Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought quotas were unconstitutional?

It’s complicated.

With the caveat that I have not seen the FCPS exact phrasing— quotas are generally unconstitutional. But, in holistic admissions, like AAP, URM status as a “plus factor”— one consideration out of several— is okay. And targets or goals that might or might not be reached are fine. So, if FCPS is trying to put systems in place to help reach enrollment goals for URMs, it could be fine. Especially if the goals are aspirational, rather than actual quotas. “We hope that there will be enough qualified URMs” is different than “we will take unqualified URMs is we must to hit a certain number. It’s like Harvard aggressively recruiting URMs and giving URM status special weight. Fine, as long as being a URM is not the deciding factor.

But— a lot of this law is in the context of college admissions, where there a set number of seats. AAP is different, because every qualified kid is supposed to be admitted. Unlike Harvard, a URM getting admission does not take a seat from some other, possibly more qualified kid. Your UMC white kid will still be admitted, whether or not the YS model is used to identify additional URM kids. So, I would think FCPS would get additional flexibility.

Quotas will discriminate against asian kids, period.

This quota requirement will result in asian kids with scores in the 130 to 135 range being left out of AAP, while kids of other races with scores in the 110s to 130 range are accepted.

It is completely racist.

I think it is racist to say Asian kids are smarter.

Don't be a fool. Your trolling attempt is weak.

It is fact based that asian kids score higher on qualifying tests than any other racial group.

Having racial quotas will punish and exclude asian kids.

DP. FCPS has different Asian populations, they're not all "smarter" or "less smart". Nor are they shorthand for high test scores (Cogat, SOL, SAT, etc.).

You must be completely unfamiliar with the racial breakdowns and scores of the students who qualify for AAP.

Fcps did a presentation the last time they tried to revise AAP citing those statistics

In order to achieve a balance in AAP of 25% of each ethnic group, plus 25% of the special ed population, fcps will need to exclude higher scoring asian students from AAP, in favor of much lower scoring kids from other demographics (up to or more than a full deviation lower).

This is the only way fcps will be able to achieve equal percentages of kids.

At that presentation, fcps did a whole segment with slides and stats of how they added the nnat to raise underrepresented minority participation in AAP. According to their own statistics, adding the nnat and lowering qualifying scores did not achieve their stated goal. It only resulted in capturing more asian and white kid, and actually making AAP more disproportionally asian.

Their is no way that fcps can make AAP racially balanced to a set quota, without excluding many higher scoring asian kids.

I thought only kids with a 135 IQ or above should be in level IV?

For what they want to accomplish it seems like shrinking AAP considerably would be preferable to engineering a big AAP program where comparable percentages of every racial group end up in AAP. This would be the worst of both worlds. They’ll still have a two-track system that offends the excluded, but the higher track will be watered down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought quotas were unconstitutional?

It’s complicated.

With the caveat that I have not seen the FCPS exact phrasing— quotas are generally unconstitutional. But, in holistic admissions, like AAP, URM status as a “plus factor”— one consideration out of several— is okay. And targets or goals that might or might not be reached are fine. So, if FCPS is trying to put systems in place to help reach enrollment goals for URMs, it could be fine. Especially if the goals are aspirational, rather than actual quotas. “We hope that there will be enough qualified URMs” is different than “we will take unqualified URMs is we must to hit a certain number. It’s like Harvard aggressively recruiting URMs and giving URM status special weight. Fine, as long as being a URM is not the deciding factor.

But— a lot of this law is in the context of college admissions, where there a set number of seats. AAP is different, because every qualified kid is supposed to be admitted. Unlike Harvard, a URM getting admission does not take a seat from some other, possibly more qualified kid. Your UMC white kid will still be admitted, whether or not the YS model is used to identify additional URM kids. So, I would think FCPS would get additional flexibility.

Quotas will discriminate against asian kids, period.

This quota requirement will result in asian kids with scores in the 130 to 135 range being left out of AAP, while kids of other races with scores in the 110s to 130 range are accepted.

It is completely racist.

I think it is racist to say Asian kids are smarter.

Don't be a fool. Your trolling attempt is weak.

It is fact based that asian kids score higher on qualifying tests than any other racial group.

Having racial quotas will punish and exclude asian kids.

DP. FCPS has different Asian populations, they're not all "smarter" or "less smart". Nor are they shorthand for high test scores (Cogat, SOL, SAT, etc.).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought quotas were unconstitutional?

It’s complicated.

With the caveat that I have not seen the FCPS exact phrasing— quotas are generally unconstitutional. But, in holistic admissions, like AAP, URM status as a “plus factor”— one consideration out of several— is okay. And targets or goals that might or might not be reached are fine. So, if FCPS is trying to put systems in place to help reach enrollment goals for URMs, it could be fine. Especially if the goals are aspirational, rather than actual quotas. “We hope that there will be enough qualified URMs” is different than “we will take unqualified URMs is we must to hit a certain number. It’s like Harvard aggressively recruiting URMs and giving URM status special weight. Fine, as long as being a URM is not the deciding factor.

But— a lot of this law is in the context of college admissions, where there a set number of seats. AAP is different, because every qualified kid is supposed to be admitted. Unlike Harvard, a URM getting admission does not take a seat from some other, possibly more qualified kid. Your UMC white kid will still be admitted, whether or not the YS model is used to identify additional URM kids. So, I would think FCPS would get additional flexibility.

Quotas will discriminate against asian kids, period.

This quota requirement will result in asian kids with scores in the 130 to 135 range being left out of AAP, while kids of other races with scores in the 110s to 130 range are accepted.

It is completely racist.

I think it is racist to say Asian kids are smarter.

Don't be a fool. Your trolling attempt is weak.

It is fact based that asian kids score higher on qualifying tests than any other racial group.

Having racial quotas will punish and exclude asian kids.

One racial group should not be scoring better on gifted tests than others. That’s a problem that should be fixed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought quotas were unconstitutional?

It’s complicated.

With the caveat that I have not seen the FCPS exact phrasing— quotas are generally unconstitutional. But, in holistic admissions, like AAP, URM status as a “plus factor”— one consideration out of several— is okay. And targets or goals that might or might not be reached are fine. So, if FCPS is trying to put systems in place to help reach enrollment goals for URMs, it could be fine. Especially if the goals are aspirational, rather than actual quotas. “We hope that there will be enough qualified URMs” is different than “we will take unqualified URMs is we must to hit a certain number. It’s like Harvard aggressively recruiting URMs and giving URM status special weight. Fine, as long as being a URM is not the deciding factor.

But— a lot of this law is in the context of college admissions, where there a set number of seats. AAP is different, because every qualified kid is supposed to be admitted. Unlike Harvard, a URM getting admission does not take a seat from some other, possibly more qualified kid. Your UMC white kid will still be admitted, whether or not the YS model is used to identify additional URM kids. So, I would think FCPS would get additional flexibility.

Quotas will discriminate against asian kids, period.

This quota requirement will result in asian kids with scores in the 130 to 135 range being left out of AAP, while kids of other races with scores in the 110s to 130 range are accepted.

It is completely racist.

I think it is racist to say Asian kids are smarter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought quotas were unconstitutional?

It’s complicated.

With the caveat that I have not seen the FCPS exact phrasing— quotas are generally unconstitutional. But, in holistic admissions, like AAP, URM status as a “plus factor”— one consideration out of several— is okay. And targets or goals that might or might not be reached are fine. So, if FCPS is trying to put systems in place to help reach enrollment goals for URMs, it could be fine. Especially if the goals are aspirational, rather than actual quotas. “We hope that there will be enough qualified URMs” is different than “we will take unqualified URMs is we must to hit a certain number. It’s like Harvard aggressively recruiting URMs and giving URM status special weight. Fine, as long as being a URM is not the deciding factor.

But— a lot of this law is in the context of college admissions, where there a set number of seats. AAP is different, because every qualified kid is supposed to be admitted. Unlike Harvard, a URM getting admission does not take a seat from some other, possibly more qualified kid. Your UMC white kid will still be admitted, whether or not the YS model is used to identify additional URM kids. So, I would think FCPS would get additional flexibility.

Quotas will discriminate against asian kids, period.

This quota requirement will result in asian kids with scores in the 130 to 135 range being left out of AAP, while kids of other races with scores in the 110s to 130 range are accepted.

It is completely racist.

Anonymous wrote:In a recent work-session the FCPS Board discussed revisions to the Strategic Plan to include:

The expansion of AAP Local Level IV to all non-center schools

The expansion of the Young Scholars Program to all schools

Setting targets that each measured demographic subgroup (Asian, Black, Hispanic, White, Economically Disadvantaged, English Language Learners, and Students with Disabilities) would be at or above 25% participation in AAP by 2022-24 and would be at equal percentages of participation by 2028-2030.

What a stupid snd utterly unfair idea to put racial quotas on who qualifies.

Asian kids will get punished. It is reversed racism.

Kids like my youngest, who are not ready for AAP, will end up in with a Level IV designation, and the program will be watered down.

25% is too high of a number. At that point fcps is flat out tracking, but there will be kids (mostly asian) cut from the highest track due to race, and kids who should not be in the top track over those cut asian kids, who are placed in the highest track above other more qualified students, in order to make the numbers appear equal.

Many schools (high and low achievement) have very similarly achieving student bodies, so picking 30 kids to track into the one local level IV class is going to create a mess at schools that are settled and happy. Picking between such similar kids is going to result in qualified kids being left out, and perhaps unqualified or less qualified teachers pet or kiss up parent kids being placed over brighter kids or kids who need gifted services.

They should focus on making sure each middle school has a level IV program (much larger pool than elementary kids) and each high school pyramid has at least one elementary center.

The rest of the ideas are just plain stupid.

Looking at the upcoming school board meeting agendas, the actual vote to approve changes will be in early March. Any ideas when we would know which schools will be adding Level IV AAP for the 2019-2020 school year?

Anonymous wrote:I thought quotas were unconstitutional?

It’s complicated.

With the caveat that I have not seen the FCPS exact phrasing— quotas are generally unconstitutional. But, in holistic admissions, like AAP, URM status as a “plus factor”— one consideration out of several— is okay. And targets or goals that might or might not be reached are fine. So, if FCPS is trying to put systems in place to help reach enrollment goals for URMs, it could be fine. Especially if the goals are aspirational, rather than actual quotas. “We hope that there will be enough qualified URMs” is different than “we will take unqualified URMs is we must to hit a certain number. It’s like Harvard aggressively recruiting URMs and giving URM status special weight. Fine, as long as being a URM is not the deciding factor.

But— a lot of this law is in the context of college admissions, where there a set number of seats. AAP is different, because every qualified kid is supposed to be admitted. Unlike Harvard, a URM getting admission does not take a seat from some other, possibly more qualified kid. Your UMC white kid will still be admitted, whether or not the YS model is used to identify additional URM kids. So, I would think FCPS would get additional flexibility.

I think this is all about the school board proving their "progressive" bona fides and putting something behind the "One Fairfax" slogan.

It sounds good on paper, but it would be a huge mess, and probably impossible to implement in reality.

This was the direction that they were moving toward for years but Garza wasn't receptive and to some extent opposed. I wonder if Brabrand is receptive or if they're just trying to set the tone from the beginning.

I thought quotas were unconstitutional?

In a recent work-session the FCPS Board discussed revisions to the Strategic Plan to include:

The expansion of AAP Local Level IV to all non-center schools

The expansion of the Young Scholars Program to all schools

Setting targets that each measured demographic subgroup (Asian, Black, Hispanic, White, Economically Disadvantaged, English Language Learners, and Students with Disabilities) would be at or above 25% participation in AAP by 2022-24 and would be at equal percentages of participation by 2028-2030.