WTF is happening at HARDY??????????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Believe me, in-boundary parents that wanted Pope out had other reasons. It had NOTHING to do do with refusing to support discrimination. What a laughable statement!

In-boundary parents, seeing how nicely Hardy had been renovated, had a sudden desire to send their children to a neighborhood school, instead of an expensive private school. It wasn't enough that they could already send their kids to Hardy anytime, because they were inboundary, they wanted first to rid Hardy of the OOB element that made them feel uncomfortable. You know what I mean.

Naturally they went straight to Michelle Rhee. Naturally Rhee met with them privately, while cancelling meetings with Hardy parents and then announcing that Hardy was losing its prinicipal.

I wouldn't be surprised that these same parents give tons of money to worthy causes that help minority students better themselves, but not in their back yard.

[Anonymous]

Sad if it's all a NIMBY situation. Some of us actually believe our idealistic talk and, for the most part, thought neighbors (who have worked so hard to make the elementary school such wonderful communities) did too.

[Anonymous]

Not a Hardy parent here, but a long time DCPS parent. You Hardy/Georgetown boundary people who deny your role in trying to white-wash this school are just full of it. I read through this entire thread, and the "in-boundary" folk refer to some mysterious reasons why Pope was removed, the people who actually sent children to Hardy refer to why he was effective, and they are able to list the reasons. So what's the big conspiracy/mystery between the "NEIGHBORHOOD" families and the secret handshake with Rhee/Henderson about Pope??? And why the F isn't V. Gray hands ON now that he's got the Pow-A.

[Anonymous]

I think some in boundary "folk" probably wanted Pope removed because he was a lack-luster principal who's achievements with Hardy just weren't good enough. Plenty of in-boundary parents have multiple degrees, Ivy league educations, high power jobs, and high expectations of any school their children might attend. Maybe Pope and his very mediocre school was sufficient for OOB to be wow-ed by its success, but it just wasn't good enough for this affluent NW DC neighborhood. Is that clear enough?

[Anonymous]

Clear enough. If you're speaking for yourself you oughta just step up and pay the $$ for a private school that guarantees who your family will associate with. The families I know with some worldly accumen who opt for public school (degrees or otherwise) aren't in it because they can't afford private. Theyre in it because the experience for our children to play on a level field is, PRICELESS. Get that? You must be a really short man. Or an ugly woman. Dr.? Esq?

[Anonymous]

22:16 --... I forgot to add..."Pope removed because he was a lack-luster principal who's achievements with Hardy just weren't good enough"...is the current situation representative of dynamic principal who is on the right path toward GOOD ENOUGH toward achievements at Hardy? You crazy. Oh, and I'm very wealthy, public school, white and in your neighborhood, and in your public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Clear enough. If you're speaking for yourself you oughta just step up and pay the $$ for a private school that guarantees who your family will associate with. The families I know with some worldly accumen who opt for public school (degrees or otherwise) aren't in it because they can't afford private. Theyre in it because the experience for our children to play on a level field is, PRICELESS. Get that? You must be a really short man. Or an ugly woman. Dr.? Esq?

Funny -- I'm the one who thinks Hardy should never have been allowed to have its discriminatory "admissions" process for OOB students under Pope (you know, the one that guaranteed the types of students that one would associate with at Hardy) b/c I am a strident believer in the BEST PUBLIC EDUCATION for all students in DC. So, I think you seriously misunderstand my viewpoint. My point about the attitude of the neighborhood and their/my high standards is simply a fact to be understood as part of this debate. Be assured, I actually am quite extreme in my SUPPORT of public schools (regardless of income) -- it doesn't mean I would willingly accept a 3rd tier principal like Pope. In a perfect world, the privates would be banned and everyone would be educated in the public system -- my utopian view. Sorry if I don't fit into some stereotypical box like you mention (short man/ugly woman/dr./esq.), I, like you, apparently, am an ardent supporter of the level field of the public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:22:16 --... I forgot to add..."Pope removed because he was a lack-luster principal who's achievements with Hardy just weren't good enough"...is the current situation representative of dynamic principal who is on the right path toward GOOD ENOUGH toward achievements at Hardy? You crazy. Oh, and I'm very wealthy, public school, white and in your neighborhood, and in your public schools.

nope, not good enough

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:22:16 --... I forgot to add..."Pope removed because he was a lack-luster principal who's achievements with Hardy just weren't good enough"...is the current situation representative of dynamic principal who is on the right path toward GOOD ENOUGH toward achievements at Hardy? You crazy. Oh, and I'm very wealthy, public school, white and in your neighborhood, and in your public schools.

maybe 22:16 was being tongue-in-cheek?

It's true, average Georgetown parents wouldn't seek opportunities to socialize with a middle school principal any more than they'd invite their housekeeper for cocktails, but they would recognize competence, however menial the task. Pope certainly had that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope and think that plenty of in-boundary parents objected to the blatant discrimination of a system that subjected the poorer, minority kids to a fake "admissions" test all the while admitting the richer, non-minority kids without such admissions criteria. I think plenty of in-boundary parents are people-of-conscience who prefer not to be a party to that type of discrimination (regardless of how some on this board think such a system was just fine b/c it kept out the "riff-raff"). Bravo to all those in boundary parents who refuse to support discrimination in that form.

<choking on laughter>

What are you smoking?! My god, that's the most ridiculous thing I've read here in a month! Look back over the threads of Ward 3 parents INCENSED at the idea of kids from Columbia Heights - or anyone OOB - attending their schools and you'll get an eyeful. The only activism among west of the park parents, is in wanting to report as many OOB families to the principal as possible!

I know you're trying to get up on your high horse, but standing atop a pile of horse sh*t doesn't quite have the same effect. Absolutely NOBODY is fooled by your delusional suggestion.


Really?!? It is laughable in DC to say no to discrimination? It's "delusional" and about getting up on a high horse to say that DC public schools shouldn't be allowed to discriminate against minority kids? What are you smoking (to borrow your phrase). These issues were supposedly decided by the US Supreme Ct. over 50 years ago!
It's one thing for a private school to establish any admissions criteria it chooses, but it hasn't been acceptable for public schools to do so in over a generation. Sorry you haven't gotten the memo yet and sad that you don't think your neighbors have higher standards than you apparently do.

Don't play dumb. Look at any of the many posts from Ward 3 parents absolutely infuriated at the thought of east of the park kids invading their schools. The racism and classism isn't always even subtle. It's laughable to pretend it isn't there, much less that someone pointing it out has issues about Brown v. Board of Ed.

(On second thought, maybe you're not playing - maybe you just can't help it.)

Oh, and BTW, Wilson academies use THE EXACT SAME PROCEDURE. Where's your outrage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clear enough. If you're speaking for yourself you oughta just step up and pay the $$ for a private school that guarantees who your family will associate with. The families I know with some worldly accumen who opt for public school (degrees or otherwise) aren't in it because they can't afford private. Theyre in it because the experience for our children to play on a level field is, PRICELESS. Get that? You must be a really short man. Or an ugly woman. Dr.? Esq?

Funny -- I'm the one who thinks Hardy should never have been allowed to have its discriminatory "admissions" process for OOB students under Pope (you know, the one that guaranteed the types of students that one would associate with at Hardy) b/c I am a strident believer in the BEST PUBLIC EDUCATION for all students in DC. So, I think you seriously misunderstand my viewpoint. My point about the attitude of the neighborhood and their/my high standards is simply a fact to be understood as part of this debate. Be assured, I actually am quite extreme in my SUPPORT of public schools (regardless of income) -- it doesn't mean I would willingly accept a 3rd tier principal like Pope. In a perfect world, the privates would be banned and everyone would be educated in the public system -- my utopian view. Sorry if I don't fit into some stereotypical box like you mention (short man/ugly woman/dr./esq.), I, like you, apparently, am an ardent supporter of the level field of the public schools.

People who think utopia is enforcing their will against other individuals and depriving them of freedom of choice are very scary. Hint: it's called totalitarianism. And yes, it's ugly, and you are too.

[Anonymous]

The facts are, Pope saw a school the rich folks weren't sending their kids to. He snapped up the opportunity and turned it into a feeder to school for Ellington for talented kids from all over the city. Suddenly Michelle Rhee comes in and the people who were anti-DCPS now want to send their kids to the school. Their kids are probably not artistically talented enough to keep up with the OOB kids and so they complain that they want their regular school back. They get it back and then when discipline, etc... goes awry they walk away.

Now that Michelle Rhee is gone and the perception is the schools will go back down the tubes I bet Hardy can go, quietly, back to being a feeder for Ellington. It stinks for current families but for those that bide their time it may be good. The proximity of Hardy to Ellington is just so perfect and I seriously doubt if the city will ever start an arts middle school even though it would be a great thing so goofiness like this hybrid can go away.

[Anonymous]

With regard to the application process discriminating against OOB students, it's occurred to me that the focus of our debate is on the wrong group of students.

Given that Hardy was 70% OOB when my kid attended, the reality is that the application process benefited the stable OOB families more than anyone else. Yes, it controlled the OOB population with which the 30% in-boundary kids would interact but the people who got the most advantage out of it were those stable OOB families -- who could have been middle-class, working class, or poor. It no doubt benefited the educated middle class and the working class the most since their kids were less likely to be excluded and they didn't have to chance the lottery system.

I can see why that particular pp has a problem with the application system. I just think it's important to realize that lots of OOB families would be in complete support of the application system. Personally, all I cared about was getting my kid in. If it had been the lottery or an application process, made no difference to me.

Believe me I sweated (figuratively speaking) about whether dd would be able to move from Hyde to Hardy. People told me that OOB kids in feeder schools wouldn't have a problem but I was extra careful about filling out that friggin' application!

Anyway, I checked the Hardy website -- the best way to ensure an OOB spot now is to be in a feeder school. No lottery for you if you already got a spot OOB in a feeder elementary.

[Anonymous]

I know people within the community that have praised the new principal of Hardy for how approachable she is. How willing she has been to deal with hard problems such as what kids do after school. Pope was no where near as approachable to the community. What I have heard is like anything the issue at Hardy is a small group of kids without parents that are willing to give them guidelines. We don't want to be honest about it but all of us have seen way too many groups of kids without appropriate supervision doing the stupid things kids do because they have the "teen" brain that makes them stupid for several years. If you ask me the problem at Hardy is not the principal or even the kids, it is the adults or actually parents that don't want to take responsibility for their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know people within the community that have praised the new principal of Hardy for how approachable she is. How willing she has been to deal with hard problems such as what kids do after school. Pope was no where near as approachable to the community. What I have heard is like anything the issue at Hardy is a small group of kids without parents that are willing to give them guidelines. We don't want to be honest about it but all of us have seen way too many groups of kids without appropriate supervision doing the stupid things kids do because they have the "teen" brain that makes them stupid for several years. If you ask me the problem at Hardy is not the principal or even the kids, it is the adults or actually parents that don't want to take responsibility for their kids.

This is very true (the part about teen behavior), but I have to ask....would you still feel this way if this was about the teens at Hart, Kramer, Ballou, or Anacostia?? OR would this be a dangerous situation that you would not want to be a part of??