Court: TJ's New Admission Policy Does Not Discriminate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A main argument in the finding is that not only are Asian students still disproportionate to their share of the population, but the admittance rate for Asian students is higher than for other groups. Therefore, it is not discriminatory against Asians. The counterargument is that relative to the old policy, there are fewer Asian students.

The counterargument is that changed the criteria with intent of reducing the number of Asians.

Isn't it 80% Asian?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

Mostly just the dumb kids who couldn't afford prep. The wealthy dumb kids did fine.

#backdoorKaren

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A main argument in the finding is that not only are Asian students still disproportionate to their share of the population, but the admittance rate for Asian students is higher than for other groups. Therefore, it is not discriminatory against Asians. The counterargument is that relative to the old policy, there are fewer Asian students.

The counterargument is that changed the criteria with intent of reducing the number of Asians.

Isn't it 80% Asian?

It was, but now around 50. I think this will go up as they move to other districts to get automatic seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

[phone]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

[phone]

DP and agree that using "dumb" to characterize any of TJ applicant is wrong. But you can't, in good faith, deny that there is a distribution of unmeasureable ability amongst TJ applicants. While any attempt at distinguishing "higher" ability applicants from "lower" ability applicants is fraught with noise, I think that reasonable folks would agree that test performance, or at least demonstrated math prowess, is positively correlated with that ability.

[Anonymous]

Are you silly? Asian applicants are far more academically advanced than any other race group. They earned the TJ seats, unlike "some" others who always begged for government welfare for generations.

Anonymous wrote:A main argument in the finding is that not only are Asian students still disproportionate to their share of the population, but the admittance rate for Asian students is higher than for other groups. Therefore, it is not discriminatory against Asians. The counterargument is that relative to the old policy, there are fewer Asian students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

I guess it's relative but many who had to be prepped for years to present well on the test always struggled to keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

I guess it's relative but many who had to be prepped for years to present well on the test always struggled to keep up.

This is an urban legend the parents of kids that didn’t get into to made up and perpetuate to make themselves feel better that their precious Larlo didn’t make the cut.

[Anonymous]

Of course it doesn't discriminate the program's 90% Asian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

I guess it's relative but many who had to be prepped for years to present well on the test always struggled to keep up.

This is an urban legend the parents of kids that didn’t get into to made up and perpetuate to make themselves feel better that their precious Larlo didn’t make the cut.

1) TJ math teachers disagree with you.

2) No one names their kid Larlo and you betray yourself as unserious when you keep using that name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you silly? Asian applicants are far more academically advanced than any other race group. They earned the TJ seats, unlike "some" others who always begged for government welfare for generations.

Anonymous wrote:A main argument in the finding is that not only are Asian students still disproportionate to their share of the population, but the admittance rate for Asian students is higher than for other groups. Therefore, it is not discriminatory against Asians. The counterargument is that relative to the old policy, there are fewer Asian students.

1) To the extent that there is a delta in academic advancement between Asian students and, say, Black students, that delta is inadequate to explain the fact that more Asian students were admitted to TJ’s Class of 2024 than there had been Black students admitted to TJ in its entire 35 year history to that point.

2) Nowhere in TJ’s founding or regulatory documents is FCPS required to select the most “advanced” students. Your point is irrelevant no matter its falsehood.

[Anonymous]

Several great TJ math teachers have resigned due to the deteriorating student quality since the admission change. I guess they did not want to teach TJ Math 1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

I guess it's relative but many who had to be prepped for years to present well on the test always struggled to keep up.

This is an urban legend the parents of kids that didn’t get into to made up and perpetuate to make themselves feel better that their precious Larlo didn’t make the cut.

1) TJ math teachers disagree with you.

2) No one names their kid Larlo and you betray yourself as unserious when you keep using that name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Several great TJ math teachers have resigned due to the deteriorating student quality since the admission change. I guess they did not want to teach TJ Math 1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

I guess it's relative but many who had to be prepped for years to present well on the test always struggled to keep up.

This is an urban legend the parents of kids that didn’t get into to made up and perpetuate to make themselves feel better that their precious Larlo didn’t make the cut.

1) TJ math teachers disagree with you.

2) No one names their kid Larlo and you betray yourself as unserious when you keep using that name.

Weird, I heard they just retired and this wasn't related.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Several great TJ math teachers have resigned due to the deteriorating student quality since the admission change. I guess they did not want to teach TJ Math 1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yikes.

It appears that this requires explanation again, as a persistent lack of comprehension in this forum, whether out of convenience or ignorance, causes this thread to stagnate.

The previous admissions process was manifestly discriminatory against students of economic disadvantage. This point is not up for debate among serious people. It deeply favored students and families who were possessed of both the economic means and the parental motivation to leverage those means in the direction of optimizing the student's TJ application. For many reasons, in Northern Virginia that largely results in an advantage for students of Asian (and especially South Asian) descent. And the admissions statistics from prior classes bear that out very, very clearly - and combined with the Curie matter, provide a clear explanation for the dramatic overrepresentation of South Asians at TJ, who comprise about 5-7% of Northern Virginia's population but were hovering near 50% of incoming TJ classes between 2018-2024.

The new admissions process eliminated many of those advantages and indeed made it much more difficult for parents to leverage their resources to optimize TJ admissions outcomes. A staggering amount of mental gymnastics are required to observe a situation where a group that had a clear advantage in a process loses that advantage and refer to that loss as "racial discrimination".

The old process was discriminatory. Fixing it is the opposite of discrimination.

The new process sought to minimize that advantage.

The old process discriminated against dumb kids, too. Glad we were able to fix the lack of representation of poor and dumb kids at TJ.

There aren't any dumb kids at TJ. Pretending there are in order to serve your narrative makes you a horrible person, full stop.

I guess it's relative but many who had to be prepped for years to present well on the test always struggled to keep up.

This is an urban legend the parents of kids that didn’t get into to made up and perpetuate to make themselves feel better that their precious Larlo didn’t make the cut.

1) TJ math teachers disagree with you.

2) No one names their kid Larlo and you betray yourself as unserious when you keep using that name.

Weird, I heard they just retired and this wasn't related.

Teachers consistently retire, but some are committed to pushing this false narrative because they are unhappy with the admission changes. I think they would prefer to return to the good old days of test buying.