Reply to Transferring back to base school from TJ

Forum Index » Advanced Academic Programs (AAP)

Reply to "Transferring back to base school from TJ"

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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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.[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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

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.[/quote]

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.[/quote]
Even now, most students from academically wealthy feeders continue to be admitted in large proportion? [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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

What does "wealth" even mean in this context? It's thrown around so much that people forget it's just bs. [/quote]
"wealthy" is a derogatory adjective adopted by brainwashed social activists to label hardworking students when it comes to academics but not sports[/quote]

The wealthy are [b]defined[/b] 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.[/quote]

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. [/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