TJ Discrimination Case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

That's an ugly, inaccurate statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

FCPS disagrees with that premise and it is their decision on how to best fill a class of gifted children as long as they do it legally.

[Anonymous]

Asian vs. non-Asian testing differences are so statistically stark that you would have to bend the definition of "gifted" incredibly far to move meaningfully away from 100%.

See, e.g., https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2022-illinois-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report.pdf, p. 8. The results don't differ meaningfully by state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

If anything, the new process is working towards exactly that: finding the most talented students. In years past, those who were test-prepped to the max had the best chances. Not what I would consider the most talented by the very definition of the word. Now, selecting minority kids from very low-SES areas who have managed to somehow have excellent GPA while taking honors courses? That's real talent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

If anything, the new process is working towards exactly that: finding the most talented students. In years past, those who were test-prepped to the max had the best chances. Not what I would consider the most talented by the very definition of the word. Now, selecting minority kids from very low-SES areas who have managed to somehow have excellent GPA while taking honors courses? That's real talent.

What do you think the racial composition of "minority kids from very low-SES areas who have managed to somehow have excellent GPA while taking honors courses" is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

If anything, the new process is working towards exactly that: finding the most talented students. In years past, those who were test-prepped to the max had the best chances. Not what I would consider the most talented by the very definition of the word. Now, selecting minority kids from very low-SES areas who have managed to somehow have excellent GPA while taking honors courses? That's real talent.

You're omitting that those "test prepped" kids also earned 4.0 GPAs and many paired them with excellent extracurriculars. They were excellent students by almost every traditional measure.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't expand access to low SES kids, but progressives have a bad tendency. They like to belittle these bright, young kids as robots whose only characteristic going for them is performing well on tests.

[Anonymous]

Yeah it turns out that really driven kids prepare for tests. Who knew?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

Yes, but the debate is how do you measure that? The old system favored prep over talent. The new system isn't much better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

If anything, the new process is working towards exactly that: finding the most talented students. In years past, those who were test-prepped to the max had the best chances. Not what I would consider the most talented by the very definition of the word. Now, selecting minority kids from very low-SES areas who have managed to somehow have excellent GPA while taking honors courses? That's real talent.

You're omitting that those "test prepped" kids also earned 4.0 GPAs and many paired them with excellent extracurriculars. They were excellent students by almost every traditional measure.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't expand access to low SES kids, but progressives have a bad tendency. They like to belittle these bright, young kids as robots whose only characteristic going for them is performing well on tests.

I thought everyone gets a 4.0 these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asian vs. non-Asian testing differences are so statistically stark that you would have to bend the definition of "gifted" incredibly far to move meaningfully away from 100%.

See, e.g., https://reports.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/2022-illinois-sat-suite-of-assessments-annual-report.pdf, p. 8. The results don't differ meaningfully by state.

Shh...just ban SAT, AP subject matter tests, tough organic chemistry courses, TJ admissions test...anything where Asians are doing too well and whites are not. use equity as excuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

Exactly - they just can't stand to be tolerant of other races or nationalities. We broke their bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

That's an ugly, inaccurate statement.

DP. It's ugly, but it's not inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TJ lawsuit folks should keep getting continuances until the Supreme Court overturned affirmative action at which point their lawsuit will have a better chance.

I'm not sure that it would. The judge found the changes were made with discriminatory intent.
However, if TJ never existed and a school was opened brand new with this admissions process, I don't think it would be considered racist.
The issue is they changed it with an eye on reducing numbers for Asians, but was on its face racially neutral. Geography is being used as a proxy for race, but they are not admitting to it.

Weird I read the judge laughed it out of court because they couldn't show any harm done.

Yes, the group claiming harm still has a higher number of seats than any other group in fact I think it's around 60% so hard to take this claim seriously.

It would be 80% w/o discrimination.

This is the core of the argument for adherents of the previous status quo. They genuinely believe that TJ should be nearly 100% Asian. These are the same people who used to claim that the existence of ANY Black or Hispanic students at TJ was de facto evidence of affirmative action. They think that they're smarter than everyone else, period.

No TJ should have the most talented students in STEM regardless of race, if thats 100% purple people so be it. The race to the bottom that is caring about equity vs actual talent is ridiculous.

Perhaps, but the old system where people were buying the test answers was definitely not identifying the most gifted but it was identifying those willing to do anything to get ahead which is why TJ became so toxic.