[padastra]

There are numerous sources in this thread that show that the Asian group, highly selected for here, are predominantly poor. Just parroting a talking point without looking at the data is as idiotic as what we all accuse Trump supporters of.

[InitialLastName]

To counter evidence with evidence, the "Asian" group is very heterogeneous, and more bimodal with respect to wealth than other groups[0][1]. Has anyone presented any data that I missed on which side of that divide the Asian G&T students in NYC schools are being drawn from?

[0]https://ncrc.org/racial-wealth-snapshot-asian-americans-and-...

[1]https://documentedny.com/2018/09/04/language-gap-drives-grow...

[padastra]

I'm not sure that's counter evidence (i.e. it doesn't lend proof to the OP's position either, it just decreases the certainty of both positions).

The only source I could find with respect to your question is that "Students from the 19 poorest districts, who make up about 31% of kindergarteners citywide, represented about 28% of gifted offers last year" (https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/ny-gifted-adm...), but I do not have the primary data.

Given the overall ethnic representation of the school, it is statistically extremely likely that a large fraction of the 28% are Asian.

I also find no cited evidence in many of the pro-ending-G&T articles that G&T programs cater to wealthy students, and presumably De Blasio and others who have access to the data and want to end the programs would have pushed those facts out there.

Anecdotally, wealthy whites and asians have the opportunity to send their children to private schools without spending a large portion of their young lives testing into G&T programs.