TJ Class 2025 Admission Data

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

[Anonymous]

The difference is everyone had access to TJ already!!! Comparing it to segregated schools is really ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

As a white immigrant, I wholeheartedly agree. So many people in this country are obsessed about races. In my view, everyone should be treated equally regardless of race. Race should play absolutely no role in anything, like eye color.

[Anonymous]

Yup this is all social engineering and wokeness run amuck. The most talented students should be there. And yes some folks aren't applying. Base schools are going to have more talent in many cases because the top 10 to 20 percent at some schools is higher than the top 1.5 percent across the county.

[Anonymous]

What are the motives of people who advocated for these changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

Even without looking at race, the geographic distribution policy, of having a minimum number of students from each school, would serve to artificially increase certain races and reduce others. This is how elite colleges reduced the number of Jews 100 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

Even without looking at race, the geographic distribution policy, of having a minimum number of students from each school, would serve to artificially increase certain races and reduce others. This is how elite colleges reduced the number of Jews 100 years ago.

Jews were also given poor subjective and personality scores to keep them out just like what is being done to Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

Even without looking at race, the geographic distribution policy, of having a minimum number of students from each school, would serve to artificially increase certain races and reduce others. This is how elite colleges reduced the number of Jews 100 years ago.

Jews were also given poor subjective and personality scores to keep them out just like what is being done to Asians.

Just like with the Jews, I don't think it's going to matter. Despite the aggressive exclusion, Jews went on to dominate finance, Law, medicine and Hollywood. Asians will do the same.

This is a blessing in disguise. The kids that don't make it to TJ will stay back at base schools and get into the same top schools without working as hard for 4 years. A few of TJ kid's friends who didn't get into TJ 4 years ago all did very well with college admissions - Ivies and other T-20 schools.

It's the high performing URMs that will end up being affected the most. There will be a shadow of doubt over their heads (everyone thinking they are quota kids) and their accomplishments will always be questioned. Pity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

Even without looking at race, the geographic distribution policy, of having a minimum number of students from each school, would serve to artificially increase certain races and reduce others. This is how elite colleges reduced the number of Jews 100 years ago.

Jews were also given poor subjective and personality scores to keep them out just like what is being done to Asians.

Just like with the Jews, I don't think it's going to matter. Despite the aggressive exclusion, Jews went on to dominate finance, Law, medicine and Hollywood. Asians will do the same.

This is a blessing in disguise. The kids that don't make it to TJ will stay back at base schools and get into the same top schools without working as hard for 4 years. A few of TJ kid's friends who didn't get into TJ 4 years ago all did very well with college admissions - Ivies and other T-20 schools.

It's the high performing URMs that will end up being affected the most. There will be a shadow of doubt over their heads (everyone thinking they are quota kids) and their accomplishments will always be questioned. Pity.

Discrimination against Jews in college admissions disappeared after about 40 years so discrimination against Asians should also disappear since it’s been about 40 years now. Hopefully, Harvard case will finally do that. Thanks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

Even without looking at race, the geographic distribution policy, of having a minimum number of students from each school, would serve to artificially increase certain races and reduce others. This is how elite colleges reduced the number of Jews 100 years ago.

Jews were also given poor subjective and personality scores to keep them out just like what is being done to Asians.

Just like with the Jews, I don't think it's going to matter. Despite the aggressive exclusion, Jews went on to dominate finance, Law, medicine and Hollywood. Asians will do the same.

This is a blessing in disguise. The kids that don't make it to TJ will stay back at base schools and get into the same top schools without working as hard for 4 years. A few of TJ kid's friends who didn't get into TJ 4 years ago all did very well with college admissions - Ivies and other T-20 schools.

It's the high performing URMs that will end up being affected the most. There will be a shadow of doubt over their heads (everyone thinking they are quota kids) and their accomplishments will always be questioned. Pity.

Discrimination against Jews in college admissions disappeared after about 40 years so discrimination against Asians should also disappear since it’s been about 40 years now. Hopefully, Harvard case will finally do that. Thanks

I doubt that. Jews are, at the end of the day, White. Most people can't tell the difference between an average Jew and an average white person. Anything that would indicate "Jewness" could be edited out of the college application process and there's no box to check to indicate you are one. Not so with Asians. Plus, the Jewish immigration died down with a few large waves. You can expect Indians to be coming to this country in large numbers for many, many years simply because there's more where they come from. Without the benefit inter-racial marriages, Asians will continue to stand out for generations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

Even without looking at race, the geographic distribution policy, of having a minimum number of students from each school, would serve to artificially increase certain races and reduce others. This is how elite colleges reduced the number of Jews 100 years ago.

Jews were also given poor subjective and personality scores to keep them out just like what is being done to Asians.

Just like with the Jews, I don't think it's going to matter. Despite the aggressive exclusion, Jews went on to dominate finance, Law, medicine and Hollywood. Asians will do the same.

This is a blessing in disguise. The kids that don't make it to TJ will stay back at base schools and get into the same top schools without working as hard for 4 years. A few of TJ kid's friends who didn't get into TJ 4 years ago all did very well with college admissions - Ivies and other T-20 schools.

It's the high performing URMs that will end up being affected the most. There will be a shadow of doubt over their heads (everyone thinking they are quota kids) and their accomplishments will always be questioned. Pity.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anything the reduces the number of seats help by the majority will be called racist. Basically, TJ must remain 70-75% of one race forever or that's discrimination against that race. Forget other minorities and whether they have access. Imagine if white people were allowed to argue that reducing the number of white kids in segregated schools was discrimination against white students.

If Applicant's are not allowed to indicate race on the application, I don't think we would see this reaction. Something that reduces the majority is very different than targeting the majority with policies to reduce them. Let's take race out of the application process entirely.

Even without looking at race, the geographic distribution policy, of having a minimum number of students from each school, would serve to artificially increase certain races and reduce others. This is how elite colleges reduced the number of Jews 100 years ago.

Jews were also given poor subjective and personality scores to keep them out just like what is being done to Asians.

Just like with the Jews, I don't think it's going to matter. Despite the aggressive exclusion, Jews went on to dominate finance, Law, medicine and Hollywood. Asians will do the same.

This is a blessing in disguise. The kids that don't make it to TJ will stay back at base schools and get into the same top schools without working as hard for 4 years. A few of TJ kid's friends who didn't get into TJ 4 years ago all did very well with college admissions - Ivies and other T-20 schools.

It's the high performing URMs that will end up being affected the most. There will be a shadow of doubt over their heads (everyone thinking they are quota kids) and their accomplishments will always be questioned. Pity.

+1

That has always been the case. Bigotry of low expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the motives of people who advocated for these changes?

Cynical take:

Problem: Unethical person cannot advance their agenda because they are racist and incompetent so nobody listens to them.
Solution: Unify the concept of "incompetence" with the state of being a URM. Now it's racist to dismiss someone as incompetent, and the complaint of racism can be thrown back into the face of the critic.
Problem: Anyone with half-decent critical thinking skills can see the problem with the plan.
Solution: Get rid of advanced math. Overall critical thinking iwithn the school system will degrade, and arguments based on logic will fall out of favor regardless, because they show support for causes in opposition to those endorsed by the school system.
Problem: That's insane.
Solution: Appoint a group of Well-Meaning People to decide who is sane and who isn't to put the issue to rest.

Not saying that's the full story, of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What are the motives of people who advocated for these changes?

Here's my cynical take. I'm also white, FWTW.

White, affluent people in their 40s and 50s remember the days when they could get into great colleges, get into the magnet schools, and receive lots of accolades without putting in that much effort. Asians show up and start dominating everything because they're doing weekend schooling and generally working harder. White people feel like their kids deserve to get into schools like TJ and win academic awards based on their kids' raw aptitude, even if there are a lot of Asian kids who are technically at a higher achievement level. They don't want their kids to do extra schooling or need to work harder, but they know they can't otherwise keep up with the Asian kids. So, the solution is to eliminate any advantages that would be gained from working harder.

The goal is not and never has been to increase URM participation. It's to increase the number of white kids at TJ. It's also to make bright, white kids who do minimal supplementation look every bit as competitive as the Asian kids who are doing a lot of academic enrichment. URMs are just being used as a tool.