Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Hot topic: New enrollment process

This from a reader:
I'm still confused about a very basic aspect of the new enrollment process. Do you increase your chances of getting an over-subscribed school by listing it higher on your list of preferences? For example, assume you and your "competition" are in the same tiebreaker category. Your competition lists School A as number 10 but does not get their first 9 choices. You, however, list School A as number 1. Do you have a better chance than your competition getting into that school because you listed it higher? Or, is that totally irrelevant, and it's pure lottery? Any help your readers could provide would be greatly appreciated.

16 comments:

  1. Pure lottery. This is one of the features of the old system that they were trying to correct in the new system - the new system is designed such that you should never need to rank a school lower than your true preference. That is, you don't need to rank a school higher for fear that you won't get any of your higher choices and somehow will be penalized for not ranking the school so low.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think this is quite right... I think you'd get a better chance because you ranked the trophy school higher than others.

    ReplyDelete
  3. - Point being that the much touted 'simplicity' is only district whitewash. It isn't much simpler at the ES level and it certainly isn't particularly clear and transparent. The postponement of the MS policy is only the beginning of all the problems that will surface as it gets underway. This will fuel discontent and support for Students First.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Will the district assign your student to your attendance area school - if you don't list it as a choice - when none of your other choices are available? (We like our attendance area school, but prefer another in a bordering area over it. We would accept it if assigned to it, but want to try for the other school. By putting it anywhere on our list, I feel that we may automatically get it.)

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you like the farther-away school best, list that first. If your neighborhood school would be an acceptable alternative, list that second. Each school has its own lottery that they will run separately. If you get picked in the lottery for both you 1st and 2nd choices, you will be assigned to your 1st choice. Considering that you have neighborhood preference for your 2nd choice, you have a better chance of getting that one. But, it won't hurt your chances of getting you neighborhood school if you list the other school first.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think the first answer was correct. I don't think there is a better chance of getting a school just because you rank it higher than someone else.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No, you do not increase your chances of getting an over-subscibed school by listing it higher on your list of preferences compared to how your "competition" made their list.

    Yes, you do increase your chances of getting that school compared to the other choices that you have made on your list. You have indicated A before B, followed by C as your order of preference for yourself. Therefore:

    1. Ignore what anybody else is doing.
    2. List the choices entirely according to your preferences.

    The new enrollment process is suppose to allow parents to make their list in this simple manner.

    Theoritically, you could list every school in the district, from first choice to last, but feel free to list as many or as few as you are comfortable with.

    You do not have to list the attendance area elementary school for where you live. If you did not list your area school and did not get any of the choices that you submitted, the district will give you an assignment to a school near you, as much as possible, including your area school, if it has space.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "I think you'd get a better chance because you ranked the trophy school higher than others."

    No, that's not the case.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "This will fuel discontent and support for Students First."

    By the way, Don, your canvasers collecting signatures are ignorant muppets. One said to me that siblings would get priority if their initative passed: her jaw went slack when I told her that was the case in the current system.

    ReplyDelete
  10. First of all, there is no need to be rude. Secondly, I have nothing to do with Students First and haven't for a long time. Thirdly, petition gatherers are paid people that are just trying to make a living. They usually have little knowledge of the measure. And next to last, the measure purposely respected the rights of siblings. The fact that a paid petition gatherer doesn't know that is of no consequence. Lastly, stick it you elitist snob.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Let me get this straight, Don. Now you want to distance yourself from the organization you helped to start and the measure you helped to write? What's the problem, cold feet? Are you worried you might actually lose?

    Who do you take us for?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Can we stop talking to or at this Don person? He has some good points and some not so good points. He is entitled to his views but why does someone egg him on so there are more posts to scroll through? The topic is the new enrollment process. It is new. Lots of real questions. For example, when and where do I submit my application? What kind of identifying docs do I need?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Just to be clear, I was very involved with Student's First. I wanted the organization to be grassroots and I left when it turned into something else. I am still in favor of neighborhood schools in general despite Student's First's organizational issues.

    Re: the subject at hand - The new enrollment process will likely have some level of increased neighborhood enrollment varying from school to school in comparison to the former SAS. I do not think it is accurate to describe it as a "neighborhood policy" as the district and the media have maintained. But time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm giving a Kindergarten Enrollment Workshop at the Excelsior Library at 11:00am today (Saturday 11/20). I'll cover all of these questions.

    The next workshop after today will be Monday December 6th at the Sunset Branch Library starting at 6:30pm

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Lastly, stick it you elitist snob."

    It's elitist to expect people advocating a position to know what the fuck they're talking about, and snobbish to think less of them if they're completely ignorant?

    The Palinification of the U.S. continues.

    ReplyDelete
  16. What is it so hard to understand for you? Petition gatherers don't typically understand the measures they are circulating. They don't really care about them. They get paid per valid signature. They often have 3 or 4 that they do at one time. There is no relationship between the gatherers and the measure itself.

    If what you are trying to say is that the measure is pointless and bogus, why did the city attorney approve it? It is OK if you have no understanding of the ballot measure process. But don't pretend you do. If you did you would know that petition gatherers have little to do with the measure itself. To the extent that that can speak intelligently about the measure usually has little bearing on their ability to get people to sign. That isn't about what you call Palinization. It is about learning how to appeal to people in a 20 second street encounter. Most people are not stupid. They are just tuned out or busy.

    Next time you insult someone check to make sure the spell doesn't backfire.

    ReplyDelete