they don't need to strive as much as the rest". This is such a silly American misconception that one is born gifted thus they don't need to work as hard as others who are not. The PPs who keep claiming that the kids who work hard only 'appear gifted' will have to prove their silly claim by 1) defining what the heck they're talking about when using the word 'gifted' and 2) showing how they know that kids who work hard are not 'gifted' by their definition. The data at TJ is very much like the data at other base schools: the kids who work hard, are dedicated, and passionate, do very well. It's as simple as that; those qualities lead to success. It has nothing to do with the suggestion that normal kids with above qualities and no learning issues cannot somehow cut it at TJ.

It is a silly notion to not believe that some kids are indeed smarter than others, and much smarter, without actually having to try that hard. I work in an industry that attracts a lot of really bright people, but everyone knows who the really, really, smart people are. They are the ones who have photographic memories and the ability to think, reason and cut through the weeds much faster than others.

They produce massive quantities of high-quality work quickly and efficiently. They also manage to have families that they spend time with, coach their kid's soccer team, and do things like community theater or partake in juried photography exhibitions in their spare time. They aren't on anti-depressants and they don't take drugs to increase their stamina. They just have a ton of stamina because the act of living doesn't wear them out. They have energy at the end of the day because everything is just easier for them.

Some people just have a greater capacity than others, it's not about being more organized or working harder, they are just brilliant. You know it when you see it.

As an adult, I know who I want on my team, and trust me it isn't the guy who stays up all night long burning the midnight oil, night after night, after night. Because inevitably they crash and burn...when one week rolls into the next, and the next, and they are just keeping up. So they quit and decide to stay home with the kids, or they get a gov't job or teach... all things they could have done without having to go through the experience of pushing themselves past exhaustion and then burning out and flaming out.

I've seen your now adult kids in the workplace and it isn't pretty.

Churn and burn baby.

Nailed it. Spot the hell on. The kids you’re referring to are derisively called the “try-hards” at TJ. They are overworked, miserable, and invariably end up at VCU despite their solid GPAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From yesterdays Supreme Court hearings..

“ But he suggested that programmes like the University of Texas’s Top Ten Percent plan (which offers admission to the top decile of every high school in the state) could be kosher if they can be justified by appeals to “socioeconomic” or “geographic”, rather than racial, diversity. ..”

Folks.. u can keep arguing about racial bias and discriminations against asians etc.. but it is futile. FCPS has no intent to discriminate against any particular race and that is why it has not been escalated to the Supreme Court.

But keep arguing. Youngkin and his crazy Indian appointee to the VA DOE are still clueless.

OK. But in return we have to agree to stop calling the process a better way of identifying the most gifted students in Fairfax County and admit it is set up to avoid that outcome (a class of the most gifted) by assuring spots based on geography and socioeconomic factors as opposed to objective merit. I am willing to do that and agree that FCPS has decided that is how they want to fill the class at TJ and move on. I feel badly for the more gifted and objectively meritorious students, but accept FCPS' decision. I accept that every middle school has county tax payers and thus deserve some seats to a public high school that serves the county. But I will not try to argue that it is set up to find the best and brightest as many continue to do.

The problem is there has never been a method that uses objective merit. Many parents put their thumb on the scale by using $$$ to enroll their kids in outside enrichment which skews these measures. A truly gifted student at a less affluent school can outperform a heavily prepped student at a wealthy school when given the same opportunities and since this is public school after all we need to be concerned about fairness.

There was a method that used objective merit when the school opened and until Asians dominated admissions.

It wasn't exactly "objective" since people found ways to subvert it by buying tests and seeking outside enrichment for $$$$ to give them an edge.

My neighbor was boasting about this after their kid got into TJ. Basically the prep centers performed exit interviews on students who'd recently taken the test to compile question banks. The county inevitably reused questions so many it seen them at the prep centers.