Walls test today

[Anonymous]

And when they get to the interview round, the slate is wiped clean.

A student who got a 98% on the entrance exam has no better chance of admission than someone who got a 75%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

I get that it is more inclusive. What I don't get is PP's assertion that it somehow leaves out better qualified applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

The cut off is not arbitrary, it is set by the top 250 scorers (or 255 if it is not a clean break). If the above numbers are accurate, 55 is a perfect score and the lowest score by anyone in the top 250 scores was 40. This is what I was told by the admissions person at the open house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And when they get to the interview round, the slate is wiped clean.

A student who got a 98% on the entrance exam has no better chance of admission than someone who got a 75%.

What is your basis for saying the slate is wiped clean at the interview round? Grades and PARCC scores only matter to sit for the test. I have not read or heard anywhere the statement about the interviews that you make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

I get that it is more inclusive. What I don't get is PP's assertion that it somehow leaves out better qualified applicants.

PP meant that the whole process leaves out better-qualified applicants, since someone scoring in the lower end of the range may be admitted over someone toward the higher end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And when they get to the interview round, the slate is wiped clean.

A student who got a 98% on the entrance exam has no better chance of admission than someone who got a 75%.

What is your basis for saying the slate is wiped clean at the interview round? Grades and PARCC scores only matter to sit for the test. I have not read or heard anywhere the statement about the interviews that you make.

Stated at an open house.

They presume that everyone in the top 250 is capable of succeeding at Walls. They choose among those 250.

Your MS GPA, your PARCC scores (which had to be 4s) and how exactly you did on the admissions test only matters in determining if you reach the interview stage. Then they pick the admitted students based on the interview and 'fit' and create a ranked wait list for those not in the top ~120.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

The cut off is not arbitrary, it is set by the top 250 scorers (or 255 if it is not a clean break). If the above numbers are accurate, 55 is a perfect score and the lowest score by anyone in the top 250 scores was 40. This is what I was told by the admissions person at the open house.

The cutoff could just as easily be 200 as it is 250-255.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

I get that it is more inclusive. What I don't get is PP's assertion that it somehow leaves out better qualified applicants.

PP meant that the whole process leaves out better-qualified applicants, since someone scoring in the lower end of the range may be admitted over someone toward the higher end.

So, just like any private school or university, whether private or public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

The cut off is not arbitrary, it is set by the top 250 scorers (or 255 if it is not a clean break). If the above numbers are accurate, 55 is a perfect score and the lowest score by anyone in the top 250 scores was 40. This is what I was told by the admissions person at the open house.

The cutoff could just as easily be 200 as it is 250-255.

Yield matters here. SWW has gone somewhere between 50-70 into the waitlist the last several years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

The cut off is not arbitrary, it is set by the top 250 scorers (or 255 if it is not a clean break). If the above numbers are accurate, 55 is a perfect score and the lowest score by anyone in the top 250 scores was 40. This is what I was told by the admissions person at the open house.

The cutoff could just as easily be 200 as it is 250-255.

Yield matters here. SWW has gone somewhere between 50-70 into the waitlist the last several years.

But what is the point of all of this if they are admitting students who score a low 70% on the entrance exam? That's really low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

The cut off is not arbitrary, it is set by the top 250 scorers (or 255 if it is not a clean break). If the above numbers are accurate, 55 is a perfect score and the lowest score by anyone in the top 250 scores was 40. This is what I was told by the admissions person at the open house.

The cutoff could just as easily be 200 as it is 250-255.

Yield matters here. SWW has gone somewhere between 50-70 into the waitlist the last several years.

But what is the point of all of this if they are admitting students who score a low 70% on the entrance exam? That's really low.

Because they have to hit enrollment numbers set by DCPS. Or their budget will be cut. Lots of the highest scoring students choose other schools so they need a long waitlist.

[Anonymous]

The cutoff could just as easily be 200 as it is 250-255.

Yield matters here. SWW has gone somewhere between 50-70 into the waitlist the last several years.

But what is the point of all of this if they are admitting students who score a low 70% on the entrance exam? That's really low.

Let's do some statistical modeling here.

Let's assume the distribution of grades is approximately normal (bell shaped distribution).

I would argue that a reasonable lower bound on the grades is around 15 points (that would mean getting correct about one out of four questions, probably just random guessing at the answers would yield such a score).

So the average score would be around 35 points and the standard deviation is about 6 points.

A cutoff grade of 40 points would let pass about 20% of the students. If 1200 students took the test, that is about 240 students.

A cutoff grade of 41 points would let pass about 16% of the students

So, if the cutoff were increased by one point from 40 to 41, about 4% of the students would not have passed. If 1200 students took the test, that is about 48 students.


In other words, to pass the top 200 students (instead of the top 250 students) would translate into raising the cutoff by one point (certainly not by several points).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For what it's worth, SWW test has a possible top score of 55. Any kid scoring above a 40 got an interview.

Exactly.

And it is so by design -- the school and DCPS want plenty of leeway to select both well-qualified students with more questionable ones (while leaving some better qualified out)

How does a hard cutoff leave some "better qualified out?" The tests are also graded blind from what I was told by SWW staff in prior years. (No names, ward, sex, race info. to the graders).

I don't think that's what PP meant. SWW could set the cutoff score higher (40 out of 55 = 72%, a low bar). But making the interview cutoff an 80 or 85% could result in a less diverse interview pool (ward, gender, race, feeder/charter school) which SWW seems to want to avoid.

The cut off is not arbitrary, it is set by the top 250 scorers (or 255 if it is not a clean break). If the above numbers are accurate, 55 is a perfect score and the lowest score by anyone in the top 250 scores was 40. This is what I was told by the admissions person at the open house.

The cutoff could just as easily be 200 as it is 250-255.

Yield matters here. SWW has gone somewhere between 50-70 into the waitlist the last several years.

But what is the point of all of this if they are admitting students who score a low 70% on the entrance exam? That's really low.

Because they have to hit enrollment numbers set by DCPS. Or their budget will be cut. Lots of the highest scoring students choose other schools so they need a long waitlist.

With fewer students, they wouldn't need as much budget.

[Anonymous]

Overhead (“lights on”, admin expenses, etc) remain largely the same regardless of number of students. Also, it’s not easy to cut teachers proportionally unless you are always able to cut an entire teacher’s load and redistribute the kids perfectly. This is tough when it comes to proper certifications and expertise, especially in the Sciences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Overhead (“lights on”, admin expenses, etc) remain largely the same regardless of number of students. Also, it’s not easy to cut teachers proportionally unless you are always able to cut an entire teacher’s load and redistribute the kids perfectly. This is tough when it comes to proper certifications and expertise, especially in the Sciences.

+100

And DCPS sets a specific number of students they want Walls to have. It's not optional for the school to choose an arbitrary number.