Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Well, that's not exactly accurate. Previously the only criteria was whether you could buy the test answers. These days it's at least based on merit.

Merit? Please define experiential factors.

Still seems better than memorizing test answers purchased from a prep center.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Well, that's not exactly accurate. Previously the only criteria was whether you could buy the test answers. These days it's at least based on merit.

Merit? Please define experiential factors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Well, that's not exactly accurate. Previously the only criteria was whether you could buy the test answers. These days it's at least based on merit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Bro you don’t have better things to worry about? None of your
Children go to tj anyway 🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Well, that's not exactly accurate. Previously the only criteria was whether you could buy the test answers. These days it's at least based on merit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Well, that's not exactly accurate. Previously the only criteria was whether you could buy the test answers. These days it's at least based on merit.

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

Bro you don’t have better things to worry about? None of your
Children go to tj anyway 🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

Anonymous wrote:Why is a “magnet” schools which was previously accepted as a top school when academics (courses, essay, gpa, testing, etc.) was the only criteria when now the criteria includes points for experiential factors having absolutely no bearing on academic ability? Anyone who says TJ is as good as always is blind to what everyone else sees.

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.

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%

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%

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%

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.