Deal Expansion

[Anonymous]

The former principal acted as a gatekeeper to keep out some students by presenting Hardy as a "magnet" when it was not, but also didn't want to strengthen the academic offerings because he preferred a music focus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wrong. Hardys new principal is a direct result of parents attempt to improve it, and a larger number than usual of ib kids are there this fall.

There are too many threads on this, but the previous principal was dead set against Deal-quality academics, and the ib parents were naturally bothered by this.

Is this true? I was under the impression that the previous principal was actively using the application process in order to screen out OOB students that seemed less talented or serious. I know there have been many threads on this subject, but believe it or not, this is the first assertion that I've read in just this way.

Doesn't it seem like he was either screening for quality applicants or he wasn't?

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, or even bring up bad blood. I'm genuinely confused by what sounds like conflicting accounts.

YOu're not a jerk, you're an innocent. PP is a rewriter of history. Check the previous threads, the numerous newspaper articles and the actual data to form your opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The former principal acted as a gatekeeper to keep out some students by presenting Hardy as a "magnet" when it was not, but also didn't want to strengthen the academic offerings because he preferred a music focus.

Please. he emphasized arts AND academics, as Hardy's DC-CAS scores indicated while he was there. Hardy was and still is second to Deal in academics and while Pope was there was very close to Deal (though lacking enough asian students to bring the scores up to deal averages.

The ib white kids at Hardy were on a par with those at Deal, suggesting that if more ib kids went to Hardy the overall scores would go up accordingly.

[Anonymous]

W3 and W2 families do not deserve a new middle school. What they DO deserve is higher taxes. Squeeeell!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:W3 and W2 families do not deserve a new middle school. What they DO deserve is higher taxes. Squeeeell!!

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=marion+barry+and+vincent+gray+photo&um=1&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&biw=1008&bih=432&tbm=isch&tbnid=jNCVJUkDvIjtfM:&imgrefurl=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2010/08/30/GA2010083003720.html&docid=EA1RLECcHh8eoM&w=1024&h=792&ei=p-yFTsPuBYy4tgfssIlB&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=317&vpy=114&dur=1435&hovh=197&hovw=255&tx=180&ty=180&page=7&tbnh=88&tbnw=122&start=73&ndsp=13&ved=1t:429,r:9,s:73

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The reality is those Key parents will choose to go private rather than go Hardy, thus their kids will not be using those district tax dollars but will be used for kids that need them. I say good. And I don't buy the argument that those Key famlies will move. They live in Palisades and can afford private.

This is utter nonsense. First, about 20% of last year's fifth grade class did move -- into the Deal boundaries, to another state, in one case to another country -- and all of them moved because of the middle school situation. Second, median household income in the 20016 zip code is $109,407. Sure that's quite a bit higher than DC as a whole (
$59,290) but that's nowhere near private school money. There are a lot of people in Palisades who can afford private school, but even more who can't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The reality is those Key parents will choose to go private rather than go Hardy, thus their kids will not be using those district tax dollars but will be used for kids that need them. I say good. And I don't buy the argument that those Key famlies will move. They live in Palisades and can

This is utter nonsense. First, about 20% of last year's fifth grade class did move -- into the Deal boundaries, to another state, in one case to another country -- and all of them moved because of the middle school situation. Second, median household income in the 20016 zip code is $109,407. Sure that's quite a bit higher than DC as a whole (
$59,290) but that's nowhere near private school money. There are a lot of people in Palisades who can afford private school, but even more who can't.

So does that mean 20% of the 5Th grade spots went to oob kids this year? And 20% seems low to have left in 5th. The Exodus usually starts around 3rd or 4th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The reality is those Key parents will choose to go private rather than go Hardy, thus their kids will not be using those district tax dollars but will be used for kids that need them. I say good. And I don't buy the argument that those Key famlies will move. They live in Palisades and can

This is utter nonsense. First, about 20% of last year's fifth grade class did move -- into the Deal boundaries, to another state, in one case to another country -- and all of them moved because of the middle school situation. Second, median household income in the 20016 zip code is $109,407. Sure that's quite a bit higher than DC as a whole (
$59,290) but that's nowhere near private school money. There are a lot of people in Palisades who can afford private school, but even more who can't.

So does that mean 20% of the 5Th grade spots went to oob kids this year? And 20% seems low to have left in 5th. The Exodus usually starts around 3rd or 4th.

I think what the ppp is saying is that 20% of Key parents move after 5th grade is completed and start 6th grade at a different middle school to avoid Hardy. If people plan on doing private then there might be an exodus at 3rd or 4th but for those that can't afford private they would stay through 5th and move somewhere else for a different middle school option.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still trying to understand why a "riot" should be a logical and natural result of any moves to limit the size of the concentric ring around Deal that defines "inboundary."

It's equally riotous that a tween living 2 blocks away from Deal would be forced into a trailer or makeshift overcrowded classroom so as to let in 75% of the city as a matter of right. Here, Bob, you and Mary can share a chair in this windowless classroom because we we don't want to look racist.

You are mixing apples and oranges here. The only way that students from 75% of the city get into Deal is due to being OOB in a feeder school. Changing the zone boundary for Deal won't change that reality at all. So, that's one issue.

The second issue is the potential modification of Deal's boundaries. The Deal boundaries currently include areas with high hispanic and African-American populations. Regardless of the OOB situation, some diversity will remain as long as those areas remain inbounds.

If the boundaries were redrawn to eliminate the high-minority areas, while simultaneously ending the flow of OOB students, it would rightly be seen as an overt effort to remove minority students from Deal.

IThis is why I continue to beleive that the best solution is to build another middle school in Ward 3. It does not have to be in the palisades, Deal could keep covering Ward 4 and other areas east of the park and the new school could some ward 3 and some ward 2 schools.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:
If the boundaries were redrawn to eliminate the high-minority areas, while simultaneously ending the flow of OOB students, it would rightly be seen as an overt effort to remove minority students from Deal.

Right, because the only possible motivation for anything anyone does is racism.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:
If the boundaries were redrawn to eliminate the high-minority areas, while simultaneously ending the flow of OOB students, it would rightly be seen as an overt effort to remove minority students from Deal.

Right, because the only possible motivation for anything anyone does is racism.

Can you please explain the non-racist motivation for purposely creating school policies that eliminate minority attendance at a specific high-performing school?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Can you please explain the non-racist motivation for purposely creating school policies that eliminate minority attendance at a specific high-performing school?

One reason might be the further you travel from Deal the less white the population. If Deal’s catchment area needs to be shrunk, it seems logical that it becomes less white. It doesn’t have to be intentional exclusion of anyone, just the way it works out.

[Anonymous]

If your elementary is Stoddert, Key, or Mann, go to Hardy. No way you get $25M for a new school.

[Anonymous]

None of the recent renovations have come in on budget. Maybe $30-40 million.

[Anonymous]

Restricting a school to an immediate neighborhood boundary to stabilize its enrollment numbers can have the effect of limiting the diversity at a school without rascist intentions.

Neighborhoods can have a majority of a certain race, class or religion for sociological reasons that aren't overtly racist.

I believe it is a good thing to draw school boundaries to purposefully include diverse groups of students, but I don't see not drawing boundaries that way as automatically racist act. You have been in DC too long and need to get out some if you do.