Anonymous wrote:The argument that test scores for Wilson and Hardy differ is an exaggeration. For Hardy, white students scored 46% advanced and 46% proficient in math, and 29% advanced with 63% proficient for reading. For Wilson, the scores are 46% advanced and 45% proficient for reading, and 61% advanced and 30% proficient for reading. (note that Hardy's scores are more variable since the school is much smaller. Reading scores for the year before last were 41% and 41%. Math scores were unchanged.)

So, for the most part, if IB parents are willing to send their kids to Wilson, they should be willing to swnd their kids to Hardy.

--IB Hardy

That's an interesting point but here is why I would be fine with sending my kids to Wilson and not Hardy. More specifically, why we bought in bounds for Deal and not Hardy when we were recently moving to a new house:

1. The racial issue. My DD and DC are Caucasian and I do not want them to be in a very small minority. I'd want at least 20% of the kids to be white. Even if Hardy had better scores than Deal, I'd still hesitate to send them to a school where she is part of such a small group.
2. High school v middle school issue. I went to a rural-small town mix high school which was, if you looked at its overall classes and scores, not great. However, it had a lot of AP and advanced classes and I never had a class that was not AP/advanced except for PE. I got a great education and if you looked at the SAT scores of my classmates in those AP/advanced classes (this was before Common Core), you'd have seen they'd have rivaled any scores for kids in much better schools. High schools allow for a lot more educational self-selection (yes, everyone can sign up for an AP class but to do so requires motivation and a desire to learn, which is even more important than raw intelligence, IMO) than middle schools, at least as far as I am aware. Thus, I care less about a school's overall scores, provided they have a good selection of AP/advanced classes and kids in those classes do well.
3. First best versus second best. As someone discussed upthread, Wilson is the best public (non test-in) HS in the city and Deal is the best public MS. This would not apply to someone who wants/plans to send their kids to a private school, but for DH and I, it’s important to send our DD and DC to public school if possible (we both are very happy with our public school education). But we want it to be the best public school education we can get. We’d rather Wilson had higher scores (though less of a concern due to point 2 above) but taking into account the AP classes and the fact that it’s the best available, we are fine with it. The alternative would be to go private (or move out of DC), neither of which is an option to take lightly, though we’d do it if necessary. However, we have no desire to send them to Hardy when we can send them to the better school, i.e. Deal – and still stay public.

I confess the uniforms are not an issue at all - would probably make it easier to get picky dressers out of the house in the morning!

The argument that test scores for Wilson and Hardy differ is an exaggeration. For Hardy, white students scored 46% advanced and 46% proficient in math, and 29% advanced with 63% proficient for reading. For Wilson, the scores are 46% advanced and 45% proficient for reading, and 61% advanced and 30% proficient for reading. (note that Hardy's scores are more variable since the school is much smaller. Reading scores for the year before last were 41% and 41%. Math scores were unchanged.)

So, for the most part, if IB parents are willing to send their kids to Wilson, they should be willing to swnd their kids to Hardy.

--IB Hardy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. I am one of the current Hardy parents who has posted here and I have spoken to many of my Ward 3 colleagues about why they will or will not send their students to Hardy. Race - either directly stated or implied - is a huge issue.

odd -- whites are in the minority at Wilson and it doesn't seem to be an issue there.

It's really not all that complicated - there's a threshold - hard to define, but it exists - where if the population of white students falls below X, the school faces additional barriers to recruiting white students.

Wilson and Deal are above this threshold; the best example of a school below this threshold is Banneker, which has the best scores in the city yet can't attract a single white student most years. And Hardy is also below this threshold.

Hope that helps you understand this phenomenon. I assure you, it exists.

I wish more people would just be transparent about this issue, as PP has done. This threshold concept exists. For those who claim that it's not about race because Deal also has diversity, here are the numbers of white students at each public school under discussion, per DCPS:

Deal: 43%
Wilson: 25%
Hardy: 11%
Banneker: 0%

However, to say it is about race doesn't always mean that it is about racism. Schools cater to their populations, and different populations have different educational needs.

Consider the phenomenon of high-scoring charter schools in DC (and other cities) with mostly poor, mostly black student bodies that feature things like uniforms, a longer school day, aggressive follow up on absenteeism and discipline, teachers with social work qualifications, and other modifications driven by research on how best to reach at-risk urban kids.

These schools could be life-changing for a kid growing up in poverty, but they tend not to attract the affluent. There is no research that shows that an affluent kid benefits from a long school day at age 3. And the schools make no apologies and no attempt to recruit the affluent. They stay focused on their target demographic.

I think this may be what is going on with the uniform issue at Hardy. It is definitely part of what is going on at Banneker, with its high DC CAS scores (but below-average SATs) and 98% college acceptance rate (but which colleges?). There is probably also some simple racism, yes, but that's thankfully the minority of people. I think for most it is this conscious or unconscious questioning of who is the school trying to reach, and how, and why, and is this a good fit for my kids.

Thank you, above PPs - maybe we're getting somewhere. If this is correct, it still seems that the solution is for more neighborhood families to send their kids there. It will bring the scores up ( the most cited reason for not attending) and change the racial ratio at the same time. It's happened at other schools in DC -- on the hill for sure, and maybe at Deal, a few years ago, I don't know.

I realize Hardy's recent past history regarding race has been difficult (lots of past threads on that - will not revisit here) so perhaps that's what needs to diffuse for real change to happen -- with the passage of time or more directly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. I am one of the current Hardy parents who has posted here and I have spoken to many of my Ward 3 colleagues about why they will or will not send their students to Hardy. Race - either directly stated or implied - is a huge issue.

odd -- whites are in the minority at Wilson and it doesn't seem to be an issue there.

It's really not all that complicated - there's a threshold - hard to define, but it exists - where if the population of white students falls below X, the school faces additional barriers to recruiting white students.

Wilson and Deal are above this threshold; the best example of a school below this threshold is Banneker, which has the best scores in the city yet can't attract a single white student most years. And Hardy is also below this threshold.

Hope that helps you understand this phenomenon. I assure you, it exists.

I wish more people would just be transparent about this issue, as PP has done. This threshold concept exists. For those who claim that it's not about race because Deal also has diversity, here are the numbers of white students at each public school under discussion, per DCPS:

Deal: 43%
Wilson: 25%
Hardy: 11%
Banneker: 0%

However, to say it is about race doesn't always mean that it is about racism. Schools cater to their populations, and different populations have different educational needs.

Consider the phenomenon of high-scoring charter schools in DC (and other cities) with mostly poor, mostly black student bodies that feature things like uniforms, a longer school day, aggressive follow up on absenteeism and discipline, teachers with social work qualifications, and other modifications driven by research on how best to reach at-risk urban kids.

These schools could be life-changing for a kid growing up in poverty, but they tend not to attract the affluent. There is no research that shows that an affluent kid benefits from a long school day at age 3. And the schools make no apologies and no attempt to recruit the affluent. They stay focused on their target demographic.

I think this may be what is going on with the uniform issue at Hardy. It is definitely part of what is going on at Banneker, with its high DC CAS scores (but below-average SATs) and 98% college acceptance rate (but which colleges?). There is probably also some simple racism, yes, but that's thankfully the minority of people. I think for most it is this conscious or unconscious questioning of who is the school trying to reach, and how, and why, and is this a good fit for my kids.

Anonymous wrote:Eaton parent here...we won't go into that discussion... but when Principal Pride came to Eaton to talk to prospective parents last year, someone asked about the uniforms and she talked at length about them.
She said that at frst, she too thought that she would "get rid of them" but found that the kids, parents and staff actually like them. So, she has reconsidered.
She talked about giving some more flexibility and having more options within the uniform. She was very open and honest and talked about it as an ongoing conversation-she is willing to listen to parents but is mostly taking her cues from the kids on the issue. it all made perfect sense when she explained it.
I should also say that I am very indifferent to the uniform question. Right now my kids are making a mess of their closets trying to figure out what to wear on their first day of school-not easy in our house right now...but if we end up at Hardy...

Not that it matters, but I would have liked to wear a uniform to school - would have saved a lot of time putting together an outfit every morning and noticing the kids who were better or worse dressed.

Eaton parent here...we won't go into that discussion... but when Principal Pride came to Eaton to talk to prospective parents last year, someone asked about the uniforms and she talked at length about them.
She said that at frst, she too thought that she would "get rid of them" but found that the kids, parents and staff actually like them. So, she has reconsidered.
She talked about giving some more flexibility and having more options within the uniform. She was very open and honest and talked about it as an ongoing conversation-she is willing to listen to parents but is mostly taking her cues from the kids on the issue. it all made perfect sense when she explained it.
I should also say that I am very indifferent to the uniform question. Right now my kids are making a mess of their closets trying to figure out what to wear on their first day of school-not easy in our house right now...but if we end up at Hardy...

^^ meant to say, "If so, what are they?"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the issue is about whether uniforms look kind of silly in a Ward 3 public school, then the answer should be pretty clear to anyone who has walked around life for a few years and observed what kind of attire public school kids almost everywhere wear to school.

But with respect to Hardy, the issue clearly triggers unrelated emotions that spring from somewhere else than reason. From some folks.

Hardy is in Ward 2 I think but the point is that it is not a Ward 2 or Ward 3 school. It is a DC school with a substantially east of the park population that just happens to be located west of the park. It follows it's own course. If folks have a problem with that then they can choose private school or move to the burbs.

"It follows its own course." That describes Hardy to a T. But who sets that course?

Like a lot of in-boundary parents, what pisses me off is that any attempt to have influence the course of the school is treated as utterly illegitimate -- by DCPS, by elected officials, and by current Hardy parents.

Do you have recent examples of this? Fi what, what are they?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the issue is about whether uniforms look kind of silly in a Ward 3 public school, then the answer should be pretty clear to anyone who has walked around life for a few years and observed what kind of attire public school kids almost everywhere wear to school.

But with respect to Hardy, the issue clearly triggers unrelated emotions that spring from somewhere else than reason. From some folks.

Hardy is in Ward 2 I think but the point is that it is not a Ward 2 or Ward 3 school. It is a DC school with a substantially east of the park population that just happens to be located west of the park. It follows it's own course. If folks have a problem with that then they can choose private school or move to the burbs.

"It follows its own course." That describes Hardy to a T. But who sets that course?

Like a lot of in-boundary parents, what pisses me off is that any attempt to have influence the course of the school is treated as utterly illegitimate -- by DCPS, by elected officials, and by current Hardy parents.

That is sn absurd and ill-informed statement.

In recent years alone, IB families have asked for and received funding for Hardy for a gifted and talented program. They have asked for and received additional funding for extra differentiation and additional courses for advanced students. If you've bothered to talk to or listen to Principal Pride you could have heard her short- and long-term plan to make sure the school meets the needs of the IB families. She has a great vision for those who choose to listen.

And you know what? OOB families have supported these changes.

Why? Because they are good for Hardy students. All Hardy students.

Here's the thing: today, at Hardy, there is no split between IB and OOB families and students. Everyone there is welcomed as part of the community. I understand that there was a split fiver years ago. But it does not exist anymore. To the extent there is some split, it seems to be wholly manufactured on this board.

Hardy families welcome eveyone's input. But if you are not part of the community, and take shots at our students for no reason, we will get upset about it. There is a difference between providing input and parroting prejudices and inaccuracies about Hardy and its students.

Signed,

An IB Hardy Parent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the issue is about whether uniforms look kind of silly in a Ward 3 public school, then the answer should be pretty clear to anyone who has walked around life for a few years and observed what kind of attire public school kids almost everywhere wear to school.

But with respect to Hardy, the issue clearly triggers unrelated emotions that spring from somewhere else than reason. From some folks.

Hardy is in Ward 2 I think but the point is that it is not a Ward 2 or Ward 3 school. It is a DC school with a substantially east of the park population that just happens to be located west of the park. It follows it's own course. If folks have a problem with that then they can choose private school or move to the burbs.

"It follows its own course." That describes Hardy to a T. But who sets that course?

Like a lot of in-boundary parents, what pisses me off is that any attempt to have influence the course of the school is treated as utterly illegitimate -- by DCPS, by elected officials, and by current Hardy parents.

Exactly, IB parents (if they come in greater numbers) will change the nature of the school. Some current parents like that idea and some don't.

If more IB parents go, the views of the parents about uniforms will change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the issue is about whether uniforms look kind of silly in a Ward 3 public school, then the answer should be pretty clear to anyone who has walked around life for a few years and observed what kind of attire public school kids almost everywhere wear to school.

But with respect to Hardy, the issue clearly triggers unrelated emotions that spring from somewhere else than reason. From some folks.

Hardy is in Ward 2 I think but the point is that it is not a Ward 2 or Ward 3 school. It is a DC school with a substantially east of the park population that just happens to be located west of the park. It follows it's own course. If folks have a problem with that then they can choose private school or move to the burbs.

Hardy is a regular DCPS neighborhood school. Not enough neighbors attend, so it has lots of open slots for OOB kids. It is not magnet school. If the chancellor believes uniforms are necessary, then so be it. Otherwise, parents should not be making that policy. The practical reality is that when you single one public school out for uniforms, it raises questions about why. I believe the parents who say it is not for disciplinary reasons. If not, why not get rid of the uniforms?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the issue is about whether uniforms look kind of silly in a Ward 3 public school, then the answer should be pretty clear to anyone who has walked around life for a few years and observed what kind of attire public school kids almost everywhere wear to school.

But with respect to Hardy, the issue clearly triggers unrelated emotions that spring from somewhere else than reason. From some folks.

Hardy is in Ward 2 I think but the point is that it is not a Ward 2 or Ward 3 school. It is a DC school with a substantially east of the park population that just happens to be located west of the park. It follows it's own course. If folks have a problem with that then they can choose private school or move to the burbs.

It is a neighborhood school, it has a designated attendance boundary. Overwhelmingly the residents of that area live in Ward 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At Latin, it was definitely an attempt to instill discipline. It bugs me that Hardy parents give years ago got to decide what my kid wears to a PUBLIC school. Ridiculous! What if parents refuse to put their kids in uniforms?

I think you've hit upon a real issue here.

There is a fundamental difference between a charter school, a private school, and a neighborhood school. You attend a neighborhood school as a matter of right, you don't apply. At an application school, the leaders of the school can tailor the school atmosphere to attract the kind of student they want to apply. At a neighborhood school the school leaders should be tailoring the school to the people who live in the neighborhood.

Hardy has a difficult legacy because at one time it was run essentially as a magnet school, students had to apply. The uniforms are a vestige of that legacy. They need to go.

Hardy was never a magnet school.

True, but it was run essentially as a magnet school. When Pope was principal every student, in-boundary or out, had to submit an application.

No wonder the principal was removed. How can a principal require an application from an IB student. Seems like an abuse of authority to me.