Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)
Reply to "TJ Admissions Roundup"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Kids from economically-disadvantaged, Asian families were practically nonexistent at TJ before the admissions change. It helped them more than other groups, per the appellate judicial opinion. [/quote] [b]Poor asian kids were about as well represented as poor kids from ANY background. [/b] The group that was helped the most were white students. The year before the the change, 86 white students were admitted. This year, 140 white students were admitted. An increase of 54 students. The year before the change 16 hispanic students were admitted. This year it was 41. An increase of 25. The year before the change 7 black students were admitted. This year, it was 19. An increase of 12. Asian admissions went down by 40 despite a 64 seat increase in class size.[/quote] Right. There was almost zero representation of kids from low-income families. Majority opinion: "Nevertheless, in the 2021 application cycle, Asian American students attending middle schools historically underrepresented at TJ saw [b]a sixfold increase in offers[/b], and the number of low-income Asian American admittees to TJ [b]increased to 51 — from a mere one in 2020[/b]." [/quote] Asian admissions went down. White admissions went up more than all other groups combined. 50 of the 138 FARM kids were asian. So? That is a by product of their attempts to racially balance the entering class. if they could have figured out how to create a [b]race neutral process[/b] that would have had all 138 of the FARM kids be URM with no whites or asians, they would have done it. The intent behind the change was racially driven.[/quote] That's not how "race-neutral" works. By definition, a process that seeks to attain a specific racial outcome is not "race-neutral" unless that outcome is "representative of the demographics of the applicant pool". You're just mad because the old process that favored parents who leveraged their resources to tip the scales in favor of their kids doesn't exist anymore. Because interest was higher from Asian families, that meant that the old process significantly favored Asian applicants.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics