"Ineligible"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the parents with kids who applied to Banneker and Walls and did not get in, did they have 4.0? I’m wondering if my DC got ineligible due to GPA.

Not a 4.0 and accepted. DC had one A- at the end of 7th

[Anonymous]

Why not use a more intuitive word? Is rejection/decline too harsh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why not use a more intuitive word? Is rejection/decline too harsh?

This is exactly my question. They use a word that makes you think there's an error--how can my child be ineligible when they had good grades and had an interview? If what they really mean is rejected, I wish they would just say that.

[Anonymous]

I agree.

Anonymous wrote:

This is exactly my question. They use a word that makes you think there's an error--how can my child be ineligible when they had good grades and had an interview? If what they really mean is rejected, I wish they would just say that.

[Anonymous]

For high school, it seems like the test-in spots available far exceed the A students who are applying to get in. We have no back-up plan - can’t afford private, not able to move, and inbound school is last option (tempted to say not an option). Not sure what to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For high school, it seems like the test-in spots available far exceed the A students who are applying to get in. We have no back-up plan - can’t afford private, not able to move, and inbound school is last option (tempted to say not an option). Not sure what to do.

Same situation over here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not use a more intuitive word? Is rejection/decline too harsh?

This is exactly my question. They use a word that makes you think there's an error--how can my child be ineligible when they had good grades and had an interview? If what they really mean is rejected, I wish they would just say that.

Right like you live outside of the boundary or some other technicality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For high school, it seems like the test-in spots available far exceed the A students who are applying to get in. We have no back-up plan - can’t afford private, not able to move, and inbound school is last option (tempted to say not an option). Not sure what to do.

Same situation over here.

I'm sorry you're in this situation, it sucks. I was really worried about this happening to us and it did. We have private Catholic HS as backup.

What about getting onto other high schools waitlists post lottery? Or did you apply to all the selective high schools already?

[Anonymous]

What are our chances for 9th DCI Chinese waitlisted at 19?

[Anonymous]

Oops. Sorry. Meant to post that in the other thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For high school, it seems like the test-in spots available far exceed the A students who are applying to get in. We have no back-up plan - can’t afford private, not able to move, and inbound school is last option (tempted to say not an option). Not sure what to do.

Do you have a high schooler? There is no test-in high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid got an interview and still got ineligible at Banneker. They're waitlisted at Walls. What would cause this after a successful process?

Sorry to hear. I guess the interview portion didn’t go well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid got an interview and still got ineligible at Banneker. They're waitlisted at Walls. What would cause this after a successful process?

Sorry to hear. I guess the interview portion didn’t go well?

Who the heck knows? My older kid goes to SWW (got in off the waitlist, but first got in to Banneker, child's second choice) after saying the interview went terribly. Younger kid didn't get in to Banneker or Walls after feeling good about the interviews.

In a non-transparent process, we have no idea what the schools were looking for. And we have a very disappointed 8th grader.

[Anonymous]

Going to once again plug McKinley Tech. You can apply now if it wasn’t on your original list and possibly get in over summer.

A 4.0 wouldn’t have been a deciding factor at Banneker.

[Anonymous]

My child had McKinley as first choice and didn’t get in after having an interview and a 3.9 with great recs.