Call to discuss the state of Hardy 05/15/23

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This controversy will set Hardy back a decade. Sad.

What? You think the UMC families that predominate Hardy are going to go somewhere else? To protest...an active PTA? Demands for competent principals? The only [b]people who are upset by this are race baiters who don't send their kids to Hardy and like to agitate to stir up crap.[/b]

Not true. Send my kids to Hardy. Am upset by how this unfolded. Am not a race baiter. Not everyone is camp Hardy was a hellscape with “kids roaming the halls” and therefore the principal had to leave immediately with a month left of school.

This is part of what is upsetting. Many of you fail to even consider any alternate point of view and that’s how you proceeded. There is ton of dismissive, self righteous, condescending and flat out aggressive comments on this thread from the parents who support this. No other view points matter but yours. Even teachers who have reasonably brought up good points are attacked here and called names. Mob mentality.

It doesn’t matter now anyhow as it’s done. Let’s see how the next month of school goes. I suspect it will get worse before it gets better.

If the threshold for change is a "hellscape with kids roaming the hallways" then the disconnect here is my expectations for a well functioning school vs yours.

Are you intentionally misunderstanding my point? I clearly meant that Hardy is nowhere near a hellscape and that having “kids in the halls” is not a a sign of a school on the brink of collapse. Have you spent much time in the halls of Hardy?

Some posters continue to exaggerate what is happening at Hardy and I was saying that not everyone believes this version of Hardy.

PP understood you. He/she was saying she's dissatisfied now with current level if misbehavior. To him/her, it needs serious action now. You, on the other hand, think things need to be much worse before serious action would be warranted.

[Anonymous]

Have they seen the misbehavior? Where are they getting information on the “level” of misbehavior? Have they spent many consecutive days observing the misbehavior? How are they making their determination that the misbehavior in the hallways is so bad that it needs serious action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a Hardy parent but good for these parents for getting organized and leading an effective outcome.
This puts DCPS on notice that they better do right by Hardy.
[b]Maybe someone could encourage the Hardy parent organizers to help other parent communities at other schools to organize as well to pressure DCPS to improve learning conditions.
DCPS needs accountability as they get away with way too much crap

This would be viewed as "condescending" and "evidence of privilege". There is no winning. If you don't try and help you are a racist. If you try and help you are a racist. The only acceptable response is to self flagellate early and often and hope to be labeled and ally.

-signed
Someone who used to try and support these causes but has had enough

Everyone get out your tiniest violins for the poor white victims in our society

Are you really trying to convince us you’ve tried to help the schools of other Wards? Because no one believes you.

Y’all are crazy defensive. You think it’s “performative” to consider your role in perpetuating inequality and racism. you’ve got no intention of helping others whatsoever. You benefit from this system. You’re like—I got mine!! My kids are “suffering” at this TERRIBLE school and we just HAPPEN to have time and resources to do something about it!! Geez I wonder WHY you have the time and resources to do anything about it?? Nothing to do with race there, huh??

No one’s is saying you should stop advocating but the the repeated screams of THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE! are just dumb.

PJ might have needed to go but I have no doubt that had he been a young WHITE first year principal it would have been handled differently.

Hardy is almost 2/3 BIPOC. White parents fighting to improve Hardy is anti-racist by definition. Read your Kendi.

Lol. The fact that that white parents dominate the PTO, LSAT, and class liaison positions in a school that is 2/3 BIPOC is already hugely problematic and definitely not anti-racist. The PTO is not representative of the student population.

It is not anti-racist to have white parents and a PTO that does not reflect the student body (in a 2/3 BIPOC school) decide to remove the first black principal in years with little to no engagement with BIPOC families. Now I’m not saying it’s necessarily racist-but it sure as sh** ain’t anti-racist.

I saw one black PTO member…during that Zoom call. Everyone else who spoke was white.

How many of those 400 signatures came from BIPOC families? Really how many?

While we are at it…How many of the 400 signatures represented unique families? I bet good money on the fact that half those signatures represented the same household.

I am thankful we have a PTO, LSAT and class liaisons that are committed to the school and willing to fight for change when needed. I couldn’t give a damn what color they are. That there are people out there like you taking note of speakers’ skin complexion like a damn bingo card instead of assessing the merits of what they have to say is really pathetic. That you think what you are doing is “anti-racist” is kinda crazy.

See, to me, that’s a problem. You should care that your PTO in no way reflects the demographics of your school. You should care that the many different voices are not represented in these meetings. You could also ask yourselves why these parents don’t show up or participate. Are there obstacles to their participation? But you all don’t do much self reflection. This thread has made that abundantly clear. You are always right.

I was listening to what people were saying in the meeting (not playing bingo). I found the meeting very uncomfortable and disliked what several parents had to say.

I never said I was being ANTI-RACIST. I was disagreeing with the poster who said that white parents taking charge to remove PJ in a school that is 2/3 BIPOC is somehow “by definition” anti-racist.

All other things equal, it would indeed be best if the demographics of the PTO reflected that of the student body. But if the PTO went out of its way to recruit BIPOC members to its ranks, wouldn’t that smack of tokenism? As others have said upthread, it’s very hard to know what “anti-racism” actually is because every action or inaction seems to evoke accusations of racism from some quarter or another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have they seen the misbehavior? Where are they getting information on the “level” of misbehavior? Have they spent many consecutive days observing the misbehavior? How are they making their determination that the misbehavior in the hallways is so bad that it needs serious action.

(1) Most of the students have sight, hearing, and communication skills.

(2) Some of us have gotten emails from teachers or admins when our children have been the victims of an incident.

(3) Some of us have been in the building during the school day for various events or other reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a Hardy parent but good for these parents for getting organized and leading an effective outcome.
This puts DCPS on notice that they better do right by Hardy.
[b]Maybe someone could encourage the Hardy parent organizers to help other parent communities at other schools to organize as well to pressure DCPS to improve learning conditions.
DCPS needs accountability as they get away with way too much crap

This would be viewed as "condescending" and "evidence of privilege". There is no winning. If you don't try and help you are a racist. If you try and help you are a racist. The only acceptable response is to self flagellate early and often and hope to be labeled and ally.

-signed
Someone who used to try and support these causes but has had enough

Everyone get out your tiniest violins for the poor white victims in our society

Are you really trying to convince us you’ve tried to help the schools of other Wards? Because no one believes you.

Y’all are crazy defensive. You think it’s “performative” to consider your role in perpetuating inequality and racism. you’ve got no intention of helping others whatsoever. You benefit from this system. You’re like—I got mine!! My kids are “suffering” at this TERRIBLE school and we just HAPPEN to have time and resources to do something about it!! Geez I wonder WHY you have the time and resources to do anything about it?? Nothing to do with race there, huh??

No one’s is saying you should stop advocating but the the repeated screams of THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE! are just dumb.

PJ might have needed to go but I have no doubt that had he been a young WHITE first year principal it would have been handled differently.

Hardy is almost 2/3 BIPOC. White parents fighting to improve Hardy is anti-racist by definition. Read your Kendi.

Lol. The fact that that white parents dominate the PTO, LSAT, and class liaison positions in a school that is 2/3 BIPOC is already hugely problematic and definitely not anti-racist. The PTO is not representative of the student population.

It is not anti-racist to have white parents and a PTO that does not reflect the student body (in a 2/3 BIPOC school) decide to remove the first black principal in years with little to no engagement with BIPOC families. Now I’m not saying it’s necessarily racist-but it sure as sh** ain’t anti-racist.

I saw one black PTO member…during that Zoom call. Everyone else who spoke was white.

How many of those 400 signatures came from BIPOC families? Really how many?

While we are at it…How many of the 400 signatures represented unique families? I bet good money on the fact that half those signatures represented the same household.

I am at a different DCPS where despite a lot of effort for recruitment, there is very little BIPOC participation on LSAT and PTO. My sense is the wealthy black parents have better things to do (like apply to private schools) and working class parents are working. Meanwhile the white parents are supposed to do nothing, and that’s somehow better for everyone? Again, you need to get your theories straight for what white parents are supposed to do. STFU and “hoard privilege” and get our kids tutors, or actually try to make the diverse school better? Or move to an all-white school?

+1. I am on the PTO Board at a diverse DCPS school and our Board is totally unrepresentative of 50%ish of the school school, but we have to *beg* people individually to run. If a POC ran for PTO, I virtually guarantee no one would run against them. There’s really only so much you can do unless you just don’t want volunteers at all. FWIW I think there are absolutely barriers to participation for many POC families that white families don’t face, but they aren’t things that those white families can do anything about.

[Anonymous]

If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

Nice arm-chair quarterbacking, but you speak from an uninformed position.

All other ways if advocacy had been tried, without positive results, and the petition was the remaining and advised option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

Nice arm-chair quarterbacking, but you speak from an uninformed position.

All other ways if advocacy had been tried, without positive results, and the petition was the remaining and advised option.

Exactly. If the PP would like to prescribe a specific manner of advocacy, I would love to hear it. Also will probably be able to demonstrate that it was attempted. Believe me, removing the principal was not the goal. The goal was for the principal to effectively and accountably do the job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

Nice arm-chair quarterbacking, but you speak from an uninformed position.

All other ways if advocacy had been tried, without positive results, and the petition was the remaining and advised option.

Having a differing opinion is not being uninformed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This controversy will set Hardy back a decade. Sad.

What? You think the UMC families that predominate Hardy are going to go somewhere else? To protest...an active PTA? Demands for competent principals? The only [b]people who are upset by this are race baiters who don't send their kids to Hardy and like to agitate to stir up crap.[/b]

Not true. Send my kids to Hardy. Am upset by how this unfolded. Am not a race baiter. Not everyone is camp Hardy was a hellscape with “kids roaming the halls” and therefore the principal had to leave immediately with a month left of school.

This is part of what is upsetting. Many of you fail to even consider any alternate point of view and that’s how you proceeded. There is ton of dismissive, self righteous, condescending and flat out aggressive comments on this thread from the parents who support this. No other view points matter but yours. Even teachers who have reasonably brought up good points are attacked here and called names. Mob mentality.

It doesn’t matter now anyhow as it’s done. Let’s see how the next month of school goes. I suspect it will get worse before it gets better.

If the threshold for change is a "hellscape with kids roaming the hallways" then the disconnect here is my expectations for a well functioning school vs yours.

Are you intentionally misunderstanding my point? I clearly meant that Hardy is nowhere near a hellscape and that having “kids in the halls” is not a a sign of a school on the brink of collapse. Have you spent much time in the halls of Hardy?

Some posters continue to exaggerate what is happening at Hardy and I was saying that not everyone believes this version of Hardy.

PP understood you. He/she was saying she's dissatisfied now with current level if misbehavior. To him/her, it needs serious action now. You, on the other hand, think things need to be much worse before serious action would be warranted.

Yes, this. By setting hellscape as the floor under which we need to pass before drastic action is taken PPP they create a BS construct to which I do not subscribe. They knew that, though. They are doing that DCUM thing where they set out a false choice or extreme starting position and then pretend like the other person is unreasonable for rejecting wholesale the entire construct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

Nice arm-chair quarterbacking, but you speak from an uninformed position.

All other ways if advocacy had been tried, without positive results, and the petition was the remaining and advised option.

Having a differing opinion is not being uninformed.

Thinking that were unexhausted avenues for other advocacy is uninformed, not opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

Why is this not the best way? Because you have created a racism straw man to deflect from an actual discussion? Your starting position is because the principal was black people needed to be careful because he's brittle. Setting aside the offensive racist stereotype of a black leader who can't handle criticism or meet the standard, the way you've set up the "rules" means anything but stroking his hair and telling him he's wonderful for trying hard is racism.

You have lots of commentary for how this was not the right way to do it. Tell us (without injecting false accusations of racism) what should have been done. We'll wait...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

Nice arm-chair quarterbacking, but you speak from an uninformed position.

All other ways if advocacy had been tried, without positive results, and the petition was the remaining and advised option.

Having a differing opinion is not being uninformed.

Thinking that were unexhausted avenues for other advocacy is uninformed, not opinion.

What were those things? Other than letting failure persist for fear some SJW was going to level accusations of racism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If tackling structural racism means asking a parent to not advocate for their kid in the best way they can, I don’t see how we’ll make progress.

I think what most people are trying to tell you on this thread is that you are not advocating for kids in the best way possible

Why is this not the best way? Because you have created a racism straw man to deflect from an actual discussion? Your starting position is because the principal was black people needed to be careful because he's brittle. Setting aside the offensive racist stereotype of a black leader who can't handle criticism or meet the standard, the way you've set up the "rules" means anything but stroking his hair and telling him he's wonderful for trying hard is racism.

You have lots of commentary for how this was not the right way to do it. Tell us (without injecting false accusations of racism) what should have been done. We'll wait...

I and many other posters have done none of this, so I don't really feel like there is anything to respond to here. I've shared above why this has damaged the school community not just this year but going forward.