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]"the seats allocated to each middle school are extremely limited (no FCPS middle school has more than a dozen guaranteed seats, see App. at 240a), there are few unallocated seats, and Asian- American applicants from feeder schools are at a marked disadvantage for the limited number of unallocated seats."

so the coalition's logic is both that few seats are allocated and that few seats are unallocated? [/quote]

They are describing the mechanism designed by the board whereby Asian students who were previously eligible to apply, are now unable to apply for a majority of the seat positions. [/quote]

But this is true of every student in the County. That's why this is a specious argument. The students who are at Poe also have a limited number of seats that they can apply to. Same with Hughes, same with Rocky Run, same with Luther Jackson.

This might be the single worst argument that one could make.[/quote]

The purpose of the paragraph is to say FCPS's TJ plan is not the same as Texas's "Top Ten Percent" plan.

FCPS had previously argued that upending the TJ plan is in essence also upending Texas's "Top Ten Percent" plan.  By invalidating the TJ plan you're going against precedent.

The coalition is saying allocating no more than a dozen kids from each school hardly constitutes strict comparison to the "Top Ten Percent" plan.  The rest of the paragraph outlines other reasons why the TJ plan isn't tied to the hip of the "Top Ten Percent" plan.

Essentially, the previous court's decision on the "Top Ten Percent" plan has limited bearing on the constitutionality of the TJ plan.  There are too many differences, and the TJ plan needs to be judged on its own merits.[/quote]

Here is where they were semi-correct:

"Asian-American applicants from feeder schools are at a marked disadvantage for the limited number of unallocated seats".

But there are two problems with this assertion:

1) Students of other races at those feeder schools were ALSO disadvantaged in exactly the same way, and at none of those schools do Asians constitute a majority;

2) Asian-American students at non-feeder schools were ADVANTAGED by the new process. [/quote]

Excellent point! Approximately 2300 Asian American students attend TJ "feeder middle schools" and approximately 3,500 Asian American students attend middle schools that are not considered "TJ feeders". So it would appear that a greater number of Asian Americans could have actually benefited from this new process than might have been harmed by it - putting the lie AGAIN to the idea that this was about hurting Asian Americans.

And we can even go further by looking at the demographic composition of the feeder schools in question! [b]Those feeder schools as a whole are only 32.4% Asian to begin with, and they're 36.7% white![/b] So even if we accept that the goal was depress the total population from TJ feeder schools, there were more white students directly impacted by that policy than Asian students!

https://schoolprofiles.fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?p=108%3A8[/quote]

Wow - I didn't even know that was the case. You nailed it. Any way you look at this case, the Coalition has to narrow their definition of exactly who was harmed by the new policy to a smaller and smaller sliver of the total population.

[b]So the majority of the students even at the two most Asian schools are NOT, in fact, Asian...

The plurality of the students at the feeder schools as a whole were white, and fewer than a third of the students at those schools are Asian...

There are more Asian students at non-feeder schools than there are at feeder schools....
[/b]
This just keeps looking worse and worse for the Coalition as you dig deeper into the numbers.[/quote]

I didn’t realize that either. [/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