Lottery results are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:oh man - older kid got into Hyde-Addison, younger sibling is wait-listed for PK3 there. As of now, both of them could also attend the immersion charter elementary where older kid has been attending for a few years.

Commute is - I won't get into the particulars, but both of them are roughly the same distance from our home, and for various reasons represent about the same level of convenience/inconvenience.

Hyde-Addison is...on paper, at least...light years ahead of our current charter in almost every respect - academics and test scores, physical facilities, supplemental activities, resources, surrounding neighborhood, an actual feeder pattern (even if it's not our ideal) - but two: the language instruction...which we do care about...and the community - leadership, staff, parents, kids. I mean, I'm sure they have great people at H-A too! But we don't know them, and we DO know and love the community at our charter.

Oh man...I could see this dilemma coming. I know we're lucky to have it! But that doesn't make it less agonizing.

(And even though younger sibling is pretty high on the waitlist, there's obviously no guarantee. so we could be in a situation where we've pulled older kid from the charter but are still sending younger kid - which would be only slightly inconvenient for us, but probably very awkward...)

One thing is that once you enroll your older kid, your younger kid should jump to the top of the waitlist. This is still not certain, but the odds are better.

As someone who has moved schools -- you will connect with your new community, too. Don't make school choices based on community.

This. Enroll the eldest ASAP and your younger kid moves up the waitlist.

We are currently at H-A, our youngest is accepted for PK3 (in-boundary + sibling preferences). We know a few other families with the same dual preferences who likely also got in. For 25-26 PK3, every kid had an in-boundary preference. You can find last year's results here: https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61

Click Results Dashboard for SY19-20 through SY25-26 Seats
Go filter for Hyde, then filter to show only PK3 lottery results for the school.

Anyways, H-A is a good community with good neighborhood feel + a solid set of committed OOB families. You won't feel out of place. If dual language is important to you, you'll need to supplement. H-A's IEP services are excellent (I know from experience)

re enrolling asap: see, I suspected this...but that was exactly the kind of decision pressure we were hoping didn't exist! oh well...thank you so much for the protip!!!!!
And the community and IEP assurances mean a lot (This is a factor for one kid - with the other, it's the opposite concern...they are ahead in most areas and need to be challenged in a way that we're not sure the charter can do, given where most of the kids are on testing...)
Random Hyde-Addison question, given the number of OOB students: I wonder if there ever any parent-organized transportation options? pools, buses, etc? That won't make or break the decision, but it would be nice...it's an option we have at the current school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’re 85 on the waitlist at Latin Cooper for 5th. There’s no chance right?

No chance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:oh man - older kid got into Hyde-Addison, younger sibling is wait-listed for PK3 there. As of now, both of them could also attend the immersion charter elementary where older kid has been attending for a few years.

Commute is - I won't get into the particulars, but both of them are roughly the same distance from our home, and for various reasons represent about the same level of convenience/inconvenience.

Hyde-Addison is...on paper, at least...light years ahead of our current charter in almost every respect - academics and test scores, physical facilities, supplemental activities, resources, surrounding neighborhood, an actual feeder pattern (even if it's not our ideal) - but two: the language instruction...which we do care about...and the community - leadership, staff, parents, kids. I mean, I'm sure they have great people at H-A too! But we don't know them, and we DO know and love the community at our charter.

Oh man...I could see this dilemma coming. I know we're lucky to have it! But that doesn't make it less agonizing.

(And even though younger sibling is pretty high on the waitlist, there's obviously no guarantee. so we could be in a situation where we've pulled older kid from the charter but are still sending younger kid - which would be only slightly inconvenient for us, but probably very awkward...)

One thing is that once you enroll your older kid, your younger kid should jump to the top of the waitlist. This is still not certain, but the odds are better.

As someone who has moved schools -- you will connect with your new community, too. Don't make school choices based on community.

OP here: Thank you! I needed to hear that...
I will say that we really do believe in this charter - it's unique, and we love it, and we want it to succeed! It's just - not where Hyde-Addison is, on any metric.

We had similar feelings of affection for the school my child attended before H-A, but long term plan of not wanting to move but needing a solid middle and high school feeder won out. I’m so glad we switched, it’s truly a joyful and well-managed school. We’ve needed 504 services and they’ve been wonderful. I do not think your PK3 will get in this year, but having sibling preference will help for next year and if not definitely get you in for K. If you don’t take it now, your older child may be the one to get shut out - lottery seats dry up in 3rd/4th/5th grades. They are most plentiful K/1st/2nd.

As someone hoping to get a kid into H-A in the upper grades, I'm confused why there aren't more spots since someone told us inbound kids often switch to private then. Do they drop the number of classes? Also great info about the school. I hope we get in!

[Anonymous]

I do find the "ineligible" designations at Banneker a bit strange -- these are all kids who had interviews at Banneker, right? So that would indicate that they did a second screening post interviews based on composite score and the lottery only ran for everyone above a specific score threshold (with others deemed ineligible and thus not actually placed in the lottery for Banneker).

If that's what is happening, it would be useful to know at some point what the score threshold is and what scores kids got. This is a tough process and more transparency would be better, especially for families who may have very weak IB options and be contemplating moves or private as an alternative.

Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do find the "ineligible" designations at Banneker a bit strange -- these are all kids who had interviews at Banneker, right? So that would indicate that they did a second screening post interviews based on composite score and the lottery only ran for everyone above a specific score threshold (with others deemed ineligible and thus not actually placed in the lottery for Banneker).

If that's what is happening, it would be useful to know at some point what the score threshold is and what scores kids got. This is a tough process and more transparency would be better, especially for families who may have very weak IB options and be contemplating moves or private as an alternative.

Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

It means they didn’t do as well in their interview and on-site essay. They don’t accept everyone that interviews (same as Walls), it’s part of the screening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:oh man - older kid got into Hyde-Addison, younger sibling is wait-listed for PK3 there. As of now, both of them could also attend the immersion charter elementary where older kid has been attending for a few years.

Commute is - I won't get into the particulars, but both of them are roughly the same distance from our home, and for various reasons represent about the same level of convenience/inconvenience.

Hyde-Addison is...on paper, at least...light years ahead of our current charter in almost every respect - academics and test scores, physical facilities, supplemental activities, resources, surrounding neighborhood, an actual feeder pattern (even if it's not our ideal) - but two: the language instruction...which we do care about...and the community - leadership, staff, parents, kids. I mean, I'm sure they have great people at H-A too! But we don't know them, and we DO know and love the community at our charter.

Oh man...I could see this dilemma coming. I know we're lucky to have it! But that doesn't make it less agonizing.

(And even though younger sibling is pretty high on the waitlist, there's obviously no guarantee. so we could be in a situation where we've pulled older kid from the charter but are still sending younger kid - which would be only slightly inconvenient for us, but probably very awkward...)

One thing is that once you enroll your older kid, your younger kid should jump to the top of the waitlist. This is still not certain, but the odds are better.

As someone who has moved schools -- you will connect with your new community, too. Don't make school choices based on community.

This. Enroll the eldest ASAP and your younger kid moves up the waitlist.

We are currently at H-A, our youngest is accepted for PK3 (in-boundary + sibling preferences). We know a few other families with the same dual preferences who likely also got in. For 25-26 PK3, every kid had an in-boundary preference. You can find last year's results here: https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61

Click Results Dashboard for SY19-20 through SY25-26 Seats
Go filter for Hyde, then filter to show only PK3 lottery results for the school.

Anyways, H-A is a good community with good neighborhood feel + a solid set of committed OOB families. You won't feel out of place. If dual language is important to you, you'll need to supplement. H-A's IEP services are excellent (I know from experience)

Just to temper this - if you've got an offer at Hyde-Addison, then your younger child already has "Sibling Offered" preference at HA. Changing that to "Sibling Enrolled" is unlikely to dramatically impact your number (maybe you go up one or two spots) since the dominant preference for those seats is "In Boundary"

Plus - someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought schools didn't start making waitlist offers until after the 5/1 deadline? So it doesn't actually matter if you enroll at HA tomorrow or three weeks from now?

I say this all knowing that if I were in your shoes I'd be enrolling in HA immediately JUST in case it helped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Got into Latin with no preferences. I'm gobsmacked and still processing.We've never had good lottery luck and I knew we had to try but I assumed we'd get yet another wait list number in the 200s.

Congrats and know the feeling. We are at a Deal feeder but tested the lottery again and got the annual 300+ on the Latin WL’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My rising 9th grader also marked "ineligible" at Banneker (but decent waitlist at Walls, go figure!) even though she has stellar grades and had a good interview and has a sibling at the top of her class at Banneker. Must have been a really competitive year. Congrats to everyone who got what they hoped for! For those who didn't, hope your kids don't take it personally. The system is complete and total crapshoot even for the competitive schools.

Interesting. I have to say, I didn't think Banneker was all that tough of an admit. I honestly thought they accepted nearly all their applicants and weren't like Walls.

Not true at all. They get almost as many applications as Walls. My kid got interviews at both, but a bunch of her friends didn’t even get interviews at Banneker, only at Walls (and most of those got into Walls or waitlisted). Banneker is definitely competitive.

I find it hard to believe that "most" of her friends got into Walls and didn't even get interviews at Banneker. There's no "most" anywhere when it comes to Walls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My rising 9th grader also marked "ineligible" at Banneker (but decent waitlist at Walls, go figure!) even though she has stellar grades and had a good interview and has a sibling at the top of her class at Banneker. Must have been a really competitive year. Congrats to everyone who got what they hoped for! For those who didn't, hope your kids don't take it personally. The system is complete and total crapshoot even for the competitive schools.

Interesting. I have to say, I didn't think Banneker was all that tough of an admit. I honestly thought they accepted nearly all their applicants and weren't like Walls.

DCUM certainly pushes that narrative.

I think it's harder than it used to be. My DD 7th is pining to go.

I actually think it's just that people used to say whatever they wanted about Banneker with zero first-hand information and it was mostly informed by racism. Now that the "DCUM" kind of people are priced out of privates and running out of spots at J-R and SWW, all of a sudden they're "taking a chance" on the school they considered themselves benevolent pioneers for even considering, only to find out . . . it's not a cakewalk just because it's full of black kids.

Yea I too suspect racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:oh man - older kid got into Hyde-Addison, younger sibling is wait-listed for PK3 there. As of now, both of them could also attend the immersion charter elementary where older kid has been attending for a few years.

Commute is - I won't get into the particulars, but both of them are roughly the same distance from our home, and for various reasons represent about the same level of convenience/inconvenience.

Hyde-Addison is...on paper, at least...light years ahead of our current charter in almost every respect - academics and test scores, physical facilities, supplemental activities, resources, surrounding neighborhood, an actual feeder pattern (even if it's not our ideal) - but two: the language instruction...which we do care about...and the community - leadership, staff, parents, kids. I mean, I'm sure they have great people at H-A too! But we don't know them, and we DO know and love the community at our charter.

Oh man...I could see this dilemma coming. I know we're lucky to have it! But that doesn't make it less agonizing.

(And even though younger sibling is pretty high on the waitlist, there's obviously no guarantee. so we could be in a situation where we've pulled older kid from the charter but are still sending younger kid - which would be only slightly inconvenient for us, but probably very awkward...)

One thing is that once you enroll your older kid, your younger kid should jump to the top of the waitlist. This is still not certain, but the odds are better.

As someone who has moved schools -- you will connect with your new community, too. Don't make school choices based on community.

This. Enroll the eldest ASAP and your younger kid moves up the waitlist.

We are currently at H-A, our youngest is accepted for PK3 (in-boundary + sibling preferences). We know a few other families with the same dual preferences who likely also got in. For 25-26 PK3, every kid had an in-boundary preference. You can find last year's results here: https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61https://enrolldcps.dc.gov/node/61

Click Results Dashboard for SY19-20 through SY25-26 Seats
Go filter for Hyde, then filter to show only PK3 lottery results for the school.

Anyways, H-A is a good community with good neighborhood feel + a solid set of committed OOB families. You won't feel out of place. If dual language is important to you, you'll need to supplement. H-A's IEP services are excellent (I know from experience)

Just to temper this - if you've got an offer at Hyde-Addison, then your younger child already has "Sibling Offered" preference at HA. Changing that to "Sibling Enrolled" is unlikely to dramatically impact your number (maybe you go up one or two spots) since the dominant preference for those seats is "In Boundary"

Plus - someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought schools didn't start making waitlist offers until after the 5/1 deadline? So it doesn't actually matter if you enroll at HA tomorrow or three weeks from now?

I say this all knowing that if I were in your shoes I'd be enrolling in HA immediately JUST in case it helped.

If the older one enrolls in a different school, doesn’t the younger one lose the sibling preference at the immersion school? I think you can actually lose the younger one’s spot if the older one doesn’t stay there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do find the "ineligible" designations at Banneker a bit strange -- these are all kids who had interviews at Banneker, right? So that would indicate that they did a second screening post interviews based on composite score and the lottery only ran for everyone above a specific score threshold (with others deemed ineligible and thus not actually placed in the lottery for Banneker).

If that's what is happening, it would be useful to know at some point what the score threshold is and what scores kids got. This is a tough process and more transparency would be better, especially for families who may have very weak IB options and be contemplating moves or private as an alternative.

Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

It means they didn’t do as well in their interview and on-site essay. They don’t accept everyone that interviews (same as Walls), it’s part of the screening.

I don't know if Walls uses "ineligible." I think they just put everyone on the waitlist, even though few will get accepted from the waitlist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do find the "ineligible" designations at Banneker a bit strange -- these are all kids who had interviews at Banneker, right? So that would indicate that they did a second screening post interviews based on composite score and the lottery only ran for everyone above a specific score threshold (with others deemed ineligible and thus not actually placed in the lottery for Banneker).

If that's what is happening, it would be useful to know at some point what the score threshold is and what scores kids got. This is a tough process and more transparency would be better, especially for families who may have very weak IB options and be contemplating moves or private as an alternative.

Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

I do find the term confusing. Being eligible and not getting an offer are two different things.

[Anonymous]

Interesting. I have to say, I didn't think Banneker was all that tough of an admit. I honestly thought they accepted nearly all their applicants and weren't like Walls.

Pp, was there a problem with the application, something missing? Or just didn't get picked?

No, I don't think there were any problems with her application - she had her recommendations, interviewed, and completed the essay. Unless something happened to her essay. I just assume she was not selected, but "ineligible" can also mean you didn't complete part of the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do find the "ineligible" designations at Banneker a bit strange -- these are all kids who had interviews at Banneker, right? So that would indicate that they did a second screening post interviews based on composite score and the lottery only ran for everyone above a specific score threshold (with others deemed ineligible and thus not actually placed in the lottery for Banneker).

If that's what is happening, it would be useful to know at some point what the score threshold is and what scores kids got. This is a tough process and more transparency would be better, especially for families who may have very weak IB options and be contemplating moves or private as an alternative.

Also has anyone been deemed ineligible for Walls yet? Odd for that designation to be appearing for one school but not the other. McKinley's waitlist is likely small enough that they didn't have to do a cutoff, but I would presume that Walls and Banneker would have similar applicant numbers and similar cut offs for the lottery pool.

It means they didn’t do as well in their interview and on-site essay. They don’t accept everyone that interviews (same as Walls), it’s part of the screening.

Two cuts would be news. I’m surprised they don’t rank into the hundreds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My rising 9th grader also marked "ineligible" at Banneker (but decent waitlist at Walls, go figure!) even though she has stellar grades and had a good interview and has a sibling at the top of her class at Banneker. Must have been a really competitive year. Congrats to everyone who got what they hoped for! For those who didn't, hope your kids don't take it personally. The system is complete and total crapshoot even for the competitive schools.

I mean I don’t know if I’d push it but it sounds like maybe an administrative issue. The intersection of “quailified for walls” and “didn’t qualify for Banneker” must be microscopic

I have heard of multiple kids in that category in past two years. It is true, but no one ever explains why. (One guess: they don't think the person will accept the offer, and they don't have a waitlist, kids are either matched or ineligible at Banneker, no one is waitlisted.)