Anonymous wrote:Anyone hear from Banneker or Walls yet?

Got an email today stating my child's GPA qualified them for an interview and it stated "This email is to confirm that you are invited to an interview for admission for the upcoming school year.".... more info will come between 2/11 and 3/10. I did not receive an interview date or time.

Anonymous wrote:Last year, it was the four terms of seventh grade and all classes counted. There is a one-pager on their admissions web pages showing how the GPA is calculated.
(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ee0f425c4f3ed4b48c52995/t/61aa31022c738b75835366c2/1638543618374/SWW+GPA+Scale+Jan+2021.pdf)

I don’t know what to make of this one-pager. It says there are no C’s on the transcripts, but there are C’s on my kid’s transcript.

Anyone hear from Banneker or Walls yet?

Last year, it was the four terms of seventh grade and all classes counted. There is a one-pager on their admissions web pages showing how the GPA is calculated.
(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ee0f425c4f3ed4b48c52995/t/61aa31022c738b75835366c2/1638543618374/SWW+GPA+Scale+Jan+2021.pdf)

Does anyone know how Walls calculates GPA for purposes of the 500 student cut off? Are they using 4 terms or 5? All classes or just core classes?

Anonymous wrote:My (second hand) understanding from a friend whose DD applied to Walls for 10th grade from a charter was that it was the same process as 9th...DD was invited for an interview based on her grades (straight As), was given a 4-5 minute interview (two questions, no follow-up questions).

Thanks!

My (second hand) understanding from a friend whose DD applied to Walls for 10th grade from a charter was that it was the same process as 9th...DD was invited for an interview based on her grades (straight As), was given a 4-5 minute interview (two questions, no follow-up questions).

Do they interview 10th grade applicants to walls? And is so, do they also rank them like they did 9th grade? Anyone know what was done last year for 10th?

Anonymous wrote:Question for a newbie: does the interview happen after the lottery or before?

In the middle. Application high schools you apply by February 1, interviews, auditions etc. take place from now to mid-March, and then the results go through the big match system with pure lottery schools and you get your result on April 1.

Question for a newbie: does the interview happen after the lottery or before?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids are at Wilson and didn’t apply to Walls, so I have no personal stake in this. What gets me about the ongoing upset about the Walls process last year is the sense of entitlement—as if Walls was the birthright of some group of “really smart kids” as judged by random parents.

I’m not saying the Walls process last year was good—I agree that putting so much weight on the interview is terrible—but the idea that the old way resulted in the “right” results is pretty narrow thinking.

No one is saying that the old way was great or even good. No one is saying their kid "deserved" a spot.

The gripe is that spots in an "application or magnet" high school were based on a 2 minute interview.
That's the gripe. Nothing more.

A pure lottery of the top 200 or 500 GPAs would have been better. It's the whole "2 minute subjective interview" that really rubbed people the wrong way.
It was just so incompetent and poorly done.

This. 1000 percent this. The "31 out of 36 points are based on an interview" and that interview (which is supposed to last 10 minutes actually lasts 2-3 minutes for half the kids) sends the message that either: 1) we're lying and it's completely random (but we're going to pretend to have a highly specific list of qualities that we can glean from 3 minutes of talking to 13 year olds); or 2) it's not completely random and it's based on something superficial but we're not telling you what that is.

I would be perfectly fine with a lottery--and I would be perfectly fine with a lottery weighted by ward or demographics, so long as it was transparent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If walls will no longer require a test it seems they really ought to raise the GPA minimum. Unless they are not actually looking for kids bright studious kids.

They essentially have. They interview the top 500 GPAs. The 3.0 minimum comes into play only if they have fewer than 500 applicants. I’ve heard that last year the cut score was 3.7.

There was a ton of 7th grade grade inflation in the 1st pandemic year, and even into the second. Limiting applicants for Walls to any GPA standard did a real disservice. No consideration of recommendations, personal essays, or past standardized results (PARCC, lexile, iReady) . Any kid who just showed up basically had a shot at Walls. I can't believe some of the kids they turned away, including some who crushed at BASIS for 4 years.

Omg let it go! Carrying around this bitterness isn’t healthy.

It's not bitterness. SY20-21 still required exam and recs and thus had a significantly smaller pool who cleared the first cut to enter the lottery (1/2 size of current pool). Rising 9th grade families should know what they're in for. There's no reason this needs to persist. It accomplished in the way of economic diversity

^^accomplished nothing

If it were an actual HS kid posting, I would be ok with your post. But you’re an adult, act like one! SWW made their decision. Move on with your life.

What makes you think I don't have a kid facing this shitshow again and have a stake in a process that withstands any reasonable scrutiny? Banneker was FAR better process, so it's not like it's driven by central DCPS

Yes, this is why my kid picked Banneker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids are at Wilson and didn’t apply to Walls, so I have no personal stake in this. What gets me about the ongoing upset about the Walls process last year is the sense of entitlement—as if Walls was the birthright of some group of “really smart kids” as judged by random parents.

I’m not saying the Walls process last year was good—I agree that putting so much weight on the interview is terrible—but the idea that the old way resulted in the “right” results is pretty narrow thinking.

It's not entitlement at all. For students with impressive accomplishments and perfect grades it's absolutely unacceptable to get a 200+ waitlist number

LOL

Anonymous wrote:My kids are at Wilson and didn’t apply to Walls, so I have no personal stake in this. What gets me about the ongoing upset about the Walls process last year is the sense of entitlement—as if Walls was the birthright of some group of “really smart kids” as judged by random parents.

I’m not saying the Walls process last year was good—I agree that putting so much weight on the interview is terrible—but the idea that the old way resulted in the “right” results is pretty narrow thinking.

It's not entitlement at all. For students with impressive accomplishments and perfect grades it's absolutely unacceptable to get a 200+ waitlist number

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If walls will no longer require a test it seems they really ought to raise the GPA minimum. Unless they are not actually looking for kids bright studious kids.

They essentially have. They interview the top 500 GPAs. The 3.0 minimum comes into play only if they have fewer than 500 applicants. I’ve heard that last year the cut score was 3.7.

There was a ton of 7th grade grade inflation in the 1st pandemic year, and even into the second. Limiting applicants for Walls to any GPA standard did a real disservice. No consideration of recommendations, personal essays, or past standardized results (PARCC, lexile, iReady) . Any kid who just showed up basically had a shot at Walls. I can't believe some of the kids they turned away, including some who crushed at BASIS for 4 years.

Omg let it go! Carrying around this bitterness isn’t healthy.

It's not bitterness. SY20-21 still required exam and recs and thus had a significantly smaller pool who cleared the first cut to enter the lottery (1/2 size of current pool). Rising 9th grade families should know what they're in for. There's no reason this needs to persist. It accomplished in the way of economic diversity

^^accomplished nothing

If it were an actual HS kid posting, I would be ok with your post. But you’re an adult, act like one! SWW made their decision. Move on with your life.

What makes you think I don't have a kid facing this shitshow again and have a stake in a process that withstands any reasonable scrutiny? Banneker was FAR better process, so it's not like it's driven by central DCPS