Reply to Lottery Debrief

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Lottery Debrief"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I just don't see how it would work fairly pp (and I'm no statistician either.)  What you'd be introducing under the "individual lotteries" scenario would be an element whereby your chances of admittance would possibly be weighted by your ranking of the school.  So, you'd be introducing a way "to game" the system -- a preference would be placed on how YOU ranked the school.

By making something even slightly "gameable" it unfairly weights the process in favor of the people who have the capacity to figure it out (or pay someone to do it for them.)

The way the lottery worked last year was at least fair.  It was entirely random, you were randomly awarded or randomly screwed, but it was random.  Yes, someone who ranked the school #6 that you ranked #1 got into it and you got waitlisted, but that's because he got lucky and you didn't.  He didn't get into his 1-5 because other people were luckier than him, and he's luckier than you.  And this is the only way to truly keep it "fair."

Otherwise, I can guarantee a pop-up industry of consultants charging $500 for rankings overnight.

[/quote]

I guess I'm just not "strategic" enough PP.  Because the order of my rankings of schools already would have mattered this past year (get in to #3 and you're off the waitlist for #4-12), I would have the exact same list whether the computer searched for #1 rankings first or not.  So I still don't understand how adding a measure where the computer considers #1 rankings for each school first, then #2, etc, and then reconciles all the "individual lotteries" with the overall rankings of each applicant and what schools they got into to get a final matched list... I don't see how that change changes anything about the order I put my schools in.  They wanted "true order" this past year, and I would have probably done a combo of fantasy schools in the top, good and acceptable schools in my middle choices, and "safety schools" (which we all found out were not so safe this year) last.  So not a "true list" since I could fill up my list with 12  HRCS and HRDCPS.

I don't see how weighting the selections by how parents ranked the schools (as well as other factors and also random lottery numbers within groups) changes how people choose to rank their schools.  You do see a difference, and that's fine, I just don't understand the difference you're trying to point out.  In the end, as you or another PP pointed out, this is just a discussion anyway, I don't have any reason to believe that Common Lottery staff are here basing their strategy next year on this conversation.  But because my family knows how it feels to both be shut out and to "win the lottery", I really hope that whatever happens next year leads to the most families getting their highest choices, and schools getting the most families that really really wanted that school.  And I wish tons of luck to those algorithm-designers, because I sure as heck don't know how to do that hard work![/quote]

So - this is important, even if it is "just a conversation."  Because the impression you (and I think many others on the listserv) are left with is that there's a more equitable way to do this.  Some way to please more people.

And, I'm also assuming you're a fairly intelligent individual, but even you are still missing how it can be gamed under your scenario.

So, I want to try and explain: We can be confident that there are many people that all want the same 5-6 "dream schools" and so they're all ranking them all #1-6. (I'd be interested to see how many people ranked the same three schools in their top 3 - I bet it was a big percentage!)  So, you know competition is going to be tight to get in to your dream school - we'll use the example of MV - and you're hoping you actually win the lottery against the other 150 people who ranked it #1 for PS3, so you also put it number one.  BUT, you know if you have crap draws repeatedly and you find yourself near the back of the pack, even the seats at schools you ranked 9-12 may be gone by the time they get around to you.

So, you hedge your bet: there's another school you actually feel borderline about, in the "rank by order of preference" guide you would normally put it number 8, but you also know, based on the data, that there were a lot less people on the wait list there than at MV.  So, you're more confident that perhaps not everyone will be placing it in their top 3.  In this case, since the algorithm you describe considers rankings, you actually increase your chances of a seat substantially by ranking the school you would have ranked #8, #2 instead, because many fewer families ranked it high.

Ergo, you're gaming the system - even if you are walking away from a few schools you'd probably rather be in for the school you put #2, you still increased your chances of a spot.

Making it any more clear?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics