Anonymous wrote:The Curie obsessed poster - Please call the FBI to investigate Curie. Or even Washington Post.

OR.. get a life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

that's a terrible ROI for parents, given that their course is $5K - I REALLY doubt the number is that high

Sure. But that's for those parents to worry about. Why are you so concerned about it?

Pick your argument. Are you implying that Curie is somehow "gaming" the admissions system or that Curie is not a good investment for parents? Or are you just keeping the Curie topic alive.. you know. beating a dead horse..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

that's a terrible ROI for parents, given that their course is $5K - I REALLY doubt the number is that high

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

that's a terrible ROI for parents, given that their course is $5K - I REALLY doubt the number is that high

I doubt it as well, but pointing out the logic is flawed. Getting 28% of the class says nothing without knowing how many students are they prepping.

+1. We need to know what the denominator is to see if this is a significant number of admits or not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

that's a terrible ROI for parents, given that their course is $5K - I REALLY doubt the number is that high

I doubt it as well, but pointing out the logic is flawed. Getting 28% of the class says nothing without knowing how many students are they prepping.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

that's a terrible ROI for parents, given that their course is $5K - I REALLY doubt the number is that high

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

that's a terrible ROI for parents, given that their course is $5K - I REALLY doubt the number is that high

it's not and their numbers are much better

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

that's a terrible ROI for parents, given that their course is $5K - I REALLY doubt the number is that high

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

No, maybe they have 1000 kids they prepped, and 10% of them got in.

Anonymous wrote:The point is that unless Currie has their own rigorous admissions standards, the fact that they got 28% of the class proves that the test isn't objective

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: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.

you're defining objective in a manner that you choose that benefits your argument. If you define objective as a measure inherent to the kid that can be used to evaluate them relative to other applicants, then the tests cease being objective if some kids can afford to prep (heavily and with success) and other either can't afford it or aren't aware that prepping for it even exists

Kids who want to make the effort can prepare. TJ shouldn't be dumped in their lap. And even if one accepted your POV, what FCPS has done would just substitute one flawed system with a worse one. All so they can reduce the number of Asian kids. Disgusting.

can a farms kid who wants to prepare do so as effictivly as a kid attending Curie?

They had 28% of all of the kids who got into TJ in the Class of 2024. Every single one of them is of South Asian descent. Every. Single. One.

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: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.

you're defining objective in a manner that you choose that benefits your argument. If you define objective as a measure inherent to the kid that can be used to evaluate them relative to other applicants, then the tests cease being objective if some kids can afford to prep (heavily and with success) and other either can't afford it or aren't aware that prepping for it even exists

Kids who want to make the effort can prepare. TJ shouldn't be dumped in their lap. And even if one accepted your POV, what FCPS has done would just substitute one flawed system with a worse one. All so they can reduce the number of Asian kids. Disgusting.

can a farms kid who wants to prepare do so as effictivly as a kid attending Curie?

They had 28% of all of the kids who got into TJ in the Class of 2024. Every single one of them is of South Asian descent. Every. Single. One.

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: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.

you're defining objective in a manner that you choose that benefits your argument. If you define objective as a measure inherent to the kid that can be used to evaluate them relative to other applicants, then the tests cease being objective if some kids can afford to prep (heavily and with success) and other either can't afford it or aren't aware that prepping for it even exists

Kids who want to make the effort can prepare. TJ shouldn't be dumped in their lap. And even if one accepted your POV, what FCPS has done would just substitute one flawed system with a worse one. All so they can reduce the number of Asian kids. Disgusting.

can a farms kid who wants to prepare do so as effictivly as a kid attending Curie?

They had 28% of all of the kids who got into TJ in the Class of 2024. Every single one of them is of South Asian descent. Every. Single. One.

More Asian bashing. Shame on you.