Anonymous wrote:If we went up to a minimum of only 10%, how many schools would be affected?

The only schools that had less than 10% at risk students in 17-18 were:

BASIS DC
Brent ES
Breakthrough Montessori
Deal MS
Eaton ES
Hearst ES
Hyde ES
Janney ES
Key ES
Lafayette ES
LAMB PCS
Lee Montessori PCS
Mann ES
Mundo Verde PCS
Ross ES
Stoddert ES
Washington Latin MS

So the only high school with <10% at risk was BASIS (SWW and Latin HS each had 11%); the only middle schools below 10% are Latin, BASIS and Deal.

A 10% minimum doesn't change things much at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That list kinda proves the case, doesn't it? Although, I do also wonder what would happen to those high performing schools with low at-risk were they suddenly forced to educate a lot more at-risk. But distribution should be more equitable if possible.

To be equitable, all schools would be ~45% at risk.

39,000 / 86,000 students. Of course they aren't evenly distributed by grades but that's what equity would look like.

Nothing would happen to DCPS schools with low at-risk figures right now, because they don't offer very many lottery seats at all. Even if at-risk preference went above everything but IB preference for PK3 and 4 (so basically every OOB student admitted would be at-risk) there would be very little change because they accept very few OOB students.

I could imagine it having more of an effect on schools with no IB preference (Capitol Hill Montessori, SWS, charters) but even then, the schools at-risk families and non-at-risk families apply to may differ because different things matter more to some families than others (some might be fine with a longer commute, school uniforms, different schedules and policies, etc. while others are not; some find things like montessori, language immersion, or extended school day more or less compelling).

If we went up to a minimum of only 10%, how many schools would be affected?

Anonymous wrote:That list kinda proves the case, doesn't it? Although, I do also wonder what would happen to those high performing schools with low at-risk were they suddenly forced to educate a lot more at-risk. But distribution should be more equitable if possible.

To be equitable, all schools would be ~45% at risk.

39,000 / 86,000 students. Of course they aren't evenly distributed by grades but that's what equity would look like.

That list kinda proves the case, doesn't it? Although, I do also wonder what would happen to those high performing schools with low at-risk were they suddenly forced to educate a lot more at-risk. But distribution should be more equitable if possible.