Lottery results are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DCUM kind of people would never be priced out of privates. The problem is people who don't belong on DCUM are now on here.

Wtf

Raise your hand if you're helping to ruin the virtual neighborhood by not having $60k/year on hand for Sidwell!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My rising 9th grader also marked "ineligible" at Banneker (but decent waitlist at Walls, go figure!) even though she has stellar grades and had a good interview and has a sibling at the top of her class at Banneker. Must have been a really competitive year. Congrats to everyone who got what they hoped for! For those who didn't, hope your kids don't take it personally. The system is complete and total crapshoot even for the competitive schools.

Interesting. I have to say, I didn't think Banneker was all that tough of an admit. I honestly thought they accepted nearly all their applicants and weren't like Walls.

DCUM certainly pushes that narrative.

I think it's harder than it used to be. My DD 7th is pining to go.

I actually think it's just that people used to say whatever they wanted about Banneker with zero first-hand information and it was mostly informed by racism. Now that the "DCUM" kind of people are priced out of privates and running out of spots at J-R and SWW, all of a sudden they're "taking a chance" on the school they considered themselves benevolent pioneers for even considering, only to find out . . . it's not a cakewalk just because it's full of black kids.

DCUM kind of people would never be priced out of privates. The problem is people who don't belong on DCUM are now on here.

omg what.

"people who don't belong" -- care to spell this out for us? race, class? Say what you mean (and take the consequences).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please explain to me what does “ineligible” mean? 9th grade #1 Banneker marked as ineligible but got into our #2

That means your child was not interviewed therefore could not be matched.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please explain to me what does “ineligible” mean? 9th grade #1 Banneker marked as ineligible but got into our #2

That means your child was not interviewed therefore could not be matched.

Or was not accepted after the interview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please explain to me what does “ineligible” mean? 9th grade #1 Banneker marked as ineligible but got into our #2

That means your child was not interviewed therefore could not be matched.

This is NOT TRUE. Kids who interview at Banneker but don't match are marked ineligible. It means "not selected". Banneker (usually) does not maintain a waitlist.

[Anonymous]

Yes my DD had interview at Banneker but no invite from SWW … straight A student every single term in middle school, two AP classes, glowing references … thought interview went ok but she wasn’t selected … honestly I also thought great grades will get you in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the 50s at MVC8. Based on last years WL data, that would be fine for admission by August, but years prior not so much. I suspect that could be because last year, many folks who wanted MVC8 were placed for a year at JF Cook, and didn't want that, but I could be wrong. Any folks more in the know have insight on whether the WL this year will move?

+1 on this. We're right where they got to on last year's waitlist (70s) and wondering if the huge movement last year was a one off or likely to be replicated. Conscious that they've a new-building but not sure how that will factor in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please explain to me what does “ineligible” mean? 9th grade #1 Banneker marked as ineligible but got into our #2

That means your child was not interviewed therefore could not be matched.

This is NOT TRUE. Kids who interview at Banneker but don't match are marked ineligible. It means "not selected". Banneker (usually) does not maintain a waitlist.

I didn't realize this about Banneker not doing a waitlist, that makes more sense.

I wonder why? And it seems odd to me that different application schools within the same system would have different approaches to this. Why would Walls, Banneker, McKinley and other applications schools all have consistent policies about waitlists? Do their application processes differ in other ways? If so, that should change. Standardizing the process is both more fair AND actually serves the goal of equity, which DCPS claims to care so much about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the 50s at MVC8. Based on last years WL data, that would be fine for admission by August, but years prior not so much. I suspect that could be because last year, many folks who wanted MVC8 were placed for a year at JF Cook, and didn't want that, but I could be wrong. Any folks more in the know have insight on whether the WL this year will move?

+1 on this. We're right where they got to on last year's waitlist (70s) and wondering if the huge movement last year was a one off or likely to be replicated. Conscious that they've a new-building but not sure how that will factor in.

Glad to find someone else in a similar boat. Feeling pretty depressed today, as we were really hoping for this, and due to some new personal circumstances, our matched school is very difficult (if not impossible).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Waitlisted #10 at Latin Cooper. Reviewed the historical waitlist data foe the past 5 years and it looks like every child waitlisted at #10 was offered a seat. What are our chances at getting in?

You should be good.

Where should we estimate the Cooper and/or 2nd St WL cut offs to be for 5th? We are ~#30 & ~#40 for each campus, but I was assuming they wouldn't go further than ~#15 unless a class is being added?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I was hoping for slightly better numbers, but as expected I'll be watching waitlists all summer and fall, looks like. But we matched with John Lewis which we're excited about!

For K:
1 Ross Elementary School Waitlisted - #24
2 Garrison Elementary School Waitlisted - #10
3 Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS Waitlisted - #17
4 E.L. Haynes PCS - Elementary School Waitlisted - #6
5 John Lewis Elementary School Match (enrollment pending)
6 Lee Montessori PCS - Brookland Sibling Offered Waitlisted - #1

For 1st Grade:
1 Ross Elementary School Waitlisted - #45
2 Garrison Elementary School Waitlisted - #20
3 Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS Waitlisted - #35
4 E.L. Haynes PCS - Elementary School Waitlisted - #8
5 John Lewis Elementary School Sibling Offered Waitlisted - #1
6 Lee Montessori PCS - Brookland Match (enrollment pending)

We put Lee down without much thought and will be turning down that offer - but is it just me or is it crazy that we got an offer for 1st from them with what must be a pretty crappy lottery number? They must be really falling in popularity.

Ha! I was wondering about you! I think these numbers are actually pretty good. But honestly, Lewis is great (or so I hear).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I was hoping for slightly better numbers, but as expected I'll be watching waitlists all summer and fall, looks like. But we matched with John Lewis which we're excited about!

For K:
1 Ross Elementary School Waitlisted - #24
2 Garrison Elementary School Waitlisted - #10
3 Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS Waitlisted - #17
4 E.L. Haynes PCS - Elementary School Waitlisted - #6
5 John Lewis Elementary School Match (enrollment pending)
6 Lee Montessori PCS - Brookland Sibling Offered Waitlisted - #1

For 1st Grade:
1 Ross Elementary School Waitlisted - #45
2 Garrison Elementary School Waitlisted - #20
3 Inspired Teaching Demonstration PCS Waitlisted - #35
4 E.L. Haynes PCS - Elementary School Waitlisted - #8
5 John Lewis Elementary School Sibling Offered Waitlisted - #1
6 Lee Montessori PCS - Brookland Match (enrollment pending)

We put Lee down without much thought and will be turning down that offer - but is it just me or is it crazy that we got an offer for 1st from them with what must be a pretty crappy lottery number? They must be really falling in popularity.

Ha! I was wondering about you! I think these numbers are actually pretty good. But honestly, Lewis is great (or so I hear).

+1 I was also invested in the outcome for this family. I've heard great things about Lewis (have good friends with two kids there who wound up turning down a spot at a JKLM last year to stay) and think the PP will discover that the joy of being at a neighborhood school with a lot of community buy in will trump whatever perceived advantages they currently see at some of these further flung options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My rising 9th grader also marked "ineligible" at Banneker (but decent waitlist at Walls, go figure!) even though she has stellar grades and had a good interview and has a sibling at the top of her class at Banneker. Must have been a really competitive year. Congrats to everyone who got what they hoped for! For those who didn't, hope your kids don't take it personally. The system is complete and total crapshoot even for the competitive schools.

Interesting. I have to say, I didn't think Banneker was all that tough of an admit. I honestly thought they accepted nearly all their applicants and weren't like Walls.

Not true at all. They get almost as many applications as Walls. My kid got interviews at both, but a bunch of her friends didn’t even get interviews at Banneker, only at Walls (and most of those got into Walls or waitlisted). Banneker is definitely competitive.

My kid is at Banneker. The administration said they’ve never seen this many applications, so seems like it is getting more competitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My rising 9th grader also marked "ineligible" at Banneker (but decent waitlist at Walls, go figure!) even though she has stellar grades and had a good interview and has a sibling at the top of her class at Banneker. Must have been a really competitive year. Congrats to everyone who got what they hoped for! For those who didn't, hope your kids don't take it personally. The system is complete and total crapshoot even for the competitive schools.

Interesting. I have to say, I didn't think Banneker was all that tough of an admit. I honestly thought they accepted nearly all their applicants and weren't like Walls.

DCUM certainly pushes that narrative.

I think it's harder than it used to be. My DD 7th is pining to go.

I actually think it's just that people used to say whatever they wanted about Banneker with zero first-hand information and it was mostly informed by racism. Now that the "DCUM" kind of people are priced out of privates and running out of spots at J-R and SWW, all of a sudden they're "taking a chance" on the school they considered themselves benevolent pioneers for even considering, only to find out . . . it's not a cakewalk just because it's full of black kids.

DCUM kind of people would never be priced out of privates. The problem is people who don't belong on DCUM are now on here.

omg what.

"people who don't belong" -- care to spell this out for us? race, class? Say what you mean (and take the consequences).

The people who are now priced out of privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the 50s at MVC8. Based on last years WL data, that would be fine for admission by August, but years prior not so much. I suspect that could be because last year, many folks who wanted MVC8 were placed for a year at JF Cook, and didn't want that, but I could be wrong. Any folks more in the know have insight on whether the WL this year will move?

+1 on this. We're right where they got to on last year's waitlist (70s) and wondering if the huge movement last year was a one off or likely to be replicated. Conscious that they've a new-building but not sure how that will factor in.

Glad to find someone else in a similar boat. Feeling pretty depressed today, as we were really hoping for this, and due to some new personal circumstances, our matched school is very difficult (if not impossible).

Unfortunately, I do not think they will go very far into the waitlist. You have a good shot at kindergarten. They open up a lot of seats. My daughter is in lower elementary and has a bunch of friends that started in kinder.