Walls admissions article in the Post

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear suggestions about what could be done to address equity in access to the school and still be a school that is focused on serving high achievers that includes high achievers from across the city..

I was thinking maybe teacher recommendations? Like, each school can nominate x number of students that meet GPA, or certain class rank? Of course I’m worried about bias, but surely it can’t be worse than the interview, oy.

I think there are probably also a lot of cases when the parent interviews affect the chance of their kid getting in. Everyone complains about "the interview" but I'm sure the rating scale also factors in the parent interview.

Interviewer was awful -- if SWW want to weight that heavily on interviews they need a serious overhaul of the entire interview process (or maybe it was just revealing of school culture in general)

Agree with PP about teacher recs, scores, etc. . . you know - the evidence of all of the hard work my child put into an elite MS transcript which amounted to a hopelessly high waitlist # at SWW. Maybe over a 10 min interview? What a joke

SWW explicitly said that the parent interview would not matter. My straight A student (very personable) was asked two questions with no follow-ups. Despite being told that everyone would have a 10 minute interview, it took less than four minutes, including the questions she asked the interviewer and students. We were asked one question. It was mind boggling. They literally could not have learned anything about these kids. This process if very similar to others we have heard about, while we heard that some kids did get a full 10 minutes (still woefully inadequate to glean much from a 13 year old, let alone have it account for 80 percent of admissions). The kids we know who were accepted vs rejected was essentially random--some very high performing, charming kids got waitlisted (high numbers), some kids with lower GPAs and less social skills got in. I agree with the PP who suggested a FOIA request...that would answer a lot of the questions that folks are merely speculating about. My guess is the reason that nobody has done is that, at the end of the day, the families at Walls don't end up all that thrilled with it so nobody goes to the trouble of following through on why their kid didn't get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear suggestions about what could be done to address equity in access to the school and still be a school that is focused on serving high achievers that includes high achievers from across the city..

I was thinking maybe teacher recommendations? Like, each school can nominate x number of students that meet GPA, or certain class rank? Of course I’m worried about bias, but surely it can’t be worse than the interview, oy.

I think there are probably also a lot of cases when the parent interviews affect the chance of their kid getting in. Everyone complains about "the interview" but I'm sure the rating scale also factors in the parent interview.

Interviewer was awful -- if SWW want to weight that heavily on interviews they need a serious overhaul of the entire interview process (or maybe it was just revealing of school culture in general)

Agree with PP about teacher recs, scores, etc. . . you know - the evidence of all of the hard work my child put into an elite MS transcript which amounted to a hopelessly high waitlist # at SWW. Maybe over a 10 min interview? What a joke

SWW explicitly said that the parent interview would not matter. My straight A student (very personable) was asked two questions with no follow-ups. Despite being told that everyone would have a 10 minute interview, it took less than four minutes, including the questions she asked the interviewer and students. We were asked one question. It was mind boggling. They literally could not have learned anything about these kids. This process if very similar to others we have heard about, while we heard that some kids did get a full 10 minutes (still woefully inadequate to glean much from a 13 year old, let alone have it account for 80 percent of admissions). The kids we know who were accepted vs rejected was essentially random--some very high performing, charming kids got waitlisted (high numbers), some kids with lower GPAs and less social skills got in. I agree with the PP who suggested a FOIA request...that would answer a lot of the questions that folks are merely speculating about. My guess is the reason that nobody has done is that, at the end of the day, the families at Walls don't end up all that thrilled with it so nobody goes to the trouble of following through on why their kid didn't get in.

If you care enough to post here, why didn’t you file a FOIA request and publish the results here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear suggestions about what could be done to address equity in access to the school and still be a school that is focused on serving high achievers that includes high achievers from across the city..

I was thinking maybe teacher recommendations? Like, each school can nominate x number of students that meet GPA, or certain class rank? Of course I’m worried about bias, but surely it can’t be worse than the interview, oy.

I think there are probably also a lot of cases when the parent interviews affect the chance of their kid getting in. Everyone complains about "the interview" but I'm sure the rating scale also factors in the parent interview.

Interviewer was awful -- if SWW want to weight that heavily on interviews they need a serious overhaul of the entire interview process (or maybe it was just revealing of school culture in general)

Agree with PP about teacher recs, scores, etc. . . you know - the evidence of all of the hard work my child put into an elite MS transcript which amounted to a hopelessly high waitlist # at SWW. Maybe over a 10 min interview? What a joke

SWW explicitly said that the parent interview would not matter. My straight A student (very personable) was asked two questions with no follow-ups. Despite being told that everyone would have a 10 minute interview, it took less than four minutes, including the questions she asked the interviewer and students. We were asked one question. It was mind boggling. They literally could not have learned anything about these kids. This process if very similar to others we have heard about, while we heard that some kids did get a full 10 minutes (still woefully inadequate to glean much from a 13 year old, let alone have it account for 80 percent of admissions). The kids we know who were accepted vs rejected was essentially random--some very high performing, charming kids got waitlisted (high numbers), some kids with lower GPAs and less social skills got in. I agree with the PP who suggested a FOIA request...that would answer a lot of the questions that folks are merely speculating about. My guess is the reason that nobody has done is that, at the end of the day, the families at Walls don't end up all that thrilled with it so nobody goes to the trouble of following through on why their kid didn't get in.

If you care enough to post here, why didn’t you file a FOIA request and publish the results here?

Posting here takes virtually zero effort (as you obviously know)...FOIA actually does take some, more than I'm willing to commit. My point is that for folks who DO care, FOIA would seem to be an avenue to some actual answers rather than mere speculation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear suggestions about what could be done to address equity in access to the school and still be a school that is focused on serving high achievers that includes high achievers from across the city..

I was thinking maybe teacher recommendations? Like, each school can nominate x number of students that meet GPA, or certain class rank? Of course I’m worried about bias, but surely it can’t be worse than the interview, oy.

I think there are probably also a lot of cases when the parent interviews affect the chance of their kid getting in. Everyone complains about "the interview" but I'm sure the rating scale also factors in the parent interview.

Interviewer was awful -- if SWW want to weight that heavily on interviews they need a serious overhaul of the entire interview process (or maybe it was just revealing of school culture in general)

Agree with PP about teacher recs, scores, etc. . . you know - the evidence of all of the hard work my child put into an elite MS transcript which amounted to a hopelessly high waitlist # at SWW. Maybe over a 10 min interview? What a joke

SWW explicitly said that the parent interview would not matter. My straight A student (very personable) was asked two questions with no follow-ups. Despite being told that everyone would have a 10 minute interview, it took less than four minutes, including the questions she asked the interviewer and students. We were asked one question. It was mind boggling. They literally could not have learned anything about these kids. This process if very similar to others we have heard about, while we heard that some kids did get a full 10 minutes (still woefully inadequate to glean much from a 13 year old, let alone have it account for 80 percent of admissions). The kids we know who were accepted vs rejected was essentially random--some very high performing, charming kids got waitlisted (high numbers), some kids with lower GPAs and less social skills got in. I agree with the PP who suggested a FOIA request...that would answer a lot of the questions that folks are merely speculating about. My guess is the reason that nobody has done is that, at the end of the day, the families at Walls don't end up all that thrilled with it so nobody goes to the trouble of following through on why their kid didn't get in.

If you kid was actually only asked two questions you should call the school and ask to see her interview scores/speak with an AP. Every kid was asked 3 questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear suggestions about what could be done to address equity in access to the school and still be a school that is focused on serving high achievers that includes high achievers from across the city..

I was thinking maybe teacher recommendations? Like, each school can nominate x number of students that meet GPA, or certain class rank? Of course I’m worried about bias, but surely it can’t be worse than the interview, oy.

I think there are probably also a lot of cases when the parent interviews affect the chance of their kid getting in. Everyone complains about "the interview" but I'm sure the rating scale also factors in the parent interview.

Interviewer was awful -- if SWW want to weight that heavily on interviews they need a serious overhaul of the entire interview process (or maybe it was just revealing of school culture in general)

Agree with PP about teacher recs, scores, etc. . . you know - the evidence of all of the hard work my child put into an elite MS transcript which amounted to a hopelessly high waitlist # at SWW. Maybe over a 10 min interview? What a joke

SWW explicitly said that the parent interview would not matter. My straight A student (very personable) was asked two questions with no follow-ups. Despite being told that everyone would have a 10 minute interview, it took less than four minutes, including the questions she asked the interviewer and students. We were asked one question. It was mind boggling. They literally could not have learned anything about these kids. This process if very similar to others we have heard about, while we heard that some kids did get a full 10 minutes (still woefully inadequate to glean much from a 13 year old, let alone have it account for 80 percent of admissions). The kids we know who were accepted vs rejected was essentially random--some very high performing, charming kids got waitlisted (high numbers), some kids with lower GPAs and less social skills got in. I agree with the PP who suggested a FOIA request...that would answer a lot of the questions that folks are merely speculating about. My guess is the reason that nobody has done is that, at the end of the day, the families at Walls don't end up all that thrilled with it so nobody goes to the trouble of following through on why their kid didn't get in.

If you kid was actually only asked two questions you should call the school and ask to see her interview scores/speak with an AP. Every kid was asked 3 questions.

Mine got 2 as well. I know because we had a entire conversation about it immediately afterwards. She was expecting 3 questions and was asked 2. I have heard all sorts of horrors about these interviews, including the teacher confusing the gender of the student. They were not well done.

We also applied to private schools and she was used to 30-45 minute interviews. I know that Walls doesn't have the staff for these but it was mind boggling that Walls could glean anything from 4 minutes.

Lastly, this is going to sound ridiculous but I swear, the really good looking kids got in. My daughter has three friends who are gorgeous, dynamic--the whole popular girl package. They are not necessarily the smartest (B students) but they are lovely. Well, they all got in.
So this is not to say that only good looking kids go in and those who did not are not good looking. Clearly this wasn't the case. But when you are interviewing kids for as little as 2 minutes each, looks and charisma are going to come in to play (in some cases) especially if the interviewer is a high schooler.
Just saying. I'm sure it had a factor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear suggestions about what could be done to address equity in access to the school and still be a school that is focused on serving high achievers that includes high achievers from across the city..

I was thinking maybe teacher recommendations? Like, each school can nominate x number of students that meet GPA, or certain class rank? Of course I’m worried about bias, but surely it can’t be worse than the interview, oy.

I think there are probably also a lot of cases when the parent interviews affect the chance of their kid getting in. Everyone complains about "the interview" but I'm sure the rating scale also factors in the parent interview.

Interviewer was awful -- if SWW want to weight that heavily on interviews they need a serious overhaul of the entire interview process (or maybe it was just revealing of school culture in general)

Agree with PP about teacher recs, scores, etc. . . you know - the evidence of all of the hard work my child put into an elite MS transcript which amounted to a hopelessly high waitlist # at SWW. Maybe over a 10 min interview? What a joke

SWW explicitly said that the parent interview would not matter. My straight A student (very personable) was asked two questions with no follow-ups. Despite being told that everyone would have a 10 minute interview, it took less than four minutes, including the questions she asked the interviewer and students. We were asked one question. It was mind boggling. They literally could not have learned anything about these kids. This process if very similar to others we have heard about, while we heard that some kids did get a full 10 minutes (still woefully inadequate to glean much from a 13 year old, let alone have it account for 80 percent of admissions). The kids we know who were accepted vs rejected was essentially random--some very high performing, charming kids got waitlisted (high numbers), some kids with lower GPAs and less social skills got in. I agree with the PP who suggested a FOIA request...that would answer a lot of the questions that folks are merely speculating about. My guess is the reason that nobody has done is that, at the end of the day, the families at Walls don't end up all that thrilled with it so nobody goes to the trouble of following through on why their kid didn't get in.

If you kid was actually only asked two questions you should call the school and ask to see her interview scores/speak with an AP. Every kid was asked 3 questions.

Mine got 2 as well. I know because we had a entire conversation about it immediately afterwards. She was expecting 3 questions and was asked 2. I have heard all sorts of horrors about these interviews, including the teacher confusing the gender of the student. They were not well done.

We also applied to private schools and she was used to 30-45 minute interviews. I know that Walls doesn't have the staff for these but it was mind boggling that Walls could glean anything from 4 minutes.

Lastly, this is going to sound ridiculous but I swear, the really good looking kids got in. My daughter has three friends who are gorgeous, dynamic--the whole popular girl package. They are not necessarily the smartest (B students) but they are lovely. Well, they all got in.
So this is not to say that only good looking kids go in and those who did not are not good looking. Clearly this wasn't the case. But when you are interviewing kids for as little as 2 minutes each, looks and charisma are going to come in to play (in some cases) especially if the interviewer is a high schooler.
Just saying. I'm sure it had a factor.

Wow. You should submit a FOIA request.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to hear suggestions about what could be done to address equity in access to the school and still be a school that is focused on serving high achievers that includes high achievers from across the city..

I was thinking maybe teacher recommendations? Like, each school can nominate x number of students that meet GPA, or certain class rank? Of course I’m worried about bias, but surely it can’t be worse than the interview, oy.

I think there are probably also a lot of cases when the parent interviews affect the chance of their kid getting in. Everyone complains about "the interview" but I'm sure the rating scale also factors in the parent interview.

Interviewer was awful -- if SWW want to weight that heavily on interviews they need a serious overhaul of the entire interview process (or maybe it was just revealing of school culture in general)

Agree with PP about teacher recs, scores, etc. . . you know - the evidence of all of the hard work my child put into an elite MS transcript which amounted to a hopelessly high waitlist # at SWW. Maybe over a 10 min interview? What a joke

SWW explicitly said that the parent interview would not matter. My straight A student (very personable) was asked two questions with no follow-ups. Despite being told that everyone would have a 10 minute interview, it took less than four minutes, including the questions she asked the interviewer and students. We were asked one question. It was mind boggling. They literally could not have learned anything about these kids. This process if very similar to others we have heard about, while we heard that some kids did get a full 10 minutes (still woefully inadequate to glean much from a 13 year old, let alone have it account for 80 percent of admissions). The kids we know who were accepted vs rejected was essentially random--some very high performing, charming kids got waitlisted (high numbers), some kids with lower GPAs and less social skills got in. I agree with the PP who suggested a FOIA request...that would answer a lot of the questions that folks are merely speculating about. My guess is the reason that nobody has done is that, at the end of the day, the families at Walls don't end up all that thrilled with it so nobody goes to the trouble of following through on why their kid didn't get in.

If you kid was actually only asked two questions you should call the school and ask to see her interview scores/speak with an AP. Every kid was asked 3 questions.

Mine got 2 as well. I know because we had a entire conversation about it immediately afterwards. She was expecting 3 questions and was asked 2. I have heard all sorts of horrors about these interviews, including the teacher confusing the gender of the student. They were not well done.

We also applied to private schools and she was used to 30-45 minute interviews. I know that Walls doesn't have the staff for these but it was mind boggling that Walls could glean anything from 4 minutes.

Lastly, this is going to sound ridiculous but I swear, the really good looking kids got in. My daughter has three friends who are gorgeous, dynamic--the whole popular girl package. They are not necessarily the smartest (B students) but they are lovely. Well, they all got in.
So this is not to say that only good looking kids go in and those who did not are not good looking. Clearly this wasn't the case. But when you are interviewing kids for as little as 2 minutes each, looks and charisma are going to come in to play (in some cases) especially if the interviewer is a high schooler.
Just saying. I'm sure it had a factor.

that is fascinating! and I would completely believe it. how to find out more?

[Anonymous]

Is it possible that they assigned similar scores to kids with 3.0 and above and just did a lottery? This would also explain why some kids appear "mediocre". Another friend's son who was stellar did not get in, and I am baffled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple.

Have an entrance exam open to any resident of DC who wishes to attend. Top 145 test takers get in, as measured by score. Wait list is ranked by exam score.

I guess it depends on what you are going for. If you want a class of interesting, successful, diverse, smart kids, it’s not necessarily the top number of test takers. That’s a different kind of school.

How about everyone is judged the same? Pretty strong to say a 13 or 14 year old is not “interesting or successful” at this stage and worse because they did well on a test.

[Anonymous]

How far into the waitlist has walls gone this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that they assigned similar scores to kids with 3.0 and above and just did a lottery? This would also explain why some kids appear "mediocre". Another friend's son who was stellar did not get in, and I am baffled.

That's what they should have done--assign some GPA threshold and do a lottery (and be transparent about it). You could assign weights to the lottery based on geography to help with equity concerns. As has now been discussed ad nauseum, using a 3-10 minute interview to determine admission is lunacy (and just reflects badly on the school- what kind of message does it send to a 13 year old that their value can be assessed in that amount of time?).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious how many students were accepted that live in ward 7 or 8 but didn't go to middle school there. Maybe part of the issue is that students from wards 7 or 8 who are academically inclined are looking for middle schools elsewhere. Is that really Walls' fault?

Huh? First it’s a high school. Second, they screen out kids with IEPs (which is illegal). They screen out kids in wards 7 and 8. What else is there to know?

Isn’t the whole point of an IEP is that the kid can’t keep up with normal kids without help? That should eliminate them from contention from high achieving spots in a competitive field…. Because they can’t keep up without help. There is no IEP allowances at my office. Eventually the cold B-smack of reality will come down on the kids who can’t keep up.

I’m all for helping them through but we shouldn’t pretend they are normal.

Having an IEP doesn't automatically mean one has an intellectual disability. Dyslexia, dysgraphia, ADHD, ADD, ASD, blindness, deafness, orthopedic and other health impairments are all disabilities that may qualify students for IEP's.

Stephen Hawking, Helen Keller, Temple Grandin, Steven Spielberg, Anderson Cooper, Bill Gates, Benjamin Banneker, Albert Einstein, and countless others would all have IEPs today. My IEP kid has dyslexia which is known as "MIT disease," because so many students and faculty have it.

Seriously, piss off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious how many students were accepted that live in ward 7 or 8 but didn't go to middle school there. Maybe part of the issue is that students from wards 7 or 8 who are academically inclined are looking for middle schools elsewhere. Is that really Walls' fault?

Huh? First it’s a high school. Second, they screen out kids with IEPs (which is illegal). They screen out kids in wards 7 and 8. What else is there to know?

Isn’t the whole point of an IEP is that the kid can’t keep up with normal kids without help? That should eliminate them from contention from high achieving spots in a competitive field…. Because they can’t keep up without help. There is no IEP allowances at my office. Eventually the cold B-smack of reality will come down on the kids who can’t keep up.

I’m all for helping them through but we shouldn’t pretend they are normal.

Having an IEP doesn't automatically mean one has an intellectual disability. Dyslexia, dysgraphia, ADHD, ADD, ASD, blindness, deafness, orthopedic and other health impairments are all disabilities that may qualify students for IEP's.

Stephen Hawking, Helen Keller, Temple Grandin, Steven Spielberg, Anderson Cooper, Bill Gates, Benjamin Banneker, Albert Einstein, and countless others would all have IEPs today. My IEP kid has dyslexia which is known as "MIT disease," because so many students and faculty have it.

Seriously, piss off.

Don't forget about Elon Musk! He recently disclosed that he had ASD. Too bad that the critical PP is too ignorant to understand and/or appreciate neuro diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simple.

Have an entrance exam open to any resident of DC who wishes to attend. Top 145 test takers get in, as measured by score. Wait list is ranked by exam score.

That's how my high school, Boston Latin, admitted 7th graders for more than 200 years, until the late 1980s, when an interview was added, presumably to increase minority enrollment. 20 years ago, the school was sued by a white family. The case settled in mediation with a concession to the plaintiffs, interview nixed. But whites did not really win. Asians did. The percentage of Asian students at BL has tripled in this century, while the white percentage remains roughly where it was when the suit was filed.

Perhaps the plaintiffs just wanted merit based entrance exams? Perhaps some of us actually believe race should not be a factor in...pretty much anything, any more than hair color should?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am curious how many students were accepted that live in ward 7 or 8 but didn't go to middle school there. Maybe part of the issue is that students from wards 7 or 8 who are academically inclined are looking for middle schools elsewhere. Is that really Walls' fault?

Huh? First it’s a high school. Second, they screen out kids with IEPs (which is illegal). They screen out kids in wards 7 and 8. What else is there to know?

Isn’t the whole point of an IEP is that the kid can’t keep up with normal kids without help? That should eliminate them from contention from high achieving spots in a competitive field…. Because they can’t keep up without help. There is no IEP allowances at my office. Eventually the cold B-smack of reality will come down on the kids who can’t keep up.

I’m all for helping them through but we shouldn’t pretend they are normal.

Having an IEP doesn't automatically mean one has an intellectual disability. Dyslexia, dysgraphia, ADHD, ADD, ASD, blindness, deafness, orthopedic and other health impairments are all disabilities that may qualify students for IEP's.

Stephen Hawking, Helen Keller, Temple Grandin, Steven Spielberg, Anderson Cooper, Bill Gates, Benjamin Banneker, Albert Einstein, and countless others would all have IEPs today. My IEP kid has dyslexia which is known as "MIT disease," because so many students and faculty have it.

Seriously, piss off.

+1