Anonymous wrote:Oh my God, only on DCUM are we debating the worthiness of kids who attended high performing WOTP schools versus kids who live in the neighborhood. Talk about Ward 3 (2) problems!

Here's the upshot--Hardy is gaining ground quickly with IB parents and will eventually be considered an excellent MS option. As mentioned before, you can be an early adopter or a late adopter, but the momentum is building. Everyone who is talking about counting white faces or demanding percentages looks like a crazy racist nitpicker.

I'd be happy to see percentages on feeder schools, compared to last year. I just don't think that data is available. As for demanding percentages, this is DC, lots of us roll with quantifiiable goals and shit like that.

Oh my God, only on DCUM are we debating the worthiness of kids who attended high performing WOTP schools versus kids who live in the neighborhood. Talk about Ward 3 (2) problems!

Here's the upshot--Hardy is gaining ground quickly with IB parents and will eventually be considered an excellent MS option. As mentioned before, you can be an early adopter or a late adopter, but the momentum is building. Everyone who is talking about counting white faces or demanding percentages looks like a crazy racist nitpicker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um no I didn't. I get the point of the PP which isn't the point of the previous 20+ pages.

Hardy' scores are fine-- not great but not horrible. Engaged Principal who has implemented differentiation. Nice small school size. Clearly there are kids who are engaged and working hard. What there isn't are IB kids. Not feeder kids who are proficient (plenty of those) but IB.

Not hard to understand.

Fine. You didn't seem to acknowledge that kids prepared through feeder schools are academically solid students. Now you do acknowledge that fact; which also means that you would probably acknowledge that proficient peers are probably the best way to attract kids living in Hardy's neighborhood to attend that school. But as for your unrelated point (but relevant to the thread) -- how many neighborhood kids living in the neighborhood attend Hardy -- I don't think we've seen that data.

but not the only way, as percent IB is also a concern - whether thats because of convenience for socializing, or discomfort with a racial mix with few whites, I can't say, but it seems to be a real concern. Plus, while official numbers on IB are not available yet, offiicial numbers on feeder school percents may never be available, so IB % may have to be the proxy. I would assume that at such point as Hardy is 50% IB it can be assumed that a very large % of OOB are from the Hardy feeders. Is that incorrect?

I believe the reverse is true. If they are coming from Hardy feeders, Pride is counting them as IB. So they could be OOB at Stoddert or Hyde but counted as IB at Hardy. The others are coming from non-feeders.

Wow. If that's the case then Hardy has an even bigger challenge, because the IB percentage -- whether 11, 13 or some higher percentage-- overstates the real attendance by the potential IB student pool. Ms Pride -- who seems by all accounts to be a very competent and energetic school principal -- really has her work cut out for her.

Most - emphasizing "most" - of the parents I know are concerned about academic proficiency -- meaning they don't give a flip about whether a Hardy student lives in Ward 3 or not; they care about prospective peers' proficiency. Those who understand the academic issue know that "OB" students who attend Hardy feeders are proficient-to-advanced students. Those are the students they want to stay in the feeder system, along with the rest of their peers in the Hardy feeders.

But I must admit that I think SOME parents IB for Hardy are counting white faces when they make their assessment. This makes me extremely uncomfortable; to be honest, I think it is racist (or maybe just willfully ignorant of the academic issues) and all I can say to buffer my realization is that I believe it is a minority of parents who think this way.

Anonymous wrote:Fine. You didn't seem to acknowledge that kids prepared through feeder schools are academically solid students. Now you do acknowledge that fact; which also means that you would probably acknowledge that proficient peers are probably the best way to attract kids living in Hardy's neighborhood to attend that school. But as for your unrelated point (but relevant to the thread) -- how many neighborhood kids living in the neighborhood attend Hardy -- I don't think we've seen that data.

From what I've seen (in conversations not just about Hardy but also about a number of other DCPS schools) proficiency is a less compelling factor than address/SES/race.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And those 5 have IB addresses right?

No, one is IB.

This is a lie. 4 kids are absolutely IB, living in the Wesley Heights neighborhood. You can check with Mann's Principal if you wish, Ms Whisnant knows who the 5 kids attending Hardy are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um no I didn't. I get the point of the PP which isn't the point of the previous 20+ pages.

Hardy' scores are fine-- not great but not horrible. Engaged Principal who has implemented differentiation. Nice small school size. Clearly there are kids who are engaged and working hard. What there isn't are IB kids. Not feeder kids who are proficient (plenty of those) but IB.

Not hard to understand.

Fine. You didn't seem to acknowledge that kids prepared through feeder schools are academically solid students. Now you do acknowledge that fact; which also means that you would probably acknowledge that proficient peers are probably the best way to attract kids living in Hardy's neighborhood to attend that school. But as for your unrelated point (but relevant to the thread) -- how many neighborhood kids living in the neighborhood attend Hardy -- I don't think we've seen that data.

but not the only way, as percent IB is also a concern - whether thats because of convenience for socializing, or discomfort with a racial mix with few whites, I can't say, but it seems to be a real concern. Plus, while official numbers on IB are not available yet, offiicial numbers on feeder school percents may never be available, so IB % may have to be the proxy. I would assume that at such point as Hardy is 50% IB it can be assumed that a very large % of OOB are from the Hardy feeders. Is that incorrect?

I believe the reverse is true. If they are coming from Hardy feeders, Pride is counting them as IB. So they could be OOB at Stoddert or Hyde but counted as IB at Hardy. The others are coming from non-feeders.

Anonymous wrote:And those 5 have IB addresses right?

Mmm I find this question inappropriate. Anyway I will answer: 4 have for sure. I am not sure about the 5th (I am not close with the family).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Um no I didn't. I get the point of the PP which isn't the point of the previous 20+ pages.

Hardy' scores are fine-- not great but not horrible. Engaged Principal who has implemented differentiation. Nice small school size. Clearly there are kids who are engaged and working hard. What there isn't are IB kids. Not feeder kids who are proficient (plenty of those) but IB.

Not hard to understand.

Fine. You didn't seem to acknowledge that kids prepared through feeder schools are academically solid students. Now you do acknowledge that fact; which also means that you would probably acknowledge that proficient peers are probably the best way to attract kids living in Hardy's neighborhood to attend that school. But as for your unrelated point (but relevant to the thread) -- how many neighborhood kids living in the neighborhood attend Hardy -- I don't think we've seen that data.

but not the only way, as percent IB is also a concern - whether thats because of convenience for socializing, or discomfort with a racial mix with few whites, I can't say, but it seems to be a real concern. Plus, while official numbers on IB are not available yet, offiicial numbers on feeder school percents may never be available, so IB % may have to be the proxy. I would assume that at such point as Hardy is 50% IB it can be assumed that a very large % of OOB are from the Hardy feeders. Is that incorrect?

Anonymous wrote:And those 5 have IB addresses right?

No, one is IB.

Anonymous wrote:Um no I didn't. I get the point of the PP which isn't the point of the previous 20+ pages.

Hardy' scores are fine-- not great but not horrible. Engaged Principal who has implemented differentiation. Nice small school size. Clearly there are kids who are engaged and working hard. What there isn't are IB kids. Not feeder kids who are proficient (plenty of those) but IB.

Not hard to understand.

Fine. You didn't seem to acknowledge that kids prepared through feeder schools are academically solid students. Now you do acknowledge that fact; which also means that you would probably acknowledge that proficient peers are probably the best way to attract kids living in Hardy's neighborhood to attend that school. But as for your unrelated point (but relevant to the thread) -- how many neighborhood kids living in the neighborhood attend Hardy -- I don't think we've seen that data.

So...are there really 40% IB kids in 6th grade this year or are there 40% from feeder schools (whether IB or OOB)? Just curious. I agree that they are probably all well prepared from the feeders.

Um no I didn't. I get the point of the PP which isn't the point of the previous 20+ pages.

Hardy' scores are fine-- not great but not horrible. Engaged Principal who has implemented differentiation. Nice small school size. Clearly there are kids who are engaged and working hard. What there isn't are IB kids. Not feeder kids who are proficient (plenty of those) but IB.

Not hard to understand.

Anonymous wrote:Um no. The point is if IB parents are embracing Hardy. We already know that OOB parents embrace it.

You missed the point entirely. Re-read and think harder.

Um no. The point is if IB parents are embracing Hardy. We already know that OOB parents embrace it.