Supreme Court Is Asked to Hear a New Admissions Case on Race

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:TJ families are narcissists of the highest order who’d gladly see every other FCPS school decline as long as they can still sport their bumper stickers and yard signs.

Ha! I’m a TJ parent whose student has had terrible experience at TJ. So much so that I chose our base school for younger sibling who was equally as advanced (if not moreso) than the TJ student. Younger sibling expressly not allowed to apply for TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Top" students in some FCPS schools are "bottom" students in others.

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

This is just plainly, manifestly false.

To be fair, not bottom, probably, mediocre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Top" students in some FCPS schools are "bottom" students in others.

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

This is just plainly, manifestly false.

To be fair, not bottom, probably, mediocre.

The correct answer here is "above average but not exceptional". But you're also proposing plucking students out of their present situation and dropping them into a new situation, rather than taking those students from an earlier age and granting them all of the advantages that go with being a part of a community like Carson's or Longfellow's with respect to the TJ Admissions process.

We can agree on needing to add inputs to the present process to ensure that the right kids are being selected across a broad array of data points. We can also agree - potentially - on reducing the percentage of allocated seats from 1.5% to perhaps 1%. We cannot agree on eliminating representation from all participating schools. Hoping that the new School Board will at least entertain some of those ideas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Top" students in some FCPS schools are "bottom" students in others.

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

This is just plainly, manifestly false.

To be fair, not bottom, probably, mediocre.

The correct answer here is "above average but not exceptional". But you're also proposing plucking students out of their present situation and dropping them into a new situation, rather than taking those students from an earlier age and granting them all of the advantages that go with being a part of a community like Carson's or Longfellow's with respect to the TJ Admissions process.

We can agree on needing to add inputs to the present process to ensure that the right kids are being selected across a broad array of data points. We can also agree - potentially - on reducing the percentage of allocated seats from 1.5% to perhaps 1%. We cannot agree on eliminating representation from all participating schools. Hoping that the new School Board will at least entertain some of those ideas.

1.5% is almost nothing. 1% turns the idea into a joke.Whitman has 500 Students per grade, is 7 too many to give them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Top" students in some FCPS schools are "bottom" students in others.

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

This is just plainly, manifestly false.

To be fair, not bottom, probably, mediocre.

The correct answer here is "above average but not exceptional". But you're also proposing plucking students out of their present situation and dropping them into a new situation, rather than taking those students from an earlier age and granting them all of the advantages that go with being a part of a community like Carson's or Longfellow's with respect to the TJ Admissions process.

We can agree on needing to add inputs to the present process to ensure that the right kids are being selected across a broad array of data points. We can also agree - potentially - on reducing the percentage of allocated seats from 1.5% to perhaps 1%. We cannot agree on eliminating representation from all participating schools. Hoping that the new School Board will at least entertain some of those ideas.

1.5% is almost nothing. 1% turns the idea into a joke.Whitman has 500 Students per grade, is 7 too many to give them?

It's not that 7 is too many to give to Whitman... it's that I (as a staunch proponent of the reforms) see a few too many seats being allocated at the moment as a function of the huge number of schools that TJ is drawing from. I'd like to see a slight rebalancing in the direction of unallocated seats and either 1 or 1.25% seems like a good way to get there. I don't think it's quite right that private school students have been nearly completely eliminated from the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Top" students in some FCPS schools are "bottom" students in others.

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

This is just plainly, manifestly false.

To be fair, not bottom, probably, mediocre.

The correct answer here is "above average but not exceptional". But you're also proposing plucking students out of their present situation and dropping them into a new situation, rather than taking those students from an earlier age and granting them all of the advantages that go with being a part of a community like Carson's or Longfellow's with respect to the TJ Admissions process.

We can agree on needing to add inputs to the present process to ensure that the right kids are being selected across a broad array of data points. We can also agree - potentially - on reducing the percentage of allocated seats from 1.5% to perhaps 1%. We cannot agree on eliminating representation from all participating schools. Hoping that the new School Board will at least entertain some of those ideas.

1.5% is almost nothing. 1% turns the idea into a joke.Whitman has 500 Students per grade, is 7 too many to give them?

It's not that 7 is too many to give to Whitman... it's that I (as a staunch proponent of the reforms) see a few too many seats being allocated at the moment as a function of the huge number of schools that TJ is drawing from. I'd like to see a slight rebalancing in the direction of unallocated seats and either 1 or 1.25% seems like a good way to get there. I don't think it's quite right that private school students have been nearly completely eliminated from the process.

Another way to put it is that 7 is too many and they should be happy with 5 because Cooper and Longfellow need those seats because their parents poured money to science olympiad and mouth counts clubs for a reason

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Top" students in some FCPS schools are "bottom" students in others.

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

This is just plainly, manifestly false.

To be fair, not bottom, probably, mediocre.

The correct answer here is "above average but not exceptional". But you're also proposing plucking students out of their present situation and dropping them into a new situation, rather than taking those students from an earlier age and granting them all of the advantages that go with being a part of a community like Carson's or Longfellow's with respect to the TJ Admissions process.

We can agree on needing to add inputs to the present process to ensure that the right kids are being selected across a broad array of data points. We can also agree - potentially - on reducing the percentage of allocated seats from 1.5% to perhaps 1%. We cannot agree on eliminating representation from all participating schools. Hoping that the new School Board will at least entertain some of those ideas.

1.5% is almost nothing. 1% turns the idea into a joke.Whitman has 500 Students per grade, is 7 too many to give them?

It's not that 7 is too many to give to Whitman... it's that I (as a staunch proponent of the reforms) see a few too many seats being allocated at the moment as a function of the huge number of schools that TJ is drawing from. I'd like to see a slight rebalancing in the direction of unallocated seats and either 1 or 1.25% seems like a good way to get there. I don't think it's quite right that private school students have been nearly completely eliminated from the process.

Another way to put it is that 7 is too many and they should be happy with 5 because Cooper and Longfellow need those seats because their parents poured money to science olympiad and mouth counts clubs for a reason

Sure. I see that argument as well. I think it is worth discussing, hopefully backed up by data from those historically less-represented schools. As a strong TJ advocate, I want to see the right kids admitted AND I want them to come from diverse backgrounds, and I don't think those things are mutually exclusive.

I also don't know to what extent the schools in western Loudoun and outer Prince William actually fill their allocations - for me that's a significant part of the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Top" students in some FCPS schools are "bottom" students in others.

Anonymous wrote:Playing arm-chair lawyer here:

To prove a policy has disparate impact, plaintiff has to prove:
(1) establish an adverse impact caused by the practice
(2) does the practice have legitimate justification
(3) Is there any less discriminatory alternative.

I'd think allocated seats for top students in every FCPS school would be a solid practice.

This is just plainly, manifestly false.

To be fair, not bottom, probably, mediocre.

The correct answer here is "above average but not exceptional". But you're also proposing plucking students out of their present situation and dropping them into a new situation, rather than taking those students from an earlier age and granting them all of the advantages that go with being a part of a community like Carson's or Longfellow's with respect to the TJ Admissions process.

We can agree on needing to add inputs to the present process to ensure that the right kids are being selected across a broad array of data points. We can also agree - potentially - on reducing the percentage of allocated seats from 1.5% to perhaps 1%. We cannot agree on eliminating representation from all participating schools. Hoping that the new School Board will at least entertain some of those ideas.

1.5% is almost nothing. 1% turns the idea into a joke.Whitman has 500 Students per grade, is 7 too many to give them?

It's not that 7 is too many to give to Whitman... it's that I (as a staunch proponent of the reforms) see a few too many seats being allocated at the moment as a function of the huge number of schools that TJ is drawing from. I'd like to see a slight rebalancing in the direction of unallocated seats and either 1 or 1.25% seems like a good way to get there. I don't think it's quite right that private school students have been nearly completely eliminated from the process.

Another way to put it is that 7 is too many and they should be happy with 5 because Cooper and Longfellow need those seats because their parents poured money to science olympiad and mouth counts clubs for a reason

Sure. I see that argument as well. I think it is worth discussing, hopefully backed up by data from those historically less-represented schools. As a strong TJ advocate, I want to see the right kids admitted AND I want them to come from diverse backgrounds, and I don't think those things are mutually exclusive.

I also don't know to what extent the schools in western Loudoun and outer Prince William actually fill their allocations - for me that's a significant part of the conversation.

It would depend on how many parents move their kids there from Ashburn or even Fairfax for 8th grade. I think Loudoun fills its spots, and Prince William is getting there, with nearly twice as many admits now vs before.

[Anonymous]

Just build more TJs if so many students are interested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just build more TJs if so many students are interested.

The new building cost $100M to the taxpayers. Private capital filled it with equipment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just build more TJs if so many students are interested.

The new building cost $100M to the taxpayers. Private capital filled it with equipment.

More funds than that amount was allocated each for building/expanding Herndon High, McLean High, and recent high schools. Constructing a new high school building isn't a significant obstacle. A stem high school stature isn't determined by its physical structure after all, but by the advanced curriculum offered and admitting highly capable students that can master it. Going by the yearly number of applications to TJ, it's evident that over 60% of interest in advanced STEM field comes from a single minority community: Asian Americans. Yet, there appears to be no political inclination to address the needs of this community. Asian Americans have been advocating for the establishment of TJ2 for several decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just build more TJs if so many students are interested.

The new building cost $100M to the taxpayers. Private capital filled it with equipment.

More funds than that amount was allocated each for building/expanding Herndon High, McLean High, and recent high schools. Constructing a new high school building isn't a significant obstacle. A stem high school stature isn't determined by its physical structure after all, but by the advanced curriculum offered and admitting highly capable students that can master it. Going by the yearly number of applications to TJ, it's evident that over 60% of interest in advanced STEM field comes from a single minority community: Asian Americans. Yet, there appears to be no political inclination to address the needs of this community. Asian Americans have been advocating for the establishment of TJ2 for several decades.

Well, voting for Republicans won’t create the tax base to make it happen. Get Ilryong Moon to champion the cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just build more TJs if so many students are interested.

The new building cost $100M to the taxpayers. Private capital filled it with equipment.

More funds than that amount was allocated each for building/expanding Herndon High, McLean High, and recent high schools. Constructing a new high school building isn't a significant obstacle. A stem high school stature isn't determined by its physical structure after all, but by the advanced curriculum offered and admitting highly capable students that can master it. Going by the yearly number of applications to TJ, it's evident that over 60% of interest in advanced STEM field comes from a single minority community: Asian Americans. Yet, there appears to be no political inclination to address the needs of this community. Asian Americans have been advocating for the establishment of TJ2 for several decades.

Democratic school board has betrayed the trust of Asian Americans by forcefully reducing their representation at TJ through elimination of merit based admission criteria. Glenn Youngkin is the sole individual who has openly aligned with the notion that lottery-based admissions have no relevance in advanced STEM fields.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just build more TJs if so many students are interested.

The new building cost $100M to the taxpayers. Private capital filled it with equipment.

More funds than that amount was allocated each for building/expanding Herndon High, McLean High, and recent high schools. Constructing a new high school building isn't a significant obstacle. A stem high school stature isn't determined by its physical structure after all, but by the advanced curriculum offered and admitting highly capable students that can master it. Going by the yearly number of applications to TJ, it's evident that over 60% of interest in advanced STEM field comes from a single minority community: Asian Americans. Yet, there appears to be no political inclination to address the needs of this community. Asian Americans have been advocating for the establishment of TJ2 for several decades.

Democratic school board has betrayed the trust of Asian Americans by forcefully reducing their representation at TJ through elimination of merit based admission criteria. Glenn Youngkin is the sole individual who has openly aligned with the notion that lottery-based admissions have no relevance in advanced STEM fields.

If you still believe that a lottery has been used in TJ admissions, no one carrying your DNA belongs anywhere near TJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ families are narcissists of the highest order who’d gladly see every other FCPS school decline as long as they can still sport their bumper stickers and yard signs.

Ha! I’m a TJ parent whose student has had terrible experience at TJ. So much so that I chose our base school for younger sibling who was equally as advanced (if not moreso) than the TJ student. Younger sibling expressly not allowed to apply for TJ.

So explain what has been so terrible.