Waitlisted at TJ - now what?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Why should TJ be limited to students whose parents funnel their kids in the direction of prestigious academic competitions? Surely there should be some of these students at TJ - and there will ALWAYS be - but why should TJ only be populated with these types? And why should ALL of these types end up at TJ? Your facts are correct but the conclusions you're drawing from them are... bordering on insane.

Why are you assuming that the kids who win these awards are simply the products of parents who are funneling their kids in that direction rather than being highly motivated, highly gifted people? That to me is pretty insane and quite racist.

Check your reading comprehension. No one suggested that TJ should only be populated with "these types." People have suggested that race shouldn't be a factor at all when determining which kids have the most academic merit. No matter how you slice things, Asians are grossly outperforming equally privileged white kids. Perhaps the reasons for that should be investigated, rather than "reducing the number of Asians" by stuffing in a bunch of less qualified white and URM kids.


The only possible logic or inference behind your post was "All of these competitions are dominated by Asians and therefore it is right that they should receive an exceedingly high percentage of spaces at TJ." Else why share the statistics?

Like it or not, that's the point you made. And it's a bad point. So you're being held accountable for it.


No. The most logical inference is that Asians can't be viewed as "overrepresented" at elite academic institutions when they're even more overrepresented in any objective measure of merit. It is not unexpected nor is it indicative of preferential treatment to see Asians overrepresented at TJ when they are significantly more overrepresented in all high level academic arenas. It is right for Asians to receive whatever percentage of TJ spaces they earn in a truly race blind process, and not one using proxy racial quotas. It is wrong for any academic institution to have a goal of "reducing Asians." simple enough for you?
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



This.

If you believe in this overrepresentation myth then perhaps you should target D-1 sports. It seems like one race is overrepresented - should we allege thag the recruitment process is corrupt ?



Pro discrimination people would say ALL those winners cheated and bribed for their awards. Only the wealthy kids win. The judges are all racists etc.


More like the anti-diversity posters just don't realize the public schools serve a different purpose than professional sports.


D-1 sports are not professional sports. And if at public universities then these are partly funded by yours and my tax dollars. Dole seeking posters note the difference.
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



This.

If you believe in this overrepresentation myth then perhaps you should target D-1 sports. It seems like one race is overrepresented - should we allege thag the recruitment process is corrupt ?



Pro discrimination people would say ALL those winners cheated and bribed for their awards. Only the wealthy kids win. The judges are all racists etc.


More like the anti-diversity posters just don't realize the public schools serve a different purpose than professional sports.


D-1 sports are not professional sports. And if at public universities then these are partly funded by yours and my tax dollars. Dole seeking posters note the difference.


Why are D1 sports relevant to this conversation?
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



This.

If you believe in this overrepresentation myth then perhaps you should target D-1 sports. It seems like one race is overrepresented - should we allege thag the recruitment process is corrupt ?



Pro discrimination people would say ALL those winners cheated and bribed for their awards. Only the wealthy kids win. The judges are all racists etc.


More like the anti-diversity posters just don't realize the public schools serve a different purpose than professional sports.


D-1 sports are not professional sports. And if at public universities then these are partly funded by yours and my tax dollars. Dole seeking posters note the difference.


Why are D1 sports relevant to this conversation?


They aren't and who cares about the distinction between D1 and pro. Their point was still valid.
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?


Hard work, involved parents, education-focused home environment, and natural intelligence? Just guessing.
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?


Hard work, involved parents, education-focused home environment, and natural intelligence? Just guessing.


Dropping $20k Curie or places like that doesn't hurt either.
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?


Hard work, involved parents, education-focused home environment, and natural intelligence? Just guessing.


Dropping $20k Curie or places like that doesn't hurt either.


Methinks you got duped when you dropped 20k at Curie. Cause nobody else paid even half the amount.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

Why should TJ be limited to students whose parents funnel their kids in the direction of prestigious academic competitions? Surely there should be some of these students at TJ - and there will ALWAYS be - but why should TJ only be populated with these types? And why should ALL of these types end up at TJ? Your facts are correct but the conclusions you're drawing from them are... bordering on insane.


It is not only populated with these types. The number of kids at TJ who make USAMO is pretty small.
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?


Hard work, involved parents, education-focused home environment, and natural intelligence? Just guessing.


Dropping $20k Curie or places like that doesn't hurt either.


Methinks you got duped when you dropped 20k at Curie. Cause nobody else paid even half the amount.


The poster knows this, and they will followup with made up posts about we spent 10k at Curie over the years and another 10k at other prep places.
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?


Hard work, involved parents, education-focused home environment, and natural intelligence? Just guessing.


Dropping $20k Curie or places like that doesn't hurt either.


Methinks you got duped when you dropped 20k at Curie. Cause nobody else paid even half the amount.


The poster knows this, and they will followup with made up posts about we spent 10k at Curie over the years and another 10k at other prep places.


Classic Trumpian logic - if you repeat a lie often enough - it will appear to be the truth.
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:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?


Hard work, involved parents, education-focused home environment, and natural intelligence? Just guessing.


Dropping $20k Curie or places like that doesn't hurt either.


Methinks you got duped when you dropped 20k at Curie. Cause nobody else paid even half the amount.


The poster knows this, and they will followup with made up posts about we spent 10k at Curie over the years and another 10k at other prep places.


Classic Trumpian logic - if you repeat a lie often enough - it will appear to be the truth.


Dear Coalition dopes - Trump is on YOUR 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:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Can we re-label this thread as “so called adults, fighting over nothing..while their kids are just fine, enjoying HS”


Yes, sure, the changes doubled the number of URM and gave many low-income students opportunities that they were previously denied, but overall it's had little to no impact on anything. I read this thread as a few parents jockeying for an advantage at the expense of the public.


If you believe in entitlement to dole then you resent anyone that works hard. Nobody is asking for anything "at the expense of the public". The ask is to have a process that gives everyone an equal opportunity to public goods. The argument that "overrepresentation" of Asians is solely due to unfair advantages arising from cheating is not just dubious but nefarious.

Just because the new process doubled the URMs does not make the process fair. The end does not justify the means. Or else we can all dispense street justice.


But it was much more fair than the previous process since it gave all students a fair shot not just those at wealthy schools.



The standard cannot be that it was better than the previous one. Or else we can keep defending “separate but equal” as better than overt discrimination.

The previous process was broken. We are not defending that process. But the new one is discriminatory as well. It did not have to be implemented with haste during the pandemic. Proper consultation and change management would have resulted in better ideas and a less polarized community. There have been great ideas on this discussion board as well. Sadly it was not to be.

The new process penalizes Asians for who they are and where they live. It does not evaluate them as individuals. That is wrong.


Agree 100% with this. It is the way they implemented the changes that is the issue. If anyone has followed them closely as I did during the last 2 years, the deception is pure evil.


I agree that the old process was broken but can't see how a race blind admission process where a group that captures over 60% of all seats is being discriminated against.


The overwhelming majority of Regeneron Science Talent search winners are Asian. Likewise, the overwhelming majority of USAMO/JMO qualifiers are Asian. Mathcounts nationals top 56 had like 4 white kids and 52 Asians. Unless you think that every single prestigious STEM national competition is racist since Asians are so grossly overrepresented, maybe you should consider that the Asians generally have higher stats and are achieving at higher levels than everyone else. White people certainly are not underprivileged or under-resourced compared to Asians, yet white people are not achieving much at the highest levels.

Asians are being discriminated against if they have the academic stats to earn 70%+ of the seats, but were cut back to only 60% for reasons not related to academic merit.



Exactly. Why don't we think NBA is racist or Nobel Prize is racist.


For the same reason that we don't think those respective competitions are racist. There isn't a single person in the pro-reform camp who believes that Regeneron or Siemens or Mathcounts are racist.

What we believe is that while SOME of TJ should be represented by winners of these competitions, there's no value in ALL of TJ coming from that very small segment of the academic world.

You will notice that there are essentially zero pro-reform advocates who are out there shouting "60% Asian is STILL TOO MUCH! We should seek to bring that number down even FURTHER!" And that's after two years of this process!


That would be a legitimate viewpoint if the other kids at TJ were coming from a strong segment of the academic world that simply wasn't aligned with the high level competitions. In reality, they're coming from the segment that wasn't smart enough to qualify for Algebra in 7th, wasn't motivated enough to do any STEM ECs or achieve anything whatsoever, wasn't smart or motivated enough to take all Honors, and are just a bunch of random, somewhat above average, pretty good students who could write good essays about how they wanted to attend TJ. Don't act like TJ is handpicking from brilliant, diverse kids like Ivies do. They're picking a bunch of somewhat above average kids for the sole purpose of improving optics.


1) Approximately 20% of the Class of 2025 came in without being in Algebra in 7th grade. As opposed to about 7-8% previously.

2) You have no idea if they were motivated enough to do STEM ECs.

3) We don't have statistics on how many came in without being "all honors".

You literally don't know what you're talking about - like a novice chef, you're throwing your spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks.

You also literally don't know what you're talking about, considering that you're throwing out numbers that are quite incorrect. According to FCAG, the number of students in 8th grade Algebra increased from 4.5% for the class of 2024 to a whopping 31%. https://www.fcag.org/documents/TJ_Class_of_2025_analysis.pdf


Anti-Asian folks don't care about facts, especially the inconvenient ones like: How do Asian students who are mostly middle class with parents often not even able to speak English able to achieve more than wealthier white students, wealthier black and wealthier Hispanic students?


Hard work, involved parents, education-focused home environment, and natural intelligence? Just guessing.


Dropping $20k Curie or places like that doesn't hurt either.


Methinks you got duped when you dropped 20k at Curie. Cause nobody else paid even half the amount.


The poster knows this, and they will followup with made up posts about we spent 10k at Curie over the years and another 10k at other prep places.


Classic Trumpian logic - if you repeat a lie often enough - it will appear to be the truth.


Dear Coalition dopes - Trump is on YOUR side


I dont believe he has spoken yet on the issue. But he will definitely endorse the reform crowd. He could do with your skills - how to do drive racist policy without appearing to be a racist. Keep repeating lies (Curie @20K, FCPS has IRS data) and create your own alternate facts - all very Trumpian.

So dont give up hope - you may still get an endorsement - if not for your message but definitely for your tactics. Classic Trumpian.
Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)
Go to: