Transferring back to base school from TJ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nightmare situation. If you talk to your TJ counselor or anyone there, they’ll downplay your student’s feelings and insist that getting Cs and Ds is normal at TJ. However, low grades aren’t typical for an average-performing student, even with extracurricular involvement. The administration is now dealing with a significant number of low-performing students especially after admissions change, and your child is just another statistic to them. With pressure to retain the class as a whole and minimize dropouts, they would never suggest that even the poorest performers leave TJ. They seem indifferent to your struggling student’s self-esteem or future college prospects. All you hear is to stay put, with no guidance on how to help your student rise from the bottom to the top of the class.

The end of the year is the best time to consider making a switch. Start a confidential discussion with your base school counselor in the spring, around the time course selections for the following year are made. If the switch needs at beginning or mid-year, the classes available will depend on enrollment levels, which may limit your course options, but the nightmare will be over.

Black students in the bottom 30% of TJ goes to Ivies. Therefore, if a black student, stay and graduate even if it means graduating in the bottom 20-30%. Everyone else, go back to base school to improve the gpa.

Not really. Ivies receive applicants from all over the US and world, and there an enough pool of black applicants with 3.5+ GPA and decent SAT. It is easier to build a relatively impressive academic profile from base school by taking slightly challenging courses and score top grades, and teachers recommendations would reiterate that. It is unlikely a TJ teacher would write a believable recommendation letter touting exceptional performance when the student is in bottom 20-30% of class with C or Ds, Irrespective of student race.

And yet that's not the case. You may believe that it should be but in reality, it isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nightmare situation. If you talk to your TJ counselor or anyone there, they’ll downplay your student’s feelings and insist that getting Cs and Ds is normal at TJ. However, low grades aren’t typical for an average-performing student, even with extracurricular involvement. The administration is now dealing with a significant number of low-performing students especially after admissions change, and your child is just another statistic to them. With pressure to retain the class as a whole and minimize dropouts, they would never suggest that even the poorest performers leave TJ. They seem indifferent to your struggling student’s self-esteem or future college prospects. All you hear is to stay put, with no guidance on how to help your student rise from the bottom to the top of the class.

The end of the year is the best time to consider making a switch. Start a confidential discussion with your base school counselor in the spring, around the time course selections for the following year are made. If the switch needs at beginning or mid-year, the classes available will depend on enrollment levels, which may limit your course options, but the nightmare will be over.

Black students in the bottom 30% of TJ goes to Ivies. Therefore, if a black student, stay and graduate even if it means graduating in the bottom 20-30%. Everyone else, go back to base school to improve the gpa.

Not really. Ivies receive applicants from all over the US and world, and there an enough pool of black applicants with 3.5+ GPA and decent SAT. It is easier to build a relatively impressive academic profile from base school by taking slightly challenging courses and score top grades, and teachers recommendations would reiterate that. It is unlikely a TJ teacher would write a believable recommendation letter touting exceptional performance when the student is in bottom 20-30% of class with C or Ds, Irrespective of student race.

And yet that's not the case. You may believe that it should be but in reality, it isn't.

I don't think just being black is going to be enough to get a mediocre student into IVY+ once they go back to test required.

Small gaps in test scores might be explainable but the old system where a poor asian kid was at a severe disadvantage to a wealthy black kid probably won't continue to happen.

Like they say, if you want a little bit of affirmative action, then ban affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are quite a few freshman that have started the process and then decided to stay this year after the parent meeting. If your child is drowning, switch now for 2nd quarter. Freshman year will ramp up a bit more during 2nd semester— if they are struggling now, it will likely only get harder.

Although there are always a few that transfer back, it seems a lot lower than in years past these days.

These vague references make you sound like trump.

We don't have to make this about the new admissions process if you feel like the uptick in kids returning to base schools reflects poorly on it.
But stop it with the bullsh*t.
The number of kids returning to their base school has increased significantly, the administration does what it can to try to keep that number low but sometimes it is in the best interests of the student to return. It's not like half the class is returning but over 40 students in the incoming class of 2025 are not going to be in the graduating class of 2025, it used to be 4 or 5.

I want every kid to be successful but that success may not be possible at TJ for every student.

Counselor presentation had 501 kids graduating in class of 2025. They admitted 550 if I remember correctly and there accepted 14 in sophomore class. That is 63 students who started at TJ but not graduating from TJ.

Is there a way to know how many freshman returned to base school for class of 2028? Will colleges know that student was at TJ before returning to base school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are quite a few freshman that have started the process and then decided to stay this year after the parent meeting. If your child is drowning, switch now for 2nd quarter. Freshman year will ramp up a bit more during 2nd semester— if they are struggling now, it will likely only get harder.

Although there are always a few that transfer back, it seems a lot lower than in years past these days.

These vague references make you sound like trump.

We don't have to make this about the new admissions process if you feel like the uptick in kids returning to base schools reflects poorly on it.
But stop it with the bullsh*t.
The number of kids returning to their base school has increased significantly, the administration does what it can to try to keep that number low but sometimes it is in the best interests of the student to return. It's not like half the class is returning but over 40 students in the incoming class of 2025 are not going to be in the graduating class of 2025, it used to be 4 or 5.

I want every kid to be successful but that success may not be possible at TJ for every student.

Counselor presentation had 501 kids graduating in class of 2025. They admitted 550 if I remember correctly and there accepted 14 in sophomore class. That is 63 students who started at TJ but not graduating from TJ.

Is there a way to know how many freshman returned to base school for class of 2028? Will colleges know that student was at TJ before returning to base school?

Your transcript will show TJ for 9th grade. And any time there is more than one school, there is an automatic text field that pops up where you need to explain why you changed schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nice try, but Asian Americans aren’t blaming Whites or any other race, but the current non-merit-based admission process that considers student's race. The last four years have clearly shown that the admissions process is now race-aware, as achieving the same diversity composition is impossible without factoring in student's race. Except for this past four years, there hasn’t been a four-year period in TJ's history where the racial composition has been so deliberately constrained and exact same percent split.

It's basically a cross section of the applicant pool. It's not contrived, it's random. Eliminating merit will reduce asians and increase whites because that is what the applicant pool looks like.

Is that the case? It was my understanding that fewer White's were applying and that one reason for the change was the overall lack of interest in the wider population, especially among URMs and also whites. IOW, both before the change and after, the classes reflect the applicant pool.

It's also been well established that what some here call merit (buying access to the test questions) others consider cheating.

Cheating is how overly privileged white supremacists explain losing. They can't imagine a world where they lose so the winner must have cheated.
We see this sort of mentality on full display with our republican candidate for president who still can't fathom having lost the election 4 years ago and still says his opponents cheated.
He will lose his damn mind when a black woman beats him. It will be cheating this and deep state that.
The fact of the matter is that testing is the best way to measure things that are testable.

Are you okay? You need to get over this and move on. The school board changed the admission process because mostly students from wealthy feeders were being admitted. Many relied on question thanks compiled by elite prep centers to give them an advantage. This has been well established and discussed here numerous times.

Even now, most students from academically wealthy feeders continue to be admitted in large proportion?

True, but before, few from schools that weren't among the wealthiest were admitted. I'm glad that all county residents now have a shot at this fantastic opportunity, not just the privileged few.

Rocky run is not a wealthy school. If wealth was what got into TJ, then TJ would have been much whiter.

What does "wealth" even mean in this context? It's thrown around so much that people forget it's just bs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nice try, but Asian Americans aren’t blaming Whites or any other race, but the current non-merit-based admission process that considers student's race. The last four years have clearly shown that the admissions process is now race-aware, as achieving the same diversity composition is impossible without factoring in student's race. Except for this past four years, there hasn’t been a four-year period in TJ's history where the racial composition has been so deliberately constrained and exact same percent split.

It's basically a cross section of the applicant pool. It's not contrived, it's random. Eliminating merit will reduce asians and increase whites because that is what the applicant pool looks like.

Is that the case? It was my understanding that fewer White's were applying and that one reason for the change was the overall lack of interest in the wider population, especially among URMs and also whites. IOW, both before the change and after, the classes reflect the applicant pool.

It's also been well established that what some here call merit (buying access to the test questions) others consider cheating.

Cheating is how overly privileged white supremacists explain losing. They can't imagine a world where they lose so the winner must have cheated.
We see this sort of mentality on full display with our republican candidate for president who still can't fathom having lost the election 4 years ago and still says his opponents cheated.
He will lose his damn mind when a black woman beats him. It will be cheating this and deep state that.
The fact of the matter is that testing is the best way to measure things that are testable.

Are you okay? You need to get over this and move on. The school board changed the admission process because mostly students from wealthy feeders were being admitted. Many relied on question thanks compiled by elite prep centers to give them an advantage. This has been well established and discussed here numerous times.

Even now, most students from academically wealthy feeders continue to be admitted in large proportion?

True, but before, few from schools that weren't among the wealthiest were admitted. I'm glad that all county residents now have a shot at this fantastic opportunity, not just the privileged few.

Rocky run is not a wealthy school. If wealth was what got into TJ, then TJ would have been much whiter.

What does "wealth" even mean in this context? It's thrown around so much that people forget it's just bs.

"wealthy" is a derogatory adjective adopted by brainwashed social activists to label hardworking students when it comes to academics but not sports

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nice try, but Asian Americans aren’t blaming Whites or any other race, but the current non-merit-based admission process that considers student's race. The last four years have clearly shown that the admissions process is now race-aware, as achieving the same diversity composition is impossible without factoring in student's race. Except for this past four years, there hasn’t been a four-year period in TJ's history where the racial composition has been so deliberately constrained and exact same percent split.

It's basically a cross section of the applicant pool. It's not contrived, it's random. Eliminating merit will reduce asians and increase whites because that is what the applicant pool looks like.

Is that the case? It was my understanding that fewer White's were applying and that one reason for the change was the overall lack of interest in the wider population, especially among URMs and also whites. IOW, both before the change and after, the classes reflect the applicant pool.

It's also been well established that what some here call merit (buying access to the test questions) others consider cheating.

Cheating is how overly privileged white supremacists explain losing. They can't imagine a world where they lose so the winner must have cheated.
We see this sort of mentality on full display with our republican candidate for president who still can't fathom having lost the election 4 years ago and still says his opponents cheated.
He will lose his damn mind when a black woman beats him. It will be cheating this and deep state that.
The fact of the matter is that testing is the best way to measure things that are testable.

Are you okay? You need to get over this and move on. The school board changed the admission process because mostly students from wealthy feeders were being admitted. Many relied on question thanks compiled by elite prep centers to give them an advantage. This has been well established and discussed here numerous times.

Even now, most students from academically wealthy feeders continue to be admitted in large proportion?

True, but before, few from schools that weren't among the wealthiest were admitted. I'm glad that all county residents now have a shot at this fantastic opportunity, not just the privileged few.

Rocky run is not a wealthy school. If wealth was what got into TJ, then TJ would have been much whiter.

What does "wealth" even mean in this context? It's thrown around so much that people forget it's just bs.

"wealthy" is a derogatory adjective adopted by brainwashed social activists to label hardworking students when it comes to academics but not sports

The wealthy are defined by an advantage in resources. A small minority of wealthy people make huge investments in human capital for their children. This advances their kids not only ahead of most poor kids but most wealthy kids as well. The limousine liberals decrying "prep" are in that group of wealthy people who don't want to make these investments and resent the pressure being placed on their kids to follow suit.

Clearly you can in fact still beat these highly trained kids, stuyvesant is filled with poor kids that beat out rich kids.

[Anonymous]

If a student lacks interest and is unwilling to put in the effort to study, does it matter how rich or poor the parent is?

Similarly, if a parent lacks motivation and is unwilling to invest time and effort into helping their student study, does it matter how affluent or impoverished that parent is?

[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:Nice try, but Asian Americans aren’t blaming Whites or any other race, but the current non-merit-based admission process that considers student's race. The last four years have clearly shown that the admissions process is now race-aware, as achieving the same diversity composition is impossible without factoring in student's race. Except for this past four years, there hasn’t been a four-year period in TJ's history where the racial composition has been so deliberately constrained and exact same percent split.

It's basically a cross section of the applicant pool. It's not contrived, it's random. Eliminating merit will reduce asians and increase whites because that is what the applicant pool looks like.

Is that the case? It was my understanding that fewer White's were applying and that one reason for the change was the overall lack of interest in the wider population, especially among URMs and also whites. IOW, both before the change and after, the classes reflect the applicant pool.

It's also been well established that what some here call merit (buying access to the test questions) others consider cheating.

Cheating is how overly privileged white supremacists explain losing. They can't imagine a world where they lose so the winner must have cheated.
We see this sort of mentality on full display with our republican candidate for president who still can't fathom having lost the election 4 years ago and still says his opponents cheated.
He will lose his damn mind when a black woman beats him. It will be cheating this and deep state that.
The fact of the matter is that testing is the best way to measure things that are testable.

Are you okay? You need to get over this and move on. The school board changed the admission process because mostly students from wealthy feeders were being admitted. Many relied on question thanks compiled by elite prep centers to give them an advantage. This has been well established and discussed here numerous times.

Even now, most students from academically wealthy feeders continue to be admitted in large proportion?

True, but before, few from schools that weren't among the wealthiest were admitted. I'm glad that all county residents now have a shot at this fantastic opportunity, not just the privileged few.

Rocky run is not a wealthy school. If wealth was what got into TJ, then TJ would have been much whiter.

What does "wealth" even mean in this context? It's thrown around so much that people forget it's just bs.

"wealthy" is a derogatory adjective adopted by brainwashed social activists to label hardworking students when it comes to academics but not sports

The wealthy are defined by an advantage in resources. A small minority of wealthy people make huge investments in human capital for their children. This advances their kids not only ahead of most poor kids but most wealthy kids as well. The limousine liberals decrying "prep" are in that group of wealthy people who don't want to make these investments and resent the pressure being placed on their kids to follow suit.

Clearly you can in fact still beat these highly trained kids, stuyvesant is filled with poor kids that beat out rich kids.

Here is the difference between "studying"/"hard work" and "prep":

The former refers to the general act of putting in effort to be stronger in academics, and perhaps even in one specific field. No reasonable person has any issue with this, and frankly if you do you're unserious.

The latter is correctly used in a derogatory fashion to refer to spending resources on a third party on efforts that are narrowly tailored to gaining access to a limited resource, in this case either TJ or elite college admissions. Creating admissions processes that cater to those who are wiilling/able to spend those resources for kids not to become generally more intelligent or academically capable but simply more prepared for that unique admissions process is bad for the community and bad for the school.

It incentivizes families to eschew whole-child development at a critical age in service of optimizing their child's interaction with the process and significantly increases the likelihood that students who would better serve the school's environment are replaced by students who, once they enter, will move right to the next optimizable process (college) while missing out on another critical phase of development.

Worse yet, as evidenced by the first 30 years of TJ's existence, it makes it virtually impossible for students and families without those resources to gain access to an educational opportunity that could create a significant social mobility delta that is not nearly as valuable for those who have resources. And when you hear folks with those resources defending legacy admissions processes (legacy referring to old and outdated, not nepotistic, though oddly both definitions sort of work here), you get the sense that excluding those from the lower classes is very much a feature, not a bug.

[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:Nice try, but Asian Americans aren’t blaming Whites or any other race, but the current non-merit-based admission process that considers student's race. The last four years have clearly shown that the admissions process is now race-aware, as achieving the same diversity composition is impossible without factoring in student's race. Except for this past four years, there hasn’t been a four-year period in TJ's history where the racial composition has been so deliberately constrained and exact same percent split.

It's basically a cross section of the applicant pool. It's not contrived, it's random. Eliminating merit will reduce asians and increase whites because that is what the applicant pool looks like.

Is that the case? It was my understanding that fewer White's were applying and that one reason for the change was the overall lack of interest in the wider population, especially among URMs and also whites. IOW, both before the change and after, the classes reflect the applicant pool.

It's also been well established that what some here call merit (buying access to the test questions) others consider cheating.

Cheating is how overly privileged white supremacists explain losing. They can't imagine a world where they lose so the winner must have cheated.
We see this sort of mentality on full display with our republican candidate for president who still can't fathom having lost the election 4 years ago and still says his opponents cheated.
He will lose his damn mind when a black woman beats him. It will be cheating this and deep state that.
The fact of the matter is that testing is the best way to measure things that are testable.

Are you okay? You need to get over this and move on. The school board changed the admission process because mostly students from wealthy feeders were being admitted. Many relied on question thanks compiled by elite prep centers to give them an advantage. This has been well established and discussed here numerous times.

Even now, most students from academically wealthy feeders continue to be admitted in large proportion?

True, but before, few from schools that weren't among the wealthiest were admitted. I'm glad that all county residents now have a shot at this fantastic opportunity, not just the privileged few.

Rocky run is not a wealthy school. If wealth was what got into TJ, then TJ would have been much whiter.

What does "wealth" even mean in this context? It's thrown around so much that people forget it's just bs.

"wealthy" is a derogatory adjective adopted by brainwashed social activists to label hardworking students when it comes to academics but not sports

The wealthy are defined by an advantage in resources. A small minority of wealthy people make huge investments in human capital for their children. This advances their kids not only ahead of most poor kids but most wealthy kids as well. The limousine liberals decrying "prep" are in that group of wealthy people who don't want to make these investments and resent the pressure being placed on their kids to follow suit.

Clearly you can in fact still beat these highly trained kids, stuyvesant is filled with poor kids that beat out rich kids.

Here is the difference between "studying"/"hard work" and "prep":

The former refers to the general act of putting in effort to be stronger in academics, and perhaps even in one specific field. No reasonable person has any issue with this, and frankly if you do you're unserious.

The latter is correctly used in a derogatory fashion to refer to spending resources on a third party on efforts that are narrowly tailored to gaining access to a limited resource, in this case either TJ or elite college admissions. Creating admissions processes that cater to those who are wiilling/able to spend those resources for kids not to become generally more intelligent or academically capable but simply more prepared for that unique admissions process is bad for the community and bad for the school.

It incentivizes families to eschew whole-child development at a critical age in service of optimizing their child's interaction with the process and significantly increases the likelihood that students who would better serve the school's environment are replaced by students who, once they enter, will move right to the next optimizable process (college) while missing out on another critical phase of development.

Worse yet, as evidenced by the first 30 years of TJ's existence, it makes it virtually impossible for students and families without those resources to gain access to an educational opportunity that could create a significant social mobility delta that is not nearly as valuable for those who have resources. And when you hear folks with those resources defending legacy admissions processes (legacy referring to old and outdated, not nepotistic, though oddly both definitions sort of work here), you get the sense that excluding those from the lower classes is very much a feature, not a bug.

I hear what you are saying and based on your definitions, I think it is based on a lot of misunderstanding about what goes on in these communities.

Curie is not singularly focused on the TJ test, never was. There is a $300 module you can take in to "prep for the test but the rest of it is what you would call studying.

Either everyone is prepping for the SAT or the prep does not affect scores in a way that does not reflect actual ability because the correlation between SAT scores and actual academic performance is the same regardless of income level of the student. There is peer reviewed research supporting this.

https://opportunityinsights.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SAT_ACT_on_Grades.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is in top 25% of TJ.

Where do you find this data? Does TJ provide it to all students? Any other FCPS schools do the same? This definitely causes stress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DD is in top 25% of TJ.

Where do you find this data? Does TJ provide it to all students? Any other FCPS schools do the same? This definitely causes stress.

stress or motivation, depending on how one views it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi All,

Wondering how it works if you want to transfer back to base school from TJ. Do grades follow you and impact final grade? When is the ideal time to make the switch? DC is absolutely drowning in work and not doing well on assessments. It’s very defeating.

I believe if you transfer back now, your grades will not follow you, but at some point they cannot ignore your performance at TJ. If you transfer back after the semester or year is over, I think your grades follow you. One bad semester can be explained away, 4 bad years cannot.
I think the principal requests to counsel you and your child before you decide to return.
She will likely suggest using the 8th period to take advantage of tutoring that is available for students.

I would at least to what she has to say but she has her own agenda and that isn't necessarily in the best interests of your child.
She's not a monster but the number of students that returned to their base schools jumped from like 4-5 a year to as high as 40 when they started the new admissions process and she implemented all sorts of ways to reduce that number. One of the ways was requesting to counsel your family on other options.
These remedial measures have helped a lot of kids keep their head above water and get on track to graduate with a respectable GPA. If you are poor then there is some value to graduating from TJ with a decent GPA. If you are UMC and drowning at TJ, take your child and leave, you aren't helping them by keeping them there.

Is this true?
For students transfer back to the base high school, can they retake the courses at the base school to replace the grades they get at TJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nightmare situation. If you talk to your TJ counselor or anyone there, they’ll downplay your student’s feelings and insist that getting Cs and Ds is normal at TJ. However, low grades aren’t typical for an average-performing student, even with extracurricular involvement. The administration is now dealing with a significant number of low-performing students especially after admissions change, and your child is just another statistic to them. With pressure to retain the class as a whole and minimize dropouts, they would never suggest that even the poorest performers leave TJ. They seem indifferent to your struggling student’s self-esteem or future college prospects. All you hear is to stay put, with no guidance on how to help your student rise from the bottom to the top of the class.

The end of the year is the best time to consider making a switch. Start a confidential discussion with your base school counselor in the spring, around the time course selections for the following year are made. If the switch needs at beginning or mid-year, the classes available will depend on enrollment levels, which may limit your course options, but the nightmare will be over.

Black students in the bottom 30% of TJ goes to Ivies. Therefore, if a black student, stay and graduate even if it means graduating in the bottom 20-30%. Everyone else, go back to base school to improve the gpa.

This may be true for past students, but affirmative action in college admissions is no longer allowed. Admissions committees for colleges are not allow to use race as a benefit for students anymore. Now students in the bottom 20-30% will be looked at the same no matter their race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nightmare situation. If you talk to your TJ counselor or anyone there, they’ll downplay your student’s feelings and insist that getting Cs and Ds is normal at TJ. However, low grades aren’t typical for an average-performing student, even with extracurricular involvement. The administration is now dealing with a significant number of low-performing students especially after admissions change, and your child is just another statistic to them. With pressure to retain the class as a whole and minimize dropouts, they would never suggest that even the poorest performers leave TJ. They seem indifferent to your struggling student’s self-esteem or future college prospects. All you hear is to stay put, with no guidance on how to help your student rise from the bottom to the top of the class.

The end of the year is the best time to consider making a switch. Start a confidential discussion with your base school counselor in the spring, around the time course selections for the following year are made. If the switch needs at beginning or mid-year, the classes available will depend on enrollment levels, which may limit your course options, but the nightmare will be over.

Black students in the bottom 30% of TJ goes to Ivies. Therefore, if a black student, stay and graduate even if it means graduating in the bottom 20-30%. Everyone else, go back to base school to improve the gpa.

This may be true for past students, but affirmative action in college admissions is no longer allowed. Admissions committees for colleges are not allow to use race as a benefit for students anymore. Now students in the bottom 20-30% will be looked at the same no matter their race.

Things may change when Trump' s term is over .