Education Department opens investigation of admissions at selective Virginia high school
A change in the admissions policy introduced five years ago at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology led to the enrollment of more Black and Hispanic students and faced a court challenge from some parents. The plaintiffs argued it came at the expense of Asian American students, whose numbers at the school dropped.
The investigation comes one day after the office of Virginia's attorney general, Republican Jason Miyares, closed its own investigation, which found the school's policy discriminated against Asian American students. His office referred the case to federal authorities.
'The Department of Education is grateful for the diligent work of Governor (Glenn) Youngkin and Attorney General Miyares for documenting a pattern of concerning practices at TJ, and we will further investigate this complaint to ensure that all students being assessed fairly, according to merit and accomplishment,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement.
The U.S. Supreme Court last year declined to hear the case challenging Thomas Jefferson's admissions policy, leaving in place an appeals court ruling that let the policy stand.
The school district said it would review the documents released by the state attorney general.
'This matter has already been fully litigated,' Fairfax County Public Schools said in a statement. 'A federal appellate court determined there was no merit to arguments that the admissions policy for Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology discriminates against any group of students.'
In 2020, the school district revised the admissions policy at Thomas Jefferson by removing a $100 application fee and admissions test and adopting a 'holistic review' process.
The first class admitted under the new policy saw an increase in low-income students, English language learners and girls. About 54% of the admitted class were Asian American — a decline from prior year percentages that ranged from 65% to 75%. The percentage of Black and Hispanic students, who have been underrepresented at the school, also increased.
Students' grades, a problem-solving essay, a 'portrait sheet' of their skills, and four experience factors — special education status, eligibility for free or reduced-price meals, whether they were an English language learner and whether they attended a historically underrepresented public middle school — were part of the review. Admissions evaluators did not have access to students' name, race or other demographic information.
A district court initially ruled in favor of the parents' group that challenged the policy, but an appeals court later overturned that ruling.
The appeals court noted that while the percentage of Asian American students had declined under the new policy compared to earlier classes, Asian American students outperformed their share of the applicant pool.
The case had been considered a possible next step to challenging admissions practices, after the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action and explicit consideration of race in its 2023 ruling against Harvard and the University of North Carolina. But in 2024, the Supreme Court declined to take up the case.
___
The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump thinks owning a piece of Intel would be a good deal for the US. Here's what to know
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — President Donald Trump wants the U.S. government to own a piece of Intel, less than two weeks after demanding the Silicon Valley pioneer dump the CEO that was hired to turn around the slumping chipmaker. If the goal is realized, the investment would deepen the Trump administration's involvement in the computer industry as the president ramps up the pressure for more U.S. companies to manufacture products domestically instead of relying on overseas suppliers. What's happening? The Trump administration is in talks to secure a 10% stake in Intel in exchange for converting government grants that were pledged to Intel under President Joe Biden. If the deal is completed, the U.S. government would become one of Intel's largest shareholders and blur the traditional lines separating the public sector and private sector in a country that remains the world's largest economy. Why would Trump do this? In his second term, Trump has been leveraging his power to reprogram the operations of major computer chip companies. The administration is requiring Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices, two companies whose chips are helping to power the craze around artificial intelligence, to pay a 15% commission on their sales of chips in China in exchange for export licenses. Trump's interest in Intel is also being driven by his desire to boost chip production in the U.S., which has been a focal point of the trade war that he has been waging throughout the world. By lessening the country's dependence on chips manufactured overseas, the president believes the U.S. will be better positioned to maintain its technological lead on China in the race to create artificial intelligence. Didn't Trump want Intel's CEO to quit? That's what the president said August 7 in an unequivocal post calling for Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan to resign less than five months after the Santa Clara, California, company hired him. The demand was triggered by reports raising national security concerns about Tan's past investments in Chinese tech companies while he was a venture capitalist. But Trump backed off after Tan professed his allegiance to the U.S. in a public letter to Intel employees and went to the White House to meet with the president, who applauded the Intel CEO for having an 'amazing story.' Why would Intel do a deal? The company isn't commenting about the possibility of the U.S. government becoming a major shareholder, but Intel may have little choice because it is currently dealing from a position of weakness. After enjoying decades of growth while its processors powered the personal computer boom, the company fell into a slump after missing the shift to the mobile computing era unleashed by the iPhone's 2007 debut. Intel has fallen even farther behind in recent years during an artificial intelligence craze that has been a boon for Nvidia and AMD. The company lost nearly $19 billion last year and another $3.7 billion in the first six months of this year, prompting Tan to undertake a cost-cutting spree. By the end of this year, Tan expects Intel to have about 75,000 workers, a 25% reduction from the end of last year. Would this deal be unusual? Although rare, it's not unprecedented for the U.S. government to become a significant shareholder in a prominent company. One of the most notable instances occurred during the Great Recession in 2008 when the government injected nearly $50 billion into General Motors in return for a roughly 60% stake in the automaker at a time it was on the verge of bankruptcy. The government ended up with a roughly $10 billion loss after it sold its stock in GM. Would the government run Intel? U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told CNBC during a Tuesday interview that the government has no intention of meddling in Intel's business, and will have its hands tied by holding non-voting shares in the company. But some analysts wonder if the Trump administration's financial ties to Intel might prod more companies looking to curry favor with the president to increase their orders for the company's chips. What government grants does Intel receive? Intel was among the biggest beneficiaries of the Biden administration's CHIPS and Science Act, but it hasn't been able to revive its fortunes while falling behind on construction projects spawned by the program. The company has received about $2.2 billion of the $7.8 billion pledged under the incentives program — money that Lutnick derided as a 'giveaway' that would better serve U.S. taxpayers if it's turned into Intel stock. 'We think America should get the benefit of the bargain,' Lutnick told CNBC. 'It's obvious that it's the right move to make.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump has pledged to ‘lead a movement to get rid of' voting by mail. Will Utah be a target?
Eva Przybyla, front, and Nicholas Wells process ballots at the Salt Lake County Government Center in Salt Lake City on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2024. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch) President Donald Trump this week vowed to 'lead a movement to get rid of' voting by mail ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. 'WE WILL BEGIN THIS EFFORT, WHICH WILL BE STRONGLY OPPOSED BY THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE THEY CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE, by signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections,' the president said in a post on Truth Social Monday. Trump, who has long opposed voting by mail, continued to claim, without evidence, that it's fraught with fraud. Utah has been the only red state among eight that have conducted universal by-mail elections, including six Democratic strongholds and one swing state — a fact that some conservatives here have balked at, while others have defended the state's by-mail system as a popular, convenient and safe voting method. After Trump's post, Utah's top election official, Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, a Republican, issued a short statement on social media without addressing the president directly. Utah Legislature approves bill to require voter ID, phase out automatic voting by mail by 2029 'The constitutional right of individual states to choose the manner in which they conduct secure elections is a fundamental strength of our system,' Henderson said. The president, however, asserted that states should do what the federal government wants. 'Remember, the States are merely an 'agent' for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes,' Trump said. 'They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do.' Another high-ranking Republican and member of GOP legislative leadership — Senate Majority Assistant Whip Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork — disagrees. McKell told Utah News Dispatch in an interview Tuesday that, like Henderson said, states have the right to choose how to administer their elections, and that he'd push back on an effort to completely undo voting by mail. 'In Utah, we're in a good place. I think there's strong support for vote by mail. There's also strong support for security,' McKell said. He added that's 'the needle we tried to thread' earlier this year when the 2025 Utah Legislature passed a bill that he sponsored to require voter ID and eventually phase out automatic voting by mail in this state by 2026. The aim of that bill, he said, was to preserve voting by mail as an option for Utah voters while also adding a new layer of security. Even though local polls have shown a vast majority of Utahns remain confident in their elections, Gallup polling shows trust nationally has decreased especially among a faction of Republican voters since 2006 as elections have become more polarized. After Trump lost the 2020 election, he ramped up rhetoric to cast doubt on election security and voting by mail. Asked about Trump's comments this week, McKell reiterated it's a matter of states rights. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'It is a federalism issue,' he said. 'If it's not enumerated in the (U.S.) Constitution, it's reserved for the states. That's article 10. I think states have the right to dictate how they run their elections.' McKell also defended Utah's track record as a state that has used voting by mail for years, starting with optional pilot programs that counties opted into before moving to universal voting by mail. 'In the state of Utah, Republicans have done really well with vote by mail. We elect Republicans,' he said, also noting that Trump in 2024 won the red state handily. 'There's generally broad support for vote by mail, especially among rural voters and elderly voters in Utah.' He added that 'it's OK if there's some tension between the federal government and state government,' but he argued the Constitution clearly reserves elections for states to control and administer. Pressed on how he'd respond to pressure from the Trump administration to get rid of voting by mail, McKell said, 'I would resist a movement that didn't originate in the state,' adding that he responds to his constituents, not the federal government. 'If there's a movement to change vote by mail, it needs to come from — it must come from — the state,' he said. 'It's a state issue. The states need to be in control of their own elections. Right now, I don't feel like there's a reason to eliminate vote by mail. I think we do a good job.' Utah election audit finds no 'significant fraud,' but raises concern over voter roll maintenance Not all Republicans in Utah embrace voting by mail, however, Earlier this year, McKell's bill was the result of a compromise between the House and Senate to more drastically restrict the state's universal vote-by-mail system. Asked whether Trump's comments could further inflame skepticism around the security of voting by mail in Utah, McKell said it's nothing new. 'We saw these comments before, and even going into the last legislative session, there were folks that opposed vote by mail.' But McKell said multiple state audits 'have shown that our elections are safe and secure,' while legislators have also made efforts to continually improve the system where issues have cropped up, like in voter roll maintenance. It remains to be seen whether Trump's comments could fan some Republican lawmakers' appetite to go after voting by mail during their next general session in January, but McKell said typically every year there's a slew of election bills for legislators to sort through. Asked whether he plans to make any tweaks to his 2025 bill, McKell said he's still talking with clerks about any possible changes. 'I feel like we did strike a really appropriate balance, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look at ways to make it better,' he said, adding that he doesn't have any specific proposals yet, 'but that could change as we get closer to the legislative session.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What are Norwich mayoral candidates doing to increase voter participation?
If past behavior is a predictor of the future, it's likely that the Norwich mayoral election will have fewer than 50% of the eligible voters participate. In Norwich, presidential elections get better turnouts. In 2020 and 2024, 90% and 71% of eligible voters in the city cast a ballot. In 2021, 2022, 2023, 32%, 47%, and 31% of eligible voters turned out, according to data from the Norwich Registrar of Voters Office. It's unfortunate that non-presidential years get a lower turnout, mayoral candidate Stacy Gould (R) said. What are the candidates doing to get out the vote? 'I'm hoping that people with a vested interest in their city come out and vote on Nov. 4,' she said. Despite the lower voter turnouts in non-presidential years, mayoral candidate Swarnjit Singh (D) feels it's more important for the public to participate in local elections, as the decisions that impact someone's day-to-day life are at the local level, he said. 'You cannot pick up a phone and call the president of the United States of America, but you have the flexibility to call your mayor,' he said. How the candidates are working to get out the vote Singh, campaigning as Singh Swarnjit, said he's knocked on over 1,000 doors in the city to get support for his campaign. He also wants to knock on the doors of people who don't normally participate in politics, as civic education, including absentee ballots, early voting, and encouraging green card holders to become citizens, is a keystone of his campaign, he said. 'That's a lot of civic education that needs to be promoted,' he said. During his door-to-door campaigning, Singh recalls even being invited inside the houses of local Republicans to talk about the issues, he said. 'I feel its going in a good direction, but I'm not taking things for granted,' he said. When The Bulletin spoke to petitioning candidate Marcia Wilbur, she hadn't been made an official candidate yet by the state, but she wants to hold town halls and other events where voters can meet her, she said. 'I think I have a pretty good pulse on what's going on, but, I definitely need to meet and greet more with the public,' Wilbur said. When Wilbur was collecting signatures for her petitioning candidacy, she, a registered Republican, got a signature from a Democrat who said they'd be willing to help with her campaign, because they wanted to support change in local politics, she said. Gould is encouraging locals to register to vote, reminding people that the two-week early voting period is an option, she said. Gould has also utilized door-knocking, signs and meet and greets to reach the voters. Her efforts are going well so far, she said. Multiple local business owners have already asked Singh for campaign signs to show their support, even though, Singh normally doesn't put campaign signs out until September, he said. Those signs can be seen in downtown and elsewhere. This article originally appeared on The Bulletin: What are the Norwich mayoral candidates doing to engage voters?
