Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You do, also, realize that Deal is made up of 30% feeder but not IB kids, right?
Regardless, your insistence on treating kids who attended a school despite living outside its boundary as intrinsically different from those who living within the boundary is absurd. The feeder number is what matters, you pompous ass.
--IB Mann parent
Just trying to understand here. Deal is 70% OOB (by lottery) and 30% "IB" (meaning kids from feeder schools)? Is that correct?
Anonymous wrote:You do, also, realize that Deal is made up of 30% feeder but not IB kids, right?
Regardless, your insistence on treating kids who attended a school despite living outside its boundary as intrinsically different from those who living within the boundary is absurd. The feeder number is what matters, you pompous ass.
--IB Mann parent
Anonymous wrote:You do, also, realize that Deal is made up of 30% feeder but not IB kids, right?
Regardless, your insistence on treating kids who attended a school despite living outside its boundary as intrinsically different from those who living within the boundary is absurd. The feeder number is what matters, you pompous ass.
--IB Mann parent
Anonymous wrote:You do, also, realize that Deal is made up of 30% feeder but not IB kids, right?
Regardless, your insistence on treating kids who attended a school despite living outside its boundary as intrinsically different from those who living within the boundary is absurd. The feeder number is what matters, you pompous ass.
--IB Mann parent
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yawn. Considering how some of the feeders are heavily weighted with OOB kids, this is not an interesting statistic. (It would be shocking -- a man bites dog story -- if OOB students didn't continue on to Hardy in large numbers, because Hardy generally is better than their alternative.) The meaningful number is the in-boundary students are Hardy. While this seems to be trending up slightly, it is still below where the admin has suggested it would be.
Puh-leeze, doofus. 35% from feeder schools is NOT ACTUALLY AN incredible uptick from last year. All of those kids perform at least at grade level. Expect 50% or more next year, imo.
It's about the same. Hyde is ~ 60% OOB, Eaton is 55% OOB, Stoddert is !7%. Those numbers of not-neighborhood kids, when combined, is significant.
Agree with you that the on-grade level metric is good.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yawn. Considering how some of the feeders are heavily weighted with OOB kids, this is not an interesting statistic. (It would be shocking -- a man bites dog story -- if OOB students didn't continue on to Hardy in large numbers, because Hardy generally is better than their alternative.) The meaningful number is the in-boundary students are Hardy. While this seems to be trending up slightly, it is still below where the admin has suggested it would be.
Puh-leeze, doofus. 35% from feeder schools is NOT ACTUALLY AN incredible uptick from last year. All of those kids perform at least at grade level. Expect 50% or more next year, imo.
Anonymous wrote:Yawn. Considering how some of the feeders are heavily weighted with OOB kids, this is not an interesting statistic. (It would be shocking -- a man bites dog story -- if OOB students didn't continue on to Hardy in large numbers, because Hardy generally is better than their alternative.) The meaningful number is the in-boundary students are Hardy. While this seems to be trending up slightly, it is still below where the admin has suggested it would be.