Anonymous wrote:All those students at Hardy feeder schools have excellent academic credentials. It's not remotely relevant where they live if the concern is academic competence.

Mann is largely an IB school. Stoddert is in the middle. Hyde is so OOB, it's not significant that kids go to Hardy -- what other alternative do they have?!

All those students at Hardy feeder schools have excellent academic credentials. It's not remotely relevant where they live if the concern is academic competence.

The bubble is starting. There are now 18 kids from stoddert 10+ from Mann, 10+ from Key and 10+ IB Hyde.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are there metal detectors at Hardy now? If so, why would increased IB enrollment make them go away?

No.

The PP who brought them up finds it 'scary' that there are metal detectors at Wilson. And going to Hardy means you might go to Wilson and be around scary people or things. Or something like that.

Perhaps we will finally see the Hardy uniforms go away also. Memo to DCPS: The Eighties are calling and they want their outmoded school uniforms back!

A few things. I attended today's open house. Principal Pride, her staff and the PTO president did a fantastic job. A very positive vibe. Good turn out---I'd guess around 50 parents. I got the sense that most, if not all, the parents in the room currently have children at Hardy feeder schools. I heard many parents comment that they are thrilled with the uniform and hope that it will not change. Principal Pride said uniforms would stay in place. Good, I say. She also said that Hardy is off the table as a possible swing space option for Hyde-Addison, so that's good news for Hardy. The small outdoor space they have figures very prominently into the school culture and taking that away would have been criminal, in my book. Principal Pride said she anticipates a "bubble" this year representing a significant increase of students enrolling from feeder schools. A good number for the 6th grade class next year would be 150, according to her.

1. Ms. Pride has been saying this for a few years, but then the numbers never turn out as rosy as the forecast. She should be more careful, lest Pride goeth before the fall.

2. The interesting number isn't feeder school enrollment -- if a school like Hyde has a significant OOB component, why wouldn't most of those OOB students go on to Hardy? Hardy is probably a better option than anything closer to home. The crucial number is whether Hardy will attract significantly more students from families who live within Hardy's official boundaries. That is the demographic that historically has pursued other middle school options, believing that Hardy is lacking. Convincing these families to enroll their kids in much larger numbers would be huge for the school, and foreshadow the IB-tipping point that DCPS has been hoping for since Michelle Rhee.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are there metal detectors at Hardy now? If so, why would increased IB enrollment make them go away?

No.

The PP who brought them up finds it 'scary' that there are metal detectors at Wilson. And going to Hardy means you might go to Wilson and be around scary people or things. Or something like that.

Perhaps we will finally see the Hardy uniforms go away also. Memo to DCPS: The Eighties are calling and they want their outmoded school uniforms back!

A few things. I attended today's open house. Principal Pride, her staff and the PTO president did a fantastic job. A very positive vibe. Good turn out---I'd guess around 50 parents. I got the sense that most, if not all, the parents in the room currently have children at Hardy feeder schools. I heard many parents comment that they are thrilled with the uniform and hope that it will not change. Principal Pride said uniforms would stay in place. Good, I say. She also said that Hardy is off the table as a possible swing space option for Hyde-Addison, so that's good news for Hardy. The small outdoor space they have figures very prominently into the school culture and taking that away would have been criminal, in my book. Principal Pride said she anticipates a "bubble" this year representing a significant increase of students enrolling from feeder schools. A good number for the 6th grade class next year would be 150, according to her.

+1 I was one of the other 50 or so parents there today. Great turnout, very positive. She didn't have her whole run down on #s but estimated around 60% feeder for next year's 6th as the 'bubble year' and noted that between the feeders adding 5th grade classes, higher birthrate trends and this year's Eaton 4ths would be the first year designated for Hardy... that the bubble will continue to grow. The school is starting Responsive Classroom (paid for by PTO, other contributions & grants). Extremely impressed by attention they pay to kids development and the quick build up of the curriculum for honors track, separation of grades by location & focus on development by age & individual needs, stable schedule, smaller size, lots of special options, and more. I was feeling on the fence before, but feel very assured. So much so, starting renovations on the house!

On the derails -- again, the current parents - including many PTO parents who are from feeder schools - broadly favor the uniforms (as I do). Also that Hardy is off the table as Hyde swing space- so we can stop that discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are there metal detectors at Hardy now? If so, why would increased IB enrollment make them go away?

No.

The PP who brought them up finds it 'scary' that there are metal detectors at Wilson. And going to Hardy means you might go to Wilson and be around scary people or things. Or something like that.

Perhaps we will finally see the Hardy uniforms go away also. Memo to DCPS: The Eighties are calling and they want their outmoded school uniforms back!

What is wrong with you? If a uniform policy is so abhorrent to you, please just send your child somewhere that doesn't have one. Please stop making your same tired argument. You'll get very little traction here.

So the rest of he world is stuck in the 80s, hmmmm with higher test scores - I think not! As PP stated, if you don't like it leave or don't enroll your child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To maintain the positive momentum, DCPS needs to avoid self-defeating ideas like the one recently floated that Hyde-Addison Elem might move to Hardy as swing space while its renovation is being done. This would take away Hardy's tiny among if green space and would employ what amounts to a tent to serve as cafeteria/gym? What the hell? Nope.

Isn't that exactly what was done at Lafayette and parents said it was fine?

I'm sure another school would be happy to take Hydes place in the queue if Hardy won't share/make some sacrifices for the good of its neighbors.

what a ridiculous comment by someone whose never clearly been near the school or the area. Lafayette has a huge playground and space. This proposal involves taking away the existing arts program from several schools (including 2 Hardy feeders) and ALL of the green space at Hardy for outdoor activity. See all the other threads and previous comments on how DCPS already gave away the Jelleff (only other nearby option) rights to privates.

Fillmore is going anyway -- not because of the Hyde renovations.

They will survive with suboptimal outdoor space for a year or so. This work has to get done.

You are selfish. You know Hyde has another option--Meyer--but you would rather take Hardy's outdoor space for 2 years?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are there metal detectors at Hardy now? If so, why would increased IB enrollment make them go away?

No.

The PP who brought them up finds it 'scary' that there are metal detectors at Wilson. And going to Hardy means you might go to Wilson and be around scary people or things. Or something like that.

Perhaps we will finally see the Hardy uniforms go away also. Memo to DCPS: The Eighties are calling and they want their outmoded school uniforms back!

What is wrong with you? If a uniform policy is so abhorrent to you, please just send your child somewhere that doesn't have one. Please stop making your same tired argument. You'll get very little traction here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are there metal detectors at Hardy now? If so, why would increased IB enrollment make them go away?

No.

The PP who brought them up finds it 'scary' that there are metal detectors at Wilson. And going to Hardy means you might go to Wilson and be around scary people or things. Or something like that.

Perhaps we will finally see the Hardy uniforms go away also. Memo to DCPS: The Eighties are calling and they want their outmoded school uniforms back!

A few things. I attended today's open house. Principal Pride, her staff and the PTO president did a fantastic job. A very positive vibe. Good turn out---I'd guess around 50 parents. I got the sense that most, if not all, the parents in the room currently have children at Hardy feeder schools. I heard many parents comment that they are thrilled with the uniform and hope that it will not change. Principal Pride said uniforms would stay in place. Good, I say. She also said that Hardy is off the table as a possible swing space option for Hyde-Addison, so that's good news for Hardy. The small outdoor space they have figures very prominently into the school culture and taking that away would have been criminal, in my book. Principal Pride said she anticipates a "bubble" this year representing a significant increase of students enrolling from feeder schools. A good number for the 6th grade class next year would be 150, according to her.

I'm Op.

Please stop trying to run this thread off the rails. You people have become really tiresome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are there metal detectors at Hardy now? If so, why would increased IB enrollment make them go away?

No.

The PP who brought them up finds it 'scary' that there are metal detectors at Wilson. And going to Hardy means you might go to Wilson and be around scary people or things. Or something like that.

Perhaps we will finally see the Hardy uniforms go away also. Memo to DCPS: The Eighties are calling and they want their outmoded school uniforms back!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meyer is a ready made swing space as mentioned above. Not optimal for the Hyde families. But putting out all the Hardy kids (and the Fillmore program, which is still up for real debate, and the entire No. Georgetown community which would lose all the field space b/w the small facilities at Hardy & Ellington field... and Ellington is already under construction with traffic/congestion/noise/etc implications one block away) is not a fair option. In addition, Hyde is still less than 50% IB.

Meyer is great -- if Ellington is done and able to move next fall as planned. If DGS is looking at other options for Hyde then that's worrying on a whole different level.

But Hyde's OOB percentage seems totally irrelevant to this discussion.

The OOB percentage is not entirely irrelevant, and I say that as an OOB at our WOTP elementary. If you look at the SIT team proposal from last month, the ONLY "cons" listed for Meyer as a swing space is that it is not within the H-A community and that it would require bussing. If more than half the students are out of boundary, and dont live in Georgetown or Burleith, the "not in the community" con is rendered greatly less relevant. Murch is now in their swing space at UDC and from everything I've heard it's going quite well. So if people like Jack Evans kowtow to a few Georgetown residents and make Recommendations that actually disrupt not one but two school communities, then shame on them.

Well said. Jack Evans stepped in in support of a few wealthy Burleith families who were against the disruptions in the Ellington fields. He did not care that in doing this he was screwing up two schools, Hyde and Hardy. I think the made his calculations: Hardy feeders are all Ward 3, except for Hyde. At Hyde the current IB kids are just above 110, which is approx 70-80 families in his constituency. He gets more political rent and prestige from supporting the anti-Ellington families in his constituency, rather than 70-80 families which attend the local public school.

So please stop the narrative against the lack of altruism of the Hardy community, and turn your attention towards the selfish Burleith/Georgetown residents who did not give a shit of their elementary and middle schools, and towards the warden of their interest, Jack Evans.

In theory. But historically "hardly" any Ward 3 families choose to send their kids to Hardy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meyer is a ready made swing space as mentioned above. Not optimal for the Hyde families. But putting out all the Hardy kids (and the Fillmore program, which is still up for real debate, and the entire No. Georgetown community which would lose all the field space b/w the small facilities at Hardy & Ellington field... and Ellington is already under construction with traffic/congestion/noise/etc implications one block away) is not a fair option. In addition, Hyde is still less than 50% IB.

Meyer is great -- if Ellington is done and able to move next fall as planned. If DGS is looking at other options for Hyde then that's worrying on a whole different level.

But Hyde's OOB percentage seems totally irrelevant to this discussion.

The OOB percentage is not entirely irrelevant, and I say that as an OOB at our WOTP elementary. If you look at the SIT team proposal from last month, the ONLY "cons" listed for Meyer as a swing space is that it is not within the H-A community and that it would require bussing. If more than half the students are out of boundary, and dont live in Georgetown or Burleith, the "not in the community" con is rendered greatly less relevant. Murch is now in their swing space at UDC and from everything I've heard it's going quite well. So if people like Jack Evans kowtow to a few Georgetown residents and make Recommendations that actually disrupt not one but two school communities, then shame on them.

Well said. Jack Evans stepped in in support of a few wealthy Burleith families who were against the disruptions in the Ellington fields. He did not care that in doing this he was screwing up two schools, Hyde and Hardy. I think the made his calculations: Hardy feeders are all Ward 3, except for Hyde. At Hyde the current IB kids are just above 110, which is approx 70-80 families in his constituency. He gets more political rent and prestige from supporting the anti-Ellington families in his constituency, rather than 70-80 families which attend the local public school.

So please stop the narrative against the lack of altruism of the Hardy community, and turn your attention towards the selfish Burleith/Georgetown residents who did not give a shit of their elementary and middle schools, and towards the warden of their interest, Jack Evans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meyer is a ready made swing space as mentioned above. Not optimal for the Hyde families. But putting out all the Hardy kids (and the Fillmore program, which is still up for real debate, and the entire No. Georgetown community which would lose all the field space b/w the small facilities at Hardy & Ellington field... and Ellington is already under construction with traffic/congestion/noise/etc implications one block away) is not a fair option. In addition, Hyde is still less than 50% IB.

Meyer is great -- if Ellington is done and able to move next fall as planned. If DGS is looking at other options for Hyde then that's worrying on a whole different level.

But Hyde's OOB percentage seems totally irrelevant to this discussion.

The OOB percentage is not entirely irrelevant, and I say that as an OOB at our WOTP elementary. If you look at the SIT team proposal from last month, the ONLY "cons" listed for Meyer as a swing space is that it is not within the H-A community and that it would require bussing. If more than half the students are out of boundary, and dont live in Georgetown or Burleith, the "not in the community" con is rendered greatly less relevant. Murch is now in their swing space at UDC and from everything I've heard it's going quite well. So if people like Jack Evans kowtow to a few Georgetown residents and make Recommendations that actually disrupt not one but two school communities, then shame on them.

Anonymous wrote:Meyer is a ready made swing space as mentioned above. Not optimal for the Hyde families. But putting out all the Hardy kids (and the Fillmore program, which is still up for real debate, and the entire No. Georgetown community which would lose all the field space b/w the small facilities at Hardy & Ellington field... and Ellington is already under construction with traffic/congestion/noise/etc implications one block away) is not a fair option. In addition, Hyde is still less than 50% IB.

Meyer is great -- if Ellington is done and able to move next fall as planned. If DGS is looking at other options for Hyde then that's worrying on a whole different level.

But Hyde's OOB percentage seems totally irrelevant to this discussion.