Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 21:35     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like DME has given the LEAs more specifics on how the lottery will work -- wish that they would post that info for the public, too.


That's ridiculous. There is no way the public needs as much info and details as the schools themselves. No doubt, we (the public could use more clarity on some aspects of this process, but no way do we need or should we get as much as the schools.

Whoever your customer base is PP, do you give the same info to the public as you guys get re: systems internally?


But when your customers are the public, and in this case parents making important school choice decisions, there must be complete transparency. Schools should have no greater understanding or access to information than the families they are funded to serve.


Whatever you do for a living, you clearly don't serve the public on any systemic level. Because you don't know the difference between being transparent about a process... And the level of detail involved in implementing that process.

But I'm forgetting that there are a lot of things on that people on DCUM want that is bizarre o unrealistic, so why am I surprised...


Let me go out on a limb here...this thread has only just begun. On 3/31 I anticipate an enormous amount of WAAAAH! Cheers to those who are engaging in Week #1.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 21:29     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like DME has given the LEAs more specifics on how the lottery will work -- wish that they would post that info for the public, too.


That's ridiculous. There is no way the public needs as much info and details as the schools themselves. No doubt, we (the public could use more clarity on some aspects of this process, but no way do we need or should we get as much as the schools.

Whoever your customer base is PP, do you give the same info to the public as you guys get re: systems internally?


But when your customers are the public, and in this case parents making important school choice decisions, there must be complete transparency. Schools should have no greater understanding or access to information than the families they are funded to serve.


Whatever you do for a living, you clearly don't serve the public on any systemic level. Because you don't know the difference between being transparent about a process... And the level of detail involved in implementing that process.

But I'm forgetting that there are a lot of things on that people on DCUM want that is bizarre o unrealistic, so why am I surprised...
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 21:26     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like DME has given the LEAs more specifics on how the lottery will work -- wish that they would post that info for the public, too.


That's ridiculous. There is no way the public needs as much info and details as the schools themselves. No doubt, we (the public could use more clarity on some aspects of this process, but no way do we need or should we get as much as the schools.

Whoever your customer base is PP, do you give the same info to the public as you guys get re: systems internally?


actually, in order for parents to make the right decisions in this lottery they should know all the factors involved. This includes preferences like the one described above. Do we need to know where the web site is served from or who came up with the color scheme? No. That doesn't weigh into our decisions... but if I'm supposed to wager my child's future on 12 choices I'd sure as hell like to know as much as I could about that wager.


I said in my post that there clearly is not enough info for the public. What is ridiculous is the idea that the public needs the same level of information as the schools who have to participate in it, give info to the lottery and then process the results after, who need to know what this new process requires of their staff... There is a lot of info and detail on how this process should run that is inappropriate to give to the public.

People need enough info to make informed decisions, which for this process amounts to lots of details about each school and understanding the basics (how many choices, when lottery opens, when it closes, when is the draw, how will the choices be made (I absolutely agree there needs to be more info about that), how do you rank, how do siblings apply, etc. But there is plenty of info that those in the schools need to run their end of this that has nothing to do with how you choose. You may want that info, but you certainly don't need it.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 20:09     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like DME has given the LEAs more specifics on how the lottery will work -- wish that they would post that info for the public, too.


That's ridiculous. There is no way the public needs as much info and details as the schools themselves. No doubt, we (the public could use more clarity on some aspects of this process, but no way do we need or should we get as much as the schools.

Whoever your customer base is PP, do you give the same info to the public as you guys get re: systems internally?


actually, in order for parents to make the right decisions in this lottery they should know all the factors involved. This includes preferences like the one described above. Do we need to know where the web site is served from or who came up with the color scheme? No. That doesn't weigh into our decisions... but if I'm supposed to wager my child's future on 12 choices I'd sure as hell like to know as much as I could about that wager.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 19:15     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like DME has given the LEAs more specifics on how the lottery will work -- wish that they would post that info for the public, too.


That's ridiculous. There is no way the public needs as much info and details as the schools themselves. No doubt, we (the public could use more clarity on some aspects of this process, but no way do we need or should we get as much as the schools.

Whoever your customer base is PP, do you give the same info to the public as you guys get re: systems internally?


But when your customers are the public, and in this case parents making important school choice decisions, there must be complete transparency. Schools should have no greater understanding or access to information than the families they are funded to serve.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 19:06     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:It sounds like DME has given the LEAs more specifics on how the lottery will work -- wish that they would post that info for the public, too.


That's ridiculous. There is no way the public needs as much info and details as the schools themselves. No doubt, we (the public could use more clarity on some aspects of this process, but no way do we need or should we get as much as the schools.

Whoever your customer base is PP, do you give the same info to the public as you guys get re: systems internally?
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 16:42     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
It sounds like DME has given the LEAs more specifics on how the lottery will work -- wish that they would post that info for the public, too.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 16:04     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
For all the back and forth, DCUM is proving to be an invaluable resource in understanding how this works. Clarity though anonymous debate. Amazing.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 16:00     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Well, that's some good news!
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 14:56     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
You are right, this is not in the FAQs. However, the language below is the from the training MySchool DC provided to LEAS:

THE WAITLIST

For any family with MULTIPLE children, if one child
gets into a school, the other child will also be on that
waitlist EVEN if it is ranked lower.

WHY?
We are trying to keep families together. You never
know which child will get off of the waitlist.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 14:28     Subject: Re:Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
If you rank your two kids differently you run the risk of forfeiting your sibling preference in the event that each gets into a school that is higher-ranked for him than the one his sibling got into.

This is the rare example of a case where it makes sense to rank strategically, rather than in strict order of your preference.


This is incorrect. There is no strategy or gaming of the system. If one sibling gets in to your #1 school and the other does not, the former sibling is added to the waitlist of the latter even though they were matched to their #1 choice. This is clear in the FAQs; you are dropped from lower-preferred waitlists except in this instance.

If this happens to you, you should enroll both siblings at their respective schools. That will then give both siblings priority enrollment at their respective schools, and you will likely be able to get in to the same school through waitlist movement.


I can't find anything in the FAQ that backs up the bold statement from above.

What is clear in the lottery is you will only be waitlisted at choices ABOVE the choice you were accepted into. So, if I have a "sibling accepted" preference at my #2, but I was accepted at my #1 I would not be on any waitlists for #2.

http://www.myschooldc.org/faq/#question-2
My child was waitlisted at one or more schools. What does that mean? wrote:
Students will be waitlisted only at schools they ranked higher than the school where they were matched. If a space becomes available at one of the schools for which your child is waitlisted, and you are next on the waitlist, you will be contacted by that school.

It is common for applicants to move up the waitlist throughout the spring and summer. If you have already enrolled at a school, and you are offered a space at a different school, you may choose to withdraw from the first school and enroll at the second. Please contact the school from which you are withdrawing so that they can offer your space to another student.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 10:00     Subject: Re:Common Lottery Algorithm
If you rank your two kids differently you run the risk of forfeiting your sibling preference in the event that each gets into a school that is higher-ranked for him than the one his sibling got into.

This is the rare example of a case where it makes sense to rank strategically, rather than in strict order of your preference.


This is incorrect. There is no strategy or gaming of the system. If one sibling gets in to your #1 school and the other does not, the former sibling is added to the waitlist of the latter even though they were matched to their #1 choice. This is clear in the FAQs; you are dropped from lower-preferred waitlists except in this instance.

If this happens to you, you should enroll both siblings at their respective schools. That will then give both siblings priority enrollment at their respective schools, and you will likely be able to get in to the same school through waitlist movement.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 09:40     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Can any of our algorithm mavens tell us how the sibling preference is applied during the scenario above?


Sibling is applied like any other preference. The kids are pooled and sorted by their lottery number.


There are 2 kinds of siblings -- a sibling already enrolled at a school, and the other child in the family is applying to that school. pretty straightforward how that works.

Two siblings each applying to a list of schools that are new to both of them. Pretty unclear how that would work. Charters have always differed in their approach to newly entering siblings. For example (doesn't matter which school because these days are gone), One school would pull an application during the lottery, if the application said a sibling had also applied, and their was a space in the sibling's grade, the sibling was granted the space immediately, before the lottery was pulled for that grade.

At another school, if a new student had a sibling, once the enrollment paperwork was submitted, the sibling moved to the top of the wait list. Not before. A real incentive to get enrollment paperwork in quickly.

The integrated lottery could do either of these generic approaches, or some other algorithm.


In that case they aren't exactly clear on which schools are using this "sibling accepted" logic and how they are applying it (acceptance or waitlist). That would be good to know.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 09:24     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Can any of our algorithm mavens tell us how the sibling preference is applied during the scenario above?


Sibling is applied like any other preference. The kids are pooled and sorted by their lottery number.


There are 2 kinds of siblings -- a sibling already enrolled at a school, and the other child in the family is applying to that school. pretty straightforward how that works.

Two siblings each applying to a list of schools that are new to both of them. Pretty unclear how that would work. Charters have always differed in their approach to newly entering siblings. For example (doesn't matter which school because these days are gone), One school would pull an application during the lottery, if the application said a sibling had also applied, and their was a space in the sibling's grade, the sibling was granted the space immediately, before the lottery was pulled for that grade.

At another school, if a new student had a sibling, once the enrollment paperwork was submitted, the sibling moved to the top of the wait list. Not before. A real incentive to get enrollment paperwork in quickly.

The integrated lottery could do either of these generic approaches, or some other algorithm.
Anonymous
Post 12/19/2013 08:53     Subject: Common Lottery Algorithm
Anonymous wrote:Can any of our algorithm mavens tell us how the sibling preference is applied during the scenario above?


Sibling is applied like any other preference. The kids are pooled and sorted by their lottery number.