Common Lottery Algorithm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The main thing EVERY family doing the common lottery this year needs to understand is this:

Research your choices and make sure our #1 is really the school you would be happiest with if you got in. You ranking it #1 will affect both your chances of actually getting any available lottery slots, as well as your position on the waitlist. And rank in your true rank order.

Can we all at least agree that that is the approach families should take to ranking their 12 choices?

I am the PP who said that if the Denver system is adopted, there is a real incentive for families not to rank in the true rank order and instead to think strategically about what schools should be listed early on.

[Anonymous]

PLEASE, there is NO weight assigned to your ranking! Those awful FAQs are deceptively vague on this. The reason they tell you to rank in order of preference is simply because you will drop off of the ones below.

I can't vouch for if or why the people answering the phones at the common lottery are giving out misinformation, but I think it must be because they don't understand it themselves. Hopefully there will be more information forthcoming from DME for those who want to understand the exact algorithm.

[Anonymous]

I think the one thing we can all agree on is that the DME office needs to be very clear on how this all will work!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main thing EVERY family doing the common lottery this year needs to understand is this:

Research your choices and make sure our #1 is really the school you would be happiest with if you got in. You ranking it #1 will affect both your chances of actually getting any available lottery slots, as well as your position on the waitlist. And rank in your true rank order.

Can we all at least agree that that is the approach families should take to ranking their 12 choices?

I am the PP who said that if the Denver system is adopted, there is a real incentive for families not to rank in the true rank order and instead to think strategically about what schools should be listed early on.

I have been researching this a lot (am the one who posted the links from Denver and New Orleans- found them on the site of the non-profit that's running this). I vaguely remember reading somewhere that if your first choices are full, say your top 3, your 4th choice is considered your number 1 choice now, because you still haven't been matched. So then you will be equivalent with those who ranked that school number 1. But can't remember where I saw that, and can't find it now. But it would make sense to prevent trying to game the system. Everything I have read says that these models prevent gaming, which I take to be pretty much gospel because these researchers are experts on game theory, and many of the papers specifically discuss these issues.

[Anonymous]

In previous years DCPS has hosted live audio conferences/webinars to answer lottery questions. Why haven't there been any this time when the lottery is every more confusing?! Did they host them and I missed it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PLEASE, there is NO weight assigned to your ranking! Those awful FAQs are deceptively vague on this. The reason they tell you to rank in order of preference is simply because you will drop off of the ones below.

I can't vouch for if or why the people answering the phones at the common lottery are giving out misinformation, but I think it must be because they don't understand it themselves. Hopefully there will be more information forthcoming from DME for those who want to understand the exact algorithm.

Okay, assuming this is true and not just conjecture, where are you getting your information?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main thing EVERY family doing the common lottery this year needs to understand is this:

Research your choices and make sure our #1 is really the school you would be happiest with if you got in. You ranking it #1 will affect both your chances of actually getting any available lottery slots, as well as your position on the waitlist. And rank in your true rank order.

Can we all at least agree that that is the approach families should take to ranking their 12 choices?

I am the PP who said that if the Denver system is adopted, there is a real incentive for families not to rank in the true rank order and instead to think strategically about what schools should be listed early on.

But in a way, since you would be stuck with that school if you got in and placed it 1st (and would be out of running for any other schools), in a way you're allowing that to be your first choice (after you take everything into consideration). You're basically saying "This is the school we think we have the best shot at and would be happy with". What is wrong with prioritizing that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main thing EVERY family doing the common lottery this year needs to understand is this:

Research your choices and make sure our #1 is really the school you would be happiest with if you got in. You ranking it #1 will affect both your chances of actually getting any available lottery slots, as well as your position on the waitlist. And rank in your true rank order.

Can we all at least agree that that is the approach families should take to ranking their 12 choices?

I am the PP who said that if the Denver system is adopted, there is a real incentive for families not to rank in the true rank order and instead to think strategically about what schools should be listed early on.

But in a way, since you would be stuck with that school if you got in and placed it 1st (and would be out of running for any other schools), in a way you're allowing that to be your first choice (after you take everything into consideration). You're basically saying "This is the school we think we have the best shot at and would be happy with". What is wrong with prioritizing that?

There's nothing wrong with it, and I will certainly be strategic in making my selections if necessary. But if they system wants to maximize people getting into their top choices, and people aren't honest about their top choices, then it seems like a real problem. I know when I talked to the DME office about it, they emphasized that they wanted a system where people would offer their true preferences in the ranking and not feel they had to be strategic. This is why I don't think they are going to do it exactly the way Denver does it, unless there is, as PP said, a mathematical way that they get rid of the incentive to reorder your preferences strategically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PLEASE, there is NO weight assigned to your ranking! Those awful FAQs are deceptively vague on this. The reason they tell you to rank in order of preference is simply because you will drop off of the ones below.

I can't vouch for if or why the people answering the phones at the common lottery are giving out misinformation, but I think it must be because they don't understand it themselves. Hopefully there will be more information forthcoming from DME for those who want to understand the exact algorithm.

You need to call the Common Lottery people yourself, right now, and ask them if it's true that "no weight will be assigned to my ranking?", because I just got off the phone with them and you are completely, 100% WRONG! And you need to STOP. SAYING. THIS!

I just got off the phone with them, and asked really specific questions, and she understood and was able to explain and answer my questions, and give examples just fine.

Here is what she said:

There are 2 factors that the lottery algorithm will weight in matching students to schools:
1. How you ranked each school
2. Your particular child's preferences (i.e. sibling preference at any school, or in bound preference for a PS or PK inbound school)

The computer will try to match those with double advantage (i.e. you ranked the school 1st and you have sibling preference 1st) first, and then go down the line. HOWEVER, since the computer is doing this with thousands of applications at once, it is possible that someone who ranked a popular school #2 but has sibling preference at that school could get a spot before someone else who ranked the same school #1 but has no sibling preference.

In other words, it's not as simple as "everyone who ranks the school #1 will be considered 1st, then everyone who ranked it #2", because people with siblings at a given school are also weighted over those with no siblings.

So, once again, IT MATTERS HOW YOU RANK THE SCHOOLS. And even though she wouldn't go as far as saying ranking a majorly popular school #2 if you don't have siblings there is as good as accepting that you won't get in, it sounds like it's a good bet that's true.

PP that I quoted, either call the Common Lottery yourself and then come back and explain how no weight is assigned to ranking, or shut up. It is irresponsible to assert that so strongly when according to this 3rd Common Lottery staff person I've spoken to who confirmed that the computer WILL WEIGHT BASED ON RANKING (and sibling preference or inbound for PS/PK) (because I have asked this same question, but with less detail before, 2 other times on 2 other occaisions).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main thing EVERY family doing the common lottery this year needs to understand is this:

Research your choices and make sure our #1 is really the school you would be happiest with if you got in. You ranking it #1 will affect both your chances of actually getting any available lottery slots, as well as your position on the waitlist. And rank in your true rank order.

Can we all at least agree that that is the approach families should take to ranking their 12 choices?

I am the PP who said that if the Denver system is adopted, there is a real incentive for families not to rank in the true rank order and instead to think strategically about what schools should be listed early on.

But in a way, since you would be stuck with that school if you got in and placed it 1st (and would be out of running for any other schools), in a way you're allowing that to be your first choice (after you take everything into consideration). You're basically saying "This is the school we think we have the best shot at and would be happy with". What is wrong with prioritizing that?

There's nothing wrong with it, and I will certainly be strategic in making my selections if necessary. But if they system wants to maximize people getting into their top choices, and people aren't honest about their top choices, then it seems like a real problem. I know when I talked to the DME office about it, they emphasized that they wanted a system where people would offer their true preferences in the ranking and not feel they had to be strategic. This is why I don't think they are going to do it exactly the way Denver does it, unless there is, as PP said, a mathematical way that they get rid of the incentive to reorder your preferences strategically.

I guess I'm taking issue with the idea of "being honest about your top choice". It's kind of like people who adore Cap City but live all the way across DC and say "Yes, that would be my 1st choice, but no way am I making that commute twice a day". If they put a closer school as #1, are they "not being honest about their top choice", or are they just taking all the factors they care about into consideration and coming up with their top choice based on that?

I think if it's the school you feel best about both having a chance at and being fine/thrilled with going to, it doesn't make sense to say "that's not honestly your top choice". We are all calculating a lot of factors into which schools we prioritize, and likelihood of getting in is a huge one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PLEASE, there is NO weight assigned to your ranking! Those awful FAQs are deceptively vague on this. The reason they tell you to rank in order of preference is simply because you will drop off of the ones below.

I can't vouch for if or why the people answering the phones at the common lottery are giving out misinformation, but I think it must be because they don't understand it themselves. Hopefully there will be more information forthcoming from DME for those who want to understand the exact algorithm.

You need to call the Common Lottery people yourself, right now, and ask them if it's true that "no weight will be assigned to my ranking?", because I just got off the phone with them and you are completely, 100% WRONG! And you need to STOP. SAYING. THIS!

I just got off the phone with them, and asked really specific questions, and she understood and was able to explain and answer my questions, and give examples just fine.

Here is what she said:

There are 2 factors that the lottery algorithm will weight in matching students to schools:
1. How you ranked each school
2. Your particular child's preferences (i.e. sibling preference at any school, or in bound preference for a PS or PK inbound school)

The computer will try to match those with double advantage (i.e. you ranked the school 1st and you have sibling preference 1st) first, and then go down the line. HOWEVER, since the computer is doing this with thousands of applications at once, it is possible that someone who ranked a popular school #2 but has sibling preference at that school could get a spot before someone else who ranked the same school #1 but has no sibling preference.

In other words, it's not as simple as "everyone who ranks the school #1 will be considered 1st, then everyone who ranked it #2", because people with siblings at a given school are also weighted over those with no siblings.

So, once again, IT MATTERS HOW YOU RANK THE SCHOOLS. And even though she wouldn't go as far as saying ranking a majorly popular school #2 if you don't have siblings there is as good as accepting that you won't get in, it sounds like it's a good bet that's true.

PP that I quoted, either call the Common Lottery yourself and then come back and explain how no weight is assigned to ranking, or shut up. It is irresponsible to assert that so strongly when according to this 3rd Common Lottery staff person I've spoken to who confirmed that the computer WILL WEIGHT BASED ON RANKING (and sibling preference or inbound for PS/PK) (because I have asked this same question, but with less detail before, 2 other times on 2 other occaisions).

On sibling preference, likewise, someone ranking the school #1 but with no sibling preference could get a spot over someone ranking the same school #2 but with sibling preference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PLEASE, there is NO weight assigned to your ranking! Those awful FAQs are deceptively vague on this. The reason they tell you to rank in order of preference is simply because you will drop off of the ones below.

I can't vouch for if or why the people answering the phones at the common lottery are giving out misinformation, but I think it must be because they don't understand it themselves. Hopefully there will be more information forthcoming from DME for those who want to understand the exact algorithm.

You need to call the Common Lottery people yourself, right now, and ask them if it's true that "no weight will be assigned to my ranking?", because I just got off the phone with them and you are completely, 100% WRONG! And you need to STOP. SAYING. THIS!

I just got off the phone with them, and asked really specific questions, and she understood and was able to explain and answer my questions, and give examples just fine.

Here is what she said:

There are 2 factors that the lottery algorithm will weight in matching students to schools:
1. How you ranked each school
2. Your particular child's preferences (i.e. sibling preference at any school, or in bound preference for a PS or PK inbound school)

The computer will try to match those with double advantage (i.e. you ranked the school 1st and you have sibling preference 1st) first, and then go down the line. HOWEVER, since the computer is doing this with thousands of applications at once, it is possible that someone who ranked a popular school #2 but has sibling preference at that school could get a spot before someone else who ranked the same school #1 but has no sibling preference.

In other words, it's not as simple as "everyone who ranks the school #1 will be considered 1st, then everyone who ranked it #2", because people with siblings at a given school are also weighted over those with no siblings.

So, once again, IT MATTERS HOW YOU RANK THE SCHOOLS. And even though she wouldn't go as far as saying ranking a majorly popular school #2 if you don't have siblings there is as good as accepting that you won't get in, it sounds like it's a good bet that's true.

PP that I quoted, either call the Common Lottery yourself and then come back and explain how no weight is assigned to ranking, or shut up. It is irresponsible to assert that so strongly when according to this 3rd Common Lottery staff person I've spoken to who confirmed that the computer WILL WEIGHT BASED ON RANKING (and sibling preference or inbound for PS/PK) (because I have asked this same question, but with less detail before, 2 other times on 2 other occaisions).

On sibling preference, likewise, someone ranking the school #1 but with no sibling preference could get a spot over someone ranking the same school #2 but with sibling preference.

It clicked for me on another thread how the "weighting" works. If you are one of the first applicants drawn, but don't have preference at schools you listed # 1-3, you won't "miss the chance" of getting into your #4 choice, because as PP said, it basically moves it to your top choice AND it still takes into account the number at which you were drawn. So, if you ranked a school 4th on your list, but were drawn BEFORE someone who ranked it #1, you still get the spot at #4 over the student drawn after you because of the luck of your draw. Doesn't seem "fair" but that's a LOTTERY.

The PP who stated that the earlier drawn applicants will all have good waitlist numbers at the schools they dont get into is correct, it will look pretty crazy for some, and the last students drawn won't have much of a shot anywhere - in the hundreds across the board. So, it's not so much that the ranking matters more this year, the order of the draw matters more because of the combined lottery. So, there is no incentive to rank a less-desired school higher because you're still either rewarded or out-of-luck based on the order of the draw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PLEASE, there is NO weight assigned to your ranking! Those awful FAQs are deceptively vague on this. The reason they tell you to rank in order of preference is simply because you will drop off of the ones below.

I can't vouch for if or why the people answering the phones at the common lottery are giving out misinformation, but I think it must be because they don't understand it themselves. Hopefully there will be more information forthcoming from DME for those who want to understand the exact algorithm.

You need to call the Common Lottery people yourself, right now, and ask them if it's true that "no weight will be assigned to my ranking?", because I just got off the phone with them and you are completely, 100% WRONG! And you need to STOP. SAYING. THIS!

I just got off the phone with them, and asked really specific questions, and she understood and was able to explain and answer my questions, and give examples just fine.

Here is what she said:

There are 2 factors that the lottery algorithm will weight in matching students to schools:
1. How you ranked each school
2. Your particular child's preferences (i.e. sibling preference at any school, or in bound preference for a PS or PK inbound school)

The computer will try to match those with double advantage (i.e. you ranked the school 1st and you have sibling preference 1st) first, and then go down the line. HOWEVER, since the computer is doing this with thousands of applications at once, it is possible that someone who ranked a popular school #2 but has sibling preference at that school could get a spot before someone else who ranked the same school #1 but has no sibling preference.

In other words, it's not as simple as "everyone who ranks the school #1 will be considered 1st, then everyone who ranked it #2", because people with siblings at a given school are also weighted over those with no siblings.

So, once again, IT MATTERS HOW YOU RANK THE SCHOOLS. And even though she wouldn't go as far as saying ranking a majorly popular school #2 if you don't have siblings there is as good as accepting that you won't get in, it sounds like it's a good bet that's true.

PP that I quoted, either call the Common Lottery yourself and then come back and explain how no weight is assigned to ranking, or shut up. It is irresponsible to assert that so strongly when according to this 3rd Common Lottery staff person I've spoken to who confirmed that the computer WILL WEIGHT BASED ON RANKING (and sibling preference or inbound for PS/PK) (because I have asked this same question, but with less detail before, 2 other times on 2 other occaisions).

On sibling preference, likewise, someone ranking the school #1 but with no sibling preference could get a spot over someone ranking the same school #2 but with sibling preference.

The person who ranked it #1 without sibling will have less of a chance getting that seat if the person who ranked it #2 with a sibling didnt get into their #1.

The important aspect that everyone seems to dismiss is that the schools are also ranking you

[Anonymous]

Nope, you're still not getting it. The only way they're doing a better job of "matching" students is because they're removing your name from the applicant pools at the schools you ranked lower than where you got in. This could conceivably really help some people, so that is why they are calling it "improved matching." There is no weighting, other than the preferences for siblings and IB. This is why they keep telling you to put them in the order in which you would like to go. You're not hurting your chances of getting into your third choice by ranking your true number one. However, it is smart to have your safety schools, since you really do not want to have to into the second chance lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope, you're still not getting it. The only way they're doing a better job of "matching" students is because they're removing your name from the applicant pools at the schools you ranked lower than where you got in. This could conceivably really help some people, so that is why they are calling it "improved matching." There is no weighting, other than the preferences for siblings and IB. This is why they keep telling you to put them in the order in which you would like to go. You're not hurting your chances of getting into your third choice by ranking your true number one. However, it is smart to have your safety schools, since you really do not want to have to into the second chance lottery.

There is no point in arguing with you, you either refuse to understand it or you are trying purposefully to mislead people. You acknowledge weighting for sibs and IB (which only applies for PS/PK), but you are denying that you are also weighted on your ranking. That makes you half right, HALF WRONG.

Everyone else, feel free not to take my or this PPs word for this and call yourself. I'm trusting what 3 different common lottery staff told me about this exact question over this anonymous person who, frankly, sounds invested in posting wrong info. Especially since they haven't said where they are getting official word that the ranking doesn't get weighted.

Feel free not to take my word for it either, but please, do NOT believe this person, because the lottery folks are saying rankings will be weighted, along with preferences. Period.