TJ admissions change from Merit to Essay impact to Asian American Students

[Anonymous]

These are actual fall enrollment numbers for TJ from the FCPS school profile data (https://t.ly/R7Mvj):

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


Why would they reject high math qualified applicants in favor of lower math applicants?

Why doesn't Fcps reveal this in the initial news release? That would show which group gets discriminated the most.

If they did, that would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Why would they reject high math qualified applicants in favor of lower math applicants?

Why doesn't Fcps reveal this in the initial news release? That would show which group gets discriminated the most.

If they did, that would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

Yup. That data would show that there may be discrimination against black and multiracial students.

Acceptance rates (class of 25):
Hispanic 21%
Asian 19%
ALL 18%
White 17%
Black 14%
Multiracial/Other* 13%

The data shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

And the number of Asian students at TJ is almost at a record high..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Why would they reject high math qualified applicants in favor of lower math applicants?

Why doesn't Fcps reveal this in the initial news release? That would show which group gets discriminated the most.

If they did, that would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

Yup. That data would show that there may be discrimination against black and multiracial students.

Acceptance rates (class of 25):
Hispanic 21%
Asian 19%
ALL 18%
White 17%
Black 14%
Multiracial/Other* 13%

The data shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

And the number of Asian students at TJ is almost at a record high..

Nah. These numbers mean nothing. You have to look at the qualifications of Asian applicants vs those of applicants from other races. Asian students, usually performing better on average, face much higher bars for most programs from AAP, TJ, to college admissions. That's a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Why would they reject high math qualified applicants in favor of lower math applicants?

Why doesn't Fcps reveal this in the initial news release? That would show which group gets discriminated the most.

If they did, that would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

Yup. That data would show that there may be discrimination against black and multiracial students.

Acceptance rates (class of 25):
Hispanic 21%
Asian 19%
ALL 18%
White 17%
Black 14%
Multiracial/Other* 13%

The data shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

And the number of Asian students at TJ is almost at a record high..

Nah. These numbers mean nothing. You have to look at the qualifications of Asian applicants vs those of applicants from other races. Asian students, usually performing better on average, face much higher bars for most programs from AAP, TJ, to college admissions. That's a fact.

That's already factored in since the first cut is the top 1.5% and is race-blind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Why would they reject high math qualified applicants in favor of lower math applicants?

Why doesn't Fcps reveal this in the initial news release? That would show which group gets discriminated the most.

If they did, that would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

Yup. That data would show that there may be discrimination against black and multiracial students.

Acceptance rates (class of 25):
Hispanic 21%
Asian 19%
ALL 18%
White 17%
Black 14%
Multiracial/Other* 13%

The data shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

And the number of Asian students at TJ is almost at a record high..

Nah. These numbers mean nothing. You have to look at the qualifications of Asian applicants vs those of applicants from other races. Asian students, usually performing better on average, face much higher bars for most programs from AAP, TJ, to college admissions. That's a fact.

These numbers mean more than the estimated, irrelevant numbers posted at the top of this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?
Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

How do they consistently maintain the admitted percentage of Asian students within the tight confines of 70 to 74%, even prior to admissions change, and then further compress it to a lower spectrum, forcefully keeping it between 54 to 57%? It's anything but race-blind. It's plausible that the selection process undergoes successive rounds of racial scrutiny to meticulously engineer such narrow margins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?

You’ve narrowed the y-axis to make the change look more significant that it actually was.

The average % of Asian students in the admitted class was 68% before the change and now it’s 58%. So 10% drop. And, looking at absolute numbers, the number of Asian students per admitted class went from 330 to 321.

There are NINE fewer Asian students per admitted class on average.

AND you got some numbers wrong.


2022 data
https://thebullelephant.com/tjhsst-admission-stats-class-of-2022/

The PP’s numbers are not only irrelevant but WRONG.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?
Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

How do they consistently maintain the admitted percentage of Asian students within the tight confines of 70 to 74%, even prior to admissions change, and then further compress it to a lower spectrum, forcefully keeping it between 54 to 57%? It's anything but race-blind. It's plausible that the selection process undergoes successive rounds of racial scrutiny to meticulously engineer such narrow margins.

Without a thumb on the scale, consistent racial quota management is impossible.

[Anonymous]

6. COURT RULED THERE IS NO DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIAN STUDENTS
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
Pg 7
“we are satisfied that the challenged admissions policy does not disparately impact Asian American students”

The SCOTUS left this ruling in place:
https://virginiamercury.com/2024/02/20/supreme-court-wont-hear-thomas-jefferson-admissions-case/



7. THE DATA BACKS THIS UP:

There are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than almost any other year in the school’s history.

Asian students still make up the majority of students. More than all other groups, combined.

And Asian students are still accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students (class of 25).

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


The data also shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%



8. LOW-INCOME ASIAN STUDENTS BENEFITED THE MOST FROM CHANGES
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/221280.P.pdf
page 16
"Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw a sixfold increase in offers, and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?
Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

How do they consistently maintain the admitted percentage of Asian students within the tight confines of 70 to 74%, even prior to admissions change, and then further compress it to a lower spectrum, forcefully keeping it between 54 to 57%? It's anything but race-blind. It's plausible that the selection process undergoes successive rounds of racial scrutiny to meticulously engineer such narrow margins.

Once you understand the 1.5% allocation to every middle school, it's clear as day and mathematically an obvious outcome why why the percentage dropped to ~55%. Simply put, Asians have elected to concentrate at a small number of middle schools.

The simple fact that very few Asians attend and apply from schools like Sandburg and Whitman means those seats tend not to go to Asian kids. Therefore, the new expanded enrollment at TJ has a lesser percentage of Asians. It's simple proportions and not discrimination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?
Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

How do they consistently maintain the admitted percentage of Asian students within the tight confines of 70 to 74%, even prior to admissions change, and then further compress it to a lower spectrum, forcefully keeping it between 54 to 57%? It's anything but race-blind. It's plausible that the selection process undergoes successive rounds of racial scrutiny to meticulously engineer such narrow margins.

Once you understand the 1.5% allocation to every middle school, it's clear as day and mathematically an obvious outcome why why the percentage dropped to ~55%. Simply put, Asians have elected to concentrate at a small number of middle schools.

The simple fact that very few Asians attend and apply from schools like Sandburg and Whitman means those seats tend not to go to Asian kids. Therefore, the new expanded enrollment at TJ has a lesser percentage of Asians. It's simple proportions and not discrimination.

It’s not ~55%. PP posted incorrect data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Why would they reject high math qualified applicants in favor of lower math applicants?

Why doesn't Fcps reveal this in the initial news release? That would show which group gets discriminated the most.

If they did, that would be like shooting themselves in the foot.

Yup. That data would show that there may be discrimination against black and multiracial students.

Acceptance rates (class of 25):
Hispanic 21%
Asian 19%
ALL 18%
White 17%
Black 14%
Multiracial/Other* 13%

The data shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

And the number of Asian students at TJ is almost at a record high..

That's great! At least discrimination against Asians is not an issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone is facing discrimination, it’s not Asian students.

The number of Asian students enrolled at TJ by school year (fall):


Aside from 2020 & 2019, there are MORE Asian students at TJ since the admissions change than any other year in the school’s history.



The data shows that Asian students were accepted at a higher rate than almost all other groups, aside from Hispanic students.

Asian 19%
Black 14%
Hispanic 21%
White 17%
Multiracial/Other* 13%
ALL 18%


The number of Asian students at TJ is almost at a record high. And they are admitted at a higher than average rate.

Do you have a link to this chart or did you make it yourself?

Obviously made it themself given 2023 is written twice.

OK, that would explain why the numbers are wrong and the graphs look incorrect.

Here you go - extra row removed:


These are fall enrollments.

Feel free to check my work via school profiles: https://t.ly/R7Mvj

The numbers from 2017 and 2018 don't seem available at your link.

The numbers at your link do not line with the students that were admitted, I suppose a lot of students decided not to attend but I thought they would backfill with the waitlist.

There are no perfect answers only trade-offs but it seems like you could still have a test alongside a 1.5% plan and a FARM preference. That was you get the most prepared students from those groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Asian count remains more or less same, but the Asian percent has gone down?
Along with the admissions change, the total number of seats were expanded by 100 seats, but Asian students were solely excluded from participating in the expanded seat assignment. There are consistently 1000+ declined Asian applicants each year, largest among all ethnicities, and none of them are allowed to receive a single seat from the expanded seat quota.

How do they consistently maintain the admitted percentage of Asian students within the tight confines of 70 to 74%, even prior to admissions change, and then further compress it to a lower spectrum, forcefully keeping it between 54 to 57%? It's anything but race-blind. It's plausible that the selection process undergoes successive rounds of racial scrutiny to meticulously engineer such narrow margins.

I don't think you can argue they have been suppressing asians a whole lot through some secret formula. If you go back 10 years before the change there were more white students than asian students. In the last year of the old system, there were 4 times as many asians as whites. If there were racists running the admissions, they were doing a really shitty job.

The fact of the matter is that asians are easy to discriminate against and they have almost no political presence and no seat at the table. So if somebody has to be lunch, it's them.