A bit hard without this year's data but I continue to question the idea that L-T's current 3rd grade is bursting at the seams or somehow done dirty by Central Office. Last year that class (then in 2nd grade) had 67 students. The had 10 lottery seats available, which is a bit high. But if they are now at 75 students, it means they had net attrition of at least 2, likely higher (you have to factor in people who move into the zone and get a by-right spot in the grade). So while 75 is pretty much the most you'd want in a grade with three teachers (I consider 25 in a 3rd grade classroom at capacity, not over capacity, and so does DCPS) and it makes sense to not offer any lottery spots for that cohort this year, It seems unproblematic to me. Especially when you consider that the class *will* experience attraction of between 20-25% between 4th and 5th, based on all historic trends. That will bring the class down to 55-60 students by 5th, a perfectly healthy number for 3 classrooms AND a positive thing for Stuart-Hobson who is likely to get a large number of those students for 6th. Certainly better than last year when L-T only had 45 5th graders. IB families always freak out about adding lottery seats and everyone seems to hate a classroom over 22 students, but at a non-title 1 school seeking to build strength in the feeder pattern and very susceptible to charter- and private-based attrition in late grades, this all makes perfect sense to me and I don't get why people would complain (just kidding, I know why people are complaining, I just think their complaints are myopic). |
OP here! Latin 2nd for 8th - It's hard to say exactly, because while you can see in the data how many matches have sibling preference, you can't see how many of the waitlisted people are siblings for charter schools - to my knowledge, that data is only made available for DCPS schools. Four years ago, Latin 2nd matched 4 kids for 8th and they were ALL siblings, and outside of that year, they've matched 0 and taken 0-3 off the wait list, so I would predict that those were all siblings, making your chances zero. Possible one or two no-preference kids have slipped in in the last five years, but I doubt it, and even then, with waitlists of 180+, you're still talking about a less than 1 percent shot. Sorry. Latin 2nd for 9th - You're correct, it's 4%. |
OP here - good note. I did NOT factor that in (must not have stood out in the numbers the way it did for Brent) but the PP is probably right. That would decrease your chance at JO Wilson, and thus increase your chance at ended up at Miner. |
OP here, assuming you'd switch in October: Using last year's numbers, your kid is going to Brent. They let in all fourth graders last year: Maury - 3% Brent - 97% Agree with some other posters up thread that you should make sure it's what you want. You've got a few days to rejigger your list. If we use the previous four years (pre-swing space) for Brent, here's your chances: Maury - 3% Brent - 6% L-T - 54% Watkins - 29% JO Wilson - 8% Payne - 0% Chisholm (English only) - 0% Thomson - 0% John Francis - 0% TR 4th - 0% TR Young - 0% |
OP here! Assuming you'd take a seat in October. Mundo Cook - 94% Mundo C8 - 0% SWS - 0% Maury (in boundary) - 0% Chisholm - 0% LT - 0% Peabody - 0% AppleTree LP - 0% JO Wilson - 0% Miner - 0% AppleTree OK - 6% |
OP here - never duplicated! I appreciated your fun and funny predictions. |
|
OP here - I've got to sign off again, but wanted to take a moment to make a blanket statement:
Just because I say you have a 0% chance somewhere does NOT mean that you should take it off your list or it's a "wasted space." Unless you have more than 12 schools you want (RARE!) there is NO reason to cut schools - lottery slots are free! And you just NEVER know what's going to happen. Things change all the time here - history isn't destiny. What if a school adds or removes a classroom? Do not use this information to change your list - odds are not relevant! Rank your list by true order of preference, always. |
OP is wise, you guys! |
Being at the maximum amount normally allowable is what I meant by busting at the seams. I said it only in the context of heck no, LT is not offering 4th grade seats for next year. The grade that DCPS did overfill was 1st last year, because those classes are supposed to be aimed at 20 under the new agreement and one had 28. That is crazy. But it's not clear if that was entirely DCPS or if the school registrar screwed up too (I suspect the latter). |
Ah, that makes sense. I was honestly just looking at the numbers and trying to figure out why the 3rd grade would be viewed as too big when it's smaller than the grades above and below. And now that makes sense as to why the current 2nd grade is so big. |
OP here - Ross - 4% Hearst - 8% Eaton - 0% Hyde - 72% Murch - 0% Garrison - 0% Nothinig - 16% |
| Okay - OP here - I think I've caught up and have responded to everyone! If I missed someone, please bump it. Please feel free to keep posting lists if you want predictions! I'll keep an eye on this thread. |
|
You’re incredible. Id love some odds.
PK4 School Within School Inspired Teaching Lee Montessori Seaton (not inbounds) Thank you! |
OP here. Assuming you'd switch schools in October: School Within School - 7% Inspired Teaching - 7% Lee Montessori - 23% Seaton (not inbounds) - 52% Nothing - 11% That's based on historical data, but I happen to know that Seaton is in a swing space next year. Generally, schools have more seats when they're in swing spaces, so I'd be surprised if you didn't get into Seaton. |
|
PK4 no preference, odds of acceptance by August:
LT Maury SWS Payne Brent Peabody Chisholm JOW |