Walls admissions article in the Post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even if grading across the board at DC middle schools has gotten easier during the pandemic, won't this affect all kids relatively equally? Meaning, those who would have had a B average instead have a B+ average, but those who would have had a B+ average instead have an A average?

Maybe there are a few outliers here and there, but if you're taking the top 500 kids who apply across the city, won't those pretty much be the same kids regardless?

I'm not sure how the academic quality of student body would dramatically plummet if there pulling from the same top 500?
(Now, the heavy weighting of the interview is another story, but Walls typically goes pretty far down the waitlist so if your kid was ranked 175 instead of 75, there's a good chance they'll get an offer anyway)

Pretty much the same kids and people act like private schools don't have grade inflation also. We know because we are coming from a private K-8. From what I've seen, the removal of the test and the interview being uneven is just an excuse for saying "We are staying private." There is no need to justify decisions. Just do what you think is best. No one will know anything until the c/o 2025 graduates. The college admissions may give a clue but who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even if grading across the board at DC middle schools has gotten easier during the pandemic, won't this affect all kids relatively equally? Meaning, those who would have had a B average instead have a B+ average, but those who would have had a B+ average instead have an A average?

Maybe there are a few outliers here and there, but if you're taking the top 500 kids who apply across the city, won't those pretty much be the same kids regardless?

I'm not sure how the academic quality of student body would dramatically plummet if there pulling from the same top 500?
(Now, the heavy weighting of the interview is another story, but Walls typically goes pretty far down the waitlist so if your kid was ranked 175 instead of 75, there's a good chance they'll get an offer anyway)

Not even remotely, but the selection process now is a grab bag as much as a randomized process would be. The test used to somewhat sort out which of those 500 deserved a spot and which ones coasted on grade inflation and luck

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if grading across the board at DC middle schools has gotten easier during the pandemic, won't this affect all kids relatively equally? Meaning, those who would have had a B average instead have a B+ average, but those who would have had a B+ average instead have an A average?

Maybe there are a few outliers here and there, but if you're taking the top 500 kids who apply across the city, won't those pretty much be the same kids regardless?

I'm not sure how the academic quality of student body would dramatically plummet if there pulling from the same top 500?
(Now, the heavy weighting of the interview is another story, but Walls typically goes pretty far down the waitlist so if your kid was ranked 175 instead of 75, there's a good chance they'll get an offer anyway)

Not even remotely, but the selection process now is a grab bag as much as a randomized process would be. The test used to somewhat sort out which of those 500 deserved a spot and which ones coasted on grade inflation and luck

I'm ticked because my kid was one of the ones who got shafted in the interview process and has a crappy WL number. However, I think the SWW peer group will be just fine because they're selecting from kids who already cleared a certain bar for grades. You could argue around the margins regarding grade inflation, but your SWW kid won't be sitting next to someone who's 2 grades levels behind and can't do the homework.

P.S. This is also why I think they should either reinstate the test, or just move to a straight lottery. The interview process is arbitrary and capricious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did you hear?

Also, does anyone know if Walls has any plans to reinstate the test? My DC is a rising 8th grader and without the test I don't see any point of having him apply...if the requirements are absurd inflated DCPS grades and interviews, the advantage of Walls over Wilson (academically stronger peer group) will no longer be strong enough to make up for the disadvantages.

Walls will still be filled with straight A kids, this is the advantage over Wilson, all other considerations being equal (like proximity form your house).

Right...but straight A isn't what it used to be given grade inflation. Something like 40 percent of Deal gets straight As (and I've hear that it's higher at some other schools). So, yes, there is some advantage but it is mainly one of behavior/discipline...and, while that may be a big advantage--especially if your kid is really bothered by disruption/hallway tussles--don't kid yourself that your DC will be surrounded by "high achievers" at Walls. The question is whether that advantage outweighs the disadvantages of Walls (e.g., if your option is Wilson, far fewer clubs/extracurriculars, APs, overall teacher quality). Having a kid at each right now, it's kind of a wash.

+1
This is our experience too...we have had two go through Walls (one graduated a couple of years ago) and one at Wilson. Walls has deteriorated pretty substantially since our first went through...

Are you aware of any matriculation data to suggest that this "deterioration" has actually occurred outside of your own mind? Serious question because if one assumes an excellent high school's primary goal is to get kids into the colleges they desire then that it the test.

Not sure what type of matriculation data you are talking about (matriculation to Walls? college matriculation data?)...either way, not clear what hypothesis you are testing or how matriculation data would help (matriculation data is data on who goes to a school they are accepted to, not what schools they are accepted to). In any event, college acceptances over the past couple of years have been turned upside down across the board due to COVID/test optional so there's really no way to discern any patterns...

And, as for your comment about whether the "deterioration" has occurred anywhere other than my mind, it's an obnoxious question/comment...like so many on DCUM...but for any serious people that might be on here looking for information that might actually help them make decisions about their kids education, I fully admit it is anecdotal. But it is sometimes helpful to hear from parents who: 1) have some longitudinal experience at a school; and 2) have some comparative experience with peer schools. I have both. Based on the experience we have had, Walls has deteriorated. It is likely the best option that some have (for those that get in) and a better choice for some than Wilson (for those who have that choice)...but for many it may be a worse choice than Wilson. In our experience, the teachers are (on average) worse (though there are some good ones). They seem to think that more work means better teaching. There are fewer options for APs and rigorous academic clubs. The administration is unresponsive. These issues were true for my older one that went through Walls but have gotten worse.

The matriculation data about which I inquired was obviously college data. Seems like you acknowledge that there isn't any such data to prove your hypothesis. What is noteworthy is that you suggest that covid will screw with recent data so even if data were to suggest no material change you would dismiss it. Let's pull that thread a but, shall we? Would not the same covid theory apply to your "deterioration" theory at Walls? A lot of what you say has gotten worse would surely have been exacerbated by covid (fewer clubs, overworked and unresponsive admins, teacher attrition).

You got to the heart of my question when you said, "I fully admit it is anecdotal." I don't object to anecdotal observations or single points of data. My objection is to people who come in with a theory and then pick and choose facts in support of it while ignoring other facts or factors. In your case you actually embraced a material factor (covid) to dismiss the lack of matriculation data deterioration but refused to even for a moment consider how that factor might be implicated in your "deterioration" observations.

Good lord that's a lot of word vomit---I'm not the prior poster but am a statistician by training and have no idea what you mean by "matriculation data deterioration" or whatever larger point you're trying to make.

As a statistician by training was English not your first language? Did they not teach you to read through all the data and support before starting your work? Had you read the post to which I replied you'd have noted that I asked about "matriculation data". Since you seem not so good with the English I will explain to you that it is a reference to data on where kids who graduate matriculate. The person then responded and introduced some sort of concept of "deterioration"; I sarcastically applied that concept back from whence it came.

Are you the same rocket scientist who replies to all posts on DCUM with "word vomit" when the words and concepts get too complex for you? If reading is that hard for you then by all means close the browser and go do something that doesn't make you feel bad about your intellect.

It's not hard when you break down the whole sentences into bite sized concepts. You should try it!

Actually, English is my second language but I'd venture to say that my writing is far more clear, concise, and precise than yours. You should seriously take a writing class, as "matriculation data deterioration" does not mean what you think it means (to quote Inigo Montoya)...."matriculation data deterioration" means the quality of the data on matriculation has declined. I assume what you are hypothesizing is that one would expect that if there has been a deterioration in the quality of Walls students, it would be matched by a commensurate deterioration in where these kids matriculate to college? If so, why don't you say so in plain English? But, in any event, as prior posters have said, rightly, that there are simply too many factors that have gone on during the pandemic--test optional being the most prominent--that have influenced where kids apply/get in/matriculate to college to infer any kind of causal relationship between the Walls admissions process and college matriculation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if grading across the board at DC middle schools has gotten easier during the pandemic, won't this affect all kids relatively equally? Meaning, those who would have had a B average instead have a B+ average, but those who would have had a B+ average instead have an A average?

Maybe there are a few outliers here and there, [b]but if you're taking the top 500 kids who apply across the city, won't those pretty much be the same kids regardless?[/b]

I'm not sure how the academic quality of student body would dramatically plummet if there pulling from the same top 500?
(Now, the heavy weighting of the interview is another story, but Walls typically goes pretty far down the waitlist so if your kid was ranked 175 instead of 75, there's a good chance they'll get an offer anyway)

Not even remotely, but the selection process now is a grab bag as much as a randomized process would be. The test used to somewhat sort out which of those 500 deserved a spot and which ones coasted on grade inflation and luck

How do you figure the top applicants are not the same? Selection and admittance may be different. I'm sure there are great vs not so great test takers in the pool. Still believe a test should be present and is valuable for the kids to go thru.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if grading across the board at DC middle schools has gotten easier during the pandemic, won't this affect all kids relatively equally? Meaning, those who would have had a B average instead have a B+ average, but those who would have had a B+ average instead have an A average?

Maybe there are a few outliers here and there, [b]but if you're taking the top 500 kids who apply across the city, won't those pretty much be the same kids regardless?[/b]

I'm not sure how the academic quality of student body would dramatically plummet if there pulling from the same top 500?
(Now, the heavy weighting of the interview is another story, but Walls typically goes pretty far down the waitlist so if your kid was ranked 175 instead of 75, there's a good chance they'll get an offer anyway)

Not even remotely, but the selection process now is a grab bag as much as a randomized process would be. The test used to somewhat sort out which of those 500 deserved a spot and which ones coasted on grade inflation and luck

How do you figure the top applicants are not the same? Selection and admittance may be different. I'm sure there are great vs not so great test takers in the pool. Still believe a test should be present and is valuable for the kids to go thru.

I think the issue is that the combination of no test plus grade inflation makes the "top 500" a very weak screen. You weed out kids who don't do their work but that's about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if grading across the board at DC middle schools has gotten easier during the pandemic, won't this affect all kids relatively equally? Meaning, those who would have had a B average instead have a B+ average, but those who would have had a B+ average instead have an A average?

Maybe there are a few outliers here and there, but if you're taking the top 500 kids who apply across the city, won't those pretty much be the same kids regardless?

I'm not sure how the academic quality of student body would dramatically plummet if there pulling from the same top 500?
(Now, the heavy weighting of the interview is another story, but Walls typically goes pretty far down the waitlist so if your kid was ranked 175 instead of 75, there's a good chance they'll get an offer anyway)

Not even remotely, but the selection process now is a grab bag as much as a randomized process would be. The test used to somewhat sort out which of those 500 deserved a spot and which ones coasted on grade inflation and luck

THIS