Cheating Scandal Triggering TJ Change

[Anonymous]

I’d love to see a limit on the number of TJ admits from one particular ES/MS feeder.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

Yes, but it is illegal to consider race for selection to these programs in the US. That is why the process is RACE BLIND.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

WRONG!!! The change was made to address the rampant cheating, which had resulted in only students from wealthy schools who could afford test prep being selected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

Not true. If the changes were made with an intent of discriminating by race, even racially neutral criteria can be found as discrimination. A voter ID case in I think Texas was decided in this way.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

WRONG!!! The change was made to address the rampant cheating, which had resulted in only students from wealthy schools who could afford test prep being selected.

Correct!

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

Yes, but it is illegal to consider race for selection to these programs in the US. That is why the process is RACE BLIND.

Yes, the process is race blind just as literacy tests and poll taxes were technically race blind. But the 2021 changes to the process were primarily driven by concerns over racial balance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

Not true. If the changes were made with an intent of discriminating by race, even racially neutral criteria can be found as discrimination. A voter ID case in I think Texas was decided in this way.

That was based on the voting rights act, not the 14th amendment.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

WRONG!!! The change was made to address the rampant cheating, which had resulted in only students from wealthy schools who could afford test prep being selected.

You can repeat that as many times as you want but it was clear throughout the rpocess and in the emails beteween FCPS board members that the primary concern was the lack of URM students at the school.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

WRONG!!! The change was made to address the rampant cheating, which had resulted in only students from wealthy schools who could afford test prep being selected.

You can repeat that as many times as you want but it was clear throughout the rpocess and in the emails beteween FCPS board members that the primary concern was the lack of URM students at the school.

The groups that were underrepresented by the old admissions process are:

Black kids
Latino kids
Poor kids of all races
Girls

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

WRONG!!! The change was made to address the rampant cheating, which had resulted in only students from wealthy schools who could afford test prep being selected.

This statement is categorically false.

Love,
Everyone's favorite pro-reform poster (the Savior, the Curie person, call me what you will)

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

WRONG!!! The change was made to address the rampant cheating, which had resulted in only students from wealthy schools who could afford test prep being selected.

You can repeat that as many times as you want but it was clear throughout the rpocess and in the emails beteween FCPS board members that the primary concern was the lack of URM students at the school.

The groups that were underrepresented by the old admissions process are:

Black kids
Latino kids
Poor kids of all races
Girls

and the first two groups (under-represented minorities) were the ones they cared about, as demonstrated by the emails and texts between the fcps board members.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/906227.page

Guys, this is as close to the "scandal" as I can find. One prep center was doing too good. I can see they prepped similar tests and the students, in their excitement and remember they are 14, boasted that they got the "exact" prep question.

Harvesting past test question isn't cheating. Guys.

DP. Agree.

Plus: THIS THREAD WAS STARTED FOUR (4) YEARS AGO !! But someone bumped it: WHY??

Seems clear that someone out there has a major grudge against TJ, the Curie test prep center, or both.

To that person: please who you are and what your motive is here?

I've been as big a contributor to this discussion as anyone. My intent in initially bringing the matter to light was to highlight the fact that there had been students getting into TJ for years on largely false pretenses.

What happened at Curie (and folks, please stop arguing that it didn't happen - you're living in an alternate reality) was designed to create imbalances in the TJ Admissions process, and did so successfully.

Worse yet, the flagship course that created these imbalances and provided undeserved advantages:
- were available for the low, low price of $5,000;
- committed students to 16 months of targeted study specifically to crack the TJ exam, which was supposed to be secured;
- appeared based on their published list to be only available to students of South Asian descent.

Did Curie do anything wrong? The answer is probably no. But did they expose a massive flaw in the TJ Admissions process that needed to be rectified, creating conditions that led to the adoption of the new admissions process so reviled by the community that they aim to exclusively serve? Yes, yes they did.

As I've said many times before, I bear no specific ill will towards Curie, except inasmuch as they are part of the very problematic industry that seeks to create imbalances in elite school admissions processes that favor families with resources. All I ever wanted was for FCPS to adjust the TJ Admissions process so that families would not be directly and obviously rewarded for participating in that industry.

And again, I and my people won. Convincingly, resoundingly, and with yet another 12-0 School Board and with the Supreme Court declining to take the case, seemingly permanently.

Again, saying you "won" is meaningless.

Your barometer is in part a 12-0 vote from a school board to support a resolution it created itself - with well-known dubious motives - after its members paid a PR firm to tell themselves what a good idea it was. The school board is a political body, and anyone knows that policies that look like they support equity receive overwhelming popular support, independent of their merit. Nobody's surprised by a unanimous vote from this echo chamber.

As to the Suproeme Court, realize that we live in America, where stupid, self-defeating ideas are legal, and hypocrisy isn't illegal up to a point. A failure of the Supreme Court to hear the case should not be interpreted as a success.

What you've accomplished is to push forward an unsatisfactory policy in wait of a better one to replace it. Yet you're harming the ability to do so by throwing around silly phrases like "we won".

The failure of the supreme court to hear this case highlights the fact that facially neutral laws are not violations of the 14th amendment merely because they were born of racist motives.
It took the voting rights act explicitly outlawing literacy tests and poll taxes, they didn't get outlawed by the civil rights act or the 14th amendment.
It's why racially motivated voter ID laws are perfectly legal, because they are in fact facially neutral.
This new admissions process is basically a modified lottery and is non-discriminatory, almost by definition (it also doesn't filter for merit).

We probably can't win this one in the courts.
We will have to win at the ballot box.

It does filter for “merit”.

30% of the students in FCPS are qualified to apply. After that it's so subjective that it's basically random.

So a lottery for merit students. Sounds good to me.

Only 20% of students get into AAP.

Picking TJ admits from a pool of 30% of 8th graders is merit in a very mediocre world.
So it is a lottery with a very low hurdle for merit.
We are not anywhere close to picking the best students.

Depends on how you define “best”.

No, it doesn't. Picking randomly from the top 30% of students is not "best" under any reasonable definition.

It could be the best allocation of seats for interested kids across the county.

It's the best method of increasing urm without express racial discrimination.

If merit has any value at all then you could have this exact same process plus a test so that you at least get the most capable kids from each of the schools.

There is certainly room for improvement in the current process, but it’s much better than the last one.

Yes, of your primary concern is racial balancing

That's illegal in the US. If you can show that's going on you can win a multi-million dollar lawsuit. Good luck!

Wanting racial balance is not illegal. Changing a merit based process to a race neutral process that de-emphasizes merit in order to achieve more racial balancing is not illegal. That's not affirmative action. No race is getting a preference in the process. The intent behind the change was race driven but the process itself is not racially discriminatory.

WRONG!!! The change was made to address the rampant cheating, which had resulted in only students from wealthy schools who could afford test prep being selected.

You can repeat that as many times as you want but it was clear throughout the rpocess and in the emails beteween FCPS board members that the primary concern was the lack of URM students at the school.

The groups that were underrepresented by the old admissions process are:

Black kids
Latino kids
Poor kids of all races
Girls

Right. And I can’t see anything wrong with trying to provide opportunities to kids from varying and diverse backgrounds.