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?

The questions still stand.

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Until the Latin, KIPP, DC Prep, Two Rivers, and DCI feeders don't have WLs a mile long, we'll continue to need charter middle schools.

I wouldn't suggest shutting them down - they provide special offerings, are available to children from areas not IB to the new and improved middle schools, and probably help to keep DCPS on their toes. But NEW charter middle schools may not be needed - use up the capacity in the DCPS middle schools (including the four new ones) first.

You're not on the charter board. One of the new ones approved to open next year is Washington Global MS. + a new campus at Two Rivers.

And that may well be a mistake given DC's planned investments in middle schools. It will be up to the next mayor to address the issue of coordinating charter and DCPS plans.

Are you kidding me? We need to "protect" DC's investments in its middle school by limiting access to charter schools? What about the actual education of actual children, which, despite financial investment, DCPS seems completely unable to pull off at any middle school with a significant number of non-wealthy students. Lets see some successes and some innovative programming ( not necessarily big financial investments, simply smart and savvy planning anfd management of resources ) before trying to limit access to other public middle school programs that seem to be having success. Having desirable DCPS middle schools is a matter of skill and political will in many cases, not just money

In other words, when DCPS makes the correct investments in middle schools, then the charter schools won't pose a threat. Otherwise it is simply smoke and mirrors to try to use our kids to improve failing schools.

Here is what makes me a bit skeptical of this statement: this entire thread.

DCPS has put tons of new resources into Hardy. They added the gifted and talented program plus more honors courses and extra differentiation.

But nobody seems to care about this actual fact; instead we get 50+ pages boiling down to "Yeah, but how many white kids go there?"

I can't know what exactly is still holding those parents back. But I do know that the charter schools they are choosing instead are super mixed by race and include addresses from all over the city. That seems to argue against your simplistic race-based conclusion

My conclusion was neither simplistic nor race based, so don't be so dismissive.

My conclusion was that people are ignoring all the money, resources, and improvements that DCPS has made at Hardy while loudly claiming that their main concern is that they want DCPS to make improvements. And it's not that they are assessing them and concluding they are not good enough. They are not even asking about them. They do not even know that they exist - and they do not even seem to care, based on the fact that over and over and over again the question is not "How are the new Hardy honors classes and programs," but "How many IB kids are at Hardy."

So how do we overcome the problem of people ignoring everything good that DCPS and rRincipal Pride are doing at Hardy?

I would then conclude that DCPS isn't doing it right or else those people are lost causes with their heads up their bums and we should just forget about them entirely. If there one and only metric is how many IB families ( which I doubt it is ) then forget about them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Until the Latin, KIPP, DC Prep, Two Rivers, and DCI feeders don't have WLs a mile long, we'll continue to need charter middle schools.

I wouldn't suggest shutting them down - they provide special offerings, are available to children from areas not IB to the new and improved middle schools, and probably help to keep DCPS on their toes. But NEW charter middle schools may not be needed - use up the capacity in the DCPS middle schools (including the four new ones) first.

You're not on the charter board. One of the new ones approved to open next year is Washington Global MS. + a new campus at Two Rivers.

And that may well be a mistake given DC's planned investments in middle schools. It will be up to the next mayor to address the issue of coordinating charter and DCPS plans.

Are you kidding me? We need to "protect" DC's investments in its middle school by limiting access to charter schools? What about the actual education of actual children, which, despite financial investment, DCPS seems completely unable to pull off at any middle school with a significant number of non-wealthy students. Lets see some successes and some innovative programming ( not necessarily big financial investments, simply smart and savvy planning anfd management of resources ) before trying to limit access to other public middle school programs that seem to be having success. Having desirable DCPS middle schools is a matter of skill and political will in many cases, not just money

In other words, when DCPS makes the correct investments in middle schools, then the charter schools won't pose a threat. Otherwise it is simply smoke and mirrors to try to use our kids to improve failing schools.

Here is what makes me a bit skeptical of this statement: this entire thread.

DCPS has put tons of new resources into Hardy. They added the gifted and talented program plus more honors courses and extra differentiation.

But nobody seems to care about this actual fact; instead we get 50+ pages boiling down to "Yeah, but how many white kids go there?"

I can't know what exactly is still holding those parents back. But I do know that the charter schools they are choosing instead are super mixed by race and include addresses from all over the city. That seems to argue against your simplistic race-based conclusion

My conclusion was neither simplistic nor race based, so don't be so dismissive.

My conclusion was that people are ignoring all the money, resources, and improvements that DCPS has made at Hardy while loudly claiming that their main concern is that they want DCPS to make improvements. And it's not that they are assessing them and concluding they are not good enough. They are not even asking about them. They do not even know that they exist - and they do not even seem to care, based on the fact that over and over and over again the question is not "How are the new Hardy honors classes and programs," but "How many IB kids are at Hardy."

So how do we overcome the problem of people ignoring everything good that DCPS and rRincipal Pride are doing at Hardy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Eaton parent here.

I think it's great news if students from a feeder school continue onto Hardy, regardless of where they live. It's about solid elementary school preparation not about address. It would be great if larger cohorts of kids who have come through elementary school together with a similar educational background move up to MS to continue together. Makes perfect sense to me.

Seems to me that the "real" IB crowd will never be satisfied. If it's all about addresses, they really won't like the Eaton crowd either even though our kids are well prepared and have great test scores-too many zip codes in our directory.

I respectfully disagree. For one thing, many OOB students in Ward 2/Ward 3 feeders (and if they go on to Hardy) are grateful for their good fortune because they realize that their IB alternatives are of much lesser quality. Since you mention Eaton, some believe this is one reason why they decided to move Eaton to Hardy because many in the majority OOB population would not object too loudly. For an IB population that had expected Deal to be available (because Eaton fed there for decades if not longer), Hardy is seen as a step down.

Also, it would be great if you could take at risk kids and put them into a good elementary school and expect by grade 5 that they are all performing at grade level. Unfortunately in the real world that assumption is not always correct.

All you people who are making this crazy distinction between "real IB" and "IB elementary graduates who lotteried in" sound like a bunch of racists. I'm sorry, but its true. You may not be racists, but your argument basically boils down to "black kids don't count."

This nonsense about playdates with kids who live close by? Come on. Your kid is going to middle school, not kindergarden.

Play the race card, Rev. Al!

Don't try to insult your way out of this one. I'm far from Rev. Al - I'm an old white dude from Ward 3 - but even I can see how racist this "IB kids are not IB kids" nonsense looks.

So a black family in Spring Valley who doesn't want their kid to go to Hardy is a racist? LOL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Until the Latin, KIPP, DC Prep, Two Rivers, and DCI feeders don't have WLs a mile long, we'll continue to need charter middle schools.

I wouldn't suggest shutting them down - they provide special offerings, are available to children from areas not IB to the new and improved middle schools, and probably help to keep DCPS on their toes. But NEW charter middle schools may not be needed - use up the capacity in the DCPS middle schools (including the four new ones) first.

You're not on the charter board. One of the new ones approved to open next year is Washington Global MS. + a new campus at Two Rivers.

And that may well be a mistake given DC's planned investments in middle schools. It will be up to the next mayor to address the issue of coordinating charter and DCPS plans.

Are you kidding me? We need to "protect" DC's investments in its middle school by limiting access to charter schools? What about the actual education of actual children, which, despite financial investment, DCPS seems completely unable to pull off at any middle school with a significant number of non-wealthy students. Lets see some successes and some innovative programming ( not necessarily big financial investments, simply smart and savvy planning anfd management of resources ) before trying to limit access to other public middle school programs that seem to be having success. Having desirable DCPS middle schools is a matter of skill and political will in many cases, not just money

In other words, when DCPS makes the correct investments in middle schools, then the charter schools won't pose a threat. Otherwise it is simply smoke and mirrors to try to use our kids to improve failing schools.

Here is what makes me a bit skeptical of this statement: this entire thread.

DCPS has put tons of new resources into Hardy. They added the gifted and talented program plus more honors courses and extra differentiation.

But nobody seems to care about this actual fact; instead we get 50+ pages boiling down to "Yeah, but how many white kids go there?"

I can't know what exactly is still holding those parents back. But I do know that the charter schools they are choosing instead are super mixed by race and include addresses from all over the city. That seems to argue against your simplistic race-based conclusion

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Eaton parent here.

I think it's great news if students from a feeder school continue onto Hardy, regardless of where they live. It's about solid elementary school preparation not about address. It would be great if larger cohorts of kids who have come through elementary school together with a similar educational background move up to MS to continue together. Makes perfect sense to me.

Seems to me that the "real" IB crowd will never be satisfied. If it's all about addresses, they really won't like the Eaton crowd either even though our kids are well prepared and have great test scores-too many zip codes in our directory.

I respectfully disagree. For one thing, many OOB students in Ward 2/Ward 3 feeders (and if they go on to Hardy) are grateful for their good fortune because they realize that their IB alternatives are of much lesser quality. Since you mention Eaton, some believe this is one reason why they decided to move Eaton to Hardy because many in the majority OOB population would not object too loudly. For an IB population that had expected Deal to be available (because Eaton fed there for decades if not longer), Hardy is seen as a step down.

Also, it would be great if you could take at risk kids and put them into a good elementary school and expect by grade 5 that they are all performing at grade level. Unfortunately in the real world that assumption is not always correct.

All you people who are making this crazy distinction between "real IB" and "IB elementary graduates who lotteried in" sound like a bunch of racists. I'm sorry, but its true. You may not be racists, but your argument basically boils down to "black kids don't count."

This nonsense about playdates with kids who live close by? Come on. Your kid is going to middle school, not kindergarden.

Play the race card, Rev. Al!

Don't try to insult your way out of this one. I'm far from Rev. Al - I'm an old white dude from Ward 3 - but even I can see how racist this "IB kids are not IB kids" nonsense looks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Until the Latin, KIPP, DC Prep, Two Rivers, and DCI feeders don't have WLs a mile long, we'll continue to need charter middle schools.

I wouldn't suggest shutting them down - they provide special offerings, are available to children from areas not IB to the new and improved middle schools, and probably help to keep DCPS on their toes. But NEW charter middle schools may not be needed - use up the capacity in the DCPS middle schools (including the four new ones) first.

You're not on the charter board. One of the new ones approved to open next year is Washington Global MS. + a new campus at Two Rivers.

And that may well be a mistake given DC's planned investments in middle schools. It will be up to the next mayor to address the issue of coordinating charter and DCPS plans.

Are you kidding me? We need to "protect" DC's investments in its middle school by limiting access to charter schools? What about the actual education of actual children, which, despite financial investment, DCPS seems completely unable to pull off at any middle school with a significant number of non-wealthy students. Lets see some successes and some innovative programming ( not necessarily big financial investments, simply smart and savvy planning anfd management of resources ) before trying to limit access to other public middle school programs that seem to be having success. Having desirable DCPS middle schools is a matter of skill and political will in many cases, not just money

In other words, when DCPS makes the correct investments in middle schools, then the charter schools won't pose a threat. Otherwise it is simply smoke and mirrors to try to use our kids to improve failing schools.

Here is what makes me a bit skeptical of this statement: this entire thread.

DCPS has put tons of new resources into Hardy. They added the gifted and talented program plus more honors courses and extra differentiation.

But nobody seems to care about this actual fact; instead we get 50+ pages boiling down to "Yeah, but how many white kids go there?"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Eaton parent here.

I think it's great news if students from a feeder school continue onto Hardy, regardless of where they live. It's about solid elementary school preparation not about address. It would be great if larger cohorts of kids who have come through elementary school together with a similar educational background move up to MS to continue together. Makes perfect sense to me.

Seems to me that the "real" IB crowd will never be satisfied. If it's all about addresses, they really won't like the Eaton crowd either even though our kids are well prepared and have great test scores-too many zip codes in our directory.

I respectfully disagree. For one thing, many OOB students in Ward 2/Ward 3 feeders (and if they go on to Hardy) are grateful for their good fortune because they realize that their IB alternatives are of much lesser quality. Since you mention Eaton, some believe this is one reason why they decided to move Eaton to Hardy because many in the majority OOB population would not object too loudly. For an IB population that had expected Deal to be available (because Eaton fed there for decades if not longer), Hardy is seen as a step down.

Also, it would be great if you could take at risk kids and put them into a good elementary school and expect by grade 5 that they are all performing at grade level. Unfortunately in the real world that assumption is not always correct.

All you people who are making this crazy distinction between "real IB" and "IB elementary graduates who lotteried in" sound like a bunch of racists. I'm sorry, but its true. You may not be racists, but your argument basically boils down to "black kids don't count."

This nonsense about playdates with kids who live close by? Come on. Your kid is going to middle school, not kindergarden.

Play the race card, Rev. Al!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Until the Latin, KIPP, DC Prep, Two Rivers, and DCI feeders don't have WLs a mile long, we'll continue to need charter middle schools.

I wouldn't suggest shutting them down - they provide special offerings, are available to children from areas not IB to the new and improved middle schools, and probably help to keep DCPS on their toes. But NEW charter middle schools may not be needed - use up the capacity in the DCPS middle schools (including the four new ones) first.

You're not on the charter board. One of the new ones approved to open next year is Washington Global MS. + a new campus at Two Rivers.

And that may well be a mistake given DC's planned investments in middle schools. It will be up to the next mayor to address the issue of coordinating charter and DCPS plans.

Are you kidding me? We need to "protect" DC's investments in its middle school by limiting access to charter schools? What about the actual education of actual children, which, despite financial investment, DCPS seems completely unable to pull off at any middle school with a significant number of non-wealthy students. Lets see some successes and some innovative programming ( not necessarily big financial investments, simply smart and savvy planning anfd management of resources ) before trying to limit access to other public middle school programs that seem to be having success. Having desirable DCPS middle schools is a matter of skill and political will in many cases, not just money

In other words, when DCPS makes the correct investments in middle schools, then the charter schools won't pose a threat. Otherwise it is simply smoke and mirrors to try to use our kids to improve failing schools.

Here is what makes me a bit skeptical of this statement: this entire thread.

DCPS has put tons of new resources into Hardy. They added the gifted and talented program plus more honors courses and extra differentiation.

But nobody seems to care about this actual fact; instead we get 50+ pages boiling down to "Yeah, but how many white kids go there?"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Eaton parent here.

I think it's great news if students from a feeder school continue onto Hardy, regardless of where they live. It's about solid elementary school preparation not about address. It would be great if larger cohorts of kids who have come through elementary school together with a similar educational background move up to MS to continue together. Makes perfect sense to me.

Seems to me that the "real" IB crowd will never be satisfied. If it's all about addresses, they really won't like the Eaton crowd either even though our kids are well prepared and have great test scores-too many zip codes in our directory.

I respectfully disagree. For one thing, many OOB students in Ward 2/Ward 3 feeders (and if they go on to Hardy) are grateful for their good fortune because they realize that their IB alternatives are of much lesser quality. Since you mention Eaton, some believe this is one reason why they decided to move Eaton to Hardy because many in the majority OOB population would not object too loudly. For an IB population that had expected Deal to be available (because Eaton fed there for decades if not longer), Hardy is seen as a step down.

Also, it would be great if you could take at risk kids and put them into a good elementary school and expect by grade 5 that they are all performing at grade level. Unfortunately in the real world that assumption is not always correct.

All you people who are making this crazy distinction between "real IB" and "IB elementary graduates who lotteried in" sound like a bunch of racists. I'm sorry, but its true. You may not be racists, but your argument basically boils down to "black kids don't count."

This nonsense about playdates with kids who live close by? Come on. Your kid is going to middle school, not kindergarden.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This nonsense about playdates with kids who live close by? Come on. Your kid is going to middle school, not kindergarden.

While I don't believe in the distinction myself, the neighborhood kids for a neighborhood school thing does hold weight. At my low OOB % JKLM (which is a Hardy feeder) I have been on a bunch of committees and room parent several times and know from experience that the kids who are OOB have parents that do not volunteer, do not participate, do not donate to the auction, the classroom, the anything for that matter, etc etc-basically, their one investment in the school is their child, which while great in many ways, is not something you find in the IB parents, who also are invested in their neighborhood and school.

...and we have proof that IB parents will never be satisfied.

Now the argument is that OOB parents never volunteer to do anything. sheesh.

Either send your kids or don't but please stop making it the fault of other people that you don't want to send your kid to Hardy.

It will just go on and on.