26-27 Lottery data up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also at a DCI feeder with a DCI offer (thankfully) and families that didn’t get in are talking about moving. Precarious situation to be in and I feel terribly for those kids who are facing both that disappointment and a major transition.

Yeah I really don't like this. This is supposed to be a feeder track that appears to run parallel to DCPS as an alternative. The system should be organized so that all the feeder elementary schools can send their kids to the middle school.

Who is running this system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

So is the 1126 the number of kids who were determined eligible at Ellington? Or is it the number of kids who completed the application process, the eligibles plus the ineligibles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

OK . . . So does this mean Banneker still has 21 available seats?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

OK . . . So does this mean Banneker still has 21 available seats?

No. They make the number of seats greater than the class they want because they know not everyone will match/accept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

OK . . . So does this mean Banneker still has 21 available seats?

No. They make the number of seats greater than the class they want because they know not everyone will match/accept.

It's all very confusing. Why is there no wait-list yet? I read the numbers as 1126 applied and 236 were accepted. It's not that straightforward?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCI has a waitlists from most feeders schools. Do you think everyone will get a seat?

I’m wondering this too

Absolutely not. They expanded the elementary schools far beyond the number of DCI seats. Those kids aren’t going to Latin or Basis, so there’s no better middle school option for them without moving.

Isn't it a little crazy to have a feeder system where not every kid is guaranteed a seat at the feeder middle/high school?

No, not crazy at all if the feeders have expanded and DCI has gotten a lot more desirable and overwhelming majority of kids are going there for middle. DCI does not have the space to expand in the current building. It’s a good thing for DCI that many families want it as it continues on its upward trajectory.

The feeder schools also make it clear that there is no guarantee. We knew this last year and got in. In fact, we got into Latin Cooper the year before and declined because we really wanted DCI. 2 families we knew took Latin spots. Some families did not play the lottery for 5th at all.

So we were willing to take the risk and 60/70% per our school of getting in. We got into DCI and my kids group of friends, they all got in. Chances of sending my kid to his IB middle - absolutely 0%.

Looking back in retrospect is much easier but it was the right decision for us and kid is having a really good experience at DCI.

We are at a feeder and DCI and everyone we know played the lottery for Latin in 5th and many were disappointed they didn’t get in. There are definitely parents that don’t really desire DCI but don’t have another feasible option.

PP here. Never said DCI is for everyone. Latin might be a better fit for some kids but we knew it wasn’t for ours.

If you don’t think it’s a good fit then don’t list it in the lottery so that spot can go to another feeder family who really wants it.

BTW one of the 2 families above who went to Latin, the 1 family took the spot because it was a sure thing not because she thought it was the best for her DS. I think she might have some regrets but was not willing to take the risk like us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

OK . . . So does this mean Banneker still has 21 available seats?

No. They make the number of seats greater than the class they want because they know not everyone will match/accept.

It's all very confusing. Why is there no wait-list yet? I read the numbers as 1126 applied and 236 were accepted. It's not that straightforward?

Banneker might not WL. Walls does (but 40 or so kids have to turn down the spot before they get into the WL).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

OK . . . So does this mean Banneker still has 21 available seats?

No. They make the number of seats greater than the class they want because they know not everyone will match/accept.

It's all very confusing. Why is there no wait-list yet? I read the numbers as 1126 applied and 236 were accepted. It's not that straightforward?

Banneker might not WL. Walls does (but 40 or so kids have to turn down the spot before they get into the WL).

Banneker has gone to its waitlist in some past years. If you go on the Tableau site you'll see that usually there's no or very little wait-list. But then for SY 23-24, 72 kids WL and 70 offers. I honestly have no idea what caused that unusual year-- was it the year of the move?

Remember that Banneker is not completely in control of whether it has a waitlist. Banneker has a certain number of seats it's offering, and a certain number of kids it would like to match in the lottery. And then it has its pool of eligible kids. But Banneker does not know whether those eligible kids are likely to match at other schools they ranked higher, so it does not know how many kids it will actually match from its eligible pool. It can estimate based on past data, but it's never going to be really precise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCI has a waitlists from most feeders schools. Do you think everyone will get a seat?

I’m wondering this too

Absolutely not. They expanded the elementary schools far beyond the number of DCI seats. Those kids aren’t going to Latin or Basis, so there’s no better middle school option for them without moving.

Isn't it a little crazy to have a feeder system where not every kid is guaranteed a seat at the feeder middle/high school?

No, not crazy at all if the feeders have expanded and DCI has gotten a lot more desirable and overwhelming majority of kids are going there for middle. DCI does not have the space to expand in the current building. It’s a good thing for DCI that many families want it as it continues on its upward trajectory.

The feeder schools also make it clear that there is no guarantee. We knew this last year and got in. In fact, we got into Latin Cooper the year before and declined because we really wanted DCI. 2 families we knew took Latin spots. Some families did not play the lottery for 5th at all.

So we were willing to take the risk and 60/70% per our school of getting in. We got into DCI and my kids group of friends, they all got in. Chances of sending my kid to his IB middle - absolutely 0%.

Looking back in retrospect is much easier but it was the right decision for us and kid is having a really good experience at DCI.

We are at a feeder and DCI and everyone we know played the lottery for Latin in 5th and many were disappointed they didn’t get in. There are definitely parents that don’t really desire DCI but don’t have another feasible option.

Parents at DCI feeders should play the lottery on 5th grade too. It will only get harder to get into a middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also at a DCI feeder with a DCI offer (thankfully) and families that didn’t get in are talking about moving. Precarious situation to be in and I feel terribly for those kids who are facing both that disappointment and a major transition.

Yeah I really don't like this. This is supposed to be a feeder track that appears to run parallel to DCPS as an alternative. The system should be organized so that all the feeder elementary schools can send their kids to the middle school.

Who is running this system?

The problem is that Stokes, MV, and DCB got greedy and expanded. The system was developed with set number of DCI seats set aside for each feeder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also at a DCI feeder with a DCI offer (thankfully) and families that didn’t get in are talking about moving. Precarious situation to be in and I feel terribly for those kids who are facing both that disappointment and a major transition.

Yeah I really don't like this. This is supposed to be a feeder track that appears to run parallel to DCPS as an alternative. The system should be organized so that all the feeder elementary schools can send their kids to the middle school.

Who is running this system?

The problem is that Stokes, MV, and DCB got greedy and expanded. The system was developed with set number of DCI seats set aside for each feeder.

All feeders expanded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.

Explain this to a novice. It says they had 1126 applicants and "matched" 239 of the 260 seats. Huh?

Application schools decide whether each applicant is eligible or ineligible. They then admit all the eligible students for whom they have room who do not match with higher-ranked schools.

OK . . . So does this mean Banneker still has 21 available seats?

No. They make the number of seats greater than the class they want because they know not everyone will match/accept.

It's all very confusing. Why is there no wait-list yet? I read the numbers as 1126 applied and 236 were accepted. It's not that straightforward?

Banneker might not WL. Walls does (but 40 or so kids have to turn down the spot before they get into the WL).

Banneker has gone to its waitlist in some past years. If you go on the Tableau site you'll see that usually there's no or very little wait-list. But then for SY 23-24, 72 kids WL and 70 offers. I honestly have no idea what caused that unusual year-- was it the year of the move?

Remember that Banneker is not completely in control of whether it has a waitlist. Banneker has a certain number of seats it's offering, and a certain number of kids it would like to match in the lottery. And then it has its pool of eligible kids. But Banneker does not know whether those eligible kids are likely to match at other schools they ranked higher, so it does not know how many kids it will actually match from its eligible pool. It can estimate based on past data, but it's never going to be really precise.

Well, accepted students haven't even made their decisions yet, so . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also at a DCI feeder with a DCI offer (thankfully) and families that didn’t get in are talking about moving. Precarious situation to be in and I feel terribly for those kids who are facing both that disappointment and a major transition.

Yeah I really don't like this. This is supposed to be a feeder track that appears to run parallel to DCPS as an alternative. The system should be organized so that all the feeder elementary schools can send their kids to the middle school.

Who is running this system?

The problem is that Stokes, MV, and DCB got greedy and expanded. The system was developed with set number of DCI seats set aside for each feeder.

All feeders expanded.

But are all feeders allowed to stop accepting new students after first like LAMB? I don’t think so, I think LAMB got that exception because it was Montessori and Spanish. The other schools have buildings and renovations invested in accommodating the expanded sizes, so they’re not going to care about screwing over families until they have trouble filling seats.

And as that interesting PP says, there are enough families for now that either don’t realize or are willing to gamble with their kids’ middle school experience that the impacts on the feeder enrollments won’t be felt for a few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also at a DCI feeder with a DCI offer (thankfully) and families that didn’t get in are talking about moving. Precarious situation to be in and I feel terribly for those kids who are facing both that disappointment and a major transition.

Yeah I really don't like this. This is supposed to be a feeder track that appears to run parallel to DCPS as an alternative. The system should be organized so that all the feeder elementary schools can send their kids to the middle school.

Who is running this system?

The problem is that Stokes, MV, and DCB got greedy and expanded. The system was developed with set number of DCI seats set aside for each feeder.

All feeders expanded.

But are all feeders allowed to stop accepting new students after first like LAMB? I don’t think so, I think LAMB got that exception because it was Montessori and Spanish. The other schools have buildings and renovations invested in accommodating the expanded sizes, so they’re not going to care about screwing over families until they have trouble filling seats.

And as that interesting PP says, there are enough families for now that either don’t realize or are willing to gamble with their kids’ middle school experience that the impacts on the feeder enrollments won’t be felt for a few years.

YY also stops accepting new students. The other feeders take new students because they have attrition, so if they didn't, they'd run short of students in the upper grades. And I think they're gambling on attrition to keep their 5th grade classes small.

It's not necessarily a gamble if you're happy with your backup plans.