IB/Sibling Preference Data?

[Anonymous]

Is there a way to see what proportion of acceptence is inbound, sibling preference, etc?
I see general acceptance and wait list numbers here (https://public.tableau.com/profile/aaron2446#!/vizhome/MSDCSeatsandWaitlistOfferData/MSDCPublicDisplay), but I'd love a little more data!

[Anonymous]

Here you go http://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61

This is from the day of the initial results. It doesn’t reflect anything that’s happened since then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here you go http://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61

This is from the day of the initial results. It doesn’t reflect anything that’s happened since then.

Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you!!

[Anonymous]

I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

I can see your frustration, but trust me, if you have more than 1 school age kid, you will appreciate this someday! I think priority still goes to IB siblings and IB kids in general, right? With OOB siblings being 3rd on the pref list?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

I have always been curious whether sibling preference increases or decreases at-risk enrollment. I would definitely favor an at-risk preference, even if that meant my kid sat out PK3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

I have always been curious whether sibling preference increases or decreases at-risk enrollment. I would definitely favor an at-risk preference, even if that meant my kid sat out PK3.

I doubt that it impacts it much! At our lottery-in school, almost all of my peers have an older child who was admitted through lottery and a younger child, admitted via preference, at the school regardless of at-risk/ses status. Possibly at a newly sought-after neighborhood school it could have a different impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

I have been thinking about this and saying this for years. And I have three children. I believe for charter and citywide schools the sibling preference makes sense of PK (because of commuting) but not for boundary schools. Yes, it’s beneficial for parents to have their kids at the same school, but for a non mandatory year, parents of more than one kid can sit that year out or look elsewhere just like a family with one kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

I get that, but if one kid is already at the school b/c they are older, the parents are already likely having 2 kids in 2 different places, with the younger one being at daycare or something. Their convenience shouldn't mean that because I am choosing to only have one kid (or, for people that plan to have more this is true if their first kid is a rising pre-k student) that we don't get into our in-boundary school because spots are filled up with siblings (even if they are in-boundary) and then have to pay more than $20,000 for an extra year of private daycare. My point is that for in-boundary at pre-k 3 there shouldn't be any sibling preference and all in-boundary should have an equal chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

I have always been curious whether sibling preference increases or decreases at-risk enrollment. I would definitely favor an at-risk preference, even if that meant my kid sat out PK3.

I doubt that it impacts it much! At our lottery-in school, almost all of my peers have an older child who was admitted through lottery and a younger child, admitted via preference, at the school regardless of at-risk/ses status. Possibly at a newly sought-after neighborhood school it could have a different impact.

The MySchoolDC staff ran a number of tests (using 2017 either or 2018 lottery entry data) at the request of the MSDC board, to see if whether and how much an at-risk preference would make a difference in placing at-risk students. The experiment concluded that sibling preference precludes many at-risk students from getting seats at high performing school. Link to the report on this is below.

A quick excerpt from the abstract: The strongest preference contemplated in this analysis, giving at-risk students the top priority out of all applicant groups including siblings, would improve lottery outcomes for 8.2% of the 7,432 applicants identified as at-risk. As the preference weakens, a smaller percentage of at-risk applicants will have improved lottery outcomes.

https://www.myschooldc.org/sites/default/files/dc/sites/myschooldc/page/MSDC%20At-Risk%20Preference%20in%20a%20Unified%20Lottery%204.26.2018_Final.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

I have been thinking about this and saying this for years. And I have three children. I believe for charter and citywide schools the sibling preference makes sense of PK (because of commuting) but not for boundary schools. Yes, it’s beneficial for parents to have their kids at the same school, but for a non mandatory year, parents of more than one kid can sit that year out or look elsewhere just like a family with one kid.

Sitting our or adding a second commute probably wouldn't have a significant impact on a child who is not at-risk. But for the nearly half of DC students who are at risk, there is an incentive to get everyone into a high-quality PK3. Most schools are doing PK well. I don't think we should do anything that might make it more likely that a kid whose parents who couldn't afford a private preschool or a high-quality day care are shut out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

I have always been curious whether sibling preference increases or decreases at-risk enrollment. I would definitely favor an at-risk preference, even if that meant my kid sat out PK3.

I doubt that it impacts it much! At our lottery-in school, almost all of my peers have an older child who was admitted through lottery and a younger child, admitted via preference, at the school regardless of at-risk/ses status. Possibly at a newly sought-after neighborhood school it could have a different impact.

The MySchoolDC staff ran a number of tests (using 2017 either or 2018 lottery entry data) at the request of the MSDC board, to see if whether and how much an at-risk preference would make a difference in placing at-risk students. The experiment concluded that sibling preference precludes many at-risk students from getting seats at high performing school. Link to the report on this is below.

A quick excerpt from the abstract: The strongest preference contemplated in this analysis, giving at-risk students the top priority out of all applicant groups including siblings, would improve lottery outcomes for 8.2% of the 7,432 applicants identified as at-risk. As the preference weakens, a smaller percentage of at-risk applicants will have improved lottery outcomes.

https://www.myschooldc.org/sites/default/files/dc/sites/myschooldc/page/MSDC%20At-Risk%20Preference%20in%20a%20Unified%20Lottery%204.26.2018_Final.pdf

The challenge is that the test was run based on the picks people made under the current system. I think people might make different choices if the preference list were different but there's no way to test this. I also worry that at-risk families (or lower-income families who are not "at risk" but who still struggle) may hear that there's no sibling preference and not apply for their younger kids, or be less likely to apply for the harder-to-get-into schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

I have always been curious whether sibling preference increases or decreases at-risk enrollment. I would definitely favor an at-risk preference, even if that meant my kid sat out PK3.

I doubt that it impacts it much! At our lottery-in school, almost all of my peers have an older child who was admitted through lottery and a younger child, admitted via preference, at the school regardless of at-risk/ses status. Possibly at a newly sought-after neighborhood school it could have a different impact.

The MySchoolDC staff ran a number of tests (using 2017 either or 2018 lottery entry data) at the request of the MSDC board, to see if whether and how much an at-risk preference would make a difference in placing at-risk students. The experiment concluded that sibling preference precludes many at-risk students from getting seats at high performing school. Link to the report on this is below.

A quick excerpt from the abstract: The strongest preference contemplated in this analysis, giving at-risk students the top priority out of all applicant groups including siblings, would improve lottery outcomes for 8.2% of the 7,432 applicants identified as at-risk. As the preference weakens, a smaller percentage of at-risk applicants will have improved lottery outcomes.

https://www.myschooldc.org/sites/default/files/dc/sites/myschooldc/page/MSDC%20At-Risk%20Preference%20in%20a%20Unified%20Lottery%204.26.2018_Final.pdf

The challenge is that the test was run based on the picks people made under the current system. I think people might make different choices if the preference list were different but there's no way to test this. I also worry that at-risk families (or lower-income families who are not "at risk" but who still struggle) may hear that there's no sibling preference and not apply for their younger kids, or be less likely to apply for the harder-to-get-into schools.

What about at-risk kids who are only children and/or the oldest child? Why should they get second preference to people that already have a kid at the school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I realize this wasn't the point of this thread, but it got me thinking. Why do PK-3 and PK-4 have sibling preference. Since getting in to your in-boundary school isn't guaranteed at that grade it seems like the preference should stop at just in-boundary and all in-boundary kids should have an equal chance at those spots. Just because someone chose to have multiple children, why do they have an advantage of getting in and therefore not having to do another year of paid daycare/pre-school to the tune of $20-$25,000.

It's because parents need their kids at the same school if at all possible. It also encourages family involvement, and adds to the likelihood of families staying at the school, which is how neighborhood schools are strengthened.

I have always been curious whether sibling preference increases or decreases at-risk enrollment. I would definitely favor an at-risk preference, even if that meant my kid sat out PK3.

I doubt that it impacts it much! At our lottery-in school, almost all of my peers have an older child who was admitted through lottery and a younger child, admitted via preference, at the school regardless of at-risk/ses status. Possibly at a newly sought-after neighborhood school it could have a different impact.

The MySchoolDC staff ran a number of tests (using 2017 either or 2018 lottery entry data) at the request of the MSDC board, to see if whether and how much an at-risk preference would make a difference in placing at-risk students. The experiment concluded that sibling preference precludes many at-risk students from getting seats at high performing school. Link to the report on this is below.

A quick excerpt from the abstract: The strongest preference contemplated in this analysis, giving at-risk students the top priority out of all applicant groups including siblings, would improve lottery outcomes for 8.2% of the 7,432 applicants identified as at-risk. As the preference weakens, a smaller percentage of at-risk applicants will have improved lottery outcomes.

https://www.myschooldc.org/sites/default/files/dc/sites/myschooldc/page/MSDC%20At-Risk%20Preference%20in%20a%20Unified%20Lottery%204.26.2018_Final.pdf

The challenge is that the test was run based on the picks people made under the current system. I think people might make different choices if the preference list were different but there's no way to test this. I also worry that at-risk families (or lower-income families who are not "at risk" but who still struggle) may hear that there's no sibling preference and not apply for their younger kids, or be less likely to apply for the harder-to-get-into schools.

A weak impact is what makes it politically feasible.

The study only measured better schools by test scores, but the benefit to families could include getting into a more convenient school or a school with programming suited to their child.