Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BECAUSE Asian Americans are collateral damage for the benefit of preferred minority group.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

Of all the funniest things posted on this forum, the suggestion that FCPS - an overwhelmed, declining school system - can bring the same analytical rigor to bear as an institution like CalTech when trying to evaluate applications without the benefit of objective metrics - may be the most hilarious.

You just want to discriminate against Asians and find a way to justify it. The joke will be on you, however, as those very kids whose families you resent so much for their commitment to education are the ones that led to TJ's top ranking. Without them, TJ's reputation will decline and it will simply be a better alternative for kids attending the county's worst high schools and an increasingly unattractive option for those attending the county's handful of remaining high-quality high schools.

Ehh. I don't resent them for their commitment to education at all. Far from it.

What I resent is their persistent belief that they have a monopoly on a commitment to education and the very narrow view that they have of what in the educational process is actually important to creating adults who are prepared to contribute to society. I reject the idea that test-taking ability is of some great value for any endeavor other than school admissions, and I strongly reject the notion that only students who are excellent test-takers belong in outstanding educational environments.

Test-taking is a skill - one that I learned at a very early age and that is largely responsible for my admission to TJ. It isn't that hard to learn how to be good at taking tests without necessarily having the content knowledge to succeed on them. But it does not have relevance to the real world outside of the process of getting admitted to selective schools or other institutions.

Where I will agree with you is that those same students are absolutely responsible for TJ's high rankings over the years - explicitly because of an inappropriate over-reliance on test scores in high school ranking algorithms. Those algorithms did nothing to determine whether or not a school was doing anything to educate its students - they merely determined how good the school was at cobbling together a core group of great test takers. Asians prioritize the development of test taking skills because they know that it used to be the secret to educational prestige through presenting students as more gifted/bright/intelligent than they actually were.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why has there never been a serious discussion about changing TJ to an Academy where any student can take classes?

Or even follow the LCPS model of 1/2 base school and 1/2 magnet program? It makes so much more sense to spread out a limited resource.

Because changing it to an Academy would only serve a larger number of students if you rebuilt about 2/3 of the present school building at an enormous cost.

This seems like a made up assertion. Even if, for example, kids weren’t taking gym at an Academy program, the gym could still be retained and made available for local community use.

Maybe but wish they'd go back to the older process where we could just buy access to the admission test. It was so much better.

Do you have any evidence that anyone could buy TJ test in past? Can you point to an article?

DP but you have heard of Curie, right?

So you know for certain that test center had access to test questions or you heard it here? There has to be some sort of evidence/article pointing to it right?

Yes. TJ students who actually attended Curie have said it repeatedly, using their real names on Facebook. And they were on the lists that Curie published.

Now, had this been a prep center that exclusively catered to Black students instead of catering exclusively to Indian students, I guarantee you that Asra Nomani and Harry Jackson would have been all over it and there would be a New York Post article about it. But the left doesn't have the same people with the same free time, connections, and personal wealth to pursue reporting on the matter, and Curie has since scrubbed its Facebook page of the infamous "lists".

So were these students expelled from TJ since they rig the system?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BECAUSE Asian Americans are collateral damage for the benefit of preferred minority group.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

+1000 best post in ages!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BECAUSE Asian Americans are collateral damage for the benefit of preferred minority group.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

Actually, Asians do not speak up enough and do not protest enough. Many times, Asians just grin and bear. This is the reason that most anti Asian hate crimes go unreported. Actually, Asians should learn from the 'preferred group' regarding how to demonstrate, protest, complain, form advocacy groups and otherwise create mayhem to draw attention to this 'victimhood' you have mentioned. Maybe the main stream media (as opposed to local media) would start covering horrific violence committed against Asians every single day if the victims actually made sure that the media would pay some attention if enough mayhem was created.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Actually, there are just as many if not more studies that show the value of tests such as SAT to be valuable and even more so if combined with GPAs. The primary reason for eliminating the objective tests is to give further advantage to this 'preferred minority group' at the expense of other groups such as Asians and whites.

In addition, how do you know whether I was born in the US or which country I am from if I was not born in this country? Furthermore, politicians and school boards are the ones in positions to take advantage of anything to take advantage of not the Asians in this country.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

Caltech is one of few top 20 universities that have eliminated, legacy, affirmative action etc. but kept and will keep test scores as one of the main citerion for admission decisions. The testing is not an inherent advantage for any particular group just like GPAs are not an inherent advantage for any particular group. However, systematically removing objective measures that the 'preferred minority group' is performing poorly at would be another evidence that the 'preferred minority group' is indeed enjoying this 'preferred status' at the expense of the disfavored group lacking political influence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

The above situation certainly equates to collateral damage and discrimination based on race which is illegal in this country although it may be legal where yo come from and for your community.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why has there never been a serious discussion about changing TJ to an Academy where any student can take classes?

Or even follow the LCPS model of 1/2 base school and 1/2 magnet program? It makes so much more sense to spread out a limited resource.

Because changing it to an Academy would only serve a larger number of students if you rebuilt about 2/3 of the present school building at an enormous cost.

This seems like a made up assertion. Even if, for example, kids weren’t taking gym at an Academy program, the gym could still be retained and made available for local community use.

Maybe but wish they'd go back to the older process where we could just buy access to the admission test. It was so much better.

Do you have any evidence that anyone could buy TJ test in past? Can you point to an article?

DP but you have heard of Curie, right?

So you know for certain that test center had access to test questions or you heard it here? There has to be some sort of evidence/article pointing to it right?

Yes. TJ students who actually attended Curie have said it repeatedly, using their real names on Facebook. And they were on the lists that Curie published.

Now, had this been a prep center that exclusively catered to Black students instead of catering exclusively to Indian students, I guarantee you that Asra Nomani and Harry Jackson would have been all over it and there would be a New York Post article about it. But the left doesn't have the same people with the same free time, connections, and personal wealth to pursue reporting on the matter, and Curie has since scrubbed its Facebook page of the infamous "lists".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BECAUSE Asian Americans are collateral damage for the benefit of preferred minority group.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

Now do MIT.

I think you're misunderstanding and misstating (possibly intentionally) the problem of standardized testing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BECAUSE Asian Americans are collateral damage for the benefit of preferred minority group.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

Well MIT seems to disagree as they found doing away with standardized test requirements was a disaster with some of the student accepted w/o any test scores and have gone back to requiring them. The Dean of Admissions said, "Our research can't explain why these tests are so predictive of academic preparedness for MIT, but we believe it is likely related to the centrality of mathematics--and mathematic exams--in our education."

My spouse, who has a phD from Caltech, where he taught undergrads college level math and engineering classes, would strongly disagree with the proposition that these tests are not predictive of competency in these subject areas. Spouse also triple majored in math, computer science and electrical engineering from another top 20 math/engineering program as an undergrad. In fact the achievement tests which used to be required are even way too easy than what is covered in these rigorous programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BECAUSE Asian Americans are collateral damage for the benefit of preferred minority group.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

Of all the funniest things posted on this forum, the suggestion that FCPS - an overwhelmed, declining school system - can bring the same analytical rigor to bear as an institution like CalTech when trying to evaluate applications without the benefit of objective metrics - may be the most hilarious.

You just want to discriminate against Asians and find a way to justify it. The joke will be on you, however, as those very kids whose families you resent so much for their commitment to education are the ones that led to TJ's top ranking. Without them, TJ's reputation will decline and it will simply be a better alternative for kids attending the county's worst high schools and an increasingly unattractive option for those attending the county's handful of remaining high-quality high schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why has there never been a serious discussion about changing TJ to an Academy where any student can take classes?

Or even follow the LCPS model of 1/2 base school and 1/2 magnet program? It makes so much more sense to spread out a limited resource.

Because changing it to an Academy would only serve a larger number of students if you rebuilt about 2/3 of the present school building at an enormous cost.

This seems like a made up assertion. Even if, for example, kids weren’t taking gym at an Academy program, the gym could still be retained and made available for local community use.

Maybe but wish they'd go back to the older process where we could just buy access to the admission test. It was so much better.

Do you have any evidence that anyone could buy TJ test in past? Can you point to an article?

DP but you have heard of Curie, right?

So you know for certain that test center had access to test questions or you heard it here? There has to be some sort of evidence/article pointing to it right?

Anonymous wrote:BECAUSE Asian Americans are collateral damage for the benefit of preferred minority group.

This victimhood narrative is so tiresome.

You deserve credit for recognizing that there was a market inefficiency in elite college admissions - standardized test scores. They were overvalued by many of the most prestigious institutions both in your countries of origin and here in the US for many years, and so you designed your parenting and educational philosophy around taking advantage of that market inefficiency.

Institutions like Caltech - through years of research - have determined that standardized test scores are NOT a predictive measure of future success or competency and can indeed be an occluding factor in a selection process, and so they've moved away from using that metric. This advancement in research has removed an advantage for you and your community as a consequence.

That does NOT equate to collateral damage. And it does NOT equate to discrimination of any kind. We're just not using the metric that you're best at anymore because it selects the wrong kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why has there never been a serious discussion about changing TJ to an Academy where any student can take classes?

Or even follow the LCPS model of 1/2 base school and 1/2 magnet program? It makes so much more sense to spread out a limited resource.

Because changing it to an Academy would only serve a larger number of students if you rebuilt about 2/3 of the present school building at an enormous cost.

This seems like a made up assertion. Even if, for example, kids weren’t taking gym at an Academy program, the gym could still be retained and made available for local community use.

Maybe but wish they'd go back to the older process where we could just buy access to the admission test. It was so much better.

Do you have any evidence that anyone could buy TJ test in past? Can you point to an article?

DP but you have heard of Curie, right?