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:

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.

How on earth is it a progressive lie when you have huge increases in low-income Asians at the school from one year to the next?

Make it make sense!

[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.

The changes were targeted at wealthy families. Wealthy people don’t like that, so they’ve spared no expense to make you believe that the changes were about race, when in fact low-income Asian students were immeasurably helped by the changes. But it’s easier to get people angry if you claim racism.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Even poor Asians are harmed by these changes. Because poor Asians pay for prep. My DH’s family was one such family. DH, a first gen immigrant from one of the poorest nations on earth at the time, attended TJ, then a tippy top engineering program. Now we are rich, but we would never send our kids to TJ.

PP can you explain now why you would never send your kids to TJ? We are also upper middle class and can afford private schools, but if our kid got into TJ (or at least the old TJ) we would send them because of the academics. We are asian if that makes a difference. But I am interested to understand this rags-to-riches through TJ and then you don't want your kids to go there.

DP here, Asian, first-gen "rags to riches" immigrant, who also would never send our kids to TJ because it's not a good match for them. Our kids do pretty well at their home school and we value the sense of community that they get by going to the same school that their nearby friends go to. Our kids are also not sure if they want to go end up in a STEM field. Lastly, and this is perhaps the most important consideration: based on our experience "making it" it just seems to us that developing relationships and networks is a more useful skill to kids who are not hyper-capable at math and science. TJ is a wonderful school but it is not a school for everyone, and not certainly for all Asians. People want different things.

I'm rich, Asian, and love TJ for the networking. But honestly, I am glad others don't want to send their kids so we have less competition.

Isn't it wonderful that as two Asian parents, each of us can raise our kids how we want to raise them, knowing that our efforts will help guide them towards what we think is important, even if our goals are based on different ideas. This is true diversity and it is what makes America a wonderful country, with each individual being able to seek out their path, largely unhindered by discriminatory practices by the government.

Black folks feel the same way. Removing elements that are discriminatory, such as standardized exams, are a positive for all.

No one is forcing black folks to take a standardized exam, just as no one is forcing Asian children to study Latin or play ice hockey. Just because you don't want your child to take a standardized test doesn't mean you get to force other kids to also be prevented from having the opportunity to take a standardized exam. You find the way for your child to flourish, but don't get in the way of other parents finding ways for their child to flourish, and certainly not by advocating for racist government action.

If the exam ends up being a confounding variable in ascribing merit, removing it is the best solution.

Nothing stopping anyone from coming up with an exam-based school either. The Basis schools, including the one in McLean, operate this way. FCPS decided it was time to catch up to the industry best practice of eliminating the requirement for a standardized exam.

The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that the exam doesn't correlate positively with identifying relevant merit for admissions to TJ. I agree, they shouldn't be including a 100-yard dash in the exam, since that is irrelevant. But standardized testing including math, language, and problem-solving is highly relevant.

I've never seen it identified as an "industry best practice" for education to eliminate standardized tests. Not sure what your point was about Basis; it was incoherent in the context of the other sentences.

[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.

+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/

Low income Asians did not, as a group, ask for changes to TJ entrance standards. Besides, none of these superficial posturing by outside groups make up for the fact that the decision makers in this case had the stated goal of discriminating against Asians, not just the crazy 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:

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/

So your citing a reference from an organization run by woke whites as an authoritative source?

These are woke whites?
https://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/who-we-are/our-staff

More analysis:
Asian American students benefitted more than any other racial group from the increased attention to English Language Learners and free or reduced meal status.
https://www.advancingjustice-aajc.org/press-release/statement-federal-judge-blocking-efforts-fairfax-county-school-district-remove-unfair

I can't believe so many Asians can be so bad at math. How can Asians have benefited if admissions were down both as a percentage and as absolute number.

[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.

How is reducing Asian admissions into TJ helping Asians?

[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.

How is reducing Asian admissions into TJ helping Asians?

There are more Asian students at TJ today than a few years ago. As an absolute number and as a % of overall Asian students in FCPS.

And there are more Asian communities represented from all over the county, including kids from low-income Asian families and EL students.

[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.

+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.

How is reducing Asian admissions into TJ helping Asians?

There are more Asian students at TJ today than a few years ago. As an absolute number and as a % of overall Asian students in FCPS.

And there are more Asian communities represented from all over the county, including kids from low-income Asian families and EL students.

We are talking about the impact of the racist policy, under which fewer Asians were admitted for the affected years. Don't be obtuse.

[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.

+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.

How is reducing Asian admissions into TJ helping Asians?

There are more Asian students at TJ today than a few years ago. As an absolute number and as a % of overall Asian students in FCPS.

And there are more Asian communities represented from all over the county, including kids from low-income Asian families and EL students.

We are talking about the impact of the racist policy, under which fewer Asians were admitted for the affected years. Don't be obtuse.

Kinda deflates the whole “stolen seat” thing when there are more Asians at TJ today than just a few years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The argument that people are “stealing” seats from Asian kids falls flat when we see that there are actually MORE Asian students at TJ now than a few years ago.

# of Asian students at TJ
21-22: 1,258
20-21: 1,299
19-20: 1,292
18-19: 1,244
17-18: 1,210

----
That data means nothing without looking at the whole population.

2017 to 2019 -- were there less Asian American students as a whole in FCPS?

Then look at the trend between 2019 and 2021, then 2021/2022.

Whole numbers mean nothing. You need to look at the rate.

(I never realized how simple data analysis was so difficult for some people)

----

No, in this case, absolute numbers are very telling. There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago.

——

But for giggles, I ran the %s (Jan enrollments):

year, Asian students at TJ, Asian students in FCPS, % of FCPS Asian population at TJ
2021-22, 1,258, 34,712, 3.62%
2020-21, 1,299, 35,644, 3.64%
2019-20, 1,292, 36,782, 3.51%
2018-19, 1,244, 37,017, 3.36%
2017-18, 1,210, 37,235, 3.25%

The "rate" of FCPS Asian students at TJ this year is a little less than last year, but still higher than the prior three years.

So about those seats that were "stolen"...

There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago. Even when you look at the "rate".

The sense of entitlement is mind-blowing.

So there are MORE Asian students at TJ today. And you’re still complaining because FCPS opened up additional seats to include a small % of kids from low-income schools? Including low-income Asian kids?

Do you even hear how messed up that is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument that people are “stealing” seats from Asian kids falls flat when we see that there are actually MORE Asian students at TJ now than a few years ago.

# of Asian students at TJ
21-22: 1,258
20-21: 1,299
19-20: 1,292
18-19: 1,244
17-18: 1,210

----
That data means nothing without looking at the whole population.

2017 to 2019 -- were there less Asian American students as a whole in FCPS?

Then look at the trend between 2019 and 2021, then 2021/2022.

Whole numbers mean nothing. You need to look at the rate.

(I never realized how simple data analysis was so difficult for some people)

----

No, in this case, absolute numbers are very telling. There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago.

——

But for giggles, I ran the %s (Jan enrollments):

year, Asian students at TJ, Asian students in FCPS, % of FCPS Asian population at TJ
2021-22, 1,258, 34,712, 3.62%
2020-21, 1,299, 35,644, 3.64%
2019-20, 1,292, 36,782, 3.51%
2018-19, 1,244, 37,017, 3.36%
2017-18, 1,210, 37,235, 3.25%

The "rate" of FCPS Asian students at TJ this year is a little less than last year, but still higher than the prior three years.

So about those seats that were "stolen"...

There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago. Even when you look at the "rate".

The sense of entitlement is mind-blowing.

So there are MORE Asian students at TJ today. And you’re still complaining because FCPS opened up additional seats to include a small % of kids from low-income schools? Including low-income Asian kids?

Do you even hear how messed up that is?

Oh Please. TJ admission reform was always about getting in more WHITE students. Just look at the Merit Lottery. The process adopted after that was a scorched earth tactic basically saying 'if we can't have it, neither can you.'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument that people are “stealing” seats from Asian kids falls flat when we see that there are actually MORE Asian students at TJ now than a few years ago.

# of Asian students at TJ
21-22: 1,258
20-21: 1,299
19-20: 1,292
18-19: 1,244
17-18: 1,210

----
That data means nothing without looking at the whole population.

2017 to 2019 -- were there less Asian American students as a whole in FCPS?

Then look at the trend between 2019 and 2021, then 2021/2022.

Whole numbers mean nothing. You need to look at the rate.

(I never realized how simple data analysis was so difficult for some people)

----

No, in this case, absolute numbers are very telling. There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago.

——

But for giggles, I ran the %s (Jan enrollments):

year, Asian students at TJ, Asian students in FCPS, % of FCPS Asian population at TJ
2021-22, 1,258, 34,712, 3.62%
2020-21, 1,299, 35,644, 3.64%
2019-20, 1,292, 36,782, 3.51%
2018-19, 1,244, 37,017, 3.36%
2017-18, 1,210, 37,235, 3.25%

The "rate" of FCPS Asian students at TJ this year is a little less than last year, but still higher than the prior three years.

So about those seats that were "stolen"...

There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago. Even when you look at the "rate".

The sense of entitlement is mind-blowing.

So there are MORE Asian students at TJ today. And you’re still complaining because FCPS opened up additional seats to include a small % of kids from low-income schools? Including low-income Asian kids?

Do you even hear how messed up that is?

Why do you make it about race? The people complaining are just saying that they rigged the admissions such that the most qualified didn't seem to make the cut. GPA of 3.5 without considering the level of courses and some half-baked math or science question plus personal essays really does not do much. On top of that you are adding geographical quotas regardless of AAP. I mean they are doing their absolute best for Asians who usually get far higher GPAs in far more difficult courses in AAP schools to be screwed in the process. Now it has been revealed the school administrators openly joked about screwing the Asians in this manner. Already people are noticing worse outcomes in AMC 8 scores, higher drop out rates, and remedial classes for 9th graders at TJ.

If I am a kid, this is a sobering experience. I now know that if I am Asian, someone can take away something I have worked hard for at a whim. All of a sudden. Go to any AAP middle school and go hear what the students have to say. I have seen the chat messages. I feel sorry for these kids. There must be a better way than to be manufacturing a racial divide among the kids at such an early age.

[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:

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.

How is reducing Asian admissions into TJ helping Asians?

There are more Asian students at TJ today than a few years ago. As an absolute number and as a % of overall Asian students in FCPS.

And there are more Asian communities represented from all over the county, including kids from low-income Asian families and EL students.

We are talking about the impact of the racist policy, under which fewer Asians were admitted for the affected years. Don't be obtuse.

Kinda deflates the whole “stolen seat” thing when there are more Asians at TJ today than just a few years ago.

Did you fail intro stat class in high school? Asian is the only racial group saw a decrease in percentage from about 70% to 50% under the new policy. FCPS designed that policy proxy for racial groups. And it worked as designed.

[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/

Low income Asians did not, as a group, ask for changes to TJ entrance standards. Besides, none of these superficial posturing by outside groups make up for the fact that the decision makers in this case had the stated goal of discriminating against Asians, not just the crazy rich ones.

If Niyati Shaw believed even 1/10th of what he/she claims they’d be calling for TJ’s dissolution.

The only thing the TJ AAG types want is a TJ that acts more like an Ivy League school when it comes to admissions so that they can get maximum mileage when they slip into every conversation that they attended TJ. They don’t give a crap about anyone else and are more than happy if TJ takes up over 50% of the School Board’s attention every year, to the detriment of the schools attended by over 97% of FCPS students in high school. There has never been a bigger group of self-indulgent narcissists in the history of secondary education.

[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/

Low income Asians did not, as a group, ask for changes to TJ entrance standards. Besides, none of these superficial posturing by outside groups make up for the fact that the decision makers in this case had the stated goal of discriminating against Asians, not just the crazy rich ones.

Low-income groups rarely have the political capital to ask for anything as a group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The argument that people are “stealing” seats from Asian kids falls flat when we see that there are actually MORE Asian students at TJ now than a few years ago.

# of Asian students at TJ
21-22: 1,258
20-21: 1,299
19-20: 1,292
18-19: 1,244
17-18: 1,210

----
That data means nothing without looking at the whole population.

2017 to 2019 -- were there less Asian American students as a whole in FCPS?

Then look at the trend between 2019 and 2021, then 2021/2022.

Whole numbers mean nothing. You need to look at the rate.

(I never realized how simple data analysis was so difficult for some people)

----

No, in this case, absolute numbers are very telling. There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago.

——

But for giggles, I ran the %s (Jan enrollments):

year, Asian students at TJ, Asian students in FCPS, % of FCPS Asian population at TJ
2021-22, 1,258, 34,712, 3.62%
2020-21, 1,299, 35,644, 3.64%
2019-20, 1,292, 36,782, 3.51%
2018-19, 1,244, 37,017, 3.36%
2017-18, 1,210, 37,235, 3.25%

The "rate" of FCPS Asian students at TJ this year is a little less than last year, but still higher than the prior three years.

So about those seats that were "stolen"...

There are MORE Asian students at TJ this year than a few years ago. Even when you look at the "rate".

The sense of entitlement is mind-blowing.

So there are MORE Asian students at TJ today. And you’re still complaining because FCPS opened up additional seats to include a small % of kids from low-income schools? Including low-income Asian kids?

Do you even hear how messed up that is?

Oh Please. TJ admission reform was always about getting in more WHITE students. Just look at the Merit Lottery. The process adopted after that was a scorched earth tactic basically saying 'if we can't have it, neither can you.'

Nope. White kids aren’t interested. Less than half of eligible white kids even bother applying. 90%+ of eligible Asian & black apply.