Waitlist Data Posted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MY kid's 5th grade BASIS number dropped by 40 spots today (started low 100s)

That tracks. They had 110 after enrollment ended and they want to get to 135. Historical yield rates say admitting another 40 should get them close. They did the same think last year; front loaded offers and filled virtually the whole class by June and then didn't really work the WL at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MY kid's 5th grade BASIS number dropped by 40 spots today (started low 100s)

That tracks. They had 110 after enrollment ended and they want to get to 135. Historical yield rates say admitting another 40 should get them close. They did the same think last year; front loaded offers and filled virtually the whole class by June and then didn't really work the WL at all.

Let's see.. so this year they had 150 match and 188 on the waitlist. Total of 338 applicants. And now 190 have received an offer, which is 56% of applicants and it's not even the end of May. I think it's maybe running slightly harder to get in than last year, but pretty close, time will tell.

Last year they had 135 match and 155 on the waitlist. Total of 290 applicants. By the June data date, they had made 50 offers. So 185/290=64%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MY kid's 5th grade BASIS number dropped by 40 spots today (started low 100s)

That tracks. They had 110 after enrollment ended and they want to get to 135. Historical yield rates say admitting another 40 should get them close. They did the same think last year; front loaded offers and filled virtually the whole class by June and then didn't really work the WL at all.

Let's see.. so this year they had 150 match and 188 on the waitlist. Total of 338 applicants. And now 190 have received an offer, which is 56% of applicants and it's not even the end of May. I think it's maybe running slightly harder to get in than last year, but pretty close, time will tell.

Last year they had 135 match and 155 on the waitlist. Total of 290 applicants. By the June data date, they had made 50 offers. So 185/290=64%.

They made 3 more offers after the 50 last year. So, 65% if you go to the August data.

Assuming 25/40 accept now (they only have 135 seats), that would be 190/338 or 56%. Maybe they would have to make a few more offers (taking it up to 57% or so) but, still, it looks like they are significantly harder to get into than last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok, inviting rampant speculation here but why not.

Waitlists for the schools we lotteried for are definitely shorter than last year (looking at K for a bunch of schools on the Hill and some charters in Edgewood/Brookland). But we obviously got a very bad lottery number as we are dead last or almost last on literally every single list.

Normally I think our lottery number would lock us out of most of these schools (places like Ludlow, Maury, Brent, Lee Montessori, ITS) but given that the waitlists are shorter overall, do you think that might speak to an overall lower demand for spots at schools and thus mean some of these schools might actually clear waitlists even if in previous years they hadn't? I guess I'm just looking for a sliver of hope, feel free to dash them. Just trying to think of some way in which maybe we still stand a chance at any of these schools as OOB, no sibling applicants with a bad lotto number.

This isn't your year. But maybe next year.

I do think there's less demand post-COVID because a lot of people moved to places with yards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, inviting rampant speculation here but why not.

Waitlists for the schools we lotteried for are definitely shorter than last year (looking at K for a bunch of schools on the Hill and some charters in Edgewood/Brookland). But we obviously got a very bad lottery number as we are dead last or almost last on literally every single list.

Normally I think our lottery number would lock us out of most of these schools (places like Ludlow, Maury, Brent, Lee Montessori, ITS) but given that the waitlists are shorter overall, do you think that might speak to an overall lower demand for spots at schools and thus mean some of these schools might actually clear waitlists even if in previous years they hadn't? I guess I'm just looking for a sliver of hope, feel free to dash them. Just trying to think of some way in which maybe we still stand a chance at any of these schools as OOB, no sibling applicants with a bad lotto number.

This isn't your year. But maybe next year.

I do think there's less demand post-COVID because a lot of people moved to places with yards.

I think it's partly less demand, but partly that people are more satisfied with Ward 5 elementaries lately and aren't lotterying as proactively in the area. The total population of the school district isn't down that much for elementary, not enough to make a difference for PP. If you're only going to lottery for high-demand schools then this is the likely outcome. But we can help you look for other options. Have you considered Seaton? It really is a lovely school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, inviting rampant speculation here but why not.

Waitlists for the schools we lotteried for are definitely shorter than last year (looking at K for a bunch of schools on the Hill and some charters in Edgewood/Brookland). But we obviously got a very bad lottery number as we are dead last or almost last on literally every single list.

Normally I think our lottery number would lock us out of most of these schools (places like Ludlow, Maury, Brent, Lee Montessori, ITS) but given that the waitlists are shorter overall, do you think that might speak to an overall lower demand for spots at schools and thus mean some of these schools might actually clear waitlists even if in previous years they hadn't? I guess I'm just looking for a sliver of hope, feel free to dash them. Just trying to think of some way in which maybe we still stand a chance at any of these schools as OOB, no sibling applicants with a bad lotto number.

This isn't your year. But maybe next year.

I do think there's less demand post-COVID because a lot of people moved to places with yards.

I think it's partly less demand, but partly that people are more satisfied with Ward 5 elementaries lately and aren't lotterying as proactively in the area. The total population of the school district isn't down that much for elementary, not enough to make a difference for PP. If you're only going to lottery for high-demand schools then this is the likely outcome. But we can help you look for other options. Have you considered Seaton? It really is a lovely school.

Not to get off the original topic, but if you’re looking in Edgewood, your IB may be Langley, which is lovely and has a great cohort for risking K