Lottery results are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

Ding ding ding!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

Look, I doubt it’s what was intended and it’s not necessarily good for Walls, but I think the unpredictable admissions at Walls have been good for the DC school landscape more broadly, and are also mostly good for individual students.

The fundamental policy problem with Walls is one that no admissions procedure can solve: there are more qualified students seeking a free college prep high school education in DC than there is room, physically, in the Walls facility.

The lack of predictability at Walls has forced families who previously assumed Walls was their future to think seriously about J-R, Latin, Basis, DCI, Banneker, Duke, MacArthur, and McKinley Tech as college-prep options. Eastern seems to be next in line. Some families have gone private or moved to the suburbs, but others attend these high schools, reinforcing their status as college prep pathways.

This constellation of smaller college-prep programs is good for the kids, too. Back in the 80s and 90s the prevailing idea was that all smart kids needed to be gathered together. But right now elite colleges limit the number of kids they take from each high school, so collecting all the high performers into one high school works against them for college admissions. (There is actually a thread going on the college board right now about this problem at TJ!) Gathering all the highest-testing kids together at Walls would make the 8th grade application/lottery season less stressful, but the present quasi-random approach gives us a better overall school system and better overall college outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

Look, I doubt it’s what was intended and it’s not necessarily good for Walls, but I think the unpredictable admissions at Walls have been good for the DC school landscape more broadly, and are also mostly good for individual students.

The fundamental policy problem with Walls is one that no admissions procedure can solve: there are more qualified students seeking a free college prep high school education in DC than there is room, physically, in the Walls facility.

The lack of predictability at Walls has forced families who previously assumed Walls was their future to think seriously about J-R, Latin, Basis, DCI, Banneker, Duke, MacArthur, and McKinley Tech as college-prep options. Eastern seems to be next in line. Some families have gone private or moved to the suburbs, but others attend these high schools, reinforcing their status as college prep pathways.

This constellation of smaller college-prep programs is good for the kids, too. Back in the 80s and 90s the prevailing idea was that all smart kids needed to be gathered together. But right now elite colleges limit the number of kids they take from each high school, so collecting all the high performers into one high school works against them for college admissions. (There is actually a thread going on the college board right now about this problem at TJ!) Gathering all the highest-testing kids together at Walls would make the 8th grade application/lottery season less stressful, but the present quasi-random approach gives us a better overall school system and better overall college outcomes.

If my kid's test scores meant she would definitely get into Walls or Banneker, I would be much more likely to put her in our zoned middle school rather than keeping her at BASIS, which is ok but not a great fit. That you have to either leave DCPS in 5th grade for charters or move to JR to guarantee your advanced kid a school with a significant number of students at grade level is not actually a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

Look, I doubt it’s what was intended and it’s not necessarily good for Walls, but I think the unpredictable admissions at Walls have been good for the DC school landscape more broadly, and are also mostly good for individual students.

The fundamental policy problem with Walls is one that no admissions procedure can solve: there are more qualified students seeking a free college prep high school education in DC than there is room, physically, in the Walls facility.

The lack of predictability at Walls has forced families who previously assumed Walls was their future to think seriously about J-R, Latin, Basis, DCI, Banneker, Duke, MacArthur, and McKinley Tech as college-prep options. Eastern seems to be next in line. Some families have gone private or moved to the suburbs, but others attend these high schools, reinforcing their status as college prep pathways.

This constellation of smaller college-prep programs is good for the kids, too. Back in the 80s and 90s the prevailing idea was that all smart kids needed to be gathered together. But right now elite colleges limit the number of kids they take from each high school, so collecting all the high performers into one high school works against them for college admissions. (There is actually a thread going on the college board right now about this problem at TJ!) Gathering all the highest-testing kids together at Walls would make the 8th grade application/lottery season less stressful, but the present quasi-random approach gives us a better overall school system and better overall college outcomes.

If my kid's test scores meant she would definitely get into Walls or Banneker, I would be much more likely to put her in our zoned middle school rather than keeping her at BASIS, which is ok but not a great fit. That you have to either leave DCPS in 5th grade for charters or move to JR to guarantee your advanced kid a school with a significant number of students at grade level is not actually a good thing.

I agree with the earlier poster that you’re responding to that the landscape is changing and that’s a good thing. If Eastern really is next in line, that becomes transformational for a lot of people in this city. I disagree that you have to leave DCPS for charters in 5th, and a considerable number of Hill families increasingly feel that way. Do many/most still try to lottery for charters? Probably. But more enroll in their IB MS now if that doesn’t happen. As I think has been said, I’m not sure many kids are striking out on ALL select HSs right now, but if success is defined as just SWW or SWW/Banneker, there aren’t enough slots to make that a guarantee—and I agree with the earlier poster that ultimately that’s a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

Look, I doubt it’s what was intended and it’s not necessarily good for Walls, but I think the unpredictable admissions at Walls have been good for the DC school landscape more broadly, and are also mostly good for individual students.

The fundamental policy problem with Walls is one that no admissions procedure can solve: there are more qualified students seeking a free college prep high school education in DC than there is room, physically, in the Walls facility.

The lack of predictability at Walls has forced families who previously assumed Walls was their future to think seriously about J-R, Latin, Basis, DCI, Banneker, Duke, MacArthur, and McKinley Tech as college-prep options. Eastern seems to be next in line. Some families have gone private or moved to the suburbs, but others attend these high schools, reinforcing their status as college prep pathways.

This constellation of smaller college-prep programs is good for the kids, too. Back in the 80s and 90s the prevailing idea was that all smart kids needed to be gathered together. But right now elite colleges limit the number of kids they take from each high school, so collecting all the high performers into one high school works against them for college admissions. (There is actually a thread going on the college board right now about this problem at TJ!) Gathering all the highest-testing kids together at Walls would make the 8th grade application/lottery season less stressful, but the present quasi-random approach gives us a better overall school system and better overall college outcomes.

If my kid's test scores meant she would definitely get into Walls or Banneker, I would be much more likely to put her in our zoned middle school rather than keeping her at BASIS, which is ok but not a great fit. That you have to either leave DCPS in 5th grade for charters or move to JR to guarantee your advanced kid a school with a significant number of students at grade level is not actually a good thing.

I agree with the earlier poster that you’re responding to that the landscape is changing and that’s a good thing. If Eastern really is next in line, that becomes transformational for a lot of people in this city. I disagree that you have to leave DCPS for charters in 5th, and a considerable number of Hill families increasingly feel that way. Do many/most still try to lottery for charters? Probably. But more enroll in their IB MS now if that doesn’t happen. As I think has been said, I’m not sure many kids are striking out on ALL select HSs right now, but if success is defined as just SWW or SWW/Banneker, there aren’t enough slots to make that a guarantee—and I agree with the earlier poster that ultimately that’s a good thing.

McKinley Tech and Ellington are specialized high schools that represent a successful outcome if your kid is focused on STEM or the arts. Ellington has always been a good outcome in that respect. McKinley is shifting in the minds of UMC parents. I'm not sure if that's positive or not, if it pushes out the kids it's serving now, but it is a shift.

But Eastern is wishful thinking. 3% of students last year tested proficient in math, and no, it's not because they're coming in already having taken geometry. The UMC Hill families sticking around through middle school overwhelmingly do not send their kids there and there's no sign of that changing.

And the problem with the current process isn't the number of slots, it's the total lack of ability to plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Financial aid is so generous at DMV private schools I wonder who is actually priced out.

Not at the best independent schools. $7k discount off $61k generally does not make this workable for most people who need to ask.

Catholic “privates” are, of course a different category and have bigger gifts, due to their mission

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

You need to factor in the total applicants from wards and it has been increasing in all wards so total accepted with increasing numbers have decreased in ward 3 and increased in other wards

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

You need to factor in the total applicants from wards and it has been increasing in all wards so total accepted with increasing numbers have decreased in ward 3 and increased in other wards

219 students in Wilson boundary attended SWW in SY19-20.

242 students in JR and MacArthur boundaries attended SWW in SY24-25.

[Anonymous]

We are inboundary for Garrison and number 9 on the waitlist. Prek3. Looks like they let 15 kids in by end of summer last year… any one else on garrison Waitlist???????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Financial aid is so generous at DMV private schools I wonder who is actually priced out.

Not at the best independent schools. $7k discount off $61k generally does not make this workable for most people who need to ask.

Catholic “privates” are, of course a different category and have bigger gifts, due to their mission

Someone just posted on another thread that they are getting 45k of aid at a Big 3 with a HHI of 300k

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

Look, I doubt it’s what was intended and it’s not necessarily good for Walls, but I think the unpredictable admissions at Walls have been good for the DC school landscape more broadly, and are also mostly good for individual students.

The fundamental policy problem with Walls is one that no admissions procedure can solve: there are more qualified students seeking a free college prep high school education in DC than there is room, physically, in the Walls facility.

The lack of predictability at Walls has forced families who previously assumed Walls was their future to think seriously about J-R, Latin, Basis, DCI, Banneker, Duke, MacArthur, and McKinley Tech as college-prep options. Eastern seems to be next in line. Some families have gone private or moved to the suburbs, but others attend these high schools, reinforcing their status as college prep pathways.

This constellation of smaller college-prep programs is good for the kids, too. Back in the 80s and 90s the prevailing idea was that all smart kids needed to be gathered together. But right now elite colleges limit the number of kids they take from each high school, so collecting all the high performers into one high school works against them for college admissions. (There is actually a thread going on the college board right now about this problem at TJ!) Gathering all the highest-testing kids together at Walls would make the 8th grade application/lottery season less stressful, but the present quasi-random approach gives us a better overall school system and better overall college outcomes.

If my kid's test scores meant she would definitely get into Walls or Banneker, I would be much more likely to put her in our zoned middle school rather than keeping her at BASIS, which is ok but not a great fit. That you have to either leave DCPS in 5th grade for charters or move to JR to guarantee your advanced kid a school with a significant number of students at grade level is not actually a good thing.

I agree with the earlier poster that you’re responding to that the landscape is changing and that’s a good thing. If Eastern really is next in line, that becomes transformational for a lot of people in this city. I disagree that you have to leave DCPS for charters in 5th, and a considerable number of Hill families increasingly feel that way. Do many/most still try to lottery for charters? Probably. But more enroll in their IB MS now if that doesn’t happen. As I think has been said, I’m not sure many kids are striking out on ALL select HSs right now, but if success is defined as just SWW or SWW/Banneker, there aren’t enough slots to make that a guarantee—and I agree with the earlier poster that ultimately that’s a good thing.

McKinley Tech and Ellington are specialized high schools that represent a successful outcome if your kid is focused on STEM or the arts. Ellington has always been a good outcome in that respect. McKinley is shifting in the minds of UMC parents. I'm not sure if that's positive or not, if it pushes out the kids it's serving now, but it is a shift.

But Eastern is wishful thinking. 3% of students last year tested proficient in math, and no, it's not because they're coming in already having taken geometry. The UMC Hill families sticking around through middle school overwhelmingly do not send their kids there and there's no sign of that changing.

And the problem with the current process isn't the number of slots, it's the total lack of ability to plan.

Not true based on what I've been hearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

Look, I doubt it’s what was intended and it’s not necessarily good for Walls, but I think the unpredictable admissions at Walls have been good for the DC school landscape more broadly, and are also mostly good for individual students.

The fundamental policy problem with Walls is one that no admissions procedure can solve: there are more qualified students seeking a free college prep high school education in DC than there is room, physically, in the Walls facility.

The lack of predictability at Walls has forced families who previously assumed Walls was their future to think seriously about J-R, Latin, Basis, DCI, Banneker, Duke, MacArthur, and McKinley Tech as college-prep options. Eastern seems to be next in line. Some families have gone private or moved to the suburbs, but others attend these high schools, reinforcing their status as college prep pathways.

This constellation of smaller college-prep programs is good for the kids, too. Back in the 80s and 90s the prevailing idea was that all smart kids needed to be gathered together. But right now elite colleges limit the number of kids they take from each high school, so collecting all the high performers into one high school works against them for college admissions. (There is actually a thread going on the college board right now about this problem at TJ!) Gathering all the highest-testing kids together at Walls would make the 8th grade application/lottery season less stressful, but the present quasi-random approach gives us a better overall school system and better overall college outcomes.

If my kid's test scores meant she would definitely get into Walls or Banneker, I would be much more likely to put her in our zoned middle school rather than keeping her at BASIS, which is ok but not a great fit. That you have to either leave DCPS in 5th grade for charters or move to JR to guarantee your advanced kid a school with a significant number of students at grade level is not actually a good thing.

I agree with the earlier poster that you’re responding to that the landscape is changing and that’s a good thing. If Eastern really is next in line, that becomes transformational for a lot of people in this city. I disagree that you have to leave DCPS for charters in 5th, and a considerable number of Hill families increasingly feel that way. Do many/most still try to lottery for charters? Probably. But more enroll in their IB MS now if that doesn’t happen. As I think has been said, I’m not sure many kids are striking out on ALL select HSs right now, but if success is defined as just SWW or SWW/Banneker, there aren’t enough slots to make that a guarantee—and I agree with the earlier poster that ultimately that’s a good thing.

McKinley Tech and Ellington are specialized high schools that represent a successful outcome if your kid is focused on STEM or the arts. Ellington has always been a good outcome in that respect. McKinley is shifting in the minds of UMC parents. I'm not sure if that's positive or not, if it pushes out the kids it's serving now, but it is a shift.

But Eastern is wishful thinking. 3% of students last year tested proficient in math, and no, it's not because they're coming in already having taken geometry. The UMC Hill families sticking around through middle school overwhelmingly do not send their kids there and there's no sign of that changing.

And the problem with the current process isn't the number of slots, it's the total lack of ability to plan.

Not true based on what I've been hearing.

The boundary participation rate and number of students attending from in boundary has been pretty flat over time. Anywhere from 15-20% since SY19-20, 16% in SY24-25. Enrollment jumped up to 21 white students in SY22-23 but is still just 25 this year. At-risk percentage was 79% in SY22-23, down to 68% SY24-25, 68% again in SY25-26.

So a bit of momentum, yeah, but unclear if it will continue to build on itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

The difference is that Walls puts every kid they interview but who doesn't match on a waitlist. And then that waitlist moves some amount over the summer/fall.

Banneker (and McKinley) have historically not maintained a waitlist - so they match the kids they match and no one else gets in.

More transparency in all of the selective high school application review processes would be very valuable, but DCPS doesn't want it so it won't happen.

One has to wonder why DCPS doesn’t want transparency.

Isn’t it obvious? Equity people.

I’m actually not sure if that’s it. But there is something super shady about the process.

Well the city actually said they wanted more kids from wards that were under-represented at Walls when they dropped the test. They actually sent people out to schools in ward 7 and 8 to tell the kids to apply.

But Walls didn’t actually wind up enrolling more kids from Wards 7 and 8. The Post did a story on it. What they have is a system that enrolls a wildly disproportionate number of kids from Deal, Hardy, and the Hill, but is unpredictable about which of those kids it takes.

I would suggest relooking at recent data because a lot less kids are getting in from ward 3.

The Hill is not Ward 3. And lots of kids at Deal and Hardy don’t live in Ward 3. Where are the stats on students enrolled in the school by Ward over the past several years?

Students IB for each HS as a percent of total SWW student body SY19-20 to SY24-25
J-R 37% to 33%
MacArthur NA to 7%
Eastern 22% to 16%
Dunbar 9% to 10%
Cardozo 8% to 7%
Coolidge 6% to 7%
Roosevelt 5% to 8%
Anacostia 4% to 4%
Ballou 4% to 4%
Woodson 3% to 4%

So minimal/no change for Wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, more students from Wards 3 and 4, fewer students from Ward 6.

You can also look at SWW students as a percent of total students living in each boundary*. From SY19-20 to SY24-25
Anacostia 1% to 1%
Ballou 1% to 1%
Cardozo 4% to 2%
Coolidge 3% to 2%
Dunbar 3% to 2%
Eastern 9% to 5%
Woodson 1% to 1%
JR 13% to 11%
MacArthur NA to 11%
Roosevelt 2% to 2%

*It's hard to make too many conclusions from this because these numbers only draw from the population that actually ended up at a DC public or charter school for HS.

Hmmmm at least directionally this shows the same pattern you see from other selective schools dropping entrance exams. You don’t get more representation from underrepresented neighborhoods, basically, and sometimes less.

Look, I doubt it’s what was intended and it’s not necessarily good for Walls, but I think the unpredictable admissions at Walls have been good for the DC school landscape more broadly, and are also mostly good for individual students.

The fundamental policy problem with Walls is one that no admissions procedure can solve: there are more qualified students seeking a free college prep high school education in DC than there is room, physically, in the Walls facility.

The lack of predictability at Walls has forced families who previously assumed Walls was their future to think seriously about J-R, Latin, Basis, DCI, Banneker, Duke, MacArthur, and McKinley Tech as college-prep options. Eastern seems to be next in line. Some families have gone private or moved to the suburbs, but others attend these high schools, reinforcing their status as college prep pathways.

This constellation of smaller college-prep programs is good for the kids, too. Back in the 80s and 90s the prevailing idea was that all smart kids needed to be gathered together. But right now elite colleges limit the number of kids they take from each high school, so collecting all the high performers into one high school works against them for college admissions. (There is actually a thread going on the college board right now about this problem at TJ!) Gathering all the highest-testing kids together at Walls would make the 8th grade application/lottery season less stressful, but the present quasi-random approach gives us a better overall school system and better overall college outcomes.

Probably the best thing in terms of college admissions for DCPS parents was student for fair admissions v. Harvard. It gives you a HUGE incentive to stay in DCPS as schools are using ZIP and historical data as a proxy.