Hardy Middle parents, staff decry replacement of principal
By Bill Turque
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, December 6, 2009

Sarah Bax, an award-winning math teacher at Hardy Middle School in Georgetown, goes back many years with Chancellor Michelle A. Rhee, once her trainer in the Teach for America program.

But Bax had a warning for her old mentor Friday night, after Rhee announced her decision to replace Patrick Pope, the popular longtime principal.

"This is a grave, grave error," Bax said. "This staff will not be here when Mr. Pope is not here."

Bax was part of a standing-room-only crowd of parents, teachers and students infuriated by Rhee's decision to change leadership at the school, home to a highly regarded arts and instrumental music program that draws a predominantly African American student body from all wards of the city.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nobody's assigning "fault"...but understanding incentives helps figure out what changes - if any - will really attract IB families. For example, getting rid of the principal that IB families wanted out did not attract IB families. Improvements to academic programs - like adding the SEM program - did not attact IB families even though IB families said it would. There was some other factor at play. And figuring out what that factor is helps make sure that resources are spent wisely. I posit that one factor is race. And that makes me wonder if there is any solution for IB families that will address their real - not their stated - concerns.

Let's see. Five principals in three years. Almost daily coverage in the Washington Post. Test scores significantly lower than Deal. Low retention of the few IB kids who do attend.

Then there's uniforms. And teachers who have publicly stated they don't believe IB kids belong at the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nobody's assigning "fault"...but understanding incentives helps figure out what changes - if any - will really attract IB families. For example, getting rid of the principal that IB families wanted out did not attract IB families. Improvements to academic programs - like adding the SEM program - did not attact IB families even though IB families said it would. There was some other factor at play. And figuring out what that factor is helps make sure that resources are spent wisely. I posit that one factor is race. And that makes me wonder if there is any solution for IB families that will address their real - not their stated - concerns.

Let's see. Five principals in three years. Almost daily coverage in the Washington Post. Test scores significantly lower than Deal. Low retention of the few IB kids who do attend.

Then there's uniforms. And teachers who have publicly stated they don't believe IB kids belong at the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Nobody's assigning "fault"...but understanding incentives helps figure out what changes - if any - will really attract IB families. For example, getting rid of the principal that IB families wanted out did not attract IB families. Improvements to academic programs - like adding the SEM program - did not attact IB families even though IB families said it would. There was some other factor at play. And figuring out what that factor is helps make sure that resources are spent wisely. I posit that one factor is race. And that makes me wonder if there is any solution for IB families that will address their real - not their stated - concerns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re # of IB kids-someone mentioned on this thread that hArdy met their goal of 50 IB 6th graders this year and met 100% capacity for that grade as well.

Is that based on DCPS methodology of counting where students actually live or using Principal Pride's system, in which OOB students who attended an IB feeder are considered "in boundary"?

Two observations on this question:

1. it is a good example of the goalpost-moving that occurs with potential Hardy parents. They announce they want something - more IB families - then when they get it, they announce that it's not quite right - not the right kind of IB families. Reminds me of a few years ago - IB families met with DCPS officials and asked for a gifted and talented program at Hardy. They got it - the SEM program - and it's great. But of course, it was mostly ignored by these same IB families because it was not the right kind of gifted and talented program.

2. People who complain about the wrong kind of IB families (ie, families that lotteried into IB schools)....I am not calling you racists. But can you at least understand the perception that this creates? There is some logic to saying "I want my kid to go to school with other kids from his high-performing school because I know these will be high-performing kids." But to say "I only want my kids to go to school with high-performing kids from the white part of town"? How are we supposed to view statements that have that message?

You talk about the "IB community" like there's one person speaking for everyone and choosing for everyone. It's hundreds of families, each family makes what they feel is the best choice for their family. If the school isn't attracting families it's not the families' fault.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re # of IB kids-someone mentioned on this thread that hArdy met their goal of 50 IB 6th graders this year and met 100% capacity for that grade as well.

Is that based on DCPS methodology of counting where students actually live or using Principal Pride's system, in which OOB students who attended an IB feeder are considered "in boundary"?

Two observations on this question:

1. it is a good example of the goalpost-moving that occurs with potential Hardy parents. They announce they want something - more IB families - then when they get it, they announce that it's not quite right - not the right kind of IB families. Reminds me of a few years ago - IB families met with DCPS officials and asked for a gifted and talented program at Hardy. They got it - the SEM program - and it's great. But of course, it was mostly ignored by these same IB families because it was not the right kind of gifted and talented program.

2. People who complain about the wrong kind of IB families (ie, families that lotteried into IB schools)....I am not calling you racists. But can you at least understand the perception that this creates? There is some logic to saying "I want my kid to go to school with other kids from his high-performing school because I know these will be high-performing kids." But to say "I only want my kids to go to school with high-performing kids from the white part of town"? How are we supposed to view statements that have that message?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re # of IB kids-someone mentioned on this thread that hArdy met their goal of 50 IB 6th graders this year and met 100% capacity for that grade as well.

Is that based on DCPS methodology of counting where students actually live or using Principal Pride's system, in which OOB students who attended an IB feeder are considered "in boundary"?

Two observations on this question:

1. it is a good example of the goalpost-moving that occurs with potential Hardy parents. They announce they want something - more IB families - then when they get it, they announce that it's not quite right - not the right kind of IB families. Reminds me of a few years ago - IB families met with DCPS officials and asked for a gifted and talented program at Hardy. They got it - the SEM program - and it's great. But of course, it was mostly ignored by these same IB families because it was not the right kind of gifted and talented program.

2. People who complain about the wrong kind of IB families (ie, families that lotteried into IB schools)....I am not calling you racists. But can you at least understand the perception that this creates? There is some logic to saying "I want my kid to go to school with other kids from his high-performing school because I know these will be high-performing kids." But to say "I only want my kids to go to school with high-performing kids from the white part of town"? How are we supposed to view statements that have that message?

This is confusing. If there is any "goal post" moving, it may be on the part of the school administration. DCPS uses a pretty simple metric for IB and OB (assuming that residences are reported accurately). Students either reside in boundaries or they don't. This has yielded rather small IB percentages at Hardy. Then the school announces lofty goals for the 6th grade entering class, but it turns out they use a different methodology altogether. A student who resides OB is somehow considered IB if s/he feeds from an IB feeder school. Given high OB enrollment at a school like Addison-Hyde, this can skew the numbers quite a bit.

Anonymous wrote:Here's how Hardy could score a big one. They should call up the music prodigy who was forced out of Deal for truancy, and try to attract her family to the school. Announce that Hardy, as a smaller school that caters to the individual student, is more than able to make her competition schedule work within their educational program -- something that a larger, obviously bureaucratic middle school like Deal is unable, or at least unwilling, to do.

Anonymous wrote:and so what?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re # of IB kids-someone mentioned on this thread that hArdy met their goal of 50 IB 6th graders this year and met 100% capacity for that grade as well.

Is that based on DCPS methodology of counting where students actually live or using Principal Pride's system, in which OOB students who attended an IB feeder are considered "in boundary"?

Two observations on this question:

1. it is a good example of the goalpost-moving that occurs with potential Hardy parents. They announce they want something - more IB families - then when they get it, they announce that it's not quite right - not the right kind of IB families. Reminds me of a few years ago - IB families met with DCPS officials and asked for a gifted and talented program at Hardy. They got it - the SEM program - and it's great. But of course, it was mostly ignored by these same IB families because it was not the right kind of gifted and talented program.

2. People who complain about the wrong kind of IB families (ie, families that lotteried into IB schools)....I am not calling you racists. But can you at least understand the perception that this creates? There is some logic to saying "I want my kid to go to school with other kids from his high-performing school because I know these will be high-performing kids." But to say "I only want my kids to go to school with high-performing kids from the white part of town"? How are we supposed to view statements that have that message?