Anonymous wrote:The lottery did not work for the application HS at all. See the threads about SWW not filling its freshman class. These schools should not be in the common lottery.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I understand that logically, a randomized process is always going to be the most fair option, and that ranking schools cuts down on the shuffle and general chaos. But I was one of the people entirely shut out, so if asked this question I am always going to respond that it was a total failure. That's the difference between cold hard logic and reason and my personal situation. This process has turned me into someone who is anti-lottery and a big supporter of good quality neighborhood schools.
Someone (possibly you) would have been entirely shut out in past years too. The difference is that you know it now, not next October. That was a hard six months for almost everyone, and it served nobody any good.
I don't know anyone who was COMPLETELY shut out in previous years. Very few got into their top choice. (Actually I know just two in the past five years). And some got into very popular schools that they are happy with, or would have been in their top 5. But many people, myself included, were shut out in the past and then got multiple offers as summer went on.
In fact, for PS3 (two years ago) we got a spot at DC prep in the lottery (turned it down), then offered Appletree LP (120s) in July, Bridges (50-60s) in early August and Shining Stars in early September. Once everything shook down, all the families I know were happy with their placement even though it wasn't their first choice. This year, I don't think that will be the case. There seems to be very little movement, particularly for PS3. If you are shut out your waitlist numbers are likely so high for every school you applied to that your chance of getting in somewhere is tiny.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was matched with my #2 school and have made peace with that choice. To me it seems to have worked very well, because I am waitlisted in the top ten at my #1 choice, and have not yet received a call asking if I want that spot. This means that those who matched truly wanted those spots, and weren't just grabbing as many spots as they could.
You've got to be effing joking! You've "made peace" with your number 2 spot?????!! Do you know how many of us didn't even get the option of "making peace with" our NUMBER TWELVE choice?
In all fairness to the first poster I also got in my 2nd choice and have made "peace" with it, but trust me it's nowhere any of you would be jealous of.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was matched with my #2 school and have made peace with that choice. To me it seems to have worked very well, because I am waitlisted in the top ten at my #1 choice, and have not yet received a call asking if I want that spot. This means that those who matched truly wanted those spots, and weren't just grabbing as many spots as they could.
You've got to be effing joking! You've "made peace" with your number 2 spot?????!! Do you know how many of us didn't even get the option of "making peace with" our NUMBER TWELVE choice?
Anonymous wrote:
I was matched with my #2 school and have made peace with that choice. To me it seems to have worked very well, because I am waitlisted in the top ten at my #1 choice, and have not yet received a call asking if I want that spot. This means that those who matched truly wanted those spots, and weren't just grabbing as many spots as they could.
yes, it worked quite well for you. I think there's a sense of inherent unfairness from people who got low #s--here you got into #2, with a shot at #1, where people on the bottom didn't even get into #12, or near it on a waitlist. The top lottery winners have a very good chance of getting into their top schools, but those at the bottom have a poor shot of getting into their last choice. The lottery works well now, in terms of waitlsits and efficiency, but for the people who had poor luck, it sucks. You only have one number and if its bad, well, too bad for you. Under the old, chaotic system, you had 12-15 chances of drawing a decent number. I say this as someone who already has a slot from last year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was matched with my #2 school and have made peace with that choice. To me it seems to have worked very well, because I am waitlisted in the top ten at my #1 choice, and have not yet received a call asking if I want that spot. This means that those who matched truly wanted those spots, and weren't just grabbing as many spots as they could.
You've got to be effing joking! You've "made peace" with your number 2 spot?????!! Do you know how many of us didn't even get the option of "making peace with" our NUMBER TWELVE choice?
Yea, I thought that was bad too (and I lucked out on #5).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was matched with my #2 school and have made peace with that choice. To me it seems to have worked very well, because I am waitlisted in the top ten at my #1 choice, and have not yet received a call asking if I want that spot. This means that those who matched truly wanted those spots, and weren't just grabbing as many spots as they could.
You've got to be effing joking! You've "made peace" with your number 2 spot?????!! Do you know how many of us didn't even get the option of "making peace with" our NUMBER TWELVE choice?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I understand that logically, a randomized process is always going to be the most fair option, and that ranking schools cuts down on the shuffle and general chaos. But I was one of the people entirely shut out, so if asked this question I am always going to respond that it was a total failure. That's the difference between cold hard logic and reason and my personal situation. This process has turned me into someone who is anti-lottery and a big supporter of good quality neighborhood schools.
Someone (possibly you) would have been entirely shut out in past years too. The difference is that you know it now, not next October. That was a hard six months for almost everyone, and it served nobody any good.
Anonymous wrote:I was matched with my #2 school and have made peace with that choice. To me it seems to have worked very well, because I am waitlisted in the top ten at my #1 choice, and have not yet received a call asking if I want that spot. This means that those who matched truly wanted those spots, and weren't just grabbing as many spots as they could.
I was matched with my #2 school and have made peace with that choice. To me it seems to have worked very well, because I am waitlisted in the top ten at my #1 choice, and have not yet received a call asking if I want that spot. This means that those who matched truly wanted those spots, and weren't just grabbing as many spots as they could.
Anonymous wrote:I understand that logically, a randomized process is always going to be the most fair option, and that ranking schools cuts down on the shuffle and general chaos. But I was one of the people entirely shut out, so if asked this question I am always going to respond that it was a total failure. That's the difference between cold hard logic and reason and my personal situation. This process has turned me into someone who is anti-lottery and a big supporter of good quality neighborhood schools.
Anonymous wrote:The lottery is an advertisement for improving neighborhood by right schools.