Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was informed over dinner tonight that an assistant principal from McKinley Tech was selected as a candidate.

Is s/he diverse? I had heard that having a principal of color at Wilson was a very important criterion this time.

Is this the new lingo for "not white"

It makes one wonder in what kind of an alternative universe DC is located, when a Korean-Amercian woman is not really considered "diverse."

Where did anyone say that hiring a Korean-American such a Kim is NOT diverse??? Which post? I think you're trying to be clever by putting nonexistent words into nonexistent posts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was informed over dinner tonight that an assistant principal from McKinley Tech was selected as a candidate.

Is s/he diverse? I had heard that having a principal of color at Wilson was a very important criterion this time.

Is this the new lingo for "not white"

It makes one wonder in what kind of an alternative universe DC is located, when a Korean-Amercian woman is not really considered "diverse."

A plan that Mary Cheh and Jack Evans support, BTW.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
There was a very angry, militant teacher (who’s still at Hardy, by the way) who was the most vocal ringleader against Rhee’s reforms and was particularly hostile to the notion that Hardy should change to attract more IB students. That teacher would have lasted about a New York minute under Dr. Kim.


You again??? I guess the "bash Hardy" threads finally died out, so you're here on a Wilson/Melissa Kim thread because, I don't know...you're bored? It's weird how you have this fascination with this teacher at Hardy. My guess is that you haven't had a kid at Hardy for at least 5 years. My kid is there now and doing great. Do you have anything else to add to the conversation other than this tired fascination?


Can someone explain why IB parents avoid Hardy like a pile of doggie doo-doo that has sat out in the hot July sun?


As explained above. They are horribly embarrassed by the failure of their misplaced grab for glory with Michelle Rhee. Their only recourse is to diss Hardy until the end of time.

It's psychologically difficult to fall from the heights of self-perceived champions of neighborhood public schools led by a glorified national heroine to the depths of being perceived as petty self-interested parents, cruelly misled and abandoned by the now fallen heroine.

Denial is a much easier course.

So true. They also hope continuing to bash Hardy will bolster their silly dreams of building another MS in the ward.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a very angry, militant teacher (who’s still at Hardy, by the way) who was the most vocal ringleader against Rhee’s reforms and was particularly hostile to the notion that Hardy should change to attract more IB students. That teacher would have lasted about a New York minute under Dr. Kim.

You again??? I guess the "bash Hardy" threads finally died out, so you're here on a Wilson/Melissa Kim thread because, I don't know...you're bored? It's weird how you have this fascination with this teacher at Hardy. My guess is that you haven't had a kid at Hardy for at least 5 years. My kid is there now and doing great. Do you have anything else to add to the conversation other than this tired fascination?

Can someone explain why IB parents avoid Hardy like a pile of doggie doo-doo that has sat out in the hot July sun?

As explained above. They are horribly embarrassed by the failure of their misplaced grab for glory with Michelle Rhee. Their only recourse is to diss Hardy until the end of time.

It's psychologically difficult to fall from the heights of self-perceived champions of neighborhood public schools led by a glorified national heroine to the depths of being perceived as petty self-interested parents, cruelly misled and abandoned by the now fallen heroine.

Denial is a much easier course.

sorry but this explanation does not hold water, it actually sounds ridiculous. the Michelle Rhee thing happened when? 2009? 2010? Hardy has 15% IB, compared to 70% IB for Deal today, and rising 6th graders were in early elementary school years at that time. the idea that parents how shell out 30K a year or go charter just because they are in denial is silly. I think the reasons are complex. Hardy covers some wealthy areas and a lot of those parents would send their kids to private anyway (see Mann), especially for middle and high school, and there is not much DCPS can do about it. test scores seems pretty good to me (although the ones at Deal are remarkably better), and the fact that the school has only about 300 students is certainly an advantage over Deal. there must be other reasons and finding what they are seems to me more productive than simply saying that IB parents sending their kids elsewhere are dumb.

Who said they were dumb? I said they were in denial over they way they acted when Rhee seemed like their champion. And yeah, right -- let's make it so "complex" that it can't be figured out, except to say that IB parents avoid Hardy because they just want the best for their children -- the same kind of IB parents who were clamboring to get in when they thought they had Michelle Rhee on their side.

well, sending kids to private at $20K-$30K per year just because they are in "denial over the way they acted when Rhee seemed their champion" seem pritty dumb to me. sorry but this reason does not really seem reasonable to me. and when I say the reasons are complex, I did not mean to say that cannot be figured out. I don't know much about Hardy, so I expected people like you and whoever knows better to explain them to me. the fact that some parents would send their kids to private no matter what it easy for me to figure out, so I did it. the other reasons, I expect somebody else to give them to me, but you need to suggest reasons that are believable. just saying poeple are in denial over soemthing they did 5 years ago does not cut it (I wonder how many of those people have kids that would be eligible for Hardy next year, and what about the current IB poeple who have nothing to do with what happened 5 years ago). similarly, saying that poeple are elitist and racist seems like gratuitous name calling (why supposedly high SES white parents flocked to Deal years ago when the percentage of minorities was even higher than the current +50%). I understand that years ago Hardy had a focus on music and arts. that would explain why IB parents did not consider the school back then, and it has nothing to do with race or SES level. I find pretty normal that parents expect the neighborhood middle school to have a strong focus on the basics, math, science, reading and writing, and not music. the fact that the school has had 5 principals in 4 years (other posters say that, I have no idea if this is true), can also explain why some parents do no trust the school. with so many changes in leadership, it is difficult to see where the school was going.

Anonymous wrote:Racism, classism, elitism....faux-limousine liberals....or actual limousine liberals...take your pick.

this cannot be the reason, otherwise why is Deal 70% IB? minorities are over 50% at Deal and the IB percentage is very high.

That would be true...except in the case being mentioned, Hardy DOES have rigorous courses, advanced courses, academic enrichment courses, etc.

Typo: advanced courses

Anonymous wrote:Racism, classism, elitism....faux-limousine liberals....or actual limousine liberals...take your pick.

I think many parents would not pull punches about the fact that they want an "elite" school -- in the sense of stellar, rigorous academics, advanced ciurrs, good sports and extracurriculars, a string faculty and a student body that is focused on learning.

To the extent that others equate that with racism, well, that's a manifestation of what President Bush used to call the "act bigotry of low expectations" -- the notion that minority students and their parents don't want/can't succeed in such scholls. The noton that an "elite" school is somehow racist and a mediocre school is "good enough" for minority students is offensive to all who value learning.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was informed over dinner tonight that an assistant principal from McKinley Tech was selected as a candidate.

Is s/he diverse? I had heard that having a principal of color at Wilson was a very important criterion this time.

Is this the new lingo for "not white"

Yep.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was informed over dinner tonight that an assistant principal from McKinley Tech was selected as a candidate.

Is s/he diverse? I had heard that having a principal of color at Wilson was a very important criterion this time.

Is this the new lingo for "not white"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a very angry, militant teacher (who’s still at Hardy, by the way) who was the most vocal ringleader against Rhee’s reforms and was particularly hostile to the notion that Hardy should change to attract more IB students. That teacher would have lasted about a New York minute under Dr. Kim.

You again??? I guess the "bash Hardy" threads finally died out, so you're here on a Wilson/Melissa Kim thread because, I don't know...you're bored? It's weird how you have this fascination with this teacher at Hardy. My guess is that you haven't had a kid at Hardy for at least 5 years. My kid is there now and doing great. Do you have anything else to add to the conversation other than this tired fascination?

Can someone explain why IB parents avoid Hardy like a pile of doggie doo-doo that has sat out in the hot July sun?

As explained above. They are horribly embarrassed by the failure of their misplaced grab for glory with Michelle Rhee. Their only recourse is to diss Hardy until the end of time.

It's psychologically difficult to fall from the heights of self-perceived champions of neighborhood public schools led by a glorified national heroine to the depths of being perceived as petty self-interested parents, cruelly misled and abandoned by the now fallen heroine.

Denial is a much easier course.

sorry but this explanation does not hold water, it actually sounds ridiculous. the Michelle Rhee thing happened when? 2009? 2010? Hardy has 15% IB, compared to 70% IB for Deal today, and rising 6th graders were in early elementary school years at that time. the idea that parents how shell out 30K a year or go charter just because they are in denial is silly. I think the reasons are complex. Hardy covers some wealthy areas and a lot of those parents would send their kids to private anyway (see Mann), especially for middle and high school, and there is not much DCPS can do about it. test scores seems pretty good to me (although the ones at Deal are remarkably better), and the fact that the school has only about 300 students is certainly an advantage over Deal. there must be other reasons and finding what they are seems to me more productive than simply saying that IB parents sending their kids elsewhere are dumb.

Who said they were dumb? I said they were in denial over they way they acted when Rhee seemed like their champion. And yeah, right -- let's make it so "complex" that it can't be figured out, except to say that IB parents avoid Hardy because they just want the best for their children -- the same kind of IB parents who were clamboring to get in when they thought they had Michelle Rhee on their side.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Word on the street is that she will replace Arne Duncan.

You must be thinking of Michelle Rhee. I'd take her back over Kaya in a heartbeat!

If Rhee's original plans to significantly change Hardy had been put into effect (as Kim's reforms at Deal were), Hardy would be a much stronger middle school today with a much higher IB participation rate. Instead, it's a distant also-ran compared with Deal.

Really, PP just couldn't resist that opportunity to take down Hardy. Seriously, there needs to be some donation to a charity when someone posts a trashy comment about Hardy. They do it during baseball games--when a player hits it out of the park or a player takes a walk, a donation is made to a charity.

"There's another comment trashing Hardy. Lexus will donate $60 to Girls on the Run..."

Virtually no one, given the choice of Deal or Hardy, would opt for Hardy. Even most families who live in bounds for Hardy and don't have the Deal option avoid Hardy like the plague. You are welcome call it "trashing." We call it reality.

It is a shame that Rhee couldn't swing her big broom and fully clean out the Hardy stables when she was here. Had she been able to do so, Hardy might be in a very different posture than it is today.

What a lucky boy or girl some kid is to have a bitch of a mother like you, honey.

NP here and not IB for Hardy, so I don't have a dog in this fight, but you may want to consider how lucky your kids might be to have as parent a person 1) who is unable to conduct a discussion countering somebody else's opinion with arguments without resorting to name calling; 2) reacts in such an aggressive and rude manner.

This has been an issue for Hardy, where proposals for change and any criticism are generally met with defensiveness, invective and personal attacks by folks who like Hardy just the way it is. Loyalty to a school is admirable, but it's hard to create a climate for change when aggressive name calling is usually the result.

Found on both sides of the issue

Racism, classism, elitism....faux-limousine liberals....or actual limousine liberals...take your pick.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was a very angry, militant teacher (who’s still at Hardy, by the way) who was the most vocal ringleader against Rhee’s reforms and was particularly hostile to the notion that Hardy should change to attract more IB students. That teacher would have lasted about a New York minute under Dr. Kim.

You again??? I guess the "bash Hardy" threads finally died out, so you're here on a Wilson/Melissa Kim thread because, I don't know...you're bored? It's weird how you have this fascination with this teacher at Hardy. My guess is that you haven't had a kid at Hardy for at least 5 years. My kid is there now and doing great. Do you have anything else to add to the conversation other than this tired fascination?

Can someone explain why IB parents avoid Hardy like a pile of doggie doo-doo that has sat out in the hot July sun?

As explained above. They are horribly embarrassed by the failure of their misplaced grab for glory with Michelle Rhee. Their only recourse is to diss Hardy until the end of time.

It's psychologically difficult to fall from the heights of self-perceived champions of neighborhood public schools led by a glorified national heroine to the depths of being perceived as petty self-interested parents, cruelly misled and abandoned by the now fallen heroine.

Denial is a much easier course.

sorry but this explanation does not hold water, it actually sounds ridiculous. the Michelle Rhee thing happened when? 2009? 2010? Hardy has 15% IB, compared to 70% IB for Deal today, and rising 6th graders were in early elementary school years at that time. the idea that parents how shell out 30K a year or go charter just because they are in denial is silly. I think the reasons are complex. Hardy covers some wealthy areas and a lot of those parents would send their kids to private anyway (see Mann), especially for middle and high school, and there is not much DCPS can do about it. test scores seems pretty good to me (although the ones at Deal are remarkably better), and the fact that the school has only about 300 students is certainly an advantage over Deal. there must be other reasons and finding what they are seems to me more productive than simply saying that IB parents sending their kids elsewhere are dumb.