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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the decision to remove before school year's end about trying to get families to not move over the summer?

Not based on any evidence I've seen, but even if it were, it's already too late. Private schools are fully enrolled for this coming year. Housing inventory is tight, mortgage rates usurious. You can't get there from here in time.

Oh sure you can. Right now would be the time frame for putting a house on the market in order to move for the following school year. Even if you don't fine a house in the new district by Fall, you can rent in that district.

Mmm, you'd have to shoot the moon in several different aspects for this plan to work, but I guess you could make it happen with enough money and enough luck. But that's no way to run a railroad, esp if your kid is happy with their friend group at Hardy and doesn't want to move.

obviously if your kid doesn't want to move and is not being subjected to any problems at Hardy, then one wouldn't need to discuss moving. But a kid that is having a horrible time might have parents that would be willing to make the change. And DCPS might be invested in sending out the message that the issue is being addressed before the end of the school. Waiting until the end of school means sending things into the ether of summer non-communication, with the attendant uncertainty of how the next school year might go. Parents wanting more certainty may leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Freudian slip aside (you have indeed done "none of this"), I can't find it on the almost 40 pages of preceding posts. I can find plenty of examples of people incorrectly claiming the parents went from nothing to removal in one meeting, but that has been debunked with facts and details. Why don't you point us to the posts where anyone suggests anything other than claiming removal was racism. Or just offer a suggestion for what could have been done?

Again, we'll wait...

You could let the people in charge of DCPS work with a new leader. They would have probably put him on a PIP, been more hands on with the school from the start next year, send in some swing support from central. You chose to overstep and its done now. I guess you will all have to live with whomever comes next, and whatever staff remains.

I can tell you though, as someone who works personnel, filling classrooms with bodies is easy. Filling them with good teachers who want to be there is tough. Any highly qualified teacher in DCPS is getting multiple offers these days, and I have no idea why they would choose Hardy after this.

This line of thinking confuses me. DCPS did have an opportunity to act at year end, not act at all or take the action they took. They could have put him on a PIP. They could have provided additional support. DCPS had all available information. The parents who complained didn't, the staff didn't and you didn't. The party that had the most information made a decision to remove him. Seems pretty egotistical of you to be second-guessing DCPS.

[Anonymous]

The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

Honeymoon period

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Freudian slip aside (you have indeed done "none of this"), I can't find it on the almost 40 pages of preceding posts. I can find plenty of examples of people incorrectly claiming the parents went from nothing to removal in one meeting, but that has been debunked with facts and details. Why don't you point us to the posts where anyone suggests anything other than claiming removal was racism. Or just offer a suggestion for what could have been done?

Again, we'll wait...

You could let the people in charge of DCPS work with a new leader. They would have probably put him on a PIP, been more hands on with the school from the start next year, send in some swing support from central. You chose to overstep and its done now. I guess you will all have to live with whomever comes next, and whatever staff remains.

I can tell you though, as someone who works personnel, filling classrooms with bodies is easy. Filling them with good teachers who want to be there is tough. Any highly qualified teacher in DCPS is getting multiple offers these days, and I have no idea why they would choose Hardy after this.

My lord you think a lot of yourselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

Honeymoon period

Johnson was asked, time and time again, to have staff greet the students each day to guide them into the school. It is a ritual worth practicing: each student learns "hey, I see you. I'm glad that you're here. Let's go have a good day together." Johnson had no interest. He didn't even bother to make sure Patterson was upstairs, albeit on a chair on his phone.

Likewise, he was instructed time and time again (I can point to personal communications from back in February on this) to have staff out front of Safeway after school. He never bothered to do this until the fight videos started circulating, and even then he didn't do it with any reliability. During the fight two weeks ago, he was standing on the other side of the street, not at the bus stop / safeway as the commotion unfolded. He appears in the background in one of the videos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

Check ins are really really important for the more “boisterous” kids to form bonds with adults and know they are there watching

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

Honeymoon period

Johnson was asked, time and time again, to have staff greet the students each day to guide them into the school. It is a ritual worth practicing: each student learns "hey, I see you. I'm glad that you're here. Let's go have a good day together." Johnson had no interest. He didn't even bother to make sure Patterson was upstairs, albeit on a chair on his phone.

Likewise, he was instructed time and time again (I can point to personal communications from back in February on this) to have staff out front of Safeway after school. He never bothered to do this until the fight videos started circulating, and even then he didn't do it with any reliability. During the fight two weeks ago, he was standing on the other side of the street, not at the bus stop / safeway as the commotion unfolded. He appears in the background in one of the videos.

Wow

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Freudian slip aside (you have indeed done "none of this"), I can't find it on the almost 40 pages of preceding posts. I can find plenty of examples of people incorrectly claiming the parents went from nothing to removal in one meeting, but that has been debunked with facts and details. Why don't you point us to the posts where anyone suggests anything other than claiming removal was racism. Or just offer a suggestion for what could have been done?

Again, we'll wait...

You could let the people in charge of DCPS work with a new leader. They would have probably put him on a PIP, been more hands on with the school from the start next year, send in some swing support from central. You chose to overstep and its done now. I guess you will all have to live with whomever comes next, and whatever staff remains.

I can tell you though, as someone who works personnel, filling classrooms with bodies is easy. Filling them with good teachers who want to be there is tough. Any highly qualified teacher in DCPS is getting multiple offers these days, and I have no idea why they would choose Hardy after this.

My lord you think a lot of yourselves.

I do. I've worked hard to become a great teacher, and I take a lot of pride in my work. I don't like the way this went down and some of my colleages feel the same. I don't think its a negative to be confident in your abilities and assured that you can find a better role elsewhere. Adjusting to new administration can often be an additional burden and I'd rather do that at a school that doesn't have this sort of parent - school relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

Honeymoon period

Johnson was asked, time and time again, to have staff greet the students each day to guide them into the school. It is a ritual worth practicing: each student learns "hey, I see you. I'm glad that you're here. Let's go have a good day together." Johnson had no interest. He didn't even bother to make sure Patterson was upstairs, albeit on a chair on his phone.

Likewise, he was instructed time and time again (I can point to personal communications from back in February on this) to have staff out front of Safeway after school. He never bothered to do this until the fight videos started circulating, and even then he didn't do it with any reliability. During the fight two weeks ago, he was standing on the other side of the street, not at the bus stop / safeway as the commotion unfolded. He appears in the background in one of the videos.

This is me again. Staff were sometimes present at Safeway. I don't want to give the impression that they were never there. But not reliably and certainly not in any manner to prevent it from become a known fighting hotspot after school.

If you see the one video from March, you can see a half-dozen kids with their phones already out while the one subject approaches the other subject. EVERYONE knew the fight was about to occur. How a fight still manages to occur in such a situation is beyond me.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, the fact that most parents starting seeing regular fight videos next to the school really changed things, especially when the admin seemed not to care.

Not sure why individual teachers seem to be threatened by this; this wasn't and isn't on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Freudian slip aside (you have indeed done "none of this"), I can't find it on the almost 40 pages of preceding posts. I can find plenty of examples of people incorrectly claiming the parents went from nothing to removal in one meeting, but that has been debunked with facts and details. Why don't you point us to the posts where anyone suggests anything other than claiming removal was racism. Or just offer a suggestion for what could have been done?

Again, we'll wait...

You could let the people in charge of DCPS work with a new leader. They would have probably put him on a PIP, been more hands on with the school from the start next year, send in some swing support from central. You chose to overstep and its done now. I guess you will all have to live with whomever comes next, and whatever staff remains.

I can tell you though, as someone who works personnel, filling classrooms with bodies is easy. Filling them with good teachers who want to be there is tough. Any highly qualified teacher in DCPS is getting multiple offers these days, and I have no idea why they would choose Hardy after this.

My lord you think a lot of yourselves.

I do. I've worked hard to become a great teacher, and I take a lot of pride in my work. I don't like the way this went down and some of my colleages feel the same. I don't think its a negative to be confident in your abilities and assured that you can find a better role elsewhere. Adjusting to new administration can often be an additional burden and I'd rather do that at a school that doesn't have this sort of parent - school relationship.

The parents' petition didn't request PJ's immediate dismissal. If you're privy to why that happened, please share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Freudian slip aside (you have indeed done "none of this"), I can't find it on the almost 40 pages of preceding posts. I can find plenty of examples of people incorrectly claiming the parents went from nothing to removal in one meeting, but that has been debunked with facts and details. Why don't you point us to the posts where anyone suggests anything other than claiming removal was racism. Or just offer a suggestion for what could have been done?

Again, we'll wait...

You could let the people in charge of DCPS work with a new leader. They would have probably put him on a PIP, been more hands on with the school from the start next year, send in some swing support from central. You chose to overstep and its done now. I guess you will all have to live with whomever comes next, and whatever staff remains.

I can tell you though, as someone who works personnel, filling classrooms with bodies is easy. Filling them with good teachers who want to be there is tough. Any highly qualified teacher in DCPS is getting multiple offers these days, and I have no idea why they would choose Hardy after this.

My lord you think a lot of yourselves.

I do. I've worked hard to become a great teacher, and I take a lot of pride in my work. I don't like the way this went down and some of my colleages feel the same. I don't think its a negative to be confident in your abilities and assured that you can find a better role elsewhere. Adjusting to new administration can often be an additional burden and I'd rather do that at a school that doesn't have this sort of parent - school relationship.

It seems such an odd set of conclusions you've drawn about the parent-school relationship.

Have your relationships with parents been any different this year?

Do you not think the parent should complain first to school admin and then to DCPS admin when they are very concerned about the daily experience of their kids?

Why do you find it strange for DCPS at times to make personnel decisions without first polling for teacher input?

Did you sign the WTU Covid letter about delaying re-opening? Do you have find the concept of a petition to be fundamentally wrong?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

Honeymoon period

Johnson was asked, time and time again, to have staff greet the students each day to guide them into the school. It is a ritual worth practicing: each student learns "hey, I see you. I'm glad that you're here. Let's go have a good day together." Johnson had no interest. He didn't even bother to make sure Patterson was upstairs, albeit on a chair on his phone.

Likewise, he was instructed time and time again (I can point to personal communications from back in February on this) to have staff out front of Safeway after school. He never bothered to do this until the fight videos started circulating, and even then he didn't do it with any reliability. During the fight two weeks ago, he was standing on the other side of the street, not at the bus stop / safeway as the commotion unfolded. He appears in the background in one of the videos.

Wow

I’ve asked this before and maybe a teacher can answer, do they have a rotation of people to cover transition times (lunch, recess, dismissal)? I work at another school and we have a schedule for those times and we know who covers what. Each person ends up on one, max two supervisions per week. Dismissal is a time that needs to be supervised, not randomly, but consistently.
It’s appealing to hear that no one was out there to greet kids or to dismiss, considering how busy the area is as well. SMH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The IS and the new principal were outside greeting students as they arrived at the school. Compare that to months and months of no one bothering to be there for the kids when they arrived. The one man assigned to the entrance just played on his phone the entire time, sitting inside.

This is not a big thing. But it is telling. Do I care about my kid being greeted? Yes, but mainly because it is correlated with a lot of other things I really care about but cannot observe as easily.

Honeymoon period

Johnson was asked, time and time again, to have staff greet the students each day to guide them into the school. It is a ritual worth practicing: each student learns "hey, I see you. I'm glad that you're here. Let's go have a good day together." Johnson had no interest. He didn't even bother to make sure Patterson was upstairs, albeit on a chair on his phone.

Likewise, he was instructed time and time again (I can point to personal communications from back in February on this) to have staff out front of Safeway after school. He never bothered to do this until the fight videos started circulating, and even then he didn't do it with any reliability. During the fight two weeks ago, he was standing on the other side of the street, not at the bus stop / safeway as the commotion unfolded. He appears in the background in one of the videos.

Wow

I’ve asked this before and maybe a teacher can answer, do they have a rotation of people to cover transition times (lunch, recess, dismissal)? I work at another school and we have a schedule for those times and we know who covers what. Each person ends up on one, max two supervisions per week. Dismissal is a time that needs to be supervised, not randomly, but consistently.
It’s appealing to hear that no one was out there to greet kids or to dismiss, considering how busy the area is as well. SMH

*I meant *appalling