Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming arguendo plaintiffs “win” in district court, the Fourth Circuit is locked down liberal. So it would be reversed. Gets to Supreme Court. 5-4 Fourth Circuit upheld. FCPS wins. Long game.

If that happens, then that would be institutionalizing racism, and we would literally be confirming that we are now a socialist country.

With the amount of actual racism that Asians face in this country, you'd think they would be able to interpret what is and is not racism. The removal of a standardized exam as a metric is antiracist.

Their reason for doing it is to reduce the number of Asians.

This is true in the same sense that when colleges decided to start admitting women, they were doing it to reduce the number of men.

Which is to say, you can read it that way if you want, and there will definitely be an impact on the number of Asians because they are so profoundly dominant at the school currently - but really, that's not why they're doing it.

Remember once upon a time we as a society believed that women were less capable of doing well in higher education.

This is not a good analogy because they didn't lower standards to let women in. Women weren't allowed in on a systemic basis, and then policy changed to allow them in. Standards of excellence didn't change. In the TJ situation, there is no prohibition against any race. All races have an opportunity to gain entrance, on a race blind basis. In order to change the racial composition, standards are being lowered. That is the rub.

Barriers are being lowered and standards are being updated. What they are looking for is fundamentally changing, but you insist on referring to it as "lowered" because it suits your superiority narrative, as though being good at taking tests is somehow a worthwhile skill set.

do you honestly think that people who are admitted to engineering, medical, veterinary, and law schools, etc are just good at taking tests? You don't think high intelligence might be a factor?

Remember, the entire point of intensive test prep is to make students appear to be smarter than they are because exam performance has been historically used as a proxy for intelligence. Or to keep up with other students and families that are doing the same.

What a brilliant insight. And we are to assume that by eliminating objective assessments the hapless bureaucrats in FCPS, whose ineptitude has been abundantly on display for the past year, will magically acquire the skills to discern "real" merit?

You just want racial quotas, as the judge essentially noted at the recent hearing.

The School Board is what it is, and I don't argue that. The Admissions Office knows what they're doing and will be absolutely fine this year.

Honestly, what I want to see more than anything else is an increase in applications across all demographics. It's inexcusable, given the population boom in Northern Virginia over the last 20 years, that we have 20% fewer applications to TJ now than we had back then.

We would have a significantly better TJ if we had a greater applicant pool.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming arguendo plaintiffs “win” in district court, the Fourth Circuit is locked down liberal. So it would be reversed. Gets to Supreme Court. 5-4 Fourth Circuit upheld. FCPS wins. Long game.

If that happens, then that would be institutionalizing racism, and we would literally be confirming that we are now a socialist country.

With the amount of actual racism that Asians face in this country, you'd think they would be able to interpret what is and is not racism. The removal of a standardized exam as a metric is antiracist.

Their reason for doing it is to reduce the number of Asians.

This is true in the same sense that when colleges decided to start admitting women, they were doing it to reduce the number of men.

Which is to say, you can read it that way if you want, and there will definitely be an impact on the number of Asians because they are so profoundly dominant at the school currently - but really, that's not why they're doing it.

Remember once upon a time we as a society believed that women were less capable of doing well in higher education.

This is not a good analogy because they didn't lower standards to let women in. Women weren't allowed in on a systemic basis, and then policy changed to allow them in. Standards of excellence didn't change. In the TJ situation, there is no prohibition against any race. All races have an opportunity to gain entrance, on a race blind basis. In order to change the racial composition, standards are being lowered. That is the rub.

Barriers are being lowered and standards are being updated. What they are looking for is fundamentally changing, but you insist on referring to it as "lowered" because it suits your superiority narrative, as though being good at taking tests is somehow a worthwhile skill set.

do you honestly think that people who are admitted to engineering, medical, veterinary, and law schools, etc are just good at taking tests? You don't think high intelligence might be a factor?

Remember, the entire point of intensive test prep is to make students appear to be smarter than they are because exam performance has been historically used as a proxy for intelligence. Or to keep up with other students and families that are doing the same.

There are individuals whom you could test prep for years: however, they do not have the needed memory and reasoning skills. It's not all about test prep.

Of course it's not. But it sure is a big help, and the proof is in the pudding. ESPECIALLY when students are evaluated on a curve, as they have been for the TJ exam for years. The speed and recognition that test prep grants can be even more effective than raw horsepower when you talk about a time-intensive exam like the Quant-Q.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming arguendo plaintiffs “win” in district court, the Fourth Circuit is locked down liberal. So it would be reversed. Gets to Supreme Court. 5-4 Fourth Circuit upheld. FCPS wins. Long game.

If that happens, then that would be institutionalizing racism, and we would literally be confirming that we are now a socialist country.

With the amount of actual racism that Asians face in this country, you'd think they would be able to interpret what is and is not racism. The removal of a standardized exam as a metric is antiracist.

Their reason for doing it is to reduce the number of Asians.

This is true in the same sense that when colleges decided to start admitting women, they were doing it to reduce the number of men.

Which is to say, you can read it that way if you want, and there will definitely be an impact on the number of Asians because they are so profoundly dominant at the school currently - but really, that's not why they're doing it.

Remember once upon a time we as a society believed that women were less capable of doing well in higher education.

This is not a good analogy because they didn't lower standards to let women in. Women weren't allowed in on a systemic basis, and then policy changed to allow them in. Standards of excellence didn't change. In the TJ situation, there is no prohibition against any race. All races have an opportunity to gain entrance, on a race blind basis. In order to change the racial composition, standards are being lowered. That is the rub.

Barriers are being lowered and standards are being updated. What they are looking for is fundamentally changing, but you insist on referring to it as "lowered" because it suits your superiority narrative, as though being good at taking tests is somehow a worthwhile skill set.

do you honestly think that people who are admitted to engineering, medical, veterinary, and law schools, etc are just good at taking tests? You don't think high intelligence might be a factor?

Remember, the entire point of intensive test prep is to make students appear to be smarter than they are because exam performance has been historically used as a proxy for intelligence. Or to keep up with other students and families that are doing the same.

What a brilliant insight. And we are to assume that by eliminating objective assessments the hapless bureaucrats in FCPS, whose ineptitude has been abundantly on display for the past year, will magically acquire the skills to discern "real" merit?

You just want racial quotas, as the judge essentially noted at the recent hearing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming arguendo plaintiffs “win” in district court, the Fourth Circuit is locked down liberal. So it would be reversed. Gets to Supreme Court. 5-4 Fourth Circuit upheld. FCPS wins. Long game.

If that happens, then that would be institutionalizing racism, and we would literally be confirming that we are now a socialist country.

With the amount of actual racism that Asians face in this country, you'd think they would be able to interpret what is and is not racism. The removal of a standardized exam as a metric is antiracist.

Their reason for doing it is to reduce the number of Asians.

This is true in the same sense that when colleges decided to start admitting women, they were doing it to reduce the number of men.

Which is to say, you can read it that way if you want, and there will definitely be an impact on the number of Asians because they are so profoundly dominant at the school currently - but really, that's not why they're doing it.

Remember once upon a time we as a society believed that women were less capable of doing well in higher education.

This is not a good analogy because they didn't lower standards to let women in. Women weren't allowed in on a systemic basis, and then policy changed to allow them in. Standards of excellence didn't change. In the TJ situation, there is no prohibition against any race. All races have an opportunity to gain entrance, on a race blind basis. In order to change the racial composition, standards are being lowered. That is the rub.

Barriers are being lowered and standards are being updated. What they are looking for is fundamentally changing, but you insist on referring to it as "lowered" because it suits your superiority narrative, as though being good at taking tests is somehow a worthwhile skill set.

do you honestly think that people who are admitted to engineering, medical, veterinary, and law schools, etc are just good at taking tests? You don't think high intelligence might be a factor?

Remember, the entire point of intensive test prep is to make students appear to be smarter than they are because exam performance has been historically used as a proxy for intelligence. Or to keep up with other students and families that are doing the same.

There are individuals whom you could test prep for years: however, they do not have the needed memory and reasoning skills. It's not all about test prep.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming arguendo plaintiffs “win” in district court, the Fourth Circuit is locked down liberal. So it would be reversed. Gets to Supreme Court. 5-4 Fourth Circuit upheld. FCPS wins. Long game.

If that happens, then that would be institutionalizing racism, and we would literally be confirming that we are now a socialist country.

With the amount of actual racism that Asians face in this country, you'd think they would be able to interpret what is and is not racism. The removal of a standardized exam as a metric is antiracist.

Their reason for doing it is to reduce the number of Asians.

This is true in the same sense that when colleges decided to start admitting women, they were doing it to reduce the number of men.

Which is to say, you can read it that way if you want, and there will definitely be an impact on the number of Asians because they are so profoundly dominant at the school currently - but really, that's not why they're doing it.

Remember once upon a time we as a society believed that women were less capable of doing well in higher education.

This is not a good analogy because they didn't lower standards to let women in. Women weren't allowed in on a systemic basis, and then policy changed to allow them in. Standards of excellence didn't change. In the TJ situation, there is no prohibition against any race. All races have an opportunity to gain entrance, on a race blind basis. In order to change the racial composition, standards are being lowered. That is the rub.

Barriers are being lowered and standards are being updated. What they are looking for is fundamentally changing, but you insist on referring to it as "lowered" because it suits your superiority narrative, as though being good at taking tests is somehow a worthwhile skill set.

do you honestly think that people who are admitted to engineering, medical, veterinary, and law schools, etc are just good at taking tests? You don't think high intelligence might be a factor?

Remember, the entire point of intensive test prep is to make students appear to be smarter than they are because exam performance has been historically used as a proxy for intelligence. Or to keep up with other students and families that are doing the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's AMAZING to me how many people on this board believe that every student who is qualified for and would succeed at TJ actually has applied in the past.

Nobody believes that. It's AMAZING to me how many people think this affects the overall demographics of who is accepted.

It absolutely does, because the demographics of those who are qualified for and would succeed at TJ but don't apply are fundamentally different from the demographics of the school. To believe otherwise indicates a belief of supremacy in the dominant demographic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How do you know they're inferior? A good number of these may be students who would not have applied to TJ otherwise but will because they feel like there's a chance other kids at their school will go too.

Oh, sure, that's what's stopping people from applying. How about the people who have applied?
Under the new policy it is clear many would be getting in who would not have under the old policy.

Academy of Loudoun has made similar changes, and the waiting list has lots of Stone Hill students who can only go if someone else from Stone Hill doesn't accept a spot.

So? This is pretty much how college admissions works too, as they rightly understand that it's better for their school environment to have students from many different areas and backgrounds.

Colleges do not have max quotas per school. It is one thing to have a minimum quota for each school then a number of at large seats. But they have made it where the schools with lots of Asians are limited to 5 spots, regardless of how many at large spots there are.

This is absolutely false. Schools like Carson and Longfellow will pick up the vast majority of the at-large spaces, of which there will be plenty because many Loudoun and PW (and even a couple of Fairfax) schools will not have enough qualified applicants to reach their school-based quotas.

OK. Loudoun implemented a max quota as well. It appears Fairfax is different.

There is indeed a max quota for how many students can attend TJ from Loudoun County, as there has always been. But that max quota does not apply to individual schools, as it would appear it does for AOS. That's kind of crappy for AOS, to be honest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming arguendo plaintiffs “win” in district court, the Fourth Circuit is locked down liberal. So it would be reversed. Gets to Supreme Court. 5-4 Fourth Circuit upheld. FCPS wins. Long game.

If that happens, then that would be institutionalizing racism, and we would literally be confirming that we are now a socialist country.

With the amount of actual racism that Asians face in this country, you'd think they would be able to interpret what is and is not racism. The removal of a standardized exam as a metric is antiracist.

Their reason for doing it is to reduce the number of Asians.

This is true in the same sense that when colleges decided to start admitting women, they were doing it to reduce the number of men.

Which is to say, you can read it that way if you want, and there will definitely be an impact on the number of Asians because they are so profoundly dominant at the school currently - but really, that's not why they're doing it.

Remember once upon a time we as a society believed that women were less capable of doing well in higher education.

This is not a good analogy because they didn't lower standards to let women in. Women weren't allowed in on a systemic basis, and then policy changed to allow them in. Standards of excellence didn't change. In the TJ situation, there is no prohibition against any race. All races have an opportunity to gain entrance, on a race blind basis. In order to change the racial composition, standards are being lowered. That is the rub.

Barriers are being lowered and standards are being updated. What they are looking for is fundamentally changing, but you insist on referring to it as "lowered" because it suits your superiority narrative, as though being good at taking tests is somehow a worthwhile skill set.

do you honestly think that people who are admitted to engineering, medical, veterinary, and law schools, etc are just good at taking tests? You don't think high intelligence might be a factor?

Disaggregating test taking ability from high intelligence is a much better solution than equating the two

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How do you know they're inferior? A good number of these may be students who would not have applied to TJ otherwise but will because they feel like there's a chance other kids at their school will go too.

Oh, sure, that's what's stopping people from applying. How about the people who have applied?
Under the new policy it is clear many would be getting in who would not have under the old policy.

Academy of Loudoun has made similar changes, and the waiting list has lots of Stone Hill students who can only go if someone else from Stone Hill doesn't accept a spot.

So? This is pretty much how college admissions works too, as they rightly understand that it's better for their school environment to have students from many different areas and backgrounds.

Where have you been? Go back a few pages and read the Supreme Court case posted that points out that the rules relaxing race considerations for colleges does not apply to public K-12.

Geographic considerations are not racial considerations

From a legal standpoint that is not true.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How do you know they're inferior? A good number of these may be students who would not have applied to TJ otherwise but will because they feel like there's a chance other kids at their school will go too.

Oh, sure, that's what's stopping people from applying. How about the people who have applied?
Under the new policy it is clear many would be getting in who would not have under the old policy.

Academy of Loudoun has made similar changes, and the waiting list has lots of Stone Hill students who can only go if someone else from Stone Hill doesn't accept a spot.

So? This is pretty much how college admissions works too, as they rightly understand that it's better for their school environment to have students from many different areas and backgrounds.

Colleges do not have max quotas per school. It is one thing to have a minimum quota for each school then a number of at large seats. But they have made it where the schools with lots of Asians are limited to 5 spots, regardless of how many at large spots there are.

This is absolutely false. Schools like Carson and Longfellow will pick up the vast majority of the at-large spaces, of which there will be plenty because many Loudoun and PW (and even a couple of Fairfax) schools will not have enough qualified applicants to reach their school-based quotas.

OK. Loudoun implemented a max quota as well. It appears Fairfax is different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How do you know they're inferior? A good number of these may be students who would not have applied to TJ otherwise but will because they feel like there's a chance other kids at their school will go too.

Oh, sure, that's what's stopping people from applying. How about the people who have applied?
Under the new policy it is clear many would be getting in who would not have under the old policy.

Academy of Loudoun has made similar changes, and the waiting list has lots of Stone Hill students who can only go if someone else from Stone Hill doesn't accept a spot.

So? This is pretty much how college admissions works too, as they rightly understand that it's better for their school environment to have students from many different areas and backgrounds.

Where have you been? Go back a few pages and read the Supreme Court case posted that points out that the rules relaxing race considerations for colleges does not apply to public K-12.

Geographic considerations are not racial considerations

From a legal standpoint that is not true.

Anonymous wrote:It's AMAZING to me how many people on this board believe that every student who is qualified for and would succeed at TJ actually has applied in the past.

Nobody believes that. It's AMAZING to me how many people think this affects the overall demographics of who is accepted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming arguendo plaintiffs “win” in district court, the Fourth Circuit is locked down liberal. So it would be reversed. Gets to Supreme Court. 5-4 Fourth Circuit upheld. FCPS wins. Long game.

If that happens, then that would be institutionalizing racism, and we would literally be confirming that we are now a socialist country.

With the amount of actual racism that Asians face in this country, you'd think they would be able to interpret what is and is not racism. The removal of a standardized exam as a metric is antiracist.

Their reason for doing it is to reduce the number of Asians.

This is true in the same sense that when colleges decided to start admitting women, they were doing it to reduce the number of men.

Which is to say, you can read it that way if you want, and there will definitely be an impact on the number of Asians because they are so profoundly dominant at the school currently - but really, that's not why they're doing it.

Remember once upon a time we as a society believed that women were less capable of doing well in higher education.

This is not a good analogy because they didn't lower standards to let women in. Women weren't allowed in on a systemic basis, and then policy changed to allow them in. Standards of excellence didn't change. In the TJ situation, there is no prohibition against any race. All races have an opportunity to gain entrance, on a race blind basis. In order to change the racial composition, standards are being lowered. That is the rub.

Barriers are being lowered and standards are being updated. What they are looking for is fundamentally changing, but you insist on referring to it as "lowered" because it suits your superiority narrative, as though being good at taking tests is somehow a worthwhile skill set.

do you honestly think that people who are admitted to engineering, medical, veterinary, and law schools, etc are just good at taking tests? You don't think high intelligence might be a factor?

Anonymous wrote:No but the fact that it is a Supreme Court decision does.

No, it doesn’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How do you know they're inferior? A good number of these may be students who would not have applied to TJ otherwise but will because they feel like there's a chance other kids at their school will go too.

Oh, sure, that's what's stopping people from applying. How about the people who have applied?
Under the new policy it is clear many would be getting in who would not have under the old policy.

Academy of Loudoun has made similar changes, and the waiting list has lots of Stone Hill students who can only go if someone else from Stone Hill doesn't accept a spot.

So? This is pretty much how college admissions works too, as they rightly understand that it's better for their school environment to have students from many different areas and backgrounds.

Colleges do not have max quotas per school. It is one thing to have a minimum quota for each school then a number of at large seats. But they have made it where the schools with lots of Asians are limited to 5 spots, regardless of how many at large spots there are.

This is absolutely false. Schools like Carson and Longfellow will pick up the vast majority of the at-large spaces, of which there will be plenty because many Loudoun and PW (and even a couple of Fairfax) schools will not have enough qualified applicants to reach their school-based quotas.