High school shutouts-- what's the plan?

[Anonymous]

Oops, correct link here https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/820108.page;jsessionid=322F47D413099F1A775A95F6FF29D534.dcum2

[Anonymous]

Waitlist data is up https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/aaron2446/viz/MSDCSeatsandWaitlistOfferData_draft/MSDCPublicDisplay

Looks like Banneker and McKinley Tech didn't match all their seats. Good luck everyone trying to find a place to land!

[Anonymous]

The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

It's not meaningless, it indicates that the wait-list may clear, and then what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

It's not meaningless, it indicates that the wait-list may clear, and then what?

There is no waitlist. Banneker wants 180 freshmen, they admitted 245, they’re calculating that 65 will enroll elsewhere. It’s exactly how private school and college admissions work: admit more students than you plan to enroll, calculating that not all of them will enroll. Walls does something similar; they matched 180 but usually have only 150 freshmen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

It's not meaningless, it indicates that the wait-list may clear, and then what?

There is no waitlist. Banneker wants 180 freshmen, they admitted 245, they’re calculating that 65 will enroll elsewhere. It’s exactly how private school and college admissions work: admit more students than you plan to enroll, calculating that not all of them will enroll. Walls does something similar; they matched 180 but usually have only 150 freshmen.

Right, so what happens if they end up with less than 180? Empty seats? Secret second round? Insider giveaways?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

It's not meaningless, it indicates that the wait-list may clear, and then what?

There is no waitlist. Banneker wants 180 freshmen, they admitted 245, they’re calculating that 65 will enroll elsewhere. It’s exactly how private school and college admissions work: admit more students than you plan to enroll, calculating that not all of them will enroll. Walls does something similar; they matched 180 but usually have only 150 freshmen.

Right, so what happens if they end up with less than 180? Empty seats? Secret second round? Insider giveaways?

Smaller class. The current freshman class is huge, so it evens out.

[Anonymous]

Wow the BASIS waitlist is getting long.

[Anonymous]

Interesting that Banneker didn’t match last year’s numbers

[Anonymous]

Seems like a much harder year for Sojourner Truth-- safety school no more! Although I know they're going through a building transition that's affecting their seat offerings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

It's not meaningless, it indicates that the wait-list may clear, and then what?

There is no waitlist. Banneker wants 180 freshmen, they admitted 245, they’re calculating that 65 will enroll elsewhere. It’s exactly how private school and college admissions work: admit more students than you plan to enroll, calculating that not all of them will enroll. Walls does something similar; they matched 180 but usually have only 150 freshmen.

They did clear their waitlist. They couldn’t fill the 260 seats they had. They only filled 245 seats.

If they have 180 seats and set aside 260 seats, that tells me a lot of kids, over 40% don’t enroll and go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

It's not meaningless, it indicates that the wait-list may clear, and then what?

There is no waitlist. Banneker wants 180 freshmen, they admitted 245, they’re calculating that 65 will enroll elsewhere. It’s exactly how private school and college admissions work: admit more students than you plan to enroll, calculating that not all of them will enroll. Walls does something similar; they matched 180 but usually have only 150 freshmen.

They did clear their waitlist. They couldn’t fill the 260 seats they had. They only filled 245 seats.

If they have 180 seats and set aside 260 seats, that tells me a lot of kids, over 40% don’t enroll and go there.

They could have easily filled 260 seats, but they instead rejected certain applicants as ineligible without putting them on the waitlist. See the recent Banneker thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Banneker and McKinley didn’t match all the seats is meaningless. The number of seats they put down is essentially a guess and a maximum. Then they decide from the pool of applicants who/how many to interview, and then from that who/how many to admit. Only those the school deems “Eligible” after the interview process can be admitted. The the number of kids on the tableau form is how many were deemed “eligible.” It tells zero information about how many applied. If they want to fill to the original number the seats they put down, they would have done it.

It's not meaningless, it indicates that the wait-list may clear, and then what?

There is no waitlist. Banneker wants 180 freshmen, they admitted 245, they’re calculating that 65 will enroll elsewhere. It’s exactly how private school and college admissions work: admit more students than you plan to enroll, calculating that not all of them will enroll. Walls does something similar; they matched 180 but usually have only 150 freshmen.

They did clear their waitlist. They couldn’t fill the 260 seats they had. They only filled 245 seats.

If they have 180 seats and set aside 260 seats, that tells me a lot of kids, over 40% don’t enroll and go there.

Also, your math is significantly off.

[Anonymous]

Banneker admitted 260 kids to yield 180. 180/260 = 69%

Walls typically admits about 240 students (adding match day numbers plus waitlist offers) to wind up with about 160 freshmen on count day. 160/240 = 67%

The numbers are really incredibly similar. It’s almost like Banneker and Walls are about the same size, located in the same general area, draw from broadly overlapping applicant pools, compete with the same privates and charters, and must conduct admissions through the same weird lottery mechanism. They’re very similar schools, in the grand scheme of things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Banneker admitted 260 kids to yield 180. 180/260 = 69%

Walls typically admits about 240 students (adding match day numbers plus waitlist offers) to wind up with about 160 freshmen on count day. 160/240 = 67%

The numbers are really incredibly similar. It’s almost like Banneker and Walls are about the same size, located in the same general area, draw from broadly overlapping applicant pools, compete with the same privates and charters, and must conduct admissions through the same weird lottery mechanism. They’re very similar schools, in the grand scheme of things.

Nope....Walls can fit inside of Banneker from maximum student standpoint. Banneker is slowly growing while Walls is over enrolled.