the harvard-westlake
CHRONICLE Los Angeles • Volume XXII • Issue III • Nov. 7, 2012
Editors in Chief: David Lim, Elana Zeltser Managing Editors: Robbie Loeb, Michael Rothberg, Camille Shooshani Executive Editor: Rachel Schwartz Presentations Editors: Jamie Chang, Gabrielle Franchina Sports Editors: Michael Aronson, Luke Holthouse Chief Copy Editor: Allana Rivera News Managing Editors: Michael Sugerman, Ally White News Section Heads: Julia Aizuss, Jack Goldfisher, Elizabeth Madden, Lauren Sonnenberg, Noa Yadidi Infographics Manager: Jivani Gengatharan News Copy Editor: Jessica Lee News Online Managers: Claire Goldsmith, Jensen Pak Assistants: Leily Arzy, Sara Evall, Haley Finkelstein, Enya Huang, Sophie Kupiec-Weglinski, Jensen McRae, Nikta Mansouri, Scott Nussbaum, J.J. Spitz, Jake Saferstein Opinion Managing Editor: Ana Scuric Section Heads: Beatrice Fingerhut, James Hur, Kyla Rhynes, Tara Stone Assistants: Parker Chusid, Lucas Gelfen, Kenneth Schrupp Features Managing Editors: Maggie Bunzel, Carrie Davidson Features Section Heads: Eojin Choi, Sydney Foreman, David Gisser, Sarah Novicoff, Morganne Ramsey, Lauren Siegel Assistants: Carly Berger, Zoe Dutton, Jacob Goodman, Aimee Misaki, Marcella Park, Nadia Rahman, David Woldenberg Sports Managing Editors: Aaron Lyons, Keane Muraoka-Robertson Section Heads: Patrick Ryan, Grant Nussbaum, Lucy Putnam, Lizzy Thomas Assistants: Elijah Akhtarzad, Mila Barzdukas, Jordan Garfinkel, Tyler Graham, Miles Harleston, Erina Szeto, Jeremy Tepper Business Manager: Cherish Molezion Ads Manager: Leslie Dinkin Photographers: Mazelle Etessami, Rebecca Katz, Scott Nussbaum, Emily Segal Multimedia Team: Mazelle Etessami, Jack Goldfisher, Eric Greenberg, Henry Hahn, Luke Holthouse, Eric Loeb, Sam Sachs Adviser: Kathleen Neumeyer The Chronicle is the student newspaper of Harvard-Westlake School. It is published eight times per year. Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the seniors on the Editorial Board. Letters to the editor may be submitted to chronicle@hw.com or mailed to 3700 Coldwater Canyon, Studio City, CA 91604. Letters must be signed and may be edited for space and to conform to Chronicle style and format. Advertising questions may be directed to Leslie Dinkin at 818465-6512. Publication of an advertisement does not imply endorsement of the product or service by the newspaper or the school.
Opinion The Chronicle
•
Dec. 19, 2012
Turn tragedy into action
Every student should feel safe coming to school. Last Friday, that sense of security was shaken for everyone in the nation. At Harvard-Westlake, we are lucky enough to have procedures in place to prevent or subdue any attacks. All students have attended ALICE training where they were told not to hide passively under their desks, but instead to resist an armed intruder. Experienced, armed campus security guards could stop a shooter with lethal force if necessary. A campus wide emergency notification system can send out texts and emails to students, teachers and parents at a moment’s notice. Perhaps more importantly, we have an effective psychological support system that may prevent these situations before they pose a threat. Not every school can afford these precautions, and there is no way to implement such safety measures in every part of our lives where gun violence is a concern, something perhaps best exemplified by the recent shooting in the Aurora movie theater. People say that a time of such grief should not be politicized — that to be respectful we should sit in silence and mourn the tragic lives
of those lost. Without progress though, those lives will have been lost in vain. It is time to move past the political arguments on gun regulation that have turned into years of legislative paralysis and to focus on action in the name of the 27 human lives that were senselessly taken last Friday. This time discussion must be turned into something more. We must establish that we will not accept mass shootings as part of life in America — that we will not allow ourselves to go through the same cycle of grief after another headline proclaiming “massacre” flashes across the screen. Of course there is no surefire way of preventing such tragedies, but there are things we can do to try to severely limit them. No matter what your political affiliations are, we should all agree action in some shape or form must be taken. Be aware of the facts, and know what you stand for. If you are passionate, email your congressman and sign a petition. Knowledge of such horrible realities will inform your decisions when you are a voter or perhaps even a leader. The worst thing we can do is nothing.
College news on Facebook is just news Deans warn seniors against sharing college acceptances at school. Facebook posts are taboo. College sweatshirts are out of the question. It is true that this time of year many seniors are understandably sensitive—perhaps overly sensitive. The culture of our school seems to frame college acceptances as predominantly hurtful rather than exciting. One person’s happiness is another’s bitterness. It is no secret that seniors consider one student’s admittance as the primary factor in another student’s rejection. We feel pitted against each other. The negative atmosphere surrounding the public announcement of college decisions at our school is unparalleled. Students must respect the defined boundary between bragging and sharing a legitimate accomplishment. There exists an absolute difference between demeaning displays and short, informative posts. Come senior year, we all incessantly talk about college. Curiosity about who gets in where, even from those of us who were deferred or rejected, is inevitable. If we actively seek out the information anyway, there is no harm in getting it directly from the credible source. Assuming that students respects the sensitivity of their peers who were there is nothing wrong with openly sharing acceptances. Some say any post on Facebook is insensitive, but at the end of the day, a respectfully written announcement is just news.
JACOB GOODMAN/CHRONICLE
Try harder for Honor Board transparency
At the end of an emailed Honor Board Recommendation, students were invited to an “informal meeting” in the Deans’ Conference Room the next day. According to a Chronicle poll, 70 percent of the 423 students polled did not know about this meeting. Besides the Chronicle reporter on the event, no students showed up to the meeting on Dec. 5. to discuss the details of the case with five prefects and Father J. Young. As part of a reformed Honor Board process announced in September, the meeting was intended to open discussion on the Honor Code and provide a meaningful way for students to have their voice in the Code that they sign on every assignment. This we support overwhelmingly as we have advocated for such an outlet in past editorials. However, this meeting replaced a comprehensive writeup by members of the Honor Board sent to all students that provided more information for students who wanted it. And with a open forum that was announced up the day before in such a small venue, we must be concerned with the lack of effort in advertising such events that Prefect Council as opposed to the care they show for social events to get students to attend. With the new concise Honor Board Recommendations, the majority of students have lost access to more details of the case. Not every student can take time out of their
break when they have clubs to attend or teachers to meet with. Previously, every student at the Upper School had the chance to skim over the facts when they had a few free minutes and crucially, a chance to see the reasoning behind the Honor Board’s actions. Not every case needs dozens of pages but if the members of the Honor Board really aspire to increased transparency, each case must have more than a two sentence summary and a list of punishments and include the reasoning behind every punishment. Without this rationale, there is no information to spark a honest discussion about the Honor Code that would drive students to an open forum. We also have little reason to have faith in opinions of our student leaders when their opinions to the case are not shown at all. Head of School Audrius Barzdukas said in September of the new process that “there will be no writing until there is an agreement” and although consensus is necessary between the students on the Honor Board and the administrators who must carry out the punishment, students should have the ability to know how this consensus was met and how different viewpoints converged to a final decision. The open forums about the Honor Code are a step in the right direction, but a more thorough recommendation is not only necessary to increase transparency on the Honor Board as was intended by the reforms but also spark to discussion.