Hardy Middle School -- 5th grade in feeder school -- who's considering Hardy for 6th?

[Anonymous]

It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

[Anonymous]

If keeping the uniforms means more spaces for OOB kids, then I hope they keep them. A Hardy lottery space is my first choice to keep living in the District with kids past elementary school age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

See previous - if you feel this way, you should go talk to Principal Pride about it. I'm sure she and the parents at Hardy now would be open to the discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

I would think the goal is to change into a mostly inbound school. I am not sure why there would be any preference for WOTP over EOTP, or EOTR, for OOB kids.

The numeric evidence we have seen so far suggest it is slowly becoming more of an IB school by the narrower definition, and fairly quickly by the feeder school definition.

I see no evidence that either DCPS, the school admin, or parents of students at Hardy, are dissatisfied with the pace of change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

I would think the goal is to change into a mostly inbound school. I am not sure why there would be any preference for WOTP over EOTP, or EOTR, for OOB kids.

The numeric evidence we have seen so far suggest it is slowly becoming more of an IB school by the narrower definition, and fairly quickly by the feeder school definition.

I see no evidence that either DCPS, the school admin, or parents of students at Hardy, are dissatisfied with the pace of change.

In Hardy's case, aren't IB and WOTP synonomous?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

I would think the goal is to change into a mostly inbound school. I am not sure why there would be any preference for WOTP over EOTP, or EOTR, for OOB kids.

The numeric evidence we have seen so far suggest it is slowly becoming more of an IB school by the narrower definition, and fairly quickly by the feeder school definition.

I see no evidence that either DCPS, the school admin, or parents of students at Hardy, are dissatisfied with the pace of change.

In Hardy's case, aren't IB and WOTP synonomous?

No. Do you know what a Venn Diagram is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

I would think the goal is to change into a mostly inbound school. I am not sure why there would be any preference for WOTP over EOTP, or EOTR, for OOB kids.

The numeric evidence we have seen so far suggest it is slowly becoming more of an IB school by the narrower definition, and fairly quickly by the feeder school definition.

I see no evidence that either DCPS, the school admin, or parents of students at Hardy, are dissatisfied with the pace of change.

In Hardy's case, aren't IB and WOTP synonomous?

No. Do you know what a Venn Diagram is?

Which Hardy feeders (IB) are not WOTP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

I would think the goal is to change into a mostly inbound school. I am not sure why there would be any preference for WOTP over EOTP, or EOTR, for OOB kids.

The numeric evidence we have seen so far suggest it is slowly becoming more of an IB school by the narrower definition, and fairly quickly by the feeder school definition.

I see no evidence that either DCPS, the school admin, or parents of students at Hardy, are dissatisfied with the pace of change.

In Hardy's case, aren't IB and WOTP synonomous?

No. Do you know what a Venn Diagram is?

Which Hardy feeders (IB) are not WOTP?

None. The Hardy feeders are Eaton (Cleveland Park), Hyde (Georgetown), Key (Palisades), Mann (Wesley Heights) and Stoddert (Glover Park).

The snide poster was trying to be clever. His post is about the fact that not all students attending these feeders are in-boundary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that if Hardy is to meet its goal to transform into a largely WOTP student middle school, the uniforms will need to be retired.

I would think the goal is to change into a mostly inbound school. I am not sure why there would be any preference for WOTP over EOTP, or EOTR, for OOB kids.

The numeric evidence we have seen so far suggest it is slowly becoming more of an IB school by the narrower definition, and fairly quickly by the feeder school definition.

I see no evidence that either DCPS, the school admin, or parents of students at Hardy, are dissatisfied with the pace of change.

In Hardy's case, aren't IB and WOTP synonomous?

No. Do you know what a Venn Diagram is?

Which Hardy feeders (IB) are not WOTP?

None. The Hardy feeders are Eaton (Cleveland Park), Hyde (Georgetown), Key (Palisades), Mann (Wesley Heights) and Stoddert (Glover Park).

The snide poster was trying to be clever. His post is about the fact that not all students attending these feeders are in-boundary.

Looks like you don't understand Venn Diagrams either. Or maybe what a synonym is.

All IB Hardy are WOTP. But not all WOTP are Hardy feeders. All X are Y, but not all Y are X, means X and Y are not synonyms.

[Anonymous]

Ergo

To say DCPS wants to make Hardy all WOTP would imply they would accept OOB from the Deal zone, say, as long as there are no OOB from EOTP.

I am certain there are people posting here who feel that way. But I don't think that is the goal of anyone at DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You would think that the easiest thing for Hardy to do is drop the uniforms. They are a total outlier -- no public school west of Rock Creek Park has them.

The apparent vehemence with which some rally around the uniform suggests that that it is a symbol in different ways. For WOTP prospective parents, the uniform symbolizes their perception of the "old" Hardy -- urban, academically challenged, the Rhee era IB vs OOB tension. Dropping the uniform would symbolize the change at Hardy. For other Hardy families, the uniform is familiar and dropping it represents unwelcome change-too-far. It's like the churches fighting bike lanes which they view as symbols of gentrification and the changing of "old DC."

Oh FFS, do you actually know any of these families who are allegedly clinging to uniforms because they love "old DC"? This is the most ridiculous bs I've ever heard about this. You're incredibly ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ergo

To say DCPS wants to make Hardy all WOTP would imply they would accept OOB from the Deal zone, say, as long as there are no OOB from EOTP.

I am certain there are people posting here who feel that way. But I don't think that is the goal of anyone at DCPS.

Not all, but majority WOTP. The DCPS objective since Michelle Rhee has been to flip Hardy into being a "neighborhood" middle school, meaning a significant majority IB enrollment. The Hardy community is not necessarily aligned with that objective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ergo

To say DCPS wants to make Hardy all WOTP would imply they would accept OOB from the Deal zone, say, as long as there are no OOB from EOTP.

I am certain there are people posting here who feel that way. But I don't think that is the goal of anyone at DCPS.

Not all, but majority WOTP. The DCPS objective since Michelle Rhee has been to flip Hardy into being a "neighborhood" middle school, meaning a significant majority IB enrollment. The Hardy community is not necessarily aligned with that objective.

No, the objective, as stated by Ms Pride at open houses , is a significant majority (75%) feeder school enrollment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ergo

To say DCPS wants to make Hardy all WOTP would imply they would accept OOB from the Deal zone, say, as long as there are no OOB from EOTP.

I am certain there are people posting here who feel that way. But I don't think that is the goal of anyone at DCPS.

Not all, but majority WOTP. The DCPS objective since Michelle Rhee has been to flip Hardy into being a "neighborhood" middle school, meaning a significant majority IB enrollment. The Hardy community is not necessarily aligned with that objective.

No, the objective, as stated by Ms Pride at open houses , is a significant majority (75%) feeder school enrollment.

That's a pretty watered down objective, so long as Eaton and Hyde-Addison are overwhelmingly OOB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ergo

To say DCPS wants to make Hardy all WOTP would imply they would accept OOB from the Deal zone, say, as long as there are no OOB from EOTP.

I am certain there are people posting here who feel that way. But I don't think that is the goal of anyone at DCPS.

Not all, but majority WOTP. The DCPS objective since Michelle Rhee has been to flip Hardy into being a "neighborhood" middle school, meaning a significant majority IB enrollment. The Hardy community is not necessarily aligned with that objective.

No, the objective, as stated by Ms Pride at open houses , is a significant majority (75%) feeder school enrollment.

That's a pretty watered down objective, so long as Eaton and Hyde-Addison are overwhelmingly OOB.

It's only "watered down" if you think the real objective should be to increase IB enrollment. Increasing feeder percentage is its own objective.

Of course, in practice, feeder enrollment and IB enrollment are both rising.