TJ Discrimination Case

[Anonymous]

we have emails and phone texts with folks saying they wanted less asians

On a more official level there are desires to increase URM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Weightage is essays, gpa and math/sci problem.

Stop making up BS

They also gave bonuses to things like FARMS.
The point is there was a minimum 3.5 GPA to apply, at which point the difference in GPA is only .5* 75weighting = 37.5 points, while the essay is 300 points.
FARMS is 90 points, more than double the possible difference in GPA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weightage is essays, gpa and math/sci problem.

Stop making up BS

They also gave bonuses to things like FARMS.
The point is there was a minimum 3.5 GPA to apply, at which point the difference in GPA is only .5* 75weighting = 37.5 points, while the essay is 300 points.
FARMS is 90 points, more than double the possible difference in GPA.

I guess your kid should've put more effort into their essay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weightage is essays, gpa and math/sci problem.

Stop making up BS

They also gave bonuses to things like FARMS.
The point is there was a minimum 3.5 GPA to apply, at which point the difference in GPA is only .5* 75weighting = 37.5 points, while the essay is 300 points.
FARMS is 90 points, more than double the possible difference in GPA.

Rigged system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:we have emails and phone texts with folks saying they wanted less asians

On a more official level there are desires to increase URM

As someone who is relatively new to this, could you tell me where I can see the emails saying they wanted fewer Asian students? Are they attached as an exhibit to something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weightage is essays, gpa and math/sci problem.

Stop making up BS

They also gave bonuses to things like FARMS.
The point is there was a minimum 3.5 GPA to apply, at which point the difference in GPA is only .5* 75weighting = 37.5 points, while the essay is 300 points.
FARMS is 90 points, more than double the possible difference in GPA.

Rigged system.

As opposed to its predecessor, where families could buy advance copies of the admission test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weightage is essays, gpa and math/sci problem.

Stop making up BS

They also gave bonuses to things like FARMS.
The point is there was a minimum 3.5 GPA to apply, at which point the difference in GPA is only .5* 75weighting = 37.5 points, while the essay is 300 points.
FARMS is 90 points, more than double the possible difference in GPA.

Rigged system.

As opposed to its predecessor, where families could buy advance copies of the admission test.

Nobody could buy admissions test - maybe you know about it so tell us where you bought it. Inquiring minds want to know!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we have emails and phone texts with folks saying they wanted less asians

On a more official level there are desires to increase URM

As someone who is relatively new to this, could you tell me where I can see the emails saying they wanted fewer Asian students? Are they attached as an exhibit to something?

I don't think they did. there were messages by some board members saying that they thought some of the changes may be discriminatory to Asians. That's different than emails saying "our intent is to weed out Asians".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we have emails and phone texts with folks saying they wanted less asians

On a more official level there are desires to increase URM

As someone who is relatively new to this, could you tell me where I can see the emails saying they wanted fewer Asian students? Are they attached as an exhibit to something?

I don't think they did. there were messages by some board members saying that they thought some of the changes may be discriminatory to Asians. That's different than emails saying "our intent is to weed out Asians".

Where can I see those emails?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

https://schoolprofiles.fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?p=108:13:::NO:0_CURRENT_SCHOOL_ID,P0_EDSL:300,0
67% Asian last year which was the first year of new rules.
72% Asian prior to that.
Next biggest demographic is white kids at about 20% - still around the same before & after the changes.

I can't find this year's admitted stats - only who got offers which is not the same thing and so not comparable to prior years' data on student body make-up.

[Anonymous]

^ ha!
The smiley face in the link appears to be a function of characters in the actual link. Seems like it works still though.

[Anonymous]

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/fairfax_county/school-board-members-called-process-for-tj-admissions-changes-anti-asian-racist-embarrassing/article_7ba0320e-74a0-11ec-bf93-4bf5ff6732bd.html

Hardly a smoking gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:we have emails and phone texts with folks saying they wanted less asians

On a more official level there are desires to increase URM

This is false. What you do have is emails and text messages that discuss a pervasive fear among the members of the school board that Brabrand's words and actions could be [/i]perceived[i] as anti-Asian. That's literally it. People like Nomani and Jackson and Dutta and Miller have tried to extrapolate those messages to be evidence of something more sinister, but have frankly embarrassed themselves in the attempt.