Reply to Fairness of Common Lottery?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Fairness of Common Lottery?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I think the PPs are right that a weighted lottery would not bring back churn. It would be like the old days, but if you were only allowed to lottery for one tier one school (because no decent school would ever get down to the #2s). Does anyone really want that?[/quote]

Why would you not want it if it meant that at least for the few families who are lucky it's all families who wanted the school as #1 at each school?  (And be clear, that # doesn't increase or decrease by either system; same # of slots, same greater # of families who want in.)  Why is it better that some families can get their #3 choice because they got a better overall number, and take that spot from a family who ranked it #1 because it really was their first choice but they had a worse number?  Why would you not rather be competing only against other families who ranked your #1 #1 as well, instead of families who ranked it all sorts of random ways but it's dependent on a single random number?

Same # of spots, but higher % filled with #1 ranked families.  And still no one has pointed out how that is not true, or why the other way is better (except for the parent who wants to be able to take risks and not lose anything).[/quote]

You mean, same # of spots, but higher % filled with #1 ranked families [b]who actually gambled their entire lottery success on their #1 school[/b]. Please re-read some of the excellent and cogent summaries of what happens to families who don't get into their number 1 choice under your scenario. They are not only on the waiting list for Dream School A with scores of other Dream School #1s, but they are at the back of the waitlist for all the other schools they ranked behind people who ranked THOSE schools #1 (and then #2, etc.)

The current algorithm is designed to allow everyone to gamble on dream schools AND also hedge their bets by having safeties.[/quote]

Families with other choices are still playing the lottery and only opting for 1 or 2 schools, basically the only ones they'd consider.  How does only allowing those who rank it #1 somehow increase the pool of those families?  They are already doing this, and they can still under the current system only apply to 2 schools, get a great number, and take that slot away from a family who wanted the school more.  AND if they apply to 2 schools and get into #2, they can still under the current system take that school slot away from someone else who ranked it #1 but got an overall horrible number.

I'm actually fine with accepting that I may be totally in the minority of thinking this is possible and should be explored.  But I leave this conversation pointing out that still NO ONE has shown how somehow families are taking other things into consideration in the proposed system of individual lotteries by ranking than in the current system.  I know many families throwing impossible schools int he mix, but some do it at the top of their list, some in the middle, some at the end as a way to fill out the 12.  Still don't understand why that is better than starting each school with lotteries of #1 picks, but definitely still sure it's a fallacy that somehow people aren't being "strategic" in the current system.  It is ALL about strategy, even if not everyone agrees on what the best strategy is.  If you doubt this, you have pages and pages of threads on exactly this (what schools and how they ranked them) here on DCUM.[/quote]

Your lottery of #1 is a horrible idea if you think about how that would actually play out at a school that had 300 applicants for 10 slots. Even if the waitlist went to 20, what do you think is going to happen to the other 280 families who ranked that school as number 1? They are going to be waitlisted at their number 2 school, but behind the 120 people who ranked that school number 1, and mixed in with all the other people who didn't get into their number 1 schools. Eventually there will be more matches wayyyyyy down the lists as people's lower-ranked school choices start to diverge.

Nobody is arguing that there isn't some element of strategy in the current system, at least as far as strategy means "understanding how the algorithm works." Because anyone who put their dream schools at the bottom of their lists wasn't being strategic; they were being uninformed. Same goes for people who only put dream schools and didn't opt for any safeties. Knowing what good safeties might be definitely required some information gathering, which I suppose you could define as strategy. But all of these are very different from the strategy that would be needed in your separate lottery scenario (see the posts above about hidden preference).[/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