Lottery results are up

[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.

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.

The TAG increase is good too, for people interested in state schools.

[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.

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.

But it could be that 2000 students apply so that is 25% chance of acceptance where say 5 years ago only 1000 apply. I’m making up numbers but you get the point. Decrease chance of getting in even if absolute numbers attending the same,

[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

Is that really it — $7k?! Wow. How do they determine eligibility? Agree that’s not enough for people who truly need it

[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.

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.

But it could be that 2000 students apply so that is 25% chance of acceptance where say 5 years ago only 1000 apply. I’m making up numbers but you get the point. Decrease chance of getting in even if absolute numbers attending the same,

Underlying application totals and teenage population growth in Ward 3 neighborhoods have been stable enough that I think any change in this respect is likely on the margins.

[Anonymous]

Rising 4th grader
#3 Murch
#8 Shepherd

Any thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rising 4th grader
#3 Murch
#8 Shepherd

Any thoughts?

Look at the waitlist data. Neither school made any waitlist offers for 4th the last two years. I would say your chances are close to zero, and any chance you might have is going to come after the school year starts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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???????

I posted earlier on the thread - we’re waitlisted for K and 1st there. 1st number is terrible - K is #10 and I am crossing my fingers!! Historically, she should get a slot, I’m just worried it’ll be too late to pull in big brother.

Where are you matched?

[Anonymous]

My kid is #7 at ITD for fourth. Can’t seem to find waitlist data. Any help here? Predictions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid is #7 at ITD for fourth. Can’t seem to find waitlist data. Any help here? Predictions?

I’m a current parent of a 3rd grader at ITDS. There are usually 2-5 new kids in the grade every year. It seems like many of them have siblings that bump them
To the top of the list. But if there are people ahead of you who turn down spots, it could work!

I hope you make it! It’s a lovely community and cohort of kids and families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is #7 at ITD for fourth. Can’t seem to find waitlist data. Any help here? Predictions?

I’m a current parent of a 3rd grader at ITDS. There are usually 2-5 new kids in the grade every year. It seems like many of them have siblings that bump them
To the top of the list. But if there are people ahead of you who turn down spots, it could work!

I hope you make it! It’s a lovely community and cohort of kids and families.

Thanks so much for the info! I’m trying to manage expectations while staying hopeful. Thanks!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Waitlisted #15 at both Mann and Janney (no preference) for PK4. Based on historic waitlist movement, looks like we might have a chance at Mann. I'm in no way optimistic about Janney. Guess we'll see how things progress over the summer.

That said, we matched at Key for PK4 (no preference). Pleasantly surprised and excited about the match. I think our kid would be happy at Key, so no complaints on our end either way.

We are a Key IB family and we love it. It’s an amazing community. I’d put it on par with Mann and better than Janney. Welcome!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

We have a HHI less than that and got $0 in aid from a local Catholic HS. According to the financial aid office, our assets (home equality, savings, Roth/IRA etc.) worked against us in their formula. So specific circumstances matter.

[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: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

We have a HHI less than that and got $0 in aid from a local Catholic HS. According to the financial aid office, our assets (home equality, savings, Roth/IRA etc.) worked against us in their formula. So specific circumstances matter.

+1. HHI 200k and got into well known private discussed here and absolutely no FA. If you have any assets, they work against you.

I suspect PP above kid plays some type of sport school wanted.

[Anonymous]

i would guess multiple siblings. getting 45k in aid total.

[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).

Apparently, DCUM is the Harvard of discussion boards.