Reply to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Friday called for a response from a Virginia school

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts on Friday called for a response from a Virginia school"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Anyone knows FCPS response to Roberts' request that was due on Wednesday?[/quote]

Link shared on page 34. As expected, the argument runs along the line of showing the applicant-vs-offered ratio, completely ignoring the fact that the new policy disqualifies previously eligible Asians from applying in the first place. [/quote]

Who precisely is disqualified from even applying as a result of the new admissions process? That's a new take.[/quote]

The previously qualified Asians are not eligible to apply for one of the allocated seats because the allocation rule blocks them from applying. [/quote]

That's completely false. The allocation rule doesn't block anyone at all from applying. What makes you think that it does? The only thing that the allocation rule does is it makes students from previous "feeder" schools - which are still very much "feeder" schools, by the way - slightly less likely to gain admission than they were previously. But in no way are they enjoined from being a part of the application process.

Asian students from other non-feeder schools now have a significantly higher chance to get in than they did previously, and only two of the schools impacted - Carson and Rocky Run - are plurality (not even majority) Asian.

The new process vastly improved access to TJ for thousands of Asian students across FCPS.[/quote]

Previously, the entire number of seats was open to all eligible applicants. The board removed the majority of seats from previously eligible Asian applicants. By your rationale, the board could have given 549 seats to everyone else, leaving only 1 seat for Asian applicants and that would have been okay because those Asians were not "enjoyed from being a part of the application process". [/quote]

[b]Is it your contention that only Asian students apply for and are eligible for the spaces at the traditional feeder schools? [/b]That doesn't hold up either.

There are thousands more Asian students in FCPS attending non-feeder schools than there are attending feeder schools.

If your question is about raw access to spaces, then every student in FCPS was impacted equally by the new rule because every one of them now was only able to compete for the allocated spaces within their school and whatever was left in the unallocated pool.

That point was not made by the lawyers at PLF because even they knew that it would be specious.[/quote]

That's not my contention at all. I was merely pointing out the fact that the majority of available seats became unavailable to previously qualified candidates, which has naturally higher representation among Asians. You are again falling into the trap of trying to explain why the allocation process is okay. Absent racist intent, I would agree with you that it may be a fine method to select students to attend TJ. However, the board chose this method based on their racist intent, knowing that this process will reduce the number of Asian applications by preventing them from being eligible to compete for allocated spaces. PLF did not make this point because it is covered in the disprate impact analysis they advanced, showing a reduced number of Asians admitted as a portion of the incoming class. The same data pattern shows in the application numbers, showing a reduction of Asians as a percentage of total applications. [/quote]

You're again falling back on a simple before-and-after comparison to make your case. It doesn't hold up. [/quote]

It will in DI. The “rule of thumb” is 80% to establish DI. [/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