Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really? The test is fine, but good luck with the interview. We had a student come on a few years ago and tell us what the interview was like, and it was essentially whether a few students liked you or now.

I keep thinking about that. It sounded like the student panelist was there to judge applicants' potential popularity. So disturbing!

Pretty sure that "student interviewer" was a troll. Went through the interview process that year with DS, and the interview was perfectly fine. All our interviewers were 100% professional and DS got in. We decided not to go there not because of the interview but because DS had already pretty much decided to go to Wilson with a lot of his friends.

I think SWW changed the interview process. My DC is a 9th grader there this year, and went through the testing and the interview last year. We were concerned about the interview because we heard horror stories from the year before. But it was actually very pleasant, and not at all stressful. As far as I know, all the kids who wanted to go to Walls at my DC's middle school ended up getting in (even if they were on the wait list).

Not according to the rankings. SWW is 266, Banneker something like 466. Neither of them have over 50% of kids who are judged college ready. Face it, if we were anywhere but here, people would generally agree that they both suck.

Or they just don't fit into the mold that puts them high in the rankings. How can SWW students be unprepared for college if they take college classes in high school? Because the "college readiness" measure is based on the number of AP and IB exams and the scores on them per student, which is a decent enough measure, I guess, but doesn't fit every situation that prepares a student for college.

Anonymous wrote:Really? The test is fine, but good luck with the interview. We had a student come on a few years ago and tell us what the interview was like, and it was essentially whether a few students liked you or now.

I keep thinking about that. It sounded like the student panelist was there to judge applicants' potential popularity. So disturbing!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Expect the interview to matter more than the test. That's how DCPS keeps AA enrollment far higher than achievement.

What the fuck does that mean? The test is pretty hard. It's not the best school in DC, Banneker is.

Not according to the rankings. SWW is 266, Banneker something like 466. Neither of them have over 50% of kids who are judged college ready. Face it, if we were anywhere but here, people would generally agree that they both suck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think SWW would rank as a magnet school, it is more of an application school. There's a difference. If that's the case then McKinley, Duke, Banneker and Phelps would be considered magnets and they're NOT.

A magnet school is an application school. Can't speak to Duke or Phelps but you have to apply to the rest to get in. I know. Dd went through the process.

And we alll sucked in terms of US news & world repot. SWW, ranjed 266, rates 56.2 percent in college readiness, Banneker, 461, was 47.2, Duke Ellington #

Anonymous wrote:I don't think SWW would rank as a magnet school, it is more of an application school. There's a difference. If that's the case then McKinley, Duke, Banneker and Phelps would be considered magnets and they're NOT.

A magnet school is an application school. Can't speak to Duke or Phelps but you have to apply to the rest to get in. I know. Dd went through the process.

Anonymous wrote:You could always contact the school and ask them that question. The admissions process will be starting in the next few months.

I called the school today. The answer I got is that if you attend a school that doesn't do standardized testing you don't have to submit test results for 9th grade.