Anonymous wrote:Will kids still go from SP to eaton? And will Eaton families try to lottery in to Hearst for the Deal feeder?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watta troll! We've gone from a discussion of IB/residents and IB/feeder to IB/own vs. rent!! This is some triflin' stuff. At least it keeps the limbo game going. Keep the thread alive!

But uniforms. That gets to the heart of it -- who's with me?!

I don't know what the uniforms look like at Hardy, but my oldest really liked her uniform at Washington Latin. She is now at Basis, and we feel the financial hit and the hassle of having to buy clothes that probably the younger girls will not wear (tweens can get really picky)....

I am hoping to feel quite confident about Hardy by the time my next girl is ready to go in a couple of years, and uniforms would be such a blessing to me as a parent for this child I really don't care she thinks. Since the alternative would be to go to Basis I don't think I will have a problem. I had a uniform at NCS which for 4th - 6th was awful - it was a striped pastel dress that had pleats at the bottom that allowed any boy who got near enough to do a "bloomer check." These uniforms allow the girls to wear pants, so I am not sure what the problem is. Once going to Hardy does not seem like a stigma, the uniforms won't either. Uniforms to me definitely don't mean anything except that a child goes to a particular school - we see Catholic kids in uniforms at after school church activities all the time.......

I'm sure it seems silly to some, but the uniforms are an issue that keeps IB families away from the school. Uniforms at Hardy vs. No Uniforms at Deal just reinforces that these schools are different and not necessarily in a favorable way for Hardy. Those who CHOOSE uniforms at private or charters are making an affirmative choice to do so. Why should some public schools wear uniforms and others not? If the Chancellor decided that all DCPS kids would wear uniforms, then I would not have a problem with it, but why should my child be told to wear a uniform at Hardy while her friends at Deal don't have to. If the Hardy community wants to get more IB students -- and I'm not sure they do -- the principal should reconsider the uniform policy.

Oh my. The spoiled brat tone of this is breathtaking. Consolation is that you reap what you sow indulging children in that kind of thinking.

Kids who are forced to go to Hardy while their friends from elementary school and other activities get to go to Deal have more important things to be upset about then just the uniforms.

What are you even talking about? No kids are being forced to go to Hardy while their classmates go to Deal. Start another thread if you want to complain incessantly about Eaton.

There are a lot of OOB kids at Eaton from Shepherd Park DC, for example. They will have a separate right to go to Deal while their IB classmates from McLean Gardens grimly trudge to Hardy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watta troll! We've gone from a discussion of IB/residents and IB/feeder to IB/own vs. rent!! This is some triflin' stuff. At least it keeps the limbo game going. Keep the thread alive!

But uniforms. That gets to the heart of it -- who's with me?!

I don't know what the uniforms look like at Hardy, but my oldest really liked her uniform at Washington Latin. She is now at Basis, and we feel the financial hit and the hassle of having to buy clothes that probably the younger girls will not wear (tweens can get really picky)....

I am hoping to feel quite confident about Hardy by the time my next girl is ready to go in a couple of years, and uniforms would be such a blessing to me as a parent for this child I really don't care she thinks. Since the alternative would be to go to Basis I don't think I will have a problem. I had a uniform at NCS which for 4th - 6th was awful - it was a striped pastel dress that had pleats at the bottom that allowed any boy who got near enough to do a "bloomer check." These uniforms allow the girls to wear pants, so I am not sure what the problem is. Once going to Hardy does not seem like a stigma, the uniforms won't either. Uniforms to me definitely don't mean anything except that a child goes to a particular school - we see Catholic kids in uniforms at after school church activities all the time.......

I'm sure it seems silly to some, but the uniforms are an issue that keeps IB families away from the school. Uniforms at Hardy vs. No Uniforms at Deal just reinforces that these schools are different and not necessarily in a favorable way for Hardy. Those who CHOOSE uniforms at private or charters are making an affirmative choice to do so. Why should some public schools wear uniforms and others not? If the Chancellor decided that all DCPS kids would wear uniforms, then I would not have a problem with it, but why should my child be told to wear a uniform at Hardy while her friends at Deal don't have to. If the Hardy community wants to get more IB students -- and I'm not sure they do -- the principal should reconsider the uniform policy.

I assure you. No one was worrying about what some IB families would think when we voted on uniforms. Surprisingly enough, we only considered whether it might be a good thing for our kids.....since our kids were actually going to the school. Is it not okay for me to think about what's best for my kid? Am I supposed to put the needs of some hypothetical IB family over my own?

And I should add, I would have been delighted to see more IB families when my child was at Hardy. The reason I even follow this thread is because I thought my kid had a decent (not perfect, but decent) education at Hardy and I wish others (hey, you IB families, I'm talking to you) could see more of its strengths.

Seriously, a few people on this thread seem to think that Hardy families spend a lot more time thinking about non-Hardy IB families than they really do. Yeah, there was a meeting years ago where the Hardy families got really pissed at Michelle Rhee because she removed their beloved and highly competent principal without warning. Wouldn't you be angry if your principal was whisked away from your school -- especially for a project that never materialized? That doesn't mean that Hardy families over the years have made choices trying to prevent IB families from choosing Hardy. Seriously, everyone has lives to lead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: It's just unfortunate that some students have been forcibly switched from feeding into an excellent public middle school (Deal) into a transitional one (Hardy). As someone said, not everyone wants to send their kids to a transitional school and not every kid is up to the challenge of attending one. I wish the focus had been to work through the issues at Hardy and make it an attractive option for IB parents before forcing more kids into the feeder pattern.

It is indeed unfortunate there is not infinite room at Deal. If there were all DC kids of MS age could attend it. But as that is not the case, someone had to be redistricted out of Deal. Discomfort with that reality, though understandable, is not a good reason to carp about Hardy or its policies, especially as it seems to be considered by most people to be the second best (noncharter) public middle school in DC. All the folks being redisticted to middle schools that do not currently exist can only hope those turn out to the "next Hardy".

I think a lot of parents who are of will be IB for Hardy are becoming very intrigued with this vision of a new charter middle school west of Rock Creek Park.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watta troll! We've gone from a discussion of IB/residents and IB/feeder to IB/own vs. rent!! This is some triflin' stuff. At least it keeps the limbo game going. Keep the thread alive!

But uniforms. That gets to the heart of it -- who's with me?!

I don't know what the uniforms look like at Hardy, but my oldest really liked her uniform at Washington Latin. She is now at Basis, and we feel the financial hit and the hassle of having to buy clothes that probably the younger girls will not wear (tweens can get really picky)....

I am hoping to feel quite confident about Hardy by the time my next girl is ready to go in a couple of years, and uniforms would be such a blessing to me as a parent for this child I really don't care she thinks. Since the alternative would be to go to Basis I don't think I will have a problem. I had a uniform at NCS which for 4th - 6th was awful - it was a striped pastel dress that had pleats at the bottom that allowed any boy who got near enough to do a "bloomer check." These uniforms allow the girls to wear pants, so I am not sure what the problem is. Once going to Hardy does not seem like a stigma, the uniforms won't either. Uniforms to me definitely don't mean anything except that a child goes to a particular school - we see Catholic kids in uniforms at after school church activities all the time.......

I'm sure it seems silly to some, but the uniforms are an issue that keeps IB families away from the school. Uniforms at Hardy vs. No Uniforms at Deal just reinforces that these schools are different and not necessarily in a favorable way for Hardy. Those who CHOOSE uniforms at private or charters are making an affirmative choice to do so. Why should some public schools wear uniforms and others not? If the Chancellor decided that all DCPS kids would wear uniforms, then I would not have a problem with it, but why should my child be told to wear a uniform at Hardy while her friends at Deal don't have to. If the Hardy community wants to get more IB students -- and I'm not sure they do -- the principal should reconsider the uniform policy.

Oh my. The spoiled brat tone of this is breathtaking. Consolation is that you reap what you sow indulging children in that kind of thinking.

Kids who are forced to go to Hardy while their friends from elementary school and other activities get to go to Deal have more important things to be upset about then just the uniforms.

What are you even talking about? No kids are being forced to go to Hardy while their classmates go to Deal. Start another thread if you want to complain incessantly about Eaton.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watta troll! We've gone from a discussion of IB/residents and IB/feeder to IB/own vs. rent!! This is some triflin' stuff. At least it keeps the limbo game going. Keep the thread alive!

But uniforms. That gets to the heart of it -- who's with me?!

I don't know what the uniforms look like at Hardy, but my oldest really liked her uniform at Washington Latin. She is now at Basis, and we feel the financial hit and the hassle of having to buy clothes that probably the younger girls will not wear (tweens can get really picky)....

I am hoping to feel quite confident about Hardy by the time my next girl is ready to go in a couple of years, and uniforms would be such a blessing to me as a parent for this child I really don't care she thinks. Since the alternative would be to go to Basis I don't think I will have a problem. I had a uniform at NCS which for 4th - 6th was awful - it was a striped pastel dress that had pleats at the bottom that allowed any boy who got near enough to do a "bloomer check." These uniforms allow the girls to wear pants, so I am not sure what the problem is. Once going to Hardy does not seem like a stigma, the uniforms won't either. Uniforms to me definitely don't mean anything except that a child goes to a particular school - we see Catholic kids in uniforms at after school church activities all the time.......

I'm sure it seems silly to some, but the uniforms are an issue that keeps IB families away from the school. Uniforms at Hardy vs. No Uniforms at Deal just reinforces that these schools are different and not necessarily in a favorable way for Hardy. Those who CHOOSE uniforms at private or charters are making an affirmative choice to do so. Why should some public schools wear uniforms and others not? If the Chancellor decided that all DCPS kids would wear uniforms, then I would not have a problem with it, but why should my child be told to wear a uniform at Hardy while her friends at Deal don't have to. If the Hardy community wants to get more IB students -- and I'm not sure they do -- the principal should reconsider the uniform policy.

Oh my. The spoiled brat tone of this is breathtaking. Consolation is that you reap what you sow indulging children in that kind of thinking.

Kids who are forced to go to Hardy while their friends from elementary school and other activities get to go to Deal have more important things to be upset about then just the uniforms.

What are you even talking about? No kids are being forced to go to Hardy while their classmates go to Deal. Start another thread if you want to complain incessantly about Eaton.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watta troll! We've gone from a discussion of IB/residents and IB/feeder to IB/own vs. rent!! This is some triflin' stuff. At least it keeps the limbo game going. Keep the thread alive!

But uniforms. That gets to the heart of it -- who's with me?!

I don't know what the uniforms look like at Hardy, but my oldest really liked her uniform at Washington Latin. She is now at Basis, and we feel the financial hit and the hassle of having to buy clothes that probably the younger girls will not wear (tweens can get really picky)....

I am hoping to feel quite confident about Hardy by the time my next girl is ready to go in a couple of years, and uniforms would be such a blessing to me as a parent for this child I really don't care she thinks. Since the alternative would be to go to Basis I don't think I will have a problem. I had a uniform at NCS which for 4th - 6th was awful - it was a striped pastel dress that had pleats at the bottom that allowed any boy who got near enough to do a "bloomer check." These uniforms allow the girls to wear pants, so I am not sure what the problem is. Once going to Hardy does not seem like a stigma, the uniforms won't either. Uniforms to me definitely don't mean anything except that a child goes to a particular school - we see Catholic kids in uniforms at after school church activities all the time.......

I'm sure it seems silly to some, but the uniforms are an issue that keeps IB families away from the school. Uniforms at Hardy vs. No Uniforms at Deal just reinforces that these schools are different and not necessarily in a favorable way for Hardy. Those who CHOOSE uniforms at private or charters are making an affirmative choice to do so. Why should some public schools wear uniforms and others not? If the Chancellor decided that all DCPS kids would wear uniforms, then I would not have a problem with it, but why should my child be told to wear a uniform at Hardy while her friends at Deal don't have to. If the Hardy community wants to get more IB students -- and I'm not sure they do -- the principal should reconsider the uniform policy.

Oh my. The spoiled brat tone of this is breathtaking. Consolation is that you reap what you sow indulging children in that kind of thinking.

Kids who are forced to go to Hardy while their friends from elementary school and other activities get to go to Deal have more important things to be upset about then just the uniforms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: It's just unfortunate that some students have been forcibly switched from feeding into an excellent public middle school (Deal) into a transitional one (Hardy). As someone said, not everyone wants to send their kids to a transitional school and not every kid is up to the challenge of attending one. I wish the focus had been to work through the issues at Hardy and make it an attractive option for IB parents before forcing more kids into the feeder pattern.

It is indeed unfortunate there is not infinite room at Deal. If there were all DC kids of MS age could attend it. But as that is not the case, someone had to be redistricted out of Deal. Discomfort with that reality, though understandable, is not a good reason to carp about Hardy or its policies, especially as it seems to be considered by most people to be the second best (noncharter) public middle school in DC. All the folks being redisticted to middle schools that do not currently exist can only hope those turn out to the "next Hardy".

Fair enough on paper, but we'll be heading to private. I really hope the Hardy experiment works, but I'd prefer more certainty with my kids' education -- especially the crucial middle school years.

everyone makes their own choices, and cannot be faulted for that. But most EOTP families now worrying about transitioning from Deal to schools that are as yet non-existent (not to mention EOTR families whose neighborhood schools are existing but dismal) mostly do not have the choice of private schools. Do you think people who can afford to have that choice should have a greater right to Deal than others? If you do not, then you must accept that some will leave Deal, without wanting to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: It's just unfortunate that some students have been forcibly switched from feeding into an excellent public middle school (Deal) into a transitional one (Hardy). As someone said, not everyone wants to send their kids to a transitional school and not every kid is up to the challenge of attending one. I wish the focus had been to work through the issues at Hardy and make it an attractive option for IB parents before forcing more kids into the feeder pattern.

It is indeed unfortunate there is not infinite room at Deal. If there were all DC kids of MS age could attend it. But as that is not the case, someone had to be redistricted out of Deal. Discomfort with that reality, though understandable, is not a good reason to carp about Hardy or its policies, especially as it seems to be considered by most people to be the second best (noncharter) public middle school in DC. All the folks being redisticted to middle schools that do not currently exist can only hope those turn out to the "next Hardy".

Anonymous wrote:maybe Deal would consider uniforms? i think there are real benefits. seriously, deal parents, would you consider it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watta troll! We've gone from a discussion of IB/residents and IB/feeder to IB/own vs. rent!! This is some triflin' stuff. At least it keeps the limbo game going. Keep the thread alive!

But uniforms. That gets to the heart of it -- who's with me?!

I don't know what the uniforms look like at Hardy, but my oldest really liked her uniform at Washington Latin. She is now at Basis, and we feel the financial hit and the hassle of having to buy clothes that probably the younger girls will not wear (tweens can get really picky)....

I am hoping to feel quite confident about Hardy by the time my next girl is ready to go in a couple of years, and uniforms would be such a blessing to me as a parent for this child I really don't care she thinks. Since the alternative would be to go to Basis I don't think I will have a problem. I had a uniform at NCS which for 4th - 6th was awful - it was a striped pastel dress that had pleats at the bottom that allowed any boy who got near enough to do a "bloomer check." These uniforms allow the girls to wear pants, so I am not sure what the problem is. Once going to Hardy does not seem like a stigma, the uniforms won't either. Uniforms to me definitely don't mean anything except that a child goes to a particular school - we see Catholic kids in uniforms at after school church activities all the time.......

I'm sure it seems silly to some, but the uniforms are an issue that keeps IB families away from the school. Uniforms at Hardy vs. No Uniforms at Deal just reinforces that these schools are different and not necessarily in a favorable way for Hardy. Those who CHOOSE uniforms at private or charters are making an affirmative choice to do so. Why should some public schools wear uniforms and others not? If the Chancellor decided that all DCPS kids would wear uniforms, then I would not have a problem with it, but why should my child be told to wear a uniform at Hardy while her friends at Deal don't have to. If the Hardy community wants to get more IB students -- and I'm not sure they do -- the principal should reconsider the uniform policy.

Oh my. The spoiled brat tone of this is breathtaking. Consolation is that you reap what you sow indulging children in that kind of thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: It's just unfortunate that some students have been forcibly switched from feeding into an excellent public middle school (Deal) into a transitional one (Hardy). As someone said, not everyone wants to send their kids to a transitional school and not every kid is up to the challenge of attending one. I wish the focus had been to work through the issues at Hardy and make it an attractive option for IB parents before forcing more kids into the feeder pattern.

It is indeed unfortunate there is not infinite room at Deal. If there were all DC kids of MS age could attend it. But as that is not the case, someone had to be redistricted out of Deal. Discomfort with that reality, though understandable, is not a good reason to carp about Hardy or its policies, especially as it seems to be considered by most people to be the second best (noncharter) public middle school in DC. All the folks being redisticted to middle schools that do not currently exist can only hope those turn out to the "next Hardy".

Fair enough on paper, but we'll be heading to private. I really hope the Hardy experiment works, but I'd prefer more certainty with my kids' education -- especially the crucial middle school years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watta troll! We've gone from a discussion of IB/residents and IB/feeder to IB/own vs. rent!! This is some triflin' stuff. At least it keeps the limbo game going. Keep the thread alive!

But uniforms. That gets to the heart of it -- who's with me?!

I don't know what the uniforms look like at Hardy, but my oldest really liked her uniform at Washington Latin. She is now at Basis, and we feel the financial hit and the hassle of having to buy clothes that probably the younger girls will not wear (tweens can get really picky)....

I am hoping to feel quite confident about Hardy by the time my next girl is ready to go in a couple of years, and uniforms would be such a blessing to me as a parent for this child I really don't care she thinks. Since the alternative would be to go to Basis I don't think I will have a problem. I had a uniform at NCS which for 4th - 6th was awful - it was a striped pastel dress that had pleats at the bottom that allowed any boy who got near enough to do a "bloomer check." These uniforms allow the girls to wear pants, so I am not sure what the problem is. Once going to Hardy does not seem like a stigma, the uniforms won't either. Uniforms to me definitely don't mean anything except that a child goes to a particular school - we see Catholic kids in uniforms at after school church activities all the time.......

I'm sure it seems silly to some, but the uniforms are an issue that keeps IB families away from the school. Uniforms at Hardy vs. No Uniforms at Deal just reinforces that these schools are different and not necessarily in a favorable way for Hardy. Those who CHOOSE uniforms at private or charters are making an affirmative choice to do so. Why should some public schools wear uniforms and others not? If the Chancellor decided that all DCPS kids would wear uniforms, then I would not have a problem with it, but why should my child be told to wear a uniform at Hardy while her friends at Deal don't have to. If the Hardy community wants to get more IB students -- and I'm not sure they do -- the principal should reconsider the uniform policy.

I assure you. No one was worrying about what some IB families would think when we voted on uniforms. Surprisingly enough, we only considered whether it might be a good thing for our kids.....since our kids were actually going to the school. Is it not okay for me to think about what's best for my kid? Am I supposed to put the needs of some hypothetical IB family over my own?