New Jay Matthew's op ed on TJ
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
the outcome wasn't. Most segregation post 60s is race neutral on it's face- that's how it's allowed to persist for as long as it does |
Anonymous
The outcome was race neutral. You just don't like the outcome. |
Anonymous
Asians are more likely to be at certain schools, which got many more admissions to TJ. Now those schools have had their admissions reduced to a certain number, lowering the number of Asians who will get in. This might get offset by Asians in other schools getting in with the per school quotas at other schools in Fairfax. Some of the Asians in the former schools will also be moving to the latter schools to take advantage of the quotas. However, if Asians take all the seats in the other schools, the people who instituted the plan will not be happy. Their goal is more black and brown people. If there is an essay requirement, that will be graded with an eye on getting more minorities(non-Asian) admitted. So Asians from some school will be replaced by Asians from other schools, and some Asians might move to get in from a different schools? So you admit Asians aren't being excluded. You even entertain the possibility that Asians might still dominate TJ admissions and people potentially being mad about that. Your definition of excluded is very odd. |
Anonymous
DP. And the new standard is race neutral and now you don't like the potential outcome. Oh well. |
Anonymous
Aren't title 1 schools funded at a higher level to begin with? |
Anonymous
|
This sounds wonderful! So glad to hear that TJ is modernizing its admissions to be less biased. |
Anonymous
Equality of choice is what we have. Equality of outcome is what they want. Forced social engineering paid for by you and me. Won't end well. |
Anonymous
You can drag a horse to the water.. |
Anonymous
Let's let the court decide if its race neutral. "Experience factors" are not race neutral. |
Anonymous
| Curious as to whether the change in the TJ admissions policy is incentivizing families who aspired for their kids to attend TJ to relocate to areas that have sent few kids to TJ or instead just to buy in some of the higher performing pyramids like Langley, McLean, Oakton, and Chantilly. Clearly TJ as it previously operated will no longer exist. The only question is whether the next version will be nearly as much of a draw for top-achieving kids. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
Gladly. I’m certain the courts will see through the BS and lies spun by the opposition to reform. The experience factors do not include race. |
Anonymous
| Brabrand and others talked frequently about race. The motive was clear. |
Anonymous
The result of this will be well-off parents sending their kids to private schools, and further harming the public school system. (ps: this is why conservatives are attacking TJ, and also why the Koch network of billionaires is funding the lawsuits against TJ. They don't care about our kids. Their goal is personal enrichment.) |
Anonymous
Spots in good privates are finite. If a would be TJ kid takes one, then that kid either goes to public or pushes out another kid at a different private. There aren't enough open spots at good privates to absorb TJ students (assuming that 1) TJ parents could afford the 40k a year tuition and 2) that those schools would want them) |