Merging Deal and Hardy

[Anonymous]

As innocently helpful as you imagine this to be, I think it is short-sighted to feed into the DCPS mentality that well-intentioned bad ideas deserve consideration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay. I also posted in the "what happened at the W3EdNet overcrowding meeting last night" thread (http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/640148.page). So if you want some even broader context for what I am about to say you can read my posts there.

The short version of the broader context: Families and staff in Wilson feeder schools are concerned about overcrowding and have tried to both brainstorm about possible solutions and engage with DCPS. We had a meeting with DCPS earlier this week where we reviewed the data and talked about possible solutions. DCPS is convening a "community working group" on overcrowding to consider the issue, which will meet for the next 5-6 months.

Okay so what about this idea of "combining" Deal and Hardy? Where did it come from?

I will confess. It came from me.

One of the ideas that DCPS presented at the meeting -- and I should add that DCPS was trying to get all ideas on the table, not suggest that this was the solution -- was the old idea from the boundary and student assignment process, the "choice set". Namely students in the Deal and Hardy feeders would not have a right to either school, but would rather be assigned to one or the other school based on some process -- random lottery, preferences, whatever. This could relieve some of the overcrowding at Deal because Hardy's building is not at capacity, and Deal's is over.

I responded that I wasn't wild about the idea of a choice set (and some noted that no one was too keen on the idea during the boundary process either). But an alternative that might be more palatable if you were going that route, would be to route all kids in the feeder through the two schools with say 6 grade at Hardy and 7+8 at Deal (I actually said 6+7 at Deal and 8 at Hardy, but some people have pointed out to me that it might make more sense the other way around). You would make more use of the capacity of both schools, relieve the pressure at Deal a bit, and could implement it relatively quickly. It would also simplify administration. As some have noted, you could have shuttle buses (Metro bus provides them now for some schools) between the two schools so that kids could walk to the nearest school and get transferred.

Now some folks might still HATE this idea. That is fine. I wasn't proposing it as the magic solution, but rather responding to another specific proposal. But it is one creative (I think at least) way of addressing the problem in the short run, and one that is likely to be preferable to a large group of people when compared to a bunch of other ideas to relieve overcrowding. Given that Deal is now around 1,500 children, something does have to give. As you can read from the other thread, a large number of ideas are on the table, including the usual ones offered here.

Brian Doyle
Co-Chair
Ward 3 - Wilson Feeder Education Network

6th grade at Hardy and 7 & 8th at Deal, thumbs up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Okay. I also posted in the "what happened at the W3EdNet overcrowding meeting last night" thread (http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/640148.page). So if you want some even broader context for what I am about to say you can read my posts there.

The short version of the broader context: Families and staff in Wilson feeder schools are concerned about overcrowding and have tried to both brainstorm about possible solutions and engage with DCPS. We had a meeting with DCPS earlier this week where we reviewed the data and talked about possible solutions. DCPS is convening a "community working group" on overcrowding to consider the issue, which will meet for the next 5-6 months.

Okay so what about this idea of "combining" Deal and Hardy? Where did it come from?

I will confess. It came from me.

One of the ideas that DCPS presented at the meeting -- and I should add that DCPS was trying to get all ideas on the table, not suggest that this was the solution -- was the old idea from the boundary and student assignment process, the "choice set". Namely students in the Deal and Hardy feeders would not have a right to either school, but would rather be assigned to one or the other school based on some process -- random lottery, preferences, whatever. This could relieve some of the overcrowding at Deal because Hardy's building is not at capacity, and Deal's is over.

I responded that I wasn't wild about the idea of a choice set (and some noted that no one was too keen on the idea during the boundary process either). But an alternative that might be more palatable if you were going that route, would be to route all kids in the feeder through the two schools with say 6 grade at Hardy and 7+8 at Deal (I actually said 6+7 at Deal and 8 at Hardy, but some people have pointed out to me that it might make more sense the other way around). You would make more use of the capacity of both schools, relieve the pressure at Deal a bit, and could implement it relatively quickly. It would also simplify administration. As some have noted, you could have shuttle buses (Metro bus provides them now for some schools) between the two schools so that kids could walk to the nearest school and get transferred.

Now some folks might still HATE this idea. That is fine. I wasn't proposing it as the magic solution, but rather responding to another specific proposal. But it is one creative (I think at least) way of addressing the problem in the short run, and one that is likely to be preferable to a large group of people when compared to a bunch of other ideas to relieve overcrowding. Given that Deal is now around 1,500 children, something does have to give. As you can read from the other thread, a large number of ideas are on the table, including the usual ones offered here.

Brian Doyle
Co-Chair
Ward 3 - Wilson Feeder Education Network

Brian, given the (ridiculous) parameters DCPS seems to be putting on the discussion (i.e., students can't be pushed, only pulled, as you describe in other thread), this solution has some merit imho. To be blunt, what it does is block OOB students from using Hardy as an access point by filling up Hardy's excess capacity with students who are IB for Deal. So it blocks on access point OOB students use to flood the system, while allowing DCPS to claim it's not revoking rights.

I'm not sure it's a great solution, or a complete one, but it's a great example of how to creatively address the parameters DCPS is putting on any solution. The obvious and sensible fixes are being rejected by DCPS, so people need to offer creative ones.

[Anonymous]

Would this address overcrowding at Wilson?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would this address overcrowding at Wilson?

It would cut down on the number of students getting into wilson using oob feeder rights obtained by attending hardy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never. Gonna. Happen.

-- Hardy IB family who would love it, but seriously why would any IB Deal family or Deal feeder family be up for this...

I seriously don't get the Hardy IB community. You have a school fed exclusively by top performing elementary schools. No dead weight whatsoever and most as hard to get into OOB as Deal feeds. If you just enrolled in boundary you'd have a school superior to Deal with a much more manageable size.

But that means someone's gotta do it first. They gotta keep going to reduce the OOB and thus reduce the brown kids to make it safe for everyone to come on in. You also have a great school in Banneker that no white families look at. DC, neck and neck with Boston for being the most racist liberal city.

Yep, as the mom of an OOB Hardy grad, the bolded statement is really offensive. Yeah, if you could just get rid of kids like mine, your school would be sooooo much better. Nice to know what you think of my child.

Poster of the Never comment. I wasn't throwing shade at Hardy as much as why on earth would the parents of the best well performing school in the city - a majority of whom live close to the school - be willing to disrupt that AND add a commute. Seriously.

For a long time - for a variety of dynamics that rehash a lot of history - many of inflated and diversionary ones are regularly brought up on DCUM - Hardy has had low IB enrollment. For families coming from schools with super high scores and lots of amenities (yes, lots supplemented by the PTA) - there is a chicken and egg issue. Hardy is a good school - but is at a point where they are working through an increasing neighborhood and feeder families along with serving a big population of students from around the city. And helping all students achieve and succeed. We are sending our kids there.

[Anonymous]

I should clarify so ask to not leave the impression that DCPS is saying something that it is not. DCPS is NOT putting constrains on the discussion. It fact the opposite. They are saying that everything is on the table, including OOB feeder rights and removing schools from the feeder pattern. I try to clarify in the other thread why I asked for ideas that don't touch on OOB feeder rights, removing schools, or redrawing boundaries. (In short, everyone comes up with those ideas, I am looking for some new -- and possibly politically viable -- ideas.)

I think you are hitting on some of the downsides, so let me air the others. First, yes, unlike what the original poster suggested, it would likely reduce the new OOB in the Deal-Hardy complex (not changing the rights of OOB students at elementary feeders, but rather children who lottery in at middle). That is a plus or a minus depending where you sit. It would reduce diversity in WOTP middle schools and high school. It could (not would, could) reduce the number of students attending middle school, and hence high school, and use some spare capacity at Hardy. But it could also entice more elementary school students from Hardy feeders to go to middle school and raise the overall number of students. Those numbers would have to go up by more than the increase in capacity use and the reduction in the intake of new OOB students, or it would make the overcapacity problem even worse (potentially at the elementary schools as well as more children stayed through 5th). The other issue is Filmore. Another space would have to be found for Filmore since the schools using Filmore don't have any space to take arts back (and like the program). One idea would be to make use of Duke Ellington once it is finished since, as I understand it, Ellington students would not be using the arts space all day. But again, I never claimed the idea was a magic bullet.

Thanks,

Brian (I generally will sign all of my posts, btw)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I should clarify so ask to not leave the impression that DCPS is saying something that it is not. DCPS is NOT putting constrains on the discussion. It fact the opposite. They are saying that everything is on the table, including OOB feeder rights and removing schools from the feeder pattern. I try to clarify in the other thread why I asked for ideas that don't touch on OOB feeder rights, removing schools, or redrawing boundaries. (In short, everyone comes up with those ideas, I am looking for some new -- and possibly politically viable -- ideas.)

I think you are hitting on some of the downsides, so let me air the others. First, yes, unlike what the original poster suggested, it would likely reduce the new OOB in the Deal-Hardy complex (not changing the rights of OOB students at elementary feeders, but rather children who lottery in at middle). That is a plus or a minus depending where you sit. It would reduce diversity in WOTP middle schools and high school. It could (not would, could) reduce the number of students attending middle school, and hence high school, and use some spare capacity at Hardy. But it could also entice more elementary school students from Hardy feeders to go to middle school and raise the overall number of students. Those numbers would have to go up by more than the increase in capacity use and the reduction in the intake of new OOB students, or it would make the overcapacity problem even worse (potentially at the elementary schools as well as more children stayed through 5th). The other issue is Filmore. Another space would have to be found for Filmore since the schools using Filmore don't have any space to take arts back (and like the program). One idea would be to make use of Duke Ellington once it is finished since, as I understand it, Ellington students would not be using the arts space all day. But again, I never claimed the idea was a magic bullet.

Thanks,

Brian (I generally will sign all of my posts, btw)

Brian, thanks for these comments. Can you please explain the underlined part? I get how you're saying a more robust Hardy might entice IB students from the Hardy feeders to choose to continue to Hardy rather than seek other options. But why would those IB elementary students choosing Hardy make the overcrowding worse? Wouldn't they simply fill seats at Hardy until Hardy is full? If the number of IB students seeking enrollment at Hardy (or Hardy + Deal) exceeds the schools' capacity, then the excess gets put on the waitlist. It's not as if Hardy has to accommodate the IB + a predefined cohort of OOB students, does it?

ST

[Anonymous]

Not Brian.

But yes, current Wilson feeder OOB students (so anyone attending in 17-18 no matter age/grade) have right to stay through Wilson in 12th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not Brian.

But yes, current Wilson feeder OOB students (so anyone attending in 17-18 no matter age/grade) have right to stay through Wilson in 12th grade.

Understood, but those current Wilson feeder OOB students won't be in the same grades as any new IB students who might choose a revitalized Hardy. They're almost all at Hardy already. My understanding is that very few of the students currently at Hardy elementary feeders are OOB students; those feeders are almost completely full of IB students. The students Brian described (if I understood him) would be current elementary students who choose Hardy for middle a couple years from now.

Perhaps I'm not understanding. Please be gentle in setting me straight.

ST

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great, more traffic on Wisconsin! No.

Because I am driving 8th grade DC1 to pickup point for private school in MoCo and then DC2 to Sidwell for 6th grade because the now-out Hardy principal has FUBAR'd our neighborhood MS? And then back ont Wisconsin to take DC3 to IB Hardy feeder while I contemplate how to pay a third private school tuition after paying $70K in DC income and property taxes for a neighborhood and home I love but stuck with a school system focused on raising the bottom up but not the middle (and definitely NOT raising the top up).

Wisconsin Ave all the way.

But why would you need 3 tuitions? Your oldest will be ready for Wilson before your youngest starts.

Someone who can afford in bounds Hardy housing, and $70K tuition can choose many other places to live that would involve less driving and good schools. You chose this, not sure why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not Brian.

But yes, current Wilson feeder OOB students (so anyone attending in 17-18 no matter age/grade) have right to stay through Wilson in 12th grade.

Understood, but those current Wilson feeder OOB students won't be in the same grades as any new IB students who might choose a revitalized Hardy. They're almost all at Hardy already. My understanding is that very few of the students currently at Hardy elementary feeders are OOB students; those feeders are almost completely full of IB students. The students Brian described (if I understood him) would be current elementary students who choose Hardy for middle a couple years from now.

Perhaps I'm not understanding. Please be gentle in setting me straight.

ST

John Eaton (forcibly moved to the Hardy pattern last year) is 50% OOB, and higher in some grades. Mann and Key have low OOB populations, and the other feeders vary.

[Anonymous]

Eaton's OOB percentage is changing in the younger grades dramatically - what is the anticipated impact of increasing Hardy IB from the switch? (And is reducing deal enrollment if they don't then fill it back up with other kids) How many of Eaton's class expected to go to hardy? Posted on another thread too - if all 70isj of Eaton's 5th go to Hardy - that's half of the 6th class! If just half of eaton 5 goes it's 1/3 of Hardy.

[Anonymous]

This whole thing is caused by the colossal failure of a boundary review process. Anyone with a brain watching the debacle knew it would come to this. There is simply no political will, then or now, to end the boundaries at the Connecticut Avenue line. And here we are, talking about combining Deal and Hardy, mixing elementary school kids with high school kids at Ellington, and of course more trailers. What a mess.

[Anonymous]

We're in bounds for Deal and I really like the idea of 6th grade at Hardy and 7/8 at Deal. It could create two schools with a high quality, uniform middle school program. Heck, let's be really hopeful and use some of those increased shared resources to add a gifted program.


Problem is, I don't trust DCPS to not muck up Deal in the process. And I certainly doubt anyone will have political will to deal with the OOB issue. (Combining the schools would almost certainly greatly increase IB enrollment from the Hardy feeders, which would require kicking out most OOB kids in order to control size.)