Anonymous wrote:Question: If both Deal and Hardy fed into Wilson, would that exceed Wilson's capacity?

Deal- capacity 1200, three grades=400 per grade
Hardy - capacity 500, three grades=166 per grade

Wilson- capacity 1600, four grades=400 per grade

So the per-grade capacity of Deal and Hardy combined is about 40% greater than Wilson. Granted, 100% of Deal and Hardy graduates don't go to Wilson. But Deal has only been super-popular for a few years, the kids who are in Wilson now are kids who were in Deal when it was significantly smaller. And Wilson is about 10% over capacity right now. The middle school drama of the past few years is about to get repeated for high school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I do understand that, but Hardy is a failing school. All kids deserve better. People will choose it when it 's worth choosing .

It's already worth choosing.

All the empirical evidence suggests few who can choose Hardy do so. It is yet to win over IB families in any significant numbers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I do understand that, but Hardy is a failing school. All kids deserve better. People will choose it when it 's worth choosing .

It's already worth choosing.

Then why don't Eaton families choose it?

Oh, but they will choose it when their choice is "controlled."

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Great logic. Let's screw the whole damn system if we are unhappy with a completely predictable outcome?

Just go to Hardy, it will get better. Don't vindictively advocate for the nuclear option C.

People just want the best for their kids. A chance at a decent high school education is better than none. There is little chance at Hardy.

Now you see why there is support for choice sets outside of Ward 3. The only difference is the others would give up a kidney for the opportunity to attend Hardy, which you won't consider.

Then let them have the opportunity, as it will likely be better than their other options. However, for schools that are being moved to Hardy unwillingly, you are forcing them to accept an inferior opportunity compared to what they had before.

You may not know the history of Hardy, which btw, is far from a failing school, but once "they" did get the opportunity. Michelle Rhee, at the behest of inbounds families, changed all that. Now the school is increasingly popular with inbounds families. The drop off from Deal to Hardy is not all that big and probably won't exist at all soon. Come over to my neighborhood where we are being switched from Deal to West. Then talk to me about being forced to accept an inferior opportunity.

Then by all means you should fight it. There's nothing democratic about how this process is being run. Instead, it's largely the brainchild of a deputy mayor and her staff who are accountable to no one but a repudiated lame duck mayor. And one who's under a serious ethical cloud to put it delicately.

And will people choose it when it no longer feeds into Wilson?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I do understand that, but Hardy is a failing school. All kids deserve better. People will choose it when it 's worth choosing .

It's already worth choosing.

Then why don't Eaton families choose it?

Anonymous wrote:

I do understand that, but Hardy is a failing school. All kids deserve better. People will choose it when it 's worth choosing .

It's already worth choosing.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Great logic. Let's screw the whole damn system if we are unhappy with a completely predictable outcome?

Just go to Hardy, it will get better. Don't vindictively advocate for the nuclear option C.

People just want the best for their kids. A chance at a decent high school education is better than none. There is little chance at Hardy.

Now you see why there is support for choice sets outside of Ward 3. The only difference is the others would give up a kidney for the opportunity to attend Hardy, which you won't consider.

Then let them have the opportunity, as it will likely be better than their other options. However, for schools that are being moved to Hardy unwillingly, you are forcing them to accept an inferior opportunity compared to what they had before.

You may not know the history of Hardy, which btw, is far from a failing school, but once "they" did get the opportunity. Michelle Rhee, at the behest of inbounds families, changed all that. Now the school is increasingly popular with inbounds families. The drop off from Deal to Hardy is not all that big and probably won't exist at all soon. Come over to my neighborhood where we are being switched from Deal to West. Then talk to me about being forced to accept an inferior opportunity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Great logic. Let's screw the whole damn system if we are unhappy with a completely predictable outcome?

Just go to Hardy, it will get better. Don't vindictively advocate for the nuclear option C.

People just want the best for their kids. A chance at a decent high school education is better than none. There is little chance at Hardy.

Hardy may get better, and we all should hope that it does. But it likely won't see material improvement in the school experience of most kids who are diverted there in the next 5-8 years. Guess someone has to be the sacrificial guinea pigs.

Exactly. People who can avoid sac riding their kids will do so, and the more vulnerable kids will be stuck at places like Hardy.

What happened to all the faith in Principal Pride?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Great logic. Let's screw the whole damn system if we are unhappy with a completely predictable outcome?

Just go to Hardy, it will get better. Don't vindictively advocate for the nuclear option C.

People just want the best for their kids. A chance at a decent high school education is better than none. There is little chance at Hardy.

Now you see why there is support for choice sets outside of Ward 3. The only difference is the others would give up a kidney for the opportunity to attend Hardy, which you won't consider.

Then let them have the opportunity, as it will likely be better than their other options. However, for schools that are being moved to Hardy unwillingly, you are forcing them to accept an inferior opportunity compared to what they had before.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Great logic. Let's screw the whole damn system if we are unhappy with a completely predictable outcome?

Just go to Hardy, it will get better. Don't vindictively advocate for the nuclear option C.

People just want the best for their kids. A chance at a decent high school education is better than none. There is little chance at Hardy.

Now you see why there is support for choice sets outside of Ward 3. The only difference is the others would give up a kidney for the opportunity to attend Hardy, which you won't consider.

I do understand that, but Hardy is a failing school. All kids deserve better. People will choose it when it 's worth choosing .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Great logic. Let's screw the whole damn system if we are unhappy with a completely predictable outcome?

Just go to Hardy, it will get better. Don't vindictively advocate for the nuclear option C.

People just want the best for their kids. A chance at a decent high school education is better than none. There is little chance at Hardy.

Hardy may get better, and we all should hope that it does. But it likely won't see material improvement in the school experience of most kids who are diverted there in the next 5-8 years. Guess someone has to be the sacrificial guinea pigs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Great logic. Let's screw the whole damn system if we are unhappy with a completely predictable outcome?

Just go to Hardy, it will get better. Don't vindictively advocate for the nuclear option C.

People just want the best for their kids. A chance at a decent high school education is better than none. There is little chance at Hardy.

Now you see why there is support for choice sets outside of Ward 3. The only difference is the others would give up a kidney for the opportunity to attend Hardy, which you won't consider.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Eaton is to be thrown under, the parents should advocate for the full lottery plan. That way they'd have at least a chance at a sect school . Hardy is awful.

Our school feeds to Hardy and no children have gone to Hardy for years. Attrition to private, charter and moco starts in grade 3. While there is a sincere effort underway to improve hardy, it is likely that eaton will now have a similar attrition experience. Welcome to the club! It is one way for dcps to get the OOB numbers up.

And if they expect anyone to drive from the Sibley hospital area to Cardozo every day they must be smokin the good stuff.

The DC Office of the "State" Superintendent of Education (a pretentious name if there was one) and the Deputy Mayor for Education. They're all that they're "cracked up" to be!