Is Charter Neighborhood Preference a good idea?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really see it as helping. I think unified applications as will likely be implemented, and a greatly broadened lottery process will then cause far more randomization and will clog up schools with people form whom the school was 5th or 6th preference, who don't really want to be there, as opposed to those who do actually want there as 1st or 2nd preference.

And how is that different from the way it is now? I know very few people who have gotten their first or second choices, other than in-bounds schools, in the past couple of lottery cycles.

Now people at least have to go out of their way to apply, it minimizes the likelihood of the scattershot, check all the boxes approach. With a unified lottery, unless it is very specifically focused and targeted (which it probably won't be) you will likely have EVEN LESS chance of getting into the charter you want. That's how it's different.

Agreed. scattershot is a good word for it. With choice in our schools, the charters fill with people who have chosen to apply there, no matter how far down their own personal list. Giving thousands of families who have never heard of a school a chance in multiple charter lotteries just because it's on a list - and don't tell me people won't check a box if they wouldn't send their kid there - if they need to "fill up" their option list or they have simply heard of it or like the name or a myriad of reasons why people might check a box - will potentially put children in schools that their parents a) have no intention of getting them to daily (Ward 1 to Ward 8, for example) or b) a school that isn't a fit for the family (an immersion or Montessori school that the family has no intention of supporting). By keeping the charter lotteries separate from DCPS you preserve school choice. Combining the lotteries sounds like a terrible, terrible idea.

[Anonymous]

I think you're not understanding what the proposed combined lottery will do. It will dramatically REDUCE the total number of schools parents can lottery for. It is the opposite of scattershot. The idea is to force parents to lottery only for the schools they are very serious about. Like the DCPS lottery, you will not be waitlisted on schools you ranked lower than where you get in. Theoretically at least, it should reduce the number of applicants for any one school, improving your odds at the schools you do try for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
* will specialized schools like Yu Ying or Bridges be as successful if people get in not because they really love the school's specialty but because it's popular and located nearby?

Most of the YY families are already there because it's popular and located nearby (many Petworth and North Hill families) and a much better option than their weak IB schools. They claim to love the specialty without having any deep or abiding connection to Chinese culture or the Chinese language. The problem you predict already exists, and on a grand scale. If you want to find a big group of parents who love the specialty for its own sake, look no further than a weekend heritage Chinese school in Rockville.

I have to agree. I'm not interested in Chinese immersion, so Yu Ying wouldn't have been a school choice for my daughter. However, under this current system, I'd have applied there because its a good school, good program and close to my house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you're not understanding what the proposed combined lottery will do. It will dramatically REDUCE the total number of schools parents can lottery for. It is the opposite of scattershot. The idea is to force parents to lottery only for the schools they are very serious about. Like the DCPS lottery, you will not be waitlisted on schools you ranked lower than where you get in. Theoretically at least, it should reduce the number of applicants for any one school, improving your odds at the schools you do try for.

I imagine a lot of people would revolt if they don't at least get a chance to lottery for at least 50% of Mundo Verde, EL Haynes, Capital City, LAMB, Two Rivers, Inspired Teaching, Creative Minds, Stokes, and Yu Ying even if it's little better than a true (low-chance) lottery. That's 5-6 slots at minimum.

And a neighborhood preference that blocks out the 5-10 seats typically available at entering grades for a number of those schools will create great angst and eventually anger.

Imagine the Washington Post Education (Emma Brown) story on "How Mundo Verde became rapidly gentrifying Bloomingdale's neighborhood school" in a couple years. Not a good situation for the PCSB and charter families, who already have their hands full explaining that charters are not a way for some parents to keep their children safely ensconced in a school system of their own creation rather than the dysfunctional, segregated DCPS.

A neighborhood preference intended to not make it seem like charters are for gentrifier haves rather than longtime neighborhood have-nots can cut both ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you're not understanding what the proposed combined lottery will do. It will dramatically REDUCE the total number of schools parents can lottery for. It is the opposite of scattershot. The idea is to force parents to lottery only for the schools they are very serious about. Like the DCPS lottery, you will not be waitlisted on schools you ranked lower than where you get in. Theoretically at least, it should reduce the number of applicants for any one school, improving your odds at the schools you do try for.

What are you basing that assessment of how it will work on? Where is the exact language of the lottery proposal? What is the algorithm that it will run on?

Specifics, please...

[Anonymous]

the algorithm is the same as the existing DCPS OOB lottery. the proposed unified lottery would be an expansion of that lottery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you're not understanding what the proposed combined lottery will do. It will dramatically REDUCE the total number of schools parents can lottery for. It is the opposite of scattershot. The idea is to force parents to lottery only for the schools they are very serious about. Like the DCPS lottery, you will not be waitlisted on schools you ranked lower than where you get in. Theoretically at least, it should reduce the number of applicants for any one school, improving your odds at the schools you do try for.

Or, everyone lotteries for the popular charters, the waitlists are still ridiculously long and you have almost no shot at getting in, and the less popular charters don't have enough kids lottery to fill their slots. Then, total mayhem ensues, with people contacting the less popular charters trying to get in, but not having a lottery number to do so.

Unlike DCPS, charters don't have students who will go because they are in-bounds. The system works for DCPS because of that. For charters, if they are going to implement one system, they should let you put down as many schools as you want (in ranked order).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're not understanding what the proposed combined lottery will do. It will dramatically REDUCE the total number of schools parents can lottery for. It is the opposite of scattershot. The idea is to force parents to lottery only for the schools they are very serious about. Like the DCPS lottery, you will not be waitlisted on schools you ranked lower than where you get in. Theoretically at least, it should reduce the number of applicants for any one school, improving your odds at the schools you do try for.

Or, everyone lotteries for the popular charters, the waitlists are still ridiculously long and you have almost no shot at getting in, and the less popular charters don't have enough kids lottery to fill their slots. Then, total mayhem ensues, with people contacting the less popular charters trying to get in, but not having a lottery number to do so.

Unlike DCPS, charters don't have students who will go because they are in-bounds. The system works for DCPS because of that. For charters, if they are going to implement one system, they should let you put down as many schools as you want (in ranked order).

Yep, you would have to be very smart about how you do your choices, or you'll wind up at your in-bounds school. It will be interesting, to say the least, to see if they get the unified lottery off the ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're not understanding what the proposed combined lottery will do. It will dramatically REDUCE the total number of schools parents can lottery for. It is the opposite of scattershot. The idea is to force parents to lottery only for the schools they are very serious about. Like the DCPS lottery, you will not be waitlisted on schools you ranked lower than where you get in. Theoretically at least, it should reduce the number of applicants for any one school, improving your odds at the schools you do try for.

Or, everyone lotteries for the popular charters, the waitlists are still ridiculously long and you have almost no shot at getting in, and the less popular charters don't have enough kids lottery to fill their slots. Then, total mayhem ensues, with people contacting the less popular charters trying to get in, but not having a lottery number to do so.

Unlike DCPS, charters don't have students who will go because they are in-bounds. The system works for DCPS because of that. For charters, if they are going to implement one system, they should let you put down as many schools as you want (in ranked order).

Yep, you would have to be very smart about how you do your choices, or you'll wind up at your in-bounds school. It will be interesting, to say the least, to see if they get the unified lottery off the ground.

Yeah, except for it's not just the individual families that suffer--the less popular charters do, too. I suspect they won't do this system this year, or if they do a lot of charters opt out. On the YY website, it says they are looking at coordinating the DATES of application (not a common application). If they do move forward, I imagine the less popular charter schools would fight to expand the # of schools to which you can apply, or just opt out of the system.

[Anonymous]

There's no way to force charters into this. So I agree: most of the high-performers/popular charters will opt out. I think only the low-performers who need to get the word out that they exist might opt in. Still think it's a bad idea overall, though. Choice is choice. Don't limit it.

[Anonymous]

PP. I mean, I DISAGREE with the PP. I don't think the popular charters need neighborhood preference or a common lottery. Unpopular charters might.

[Anonymous]

Are there really "unpopular" charters for the city or just "unpopular" charters for the demographic that posts on DCUM? I bet the vast majority of posters here didn't apply to any KIPP school and would not do so with a unified application, but they still have waitlists because many other DC parents do apply. And there are plenty of parents who do not consider the schools discussed here to be there first choices. Now, if there are charters that are universally unpopular across the board, then maybe they should be closed because they are not offering any "choice" to the students of the city.

[Anonymous]

Common lottery would be good or neutral for everyone, except parents who want to sit on multiple spots or secure as many acceptances as possible before doing research or making decisions. Fewer applicants to each school, shorter waitlists to manage, less September shuffling. Top charters will like it because they will get people who are completely committed to their program. Less popular charters will also be fine; they're likely to firm up their classes much earlier in the season, either during the lottery or in whatever second-chance application process is put in place. Charters that are not desirable even as a school of last resort will be out of business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are there really "unpopular" charters for the city or just "unpopular" charters for the demographic that posts on DCUM? I bet the vast majority of posters here didn't apply to any KIPP school and would not do so with a unified application, but they still have waitlists because many other DC parents do apply. And there are plenty of parents who do not consider the schools discussed here to be there first choices. Now, if there are charters that are universally unpopular across the board, then maybe they should be closed because they are not offering any "choice" to the students of the city.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Does every DC neighborhood have and IB school? I'm sure they do or would have too, maybe not the IB school a child once had, but there probably is one, an alternative.