By the numbers: A dispassioned evaluation of Hardy (compared to Deal and Wilson)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does a student who was an OOB student at a Hardy feeder, who goes on to Hardy, count as 'IB' to the people who are breathlessly watching these numbers?

No, they are technically not IB. They won't show up as IB. That's why feeder is the more relevant number. It is not reported however.

Not really. OOB feeders opting in doesn't say much as presumably they don't have any other option for middle so they aren't "opting in", more like continuing down the best path available. IB rate tells more.

Um, the OOB feeders in many cases have exactly the options that IB feeders do - often they can go to Wilson (the Wilson geographic boundaries are huge and extend well beyond the feeder school boundaries); they can go to a magnet school like Walls or Duke, they can go private (yes, DCUM, many OOB Hardy families are wealthy enough to attend private high schools), or they can move.

[Anonymous]

Big increase in PARCC at Hardy this year. One of only a few schools in the city (25 or so) that posted more than 2% gains in both subjects. Hardy posted 15.8% gain in ELA and 9.3% gain in math.

Hardy went from 24% at L4+ in ELA in 2015 to 40% in 2016.
Hardy went from 22% at L4+ in MATH in 2015 to 31% in 2016.

Those are massive gains.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does a student who was an OOB student at a Hardy feeder, who goes on to Hardy, count as 'IB' to the people who are breathlessly watching these numbers?

No, they are technically not IB. They won't show up as IB. That's why feeder is the more relevant number. It is not reported however.

Not really. OOB feeders opting in doesn't say much as presumably they don't have any other option for middle so they aren't "opting in", more like continuing down the best path available. IB rate tells more.

Um, the OOB feeders in many cases have exactly the options that IB feeders do - often they can go to Wilson (the Wilson geographic boundaries are huge and extend well beyond the feeder school boundaries); they can go to a magnet school like Walls or Duke, they can go private (yes, DCUM, many OOB Hardy families are wealthy enough to attend private high schools), or they can move.

Some OOB families at Hardy feeders actually live IB for Deal. Or they live close enough to Latin that that becomes an attractive option, with some lottery luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are there metal detectors at Hardy now? If so, why would increased IB enrollment make them go away?

Are you kidding? No metal detectors at Hardy!

Previous number of 6th graders from Hyde is wrong. My son counted about 15, and I saw more than 10 being dropped in front of the school on the first day.

I thought the original cited number was surprisingly low. My kid went to Hyde back in the day and lots of her fellow students joined her at Hardy. Your numbers make more sense.

[Anonymous]

OP here.

Quick analysis based on the PARCC scores by ethnicity below.

First, here are the reported percentages of L4+ in ELA and MATH at Hardy and Deal in 2016:
Hardy 2016 ELA: 40%
Hardy 2016 MATH: 31%
Deal 2016 ELA: 63%
Deal 2016 MATH: 50%

If Hardy had the same demographic composition as Deal, its scores would be 51% in ELA and 43% in MATH in 2016.

For reference, here are the reported 2015 scores:
Hardy 2015 ELA: 24%
Hardy 2015 MATH: 22%
Deal 2015 ELA: 68%
Deal 2015 MATH: 44%

If Hardy had the same demographic composition as Deal for the 2015 year, its scores would be 30.5% in ELA and 31.1% in MATH.

These numbers strongly suggest the gap between Hardy and Deal is shrinking rapidly.

The demographics-adjusted gap between Deal and Hardy in 2015 was 37.5% (=68%-30.5%) in ELA and 12.9% (=44%-31.1%) in MATH. In 2016, these gaps have shrunk to 12% in ELA and 7% in MATH.

Stated again for emphasis, in one year, the ELA gap shrank from 37.5% to 12% and the MATH gap shrank from 12.9% to 7%. I believe strongly this gap will all but vanish within two years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here.

Quick analysis based on the PARCC scores by ethnicity below.

First, here are the reported percentages of L4+ in ELA and MATH at Hardy and Deal in 2016:
Hardy 2016 ELA: 40%
Hardy 2016 MATH: 31%
Deal 2016 ELA: 63%
Deal 2016 MATH: 50%

If Hardy had the same demographic composition as Deal, its scores would be 51% in ELA and 43% in MATH in 2016.

For reference, here are the reported 2015 scores:
Hardy 2015 ELA: 24%
Hardy 2015 MATH: 22%
Deal 2015 ELA: 68%
Deal 2015 MATH: 44%

If Hardy had the same demographic composition as Deal for the 2015 year, its scores would be 30.5% in ELA and 31.1% in MATH.

These numbers strongly suggest the gap between Hardy and Deal is shrinking rapidly.

The demographics-adjusted gap between Deal and Hardy in 2015 was 37.5% (=68%-30.5%) in ELA and 12.9% (=44%-31.1%) in MATH. In 2016, these gaps have shrunk to 12% in ELA and 7% in MATH.

Stated again for emphasis, in one year, the ELA gap shrank from 37.5% to 12% and the MATH gap shrank from 12.9% to 7%. I believe strongly this gap will all but vanish within two years.

Hary was a solid school 2-3 years ago (and before that too) - but the rapid demographic changes are probably what is responsible for quickly closing the gap. This will probably build on itself - more IB students results in more IB students - until the gap is gone. Good teachers + good demographics = good scores.

[Anonymous]

Tomorrow morning there will be an Open House at Hardy Middle School, 9:30am-11:00am; Hardy Library, 1819 35th St NW. Meet the principal, tour the facility, see classes in session, hear about activities and opportunities.

[Anonymous]

To maintain the positive momentum, DCPS needs to avoid self-defeating ideas like the one recently floated that Hyde-Addison Elem might move to Hardy as swing space while its renovation is being done. This would take away Hardy's tiny among if green space and would employ what amounts to a tent to serve as cafeteria/gym? What the hell? Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To maintain the positive momentum, DCPS needs to avoid self-defeating ideas like the one recently floated that Hyde-Addison Elem might move to Hardy as swing space while its renovation is being done. This would take away Hardy's tiny among if green space and would employ what amounts to a tent to serve as cafeteria/gym? What the hell? Nope.

Isn't that exactly what was done at Lafayette and parents said it was fine?

I'm sure another school would be happy to take Hydes place in the queue if Hardy won't share/make some sacrifices for the good of its neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To maintain the positive momentum, DCPS needs to avoid self-defeating ideas like the one recently floated that Hyde-Addison Elem might move to Hardy as swing space while its renovation is being done. This would take away Hardy's tiny among if green space and would employ what amounts to a tent to serve as cafeteria/gym? What the hell? Nope.

Isn't that exactly what was done at Lafayette and parents said it was fine?

I'm sure another school would be happy to take Hydes place in the queue if Hardy won't share/make some sacrifices for the good of its neighbors.

what a ridiculous comment by someone whose never clearly been near the school or the area. Lafayette has a huge playground and space. This proposal involves taking away the existing arts program from several schools (including 2 Hardy feeders) and ALL of the green space at Hardy for outdoor activity. See all the other threads and previous comments on how DCPS already gave away the Jelleff (only other nearby option) rights to privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To maintain the positive momentum, DCPS needs to avoid self-defeating ideas like the one recently floated that Hyde-Addison Elem might move to Hardy as swing space while its renovation is being done. This would take away Hardy's tiny among if green space and would employ what amounts to a tent to serve as cafeteria/gym? What the hell? Nope.

Isn't that exactly what was done at Lafayette and parents said it was fine?

I'm sure another school would be happy to take Hydes place in the queue if Hardy won't share/make some sacrifices for the good of its neighbors.

what a ridiculous comment by someone whose never clearly been near the school or the area. Lafayette has a huge playground and space. This proposal involves taking away the existing arts program from several schools (including 2 Hardy feeders) and ALL of the green space at Hardy for outdoor activity. See all the other threads and previous comments on how DCPS already gave away the Jelleff (only other nearby option) rights to privates.

Fillmore is going anyway -- not because of the Hyde renovations.

They will survive with suboptimal outdoor space for a year or so. This work has to get done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To maintain the positive momentum, DCPS needs to avoid self-defeating ideas like the one recently floated that Hyde-Addison Elem might move to Hardy as swing space while its renovation is being done. This would take away Hardy's tiny among if green space and would employ what amounts to a tent to serve as cafeteria/gym? What the hell? Nope.

Isn't that exactly what was done at Lafayette and parents said it was fine?

I'm sure another school would be happy to take Hydes place in the queue if Hardy won't share/make some sacrifices for the good of its neighbors.

what a ridiculous comment by someone whose never clearly been near the school or the area. Lafayette has a huge playground and space. This proposal involves taking away the existing arts program from several schools (including 2 Hardy feeders) and ALL of the green space at Hardy for outdoor activity. See all the other threads and previous comments on how DCPS already gave away the Jelleff (only other nearby option) rights to privates.

Fillmore is going anyway -- not because of the Hyde renovations.

They will survive with suboptimal outdoor space for a year or so. This work has to get done.

It's two years. Middle school is only three years long. Meyer is already ready-made and appropriate for swing space and the District will provide bussing. Incurring the ridiculous cost of squeezing an elementary school into Hardy and on Hardy's outdoor campus is absurd when there is a good alternative. I know I and my feeder school families will lobby hard against this suggested latest plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To maintain the positive momentum, DCPS needs to avoid self-defeating ideas like the one recently floated that Hyde-Addison Elem might move to Hardy as swing space while its renovation is being done. This would take away Hardy's tiny among if green space and would employ what amounts to a tent to serve as cafeteria/gym? What the hell? Nope.

Isn't that exactly what was done at Lafayette and parents said it was fine?

I'm sure another school would be happy to take Hydes place in the queue if Hardy won't share/make some sacrifices for the good of its neighbors.

what a ridiculous comment by someone whose never clearly been near the school or the area. Lafayette has a huge playground and space. This proposal involves taking away the existing arts program from several schools (including 2 Hardy feeders) and ALL of the green space at Hardy for outdoor activity. See all the other threads and previous comments on how DCPS already gave away the Jelleff (only other nearby option) rights to privates.

Fillmore is going anyway -- not because of the Hyde renovations.

They will survive with suboptimal outdoor space for a year or so. This work has to get done.

It's two years. Middle school is only three years long. Meyer is already ready-made and appropriate for swing space and the District will provide bussing. Incurring the ridiculous cost of squeezing an elementary school into Hardy and on Hardy's outdoor campus is absurd when there is a good alternative. I know I and my feeder school families will lobby hard against this suggested latest plan.

+ 1 'suboptimal' really meaning pathetic... it also would take away from the "Ellington" field space too. And at the same time it would squelch the growing momentum for the growing support for Hardy.

[Anonymous]

What's your good alternative? How much more expensive is it? The more elaborate the swing space the less money there is for the actual renovation.

[Anonymous]

Meyer is a ready made swing space as mentioned above. Not optimal for the Hyde families. But putting out all the Hardy kids (and the Fillmore program, which is still up for real debate, and the entire No. Georgetown community which would lose all the field space b/w the small facilities at Hardy & Ellington field... and Ellington is already under construction with traffic/congestion/noise/etc implications one block away) is not a fair option. In addition, Hyde is still less than 50% IB.