Lottery Etiquette

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For elementary school school lottery, we only told a few friends of the lottery results, no one at our existing IB school. Told friends at IB school in the weeks leading up to the new school year. Told our kids the week before school started.
For middle school, we told our kid that night, and discretely told friends in the weeks after, mainly trying to figure out who would be joining at the new school (BASIS). But don't do what some of the 4th grade parents did on our school's WhatsApp group - broadcast to the whole grade who got into Latin or how high their kid's spot was on the waitlist.

I’m the PP who opted for honesty - I think it’s crappy to not tell the other elementary families until August. What is your rationale for that?

Because there is/was a cohort of families who are judgmental of families who lottery out of the school. I didn't want to deal with that drama when we still had to see them every school day (it's a small school community).

A year from now, you will barely remember these families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For elementary school school lottery, we only told a few friends of the lottery results, no one at our existing IB school. Told friends at IB school in the weeks leading up to the new school year. Told our kids the week before school started.
For middle school, we told our kid that night, and discretely told friends in the weeks after, mainly trying to figure out who would be joining at the new school (BASIS). But don't do what some of the 4th grade parents did on our school's WhatsApp group - broadcast to the whole grade who got into Latin or how high their kid's spot was on the waitlist.

I’m the PP who opted for honesty - I think it’s crappy to not tell the other elementary families until August. What is your rationale for that?

Because there is/was a cohort of families who are judgmental of families who lottery out of the school. I didn't want to deal with that drama when we still had to see them every school day (it's a small school community).

A year from now, you will barely remember these families.

+1. And they are probably secretly doing the lottery every year too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was on-campus at Stuart-Hobson the day after results were released last year. The school was giddy. Lots of congratulations all around. That wasn't unusual for the school, but it was nice to deal with it as a parent and not a teacher.

That's great BUT I guarantee you there were kids at school that day masking disappointment at not getting a spot at their desired application school, and likely doubly sad because so many of their classmates were excited -- their friends will now be attending other schools.

Yep. I taught there way back when SWW required a test and remember results day distinctly. It was a great day for some kiddos and a not so great day for others. I do believe that most kids got into a school on their list, even if it wasn't #1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

Yes, if your kid is in the top 100 kids as ranked by Walls, they will get in regardless of their lottery number.

The reason people say the admissions system is like a lottery is that the factors are so subjective that many results don't seem rational.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depends.

For the PK3 lottery I think it's helpful for people to share their results and situations (like what they ranked highest, if they are wait listed) because everyone is new to the process and it's part of how you learn. But you should always be sensitive about it, especially if you "win" the lottery. Others won't, and if you are seen as gloating, they will get annoyed with you.

As kids get older people tend to be slightly more circumspect, especially because choosing to lottery often indicates dissatisfaction with the school other people's kids attend. Also middle school lottery in DC is stressful because there are simply not enough spots available as the schools a lot of people want and many people have very tough choices to make if they don't get a lottery spot for MS.

In HS you have application schools, plus at that point the kids are taking the lead on school preferences and you need to be thoughtful about how the kids feel (again, especially kids who don't get spots at their desired school).

The lottery is a good time to practice empathy, be observant about how your situation might differ from someone else's (for instance some people have really weak IB options do more may ride on the lottery for them), and learn to talk about kids in a non-competitive and mutually supportive way. This is far from the last time those skills will come in handy with other parents.

Eh. I would say that this is an opportunity to begin the essential process of being less fixated on “wins” for your kid. You cannot really predict the future. I was devastated when my kid “lost” the K lottery but the IB school ended up being excellent for K. Similarly bummed to “lose” for MS but again IB worked really well. Believe it or not it is possible to be chill about this stuff and you do not have to be a constant maximizer.

That's great for you but not everyone's IB works "really well." We were at out IB from PK3 though 2nd and it was a rough run for my kid, when we finally had lottery puck and got a spot at another DCPS.i wasn't "maximizing" to feel frustration and disappointment each year when we'd watch other families depart our IB, and the have to explain to our kid why a friend wouldn't be at our school anymore.

I bet your IB is a school a lot like where we ended up -- a good DCPS with an acceptable MS feed. I wish you understood how rare this is in DC.

You misunderstand. I’m talking about people who think they need to take exaggerated steps to conceal or carefully share that they “won” the lottery. Same as I assume you didn’t go around talking constantly about how much you wanted to get out of your “bad” IB.

I'm the PP who I think you identified as "maximizing" and I wasn't suggesting concealing lottery results. More I was suggesting sensitivity in situations where the people you are talking to might be facing tough decisions due to bad results. I have had friends text me excitedly with their results and "so how about you??" And would have preferred a more diplomatic approach. Obviously everyone finds out where everyone goes, but it's good to remember not everyone gets what hoped for.

To me, this is a heartbreaking part about the lottery -- the "winners" and "losers." Especially as the kids get older and middle and high school pathways feels actually life altering.

As for the elementary school parents who are judgemental -- this is all because they are not completely sure they are making the right decision for their own kid. Whe you leave, it creates evidence that there is a better school than their current school and their kid may be missing out, and it feeds that feeling, which im sure feels awful. This all supports the plan of saying less to families to stay. Also, elementary school really isn't that high stakes, so staying is fine, and taking a better opportunity is also fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

Yes, if your kid is in the top 100 kids as ranked by Walls, they will get in regardless of their lottery number.

The reason people say the admissions system is like a lottery is that the factors are so subjective that many results don't seem rational.

+1. By lottery, I mean that it's opaque and arbitrary, not that your literal lottery number matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

Yes, if your kid is in the top 100 kids as ranked by Walls, they will get in regardless of their lottery number.

The reason people say the admissions system is like a lottery is that the factors are so subjective that many results don't seem rational.

+1. By lottery, I mean that it's opaque and arbitrary, not that your literal lottery number matters.

It would be much easier as a lottery among GPA-qualified kids. Faster and less hassle for everyone and no less arbitrary!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

Yes, if your kid is in the top 100 kids as ranked by Walls, they will get in regardless of their lottery number.

The reason people say the admissions system is like a lottery is that the factors are so subjective that many results don't seem rational.

PP here and thanks for the info. Do you know if this is true for Banneker as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

Yes, if your kid is in the top 100 kids as ranked by Walls, they will get in regardless of their lottery number.

The reason people say the admissions system is like a lottery is that the factors are so subjective that many results don't seem rational.

PP here and thanks for the info. Do you know if this is true for Banneker as well?

https://www.myschooldc.org/how-apply/applying-high-school

You can see all the criteria there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

Yes, if your kid is in the top 100 kids as ranked by Walls, they will get in regardless of their lottery number.

The reason people say the admissions system is like a lottery is that the factors are so subjective that many results don't seem rational.

PP here and thanks for the info. Do you know if this is true for Banneker as well?

Yes, your actual lottery number is not relevant to Banneker admissions.

This is because Banneker always manages to admit every kid they deem qualified who doesn’t match with a higher ranked school. When they occasionally wind up with a waitlist, as for the current junior class, they then clear the waitlist and simply have a larger cohort.

(That said, the Banneker admissions system is also somewhat arbitrary, opaque, and subjective!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For elementary school school lottery, we only told a few friends of the lottery results, no one at our existing IB school. Told friends at IB school in the weeks leading up to the new school year. Told our kids the week before school started.
For middle school, we told our kid that night, and discretely told friends in the weeks after, mainly trying to figure out who would be joining at the new school (BASIS). But don't do what some of the 4th grade parents did on our school's WhatsApp group - broadcast to the whole grade who got into Latin or how high their kid's spot was on the waitlist.

I’m the PP who opted for honesty - I think it’s crappy to not tell the other elementary families until August. What is your rationale for that?

Because there is/was a cohort of families who are judgmental of families who lottery out of the school. I didn't want to deal with that drama when we still had to see them every school day (it's a small school community).

A year from now, you will barely remember these families.

I wouldn't go this far but yes, everyone moves on.

An observation from someone who moved a kid from a school like this (with a small cohort of families who were very judgmental of anyone who lotteried out) is that the mere existence of a cohort like this is evidence of the problems at the school. We moved to a school with a lot more IB buy-in and better retention year to year. And guess what, that school doesn't have a cohort of judgmental parents giving side eye to anyone who might leave this school. In fact, at our new elementary, kids leave for various reasons all the time (got into a charter that starts at 5th, moved to private, parents are moving, etc.) and there's really no judgment or anger. Sometimes sadness at saying goodbye to friends, but people are wished well and everyone moves on.

The reason why is that people feel good about this school. If a family leaves for whatever reason, that doesn't change what people like about the school. Whereas at our old school, there was intense pressure to stay because of this perception that even one or two IB families leaving could make or break a cohort. That sucks! I hated it. I'm so glad to now be at a school where people are not examining our choices that much and, while we feel welcome at the school, no one is counting on us to make the exact same choices they will make. It is so nice to get rid of that pressure. We also feel less pressure and resentment over things like attending school wide events (lots of people go to all of them, if you miss some for a conflict or just too tired, no one cares), participating in PTO (lots of involvement, makes it easier to give/volunteer where you can and not feel like the whole thing depends on your participation all the time), etc. It's just a more functional environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Depends.

For the PK3 lottery I think it's helpful for people to share their results and situations (like what they ranked highest, if they are wait listed) because everyone is new to the process and it's part of how you learn. But you should always be sensitive about it, especially if you "win" the lottery. Others won't, and if you are seen as gloating, they will get annoyed with you.

As kids get older people tend to be slightly more circumspect, especially because choosing to lottery often indicates dissatisfaction with the school other people's kids attend. Also middle school lottery in DC is stressful because there are simply not enough spots available as the schools a lot of people want and many people have very tough choices to make if they don't get a lottery spot for MS.

In HS you have application schools, plus at that point the kids are taking the lead on school preferences and you need to be thoughtful about how the kids feel (again, especially kids who don't get spots at their desired school).

The lottery is a good time to practice empathy, be observant about how your situation might differ from someone else's (for instance some people have really weak IB options do more may ride on the lottery for them), and learn to talk about kids in a non-competitive and mutually supportive way. This is far from the last time those skills will come in handy with other parents.

Eh. I would say that this is an opportunity to begin the essential process of being less fixated on “wins” for your kid. You cannot really predict the future. I was devastated when my kid “lost” the K lottery but the IB school ended up being excellent for K. Similarly bummed to “lose” for MS but again IB worked really well. Believe it or not it is possible to be chill about this stuff and you do not have to be a constant maximizer.

That's great for you but not everyone's IB works "really well." We were at out IB from PK3 though 2nd and it was a rough run for my kid, when we finally had lottery puck and got a spot at another DCPS.i wasn't "maximizing" to feel frustration and disappointment each year when we'd watch other families depart our IB, and the have to explain to our kid why a friend wouldn't be at our school anymore.

I bet your IB is a school a lot like where we ended up -- a good DCPS with an acceptable MS feed. I wish you understood how rare this is in DC.

You misunderstand. I’m talking about people who think they need to take exaggerated steps to conceal or carefully share that they “won” the lottery. Same as I assume you didn’t go around talking constantly about how much you wanted to get out of your “bad” IB.

I'm the PP who I think you identified as "maximizing" and I wasn't suggesting concealing lottery results. More I was suggesting sensitivity in situations where the people you are talking to might be facing tough decisions due to bad results. I have had friends text me excitedly with their results and "so how about you??" And would have preferred a more diplomatic approach. Obviously everyone finds out where everyone goes, but it's good to remember not everyone gets what hoped for.

To me, this is a heartbreaking part about the lottery -- the "winners" and "losers." Especially as the kids get older and middle and high school pathways feels actually life altering.

As for the elementary school parents who are judgemental -- this is all because they are not completely sure they are making the right decision for their own kid. Whe you leave, it creates evidence that there is a better school than their current school and their kid may be missing out, and it feeds that feeling, which im sure feels awful. This all supports the plan of saying less to families to stay. Also, elementary school really isn't that high stakes, so staying is fine, and taking a better opportunity is also fine.

+1 on the dynamics of telling your elementary school family friends about leaving for a lottery spot, we had to navigate this several years ago and didn't share the news for a while. Had a close-knit group that included the school's most active supporters. We didn't share details about why were leaving just said things like "a better fit." We found out after we left that more than a few had been secretly playing the lottery. Now that the kids are nearer to MS it is clear most of these families will leave the school before 5th, we just did it early.

Our kids were pretty small (early elementary) and we told them about the new school during the second half of the summer...absolutely would not have told them before they completed that final year at the old school, they would have been devastated. But they're thriving where we are now, and we still see families still going to our old school quite a bit. Even though it has been years we are still pretty mum about details on the differences between the schools (unless pointedly asked) because of the reasons PP says above -- it doesn't feel good to think your kid might be missing out on some of these things and the school we left has a lot of good features too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the other way that high school is distinctly different is that for application schools it isn’t random, so a bad result feels not only disappointing but also like a negative judgement.

Nope. Walls is a lottery basically. They are no longer taking the brightest kid. So that’s that, not much different.

Well no. Latin's 9th grade seats are a lottery (with sibling preference). Walls is a lottery amongst those who meet the threshold criteria and complete the application process. So it is partly a performance judgment.

OK but the threshold is subjective (recommendations) and there is rampant grade inflation (grades) so it is not clear just how good that “performance” really is.

Also PP above said bad result which implies that the kid applied and didn’t get in. So at this point, it is a lottery.

It really isn’t as much of a lottery as people seem to think. Applicants are ranked (points), and the top ones get in. The only time a lottery number matters is for candidates right on the edge of getting in who all have the same score. I agree that the criteria for ranking kids is hugely subjective and doesn’t lead to the smartest kids always getting in, but a subjective application process is not the same as a random lottery, and it feels different to kids getting results.

Right and there are also the essays and interviews. There are a lot of data points that are considered. I, too, am unclear on how the ranking works in relation to the lottery — like even if my kid is ranked in top 100 of applicants, do they still get in if they have a really horrible lottery number? This is the anxiety i have today (choosing to believe my is qualified otherwise, I know could be wrong!).

Yes, if your kid is in the top 100 kids as ranked by Walls, they will get in regardless of their lottery number.

The reason people say the admissions system is like a lottery is that the factors are so subjective that many results don't seem rational.

I believe this is generally true except for the kids right on the edge in terms of score. So if they are taking the top 100 kids, and kids 99, 100, and 101 all have exactly the same score then their lottery number would determine which two would get in and which one would be waitlisted.