Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them be. People should feel free to spend their money however they please.

Yes, but they should not misrepresent the facts about Hardy.

Is it a misrepresentation to acknowledge that Hardy is not up to Deal's level? Really? Honestly, who among us, given the choice, would not choose Deal over Hardy?

Exactly.

Nobody ever said they are equal -- instead, the argument was there's good reason to believe they will be of comparable quality within a few years, given the trend set out in the attendance data. Get back on-topic, please.

Hardy vs. Deal? it doesn't really matter because after 8th grade, both schools feed to Wilson.

Hardy is not as good as Deal right now -- by any means. It once was and could be again, but it's not right now. Middle school is only three years, so parents have to decide if they are willing to put their kids in an inferior, but improving school, or spend the money on private. It's a tough choice. I personally wish DCPS would put $$ and talent into improving Hardy to make it more desirable instead of forcing families from Deal to Hardy against their will, but my children are high school age, so it's not my battle to fight.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone have an actual answer to the question asked?

Anyone?

I wish i could say that my kid is coming now, but he has a few years left and then he'll join Hardy family.
He'll do great in Hardy or any other school. It's close to home and public and that's important to us.
I'm sure the IB % will go up yearly. People are tired of driving far or hoping for lottery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gosh, this never-ending obsession with IB enrollment at Hardy! It's starting to remind me of the guy who keeps posting about interracial relationships.

DC has a goal of becoming more of a system of neighborhood schools. One of the more dramatic examples of a school getting hardly any IB students is Hardy. Plus there is a goal of improving middle schools ("Deal for all")

It seems eminently logical that people concerned with advancing these goals would focus on progress at Hardy. Certainly makes more sense than the agonizing about the Hill.

I believe that Bowser's actual campaign slogan is "Platitudes for all."

Anonymous wrote:Gosh, this never-ending obsession with IB enrollment at Hardy! It's starting to remind me of the guy who keeps posting about interracial relationships.

DC has a goal of becoming more of a system of neighborhood schools. One of the more dramatic examples of a school getting hardly any IB students is Hardy. Plus there is a goal of improving middle schools ("Deal for all")

It seems eminently logical that people concerned with advancing these goals would focus on progress at Hardy. Certainly makes more sense than the agonizing about the Hill.

If the IB numbers were very high the school would be advertising them.

Since they are not, I assume they are lower than expectations and will be released with all the count day stats.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone have an actual answer to the question asked?

Apparently not.

Anyone have an actual answer to the question asked?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them be. People should feel free to spend their money however they please.

Yes, but they should not misrepresent the facts about Hardy.

Is it a misrepresentation to acknowledge that Hardy is not up to Deal's level? Really? Honestly, who among us, given the choice, would not choose Deal over Hardy?

Exactly.

Nobody ever said they are equal -- instead, the argument was there's good reason to believe they will be of comparable quality within a few years, given the trend set out in the attendance data. Get back on-topic, please.

I believe that the DME canned talking point is "Different, but equally good"!

OMG, go away! You're not witty, and this obsession with Hardy is pathological.

It's probably just someone wanting to justify their decision to go private -- and needs to denigrate anyone who makes a different decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them be. People should feel free to spend their money however they please.

Yes, but they should not misrepresent the facts about Hardy.

Is it a misrepresentation to acknowledge that Hardy is not up to Deal's level? Really? Honestly, who among us, given the choice, would not choose Deal over Hardy?

Exactly.

Nobody ever said they are equal -- instead, the argument was there's good reason to believe they will be of comparable quality within a few years, given the trend set out in the attendance data. Get back on-topic, please.

I believe that the DME canned talking point is "Different, but equally good"!

OMG, go away! You're not witty, and this obsession with Hardy is pathological.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them be. People should feel free to spend their money however they please.

Yes, but they should not misrepresent the facts about Hardy.

Is it a misrepresentation to acknowledge that Hardy is not up to Deal's level? Really? Honestly, who among us, given the choice, would not choose Deal over Hardy?

Exactly.

Nobody ever said they are equal -- instead, the argument was there's good reason to believe they will be of comparable quality within a few years, given the trend set out in the attendance data. Get back on-topic, please.

I believe that the DME canned talking point is "Different, but equally good"!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them be. People should feel free to spend their money however they please.

Yes, but they should not misrepresent the facts about Hardy.

Is it a misrepresentation to acknowledge that Hardy is not up to Deal's level? Really? Honestly, who among us, given the choice, would not choose Deal over Hardy?

Someone who live IB for Hardy, ergo much moe convenient to Hardy who has visited the school and is impressed with the principal and the teachers, and who has IB friends who are happy with the school and who realizes that the overall scores reflect the diversity of the students at the school, not the quality of the teaching and that if their kid is high scoring, they will continue to be at Hardy. Hardy won't bring them down. They will bring Hardy up - score-wise, that is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them be. People should feel free to spend their money however they please.

Yes, but they should not misrepresent the facts about Hardy.

Is it a misrepresentation to acknowledge that Hardy is not up to Deal's level? Really? Honestly, who among us, given the choice, would not choose Deal over Hardy?

Exactly.

Nobody ever said they are equal -- instead, the argument was there's good reason to believe they will be of comparable quality within a few years, given the trend set out in the attendance data. Get back on-topic, please.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let them be. People should feel free to spend their money however they please.

Yes, but they should not misrepresent the facts about Hardy.

Is it a misrepresentation to acknowledge that Hardy is not up to Deal's level? Really? Honestly, who among us, given the choice, would not choose Deal over Hardy?

Exactly.