LAMB lottery results

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just double checked from the year our child entered LAMB and all names were listed then. Add this to the list of If This Is Going To Bother You, Please Apply Elsewhere.

Or maybe they should do the common lottery.

Perhaps. But that is up to them to decide. They see advantages in staying out. Again if this bothers you ...

I didn't apply to LAMB, I'm at another charter. No skin in this game except the improvement of the process. The problem is when there is an issue with one of us, or a concern, we all look bad.

It IS up to your admin (according to DCPCSB) to manage your own process. But, you owe it to the rest of us not to screw it up.

I don't believe you for a second. There is nothing wrong with LAMB's process other than the fact that there are always too many people for too few spots. I totally get that. But I think you should be focusing your energies elsewhere, in a more positive way.

Agree. On top, full names should never have been posted.

Tax dollars to run a school are not an entitlement. They come with scrutiny

[Anonymous]

They've pulled the names off before I got to see where we are. Although I agree it shouldn't have been full names. But why not initials?
http://www.lambpcs.org/lottery-results/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They've pulled the names off before I got to see where we are. Although I agree it shouldn't have been full names. But why not initials?
http://www.lambpcs.org/lottery-results/

If you log in here, I'm sure someone will PM them to you.

[Anonymous]

I just called and they said everyone on the list posted over the weekend was wait listed. I thought people on DCUM said people who got in were on the list too but that is definitely not what I was told on the phone. I was also told that if people move over the summer they do not fill those spots with wait listed people (which seems crazy but that is a whole other topic).

They also to me that four pre-k 4 slots were available.

[Anonymous]

If anyone has the list and could email it to me, I'd appreciate it. Dying to know where we ranked. [e-mail]

[Anonymous]

I have the list saved. If you tell me your child's first name and last initial I'll look it up for you.

[Anonymous]

After all the grief they'll certainly receive from how they handled this year's lottery, I certainly hope LAMB makes it easy on themselves and joins the centralized lottery next year. Listing full names is questionable (although, I don't personally mind that much) and only making the list of waitlisted famlies public is also questionable. They shouldn't be only partially transparent. If I was in the top five on the waitlist, I sure as heck would want to know/see the names ahead of mine and what sort of preference, if any, they had. I just think if you want people to trust the results you have to be transparent.

[Anonymous]

Also to me the fact that they don't add new three and four year olds if people move seems crazy. They are funded with taxpayer money but seem to see no need to try to serve as many children as they can within the scale that is available to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After all the grief they'll certainly receive from how they handled this year's lottery, I certainly hope LAMB makes it easy on themselves and joins the centralized lottery next year. Listing full names is questionable (although, I don't personally mind that much) and only making the list of waitlisted famlies public is also questionable. They shouldn't be only partially transparent. If I was in the top five on the waitlist, I sure as heck would want to know/see the names ahead of mine and what sort of preference, if any, they had. I just think if you want people to trust the results you have to be transparent.

It's been common practice at charters not to post the accepted names. What is the point? If you've been accepted, you got a call or an email. The waitlist is posted so that those waitlisted can see where they are on the list. I think all parents would prefer our children's names and information to be put on the website as little as possible and for as short a time as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After all the grief they'll certainly receive from how they handled this year's lottery, I certainly hope LAMB makes it easy on themselves and joins the centralized lottery next year. Listing full names is questionable (although, I don't personally mind that much) and only making the list of waitlisted famlies public is also questionable. They shouldn't be only partially transparent. If I was in the top five on the waitlist, I sure as heck would want to know/see the names ahead of mine and what sort of preference, if any, they had. I just think if you want people to trust the results you have to be transparent.

It's been common practice at charters not to post the accepted names. What is the point? If you've been accepted, you got a call or an email. The waitlist is posted so that those waitlisted can see where they are on the list. I think all parents would prefer our children's names and information to be put on the website as little as possible and for as short a time as possible.

Meant to add, I'm sure there are times when charters did post accepted names, but there are many, many instances of them NOT posting them.

- 3 year lottery veteran

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just called and they said everyone on the list posted over the weekend was wait listed. I thought people on DCUM said people who got in were on the list too but that is definitely not what I was told on the phone. I was also told that if people move over the summer they do not fill those spots with wait listed people (which seems crazy but that is a whole other topic).

They also to me that four pre-k 4 slots were available.

No. For PK3, the first 27 on the list got calls and were in. I just called and they said they are now to number 30 on that initial list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just called and they said everyone on the list posted over the weekend was wait listed. I thought people on DCUM said people who got in were on the list too but that is definitely not what I was told on the phone. I was also told that if people move over the summer they do not fill those spots with wait listed people (which seems crazy but that is a whole other topic).

They also to me that four pre-k 4 slots were available.

No. For PK3, the first 27 on the list got calls and were in. I just called and they said they are now to number 30 on that initial list.

I really hope you are right because that would make me first on pre-k 4 list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just double checked from the year our child entered LAMB and all names were listed then. Add this to the list of If This Is Going To Bother You, Please Apply Elsewhere.

Or maybe they should do the common lottery.

Perhaps. But that is up to them to decide. They see advantages in staying out. Again if this bothers you ...

I didn't apply to LAMB, I'm at another charter. No skin in this game except the improvement of the process. The problem is when there is an issue with one of us, or a concern, we all look bad.

It IS up to your admin (according to DCPCSB) to manage your own process. But, you owe it to the rest of us not to screw it up.

I don't believe you for a second. There is nothing wrong with LAMB's process other than the fact that there are always too many people for too few spots. I totally get that. But I think you should be focusing your energies elsewhere, in a more positive way.

Are you involved in LAMB's lottery process? Can you vouch for the process? I'd love to hear more about the process they use if you are so confident that there are 100% no issues with it. Do they use a 3rd party computer system? Is it done in house? Can you tell us about the exact weighting system in order? Please provide the details so we can review it, since you are so certain about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just called and they said everyone on the list posted over the weekend was wait listed. I thought people on DCUM said people who got in were on the list too but that is definitely not what I was told on the phone. I was also told that if people move over the summer they do not fill those spots with wait listed people (which seems crazy but that is a whole other topic).

They also to me that four pre-k 4 slots were available.

No. For PK3, the first 27 on the list got calls and were in. I just called and they said they are now to number 30 on that initial list.

I really hope you are right because that would make me first on pre-k 4 list.

I think that is right because I have a friend in mid-20s that got a "you are in" call on Friday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just called and they said everyone on the list posted over the weekend was wait listed. I thought people on DCUM said people who got in were on the list too but that is definitely not what I was told on the phone. I was also told that if people move over the summer they do not fill those spots with wait listed people (which seems crazy but that is a whole other topic).

They also to me that four pre-k 4 slots were available.

No. For PK3, the first 27 on the list got calls and were in. I just called and they said they are now to number 30 on that initial list.

I really hope you are right because that would make me first on pre-k 4 list.

I think that is right because I have a friend in mid-20s that got a "you are in" call on Friday.

confirmed - we were in the top 27 on the list that was posted and got a call that we were in.