Anonymous wrote:If Carson and LF used to send 25% of their 8th graders, now it becomes 1.5%. It hurts more than those who used to be between 5-10%. I am not sure if a 3.5 GPA in LF would weigh the same as a 3.5 in other schools. If all tests and HW are exactly the same in each middle, I guess 3.5 would be on the similar level. Otherwise, kids' academic performance at the entry point to TJ will be very different for the 2025 class. But kids at this age, with good teachers and support, may catch up quickly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Impact does not imply intent.

It does in this case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Impact does not imply intent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

The whole exercise was intended to discriminate against "the group that occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school." It's what FCPS does these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Correct. And the point I'm making is that the charge of "less qualified" is a lot more pernicious than "prepped robots". Neither are great, but one is a lot uglier than the other and carries much deeper coded meaning about inadequacy. Additionally, the power relationship in this dynamic SIGNIFICANTLY favors the group that routinely occupies 70-75% of the seats at the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

That's ludicrous. All I meant was that there are lots of racial stereotypes being thrown around in this debate - some of the people who don't like the changes admissions policy are stereotyping Black and Latino/a students (as less qualified) and some of the people who do like the changes are stereotyping Asian American students (as prepped robots). The only students that have escaped the stereotyping are white students. Funny how that works out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Yep - this is what happens when you engage in both-sidesism and try to pretend that the privileged - the majority - are equally oppressed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's just monumentally wrong on so many levels. TJ isn't going anywhere.

What you will have is probably a slightly smaller number of kids taking TJ Math 5/6/BC Calc as freshmen. And that's fine. But the level of instruction in those classes isn't going anywhere, believe me.

This is an assertion without evidence. The evidence of what has happened in so many other places suggests otherwise.
Bringing in more minorities, then there will be pressure to have then do well, pressure for grade inflation.
Equity is a major factor for the Fairfax School Board.

This process has happened in so many other places. Some Harvard professors actually give out internal grades to students, while giving them the inflated grades for their transcript.

Believing you over evidence of how colleges have reacted to affirmative action admissions would require some more evidence from you.

Citation desperately needed

What you've cleverly done here is provided what researchers call a "non-falsifiable hypothesis".

"There will be pressure to have them do well, pressure for grade inflation." This statement introduces two possibilities:

1) minority students do well, thus "confirming" your hypothesis based on the framework that these students could never do well without artificial assistance - which tracks nicely with your theory that the only way they'd get into TJ is by lowering standards
2) minority students do poorly, thus "confirming" the idea that they don't belong at TJ to begin with

I can't speak to your motivations or what's in your heart, but your argument style is to a tee how racists justify their racism.

Nothing clever about it. There is no need for me to prove this hypothesis. Just stating that this is what some people are expecting to happen, based on what has been observed elsewhere. By the way, I don't limit the inability to do well to black and brown kids, but also whites and Asians who are getting spots due to a school minimum quota.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Mansfield#Views_on_grades_and_affirmative_action

So your citation is of a guy who fought against the concept of affirmative action and grade inflation by..... inflating grades. Well played. At least he knew it was happening.

The whole point I'm making is that there is absolutely no way to prove that this is or is not going to happen at TJ, and therefore just like Tucker Carlson on Fox News, you are sowing the seeds of doubt for no reason other than to undermine a policy that you find disfavorable.

Of course you don't need to prove your hypothesis. There's no proving or disproving it. But you'll get what you want from the status quo crowd because they'll be able to say, "well, how do we know they AREN'T inflating the grades?"

Disgusting. And yes, objectively racist.

people like this dont know theyre racist. you have to be patient with them. my parents used to believe that crap too, its natural

You actually make a really good point. I need to do better with understanding that a lot of these people don't understand the impacts of their attitudes. I've seen enough of it at TJ to know this by now but it still makes me angry as hell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

"...on many sides.... on many sides....."

- 45

Anonymous wrote:This whole thread (like many others on DCUM that devolve into racial stereotyping) shows how toxic the TJ discussion and environment have become. It's sad for all the kids that go there or will go there who just want to take cool STEM courses that aren't available elsewhere. These kids are now just pawns in a political debate marked by racist overtones on all sides.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Falls Church City sends about 2 a year and many have dropped out early in 9th grade.

True
False

I think there were two years in a row within the last 4 years that all FCC kids dropped out.

Nope. There are active FCC students in each class currently at TJ who began there in 9th grade.

Could be froshmores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Falls Church City sends about 2 a year and many have dropped out early in 9th grade.

True
False

I think there were two years in a row within the last 4 years that all FCC kids dropped out.

Nope. There are active FCC students in each class currently at TJ who began there in 9th grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's just monumentally wrong on so many levels. TJ isn't going anywhere.

What you will have is probably a slightly smaller number of kids taking TJ Math 5/6/BC Calc as freshmen. And that's fine. But the level of instruction in those classes isn't going anywhere, believe me.

This is an assertion without evidence. The evidence of what has happened in so many other places suggests otherwise.
Bringing in more minorities, then there will be pressure to have then do well, pressure for grade inflation.
Equity is a major factor for the Fairfax School Board.

This process has happened in so many other places. Some Harvard professors actually give out internal grades to students, while giving them the inflated grades for their transcript.

Believing you over evidence of how colleges have reacted to affirmative action admissions would require some more evidence from you.

Citation desperately needed

What you've cleverly done here is provided what researchers call a "non-falsifiable hypothesis".

"There will be pressure to have them do well, pressure for grade inflation." This statement introduces two possibilities:

1) minority students do well, thus "confirming" your hypothesis based on the framework that these students could never do well without artificial assistance - which tracks nicely with your theory that the only way they'd get into TJ is by lowering standards
2) minority students do poorly, thus "confirming" the idea that they don't belong at TJ to begin with

I can't speak to your motivations or what's in your heart, but your argument style is to a tee how racists justify their racism.

Nothing clever about it. There is no need for me to prove this hypothesis. Just stating that this is what some people are expecting to happen, based on what has been observed elsewhere. By the way, I don't limit the inability to do well to black and brown kids, but also whites and Asians who are getting spots due to a school minimum quota.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Mansfield#Views_on_grades_and_affirmative_action

So your citation is of a guy who fought against the concept of affirmative action and grade inflation by..... inflating grades. Well played. At least he knew it was happening.

The whole point I'm making is that there is absolutely no way to prove that this is or is not going to happen at TJ, and therefore just like Tucker Carlson on Fox News, you are sowing the seeds of doubt for no reason other than to undermine a policy that you find disfavorable.

Of course you don't need to prove your hypothesis. There's no proving or disproving it. But you'll get what you want from the status quo crowd because they'll be able to say, "well, how do we know they AREN'T inflating the grades?"

Disgusting. And yes, objectively racist.

people like this dont know theyre racist. you have to be patient with them. my parents used to believe that crap too, its natural