SWW - when do notices go out about interviews?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the last few years, Walls has been fixated on GPA but, with grade inflation in DC, the school is not necessary selecting the top students. For example, based on 9th grade PARRC results, over 30% of Walls 9th graders are below grade level in math. If they had an admission test, Walls could easily only select 9th graders who are at least grade level in math. Just compare Walls to Stuyvesant, a 82% minority magnet school in NYC, which has an admissions test and where no 9th grader is below grade level in math. Obviously, Walls is not focused on picking the top students in DC.

This year Walls changed the admissions system so that subjective teacher recs are worth three times more than a kid’s GPA. And the teacher recs are not based on any numerical rating. Thus, overworked Walls admissions staff are assigning numerical weights to these teacher recs based on general comments such as “this student is great” or “this student is solid” and using these comments to calculate the applicant’s overall numerical score to determine if he or she warrants an interview. As a result, a student with a relatively low GPA but excellent teacher recs will receive an interview over a kid with a stronger GPA who submitted more lukewarm teacher recs.

Based on this change, it is hard to see how Walls will be picking a stronger class this year than previous years. It will be interesting to see if the new class, like previous recent ones, includes a high percentage of “straight A” kids testing below grade level.

While I agree with you that the process leaves a lot to be desired (my 4.0 kid didn't get an interview), I also want to call into question two of your statements. First, Stuyvesant is something like 10% Black and Latino, so saying it's 82% minority effectively means it's 72% Asian. I don't think Asian kids are underrepresented in NYC's selective schools, so it doesn't seem right to include them in the minority stats.

Second, I don't think your comment about Walls choosing based on vague recommendations is correct. The recommendation forms have choices for teachers such as "5: reading level is far advanced for age and grade level," "4: Reads well above expectations for age and grade level," etc. So even though it's subjective based on the teacher's judgment, the admissions staff won't have to assign guesstimates to what "this student is solid" means.

Nice for you to supposedly have insight about what the teacher recommendation process looked like. Us mere mortal parents weren't provided transparency. So we'll have to take your word for it, I guess?

[Anonymous]

So is it the case that no other kids will be asked to interview?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just have to laugh. This is quite a robust magnet school that DCPS is running. Academic record has completely ceased to be a factor in admissions. 🤔🤪

I just have to laugh at this post. Because a few parents on DCUM post their 4.0 kids didn’t get an interview the school has completely let go of academic records as a factor? Hyperbolic much? My 4.0 kid got an interview. As I’m sure many of 4.0 kids did.

Knowing stats would be helpful. How many applicants were there? How many had a 4.0? How many spots are there total? How many interview invites did they extend? Did all the kids being invited to interview rank school without walls as number one? I really think the recommendation letter process was not fair. This was a lot of extra unpaid work for the teachers, some of whom probably were not too happy, and it might've shown in their letters.

Correct. There were teachers asked to write one letter and teachers asked to write 50.
There were kids whose parents applied in the 11th hour (for a million reasons) and I can imagine that if they asked the teacher writing 50 recs, that might have not have been viewed favorably.

there were teachers who had to be reminded by parents (a process probably also not viewed favorably by the teacher who is already over burdened).

There were kids who were the first kid to ask a teacher (and probably were also not high scorers as recommenders always tend to leave room at the top for those who come later).

All sorts of room for error and bias, which is why recs don't typically count for everything in an admissions process like this. But in this case they did since 4.0s were turned down.

King of crazy. This was ultimately decided entirely by the recs!!

So much conjecture. First of all, you don’t know what the recs say about your kid. A kid might not have gotten an interview because their rec wasn’t as good as other kids, which is valid. The recs ask about all sorts of things, including social skills. Maybe a 4.0 kid isn’t mature, or kind, or whatever….they have to differentiate between the apps, and so the recs add to the big picture. Even if there were no recs, many 4.0 kids would not get interviews because they just can’t interview everyone. I think the system is crazy that everyone is vying for spots for what is really not even a particularly awesome school (we did apply, though), but even I can recognize that recs aren’t inherently an unfair part of the process.

Walls used to have an entrance exam. Do you think that would be fairer?

Actually, no. I’m not a fan of the entrance exam. Kids take loads of tests during middle school, all of which are factored into their grades, which make up their gpa. I know the arguments for the test, but I’ve never heard a good enough argument for it that outweighs the reasons against it.

They used to require that a student needed to have at least a "4" on PARCC.
They removed this requirement for equity purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP: I mean, did you even bother to have your kid apply to other schools like Banneker - McKinley or lottery for Latin - Basis? Walls has been cultivating absolute mediocrity for the past four years since getting rid of the test, yet everyone on this forum continues to act as if it is the only best high school in DC. It's not. Your kid deserves better.

Agreed. It's sad how people extol Walls when it's really not a very good school that's a PITA to get to.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I was prepared (and prepared my kid) for the interview side of the process to be a lottery.

But I thought they'd screen into that process based on GPA and I was NOT prepared to be shut out at this stage.

On the bright (lolsob) side, now I know that kid's teachers don't like them, relative to their peers...

Kid was really turned off by the excessive messaging around rigor at Banneker and is not into STEM. I know, special snowflake. It just sucks and I'm sad for my kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP: I mean, did you even bother to have your kid apply to other schools like Banneker - McKinley or lottery for Latin - Basis? Walls has been cultivating absolute mediocrity for the past four years since getting rid of the test, yet everyone on this forum continues to act as if it is the only best high school in DC. It's not. Your kid deserves better.

Agreed. It's sad how people extol Walls when it's really not a very good school that's a PITA to get to.

Walls still has by far the best AP and SAT scores in the city. I think the kids at McKinley are hard-working and it's a much better option than their zoned high schools, which are mostly Ward 7 and 8, but PP's kid will be an outlier there. Absolutely apply to Banneker, too, which is in the middle on these metrics, but their process is also opaque and does not use standardized tests. (No one's does.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the last few years, Walls has been fixated on GPA but, with grade inflation in DC, the school is not necessary selecting the top students. For example, based on 9th grade PARRC results, over 30% of Walls 9th graders are below grade level in math. If they had an admission test, Walls could easily only select 9th graders who are at least grade level in math. Just compare Walls to Stuyvesant, a 82% minority magnet school in NYC, which has an admissions test and where no 9th grader is below grade level in math. Obviously, Walls is not focused on picking the top students in DC.

This year Walls changed the admissions system so that subjective teacher recs are worth three times more than a kid’s GPA. And the teacher recs are not based on any numerical rating. Thus, overworked Walls admissions staff are assigning numerical weights to these teacher recs based on general comments such as “this student is great” or “this student is solid” and using these comments to calculate the applicant’s overall numerical score to determine if he or she warrants an interview. As a result, a student with a relatively low GPA but excellent teacher recs will receive an interview over a kid with a stronger GPA who submitted more lukewarm teacher recs.

Based on this change, it is hard to see how Walls will be picking a stronger class this year than previous years. It will be interesting to see if the new class, like previous recent ones, includes a high percentage of “straight A” kids testing below grade level.

While I agree with you that the process leaves a lot to be desired (my 4.0 kid didn't get an interview), I also want to call into question two of your statements. First, Stuyvesant is something like 10% Black and Latino, so saying it's 82% minority effectively means it's 72% Asian. I don't think Asian kids are underrepresented in NYC's selective schools, so it doesn't seem right to include them in the minority stats.

Second, I don't think your comment about Walls choosing based on vague recommendations is correct. The recommendation forms have choices for teachers such as "5: reading level is far advanced for age and grade level," "4: Reads well above expectations for age and grade level," etc. So even though it's subjective based on the teacher's judgment, the admissions staff won't have to assign guesstimates to what "this student is solid" means.

Nice for you to supposedly have insight about what the teacher recommendation process looked like. Us mere mortal parents weren't provided transparency. So we'll have to take your word for it, I guess?

+100

Here is what a DC teacher who actually did Walls recs this year said:

"There are no rankings in the apps. I was never asked to rank kids or assign some numerical number."

[Anonymous]

For families who were offered an interview were you assigned a date and time or do you have to register for it and get to select which of the two days?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP: I mean, did you even bother to have your kid apply to other schools like Banneker - McKinley or lottery for Latin - Basis? Walls has been cultivating absolute mediocrity for the past four years since getting rid of the test, yet everyone on this forum continues to act as if it is the only best high school in DC. It's not. Your kid deserves better.

Agreed. It's sad how people extol Walls when it's really not a very good school that's a PITA to get to.

Walls still has by far the best AP and SAT scores in the city. I think the kids at McKinley are hard-working and it's a much better option than their zoned high schools, which are mostly Ward 7 and 8, but PP's kid will be an outlier there. Absolutely apply to Banneker, too, which is in the middle on these metrics, but their process is also opaque and does not use standardized tests. (No one's does.)

No, BASIS DC does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP: I mean, did you even bother to have your kid apply to other schools like Banneker - McKinley or lottery for Latin - Basis? Walls has been cultivating absolute mediocrity for the past four years since getting rid of the test, yet everyone on this forum continues to act as if it is the only best high school in DC. It's not. Your kid deserves better.

Agreed. It's sad how people extol Walls when it's really not a very good school that's a PITA to get to.

Walls still has by far the best AP and SAT scores in the city. I think the kids at McKinley are hard-working and it's a much better option than their zoned high schools, which are mostly Ward 7 and 8, but PP's kid will be an outlier there. Absolutely apply to Banneker, too, which is in the middle on these metrics, but their process is also opaque and does not use standardized tests. (No one's does.)

No, BASIS DC does.

For DCPS high schools, obviously. And you can't get into BASIS in the 9th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For families who were offered an interview were you assigned a date and time or do you have to register for it and get to select which of the two days?

There is no registering - the email says we will receive notification by Thursday of when we need to show up - between 9 and 3 on either 2/24 or 3/2.

[Anonymous]

Wait, do you think that higher SATs reflect the quality of the school? You would be mistaken there. Walls has 12% at risk students. Banneker and McKinley are Title 1 schools with 35% at-risk (meaning: living in poverty) students. The SAT scores at Walls are not reflecting the quality of the school; they are reflecting the basic average incomes of the student population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait, do you think that higher SATs reflect the quality of the school? You would be mistaken there. Walls has 12% at risk students. Banneker and McKinley are Title 1 schools with 35% at-risk (meaning: living in poverty) students. The SAT scores at Walls are not reflecting the quality of the school; they are reflecting the basic average incomes of the student population.

We're talking about where a kid who has 98th+ percentile test scores and 5s on the PARCC is going to find an appropriate academic experience. Do you think that's going to be at a school where most of the kids are below grade level, the average SAT score is 950 and where a large majority of kids who take AP tests are not getting at least a 3? Do you think that's a school that's going to have the interest and ability to serve PP's kid? Or do you think maybe it's better for them to be at a school where their kid has enough of a peer group that you can have classes specifically targeted at them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the last few years, Walls has been fixated on GPA but, with grade inflation in DC, the school is not necessary selecting the top students. For example, based on 9th grade PARRC results, over 30% of Walls 9th graders are below grade level in math. If they had an admission test, Walls could easily only select 9th graders who are at least grade level in math. Just compare Walls to Stuyvesant, a 82% minority magnet school in NYC, which has an admissions test and where no 9th grader is below grade level in math. Obviously, Walls is not focused on picking the top students in DC.

This year Walls changed the admissions system so that subjective teacher recs are worth three times more than a kid’s GPA. And the teacher recs are not based on any numerical rating. Thus, overworked Walls admissions staff are assigning numerical weights to these teacher recs based on general comments such as “this student is great” or “this student is solid” and using these comments to calculate the applicant’s overall numerical score to determine if he or she warrants an interview. As a result, a student with a relatively low GPA but excellent teacher recs will receive an interview over a kid with a stronger GPA who submitted more lukewarm teacher recs.

Based on this change, it is hard to see how Walls will be picking a stronger class this year than previous years. It will be interesting to see if the new class, like previous recent ones, includes a high percentage of “straight A” kids testing below grade level.

While I agree with you that the process leaves a lot to be desired (my 4.0 kid didn't get an interview), I also want to call into question two of your statements. First, Stuyvesant is something like 10% Black and Latino, so saying it's 82% minority effectively means it's 72% Asian. I don't think Asian kids are underrepresented in NYC's selective schools, so it doesn't seem right to include them in the minority stats.

Second, I don't think your comment about Walls choosing based on vague recommendations is correct. The recommendation forms have choices for teachers such as "5: reading level is far advanced for age and grade level," "4: Reads well above expectations for age and grade level," etc. So even though it's subjective based on the teacher's judgment, the admissions staff won't have to assign guesstimates to what "this student is solid" means.

Nice for you to supposedly have insight about what the teacher recommendation process looked like. Us mere mortal parents weren't provided transparency. So we'll have to take your word for it, I guess?

I'm a parent and have the rubric for recomendations. You should ask your school. I printed it out and gave it to my child and said, this is what the selective high schools are asking your teachers. Try to always be someone that's a '5'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the last few years, Walls has been fixated on GPA but, with grade inflation in DC, the school is not necessary selecting the top students. For example, based on 9th grade PARRC results, over 30% of Walls 9th graders are below grade level in math. If they had an admission test, Walls could easily only select 9th graders who are at least grade level in math. Just compare Walls to Stuyvesant, a 82% minority magnet school in NYC, which has an admissions test and where no 9th grader is below grade level in math. Obviously, Walls is not focused on picking the top students in DC.

This year Walls changed the admissions system so that subjective teacher recs are worth three times more than a kid’s GPA. And the teacher recs are not based on any numerical rating. Thus, overworked Walls admissions staff are assigning numerical weights to these teacher recs based on general comments such as “this student is great” or “this student is solid” and using these comments to calculate the applicant’s overall numerical score to determine if he or she warrants an interview. As a result, a student with a relatively low GPA but excellent teacher recs will receive an interview over a kid with a stronger GPA who submitted more lukewarm teacher recs.

Based on this change, it is hard to see how Walls will be picking a stronger class this year than previous years. It will be interesting to see if the new class, like previous recent ones, includes a high percentage of “straight A” kids testing below grade level.

While I agree with you that the process leaves a lot to be desired (my 4.0 kid didn't get an interview), I also want to call into question two of your statements. First, Stuyvesant is something like 10% Black and Latino, so saying it's 82% minority effectively means it's 72% Asian. I don't think Asian kids are underrepresented in NYC's selective schools, so it doesn't seem right to include them in the minority stats.

Second, I don't think your comment about Walls choosing based on vague recommendations is correct. The recommendation forms have choices for teachers such as "5: reading level is far advanced for age and grade level," "4: Reads well above expectations for age and grade level," etc. So even though it's subjective based on the teacher's judgment, the admissions staff won't have to assign guesstimates to what "this student is solid" means.

Nice for you to supposedly have insight about what the teacher recommendation process looked like. Us mere mortal parents weren't provided transparency. So we'll have to take your word for it, I guess?

+100

Here is what a DC teacher who actually did Walls recs this year said:

"There are no rankings in the apps. I was never asked to rank kids or assign some numerical number."

Interesting. I definately got a rubric for the recomendations. Maybe it was wrong?