I've fallen out of the habit in recent months, but I'll try to get better. OP, why don't you join me? Others welcome too.

A while back, a few people asked about using a survey form to gather info on how different student characteristics affect admissions. I've been thinking about how one could be constructed with the limited free utility Google provides, and how it might work. I think I've figured out a way to design it. I would create a survey that asks people to respond for each of several characteristics whether or not their child was admitted. At the end, we would see collective admission results subdivided by characteristic.

Here is an example of how it might work: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEhBN2JROG5MMHJQWUEzdmlfdUZjZHc6MQ#gid=0

Since we are not interested in any particular year, but rather in any results for particular schools, anyone who applied in any recent years to the school(s) covered could participate. I'd probably severely limit the number of schools covered, so we can see how it works before expanding.

I'm a little hesitant to embark on such a process because it might make people overweight the relative importance of some characteristics. On the other hand, I don't really know what the results will be, so maybe it will help people understand better.

Let me know whether you think this is a worthwhile process, or just a waste of time. Also, if you think it's a good idea, post the characteristics that should be measured and the schools that should be covered. My initial inclination is to aggregate a few similarly selective schools together, to increase the number of responses.

What do you think?

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain how to read the graphic for wait list slots? Why all the spaces and then the names of the schools? Does it suggest anything about how many people have said they might give up a slot? TIA

All the blank spaces in the waitlist response zone are from survey respondents who left that question blank. Just ignore the blank spaces. If anyone identified a slot they are planning to turn down, it's listed there. So as of this writing, here are the accept slots that will be turned down, which suggests these schools might go to their waitlists:

Bullis
WES k girl Potomac/K/Boy
Beauvoir/K/Boy
Wis
St Patricks / PK / Boy
Norwood / K / Boy
K/Girl Norwood, Concord Hill, Sidwell
Bullis
Rochambeau / 3rd maternelle / Boy

Anonymous wrote:

SAM2 wrote:On another thread, someone suggested a survey tool aimed at counting who might turn down spots from various schools, so that people on the waitlists will have some sense of whether or not their WL might move. I thought that seemed like a good idea. I was thinking of a very simple list of schools, and people could tick off any schools where they are admitted but plan to decline the spot.

What do you think? Good idea, or waste of time?

Great idea...thank you!

My comment above was from March 2011. I incorporated a waitlist question in the 2012 survey form. http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/217240.page People can post there with spots they are turning down, or else they can just post them on this thread. Or I guess they can post wherever they want. Free to be you and me.

Anonymous wrote:SAM2 - if I've only gotten half of our results, should I wait and post when i have them all? Would it screw up the tool to just do half now?

Might as well go ahead and answer now. You might skip the questions about total number of schools admitted / waitlisted / denied, since you don't know the totals yet. But for everything else, there's no reason not to enter it piecemeal. It's best though if you don't answer the same questions multiple times. So try to remember that you've already answered about grade, test scores, applicant characteristics, etc, and skip those questions when you come back later to add more school results. Otherwise it will make the numbers even more confusing.

Congratulations.

Anonymous wrote:SAM2 - there seems to be a bit of weirdness in the results so far. It shows 10 responses but only 8 kids. Also are the individual school results supposed to be calculating percentage based on total respondents or total respondents for that school?

Weirdness is inevitable with this tool. The difference you note (10 responses for 8 kids) seems like it has to do with a people who chose to skip many of the substantive questions. Some just wanted get to the question at the end about what other schools should be added to the results list next year, and others perhaps just wanted to test-drive the survey form.

For the percentages, Google is clearly calculating them off some total number that I'm not easily spotting. It probably will become more clear as more responses mount up. Until then, I'd recommend ignoring the percentages Google calculates for each school, and just look at the raw numbers people are reporting. If this unfolds like last year, we all will soon see rough patterns. [ETA: I think Google is calculating percentages off the total number of responses to any part of the survey. If that's correct, the Google percentages will never make sense for what people here want them to do. Best to focus on raw numbers.]

Best luck to everyone today. May your mailboxes be clogged with fat envelopes.

Anonymous wrote:What defines a diversity applicant?

For purposes of this counting survey, it means whatever you think your schools consider diversity for admissions purposes. It can mean race, ethnicity, orientation, religion, SES status, physical disability, whatever ... as long as the schools consider those things. You have to decide whether the schools you are applying to will consider your child diverse in a way that affects admissions. But while you personally may think your child's triple-nipple makes him extremely diverse, if you honestly don't think the schools will view it that way, then he's not diverse for purposes of this survey.

HTH. No offense intended to those with supernumerary nipples.

Below are links to a tool for counting 2012 admissions results. The counting survey is live now. Please enter real results only.

Here is a link to a simply survey tool, so people can log their admission results for 2012.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dE5NYXREbjVicnV5UXQzd3BNOUw1NlE6MQ

Here is a direct link to a summary of the current results.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewanalytics?formkey=dE5NYXREbjVicnV5UXQzd3BNOUw1NlE6MQ

You will see that I listed only a limited number of schools, and dropped some from last time. This is due to a lack of many results for those schools. If there are schools you want me to add back next year, there is a spot at the end of the form to list them.

Also, as is DCUM tradition, people of course should feel free to bypass the survey, and just post results to this thread free form.

Good luck to everyone. May all your envelopes be fat.

Bump. Beta-test time. Below are links to a tool for counting 2012 admissions results. For right now, I am just testing it to make sure it works. Please enter whatever results you want. Admit your daughter to 20 different schools. Call yourself a major donor or a celebrity. Do whatever you want. I will wipe the results clean on Friday, and set it ready for real data. But for now ... go crazy!

Here is a link to a simply survey tool, so people can log their admission results for 2012.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dE5NYXREbjVicnV5UXQzd3BNOUw1NlE6MQ

Here is a direct link to a summary of the current results.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewanalytics?formkey=dE5NYXREbjVicnV5UXQzd3BNOUw1NlE6MQ

You will see that I listed only a limited number of schools, and dropped some from last time. This is due to a lack of many results for those schools. If there are schools you want me to add back next year, there is a spot at the end of the form to list them.

Also, as is DCUM tradition, people of course should feel free to bypass the form and post results to this thread.

Good luck to everyone.

Anonymous wrote:SAM2 - I think the grade/admission status cross-reference would be interesting just because it seems to come up frequently in threads that "X is easier/harder to get into in LS/MS/9th grade/Pre-K" and it would be nice to have actual data of some sort. It might also help people that are on the fence about applying at MS vs. 9th grade or something.

OK, I can see what you mean now. But recognize that most responses are from PK & K applicants, so the numbers of people applying to those higher grades are pretty small for many schools. Would it be OK to just split the responses into two categories: PK/K vs. grades 1-9? So as an example, what you might see for a particular school is that 5 of 10 applicants to PK/K were admitted, but 2 of 4 applicants for grades 1-9 were admitted. Grouping 1-9 might not be as detailed as you'd want, but (1) it would be a lot less work for me, (2) responders are less likely to be scared off with aggregated numbers. Thoughts?

Thank you for the feedback. Here are some answers and further questions:

1. Cross referencing grade against admissions results. PPs, why is that cross reference helpful for you? What will it help you learn? I'm asking because it might guide how to set up something like that.

2. When to enter results. For last year's form, it really was best if people were patient and entered all their results at once. But I know it's hard to be patient in early March, so I'm trying to think of some modifications so it won't matter as much.

3. Should I add a question about which admission slots people will turn down? I was thinking last year that it might help people to have a sense of which admission slots will be turned down, so they can gauge whether the waitlist might open up. Would that be helpful? Or am I creating some monster no one wants?

4. Cross referencing admissions results against applicant characteristics. I am thinking about doing something like this, but I am really wary, because reducing admissions to these limited factors really brings out the worst in all of us. What do others think?

Below are links to a tool for counting 2012 admissions results. The counting survey is live now. Please enter real results only.

Here is a link to a simply survey tool, so people can log their admission results for 2012.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dE5NYXREbjVicnV5UXQzd3BNOUw1NlE6MQ

Here is a direct link to a summary of the current results.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewanalytics?formkey=dE5NYXREbjVicnV5UXQzd3BNOUw1NlE6MQ

You will see that I listed only a limited number of schools, and dropped some from last time. This is due to a lack of many results for those schools. If there are schools you want me to add back next year, there is a spot at the end of the form to list them.

Also, as is DCUM tradition, people of course should feel free to bypass the survey, and just post results to this thread free form.

Good luck to everyone. May all your envelopes be fat.

Anonymous wrote:SAM2, what does "foreign looking" mean to you?

For the question I posed, it's really irrelevant what I think -- what matters is what "foreign-looking" means to you (or anyone who is willing to answer the question). Here it is again, with a slight rephrase to make that clear ...

Does it matter what my apparent ethnicity is? If you consider me somewhat foreign-looking or foreign-sounding, does that change your assumptions when I ask about your background?

What I'm really curious about is whether you are more offended by questions about your background if they come from someone who (you assume) is from some traditionally American group. Are you less offended if the person asking does not sound or look traditionally American? For example, if my skin is medium brown, and I have a slight French accent, how does that change your level of offense when I ask about your background?

I'm not trying to fight with you. I'm just curious about what drives the discomfort you feel with such questions.

Anonymous wrote:

SAM2 wrote:By the way, does it matter what my apparent ethnicity is? If I'm somewhat foreign-looking or foreign-sounding myself, does that change your assumptions when I ask about your background?

This is the perfect example of the exoticized "other." The assumptions you make aren't necessarily negative in YOUR mind, but they might be for the Asian person. No one wants to be a museum piece to be probed and examined. There are a couple unexamined assumptions in this post: 1) Asians have an "exotic" name. If you met someone named, say, Patrick O'Connor, would you ask about the origins of his name? Why is the Asian name so much more "interesting" to you? What do you consider to be "American"? 2) I'm assuming that you are white or black, but the assumption here is that if you are Asian you are "foreign-looking." Why, after all these posts, would you assume that someone who is Asian is "foreign"?

You're misinterpreting my question, and making lots of inaccurate assumptions about me. I'm sure it's unintentional, but I'll correct them below so we can communicate better.

First, I certainly wouldn't consider most Asian names "exotic" or even particularly notable. Nor would I consider "Patrick O'Connor" notable. I wouldn't comment on names like "Mike Smith" or "Yu-Ch'uan Wang" or "Viktor Pshonka", because those names are not too uncommon or interesting to me. But I don't have much experience with Laotian names. While I surely would realize the person I was meeting has some Asian heritage (assuming he actually was Laotian, I guess), I would not simply lump him in with other Asian names, as you suggest. Instead, I would be interested in the origins of his name, so I'd ask about it. Isn't that the whole point of getting to know people?

Second, I don't see why you'd think I classify all Asian people as foreign-looking. I used the word "foreign-sounding" to describe myself because I was keying off language in the prior post about foreigners, but perhaps there's a better phrase ("not a traditionally American accent"?). I'm also not sure what basis you have to assume my own race. That seems like the sort of dangerous assumption that causes problems. But more importantly, could you answer my question? If I look or sound "not traditionally Caucasian" -- perhaps Latino or maybe even Asian (!) -- do you still make all sorts of negative assumptions when I ask about your background?

Anonymous wrote:Again, I can't speak for the OP, but they asked where he was from and he answered with his hometown ....

I wasn't really talking about OP's situation with my posts, but rather was trying to explore the comment several PPs made about how offensive it is to ask about origins. I don't really have much of an opinion about OP's situation, because I find it very hard to judge from afar how a conversation like that went. Nuances are too easily lost when we hear only a brief summary. I can think of about a dozen questions I'd want to ask OP, with lots of follow ups, before I could evaluate the situation. What I find somewhat telling is that OP's own wife -- who did hear the full story in all its detail, and who presumably would be sensitive to OP's feelings -- said he was overreacting. That suggests to me that whatever happened wasn't really so cut-and-dried. So was what happened to OP really offensive and inappropriate? ... or was he being overly sensitive? ... or maybe some combination of both? I have no idea.

The point is it is rude to put labels on people that they aren't labeling themselves with at the time. Yes, they may have been looking for common ground but in so doing they made someone feel like an "other" or a novelty. No one likes feeling that way. That's not inclusive even if it is well intentioned.

Fair enough on some of these points, but my point is that if we deter people from even seeking common ground, out of fear they might offend one another, then they're not going to make any progress. That's just how people interact. Sometimes we all step on one another's toes; it's part of learning to dance together.

We're probably not too far apart. I doubt you, or other PPs, really want to prohibit people from talking to one another, despite some of the more extreme statements posted here. And I'm certainly not suggesting it's OK to offend people or pry into their personal business. There's probably some middle range that most people are comfortable with.