Federal judge rules that admissions changes at nation’s top public school discriminate against Asian

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

+1

“We continue to be committed to expanding educational opportunities for all. The Asian American community is an incredibly diverse group, and the revised admissions process benefits all students, including Asian American students who are low-income or English language learners, a fact that the Coalition for TJ ignores,” said Niyati Shah, Advancing Justice – AAJC’s Director of Litigation. “All students deserve a high quality education where they can also learn and benefit from the diversity of their peers. We support measures that promote equal educational opportunities for all students, and reject attempts to obscure the rich diversity of our communities.”

https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/civil-rights-groups-file-to-submit-amicus-brief-that-supports-admissions-policies-that-address-structural-barriers-to-education/

There is no shortage of misinformed, self hating Asians. The fact is they were supporting a racist process. see title of thread.

Maybe they want to help ALL Asians, not just the rich ones.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

Or I’ve been studying TJ admissions for a dozen years and I know EXACTLY what I’m talking about.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

And that’s great - but clearly they didn’t work. Meanwhile the $5K, 16-month Curie program yielded more students to the Class of 2024 than there have been low-income students over the past 15 years.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

0.6% low-income is disgraceful.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

0.6% low-income is disgraceful.

In a class of 480, that number would be 3.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

Or I’ve been studying TJ admissions for a dozen years and I know EXACTLY what I’m talking about.

Studying TJ admissions for over a dozen years! Well done. Where's your Phd, peer reviewed publication?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

+1

“We continue to be committed to expanding educational opportunities for all. The Asian American community is an incredibly diverse group, and the revised admissions process benefits all students, including Asian American students who are low-income or English language learners, a fact that the Coalition for TJ ignores,” said Niyati Shah, Advancing Justice – AAJC’s Director of Litigation. “All students deserve a high quality education where they can also learn and benefit from the diversity of their peers. We support measures that promote equal educational opportunities for all students, and reject attempts to obscure the rich diversity of our communities.”

https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/civil-rights-groups-file-to-submit-amicus-brief-that-supports-admissions-policies-that-address-structural-barriers-to-education/

There is no shortage of misinformed, self hating Asians. The fact is they were supporting a racist process. see title of thread.

Maybe they want to help ALL Asians, not just the rich ones.

Or maybe they just want to stick it to their immigrant parents. now that they don't have to struggle. like all the other progressives drinking wine while pontificating about poor people and wanting to save them, while really knowing nothing about them or stuggle.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

0.6% low-income is disgraceful.

In a class of 480, that number would be 3.

Claiming the racist TJ policy was benefitting low income Asians is another progressive lie. Besides, you can't make a racist policy that happens to benefit low-income students, it's still racist.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

0.6% low-income is disgraceful.

here comes the social engineer. armed with arbitrary data.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

0.6% low-income is disgraceful.

In a class of 480, that number would be 3.

Claiming the racist TJ policy was benefitting low income Asians is another progressive lie. Besides, you can't make a racist policy that happens to benefit low-income students, it's still racist.

It is just another divide and rule tactic.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

Or I’ve been studying TJ admissions for a dozen years and I know EXACTLY what I’m talking about.

Studying TJ admissions for over a dozen years! Well done. Where's your Phd, peer reviewed publication?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

You are so wrong! Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about.

0.6% (less than 1%) of the admitted class of 2024 was low-income.

It's not the Milton Hershey School. Their are organizations such TJ Test Prep, and others, that provide free services to low-income households.

0.6% low-income is disgraceful.

here comes the social engineer. armed with arbitrary data.

Nothing "arbitrary" about it. 0.6% low-income is disgraceful.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The have hat has not been moved from the ultra wealthy communities to economically disadvantaged ones. The top TJ feeders like Carson and Rocky Run are still getting tons of kids in. Now schools that rarely got any one in, Poe/Glasgow/Whitman/whoever, are also assured a solid chunk of seats.

Which communities lost out? Middle class. Rich never give from themselves to low income. Frost went from something like 25 seats to 9, which is probably only the 1.5% they are required to get.

Not sure exactly how it impacted different schools but Elaine Tholen admitted to the McLean PTSA that the school, already overcrowded, picked up 20-30 additional freshmen from Longfellow last fall due to the TJ admissions changes.

This is the problem with how this TJ reform was done. Mclean has far fewer spots at TJ and the School Board did nothing to address the already existing issue with overcrowding at McLean High School ( which are now further overcrowded)

The good way would have been to effect reform at TJ and concurrently address issues at McLean, Langley, Marshall, Oakton, Chantilly and other schools impacted by the TJ policy change. Throw in some dollars to have advanced math/science classes.

The school board did not do that. Instead they fed the flames of "Asians are preppers and cheats". Reform did not have to be about us vs them. But you don't get political mileage unless you make the issue partisan. And this is what the school board did. Tholen was a deer in headlights when all this was happening.

They are certainly preppers, but not cheats, and the testing requirements were biased. Idk what you guys think, but they aren’t going back to the biased process

You are conflating two issues. Issue 1: The previous process was broken. Issue 2: The new process is fair/equitable. You will find many folks like me in agreement with Issue 1 - that process was broken (Curie exemplifies why it was broken) and we are not going back. Let us only talk about Issue 2. The new process is no good and largely because the School Board was in a hurry to implement. Any solution will likely result in fewer Asians at TJ. Most reasonable Asians would be ok as long as you soften the blow by offering some TJ like courses at their home schools. Instead we have had an approach where Braband and the school board have created a victor/vanquished dynamic and supported canards of "cheating Asians" to rally their idealogical base.

This makes no sense. You are assuming this but it's a strange assumption. What do "most reasonable XXXs" want? They don't want a better CS course for their senior year. They either want the cohort, if that is their goal, or they want the cachet, if that is their goal. Neither of those are achieved by adding DiffEq to Mclean. The first is achieved by -going to Mclean-.

I am not assuming. I would do it. Many that I know would do it. What I feel right now is that the school board has changed the rules of the game on TJ on me (my child's odds are way lower and it does not matter to my child - the impcated individual - that the School Board added yet another social justice badge of honor at his expense). Further, the Board has done nothing to fix overcrowding at Mclean (an issue that predates the TJ reform and the reform has further exacerbated it). To me it feels like the Board is tell me to eff-off and they will do anything they can because they have the power. I felt the same when McConnell reused to consider Merrick Garland for Scalia's seat. It was the tyranny of the majority. We have the power and we will ride roughshod over you.

So yes you can go on with your assumption that Asian parents want nothing less than a test that they can "game". It feeds the stereotype that has been assiduously cultivated on this Board - you cannot allow for the existence of reasonable Asian parents. Hence you advocate for this new broken process as the only alternative to the past one

I don't think you guys understand. I am an immigrant who came to this country 20 years back. I have encountered racism as a brown Asian man. However, this act of intentionally targeting people like me and my kids has been the worst by far. Calling us overrepresented and making policies to weed us out. Very upsetting. FCPS owes us an apology.

Are you going to continue to vote for every progressive during elections? If so, nothing is going to change.

I am very struggling with that - as a staunch politically active democrat who has contributed time and money. Still think the hateful progressives are small in number. I am definitely having second thoughts though. Not because I don't believe in progressive ideas but because I can't get behind the hatefulness and thoughtless destructivess of many progressives. It is a "Let's destroy first and ask questions later" approach.

Your concerns are very valid... but to be honest, if "hateful" is what you're worried about, you have much bigger issues with the red hat folks than with a few people who are trying to expand access for lower-income Asians in addition to other populations.

hence the struggle. however, I have to say I didn't realize the extent of the anti-Asian hate. and the sheer thoughtlessness. I am still not ready to move sides but that's possibly because I am as liberal as they come.

btw adding low-income asian is just specious and you so transparent. don't make it worse. you either don't understand or don't care about low-income asians.

Why? They've been cut out of the process for generations, and the evidence is in the numbers. Now they're present in the school and celebrated.

Because your hypocrisy and lack of knowledge is evident.

1. you are talking about asians only after your intervention was judged as being racist.
2. low-income asians very much believe in meritocracy. you are just making faulty assumptions about them. you have no idea!

I think ignorant, racist folks like you will lead to democrats being a fringe party.

1. Pro-reform groups have been talking about low-income Asians for the entirety of this process.

2. That's fine, they can believe in meritocracy all they way - but the process cut them out because of the prevalence of boutique exam prep programs. Maybe they were spending money on them as well, but they weren't showing up in the admitted student pool until the Class of 2025. Perhaps merit has been defined poorly if low-income Asians were deemed by the TJ process to be unworthy of selection.

+1

“We continue to be committed to expanding educational opportunities for all. The Asian American community is an incredibly diverse group, and the revised admissions process benefits all students, including Asian American students who are low-income or English language learners, a fact that the Coalition for TJ ignores,” said Niyati Shah, Advancing Justice – AAJC’s Director of Litigation. “All students deserve a high quality education where they can also learn and benefit from the diversity of their peers. We support measures that promote equal educational opportunities for all students, and reject attempts to obscure the rich diversity of our communities.”

https://www.naacpldf.org/press-release/civil-rights-groups-file-to-submit-amicus-brief-that-supports-admissions-policies-that-address-structural-barriers-to-education/

There is no shortage of misinformed, self hating Asians. The fact is they were supporting a racist process. see title of thread.

Maybe they want to help ALL Asians, not just the rich ones.

Or maybe they just want to stick it to their immigrant parents. now that they don't have to struggle. like all the other progressives drinking wine while pontificating about poor people and wanting to save them, while really knowing nothing about them or stuggle.

Clearly you DGAF about kids from low-income Asian families. Maybe you should be thankful someone is.