There is no disadvantage, you are just a poor loser.

Analyzing the simple scenario (12 schools, equally desirable to each person) that you gave above, if there are 200 spots and 800 students, each student has an equal chance to get one of those spots regardless of whether it is one lottery or more, as if they get more than one they have to toss it back in the pot.

But there are three major advantages that you see, two that have been discussed recently, and one that you just pointed out:
1. People actually get to choose which school they prefer and you no longer have the scenario in which someone who wanted Yu Ying got into EL Haynes and vice versa and can’t switch.
2. There is no waiting for the major shakeout, most people know fairly early what the plan will be and have time to act accordingly, instead of waiting until October to have any clue how it will end up.
3. People research their options and don’t just choose the most popular option, thus convincing more people to apply for lesser known (generally neighborhood) schools and invest in them when they get in. This increases the number of acceptable choices and conceivably can improve the schools long-term.


The one actual disadvantage is that the parents need to do a lot of upfront research when they might not end up having the option, thus they get invested and some end up having wasted a lot of time, which could turn them into poor losers who no longer understand statistics.

Anonymous wrote:The same number of students get into the desirable spots either way in this scenario. Thus, every student still has the same chance to get one of the 12 spots. The only difference is that with one lottery you know earlier whether you got into your chosen school, a different school, or got shut out.

You still don't understand the difference between one single student's odds of getting into 12 schools in 12 different lotteries vs. 12 schools in 1 lottery. No one is arguing the fact that at the end of the day, there are only X number of spots with Y numbers of people looking and only X students will end up in those spots. Yes, we all understand that part.

Anonymous wrote:Okay, you win, statistics moron. Let's go back to a system in which everyone has an equal chance to land a desirable spot, but the spots they land are not desirable to them. Great plan.

Childish namecalling aside, another issue you clearly don't understand is the difference between working to improve the overall number of quality spots available (which is essential obviously in DC), and just pointing out basic facts about the pluses and minuses about different application/lottery systems. Those are two totally different issues, even though the overwhelming demand compared to the small supply is a root cause for both.

You're too petty to pay attention to the fact that it's possible to both be in favor of the common lottery (which I am), AND to recognize that there is a drawback, namely that actually individual odds of getting in to one of the better schools are reduced if there's one draw. Good luck with just spinning around on namecalling and oversimplication. Hopefully others are actually able to recognize the pluses and minuses and keep working to improve BOTH the number of quality school spots available (by improving the schools we already have and opening new schools where necessary, both complex but crucial endeavors) as well as by improving the application system each year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

DP, ok, so explain it. If you have 12 schools, school 1, school 2, school 3, etc, and 1000 people applying for spots at all 12 schools, explain how the Common Lottery giving each person one single lottery number that is the biggest determining factor in how much "choice" you get or how good a choice you get, somehow gives ALL 1000 people the exact same odds of getting into even ONE of the 12 schools, than 12 SEPARATE lotteries where each of the 1000 gets a new chance at a great number?

Please explain that, because I don't understand you saying you didn't have better odds with 12 separate lotteries either.

NP here. Because you still have the same number of seats at desirable schools. If you only have 200 non-sibling seats in PK-3 for schools that these 1000 people are excited about, there are still only going to be 200 winning families and 800 losing families no matter how you order the lottery. There have been several threads trying to explain this same point to people over and over again.

The same number of students get into the desirable spots either way in this scenario. Thus, every student still has the same chance to get one of the 12 spots. The only difference is that with one lottery you know earlier whether you got into your chosen school, a different school, or got shut out.

Different PP. Odds were better mathematically, I guess, but the premise now is to get people into schools they like BETTER so they will not have to keep lotterying year after year.

It's really not that great to have separate lotteries if you're going to get offered places at Payne Elementary, Burroughs and Miner when you wanted Mundo Verde or John Eaton. Better to get the winners where they really want to be than to keep churning people endlessly through schools they don't like. Bonus is that the lottery might actually concentrate high SES neighbors at their IB schools where they might be inclined to get involved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

DP, ok, so explain it. If you have 12 schools, school 1, school 2, school 3, etc, and 1000 people applying for spots at all 12 schools, explain how the Common Lottery giving each person one single lottery number that is the biggest determining factor in how much "choice" you get or how good a choice you get, somehow gives ALL 1000 people the exact same odds of getting into even ONE of the 12 schools, than 12 SEPARATE lotteries where each of the 1000 gets a new chance at a great number?

Please explain that, because I don't understand you saying you didn't have better odds with 12 separate lotteries either.

Without going into the statistics (I will wait for someone else to explain), I will note that in your second scenario (last year), very few people would actually have a CHOICE, they would just be stuck with whichever one they got into, even if it was someone else's first choice who got into their first choice. In the current scenario, people do have choices.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

DP, ok, so explain it. If you have 12 schools, school 1, school 2, school 3, etc, and 1000 people applying for spots at all 12 schools, explain how the Common Lottery giving each person one single lottery number that is the biggest determining factor in how much "choice" you get or how good a choice you get, somehow gives ALL 1000 people the exact same odds of getting into even ONE of the 12 schools, than 12 SEPARATE lotteries where each of the 1000 gets a new chance at a great number?

Please explain that, because I don't understand you saying you didn't have better odds with 12 separate lotteries either.

Okay, you win, statistics moron. Let's go back to a system in which everyone has an equal chance to land a desirable spot, but the spots they land are not desirable to them. Great plan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We got nothing in the first round or the second round, so we're sticking with daycare for another year. Can't help but think that the previous system would have been better for us.

You clearly never went through the previous system.

BS. I went through the previous system and can tell you that EVERYONE I know got in somewhere they were happy with for PS3. EVERYONE. In fact most of us had multiple offers. Sure, we may have been less likely to get in at our number one pick, but we got multiple offers. This time around, if you got a bad draw in the lottery you were shut out of everywhere.

For us, it worked okay. For PS3 we had offers for Bridges, Appletree, DC Prep and a couple of others, as well as our inbound. For K we played again now with the common lottery and were shut out initially and hovered around the 50 percent mark on all the wait lists. Got in to our number 5 pick in May and happy there (so far). Still, for most people under the old system so long as you applied everywhere your chances of being shut out were minimal.

Awwww, look at you thinking you know something about statistics!

My thoughts exactly. PP doesn't seem to understand that no lottery procedure can change the number of desirable spots.

NP - and you 2 PP's seem to not understand that 12 separate shots at 12 schools gives EVERYONE who applies better odds at getting into one than 1 lottery number for all 12 determining it. Yes, you deal with the exact same number of actual open spots in both scenarios, but you increase your odds of getting lucky somewhere dramatically when it's a separate draw (and separate random lottery number) for each school.

But don't worry, you're just as cute as you think the other PP is when you don't understand something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Thank you for this. I'm the PP who apparently knows painfully little about statistics. But we applied to six schools before the common lottery and our wait list numbers went from #6 to a few in the #20s-40s, all the way into the hundreds. Same child last year apparently had a terrible lottery pull and was well into the hundreds for ALL of our choices. This is not brain surgery and I'm surprised that people are throwing statistical slurs around when it's super basic.

I'm not sure exactly what your point is, but surely you know that your personal experience does not equal statistics?

Nobody disagrees that in the common lottery the early pulls do a lot better. But look at the bigger picture. Did you get into a school you love under the old system? It sounds like no, if you played the lottery again. A number 6 waitlist means NOTHING if it's not the school you want to be at. And there are not enough places at the schools that people love. The vast majority of the people who had options at more than one school under the old system were still playing the lottery again because they weren't happy with the choices available to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Thank you for this. I'm the PP who apparently knows painfully little about statistics. But we applied to six schools before the common lottery and our wait list numbers went from #6 to a few in the #20s-40s, all the way into the hundreds. Same child last year apparently had a terrible lottery pull and was well into the hundreds for ALL of our choices. This is not brain surgery and I'm surprised that people are throwing statistical slurs around when it's super basic.

+1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there's truth to two of the PPs - in the old system, one bad draw didn't knock you out of the game (that absolutely happened this time around with the unified lottery. My Kindergartener had numbers in the hundreds for each of her schools) so you had better odds taking individual chances at each school. BUT there really has been an explosion of people looking for spots so it's obvious that a greater number of people looking for a roughly similar number of spots (the opening of new schools isn't pacing growth) is going to cause headaches.
I'm not thrilled with where we landed but we'll see how it goes.

No, you didn't. It's painful how little DCUMers understand about statistics.

It's painful how little YOU understand.

two systems - 1, you apply everywhere and you take your chances, you play 10-15 individual lotteries. You have an equal chance of getting a good number (or a poor one) 10-15 times. (But you can hold on to multiple places).
2, you apply to a max of 12 schools and whatever number draw you get dictates how you are placed at each of those 12 schools. If you have a good number you have a good chance of getting in to one of your top choices, if you have a middling number you may be shut out of all of them (depending on your choices) except your in bound school. If you have a poor number, you may not even be offered a place at your inbound school. If you have a poor number you are shut out of everything.

Further, while there are limited spots at HRCSs there are many other schools that are good especially for PS and PK. With the new system parents seemed less likely to take a scattershot approach and apply to schools they hadn't thought much of before, which previously often ended up being schools they got into and ended up being happy with. Suggesting that there aren't enough spots is disengenious. There aren't enough spots in the 5-10 "top" choice schools among DCUM readers, but overall there are plenty of spots at "good enough" schools. In fact many of them STILL have open spots right now.

Thank you for this. I'm the PP who apparently knows painfully little about statistics. But we applied to six schools before the common lottery and our wait list numbers went from #6 to a few in the #20s-40s, all the way into the hundreds. Same child last year apparently had a terrible lottery pull and was well into the hundreds for ALL of our choices. This is not brain surgery and I'm surprised that people are throwing statistical slurs around when it's super basic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

my kid applied for K this year and we were happy with where we ended up (off the waitlist by June). of his class of PK4 students all of whom applied for K places, only ONE got in in the first round. Of 20 kids. by mid June most were still looking for K spots.

When you contrast to this year, what grade are you talking about? How long ago were you applying for K? K is hard because most openings are through attrition only. This year, however, MV expanded so it was actually a good year to get in to MV for K, but this would have been the case even without the common lottery.

What school were you at where all families were looking to leave at PK. That makes me very sad. What could that school have done to keep you?

It could have been appletree, which ends at PK4. And of course, all of those kids would have had an IB K that they had a right to attend. You can't be shut out of K-12, though you can dislike your options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We got nothing in the first round or the second round, so we're sticking with daycare for another year. Can't help but think that the previous system would have been better for us.

You clearly never went through the previous system.

BS. I went through the previous system and can tell you that EVERYONE I know got in somewhere they were happy with for PS3. EVERYONE. In fact most of us had multiple offers. Sure, we may have been less likely to get in at our number one pick, but we got multiple offers. This time around, if you got a bad draw in the lottery you were shut out of everywhere.

For us, it worked okay. For PS3 we had offers for Bridges, Appletree, DC Prep and a couple of others, as well as our inbound. For K we played again now with the common lottery and were shut out initially and hovered around the 50 percent mark on all the wait lists. Got in to our number 5 pick in May and happy there (so far). Still, for most people under the old system so long as you applied everywhere your chances of being shut out were minimal.

Under the previous system we were completely shut out for K, so I beg to differ. Maybe PK3 was different, but K was horrible, in contrast to this year where we got multiple offers--three from HRCS.

my kid applied for K this year and we were happy with where we ended up (off the waitlist by June). of his class of PK4 students all of whom applied for K places, only ONE got in in the first round. Of 20 kids. by mid June most were still looking for K spots.

When you contrast to this year, what grade are you talking about? How long ago were you applying for K? K is hard because most openings are through attrition only. This year, however, MV expanded so it was actually a good year to get in to MV for K, but this would have been the case even without the common lottery.

What school were you at where all families were looking to leave at PK. That makes me very sad. What could that school have done to keep you?

What could they have done? Er, provided a kindergarten class. Pretty sure they'd have had 100 percent reenrollment if they actually offered kindergarten.