Hardy vs. DCI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy for sure

Hardy has better math and ELA proficiency but I would wonder if there’s a difference between students who come from in boundary schools and from out-of-boundary schools. How do the out-of-boundary Hardy students compare to DCI students? If you are not in boundary, I would be concerned with defacto tracking.

.

Not a huge difference when it comes to math and ELA. Quick look up on the report card says on grade level or above math 45%, ELA 67% at Hardy. DCI math 41%, ELA 61%.

At risk at both schools pretty much the same.

But if you delve further, the DCI numbers are for BOTH the middle and high school, not just middle school.

Now if you look at Wilson’s stats, lower than both schools above, you see math 32%, ELA 58%.

Extrapolate from there however you want but DCI’s number is decent considering it’s for BOTH middle and high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy for sure

Hardy has better math and ELA proficiency but I would wonder if there’s a difference between students who come from in boundary schools and from out-of-boundary schools. How do the out-of-boundary Hardy students compare to DCI students? If you are not in boundary, I would be concerned with defacto tracking.

.

Not a huge difference when it comes to math and ELA. Quick look up on the report card says on grade level or above math 45%, ELA 67% at Hardy. DCI math 41%, ELA 61%.

At risk at both schools pretty much the same.

But if you delve further, the DCI numbers are for BOTH the middle and high school, not just middle school.

Now if you look at Wilson’s stats, lower than both schools above, you see math 32%, ELA 58%.

Extrapolate from there however you want but DCI’s number is decent considering it’s for BOTH middle and high school.

Good point. How do you think the magnet schools fit into this? DCI and Hardy students go to Walls/Banneker/Ellington but are Hardy kids more likely to go to one of these schools, and DCI more likely to stay put at DCI?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hardy for sure

Hardy has better math and ELA proficiency but I would wonder if there’s a difference between students who come from in boundary schools and from out-of-boundary schools. How do the out-of-boundary Hardy students compare to DCI students? If you are not in boundary, I would be concerned with defacto tracking.

.

Not a huge difference when it comes to math and ELA. Quick look up on the report card says on grade level or above math 45%, ELA 67% at Hardy. DCI math 41%, ELA 61%.

At risk at both schools pretty much the same.

But if you delve further, the DCI numbers are for BOTH the middle and high school, not just middle school.

Now if you look at Wilson’s stats, lower than both schools above, you see math 32%, ELA 58%.

Extrapolate from there however you want but DCI’s number is decent considering it’s for BOTH middle and high school.

Good point. How do you think the magnet schools fit into this? DCI and Hardy students go to Walls/Banneker/Ellington but are Hardy kids more likely to go to one of these schools, and DCI more likely to stay put at DCI?

There are a bunch of DCI 9th graders at Walls this year - the parent's were all over the school counselor with math placement.
[short story: DCI does not put "credits" on the transcript, DCPS requires certain credits to graduate, the counselor could not place DCI students in more advanced math placement because the student would not have the required credits for graduation.]

There are a bunch of Hardy students at Walls.

For 9th grade, students pick the place that is right for them. Up until that point, parents have a lot more say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not recommend DCI to anyone who has an alternative. I believe it only has a good reputation because there aren’t many other options in the city. 19:09 made some really solid observations (although I disagree with the point about sports since there are lunch clubs and after school options that aren’t competitive).

I’ll add:

Pros:
- International trips and a fairly large budget for clubs and events.

- Social justice focus and student advocacy. They have gender neutral student restrooms (not single stalls, but actual bathrooms).

Cons:
- Leaders are inexperienced, which has a ripple effect. Many of the people in high positions were founding teachers, and aren’t qualified for their job. As a result, really important teams like the discipline team suffer from ineffective leadership, and the school is chaotic.

- The school expanded too rapidly and it was impossible to fill all vacancies with quality educators. In fact, not all positions were filled last year. This results in a variety of classroom experiences and high turnover as previously mentioned.

- The chromebooks aren’t used as a tool to supplement learning when beneficial. There is too much reliance on the devices when it isn’t necessary.

Why would leaders who were founding teachers be considered inexperienced? The founding year was 2014...so if they were founding teachers, that means they are beginning their 7th year at DCI...

[Anonymous]

Um, because they are inexperienced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um, because they are inexperienced.

+1. They've only been in a senior position at this start up school, so they don't bring experience understanding how to do things at an established school. The top leadership tends to hire non-threatening suck ups into leadership positions as opposed to professionals who bring strong experience. This was a problem at our feeder charter too.

[Anonymous]

What happened to the COO that was there a few years ago? I really liked him then suddenly he was gone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um, because they are inexperienced.

+1. They've only been in a senior position at this start up school, so they don't bring experience understanding how to do things at an established school. The top leadership tends to hire non-threatening suck ups into leadership positions as opposed to professionals who bring strong experience. This was a problem at our feeder charter too.

Non threatening suck ups? You know them personally? What makes you think that is what happened?

It looks like they tried to hire some outsiders with “experience” and had some fails.

There is plenty of experience to be had in growing with the school, understanding the history, knowing the kids and staff, and being generally understanding of the inner workings of the institution. Also, every leader has a first leadership position. Where else does one get experience?

[Anonymous]

We had the choice of Latin, Hardy, and DCI; our preference was Latin > Hardy > DCI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um, because they are inexperienced.

+1. They've only been in a senior position at this start up school, so they don't bring experience understanding how to do things at an established school. The top leadership tends to hire non-threatening suck ups into leadership positions as opposed to professionals who bring strong experience. This was a problem at our feeder charter too.

Non threatening suck ups? You know them personally? What makes you think that is what happened?

It looks like they tried to hire some outsiders with “experience” and had some fails.

There is plenty of experience to be had in growing with the school, understanding the history, knowing the kids and staff, and being generally understanding of the inner workings of the institution. Also, every leader has a first leadership position. Where else does one get experience?

I’m not the pp you responded to, but I *do* know them personally. The executive director only wants people in positions of power who she knows she can manipulate and who won’t question her. These founding staff members who are now leaders weren’t even necessarily good teachers. And many of them only had/have a BA and went from being a classroom teacher with a few years of experience to an assistant principal, director, or principal.

The CAO who was there in 2018-2019 was really good! He was a genuine and kind person, so of course he didn’t work out there.

[Anonymous]

What you're describing is the same story with the YY leadership since the get go. We aren't continuing on to DCI because we've had more than enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What you're describing is the same story with the YY leadership since the get go. We aren't continuing on to DCI because we've had more than enough.

That makes sense considering YY and DCI were founded by the same person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What you're describing is the same story with the YY leadership since the get go. We aren't continuing on to DCI because we've had more than enough.

+1. This is why we wouldn't send our kid to DCI. In retrospect, we wish we had bailed on YY sooner.

[Anonymous]

DCI is an incredibly diverse school with the most ambitious mission in DC. We have been so happy with our children’s experience there. Looking forward to seeing It continue to grow and flourish even without the families with big money, without preferential admissions, and without the boundary restrictions that other schools rely on to strengthen test scores and prestige.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you're describing is the same story with the YY leadership since the get go. We aren't continuing on to DCI because we've had more than enough.

+1. This is why we wouldn't send our kid to DCI. In retrospect, we wish we had bailed on YY sooner.

Same here. Our kid always earned top grades across the board at YY. When we switched to a private in the upper grades where we were told that the kid's Chinese wasn't too hot for a child who'd been in 50% immersion for years, he needed remedial ELA, and his math barely cut it. He's caught up by now, but getting there was work, money and time we weren't planning to spend.