Parents of 2-year-old in DC - what should we be doing NOW to prepare for the PK3 lottery?

[Anonymous]

The walk from the Takoma metro is longish (20-25 minutes). But there are metrobuses that go past the DCI Walter Reed building from there.

Or you can go to Silver Spring and take a bus south down 16th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tip for parents 3 year old starting PK3.

Potty Train your child.

Teach them how to say please, thank you and excuse me.

Signed,

PK 3 teacher seeing some of the rudest, whiniest and unpotty trained kids i have ever had in 15 years of ECE.

Best post ever.

[Anonymous]

My best advice is for you to trust your own instincts. Talk to others, but think about your own family and your own children and what might be good for all of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The walk from the Takoma metro is longish (20-25 minutes). But there are metrobuses that go past the DCI Walter Reed building from there.

Or you can go to Silver Spring and take a bus south down 16th.

It's under a mile. I think most kids can walk in 15-20. Brookland metro to Takoma is what 2 stops away?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some families move to Brookland/ Woodridge and play for charters and others get into the school, then move from Cap Hill / NW (EOTP) for convenience and space.

It's getting pricey over there, especially near the metro.

I wonder if the DCI feeder people will be as keen on Brookland once they have to get their kid all the way to Walter Reed whenever DCI moves up there. But they'll probably run a shuttle bus?

DCI feeder people that go to DCI have been going to 16th and Park. WR is preferred especially if you're near Brookland metro.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure kids will not want to take that long hike from Takoma metro to the entrance on 16th street. That will be brutal, especially in the winter.

[Anonymous]

Yes, assuming you live right on top of Brookland metro, it's a quick ride and a walk. But most people who are buying in "Brookland" (which now seems almost as inflated as "Capitol Hill" in real estate terms) are looking at a decent walk on both ends, or a bus ride.

Brookland is nice, don't get me wrong, but it's not that convenient to Walter Reed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, assuming you live right on top of Brookland metro, it's a quick ride and a walk. But most people who are buying in "Brookland" (which now seems almost as inflated as "Capitol Hill" in real estate terms) are looking at a decent walk on both ends, or a bus ride.

Brookland is nice, don't get me wrong, but it's not that convenient to Walter Reed.

Not many options. It's not convenient to Latin or Basis either. They aren't going to Brookland Middle so there's not many options. You better believe my DC would be taking metro/bus on his own in middle school. Don't we all brag about how living in the city, we can raise these independent kids? Who cares how long it takes them, they leave accordingly. Kids in NYC have been doing it forever, ours can too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should read this:

https://www.washingtonian.com/2014/03/24/how-not-to-get-your-kid-into-kindergarten/

Dated information.

Not that dated. Although I wish she would do a follow up.

I agree it is not dated at all. The core of the article is about the hoops parents jump through for a situation that is largely beyond their control. The single driving factor is the lottery number. A high lottery number means that you'll get one of your top picks, and a low number means you'll get one of your low picks. The strategy of it is really all at the low end: trying to identify a few schools you could live with for a year, which hopefully no-one else has identified, and maybe get luckier next season. Nothing about that has fundamentally changed.

It is the calculus that makes me question the value of the common lottery. Yes, I know it was designed by a prize-winning mathematician and I readily concede he is smarter than I am. I simply submit that the model was originally about getting med students into their desired internships, and by and large med students are highly mobile (for the most part they don't have children and mortgages). In the case of the DC school lottery, we're talking about data points that are much more fixed (even if the school 4 miles away is available, that doesn't necessarily make it feasible for any given family to attend). At least with the old system, if you really wanted Spanish Immersion, and you bombed out in the LAMB lottery, you had another shot with the Stokes lottery; with the DC Bi lottery, with the MV lottery, with DCPS ranking Oyster, Cleveland, Tyler, etc. Now if you get a great number you run the table and if you get a bad number you're left with the dregs.

Med students have strongly different geographical preferences, different specialty preferences, and can easily move. This is not representative of EOTP families competing for the exact same spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should read this:

https://www.washingtonian.com/2014/03/24/how-not-to-get-your-kid-into-kindergarten/

Dated information.

Not that dated. Although I wish she would do a follow up.

I agree it is not dated at all. The core of the article is about the hoops parents jump through for a situation that is largely beyond their control. The single driving factor is the lottery number. A high lottery number means that you'll get one of your top picks, and a low number means you'll get one of your low picks. The strategy of it is really all at the low end: trying to identify a few schools you could live with for a year, which hopefully no-one else has identified, and maybe get luckier next season. Nothing about that has fundamentally changed.

It is the calculus that makes me question the value of the common lottery. Yes, I know it was designed by a prize-winning mathematician and I readily concede he is smarter than I am. I simply submit that the model was originally about getting med students into their desired internships, and by and large med students are highly mobile (for the most part they don't have children and mortgages). In the case of the DC school lottery, we're talking about data points that are much more fixed (even if the school 4 miles away is available, that doesn't necessarily make it feasible for any given family to attend). At least with the old system, if you really wanted Spanish Immersion, and you bombed out in the LAMB lottery, you had another shot with the Stokes lottery; with the DC Bi lottery, with the MV lottery, with DCPS ranking Oyster, Cleveland, Tyler, etc. Now if you get a great number you run the table and if you get a bad number you're left with the dregs.

Med students have strongly different geographical preferences, different specialty preferences, and can easily move. This is not representative of EOTP families competing for the exact same spots.

This is true and I think the old system, while messy, distributed the odds more fairly because everyone had multiple shots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should read this:

https://www.washingtonian.com/2014/03/24/how-not-to-get-your-kid-into-kindergarten/

Dated information.

Not that dated. Although I wish she would do a follow up.

I agree it is not dated at all. The core of the article is about the hoops parents jump through for a situation that is largely beyond their control. The single driving factor is the lottery number. A high lottery number means that you'll get one of your top picks, and a low number means you'll get one of your low picks. The strategy of it is really all at the low end: trying to identify a few schools you could live with for a year, which hopefully no-one else has identified, and maybe get luckier next season. Nothing about that has fundamentally changed.

It is the calculus that makes me question the value of the common lottery. Yes, I know it was designed by a prize-winning mathematician and I readily concede he is smarter than I am. I simply submit that the model was originally about getting med students into their desired internships, and by and large med students are highly mobile (for the most part they don't have children and mortgages). In the case of the DC school lottery, we're talking about data points that are much more fixed (even if the school 4 miles away is available, that doesn't necessarily make it feasible for any given family to attend). At least with the old system, if you really wanted Spanish Immersion, and you bombed out in the LAMB lottery, you had another shot with the Stokes lottery; with the DC Bi lottery, with the MV lottery, with DCPS ranking Oyster, Cleveland, Tyler, etc. Now if you get a great number you run the table and if you get a bad number you're left with the dregs.

Med students have strongly different geographical preferences, different specialty preferences, and can easily move. This is not representative of EOTP families competing for the exact same spots.

This is true and I think the old system, while messy, distributed the odds more fairly because everyone had multiple shots.

This is not true. The odds are not distributed more with multiple lotteries. A person with a lucky lottery number can only pick one school, then the other options they had trickle down. There's still the same amount of spots and offered to same amount of people. I can understand how it feels otherwise if you've been dealt a bad lottery number, but don't let your personal experience ignore statistics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should read this:

https://www.washingtonian.com/2014/03/24/how-not-to-get-your-kid-into-kindergarten/

Dated information.

Not that dated. Although I wish she would do a follow up.

I agree it is not dated at all. The core of the article is about the hoops parents jump through for a situation that is largely beyond their control. The single driving factor is the lottery number. A high lottery number means that you'll get one of your top picks, and a low number means you'll get one of your low picks. The strategy of it is really all at the low end: trying to identify a few schools you could live with for a year, which hopefully no-one else has identified, and maybe get luckier next season. Nothing about that has fundamentally changed.

It is the calculus that makes me question the value of the common lottery. Yes, I know it was designed by a prize-winning mathematician and I readily concede he is smarter than I am. I simply submit that the model was originally about getting med students into their desired internships, and by and large med students are highly mobile (for the most part they don't have children and mortgages). In the case of the DC school lottery, we're talking about data points that are much more fixed (even if the school 4 miles away is available, that doesn't necessarily make it feasible for any given family to attend). At least with the old system, if you really wanted Spanish Immersion, and you bombed out in the LAMB lottery, you had another shot with the Stokes lottery; with the DC Bi lottery, with the MV lottery, with DCPS ranking Oyster, Cleveland, Tyler, etc. Now if you get a great number you run the table and if you get a bad number you're left with the dregs.

Med students have strongly different geographical preferences, different specialty preferences, and can easily move. This is not representative of EOTP families competing for the exact same spots.

This is true and I think the old system, while messy, distributed the odds more fairly because everyone had multiple shots.

This is not true. The odds are not distributed more with multiple lotteries. A person with a lucky lottery number can only pick one school, then the other options they had trickle down. There's still the same amount of spots and offered to same amount of people. I can understand how it feels otherwise if you've been dealt a bad lottery number, but don't let your personal experience ignore statistics.

Then can you use some probability theory and statistics to explain it to the rest of us? Because I recall knowing people who did terribly in one school's lottery, but very well in another's. Let's call the first one school A and the second school B. Granted they preferred school A to school B, but they still vastly preferred school B to schools C & D & E - not to mention their local neighborhood school. So, even though they preferred A, they still got lucky with B. Now, under the new system, the low number they got lands them at the bottom of the pile and they only get into school N or O or P. How far down do parents have to fall because of one bad draw?

The lottery concept works when everyone isn't competing for the exact same schools. But the reality is that they are. It's not a matter of "I want something in Ward 7 or Ward 8, but I'll take Two Rivers or Oyster as a last choice" vs. "I'd really rather have Yu Ying or LAMB, but otherwise I want Payne or Miner." No. Thousands of people want a few dozen seats. At least multiple lotteries gave them multiple chances at multiple schools. Sorry you didn't get Mundo Verde, but at least you got Cap City! Now if you blow up once, that's it: better luck next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should read this:

https://www.washingtonian.com/2014/03/24/how-not-to-get-your-kid-into-kindergarten/

Dated information.

Not that dated. Although I wish she would do a follow up.

I agree it is not dated at all. The core of the article is about the hoops parents jump through for a situation that is largely beyond their control. The single driving factor is the lottery number. A high lottery number means that you'll get one of your top picks, and a low number means you'll get one of your low picks. The strategy of it is really all at the low end: trying to identify a few schools you could live with for a year, which hopefully no-one else has identified, and maybe get luckier next season. Nothing about that has fundamentally changed.

It is the calculus that makes me question the value of the common lottery. Yes, I know it was designed by a prize-winning mathematician and I readily concede he is smarter than I am. I simply submit that the model was originally about getting med students into their desired internships, and by and large med students are highly mobile (for the most part they don't have children and mortgages). In the case of the DC school lottery, we're talking about data points that are much more fixed (even if the school 4 miles away is available, that doesn't necessarily make it feasible for any given family to attend). At least with the old system, if you really wanted Spanish Immersion, and you bombed out in the LAMB lottery, you had another shot with the Stokes lottery; with the DC Bi lottery, with the MV lottery, with DCPS ranking Oyster, Cleveland, Tyler, etc. Now if you get a great number you run the table and if you get a bad number you're left with the dregs.

Med students have strongly different geographical preferences, different specialty preferences, and can easily move. This is not representative of EOTP families competing for the exact same spots.

This is true and I think the old system, while messy, distributed the odds more fairly because everyone had multiple shots.

This is not true. The odds are not distributed more with multiple lotteries. A person with a lucky lottery number can only pick one school, then the other options they had trickle down. There's still the same amount of spots and offered to same amount of people. I can understand how it feels otherwise if you've been dealt a bad lottery number, but don't let your personal experience ignore statistics.

Then can you use some probability theory and statistics to explain it to the rest of us? Because I recall knowing people who did terribly in one school's lottery, but very well in another's. Let's call the first one school A and the second school B. Granted they preferred school A to school B, but they still vastly preferred school B to schools C & D & E - not to mention their local neighborhood school. So, even though they preferred A, they still got lucky with B. Now, under the new system, the low number they got lands them at the bottom of the pile and they only get into school N or O or P. How far down do parents have to fall because of one bad draw?

The lottery concept works when everyone isn't competing for the exact same schools. But the reality is that they are. It's not a matter of "I want something in Ward 7 or Ward 8, but I'll take Two Rivers or Oyster as a last choice" vs. "I'd really rather have Yu Ying or LAMB, but otherwise I want Payne or Miner." No. Thousands of people want a few dozen seats. At least multiple lotteries gave them multiple chances at multiple schools. Sorry you didn't get Mundo Verde, but at least you got Cap City! Now if you blow up once, that's it: better luck next year.

You don't get it. It's ok. It's not about "my friend got more lucky a few years ago" blah blah blah.

[Anonymous]

People who are fondly remembering the old system forget the complaints.

Applications necessarily done online - people had to run all over town to submit applications and some got lost. Lack of transparency or trust in the lottery draws because they were done at each school. The multiple different deadlines. And the people who sat on multiple yes's meaning significant student movement for weeks into the new year.

There are simply more people entering the lottery now than 4-5 years ago. And not enough new seats have been created to keep up with demand. That's the reason for the tightness you are feeling.

It is deeply related to the shortage of real estate appropriate for a school which has slowed the charter sector growth significantly. This was a DCPS strategy to maintain / increase market share. And it's working.

[Anonymous]

there are only so many spots. whether under the current lottery system or the previous one, not everyone is going to get their top choice. there will be lucky and unlucky people in both systems. the difference here is that the system knows what your top choice is, and if you're lucky with your overall draw, you will get it.

in the old system, it was possible for you to get into your #7 choice, and someone else get into their #7 choice, but if you'd been able to trade, you each would have had a spot at your #1 choice. That doesn't happen anymore. Under the old system, lucky people got into multiple schools and THEN decided which one they preferred. Under the new system, you prioritize in advance, which is much more efficient and means fewer slots open up over the summer.