Is the School Lottery System Transparent??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, it sounds like you will be happier in the suburbs. PP's suggestions of Burke, Springfield, and Centreville were on-point with your price range. You aren't going to get walkable to the metro, safe, and good schools in your price range.

+1

That was our price range (450k-two teacher salaries) and we ended up in Centreville. I like it more than I thought I would and we are very happy with our zoned elementary school, but do really miss the walkable urban thing. When you need good schools and a safer neighborhood in that price range though, you have to give up something. It worked out decently for us b/c we both left our DCPS teaching positions and now work for FCPS. I really enjoyed my DCPS students but the commute was just too much from the distant burbs. Housing prices are one of the many reasons why it is hard for DCPS to recruit and keep good teachers. IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think folks are too cramped in their thinking about OP's options, as if everything is riding on the first house they buy or on placing all their chips on the lottery. This seems to me to ignore things like the future potential for appreciating of DC real estate and continued improvement in the DC public and charter school landscape. There's already a good amount of flexibility out there for early elementary, and while middle and high schools have a ways to go, they offer a much better world than even a few years ago. As others are suggesting, why not buy in Trinidad or Eckington or Park View or some other "gritty" neighborhood with better housing prices and some quiet buzz, plus elementary options that will last you three or four years? Then see how those schools improve and play the lottery for a few years to try and get something through fourth or fifth grade? By then, you might not be in bounds for a good middle school, but you might have lotteried into something, or your house might have appreciated enough to sell for a premium to someone who cares less about schools so that you could trade up to a better neighborhood. This is exactly what happened to us. Not saying it's a guarantee -- but frankly, there are no guarantees in life. Just risks that some people are comfortable with and some are not. Why not go after something new and different? It's not like OP can't decide in a few years it's not for them and then head for the suburbs. But for now, it sounds like OP is game for trying something else.

Families with small kids and housing budgets of $450k are of limited means and should not be gambling on real estate speculation -- and trying to buy in neighborhoods with buzz can end very badly and they will not have resources to recover, move, or pay for private school. It's fine if you are childless or can call up mom and dad to cover grandkids tuition but it sounds like OP needs that budge to work out of the box not spread her risk on school potter or real estate gentrification lottery.

Words like "gambling", "speculation", and "lottery" are basically just negative slogans for risk choices that, at least to our family, were more than worth it, because they weren't actually that risky, but rather offered a realistic chance at a payoff that to us was really valuable.

All of us take risks every second of the day -- leaving our house, getting in a car, applying for a job, deciding where to live, having a kid, etc. The important question isn't whether a choice is "risky" but how to accurately measure the risk, and then deciding if it is worth taking to you.

Every time I have to drive my family to Springfield VA for a birthday party and my head starts to hurt from all the traffic and endless cul-de-sacs and carbon copy chain retail, I am so SUBJECTIVELY happy that I took the DC housing market "gamble" (which OBJECTIVELY has more than tripled in value in the last 20 years, including increasing or holding steady in every single year except for 2008 and 2009) AND rolled the dice multiple times on the DC school "lottery" (which OBJECTIVELY matches 75 percent of parents with one of their requested schools, and 85 percent of those with one of their top 3 choices).

Again, I'm not saying these are objectively guarantees, but they're not the same as day trading stocks or playing the slots in Vegas either. I'm also not saying that OP's family will subjectively find DC to be the right choice for them. I just don't think you can objectively classify living in DC as a choice that only diehards can subjectively handle or appreciate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think folks are too cramped in their thinking about OP's options, as if everything is riding on the first house they buy or on placing all their chips on the lottery. This seems to me to ignore things like the future potential for appreciating of DC real estate and continued improvement in the DC public and charter school landscape. There's already a good amount of flexibility out there for early elementary, and while middle and high schools have a ways to go, they offer a much better world than even a few years ago. As others are suggesting, why not buy in Trinidad or Eckington or Park View or some other "gritty" neighborhood with better housing prices and some quiet buzz, plus elementary options that will last you three or four years? Then see how those schools improve and play the lottery for a few years to try and get something through fourth or fifth grade? By then, you might not be in bounds for a good middle school, but you might have lotteried into something, or your house might have appreciated enough to sell for a premium to someone who cares less about schools so that you could trade up to a better neighborhood. This is exactly what happened to us. Not saying it's a guarantee -- but frankly, there are no guarantees in life. Just risks that some people are comfortable with and some are not. Why not go after something new and different? It's not like OP can't decide in a few years it's not for them and then head for the suburbs. But for now, it sounds like OP is game for trying something else.

Families with small kids and housing budgets of $450k are of limited means and should not be gambling on real estate speculation -- and trying to buy in neighborhoods with buzz can end very badly and they will not have resources to recover, move, or pay for private school. It's fine if you are childless or can call up mom and dad to cover grandkids tuition but it sounds like OP needs that budge to work out of the box not spread her risk on school potter or real estate gentrification lottery.

Words like "gambling", "speculation", and "lottery" are basically just negative slogans for risk choices that, at least to our family, were more than worth it, because they weren't actually that risky, but rather offered a realistic chance at a payoff that to us was really valuable.

All of us take risks every second of the day -- leaving our house, getting in a car, applying for a job, deciding where to live, having a kid, etc. The important question isn't whether a choice is "risky" but how to accurately measure the risk, and then deciding if it is worth taking to you.

Every time I have to drive my family to Springfield VA for a birthday party and my head starts to hurt from all the traffic and endless cul-de-sacs and carbon copy chain retail, I am so SUBJECTIVELY happy that I took the DC housing market "gamble" (which OBJECTIVELY has more than tripled in value in the last 20 years, including increasing or holding steady in every single year except for 2008 and 2009) AND rolled the dice multiple times on the DC school "lottery" (which OBJECTIVELY matches 75 percent of parents with one of their requested schools, and 85 percent of those with one of their top 3 choices).

Again, I'm not saying these are objectively guarantees, but they're not the same as day trading stocks or playing the slots in Vegas either. I'm also not saying that OP's family will subjectively find DC to be the right choice for them. I just don't think you can objectively classify living in DC as a choice that only diehards can subjectively handle or appreciate.

I agree that lots of different families can be happy in DC, and that people sometimes don't think enough about the risks and annoyances of the suburbs. But wanted to comment about the lottery. Yes, 85% of kids get matched to one of their top-3 choices. But that's across all grades, with PK4 and K (grades OP's kid would likely apply for) not having many seats at a lot of schools. And that 85% doesn't apply equally to all applicants. If you list your top 3 as Amidon, Van Ness, and Savoy, your chances of getting matched somewhere are probably close to 100%. If you list Two Rivers, SWS, and Brent, not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think folks are too cramped in their thinking about OP's options, as if everything is riding on the first house they buy or on placing all their chips on the lottery. This seems to me to ignore things like the future potential for appreciating of DC real estate and continued improvement in the DC public and charter school landscape. There's already a good amount of flexibility out there for early elementary, and while middle and high schools have a ways to go, they offer a much better world than even a few years ago. As others are suggesting, why not buy in Trinidad or Eckington or Park View or some other "gritty" neighborhood with better housing prices and some quiet buzz, plus elementary options that will last you three or four years? Then see how those schools improve and play the lottery for a few years to try and get something through fourth or fifth grade? By then, you might not be in bounds for a good middle school, but you might have lotteried into something, or your house might have appreciated enough to sell for a premium to someone who cares less about schools so that you could trade up to a better neighborhood. This is exactly what happened to us. Not saying it's a guarantee -- but frankly, there are no guarantees in life. Just risks that some people are comfortable with and some are not. Why not go after something new and different? It's not like OP can't decide in a few years it's not for them and then head for the suburbs. But for now, it sounds like OP is game for trying something else.

Families with small kids and housing budgets of $450k are of limited means and should not be gambling on real estate speculation -- and trying to buy in neighborhoods with buzz can end very badly and they will not have resources to recover, move, or pay for private school. It's fine if you are childless or can call up mom and dad to cover grandkids tuition but it sounds like OP needs that budge to work out of the box not spread her risk on school potter or real estate gentrification lottery.

Words like "gambling", "speculation", and "lottery" are basically just negative slogans for risk choices that, at least to our family, were more than worth it, because they weren't actually that risky, but rather offered a realistic chance at a payoff that to us was really valuable.

All of us take risks every second of the day -- leaving our house, getting in a car, applying for a job, deciding where to live, having a kid, etc. The important question isn't whether a choice is "risky" but how to accurately measure the risk, and then deciding if it is worth taking to you.

Every time I have to drive my family to Springfield VA for a birthday party and my head starts to hurt from all the traffic and endless cul-de-sacs and carbon copy chain retail, I am so SUBJECTIVELY happy that I took the DC housing market "gamble" (which OBJECTIVELY has more than tripled in value in the last 20 years, including increasing or holding steady in every single year except for 2008 and 2009) AND rolled the dice multiple times on the DC school "lottery" (which OBJECTIVELY matches 75 percent of parents with one of their requested schools, and 85 percent of those with one of their top 3 choices).

Again, I'm not saying these are objectively guarantees, but they're not the same as day trading stocks or playing the slots in Vegas either. I'm also not saying that OP's family will subjectively find DC to be the right choice for them. I just don't think you can objectively classify living in DC as a choice that only diehards can subjectively handle or appreciate.

It's called a lottery by DCPS. But I'm glad the real estate bubble saved you from the ravages of suburban living.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think folks are too cramped in their thinking about OP's options, as if everything is riding on the first house they buy or on placing all their chips on the lottery. This seems to me to ignore things like the future potential for appreciating of DC real estate and continued improvement in the DC public and charter school landscape. There's already a good amount of flexibility out there for early elementary, and while middle and high schools have a ways to go, they offer a much better world than even a few years ago. As others are suggesting, why not buy in Trinidad or Eckington or Park View or some other "gritty" neighborhood with better housing prices and some quiet buzz, plus elementary options that will last you three or four years? Then see how those schools improve and play the lottery for a few years to try and get something through fourth or fifth grade? By then, you might not be in bounds for a good middle school, but you might have lotteried into something, or your house might have appreciated enough to sell for a premium to someone who cares less about schools so that you could trade up to a better neighborhood. This is exactly what happened to us. Not saying it's a guarantee -- but frankly, there are no guarantees in life. Just risks that some people are comfortable with and some are not. Why not go after something new and different? It's not like OP can't decide in a few years it's not for them and then head for the suburbs. But for now, it sounds like OP is game for trying something else.

Families with small kids and housing budgets of $450k are of limited means and should not be gambling on real estate speculation -- and trying to buy in neighborhoods with buzz can end very badly and they will not have resources to recover, move, or pay for private school. It's fine if you are childless or can call up mom and dad to cover grandkids tuition but it sounds like OP needs that budge to work out of the box not spread her risk on school potter or real estate gentrification lottery.

Words like "gambling", "speculation", and "lottery" are basically just negative slogans for risk choices that, at least to our family, were more than worth it, because they weren't actually that risky, but rather offered a realistic chance at a payoff that to us was really valuable.

All of us take risks every second of the day -- leaving our house, getting in a car, applying for a job, deciding where to live, having a kid, etc. The important question isn't whether a choice is "risky" but how to accurately measure the risk, and then deciding if it is worth taking to you.

Every time I have to drive my family to Springfield VA for a birthday party and my head starts to hurt from all the traffic and endless cul-de-sacs and carbon copy chain retail, I am so SUBJECTIVELY happy that I took the DC housing market "gamble" (which OBJECTIVELY has more than tripled in value in the last 20 years, including increasing or holding steady in every single year except for 2008 and 2009) AND rolled the dice multiple times on the DC school "lottery" (which OBJECTIVELY matches 75 percent of parents with one of their requested schools, and 85 percent of those with one of their top 3 choices).

Again, I'm not saying these are objectively guarantees, but they're not the same as day trading stocks or playing the slots in Vegas either. I'm also not saying that OP's family will subjectively find DC to be the right choice for them. I just don't think you can objectively classify living in DC as a choice that only diehards can subjectively handle or appreciate.

I agree that lots of different families can be happy in DC, and that people sometimes don't think enough about the risks and annoyances of the suburbs. But wanted to comment about the lottery. Yes, 85% of kids get matched to one of their top-3 choices. But that's across all grades, with PK4 and K (grades OP's kid would likely apply for) not having many seats at a lot of schools. And that 85% doesn't apply equally to all applicants. If you list your top 3 as Amidon, Van Ness, and Savoy, your chances of getting matched somewhere are probably close to 100%. If you list Two Rivers, SWS, and Brent, not so much.

There's no question that the actual schools chosen affect the odds of getting one of them. But I think it's noteworthy that even with limited seats at high demand schools, and the fact that parents are free to list less than 12 schools in their lottery entry if they want to name only 10 or 8 or even 1, the system is still matching three quarters of all parents with a school they thought was worth selecting. The point is that as an objective matter, three fourths of parents are getting matched with a school that those parents subjectively thought was worth choosing. And that doesn't include round 2 of the lottery, or getting accepted off the waitlists. Again, I don't disagree that it's not the same guarantee as living in a attend-by-right school district. But it's not the Powerball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still think folks are too cramped in their thinking about OP's options, as if everything is riding on the first house they buy or on placing all their chips on the lottery. This seems to me to ignore things like the future potential for appreciating of DC real estate and continued improvement in the DC public and charter school landscape. There's already a good amount of flexibility out there for early elementary, and while middle and high schools have a ways to go, they offer a much better world than even a few years ago. As others are suggesting, why not buy in Trinidad or Eckington or Park View or some other "gritty" neighborhood with better housing prices and some quiet buzz, plus elementary options that will last you three or four years? Then see how those schools improve and play the lottery for a few years to try and get something through fourth or fifth grade? By then, you might not be in bounds for a good middle school, but you might have lotteried into something, or your house might have appreciated enough to sell for a premium to someone who cares less about schools so that you could trade up to a better neighborhood. This is exactly what happened to us. Not saying it's a guarantee -- but frankly, there are no guarantees in life. Just risks that some people are comfortable with and some are not. Why not go after something new and different? It's not like OP can't decide in a few years it's not for them and then head for the suburbs. But for now, it sounds like OP is game for trying something else.

Families with small kids and housing budgets of $450k are of limited means and should not be gambling on real estate speculation -- and trying to buy in neighborhoods with buzz can end very badly and they will not have resources to recover, move, or pay for private school. It's fine if you are childless or can call up mom and dad to cover grandkids tuition but it sounds like OP needs that budge to work out of the box not spread her risk on school potter or real estate gentrification lottery.

Words like "gambling", "speculation", and "lottery" are basically just negative slogans for risk choices that, at least to our family, were more than worth it, because they weren't actually that risky, but rather offered a realistic chance at a payoff that to us was really valuable.

All of us take risks every second of the day -- leaving our house, getting in a car, applying for a job, deciding where to live, having a kid, etc. The important question isn't whether a choice is "risky" but how to accurately measure the risk, and then deciding if it is worth taking to you.

Every time I have to drive my family to Springfield VA for a birthday party and my head starts to hurt from all the traffic and endless cul-de-sacs and carbon copy chain retail, I am so SUBJECTIVELY happy that I took the DC housing market "gamble" (which OBJECTIVELY has more than tripled in value in the last 20 years, including increasing or holding steady in every single year except for 2008 and 2009) AND rolled the dice multiple times on the DC school "lottery" (which OBJECTIVELY matches 75 percent of parents with one of their requested schools, and 85 percent of those with one of their top 3 choices).

Again, I'm not saying these are objectively guarantees, but they're not the same as day trading stocks or playing the slots in Vegas either. I'm also not saying that OP's family will subjectively find DC to be the right choice for them. I just don't think you can objectively classify living in DC as a choice that only diehards can subjectively handle or appreciate.

It's called a lottery by DCPS. But I'm glad the real estate bubble saved you from the ravages of suburban living.

Just because DCPS calls it a lottery doesn't make it a casino game. All I'm suggesting is that the words we use don't always portray reality. For example, is it really accurate to call DC's real estate market a "bubble"? As if it's about to burst? If so, how many more years (beyond the current streak of 32, since the last time prices fell more than 7 percent was 1982) can we expect to wait before it does?

Similarly, I never said the suburbs were a ravaged war zone. I said driving in them hurts my head, in ways that I stated were subjective to me. I can understand and appreciate why others would subjectively feel the opposite. I am just suggesting that OP try to objectively measure the risks more accurately than some are suggesting, and then make a subjective decision that's right for her and her family.

[Anonymous]

OP, I don't think it's been asked yet, but are you looking for a PK-4 spot for the upcoming 2015-16 school year? Both rounds of the lottery are over, so have you been looking into private pre-schools and daycares?

[Anonymous]

Regarding families matched in lottery. Also remember a lot of families play lottery just to play. We are at HRCS and only applied to 5 WOTP schools. Didn't get into any. Not sure I would even go if I did. Just applied because I can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Regarding families matched in lottery. Also remember a lot of families play lottery just to play. We are at HRCS and only applied to 5 WOTP schools. Didn't get into any. Not sure I would even go if I did. Just applied because I can.

NBD my sister just graduated from high school. Already has her college listed on FB even though classes don't start until August. She's a "rising" Wilson principal.

[Anonymous]

Sorry meant that for other thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:May be moving to DC and am worried about the school situation. I have heard some of the lotteries are not truly blind. What is the deal with the school lotteries? So scary to move to a place where you're literally gambling with your child's education.

You are overstating the risk. If you want to go to a good school guaranteed, then buy or rent a home within the boundaries of a good school in Northwest DC. That way, you can try the lottery, but if you are not successful, you still receive a quality education by right.

Which neighborhoods are recommended with good in-bound schools for our budget ($450-550K)? See now why I would think we would be gambling with our child's education?

You are not guaranteed a good in-bounds school in MD for that amount either until you get out to Howard County. If you can find a house in the Rock Creek Forest zone, you might succeed there but the house will need updating. The rest, Flora Singer, Oakland Terrance, Forest Knolls are either Title 1 or have questionable scores.

[Anonymous]

At OP's budget of $550k, she's not going to get into a nice neighborhood with good IB schools - just not happening.

Lots of others have mentioned newly gentrified neighborhoods with dicey-but-hopefully-improving schools (eckington, Petworth, brookland, etc). As others have noted, these neighborhoods are already pretty nice, but schools have to catch up. But I would think that at OP's budget, she's going to end up with a 2 bed condo in the dicey parts of those neighborhoods. The busy street, or the street with a liquor store on the corner, or 3 blocks farther away from where you really want to be so people have to ask "is this still [fill in the blank neighborhood]?"

So then you are left with the crappy parts of the city (unsafe, etc) with crappy schools.

To the PP's comment about buying in a mediocre neighborhood and trading up, while I agree in concept and have done this myself, the difference between your situation and OP's is that her kid is already 4. You bought into east CH years before having a kid, so suffering through drug trades etc was less important. Would you have done that with your kindergartener, all on the chance to get into an elementary by 3rd grade?

I just don't think that budget gets you 1000 sf anywhere borderline safe that you'd really want to have a kid. (and I say this as someone who has happily lived in some insanely sketchy places pre kids - but once we had a kid, we bought the crappiest ugliest smallest house all because we refused to compromise on location)

[Anonymous]

You can get a 2bd condo in upper NW for that amount. People are making it seem like it's impossible when it's not. There is a 2bd/2bt 1000+ soft in the Garfield on Conn ave in Chevy Chase zoned for Murch on the market for 399k. There isn't a huge selection but it can be done if you have time to wait for what you want and are flexible on location in upper NW. No you can't get a house or townhouse but a condo is possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can get a 2bd condo in upper NW for that amount. People are making it seem like it's impossible when it's not. There is a 2bd/2bt 1000+ soft in the Garfield on Conn ave in Chevy Chase zoned for Murch on the market for 399k. There isn't a huge selection but it can be done if you have time to wait for what you want and are flexible on location in upper NW. No you can't get a house or townhouse but a condo is possible.

I like Chevy Chase but it's not close to the metro (she'd have to walk all the way down to Van Ness). OP wanted something close to the metro. If she was willing to be somewhat flexible on the metro distance (or be OK with buses), she'd have a better choice. Also, condos have condo fees. It's small comfort to be able to afford to buy a condo when you have to pay expensive condo fees on top of that each month.

[Anonymous]

Actually you can walk to friendship heights (10-12 min). It's closer then van ness. My DH does it everyday.