So how many IB are going to really be at Hardy?

[Anonymous]

Also consider that "your kind" did to refer to the color of your skin but the kind of parents who would insist that a beloved and successful principal be ousted before they'd send their kids there.

And 4 years later, iare asking that the teachers who supported him be ousted too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, I'm sure it would be very gratifying to you -- even four years later, to get this kind of revenge. Move the teachers -- not because they're doing a bad job, not because the principal has problems with them, not because their IMPACT scores are low, but because of a few parents holding a grudge from 4 years ago -- who will not send their children to Hardy no mater what -- but would still love to see the teachers go. Vindication

Thankfully, your numbers are few and diminishing rapidly. Now I ask just one thing -- please be quiet about this -- talk among yourselves. No need to poison the future.

Or is there? will you only be satisfied if Hardy is a total failure forever, because you couldn't get what you wanted?

It's not about vindication. I sincerely believe that anyone who said the things I have heard Hardy teachers say -- current Hardy teachers -- has no business working with children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Thankfully, your numbers are few and diminishing rapidly. Now I ask just one thing -- please be quiet about this -- talk among yourselves. No need to poison the future.

I understood STFU the first time, no need to keep repeating yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um no I didn't. I get the point of the PP which isn't the point of the previous 20+ pages.

Hardy' scores are fine-- not great but not horrible. Engaged Principal who has implemented differentiation. Nice small school size. Clearly there are kids who are engaged and working hard. What there isn't are IB kids. Not feeder kids who are proficient (plenty of those) but IB.

Not hard to understand.

Fine. You didn't seem to acknowledge that kids prepared through feeder schools are academically solid students. Now you do acknowledge that fact; which also means that you would probably acknowledge that proficient peers are probably the best way to attract kids living in Hardy's neighborhood to attend that school. But as for your unrelated point (but relevant to the thread) -- how many neighborhood kids living in the neighborhood attend Hardy -- I don't think we've seen that data.

but not the only way, as percent IB is also a concern - whether thats because of convenience for socializing, or discomfort with a racial mix with few whites, I can't say, but it seems to be a real concern. Plus, while official numbers on IB are not available yet, offiicial numbers on feeder school percents may never be available, so IB % may have to be the proxy. I would assume that at such point as Hardy is 50% IB it can be assumed that a very large % of OOB are from the Hardy feeders. Is that incorrect?

I believe the reverse is true. If they are coming from Hardy feeders, Pride is counting them as IB. So they could be OOB at Stoddert or Hyde but counted as IB at Hardy. The others are coming from non-feeders.

Wow. If that's the case then Hardy has an even bigger challenge, because the IB percentage -- whether 11, 13 or some higher percentage-- overstates the real attendance by the potential IB student pool. Ms Pride -- who seems by all accounts to be a very competent and energetic school principal -- really has her work cut out for her.

Oh, you mean her work educating kids? Because that's what I would expect her to focus on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh my God, only on DCUM are we debating the worthiness of kids who attended high performing WOTP schools versus kids who live in the neighborhood. Talk about Ward 3 (2) problems!

Here's the upshot--Hardy is gaining ground quickly with IB parents and will eventually be considered an excellent MS option. As mentioned before, you can be an early adopter or a late adopter, but the momentum is building. Everyone who is talking about counting white faces or demanding percentages looks like a crazy racist nitpicker.

Nailed it! Thanks, pp!

[Anonymous]

I'm one of the posters who was actually at that meeting 4 years ago.

If you were there, think back to which teachers were there and who spoke up in defense of Patrick Pope. Still want them gone?

This would be a classic case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Trust me, you don't want to see those particular teachers go anywhere except into a classroom with your child.

Ancient history, let it go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thankfully, your numbers are few and diminishing rapidly. Now I ask just one thing -- please be quiet about this -- talk among yourselves. No need to poison the future.

I understood STFU the first time, no need to keep repeating yourself.

That wasn't me. and my intent is not to stifle you, it's to get beyond the past so Hardy has a better chance to educate kids in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, I'm sure it would be very gratifying to you -- even four years later, to get this kind of revenge. Move the teachers -- not because they're doing a bad job, not because the principal has problems with them, not because their IMPACT scores are low, but because of a few parents holding a grudge from 4 years ago -- who will not send their children to Hardy no mater what -- but would still love to see the teachers go. Vindication

Thankfully, your numbers are few and diminishing rapidly. Now I ask just one thing -- please be quiet about this -- talk among yourselves. No need to poison the future.

Or is there? will you only be satisfied if Hardy is a total failure forever, because you couldn't get what you wanted?

It's not about vindication. I sincerely believe that anyone who said the things I have heard Hardy teachers say -- current Hardy teachers -- has no business working with children.

Thankfully, this is probably just DCUM talk and there's no plan to march to DCPS HQ and demand their heads -- four years later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



You're going to be lambasted again, and deservingly so. The self-serving "take care of my snowflake and screw the city in the process" of your POV is breath-taking.

Apparently this is tough for people like you to understand, but when the majority of DCPS's students are below grade level, then shutting off an escape valve (such as Hardy) is educational malpractice. If your snowflake is too good to share a school with the refugees, then:

A) move
B) go private
C) apply to the charters which are already better than Hardy anyway

but in any case:

for the love of your child SHUT UP and don't ever talk in public like you do on DCUM. You racist, douchebag prick.

Translation: if you live IB, it's not your school. If you don't like it, go somewhere else. If you object, be prepared to be called a racist. And people wonder why the IB families aren't flocking there.

Yup.

Oh really - a couple of anonymous foul-mouthed supposed OOB Hardy parents has this effect? This is just as plausible as the uniform theory.

The world is bigger than DCUM. I've heard this sentiment expressed elsewhere. In fact, I was at the notorious 2010 Hardy PTA meeting when Michelle Rhee announced Pope was being reassigned, this sentiment was loudly voiced, by parents, including PTA leaders, but also by teachers. The parents have moved on, the teachers are still there.

As for the "uniform theory," have you considered that maybe parents make a thoughtful decision after looking at a bunch of factors? The attitude of the Hardy community -- including teachers -- toward in-boundary families is a factor. The lack of support from DCPS and elected officials is a factor. The mediocre academics is a factor. The lackluster extracurriculars is a factor. Uniforms? They're just a kicker.

Oh jeez, are we bringing that up again? I hesitate to even reply because I don't want to rehash this whole argument. But I was at that meeting, too. And what I saw were a group of parents who were angry that their beloved and highly competent principal was being removed - after Michelle Rhee appeared to have consulted with Key Elementary parents but not ever having consulted with Hardy parents. Furthermore Rhee made the novice error of appearing to smile (as in being patronizing)at African-American parents who made comments and not at the white parents -- which was noticed during the meeting and only infuriated the parents more.

When the well-respected leader of your school is suddenly removed, I think you have a right to be angry when you get no advanced warning and no adequate explanation. And since the middle school arts magnet school that Pope was reassigned to create never actually materialized, I think in hindsight the Hardy parents were right to be suspicious and angry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my God, only on DCUM are we debating the worthiness of kids who attended high performing WOTP schools versus kids who live in the neighborhood. Talk about Ward 3 (2) problems!

Here's the upshot--Hardy is gaining ground quickly with IB parents and will eventually be considered an excellent MS option. As mentioned before, you can be an early adopter or a late adopter, but the momentum is building. Everyone who is talking about counting white faces or demanding percentages looks like a crazy racist nitpicker.

Nailed it! Thanks, pp!

+1 and the people who want Hardy to fail because they didn't get their way in the ancient past will finally quiet down. Their spite will dissipate and they will not pass it on to the next generation. At least that is my dream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



You're going to be lambasted again, and deservingly so. The self-serving "take care of my snowflake and screw the city in the process" of your POV is breath-taking.

Apparently this is tough for people like you to understand, but when the majority of DCPS's students are below grade level, then shutting off an escape valve (such as Hardy) is educational malpractice. If your snowflake is too good to share a school with the refugees, then:

A) move
B) go private
C) apply to the charters which are already better than Hardy anyway

but in any case:

for the love of your child SHUT UP and don't ever talk in public like you do on DCUM. You racist, douchebag prick.

Translation: if you live IB, it's not your school. If you don't like it, go somewhere else. If you object, be prepared to be called a racist. And people wonder why the IB families aren't flocking there.

Yup.

Oh really - a couple of anonymous foul-mouthed supposed OOB Hardy parents has this effect? This is just as plausible as the uniform theory.

The world is bigger than DCUM. I've heard this sentiment expressed elsewhere. In fact, I was at the notorious 2010 Hardy PTA meeting when Michelle Rhee announced Pope was being reassigned, this sentiment was loudly voiced, by parents, including PTA leaders, but also by teachers. The parents have moved on, the teachers are still there.

As for the "uniform theory," have you considered that maybe parents make a thoughtful decision after looking at a bunch of factors? The attitude of the Hardy community -- including teachers -- toward in-boundary families is a factor. The lack of support from DCPS and elected officials is a factor. The mediocre academics is a factor. The lackluster extracurriculars is a factor. Uniforms? They're just a kicker.

Why would teachers have a hostile attitude toward IB students? If that's in fact the case, those teachers need to be shown the door ASAP.

I've been saying that for four years...

Ah-- holding a grudge because of the big mess four years ago? would Hardy become acceptable if those particular teachers were swept out so you wouldn't have to see their faces?

It's not about seeing their faces. It's about entrusting my children to them. Do you love your kids so little that you would send them to spend six hours a day with adults who have publicly said they don't like your kind? That the teachers are still at Hardy speaks volumes about how seriously (or unseriously) DCPS takes the challenge of meeting the needs of the entire Hardy community. I've never had a job where I could make public statements like that in the evening and still have a job the next morning.

Moving those teachers would be a start.

Those teachers never said they didn't like IB kids! They didn't want to lose their principal and that's all they said. You're either lying or stupid. One of them was the toughest and most dedicated teachers my kid ever had - an award-winning gem of a teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:



You're going to be lambasted again, and deservingly so. The self-serving "take care of my snowflake and screw the city in the process" of your POV is breath-taking.

Apparently this is tough for people like you to understand, but when the majority of DCPS's students are below grade level, then shutting off an escape valve (such as Hardy) is educational malpractice. If your snowflake is too good to share a school with the refugees, then:

A) move
B) go private
C) apply to the charters which are already better than Hardy anyway

but in any case:

for the love of your child SHUT UP and don't ever talk in public like you do on DCUM. You racist, douchebag prick.

Translation: if you live IB, it's not your school. If you don't like it, go somewhere else. If you object, be prepared to be called a racist. And people wonder why the IB families aren't flocking there.

Yup.

Oh really - a couple of anonymous foul-mouthed supposed OOB Hardy parents has this effect? This is just as plausible as the uniform theory.

The world is bigger than DCUM. I've heard this sentiment expressed elsewhere. In fact, I was at the notorious 2010 Hardy PTA meeting when Michelle Rhee announced Pope was being reassigned, this sentiment was loudly voiced, by parents, including PTA leaders, but also by teachers. The parents have moved on, the teachers are still there.

As for the "uniform theory," have you considered that maybe parents make a thoughtful decision after looking at a bunch of factors? The attitude of the Hardy community -- including teachers -- toward in-boundary families is a factor. The lack of support from DCPS and elected officials is a factor. The mediocre academics is a factor. The lackluster extracurriculars is a factor. Uniforms? They're just a kicker.

Oh jeez, are we bringing that up again? I hesitate to even reply because I don't want to rehash this whole argument. But I was at that meeting, too. And what I saw were a group of parents who were angry that their beloved and highly competent principal was being removed - after Michelle Rhee appeared to have consulted with Key Elementary parents but not ever having consulted with Hardy parents. Furthermore Rhee made the novice error of appearing to smile (as in being patronizing)at African-American parents who made comments and not at the white parents -- which was noticed during the meeting and only infuriated the parents more.

When the well-respected leader of your school is suddenly removed, I think you have a right to be angry when you get no advanced warning and no adequate explanation. And since the middle school arts magnet school that Pope was reassigned to create never actually materialized, I think in hindsight the Hardy parents were right to be suspicious and angry.

In a way, maybe it's good that the real issue is bubbling up, so it can finally be quelled and we can all move on. What I think we're learning here is that there are people in the Hardy neighborhood who don't want it to succeed as a neighborhood school because that will mean they have failed at blackballing the school after they were hurt so much by Michelle Rhee's antics in 2010.

Rhee is gone. Pope is gone. Let's move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thankfully, your numbers are few and diminishing rapidly. Now I ask just one thing -- please be quiet about this -- talk among yourselves. No need to poison the future.

I understood STFU the first time, no need to keep repeating yourself.

My goodness. I'm getting the vapors from the language implied by this IB parent (and note that the OOB parent asked the IB parent to "please be quiet"; the IB parent conjured this into "STFU"). I could never send my OOB child to Hardy with students that have parents that use phrases like this.

[Anonymous]

Unless you have an IB student at Hardy, you have no business guessing or implying or stating as a fact that there are teachers, administrators, or OB families that treat IB kids and families poorly.

I'm an IB parent. My kid is treated exactly the same as every kid at Hardy - not special, not better, not worse. He's treated the same by teachers, by his fellow students, and by everyone else associated with the school. My child is treated quite well and is a peer to his fellow students, whether they are IB or OOB.

As Hardy parents, we are treated exactly like every other Hardy family by teachers, administrators, and by everyone associated with the school. We are treated well.

Heck, who thinks that students care? Who thinks that Hardy teachers have the time to figure out who is IB and who is OOB, and then mistreat the IB students?

Believe me, this is a non-issue. Hardy's teachers educate children. Some are great; some are average; a few are poor. But none of them cares about which student is IB and which is OOB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Rhee is gone. Pope is gone. Let's move on.

But the teachers remain...