Anonymous wrote:The first picture should be of equally tall kids standing on varying sized boxes labeled “home support”, “tutoring”, “implicit teacher biases” etc. The tall kid isn’t tall because he’s just tall. He has more boxes. He has every advantage outside of school. So in an equitable situation he wouldn’t be given more advantages in school while the kid with no supports outside of school gets fewer. AAP reeks of this though.

The same should be done in sports also, to be fair.

The first picture should be of equally tall kids standing on varying sized boxes labeled “home support”, “tutoring”, “implicit teacher biases” etc. The tall kid isn’t tall because he’s just tall. He has more boxes. He has every advantage outside of school. So in an equitable situation he wouldn’t be given more advantages in school while the kid with no supports outside of school gets fewer. AAP reeks of this though.

Did anybody really not know the substance of OP's post already? You'd have to be in a coma seriously. I'd assume anyway.

Another thing is, I think that many people of many different cultures are able to picture themselves in the shoes of the underrepresented minority. What differs is how people react to being in that position. That is, if they were the ones who were underrepresented, what should happen? For some cultures, the answer is "work your butt off to make sure you're not underrepresented anymore." For others, it's "change the rules to change the representation."

As a result, we're seeing both happening: on one hand, the numbers of Asians that got admitted on merit went way up. On the other, the rules changed to make sure that the numbers of Whites went up.

I would argue that many working class people have much harder jobs, thus have a stronger work ethic than some middle class people.

I would rather have a desk job than clean toilets or doing heavy manual work for 8 hours a day.

The role of nepotism in getting some well paid jobs and inheritance as a portion of wealth should also be taken into account.

So I don't disregard the presence of work ethic in the poor.

I think it's unfair that intelligence and work ethic were distributed equally among all racial groups and economic strata when no other physical or medical conditions have been equally distributed in the same way. Why wasn't height equally distributed among all races? Or ability to build muscle? Or resistance against diabetes? It's just not fair!

/s

FCPS should work on distribution of work ethics equally amongst ALL racial groups. Not by implementing Equity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: This is because the important factors, intelligence and work ethic is what is making the difference and is equally distributed in the population.

Do you have any proof that intelligence and work ethic are equally distributed across all races, cultures, and income levels?

Of course it is equal across all races, cultures and income levels around the world. But immigrants who have come to America are not always representative of their home countries — it’s why some countries call the phenomenon of people leaving their country a “brain drain.” Highly educated and/or motivated people tend to take the risk of leaving their home country for America. So the people you have here might be of higher education level and/or motivation than your average person of that culture.

I agree with the immigrant effect.

However, even setting this aside, different cultures around the world value education in vastly different ways, and these values affect the hours children spend on schoolwork and the expectations families have of them.

What exactly is your point? Asian students in Title I schools will be subject to the same lower AAP pool cut-offs as white, black, and Hispanic students in Title I schools.

I expect this is responding to the "work ethic is equally distributed in the population" nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: This is because the important factors, intelligence and work ethic is what is making the difference and is equally distributed in the population.

Do you have any proof that intelligence and work ethic are equally distributed across all races, cultures, and income levels?

Of course it is equal across all races, cultures and income levels around the world. But immigrants who have come to America are not always representative of their home countries — it’s why some countries call the phenomenon of people leaving their country a “brain drain.” Highly educated and/or motivated people tend to take the risk of leaving their home country for America. So the people you have here might be of higher education level and/or motivation than your average person of that culture.

I agree with the immigrant effect.

However, even setting this aside, different cultures around the world value education in vastly different ways, and these values affect the hours children spend on schoolwork and the expectations families have of them.

What exactly is your point? Asian students in Title I schools will be subject to the same lower AAP pool cut-offs as white, black, and Hispanic students in Title I schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
But immigrants who have come to America are not always representative of their home countries — it’s why some countries call the phenomenon of people leaving their country a “brain drain.” Highly educated and/or motivated people tend to take the risk of leaving their home country for America. So the people you have here might be of higher education level and/or motivation than your average person of that culture.

I agree with the immigrant effect.

However, even setting this aside, different cultures around the world value education in vastly different ways, and these values affect the hours children spend on schoolwork and the expectations families have of them.

This explains, though, why South Asians are overrepresented in AAP and TJ. The South Asians in the DC area are not even remotely representative of South Asians as a whole.

On that note, the educational values thing is a big deal here. There are huge cultural differences as to whether TJ would even be desirable and just how much pressure to put on kids. I'm pretty typical for a white person in this respect, but I wouldn't want my kids to go to TJ unless they were above and beyond and would easily be in the top half of their class there. Otherwise, it would be too much homework and too much stress for no real gain. Many Asian families feel very differently than I do, which is why despite economic similarities, there are proportionally so many more Asian kids than white kids in AAP and TJ.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: This is because the important factors, intelligence and work ethic is what is making the difference and is equally distributed in the population.

Do you have any proof that intelligence and work ethic are equally distributed across all races, cultures, and income levels?

Of course it is equal across all races, cultures and income levels around the world. But immigrants who have come to America are not always representative of their home countries — it’s why some countries call the phenomenon of people leaving their country a “brain drain.” Highly educated and/or motivated people tend to take the risk of leaving their home country for America. So the people you have here might be of higher education level and/or motivation than your average person of that culture.

I agree with the immigrant effect.

However, even setting this aside, different cultures around the world value education in vastly different ways, and these values affect the hours children spend on schoolwork and the expectations families have of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: This is because the important factors, intelligence and work ethic is what is making the difference and is equally distributed in the population.

Do you have any proof that intelligence and work ethic are equally distributed across all races, cultures, and income levels?

Of course it is equal across all races, cultures and income levels around the world. But immigrants who have come to America are not always representative of their home countries — it’s why some countries call the phenomenon of people leaving their country a “brain drain.” Highly educated and/or motivated people tend to take the risk of leaving their home country for America. So the people you have here might be of higher education level and/or motivation than your average person of that culture.

PP. Also, given how the mechanics of NYC specialized school admissions work, it is unlikely that any student in Stuyvesant benefitted from that second chance program. If they are just under the cutoff in Stuy, they would be passing with flying colors for several other schools, and would be admitted there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: When kids of low socio economic status and Black and Hispanic background of equal intelligence and work ethic achieve at an equal level as middle class white and Asian kids then the system is equitable . This is because the important factors, intelligence and work ethic is what is making the difference and is equally distributed in the population. Until that standard is reached then the system isn’t equitable.

Then why is Stuyvesant in NYC dominated by poor Asian students? Mind you Asians in NYC have the highest poverty rate in NYC even above Blacks and Hispanics. Why are many Asians still doing well in academics even when they have no advantages in terms of wealth and income?

I wonder if NYCPS also allows anyone to claim to be low income for purposes of high school admissions?

Stuyvesant admissions are test based. There is (was?) a program for low income students that allowed those who scored very close to a cutoff score to take the test a second time with additional tutoring, so a leg up but still a test.

My son went to Stuyvesant; the low income Asian students there are indeed low income.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: When kids of low socio economic status and Black and Hispanic background of equal intelligence and work ethic achieve at an equal level as middle class white and Asian kids then the system is equitable . This is because the important factors, intelligence and work ethic is what is making the difference and is equally distributed in the population. Until that standard is reached then the system isn’t equitable.

Then why is Stuyvesant in NYC dominated by poor Asian students? Mind you Asians in NYC have the highest poverty rate in NYC even above Blacks and Hispanics. Why are many Asians still doing well in academics even when they have no advantages in terms of wealth and income?

I wonder if NYCPS also allows anyone to claim to be low income for purposes of high school admissions?