New TJ Lawsuit Filed 3/10/21 by Pacific Legal Foundation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

The above commenter has absolutely no idea how anything works and is babbling incoherently while spewing deep racism. -1000

'Deep racism'? Look up college mismatch thesis to learn more. Asking colleges to fix problems of lower level education systems which have their own problems with this systemic racism, inevitably leads to the same results.

1) I would imagine that we are in agreement that working to help fix these issues at the high school level is better than working to fix them at the college level

2) No one who is pro-reform is arguing that we should abandon working to solve issues at the PreK-8 level as well. But leaving generations of students behind while we wait for results doesn't work either and serves to deepen the status quo.

the anti-reform want to focus to be on solving issues prek-8 because that leaves the status quo intact indefinitely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

The above commenter has absolutely no idea how anything works and is babbling incoherently while spewing deep racism. -1000

'Deep racism'? Look up college mismatch thesis to learn more. Asking colleges to fix problems of lower level education systems which have their own problems with this systemic racism, inevitably leads to the same results.

1) I would imagine that we are in agreement that working to help fix these issues at the high school level is better than working to fix them at the college level

2) No one who is pro-reform is arguing that we should abandon working to solve issues at the PreK-8 level as well. But leaving generations of students behind while we wait for results doesn't work either and serves to deepen the status quo.

the anti-reform want to focus to be on solving issues prek-8 because that leaves the status quo intact indefinitely.

ding ding ding. They want to reform to be focused on levels that have nothing to do with their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

The above commenter has absolutely no idea how anything works and is babbling incoherently while spewing deep racism. -1000

'Deep racism'? Look up college mismatch thesis to learn more. Asking colleges to fix problems of lower level education systems which have their own problems with this systemic racism, inevitably leads to the same results.

1) I would imagine that we are in agreement that working to help fix these issues at the high school level is better than working to fix them at the college level

2) No one who is pro-reform is arguing that we should abandon working to solve issues at the PreK-8 level as well. But leaving generations of students behind while we wait for results doesn't work either and serves to deepen the status quo.

the anti-reform want to focus to be on solving issues prek-8 because that leaves the status quo intact indefinitely.

Exactly. It's so disingenuous when you hear "we need to be fixing these issues at the younger levels and bring these kids up to speed before we start looking at TJ admissions".

These people feign concern for what's going on in those grade levels when they haven't lifted one finger - in 99% of all cases - to actually support issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

No matter what changes are made at the younger levels, they will continue to demand that metrics are used which will allow them to leverage their resources to get their kids to the front of the line.

It's an addiction to feeling like a superior parent. It strives to make the admissions process about the efforts and priorities of the parents rather than that of the students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

The above commenter has absolutely no idea how anything works and is babbling incoherently while spewing deep racism. -1000

'Deep racism'? Look up college mismatch thesis to learn more. Asking colleges to fix problems of lower level education systems which have their own problems with this systemic racism, inevitably leads to the same results.

1) I would imagine that we are in agreement that working to help fix these issues at the high school level is better than working to fix them at the college level

2) No one who is pro-reform is arguing that we should abandon working to solve issues at the PreK-8 level as well. But leaving generations of students behind while we wait for results doesn't work either and serves to deepen the status quo.

the anti-reform want to focus to be on solving issues prek-8 because that leaves the status quo intact indefinitely.

Exactly. It's so disingenuous when you hear "we need to be fixing these issues at the younger levels and bring these kids up to speed before we start looking at TJ admissions".

These people feign concern for what's going on in those grade levels when they haven't lifted one finger - in 99% of all cases - to actually support issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

No matter what changes are made at the younger levels, they will continue to demand that metrics are used which will allow them to leverage their resources to get their kids to the front of the line.

It's an addiction to feeling like a superior parent. It strives to make the admissions process about the efforts and priorities of the parents rather than that of the students.

You and your typical SJW high and mighty talk. Some people actually believe its better to help URM reach the bar rather than lowering it. Hand up vs. Handout has plenty of data behind it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

Dinesh D'Souza wrote an entire book ("Illiberal Education") back in the 1990s point this phenomena out and how it is failing URMs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

The above commenter has absolutely no idea how anything works and is babbling incoherently while spewing deep racism. -1000

'Deep racism'? Look up college mismatch thesis to learn more. Asking colleges to fix problems of lower level education systems which have their own problems with this systemic racism, inevitably leads to the same results.

1) I would imagine that we are in agreement that working to help fix these issues at the high school level is better than working to fix them at the college level

2) No one who is pro-reform is arguing that we should abandon working to solve issues at the PreK-8 level as well. But leaving generations of students behind while we wait for results doesn't work either and serves to deepen the status quo.

the anti-reform want to focus to be on solving issues prek-8 because that leaves the status quo intact indefinitely.

Exactly. It's so disingenuous when you hear "we need to be fixing these issues at the younger levels and bring these kids up to speed before we start looking at TJ admissions".

These people feign concern for what's going on in those grade levels when they haven't lifted one finger - in 99% of all cases - to actually support issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

No matter what changes are made at the younger levels, they will continue to demand that metrics are used which will allow them to leverage their resources to get their kids to the front of the line.

It's an addiction to feeling like a superior parent. It strives to make the admissions process about the efforts and priorities of the parents rather than that of the students.

You and your typical SJW high and mighty talk. Some people actually believe its better to help URM reach the bar rather than lowering it. Hand up vs. Handout has plenty of data behind it.

1) I'm betting you and most here have taken zero concrete steps to actually help with helping folks from underrepresented groups reach the artifically set bar

2) It's not about lowering any bar, it's about fixing the bar so that irrelevant metrics like standardized exams aren't used as barriers to entry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

Dinesh D'Souza wrote an entire book ("Illiberal Education") back in the 1990s point this phenomena out and how it is failing URMs.

Dinesh D'Souza is a convicted felon and conspiracy theorist who was pardoned by the former president as a reward for trolling President Obama. He is not someone you want to be quoting if you want to be taken seriously, least of all in academic circles.

Oh by the way, he was once a university president who got canned because of adultery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ has a series of private sponsors that provide funding and materials for some of the labs at the school. I believe that TJ receives the same amount of money per student as every other school in FCPS.

This is pretty much spot on. FCPS did spend a little more on the renovation than they might have for a regular school.

yep, of course, the board is free to say that the infusion of outside money creates inequity and decline the donations

What would be the point of that? The point is not to make everyone equal - it's to make one school more accessible and therefore more interesting to a wider demographic of talented individuals. Increasing the level of interest in TJ will only make the student body stronger in the long run.

TJ happily accepts extra funding for manipulation of the school facilities/prestige/interest at the same time cry when some parents spend extra money for prep.. wondering what is motive of extra funding from private sponsors .. why funding only for TJ ..? TJ is causing injustice to other poor HS like prepping causing injustice to other poor kids ..

stop extra funding to TJ and prepping kids.. both are bad..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

The above commenter has absolutely no idea how anything works and is babbling incoherently while spewing deep racism. -1000

'Deep racism'? Look up college mismatch thesis to learn more. Asking colleges to fix problems of lower level education systems which have their own problems with this systemic racism, inevitably leads to the same results.

1) I would imagine that we are in agreement that working to help fix these issues at the high school level is better than working to fix them at the college level

2) No one who is pro-reform is arguing that we should abandon working to solve issues at the PreK-8 level as well. But leaving generations of students behind while we wait for results doesn't work either and serves to deepen the status quo.

the anti-reform want to focus to be on solving issues prek-8 because that leaves the status quo intact indefinitely.

ding ding ding. They want to reform to be focused on levels that have nothing to do with their kids.

Well, if they could really have their way they'd argue for fixing this in utero. They basically only care about their own interests and can't be bothered to see there's a bigger picture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ has a series of private sponsors that provide funding and materials for some of the labs at the school. I believe that TJ receives the same amount of money per student as every other school in FCPS.

This is pretty much spot on. FCPS did spend a little more on the renovation than they might have for a regular school.

yep, of course, the board is free to say that the infusion of outside money creates inequity and decline the donations

What would be the point of that? The point is not to make everyone equal - it's to make one school more accessible and therefore more interesting to a wider demographic of talented individuals. Increasing the level of interest in TJ will only make the student body stronger in the long run.

TJ happily accepts extra funding for manipulation of the school facilities/prestige/interest at the same time cry when some parents spend extra money for prep.. wondering what is motive of extra funding from private sponsors .. why funding only for TJ ..? TJ is causing injustice to other poor HS like prepping causing injustice to other poor kids ..

stop extra funding to TJ and prepping kids.. both are bad..

THe situations aren't comparable and it's easy to devise criteria where the impact of prep is lessened like the new process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ has a series of private sponsors that provide funding and materials for some of the labs at the school. I believe that TJ receives the same amount of money per student as every other school in FCPS.

This is pretty much spot on. FCPS did spend a little more on the renovation than they might have for a regular school.

yep, of course, the board is free to say that the infusion of outside money creates inequity and decline the donations

What would be the point of that? The point is not to make everyone equal - it's to make one school more accessible and therefore more interesting to a wider demographic of talented individuals. Increasing the level of interest in TJ will only make the student body stronger in the long run.

TJ happily accepts extra funding for manipulation of the school facilities/prestige/interest at the same time cry when some parents spend extra money for prep.. wondering what is motive of extra funding from private sponsors .. why funding only for TJ ..? TJ is causing injustice to other poor HS like prepping causing injustice to other poor kids ..

stop extra funding to TJ and prepping kids.. both are bad..

THe situations aren't comparable and it's easy to devise criteria where the impact of prep is lessened like the new process.

the impact of prep is lessened by moving some of the TJ labs to other base schools too ..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ has a series of private sponsors that provide funding and materials for some of the labs at the school. I believe that TJ receives the same amount of money per student as every other school in FCPS.

This is pretty much spot on. FCPS did spend a little more on the renovation than they might have for a regular school.

yep, of course, the board is free to say that the infusion of outside money creates inequity and decline the donations

What would be the point of that? The point is not to make everyone equal - it's to make one school more accessible and therefore more interesting to a wider demographic of talented individuals. Increasing the level of interest in TJ will only make the student body stronger in the long run.

TJ happily accepts extra funding for manipulation of the school facilities/prestige/interest at the same time cry when some parents spend extra money for prep.. wondering what is motive of extra funding from private sponsors .. why funding only for TJ ..? TJ is causing injustice to other poor HS like prepping causing injustice to other poor kids ..

stop extra funding to TJ and prepping kids.. both are bad..

THe situations aren't comparable and it's easy to devise criteria where the impact of prep is lessened like the new process.

Why is it comparable ? TJ has EXTRA funding and some kids have RICH parents ..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TJ has a series of private sponsors that provide funding and materials for some of the labs at the school. I believe that TJ receives the same amount of money per student as every other school in FCPS.

This is pretty much spot on. FCPS did spend a little more on the renovation than they might have for a regular school.

yep, of course, the board is free to say that the infusion of outside money creates inequity and decline the donations

What would be the point of that? The point is not to make everyone equal - it's to make one school more accessible and therefore more interesting to a wider demographic of talented individuals. Increasing the level of interest in TJ will only make the student body stronger in the long run.

TJ happily accepts extra funding for manipulation of the school facilities/prestige/interest at the same time cry when some parents spend extra money for prep.. wondering what is motive of extra funding from private sponsors .. why funding only for TJ ..? TJ is causing injustice to other poor HS like prepping causing injustice to other poor kids ..

stop extra funding to TJ and prepping kids.. both are bad..

THe situations aren't comparable and it's easy to devise criteria where the impact of prep is lessened like the new process.

Why is not it comparable ? TJ has EXTRA funding and some kids have RICH parents ..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

The above commenter has absolutely no idea how anything works and is babbling incoherently while spewing deep racism. -1000

'Deep racism'? Look up college mismatch thesis to learn more. Asking colleges to fix problems of lower level education systems which have their own problems with this systemic racism, inevitably leads to the same results.

1) I would imagine that we are in agreement that working to help fix these issues at the high school level is better than working to fix them at the college level

2) No one who is pro-reform is arguing that we should abandon working to solve issues at the PreK-8 level as well. But leaving generations of students behind while we wait for results doesn't work either and serves to deepen the status quo.

the anti-reform want to focus to be on solving issues prek-8 because that leaves the status quo intact indefinitely.

Exactly. It's so disingenuous when you hear "we need to be fixing these issues at the younger levels and bring these kids up to speed before we start looking at TJ admissions".

These people feign concern for what's going on in those grade levels when they haven't lifted one finger - in 99% of all cases - to actually support issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

No matter what changes are made at the younger levels, they will continue to demand that metrics are used which will allow them to leverage their resources to get their kids to the front of the line.

It's an addiction to feeling like a superior parent. It strives to make the admissions process about the efforts and priorities of the parents rather than that of the students.

You and your typical SJW high and mighty talk. Some people actually believe its better to help URM reach the bar rather than lowering it. Hand up vs. Handout has plenty of data behind it.

1) I'm betting you and most here have taken zero concrete steps to actually help with helping folks from underrepresented groups reach the artifically set bar

2) It's not about lowering any bar, it's about fixing the bar so that irrelevant metrics like standardized exams aren't used as barriers to entry.

1. I pay taxes for schools and teachers. They need to do their job. I also support school choice and vouchers.
2. Then can we agree to take race off of the application and identify truly gifted kids objectively n a race-blind application process? Or is race an inherent barrier to entry in your book?
2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This country and society are rooted in racism, so to fix the problems we now have, we can’t be race neutral or race blind. I think a lot of the people who have problems with the admissions changes don’t even really understand the history of systemic racism in the US. You can’t treat an entire group of humans as less than for centuries and then say “oh, the system is fair.” No, it’s not fair. Literally nothing in this country is fair for Black people who have to overcome far more obstacles than others. They are not starting from the same starting line; it’s as if everyone else has a head start in a race. And it doesn’t matter if you don’t consider yourself to be affluent; if you are not Black, you will not face the same obstacles.

You are then stigmatizing the blacks who get in as less qualified, plus putting in less qualified people and having them try and perform in a harder setting. Harvard can get all the top blacks. Then the rest of the colleges are dealing with students who should be in a lower tier. And the tier below that like UNC has people who should be in an even lower tier college.

Dinesh D'Souza wrote an entire book ("Illiberal Education") back in the 1990s point this phenomena out and how it is failing URMs.

Isn't he a convicted felon and well-known buffoon? That doesn't lend credibility to your point at all.