Aren’t some people saying the exact same things about Asian American students with respect to academics? They’re all stereotypes.
I do believe, however, that a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for people to excel at a very high level (however defined) in some fields is their natural talents in those fields.
Right, shouldn’t judge others intention or ability. Pointless.
While I agree it may well be better to have more low income kids, the problem is the board’s handling of this. If they had simply said we need more low income kids then the new methodology could easily have been found to be legally sound, after all the Texas top 6% UT admissions process is somewhat similar. But as the judge noted:
“Throughout this process, Board members and high-level FCPS officials expressed their desire to remake TJ admissions because they were dissatisfied with the racial composition of the school”
It’s an easy call to rule against such legally indefensible actions. Recall the Masterpiece cake shop ruling in the Supreme Court, which turned on the display of animus to religion by Colorado officials, and never reached the first amendment questions in that case.
Surprised no one brings UC prop 16 up.
I’m not surprised it didn’t pass. DEI tends to be a top down rather than bottom up priority. I wonder if many parents felt the same urgency to pursue the changes to TJ admission policy the Board in Fairfax displayed. Given the way the entire process was conducted I’m guessing they didn’t expect alot of support for their proposals.
I actually want to hear cc parents’ view on this as well.
Here is the thought experiments: what if the following STEM-Savvy schools
What if they no longer admitting their incoming classes according to the STEM-excellences (Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology…) but considering the non-STEM factors?
Would it benefit the schools or STEM fields overall? Would incoming classes be equipped with enough ability to handle the rigors? The questions are not only giving everyone access to the educational resources, but also the ability or the readiness or the “passion” to deal with the academic challenges.
I think if I were the student in TJ district, I would want to do my best to get into TJ not just because the school is a feeder school to any of these schools with highly ranked STEM programs but because I am good at it and I would love to be surrounded by peers who also enjoy those challenges. The same ambition should continue to push me to the next step, STEM programs in colleges. A certain level of selectiveness is required in STEM fields imo and hopefully students who wish to attend the schools are also up to the challenges too.
Can’t address the others, but the two UC’s on your list already consider non-STEM factors and have for many years.
Actually, DEI often originates from the bottom up by members of outgroup minorities who perceive themselves as being unfairly excluded. However, in environments of highly competitive scarcity (e.g. admission to elite high schools and colleges that are not being expanded to be able to take more students), the bottom up response by members of groups that are perceived as benefiting from the situation often includes anti-DEI, because any (additional) inclusion for someone else means (potential) exclusion for you in a zero-sum game.
Without considering STEM/academic performace at all or still prioritizing STEM. That’s quite different.
Just because they care about STEM excellence does not mean that they care only about STEM excellence. Also, CMU, UCB, and UCLA are more generalized universities, so they would not necessarily privilege STEM in admissions, except for divisions where that is more important (e.g. engineering divisions). Take a look at what CMU expects frosh applicants to have in high school at https://www.cmu.edu/admission/admission/academic-requirements-college-level-work . Note the lesser math and science requirements for applicants to the CFA and DCHSS. Science requirements also vary across the divisions.
Most of the schools on your list stress good verbal and written communication skills.
Purdue (a T10 for engineering) specifically tells applicants they look closely at English grades along with math, physics, and chemistry.
Thank you everyone for response.
If that’s the case, why can’t TJ prioritize other factors (non-STEM)?
Looks like they actually do include other criteria (at least implicitly – essays inherently result in evaluation of writing skills): TJHSST Freshman Application Process | Fairfax County Public Schools
Yeah, but they didn’t ditch the priority of students’ math excellences at all right? What I meant is they determine the class primarily by placement tests anyway. Which may require advanced math level beyond what’s taught in majority of the public grade schools.
Or what if those engineering schools take everyone including students without any exposures to advanced stem topics. It is likely the students will struggle even if they get in.
The other thing is how come selectiveness becomes exclusiveness. I don’t think the two are the same.
Also out of my curiosity, I found this TJ alumni’s input about his/her experience in TJ. Give a perspective on what it means by potential challenges or struggle 
Not sure if it makes sense to put students in such an environments in the name of diversity if they are not up for it either. Competitiveness comes w prize and price.
Did you mean TJ or colleges? Neither determines the class primarily by placement tests? Most of the colleges on your list do require that matriculating students take placement test(s) during their freshman year after having being admitted to help determine which math/science course starting points and sequences are most appropriate based on their HS background. In short they try to give students from weaker HS backgrounds a chance to catch up, rather than just throw everyone in the deep end and sees who sinks and swims.
but isn’t this the whole issue with not having a rigorous exam for admission?
There are many top kids that will thrive and enjoy their time at TJ and these are the ones that should be there. Sure they will work hard, but they will enjoy being with like-minded kids. Unfortunately, there are others that are either trying to do the same or even worse are being pushed by their parents.
I am not sure what the answer is but it does not seem it should be to take away the opportunities that TJ offers to those that want the experience.
I mean each stage is foundation to next stage. In case of TJ, it is a concentration of students with stronger STEM aptitude. Before 2020, it was done via standardized tests. Though I am not sure about the test content, based on the thread here it seems to imply in order to get into TJ (or pass the exam), students will need to be ahead of middle school peers in math.
What I am arguing about is, such a selective approach is there for a reason. It does benefit the class when everyone is up to speed. What you mentioned make sense (placement test after matriculation), but before the class is matriculated, there is selection process. That selection process should include prioritizing STEM aptitude from each application even if the selection process is not in “standardized test format”.
Do you really think the top engineering schools should accept a student with average GPA and took easier (or even none of) STEM related curriculum, and teach these students from HS level math?
Right, the news says “the change of the admission rules” (i.e. eliminating standardized test in 2020) is struck down by federal judge. I assume this means TJ will go back to test-based selection process.
Imo, selection is required in STEM fields, it requires certain aptitude and academic rigor.
Also the full school name is “Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology”, it says clearly, it is a school for STEM. (not everyone or not every intelligent or creative one need to be in STEM school)
If TJ is too small to accommodate all students who could benefit from what it offers that regular high school do not offer, then it should be made larger, or additional schools or programs of the nature added. Having it be subject to competitive scarcity seems to bring out the worst attitudes in a zero-sum game where anyone who wins causes someone else to lose (and it gets uglier when people start thinking of it in terms of race and ethnicity).