Court: TJ's New Admission Policy Does Not Discriminate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Super Court can strike down any admission system that is considered unconstitutional.

Ask Harvard how they feel now. Harvard can still use the same admission system next year if it spares enough money for potential punitive damanges.

Apparently, FCPS does not have deep pockets like Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Establishing an admissions system which indirectly discriminates against asians (see page 39, paragraph 3 of the SCOTUS AA ruling). There is now a new basis for more lawsuits.

Asians are not discriminated against in TJ admissions. They have the highest acceptance rate and highest representation.

So you do not understand how the current Supreme Court thinks about equal protection? If they believe there was a deliberate, racially motivated effort to reduce the percentage of Asian kids at a school, they may well declare the system contrary to the Constitution, regardless of whether Asians are still statistically “over-represented.”

I suspect you do know this, but believe that you’ll convince people otherwise if you just copy and paste often enough.

If that is the justification for striking the new process down, all that would need to happen is for a new School Board to design either the exact same process or one that is relatively similar in order to pass muster.

The Court cannot mandate that a school system adopt a specific admissions system or any element of one.

Not sure it matters since FPCS system is race-blind so the Harvard case that used race as a factor in admissions isn't relevant.

The whole alleged purpose of the changes was racial. Just because a rule or law as written doesn't mention race or a discriminatory purpose doesn't necessarily mean that's not the actual purpose. It can still have a discriminatory effect.

For example, an effect of discriminating against Asians in favor of Whites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TJ's governing documents mandate that FCPS selects students who are advanced in STEM, but not necessarily the most advanced, to attend the school.

We can argue ad nauseam about whether or not TJ should be striving to be the #1 public school in America through its admissions process, but the bottom line is that they're in no way, shape, or form required to do so.

The claim was the reforms were weeding out weaker students who were getting in due to prep/cheating, and getting stronger students now. Now the claim is we don't have to take the stronger students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Super Court can strike down any admission system that is considered unconstitutional.

Ask Harvard how they feel now. Harvard can still use the same admission system next year if it spares enough money for potential punitive damanges.

Apparently, FCPS does not have deep pockets like Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Establishing an admissions system which indirectly discriminates against asians (see page 39, paragraph 3 of the SCOTUS AA ruling). There is now a new basis for more lawsuits.

Asians are not discriminated against in TJ admissions. They have the highest acceptance rate and highest representation.

So you do not understand how the current Supreme Court thinks about equal protection? If they believe there was a deliberate, racially motivated effort to reduce the percentage of Asian kids at a school, they may well declare the system contrary to the Constitution, regardless of whether Asians are still statistically “over-represented.”

I suspect you do know this, but believe that you’ll convince people otherwise if you just copy and paste often enough.

If that is the justification for striking the new process down, all that would need to happen is for a new School Board to design either the exact same process or one that is relatively similar in order to pass muster.

The Court cannot mandate that a school system adopt a specific admissions system or any element of one.

Not sure it matters since FPCS system is race-blind so the Harvard case that used race as a factor in admissions isn't relevant.

The whole alleged purpose of the changes was racial. Just because a rule or law as written doesn't mention race or a discriminatory purpose doesn't necessarily mean that's not the actual purpose. It can still have a discriminatory effect.

Oh, sounds like you're describing FCPS school boundaries that deliberately carve up the land to concentrate SFHs in some schools and garden apartments in others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ's governing documents mandate that FCPS selects students who are advanced in STEM, but not necessarily the most advanced, to attend the school.

We can argue ad nauseam about whether or not TJ should be striving to be the #1 public school in America through its admissions process, but the bottom line is that they're in no way, shape, or form required to do so.

The claim was the reforms were weeding out weaker students who were getting in due to prep/cheating, and getting stronger students now. Now the claim is we don't have to take the stronger students.

I don't think that's how the new system works. Isn't it a quota/cap system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Super Court can strike down any admission system that is considered unconstitutional.

Ask Harvard how they feel now. Harvard can still use the same admission system next year if it spares enough money for potential punitive damanges.

Apparently, FCPS does not have deep pockets like Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Establishing an admissions system which indirectly discriminates against asians (see page 39, paragraph 3 of the SCOTUS AA ruling). There is now a new basis for more lawsuits.

Asians are not discriminated against in TJ admissions. They have the highest acceptance rate and highest representation.

So you do not understand how the current Supreme Court thinks about equal protection? If they believe there was a deliberate, racially motivated effort to reduce the percentage of Asian kids at a school, they may well declare the system contrary to the Constitution, regardless of whether Asians are still statistically “over-represented.”

I suspect you do know this, but believe that you’ll convince people otherwise if you just copy and paste often enough.

If that is the justification for striking the new process down, all that would need to happen is for a new School Board to design either the exact same process or one that is relatively similar in order to pass muster.

The Court cannot mandate that a school system adopt a specific admissions system or any element of one.

Not sure it matters since FPCS system is race-blind so the Harvard case that used race as a factor in admissions isn't relevant.

The whole alleged purpose of the changes was racial. Just because a rule or law as written doesn't mention race or a discriminatory purpose doesn't necessarily mean that's not the actual purpose. It can still have a discriminatory effect.

For example, an effect of discriminating against Asians in favor of Whites.

The new admissions process does not discriminate against any race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Super Court can strike down any admission system that is considered unconstitutional.

Ask Harvard how they feel now. Harvard can still use the same admission system next year if it spares enough money for potential punitive damanges.

Apparently, FCPS does not have deep pockets like Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Establishing an admissions system which indirectly discriminates against asians (see page 39, paragraph 3 of the SCOTUS AA ruling). There is now a new basis for more lawsuits.

Asians are not discriminated against in TJ admissions. They have the highest acceptance rate and highest representation.

So you do not understand how the current Supreme Court thinks about equal protection? If they believe there was a deliberate, racially motivated effort to reduce the percentage of Asian kids at a school, they may well declare the system contrary to the Constitution, regardless of whether Asians are still statistically “over-represented.”

I suspect you do know this, but believe that you’ll convince people otherwise if you just copy and paste often enough.

If that is the justification for striking the new process down, all that would need to happen is for a new School Board to design either the exact same process or one that is relatively similar in order to pass muster.

The Court cannot mandate that a school system adopt a specific admissions system or any element of one.

Not sure it matters since FPCS system is race-blind so the Harvard case that used race as a factor in admissions isn't relevant.

The whole alleged purpose of the changes was racial. Just because a rule or law as written doesn't mention race or a discriminatory purpose doesn't necessarily mean that's not the actual purpose. It can still have a discriminatory effect.

Oh, sounds like you're describing FCPS school boundaries that deliberately carve up the land to concentrate SFHs in some schools and garden apartments in others.

Maybe FCPS should do lottery for all kids in ES and MS.

[Anonymous]

That is "bus in bus out".

Anonymous wrote:Maybe FCPS should do lottery for all kids in ES and MS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ's governing documents mandate that FCPS selects students who are advanced in STEM, but not necessarily the most advanced, to attend the school.

We can argue ad nauseam about whether or not TJ should be striving to be the #1 public school in America through its admissions process, but the bottom line is that they're in no way, shape, or form required to do so.

The claim was the reforms were weeding out weaker students who were getting in due to prep/cheating, and getting stronger students now. Now the claim is we don't have to take the stronger students.

I don't think that's how the new system works. Isn't it a quota/cap system?

Minimum quota per school. However, this wasn't the only change. They removed testing and teacher's recs, looking at STEM extracurriculars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ's governing documents mandate that FCPS selects students who are advanced in STEM, but not necessarily the most advanced, to attend the school.

We can argue ad nauseam about whether or not TJ should be striving to be the #1 public school in America through its admissions process, but the bottom line is that they're in no way, shape, or form required to do so.

The claim was the reforms were weeding out weaker students who were getting in due to prep/cheating, and getting stronger students now. Now the claim is we don't have to take the stronger students.

You mean body stronger but stupid students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, any change to the status quo will disproportionally impact the most overrepresented groups.

So then *that group* can claim discrimination. You can never change any admissions process without someone claiming "discrimination".

p.s. the process does not discriminate against certain groups if those groups have higher than average admissions rate and highest % of representation at the school.

Does it not seem racist to say one group is over represented?

I have an Asian kid who loves to play basketball. He is average height, will probably end up 5’10”. He really wants to play basketball and I know his chances are low. What if the team was told that blacks are overrepresented and that the team should take some Asian kids? If most of the team is 6’4” and my kid shows up and is not as tall and not as good, he should not get on the team.

It's always basketball with these people.

Repeating this for the thousandth time... School admissions processes ARE NOT analogs for athletic team tryouts.

Athletic teams exist for the purpose of competing against other schools to win games. TJ does not exist to win competitions or to be highly ranked. The fact that it is and it does are tangential to its purpose. TJ's governing documents mandate that FCPS selects students who are advanced in STEM, but not necessarily the most advanced, to attend the school.

We can argue ad nauseam about whether or not TJ should be striving to be the #1 public school in America through its admissions process, but the bottom line is that they're in no way, shape, or form required to do so.[b]

So, the supporters of TJ's new admission process know that this will make TJ decline.

Yes. But I have no problem with each middle school being provided some seats as everyone's tax dollars go to funding the school. That part shouldn't be controversial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, any change to the status quo will disproportionally impact the most overrepresented groups.

So then *that group* can claim discrimination. You can never change any admissions process without someone claiming "discrimination".

p.s. the process does not discriminate against certain groups if those groups have higher than average admissions rate and highest % of representation at the school.

Does it not seem racist to say one group is over represented?

I have an Asian kid who loves to play basketball. He is average height, will probably end up 5’10”. He really wants to play basketball and I know his chances are low. What if the team was told that blacks are overrepresented and that the team should take some Asian kids? If most of the team is 6’4” and my kid shows up and is not as tall and not as good, he should not get on the team.

It's always basketball with these people.

Repeating this for the thousandth time... School admissions processes ARE NOT analogs for athletic team tryouts.

Athletic teams exist for the purpose of competing against other schools to win games. TJ does not exist to win competitions or to be highly ranked. The fact that it is and it does are tangential to its purpose. TJ's governing documents mandate that FCPS selects students who are advanced in STEM, but not necessarily the most advanced, to attend the school.

We can argue ad nauseam about whether or not TJ should be striving to be the #1 public school in America through its admissions process, but the bottom line is that they're in no way, shape, or form required to do so.[b]

So, the supporters of TJ's new admission process know that this will make TJ decline.

Yes. But I have no problem with each middle school being provided some seats as everyone's tax dollars go to funding the school. That part shouldn't be controversial.

Some areas are providing a lot more tax revenues than others. Are you suggesting seats should be allocated based on the source of tax dollars?

[Anonymous]

Not "some". Most seats were allocated to seat 1.5% of each middle school.

Anonymous wrote: Yes. But I have no problem with each middle school being provided some seats as everyone's tax dollars go to funding the school. That part shouldn't be controversial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, any change to the status quo will disproportionally impact the most overrepresented groups.

So then *that group* can claim discrimination. You can never change any admissions process without someone claiming "discrimination".

p.s. the process does not discriminate against certain groups if those groups have higher than average admissions rate and highest % of representation at the school.

Does it not seem racist to say one group is over represented?

I have an Asian kid who loves to play basketball. He is average height, will probably end up 5’10”. He really wants to play basketball and I know his chances are low. What if the team was told that blacks are overrepresented and that the team should take some Asian kids? If most of the team is 6’4” and my kid shows up and is not as tall and not as good, he should not get on the team.

It's always basketball with these people.

Repeating this for the thousandth time... School admissions processes ARE NOT analogs for athletic team tryouts.

Athletic teams exist for the purpose of competing against other schools to win games. TJ does not exist to win competitions or to be highly ranked. The fact that it is and it does are tangential to its purpose. TJ's governing documents mandate that FCPS selects students who are advanced in STEM, but not necessarily the most advanced, to attend the school.

We can argue ad nauseam about whether or not TJ should be striving to be the #1 public school in America through its admissions process, but the bottom line is that they're in no way, shape, or form required to do so.[b]

So, the supporters of TJ's new admission process know that this will make TJ decline.

Yes. But I have no problem with each middle school being provided some seats as everyone's tax dollars go to funding the school. That part shouldn't be controversial.

Some areas are providing a lot more tax revenues than others. Are you suggesting seats should be allocated based on the source of tax dollars?

No. I do not say that for having a fire department near by either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not "some". Most seats were allocated to seat 1.5% of each middle school.

Anonymous wrote: Yes. But I have no problem with each middle school being provided some seats as everyone's tax dollars go to funding the school. That part shouldn't be controversial.

So?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Super Court can strike down any admission system that is considered unconstitutional.

Ask Harvard how they feel now. Harvard can still use the same admission system next year if it spares enough money for potential punitive damanges.

Apparently, FCPS does not have deep pockets like Harvard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Establishing an admissions system which indirectly discriminates against asians (see page 39, paragraph 3 of the SCOTUS AA ruling). There is now a new basis for more lawsuits.

Asians are not discriminated against in TJ admissions. They have the highest acceptance rate and highest representation.

So you do not understand how the current Supreme Court thinks about equal protection? If they believe there was a deliberate, racially motivated effort to reduce the percentage of Asian kids at a school, they may well declare the system contrary to the Constitution, regardless of whether Asians are still statistically “over-represented.”

I suspect you do know this, but believe that you’ll convince people otherwise if you just copy and paste often enough.

If that is the justification for striking the new process down, all that would need to happen is for a new School Board to design either the exact same process or one that is relatively similar in order to pass muster.

The Court cannot mandate that a school system adopt a specific admissions system or any element of one.

Not sure it matters since FPCS system is race-blind so the Harvard case that used race as a factor in admissions isn't relevant.

The whole alleged purpose of the changes was racial. Just because a rule or law as written doesn't mention race or a discriminatory purpose doesn't necessarily mean that's not the actual purpose. It can still have a discriminatory effect.

For example, an effect of discriminating against Asians in favor of Whites.

The new admissions process does not discriminate against any race.

Neither did literacy tests and poll taxes to vote.