Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?

That is a lie.

There is not racial quota management. There are a handful of spots set aside for every MS if they have qualified candidates. But it's not a quota and it's not based on race. It's a race-blind admissions process.

It is race blind on it’s face but we all know biases creep up when certain names are listed on an app.

Only a fool or a brainwashed equity minion would believe a process to be anything but race quota management when it yields a tightly controlled percent of Asians admitted before for four years before admissions change, and a lowered but again a tightly controlled percent after for four years. This is like saying a car maintains a narrow speed range, but a blind person is driving it.

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%

Numbers dont lie.

They don’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?

That is a lie.

There is not racial quota management. There are a handful of spots set aside for every MS if they have qualified candidates. But it's not a quota and it's not based on race. It's a race-blind admissions process.

It is race blind on it’s face but we all know biases creep up when certain names are listed on an app.

Only a fool or a brainwashed equity minion would believe a process to be anything but race quota management when it yields a tightly controlled percent of Asians admitted before for four years before admissions change, and a lowered but again a tightly controlled percent after for four years. This is like saying a car maintains a narrow speed range, but a blind person is driving it.

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%

The correlation and causation is the demographic of the applicants. That is the "tightly controlled" quota.

The demographic of admitted students is very similar to the demographic of applicants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?

That is a lie.

There is not racial quota management. There are a handful of spots set aside for every MS if they have qualified candidates. But it's not a quota and it's not based on race. It's a race-blind admissions process.

It is race blind on it’s face but we all know biases creep up when certain names are listed on an app.

Only a fool or a brainwashed equity minion would believe a process to be anything but race quota management when it yields a tightly controlled percent of Asians admitted before for four years before admissions change, and a lowered but again a tightly controlled percent after for four years. This is like saying a car maintains a narrow speed range, but a blind person is driving it.

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%

Numbers dont lie.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?

That is a lie.

There is not racial quota management. There are a handful of spots set aside for every MS if they have qualified candidates. But it's not a quota and it's not based on race. It's a race-blind admissions process.

It is race blind on it’s face but we all know biases creep up when certain names are listed on an app.

Only a fool or a brainwashed equity minion would believe a process to be anything but race quota management when it yields a tightly controlled percent of Asians admitted before for four years before admissions change, and a lowered but again a tightly controlled percent after for four years. This is like saying a car maintains a narrow speed range, but a blind person is driving it.

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%

It’s not a “race quota” no matter how often you trying to repeat that bullcrap. The admissions team doesn’t know race or names.

They added new seats to expand access to more middle schools. The number of Asian students has remained fairly level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?

That is a lie.

There is not racial quota management. There are a handful of spots set aside for every MS if they have qualified candidates. But it's not a quota and it's not based on race. It's a race-blind admissions process.

It is race blind on it’s face but we all know biases creep up when certain names are listed on an app.

Only a fool or a brainwashed equity minion would believe a process to be anything but race quota management when it yields a tightly controlled percent of Asians admitted before for four years before admissions change, and a lowered but again a tightly controlled percent after for four years. This is like saying a car maintains a narrow speed range, but a blind person is driving it.

Merit Test based Admissions:
Class of 2020, Asian American 71.34%
Class of 2021, Asian American 74.90%
Class of 2023, Asian American 72.87%
Class of 2024, Asian American 73.05%

Admissions changed to Essay based:
Class of 2025, Asian American 54.36%
Class of 2026, Asian American 59.82%
Class of 2027, Asian American 61.64%.
Class of 2028, Asian American 57.27%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a long time the number one school in the nation, US News now has TJ at #14. Not sure how much is a change in methodology, how much is the admissions policy (surprised to see WTOP call that one out below, because they usually parrot the FCPS party line on everything), and how much is other schools getting better.

Following controversial changes to its admissions policy in 2021 to boost diversity, Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Virginia remains the top ranked school in the D.C. region and 14th in the nation, slipping from the top 10. It’s also the 5th ranked STEM school in the nation.

https://wtop.com/education/2024/04/regions-best-high-schools/

Diversity in the school (Blacks, Hispanics, Low income) had 10% weightage too and class of 2022 lacked that which could have costed the ranking

facts

Can you explain how this works with a race-blind process that is required by law in the US?

The US New rating forumula (which is what PP was talking about) is not governed by US law.

Yes, the lack of diversity at TJ is costing them their ranking.

So, why TJ’s ranking is getting worse not better?

the county has a large share of black and Hispanic students that are not being fairly represented at TJ

So, why adding more Black and Hispanic students worsens the ranking? It should make the ranking better if your logic is right.

For ranking TJ at #14, they used seniors data from year 2021-22 when there was less diversity than it is now. Going forward rankings should be better since the new policy admitted more blacks and Hispanics than before.

Methodology data is needed here.

It would not surprise me if US News & World Report has recently altered their scoring criteria to give more weight to DEI. A different rating organization- Great Schools - did exactly that, and they have dinged McLean HS not for any academic deficiencies, but Great School’s perception of insufficient diversity at McLean.

Has USNWR re-weighted diversity to TJ’s disadvantage?

That's not true. Langley has half the diversity of McLean yet they were given an "8" for equity. McLean got dinged not because they lack diversity, but because their diverse/low-income kids are failing. However they are succeeding at Langley.

These rankings mostly hurt diverse schools since you get penalized if you have low-income kids.

Is that so! for some reason Stuyvesant with 42% low income, four times that of TJ, doesnt seem to be complaining about the same rankings process. Unlike TJ, perhaps they are not admitting underqualified or playing the blame game?

Well, they are admitting low-income Asian students, who had essentially zero access to TJ for decades but do now under the new admissions process. How do you feel about that change?

That is a lie. Total Asian representation went down from 73% to 54% in one year. Asian students were deliberately exluded from expanded seat quota, and algebra1 selections increased 7 times knowing well Asians had higher math of Geometry or higher.

Avg # Asian students/class
2015-2024 = 330
2025-2028 = 321

On average, there are 9 fewer Asian kids per class. Out of hundreds.

Why do you keep posting this? Do you not know the difference between number and percentage? Don't you understand the effect of denominator? You are making a fool of yourself, just drop. Find another narrative.

For equity cheerleaders simple numbers look convenient, but percentages look scary.

OK, let's look at %s.

Avg % Asian students/class
2015-2024 = 68%
2025-2028 = 58%

So 10% fewer Asian students, on average. And they still comprise the majority.

Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?

That is a lie.

There is not racial quota management. There are a handful of spots set aside for every MS if they have qualified candidates. But it's not a quota and it's not based on race. It's a race-blind admissions process.

It is race blind on it’s face but we all know biases creep up when certain names are listed on an app.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect? Everybody knows what kind of students in TJ. Colleges are not stupid. When TJ changes its admission, college would also change admission based on TJ's change. It's a downward spiral.

No, you've got that backwards, friend. College admissions at UVA and VT were declining under the old admissions. Changing the admissions needed to happen for that reason as well as the other reasons.

If you aim at UVA and VT, do you need to go to TJ?

Yes, but not if merely aiming to get admitted to UVA/VT non-competitive major.

Look at it this way. Consider the likelihood of your HS student gaining admission to UVA competitive major. With 329 high schools in Virginia, even if the top 1 or 2 kids from each school apply to most sought-after Engineering/CS/premed programs, your base high HS kid's chance is about 1 in 100. Securing acceptance into UVA is relatively easy for non-competitive majors like liberal arts, social sciences, or business, regardless of the high school attended. Most people dont care to inquire further if the UVA admission was into a non-competitive or most sought after major.

Contrast this with the top quarter TJ students, many of whom aim exclusively for highly competitive majors at UVA. Despite the intense competition, a substantial number of TJ kids, around 40 to 50 accept admission ( likely 200+ offers) into these competitive majors, not just any majors. Can you name another Virginia high school with comparable 40 to 50 acceptance success of getting students admitted or 200+ offered to UVA/VT's top-tier programs?

For the average high school student, UVA is often a reach school. However, for top quarter TJ students, it's considered a match or even a safety, particularly in the context of competitive majors. Most top-quarter TJ students apply to numerous competitive colleges, reserving UVA/VT/UMD as their safety options.

If student is not a top-quarter TJ student, then there is no guarantee they would have been in the top 5% in their base school, especially at Langley/Oakton/McLean, leaving their chances more or less the same with college admissions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect? Everybody knows what kind of students in TJ. Colleges are not stupid. When TJ changes its admission, college would also change admission based on TJ's change. It's a downward spiral.

No, you've got that backwards, friend. College admissions at UVA and VT were declining under the old admissions. Changing the admissions needed to happen for that reason as well as the other reasons.

If you aim at UVA and VT, do you need to go to TJ?

Going to TJ for any college is a BIG mistake. The admissions requirements for a TJ kid vs a kid at base school are wildly different. You stand a much better chance to be admitted to any college coming from your base school. That's the trade off of going to TJ. Just know that going in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a long time the number one school in the nation, US News now has TJ at #14. Not sure how much is a change in methodology, how much is the admissions policy (surprised to see WTOP call that one out below, because they usually parrot the FCPS party line on everything), and how much is other schools getting better.

Following controversial changes to its admissions policy in 2021 to boost diversity, Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Virginia remains the top ranked school in the D.C. region and 14th in the nation, slipping from the top 10. It’s also the 5th ranked STEM school in the nation.

https://wtop.com/education/2024/04/regions-best-high-schools/

Diversity in the school (Blacks, Hispanics, Low income) had 10% weightage too and class of 2022 lacked that which could have costed the ranking

Can you explain how this works with a race-blind process that is required by law in the US?

The US New rating forumula (which is what PP was talking about) is not governed by US law.

Yes, the lack of diversity at TJ is costing them their ranking.

So, why TJ’s ranking is getting worse not better?

the county has a large share of black and Hispanic students that are not being fairly represented at TJ

So, why adding more Black and Hispanic students worsens the ranking? It should make the ranking better if your logic is right.

For ranking TJ at #14, they used seniors data from year 2021-22 when there was less diversity than it is now. Going forward rankings should be better since the new policy admitted more blacks and Hispanics than before.

Methodology data is needed here.

It would not surprise me if US News & World Report has recently altered their scoring criteria to give more weight to DEI. A different rating organization- Great Schools - did exactly that, and they have dinged McLean HS not for any academic deficiencies, but Great School’s perception of insufficient diversity at McLean.

Has USNWR re-weighted diversity to TJ’s disadvantage?

That's not true. Langley has half the diversity of McLean yet they were given an "8" for equity. McLean got dinged not because they lack diversity, but because their diverse/low-income kids are failing. However they are succeeding at Langley.

These rankings mostly hurt diverse schools since you get penalized if you have low-income kids.

Is that so! for some reason Stuyvesant with 42% low income, four times that of TJ, doesnt seem to be complaining about the same rankings process. Unlike TJ, perhaps they are not admitting underqualified or playing the blame game?

Well, they are admitting low-income Asian students, who had essentially zero access to TJ for decades but do now under the new admissions process. How do you feel about that change?

That is a lie. Total Asian representation went down from 73% to 54% in one year. Asian students were deliberately exluded from expanded seat quota, and algebra1 selections increased 7 times knowing well Asians had higher math of Geometry or higher.

Avg # Asian students/class
2015-2024 = 330
2025-2028 = 321

On average, there are 9 fewer Asian kids per class. Out of hundreds.

Why do you keep posting this? Do you not know the difference between number and percentage? Don't you understand the effect of denominator? You are making a fool of yourself, just drop. Find another narrative.

For equity cheerleaders simple numbers look convenient, but percentages look scary.

OK, let's look at %s.

Avg % Asian students/class
2015-2024 = 68%
2025-2028 = 58%

So 10% fewer Asian students, on average. And they still comprise the majority.

Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?

That is a lie.

There is not racial quota management. There are a handful of spots set aside for every MS if they have qualified candidates. But it's not a quota and it's not based on race. It's a race-blind admissions process.

Anonymous wrote:There are so many different kinds of Asian kids. Huge difference between Indian, East and Southeast Asians. There are Asian Americans, immigrant Asians, poor uneducated Asians, refugees, children of refugees. You cannot group all of these people together. Non Asians just put them as one group.

For statistical convenience many different skin colors got put into one Asian American group:

Asian American ethnic group consists of Chinese and Indian at 4.1 million each, Filipino (2.9 million), Vietnamese (1.8 million), Korean (1.5 million), Japanese (768,985), Pakistani (≈500,000), Hmong (305,525), Cambodian (259,307), Thai (204,150), Taiwanese (194,263), Laotian (192,929), Bangladeshi (185,177), Burmese (169,915), Nepalese (162,993), Indonesian (76,873), Sri Lankan (51,735), Bhutanese (26,534), Mongolian (21,199), Malaysian (20,758), and Okinawan (3,526) (Monte and Shin, 2022).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect? Everybody knows what kind of students in TJ. Colleges are not stupid. When TJ changes its admission, college would also change admission based on TJ's change. It's a downward spiral.

No, you've got that backwards, friend. College admissions at UVA and VT were declining under the old admissions. Changing the admissions needed to happen for that reason as well as the other reasons.

If you aim at UVA and VT, do you need to go to TJ?

Anonymous wrote:What do you expect? Everybody knows what kind of students in TJ. Colleges are not stupid. When TJ changes its admission, college would also change admission based on TJ's change. It's a downward spiral.

No, you've got that backwards, friend. College admissions at UVA and VT were declining under the old admissions. Changing the admissions needed to happen for that reason as well as the other reasons.

What do you expect? Everybody knows what kind of students in TJ. Colleges are not stupid. When TJ changes its admission, college would also change admission based on TJ's change. It's a downward spiral.

Anonymous wrote:It's probably because they let more white kids in with the new policy. White kids just aren't hard enough workers.

They always talk about black and hispanic but this quiet fact should be spoken out loud.

Anonymous wrote:This year also marked the first time TJ has a student who failed SOL. Quite “a landmark achievement” for the equity team.

What would happen to this kid? Back to the base school? Would it be because of the stress of constantly having to catch up at TJ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a long time the number one school in the nation, US News now has TJ at #14. Not sure how much is a change in methodology, how much is the admissions policy (surprised to see WTOP call that one out below, because they usually parrot the FCPS party line on everything), and how much is other schools getting better.

Following controversial changes to its admissions policy in 2021 to boost diversity, Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Virginia remains the top ranked school in the D.C. region and 14th in the nation, slipping from the top 10. It’s also the 5th ranked STEM school in the nation.

https://wtop.com/education/2024/04/regions-best-high-schools/

Diversity in the school (Blacks, Hispanics, Low income) had 10% weightage too and class of 2022 lacked that which could have costed the ranking

Can you explain how this works with a race-blind process that is required by law in the US?

The US New rating forumula (which is what PP was talking about) is not governed by US law.

Yes, the lack of diversity at TJ is costing them their ranking.

So, why TJ’s ranking is getting worse not better?

the county has a large share of black and Hispanic students that are not being fairly represented at TJ

So, why adding more Black and Hispanic students worsens the ranking? It should make the ranking better if your logic is right.

For ranking TJ at #14, they used seniors data from year 2021-22 when there was less diversity than it is now. Going forward rankings should be better since the new policy admitted more blacks and Hispanics than before.

Methodology data is needed here.

It would not surprise me if US News & World Report has recently altered their scoring criteria to give more weight to DEI. A different rating organization- Great Schools - did exactly that, and they have dinged McLean HS not for any academic deficiencies, but Great School’s perception of insufficient diversity at McLean.

Has USNWR re-weighted diversity to TJ’s disadvantage?

That's not true. Langley has half the diversity of McLean yet they were given an "8" for equity. McLean got dinged not because they lack diversity, but because their diverse/low-income kids are failing. However they are succeeding at Langley.

These rankings mostly hurt diverse schools since you get penalized if you have low-income kids.

Is that so! for some reason Stuyvesant with 42% low income, four times that of TJ, doesnt seem to be complaining about the same rankings process. Unlike TJ, perhaps they are not admitting underqualified or playing the blame game?

Well, they are admitting low-income Asian students, who had essentially zero access to TJ for decades but do now under the new admissions process. How do you feel about that change?

That is a lie. Total Asian representation went down from 73% to 54% in one year. Asian students were deliberately exluded from expanded seat quota, and algebra1 selections increased 7 times knowing well Asians had higher math of Geometry or higher.

Avg # Asian students/class
2015-2024 = 330
2025-2028 = 321

On average, there are 9 fewer Asian kids per class. Out of hundreds.

Why do you keep posting this? Do you not know the difference between number and percentage? Don't you understand the effect of denominator? You are making a fool of yourself, just drop. Find another narrative.

For equity cheerleaders simple numbers look convenient, but percentages look scary.

OK, let's look at %s.

Avg % Asian students/class
2015-2024 = 68%
2025-2028 = 58%

So 10% fewer Asian students, on average. And they still comprise the majority.

Racial quota management ensures same exact percent of Asians are admitted every year?