U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Friday called for a response from a Virginia 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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

No, Most people will be on board with diversity. But, the issue is how fcps approached and implemented the problem. It was shady and shutdown any public dialog. There were objections/comments with in the board itself. Take for example, they knowingly undermined AAP by implementing quotas based on attending schools instead of base schools. They deliberately flattened out GPA (or unweighted), which actually makes it a disadvantage for kids who takes tougher courses. In addition, the cumulative GPA of 1.25 years worth of course work given same points as one single essay kids write in 30min. If this is not enough, they then played with bonus points (a.k.a 'other experience' (??) factors) to figure how many points needs to be added to get the 'desired' effect.

It felt like intent wasn't really to cut down all of asians. It was only to hurt specific group of kids who come from academic focused families, likely in AAP, focus on courses/grades etc and guess what asians represent a significant percent of this group.

I don't mind removing test that can be prepped or not giving any weight to cookie cutter or expensive extra curricular activities that only certain kids can take advantage of. Diversity is good, but do not make deliberate changes to undermine/hurt specific groups of population. This is what makes it annoying and frustrating. All they need to do is remove the weightage to any factors that are not available to all the kids and then do a fair evaluation on top of that.

True, if you dig down all changes cumulatively had a single purpose, which is to intentionally hurt kids coming from middle/upper middle class families who tend to concentrate at AAP centers or 'good' schools. I wouldn't say that this is to hurt 'all' asians, but its no surprise that 'certain' asians represent a majority of the kids who are negatively effected. Imagine, all their advanced courses, grades etc get a max score of 300 points and one stupid science essay gets the equal treatment and so is the portrait sheet. Then a 'whopping' 300 points are given to 'other experience' factors. So, these kids who do not qualify for any of these experience factors have a max score of 900 out of total 1200 points. Can anyone honestly tell me if this is not intentional and well thought out plan to hurt these specific kids? I honestly don't understand why everyone is ok with it and don't understand the implications.

Well said.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

Define diversity - if you do it by skin color, you've already lost the argument. Prove that TJ is not diverse; again if you come up with a race chart, you've already lost.

And attituteds like that are why the school is going to end up closed or as an academy

In other words, you are either unable to or unwilling to even define diversity except in a racist way, and would rather that a school close down than have it not be involved in implementing your desired racist policies.

You've solved the problems. No black kids at a school isn't an issue if mentioning that there are no black kids at the school is racist. Congratulations.

That's not what I said. If you can tie the lack of black kids at a school to explicitly racist policies, such as affirmative action, or facially neutral policies implemented with racist intent, like the new TJ admission policies, then we can absolutely work together to remove those barriers to black kids. Absent such evidence, it's improper to identify racial disparity as a "problem" that needs solving.

You have failed at every turn here, both in defining the situation and in defining the appropriateness of solving it. But I'll play your game, if only because it's satisfying to defeat you on your own illegitimate turf.

Black and Hispanic families in the Northern Virginia area are significantly less wealthy by every reasonable measure than white and Asian families, and ESPECIALLY those white and Asian families who historically attend TJ. This is not up for debate.

Standardized exams of all types significantly favor those families with the resources to prepare for those exams - this isn't up for debate either. And it becomes even MORE the case when the school system chooses a secured exam that isn't supposed to have any available resources for prep - in that case, expensive prep with privileged access becomes even MORE valuable.

Therefore, engaging in an admissions process that uses relative (importantly, not absolute, but relative) performance on a standardized exam both as a gatekeeper for eligibility (as was the case in the semifinalist process) and for eventual selection (as evidenced by the huge delta in semifinalist scores and offered scores) is pretty explicitly racist.

You're done. Go home.

LMAO. All that chest-puffing and don't even understand the definition of explicit.

No, I do. It's explicit because everyone in academia KNOWS that standardized exams are problematic along both racial and socioeconomic lines.

You want to play with the lines between implicit and explicit racism. Doing that in bad faith is explicitly racist.

That's not the definition of explicit racism. You are wasting everyone's time insisting that it is. Reality does not care about the distortion field inside your head.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

Absolutely, you need action. You need to set reasonable timelines (2 years may be) and reach out to all impacted folks. Given the amount of discussion this "Change" has triggered (including on this board) and the fact that the Supreme Court has taken notice - the inadequacy of the process that Braband and his political cronies conducted is in full view.

Instead of running models that showed racial yields, they could have run models on how schools like Mclean would have been impacted. They could have addressed all of this one go to make change palatable to the impacted parties. You would never get everyone on board but you would show you care. The school board leveraged their 12-0 mandate to take a shot at political glory. And are now entrenched in their position because their careers are on the line and even a minor concession will likely be against their legal strategy. All of us eff-up at work sometimes. I have greater respect for those that own up to it and move on. Not this school board.

+1. If you read the FCPS materials in the litigation, it appears McLean picked up about 30 additional freshmen this year due to the TJ admissions change, which will translate to 120 over four years. Over that same period, they plan to move 190 kids to Langley, so the net effect is to bring the enrollment down by about 70 kids before taking into account the impact of all the new housing getting built in Tysons and West Falls that will feed entirely into McLean and Marshall.

Yet they’ve spent maybe 5-10 hours addressing the overcrowding at McLean over the past several years, and done nothing to plan for the school’s need for a permanent addition, while spending many months obsessing about TJ admissions in the elusive search for “equity” and spending God knows how many hours and dollars on litigation (even with some of the lawyers not charging FCPS).

It’s insane that that they think the community isn’t paying attention to what they obsess about and what they choose to completely ignore. Elaine Tholen, Karl Frisch, and the at-large members like Karen Keys Gamarra should get ready to defend their records, because we are absolutely going to come after them if they try to run again next year. Listening to Keys Gamarra complain last night about the need to listen to the community felt like reliving some of the abuse of the past several years, because she has never listened to Asian families about TJ or McLean families begging for a sensible long-term plan to address the overcrowding at MHS and the growth in the Tysons/McLean area. The one time I was able to bend her ear about it directly she admitted that she didn’t even remember the difference between Langley and McLean - she just treats us all as equally not worthy of her attention.

FCPS would stop obsessing about TJ admissions if a very small subset of the community would quit wasting everyone's time by challenging whatever they come up with.

+1000. It's worth remembering that TJ admissions was a problem that had to be solved - WITHOUT QUESTION - because of the pandemic. They couldn't administer the exam as a result of it. At the exact same time, more data was released that strongly indicated that the previous admissions process was giving a deeply unfair advantage to communities with resources (witness the <1% FARMS rate). It made all the sense in the world to try to kill two birds with one stone given the situation at hand. But the status quo simply was not an option for Class of 2025 and there's no argument possible that it was.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

Absolutely, you need action. You need to set reasonable timelines (2 years may be) and reach out to all impacted folks. Given the amount of discussion this "Change" has triggered (including on this board) and the fact that the Supreme Court has taken notice - the inadequacy of the process that Braband and his political cronies conducted is in full view.

Instead of running models that showed racial yields, they could have run models on how schools like Mclean would have been impacted. They could have addressed all of this one go to make change palatable to the impacted parties. You would never get everyone on board but you would show you care. The school board leveraged their 12-0 mandate to take a shot at political glory. And are now entrenched in their position because their careers are on the line and even a minor concession will likely be against their legal strategy. All of us eff-up at work sometimes. I have greater respect for those that own up to it and move on. Not this school board.

+1. If you read the FCPS materials in the litigation, it appears McLean picked up about 30 additional freshmen this year due to the TJ admissions change, which will translate to 120 over four years. Over that same period, they plan to move 190 kids to Langley, so the net effect is to bring the enrollment down by about 70 kids before taking into account the impact of all the new housing getting built in Tysons and West Falls that will feed entirely into McLean and Marshall.

Yet they’ve spent maybe 5-10 hours addressing the overcrowding at McLean over the past several years, and done nothing to plan for the school’s need for a permanent addition, while spending many months obsessing about TJ admissions in the elusive search for “equity” and spending God knows how many hours and dollars on litigation (even with some of the lawyers not charging FCPS).

It’s insane that that they think the community isn’t paying attention to what they obsess about and what they choose to completely ignore. Elaine Tholen, Karl Frisch, and the at-large members like Karen Keys Gamarra should get ready to defend their records, because we are absolutely going to come after them if they try to run again next year. Listening to Keys Gamarra complain last night about the need to listen to the community felt like reliving some of the abuse of the past several years, because she has never listened to Asian families about TJ or McLean families begging for a sensible long-term plan to address the overcrowding at MHS and the growth in the Tysons/McLean area. The one time I was able to bend her ear about it directly she admitted that she didn’t even remember the difference between Langley and McLean - she just treats us all as equally not worthy of her attention.

FCPS would stop obsessing about TJ admissions if a very small subset of the community would quit wasting everyone's time by challenging whatever they come up with.

+1000. It's worth remembering that TJ admissions was a problem that had to be solved - WITHOUT QUESTION - because of the pandemic. They couldn't administer the exam as a result of it. At the exact same time, more data was released that strongly indicated that the previous admissions process was giving a deeply unfair advantage to communities with resources (witness the <1% FARMS rate). It made all the sense in the world to try to kill two birds with one stone given the situation at hand. But the status quo simply was not an option for Class of 2025 and there's no argument possible that it was.

I'm always wary when someone insists that a position cannot be questioned or challenged. It's the mark of an unreasonable closed-minded person with authoritarian and iliberal tendencies.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

Absolutely, you need action. You need to set reasonable timelines (2 years may be) and reach out to all impacted folks. Given the amount of discussion this "Change" has triggered (including on this board) and the fact that the Supreme Court has taken notice - the inadequacy of the process that Braband and his political cronies conducted is in full view.

Instead of running models that showed racial yields, they could have run models on how schools like Mclean would have been impacted. They could have addressed all of this one go to make change palatable to the impacted parties. You would never get everyone on board but you would show you care. The school board leveraged their 12-0 mandate to take a shot at political glory. And are now entrenched in their position because their careers are on the line and even a minor concession will likely be against their legal strategy. All of us eff-up at work sometimes. I have greater respect for those that own up to it and move on. Not this school board.

+1. If you read the FCPS materials in the litigation, it appears McLean picked up about 30 additional freshmen this year due to the TJ admissions change, which will translate to 120 over four years. Over that same period, they plan to move 190 kids to Langley, so the net effect is to bring the enrollment down by about 70 kids before taking into account the impact of all the new housing getting built in Tysons and West Falls that will feed entirely into McLean and Marshall.

Yet they’ve spent maybe 5-10 hours addressing the overcrowding at McLean over the past several years, and done nothing to plan for the school’s need for a permanent addition, while spending many months obsessing about TJ admissions in the elusive search for “equity” and spending God knows how many hours and dollars on litigation (even with some of the lawyers not charging FCPS).

It’s insane that that they think the community isn’t paying attention to what they obsess about and what they choose to completely ignore. Elaine Tholen, Karl Frisch, and the at-large members like Karen Keys Gamarra should get ready to defend their records, because we are absolutely going to come after them if they try to run again next year. Listening to Keys Gamarra complain last night about the need to listen to the community felt like reliving some of the abuse of the past several years, because she has never listened to Asian families about TJ or McLean families begging for a sensible long-term plan to address the overcrowding at MHS and the growth in the Tysons/McLean area. The one time I was able to bend her ear about it directly she admitted that she didn’t even remember the difference between Langley and McLean - she just treats us all as equally not worthy of her attention.

FCPS would stop obsessing about TJ admissions if a very small subset of the community would quit wasting everyone's time by challenging whatever they come up with.

+1000. It's worth remembering that TJ admissions was a problem that had to be solved - WITHOUT QUESTION - because of the pandemic. They couldn't administer the exam as a result of it. At the exact same time, more data was released that strongly indicated that the previous admissions process was giving a deeply unfair advantage to communities with resources (witness the <1% FARMS rate). It made all the sense in the world to try to kill two birds with one stone given the situation at hand. But the status quo simply was not an option for Class of 2025 and there's no argument possible that it was.

The School Board could have put forth an INTERIM process for the Pandemic and not used the pandemic to make a permanent change. Every business resorted to INTERIM measures. The pandemic cannot be the reason to bring permanent change. In fact the pandemic is the reason to not push permanent change given that consultation could not be effective during the pandemic.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

No, Most people will be on board with diversity. But, the issue is how fcps approached and implemented the problem. It was shady and shutdown any public dialog. There were objections/comments with in the board itself. Take for example, they knowingly undermined AAP by implementing quotas based on attending schools instead of base schools. They deliberately flattened out GPA (or unweighted), which actually makes it a disadvantage for kids who takes tougher courses. In addition, the cumulative GPA of 1.25 years worth of course work given same points as one single essay kids write in 30min. If this is not enough, they then played with bonus points (a.k.a 'other experience' (??) factors) to figure how many points needs to be added to get the 'desired' effect.

It felt like intent wasn't really to cut down all of asians. It was only to hurt specific group of kids who come from academic focused families, likely in AAP, focus on courses/grades etc and guess what asians represent a significant percent of this group.

I don't mind removing test that can be prepped or not giving any weight to cookie cutter or expensive extra curricular activities that only certain kids can take advantage of. Diversity is good, but do not make deliberate changes to undermine/hurt specific groups of population. This is what makes it annoying and frustrating. All they need to do is remove the weightage to any factors that are not available to all the kids and then do a fair evaluation on top of that.

True, if you dig down all changes cumulatively had a single purpose, which is to intentionally hurt kids coming from middle/upper middle class families who tend to concentrate at AAP centers or 'good' schools. I wouldn't say that this is to hurt 'all' asians, but its no surprise that 'certain' asians represent a majority of the kids who are negatively effected. Imagine, all their advanced courses, grades etc get a max score of 300 points and one stupid science essay gets the equal treatment and so is the portrait sheet. Then a 'whopping' 300 points are given to 'other experience' factors. So, these kids who do not qualify for any of these experience factors have a max score of 900 out of total 1200 points. Can anyone honestly tell me if this is not intentional and well thought out plan to hurt these specific kids? I honestly don't understand why everyone is ok with it and don't understand the implications.

The point is not to HURT AAP kids, it's to HELP kids who might not have been identified as AAP kids or who have come into their own as students after they had an opportunity to be identified for AAP - "late bloomers". It is also well-established on this board that the AAP process is entirely gameable by families with resources.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

Define diversity - if you do it by skin color, you've already lost the argument. Prove that TJ is not diverse; again if you come up with a race chart, you've already lost.

And attituteds like that are why the school is going to end up closed or as an academy

In other words, you are either unable to or unwilling to even define diversity except in a racist way, and would rather that a school close down than have it not be involved in implementing your desired racist policies.

You've solved the problems. No black kids at a school isn't an issue if mentioning that there are no black kids at the school is racist. Congratulations.

That's not what I said. If you can tie the lack of black kids at a school to explicitly racist policies, such as affirmative action, or facially neutral policies implemented with racist intent, like the new TJ admission policies, then we can absolutely work together to remove those barriers to black kids. Absent such evidence, it's improper to identify racial disparity as a "problem" that needs solving.

Cool, now get the Board and, more importantly, local voters to agree. Your solution really is genius, I think you should start publicizing it widely- no racism because pointing out racism is in itself racist

Again, that's not what I said. Your lack of reading comprehension is at an impressive level.

Or maybe views like "That's not what I said. If you can tie the lack of black kids at a school to explicitly racist policies, such as affirmative action, or facially neutral policies implemented with racist intent, like the new TJ admission policies, then we can absolutely work together to remove those barriers to black kids. Absent such evidence, it's improper to identify racial disparity as a "problem" that needs solving." will go over better in Alabama.

So first you mischaracterize what I said, and when challenged, you try to assail what I said by inferring that it is somehow unwholesome through a worthless innuendo. Your thoughts are shallow and your character bankrupt.

What you said amounts to racist garbage

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

Absolutely, you need action. You need to set reasonable timelines (2 years may be) and reach out to all impacted folks. Given the amount of discussion this "Change" has triggered (including on this board) and the fact that the Supreme Court has taken notice - the inadequacy of the process that Braband and his political cronies conducted is in full view.

Instead of running models that showed racial yields, they could have run models on how schools like Mclean would have been impacted. They could have addressed all of this one go to make change palatable to the impacted parties. You would never get everyone on board but you would show you care. The school board leveraged their 12-0 mandate to take a shot at political glory. And are now entrenched in their position because their careers are on the line and even a minor concession will likely be against their legal strategy. All of us eff-up at work sometimes. I have greater respect for those that own up to it and move on. Not this school board.

+1. If you read the FCPS materials in the litigation, it appears McLean picked up about 30 additional freshmen this year due to the TJ admissions change, which will translate to 120 over four years. Over that same period, they plan to move 190 kids to Langley, so the net effect is to bring the enrollment down by about 70 kids before taking into account the impact of all the new housing getting built in Tysons and West Falls that will feed entirely into McLean and Marshall.

Yet they’ve spent maybe 5-10 hours addressing the overcrowding at McLean over the past several years, and done nothing to plan for the school’s need for a permanent addition, while spending many months obsessing about TJ admissions in the elusive search for “equity” and spending God knows how many hours and dollars on litigation (even with some of the lawyers not charging FCPS).

It’s insane that that they think the community isn’t paying attention to what they obsess about and what they choose to completely ignore. Elaine Tholen, Karl Frisch, and the at-large members like Karen Keys Gamarra should get ready to defend their records, because we are absolutely going to come after them if they try to run again next year. Listening to Keys Gamarra complain last night about the need to listen to the community felt like reliving some of the abuse of the past several years, because she has never listened to Asian families about TJ or McLean families begging for a sensible long-term plan to address the overcrowding at MHS and the growth in the Tysons/McLean area. The one time I was able to bend her ear about it directly she admitted that she didn’t even remember the difference between Langley and McLean - she just treats us all as equally not worthy of her attention.

FCPS would stop obsessing about TJ admissions if a very small subset of the community would quit wasting everyone's time by challenging whatever they come up with.

+1000. It's worth remembering that TJ admissions was a problem that had to be solved - WITHOUT QUESTION - because of the pandemic. They couldn't administer the exam as a result of it. At the exact same time, more data was released that strongly indicated that the previous admissions process was giving a deeply unfair advantage to communities with resources (witness the <1% FARMS rate). It made all the sense in the world to try to kill two birds with one stone given the situation at hand. But the status quo simply was not an option for Class of 2025 and there's no argument possible that it was.

I'm always wary when someone insists that a position cannot be questioned or challenged. It's the mark of an unreasonable closed-minded person with authoritarian and iliberal tendencies.

DP. I'm pretty sure it's someone who is trying to tell you that they couldn't just use the same process as they'd used before.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

Absolutely, you need action. You need to set reasonable timelines (2 years may be) and reach out to all impacted folks. Given the amount of discussion this "Change" has triggered (including on this board) and the fact that the Supreme Court has taken notice - the inadequacy of the process that Braband and his political cronies conducted is in full view.

Instead of running models that showed racial yields, they could have run models on how schools like Mclean would have been impacted. They could have addressed all of this one go to make change palatable to the impacted parties. You would never get everyone on board but you would show you care. The school board leveraged their 12-0 mandate to take a shot at political glory. And are now entrenched in their position because their careers are on the line and even a minor concession will likely be against their legal strategy. All of us eff-up at work sometimes. I have greater respect for those that own up to it and move on. Not this school board.

+1. If you read the FCPS materials in the litigation, it appears McLean picked up about 30 additional freshmen this year due to the TJ admissions change, which will translate to 120 over four years. Over that same period, they plan to move 190 kids to Langley, so the net effect is to bring the enrollment down by about 70 kids before taking into account the impact of all the new housing getting built in Tysons and West Falls that will feed entirely into McLean and Marshall.

Yet they’ve spent maybe 5-10 hours addressing the overcrowding at McLean over the past several years, and done nothing to plan for the school’s need for a permanent addition, while spending many months obsessing about TJ admissions in the elusive search for “equity” and spending God knows how many hours and dollars on litigation (even with some of the lawyers not charging FCPS).

It’s insane that that they think the community isn’t paying attention to what they obsess about and what they choose to completely ignore. Elaine Tholen, Karl Frisch, and the at-large members like Karen Keys Gamarra should get ready to defend their records, because we are absolutely going to come after them if they try to run again next year. Listening to Keys Gamarra complain last night about the need to listen to the community felt like reliving some of the abuse of the past several years, because she has never listened to Asian families about TJ or McLean families begging for a sensible long-term plan to address the overcrowding at MHS and the growth in the Tysons/McLean area. The one time I was able to bend her ear about it directly she admitted that she didn’t even remember the difference between Langley and McLean - she just treats us all as equally not worthy of her attention.

FCPS would stop obsessing about TJ admissions if a very small subset of the community would quit wasting everyone's time by challenging whatever they come up with.

+1000. It's worth remembering that TJ admissions was a problem that had to be solved - WITHOUT QUESTION - because of the pandemic. They couldn't administer the exam as a result of it. At the exact same time, more data was released that strongly indicated that the previous admissions process was giving a deeply unfair advantage to communities with resources (witness the <1% FARMS rate). It made all the sense in the world to try to kill two birds with one stone given the situation at hand. But the status quo simply was not an option for Class of 2025 and there's no argument possible that it was.

The School Board could have put forth an INTERIM process for the Pandemic and not used the pandemic to make a permanent change. Every business resorted to INTERIM measures. The pandemic cannot be the reason to bring permanent change. In fact the pandemic is the reason to not push permanent change given that consultation could not be effective during the pandemic.

And just about every business has made some changes to the way they do business as a result of things they learned during the pandemic.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

Define diversity - if you do it by skin color, you've already lost the argument. Prove that TJ is not diverse; again if you come up with a race chart, you've already lost.

And attituteds like that are why the school is going to end up closed or as an academy

In other words, you are either unable to or unwilling to even define diversity except in a racist way, and would rather that a school close down than have it not be involved in implementing your desired racist policies.

You've solved the problems. No black kids at a school isn't an issue if mentioning that there are no black kids at the school is racist. Congratulations.

That's not what I said. If you can tie the lack of black kids at a school to explicitly racist policies, such as affirmative action, or facially neutral policies implemented with racist intent, like the new TJ admission policies, then we can absolutely work together to remove those barriers to black kids. Absent such evidence, it's improper to identify racial disparity as a "problem" that needs solving.

Cool, now get the Board and, more importantly, local voters to agree. Your solution really is genius, I think you should start publicizing it widely- no racism because pointing out racism is in itself racist

Again, that's not what I said. Your lack of reading comprehension is at an impressive level.

Or maybe views like "That's not what I said. If you can tie the lack of black kids at a school to explicitly racist policies, such as affirmative action, or facially neutral policies implemented with racist intent, like the new TJ admission policies, then we can absolutely work together to remove those barriers to black kids. Absent such evidence, it's improper to identify racial disparity as a "problem" that needs solving." will go over better in Alabama.

So first you mischaracterize what I said, and when challenged, you try to assail what I said by inferring that it is somehow unwholesome through a worthless innuendo. Your thoughts are shallow and your character bankrupt.

What you said amounts to racist garbage

+1000. Do you think the Coalition-aligned folks simply don't understand their racism or that they understand it and therefore are using the Russian "accusation as confession" tactic?

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

No, Most people will be on board with diversity. But, the issue is how fcps approached and implemented the problem. It was shady and shutdown any public dialog. There were objections/comments with in the board itself. Take for example, they knowingly undermined AAP by implementing quotas based on attending schools instead of base schools. They deliberately flattened out GPA (or unweighted), which actually makes it a disadvantage for kids who takes tougher courses. In addition, the cumulative GPA of 1.25 years worth of course work given same points as one single essay kids write in 30min. If this is not enough, they then played with bonus points (a.k.a 'other experience' (??) factors) to figure how many points needs to be added to get the 'desired' effect.

It felt like intent wasn't really to cut down all of asians. It was only to hurt specific group of kids who come from academic focused families, likely in AAP, focus on courses/grades etc and guess what asians represent a significant percent of this group.

I don't mind removing test that can be prepped or not giving any weight to cookie cutter or expensive extra curricular activities that only certain kids can take advantage of. Diversity is good, but do not make deliberate changes to undermine/hurt specific groups of population. This is what makes it annoying and frustrating. All they need to do is remove the weightage to any factors that are not available to all the kids and then do a fair evaluation on top of that.

True, if you dig down all changes cumulatively had a single purpose, which is to intentionally hurt kids coming from middle/upper middle class families who tend to concentrate at AAP centers or 'good' schools. I wouldn't say that this is to hurt 'all' asians, but its no surprise that 'certain' asians represent a majority of the kids who are negatively effected. Imagine, all their advanced courses, grades etc get a max score of 300 points and one stupid science essay gets the equal treatment and so is the portrait sheet. Then a 'whopping' 300 points are given to 'other experience' factors. So, these kids who do not qualify for any of these experience factors have a max score of 900 out of total 1200 points. Can anyone honestly tell me if this is not intentional and well thought out plan to hurt these specific kids? I honestly don't understand why everyone is ok with it and don't understand the implications.

The point is not to HURT AAP kids, it's to HELP kids who might not have been identified as AAP kids or who have come into their own as students after they had an opportunity to be identified for AAP - "late bloomers". It is also well-established on this board that the AAP process is entirely gameable by families with resources.

Nothing is "well established" on this board other than the fact that losers question every process where they end up on the wrong 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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

Absolutely, you need action. You need to set reasonable timelines (2 years may be) and reach out to all impacted folks. Given the amount of discussion this "Change" has triggered (including on this board) and the fact that the Supreme Court has taken notice - the inadequacy of the process that Braband and his political cronies conducted is in full view.

Instead of running models that showed racial yields, they could have run models on how schools like Mclean would have been impacted. They could have addressed all of this one go to make change palatable to the impacted parties. You would never get everyone on board but you would show you care. The school board leveraged their 12-0 mandate to take a shot at political glory. And are now entrenched in their position because their careers are on the line and even a minor concession will likely be against their legal strategy. All of us eff-up at work sometimes. I have greater respect for those that own up to it and move on. Not this school board.

+1. If you read the FCPS materials in the litigation, it appears McLean picked up about 30 additional freshmen this year due to the TJ admissions change, which will translate to 120 over four years. Over that same period, they plan to move 190 kids to Langley, so the net effect is to bring the enrollment down by about 70 kids before taking into account the impact of all the new housing getting built in Tysons and West Falls that will feed entirely into McLean and Marshall.

Yet they’ve spent maybe 5-10 hours addressing the overcrowding at McLean over the past several years, and done nothing to plan for the school’s need for a permanent addition, while spending many months obsessing about TJ admissions in the elusive search for “equity” and spending God knows how many hours and dollars on litigation (even with some of the lawyers not charging FCPS).

It’s insane that that they think the community isn’t paying attention to what they obsess about and what they choose to completely ignore. Elaine Tholen, Karl Frisch, and the at-large members like Karen Keys Gamarra should get ready to defend their records, because we are absolutely going to come after them if they try to run again next year. Listening to Keys Gamarra complain last night about the need to listen to the community felt like reliving some of the abuse of the past several years, because she has never listened to Asian families about TJ or McLean families begging for a sensible long-term plan to address the overcrowding at MHS and the growth in the Tysons/McLean area. The one time I was able to bend her ear about it directly she admitted that she didn’t even remember the difference between Langley and McLean - she just treats us all as equally not worthy of her attention.

FCPS would stop obsessing about TJ admissions if a very small subset of the community would quit wasting everyone's time by challenging whatever they come up with.

+1000. It's worth remembering that TJ admissions was a problem that had to be solved - WITHOUT QUESTION - because of the pandemic. They couldn't administer the exam as a result of it. At the exact same time, more data was released that strongly indicated that the previous admissions process was giving a deeply unfair advantage to communities with resources (witness the <1% FARMS rate). It made all the sense in the world to try to kill two birds with one stone given the situation at hand. But the status quo simply was not an option for Class of 2025 and there's no argument possible that it was.

The School Board could have put forth an INTERIM process for the Pandemic and not used the pandemic to make a permanent change. Every business resorted to INTERIM measures. The pandemic cannot be the reason to bring permanent change. In fact the pandemic is the reason to not push permanent change given that consultation could not be effective during the pandemic.

And just about every business has made some changes to the way they do business as a result of things they learned during the pandemic.

And that would be welcome adaptability on the part of the school board. Learning from experience is far better than learning from ideology.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

No, Most people will be on board with diversity. But, the issue is how fcps approached and implemented the problem. It was shady and shutdown any public dialog. There were objections/comments with in the board itself. Take for example, they knowingly undermined AAP by implementing quotas based on attending schools instead of base schools. They deliberately flattened out GPA (or unweighted), which actually makes it a disadvantage for kids who takes tougher courses. In addition, the cumulative GPA of 1.25 years worth of course work given same points as one single essay kids write in 30min. If this is not enough, they then played with bonus points (a.k.a 'other experience' (??) factors) to figure how many points needs to be added to get the 'desired' effect.

It felt like intent wasn't really to cut down all of asians. It was only to hurt specific group of kids who come from academic focused families, likely in AAP, focus on courses/grades etc and guess what asians represent a significant percent of this group.

I don't mind removing test that can be prepped or not giving any weight to cookie cutter or expensive extra curricular activities that only certain kids can take advantage of. Diversity is good, but do not make deliberate changes to undermine/hurt specific groups of population. This is what makes it annoying and frustrating. All they need to do is remove the weightage to any factors that are not available to all the kids and then do a fair evaluation on top of that.

True, if you dig down all changes cumulatively had a single purpose, which is to intentionally hurt kids coming from middle/upper middle class families who tend to concentrate at AAP centers or 'good' schools. I wouldn't say that this is to hurt 'all' asians, but its no surprise that 'certain' asians represent a majority of the kids who are negatively effected. Imagine, all their advanced courses, grades etc get a max score of 300 points and one stupid science essay gets the equal treatment and so is the portrait sheet. Then a 'whopping' 300 points are given to 'other experience' factors. So, these kids who do not qualify for any of these experience factors have a max score of 900 out of total 1200 points. Can anyone honestly tell me if this is not intentional and well thought out plan to hurt these specific kids? I honestly don't understand why everyone is ok with it and don't understand the implications.

The point is not to HURT AAP kids, it's to HELP kids who might not have been identified as AAP kids or who have come into their own as students after they had an opportunity to be identified for AAP - "late bloomers". It is also well-established on this board that the AAP process is entirely gameable by families with resources.

At least in my kids elementary school, every year, there will be few principal placements into AAP (4th, 5th or even 6th grade) or advanced math based on how the kids are performing. My daughter said one of her friends who is currently not in AAP, but will likely be placed into AAP next year if she continues to do well in her 4th grade. My neighbors kid got placed into Level IV (or advanced math? - I know he took IOWA test) in 6th grade. So, I think teachers do spot talent and move the kids up if they see the potential. In my opinion AAP kids, especially from north west fairfax county are definitely getting hurt.

[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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

There are enough ideas that have been thrown around including prior pages on this thread.

A good place to start would be for the School Board to formally apologize for Braband's "pay to play" innuendos and reach out to the impacted communities (Asians as well as the school districts that have been impacted) and try to tap down the adversarial nature of the dialog.

Most people (yes, Asians included) care for diversity and would listen. But all we see is liberal use of innuendos that Asians are cheats and resource hoarders. That does not create an environment where you get any moderate to collaborate. Solutions have been found for many more intractable problems. It needs leadership and we have none of that at FCPS.

So the right way is to do nothing and pretend there is no problem? Oh, and listen, but only if it isn't accompanied by action.

No, Most people will be on board with diversity. But, the issue is how fcps approached and implemented the problem. It was shady and shutdown any public dialog. There were objections/comments with in the board itself. Take for example, they knowingly undermined AAP by implementing quotas based on attending schools instead of base schools. They deliberately flattened out GPA (or unweighted), which actually makes it a disadvantage for kids who takes tougher courses. In addition, the cumulative GPA of 1.25 years worth of course work given same points as one single essay kids write in 30min. If this is not enough, they then played with bonus points (a.k.a 'other experience' (??) factors) to figure how many points needs to be added to get the 'desired' effect.

It felt like intent wasn't really to cut down all of asians. It was only to hurt specific group of kids who come from academic focused families, likely in AAP, focus on courses/grades etc and guess what asians represent a significant percent of this group.

I don't mind removing test that can be prepped or not giving any weight to cookie cutter or expensive extra curricular activities that only certain kids can take advantage of. Diversity is good, but do not make deliberate changes to undermine/hurt specific groups of population. This is what makes it annoying and frustrating. All they need to do is remove the weightage to any factors that are not available to all the kids and then do a fair evaluation on top of that.

True, if you dig down all changes cumulatively had a single purpose, which is to intentionally hurt kids coming from middle/upper middle class families who tend to concentrate at AAP centers or 'good' schools. I wouldn't say that this is to hurt 'all' asians, but its no surprise that 'certain' asians represent a majority of the kids who are negatively effected. Imagine, all their advanced courses, grades etc get a max score of 300 points and one stupid science essay gets the equal treatment and so is the portrait sheet. Then a 'whopping' 300 points are given to 'other experience' factors. So, these kids who do not qualify for any of these experience factors have a max score of 900 out of total 1200 points. Can anyone honestly tell me if this is not intentional and well thought out plan to hurt these specific kids? I honestly don't understand why everyone is ok with it and don't understand the implications.

The point is not to HURT AAP kids, it's to HELP kids who might not have been identified as AAP kids or who have come into their own as students after they had an opportunity to be identified for AAP - "late bloomers". It is also well-established on this board that the AAP process is entirely gameable by families with resources.

At least in my kids elementary school, every year, there will be few principal placements into AAP (4th, 5th or even 6th grade) or advanced math based on how the kids are performing. My daughter said one of her friends who is currently not in AAP, but will likely be placed into AAP next year if she continues to do well in her 4th grade. My neighbors kid got placed into Level IV (or advanced math? - I know he took IOWA test) in 6th grade. So, I think teachers do spot talent and move the kids up if they see the potential. In my opinion AAP kids, especially from north west fairfax county are definitely getting hurt.

Those principal placed kids don't stay in AAP for middle school and TJ admissions are only concerned with middle 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:TJ's racist policy that your tax dollars is defending cut the Asian entry by half

https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2022/04/fairfax-co-schools-defends-admissions-policy-at-thomas-jefferson-hs/

“By half”? Guess you’re not so good with numbers?

Recap of admission #s from 2024 to 2025:
+64 overall

+50 female
+14 male

+46 hispanic +242%
+37 white +26%
+29 black +245%
+8 other/mixed +26%
-56 asian -26%

+142 from underrepresented MSs
-36 private school

And despite that TJ is still over 50% Asian right?

Yup. Headline: Group That Is Over-Represented Threefold Thinks It’s Racist That They’re No Longer Over-Represented Four-Fold

+1 And something must be done about this!

Keep going. This "racial balancing" motivation is what is being questioned by the court. You can have a great outcome but if the process to get there is not constitutional then it does not matter. But keep going. You guys dont care how unfair/unconstitutional a process is as long as it gets your goals.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that the approach sucked but the outcome is a step in the right direction.

People have *repeatedly* pointed out that ends do not justify the means in any modern democracy. If that does not sink in from a constitutional perspective, let me give you something you can relate to.

Even if you catch a murderer red-handed and dont follow due process like reading the Miranda rights, you will not get the conviction.

There are many on this forum who are on board with increasing diversity at TJ but you have to do it the right way.

What is the right way to increase diversity at TJ?

Define diversity - if you do it by skin color, you've already lost the argument. Prove that TJ is not diverse; again if you come up with a race chart, you've already lost.

And attituteds like that are why the school is going to end up closed or as an academy

In other words, you are either unable to or unwilling to even define diversity except in a racist way, and would rather that a school close down than have it not be involved in implementing your desired racist policies.

You've solved the problems. No black kids at a school isn't an issue if mentioning that there are no black kids at the school is racist. Congratulations.

That's not what I said. If you can tie the lack of black kids at a school to explicitly racist policies, such as affirmative action, or facially neutral policies implemented with racist intent, like the new TJ admission policies, then we can absolutely work together to remove those barriers to black kids. Absent such evidence, it's improper to identify racial disparity as a "problem" that needs solving.

Cool, now get the Board and, more importantly, local voters to agree. Your solution really is genius, I think you should start publicizing it widely- no racism because pointing out racism is in itself racist

Again, that's not what I said. Your lack of reading comprehension is at an impressive level.

Or maybe views like "That's not what I said. If you can tie the lack of black kids at a school to explicitly racist policies, such as affirmative action, or facially neutral policies implemented with racist intent, like the new TJ admission policies, then we can absolutely work together to remove those barriers to black kids. Absent such evidence, it's improper to identify racial disparity as a "problem" that needs solving." will go over better in Alabama.

So first you mischaracterize what I said, and when challenged, you try to assail what I said by inferring that it is somehow unwholesome through a worthless innuendo. Your thoughts are shallow and your character bankrupt.

What you said amounts to racist garbage

You continue to make baseless assertions with no logic or facts.