Did everyone land?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney wasn't.

Nor was Lafayette.

Really? First time in 5 years (at least) that all IB families who wanted a spot didn't ultimately get one (even if it was only offered at the end of the summer).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We got nothing in the first round or the second round, so we're sticking with daycare for another year. Can't help but think that the previous system would have been better for us.

You clearly never went through the previous system.

BS. I went through the previous system and can tell you that EVERYONE I know got in somewhere they were happy with for PS3. EVERYONE. In fact most of us had multiple offers. Sure, we may have been less likely to get in at our number one pick, but we got multiple offers. This time around, if you got a bad draw in the lottery you were shut out of everywhere.

For us, it worked okay. For PS3 we had offers for Bridges, Appletree, DC Prep and a couple of others, as well as our inbound. For K we played again now with the common lottery and were shut out initially and hovered around the 50 percent mark on all the wait lists. Got in to our number 5 pick in May and happy there (so far). Still, for most people under the old system so long as you applied everywhere your chances of being shut out were minimal.

Awwww, look at you thinking you know something about statistics!

Aw, look at you thinking you can ignore the "you clearly never went through the previous system" response that this was responding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Nothing will change your chance of getting in except either (1) having fewer people apply or (2) having more desirable slots. This is basic statistics, people.

[Anonymous]

I think the common lottery reduced choice a little. When the lottery wasn't shared, you could apply for every charter school if you wanted to. Now you are limited to those you choose. This seems fair to me. It reduces wait list numbers for the less desirable charter schools (LRCS) and seems to make everything more efficient. However, parents can no longer play the 'lottery now, decide later" game that they used to be able to playl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the common lottery reduced choice a little. When the lottery wasn't shared, you could apply for every charter school if you wanted to. Now you are limited to those you choose. This seems fair to me. It reduces wait list numbers for the less desirable charter schools (LRCS) and seems to make everything more efficient. However, parents can no longer play the 'lottery now, decide later" game that they used to be able to playl

This. Basically, the old system favored the motivated, DCUM types who could afford to take the time to apply to the various lotteries across the city. The lottery dropped the barrier to entry for all. So while it made the playing field more fair across the board, those previous parents who applied to a bunch of HRCS piecemeal lost their edge. And that's who is complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We got nothing in the first round or the second round, so we're sticking with daycare for another year. Can't help but think that the previous system would have been better for us.

You clearly never went through the previous system.

BS. I went through the previous system and can tell you that EVERYONE I know got in somewhere they were happy with for PS3. EVERYONE. In fact most of us had multiple offers. Sure, we may have been less likely to get in at our number one pick, but we got multiple offers. This time around, if you got a bad draw in the lottery you were shut out of everywhere.

For us, it worked okay. For PS3 we had offers for Bridges, Appletree, DC Prep and a couple of others, as well as our inbound. For K we played again now with the common lottery and were shut out initially and hovered around the 50 percent mark on all the wait lists. Got in to our number 5 pick in May and happy there (so far). Still, for most people under the old system so long as you applied everywhere your chances of being shut out were minimal.

Under the previous system we were completely shut out for K, so I beg to differ. Maybe PK3 was different, but K was horrible, in contrast to this year where we got multiple offers--three from HRCS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Nothing will change your chance of getting in except either (1) having fewer people apply or (2) having more desirable slots. This is basic statistics, people.

Old system last year. Was shut out completely.

[Anonymous]

Shut out for 6th and had to go private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Nothing will change your chance of getting in except either (1) having fewer people apply or (2) having more desirable slots. This is basic statistics, people.

Old system last year. Was shut out completely.

And I was pk 3. nice year at a part-time private preschool, so I don't begrudge the loss too much. scored in the common lottery. shut out of all the individual lotteries except ss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Nothing will change your chance of getting in except either (1) having fewer people apply or (2) having more desirable slots. This is basic statistics, people.

Exactly. Posters who are saying anything different should be ashamed at the lack of knowledge they are demonstrating.

[Anonymous]

IB for PK4 at Janney and didn't get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Nothing will change your chance of getting in except either (1) having fewer people apply or (2) having more desirable slots. This is basic statistics, people.

Exactly. Posters who are saying anything different should be ashamed at the lack of knowledge they are demonstrating.

It's your lack of understanding that is telling. Let's go through this again, more simply:

Current system: 1 lottery draw, 12 possibilities all based on that same draw
Old system: multiple draws (as many as you wish to apply to), numerous chances to win all based on separate individual draws

and no I'm not talking about the limited number of "highly desirable" spots. you are correct, they don't change (at least not much, though there is some expansion some years, and there are always new schools). I'm talking about the entire universe of available schools. most people won't get a highly desirable spot regardless of the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We got nothing in the first round or the second round, so we're sticking with daycare for another year. Can't help but think that the previous system would have been better for us.

You clearly never went through the previous system.

BS. I went through the previous system and can tell you that EVERYONE I know got in somewhere they were happy with for PS3. EVERYONE. In fact most of us had multiple offers. Sure, we may have been less likely to get in at our number one pick, but we got multiple offers. This time around, if you got a bad draw in the lottery you were shut out of everywhere.

For us, it worked okay. For PS3 we had offers for Bridges, Appletree, DC Prep and a couple of others, as well as our inbound. For K we played again now with the common lottery and were shut out initially and hovered around the 50 percent mark on all the wait lists. Got in to our number 5 pick in May and happy there (so far). Still, for most people under the old system so long as you applied everywhere your chances of being shut out were minimal.

Under the previous system we were completely shut out for K, so I beg to differ. Maybe PK3 was different, but K was horrible, in contrast to this year where we got multiple offers--three from HRCS.

my kid applied for K this year and we were happy with where we ended up (off the waitlist by June). of his class of PK4 students all of whom applied for K places, only ONE got in in the first round. Of 20 kids. by mid June most were still looking for K spots.

When you contrast to this year, what grade are you talking about? How long ago were you applying for K? K is hard because most openings are through attrition only. This year, however, MV expanded so it was actually a good year to get in to MV for K, but this would have been the case even without the common lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We got nothing in the first round or the second round, so we're sticking with daycare for another year. Can't help but think that the previous system would have been better for us.

You clearly never went through the previous system.

BS. I went through the previous system and can tell you that EVERYONE I know got in somewhere they were happy with for PS3. EVERYONE. In fact most of us had multiple offers. Sure, we may have been less likely to get in at our number one pick, but we got multiple offers. This time around, if you got a bad draw in the lottery you were shut out of everywhere.

For us, it worked okay. For PS3 we had offers for Bridges, Appletree, DC Prep and a couple of others, as well as our inbound. For K we played again now with the common lottery and were shut out initially and hovered around the 50 percent mark on all the wait lists. Got in to our number 5 pick in May and happy there (so far). Still, for most people under the old system so long as you applied everywhere your chances of being shut out were minimal.

Under the previous system we were completely shut out for K, so I beg to differ. Maybe PK3 was different, but K was horrible, in contrast to this year where we got multiple offers--three from HRCS.

my kid applied for K this year and we were happy with where we ended up (off the waitlist by June). of his class of PK4 students all of whom applied for K places, only ONE got in in the first round. Of 20 kids. by mid June most were still looking for K spots.

When you contrast to this year, what grade are you talking about? How long ago were you applying for K? K is hard because most openings are through attrition only. This year, however, MV expanded so it was actually a good year to get in to MV for K, but this would have been the case even without the common lottery.

What school were you at where all families were looking to leave at PK. That makes me very sad. What could that school have done to keep you?