Lexington (MA) High School Senate

LEXINGTON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT-FACULTY SENATE

2002-2003

Moderator Muhammad Dhanani, Assistant Moderator Lawrence J. David, Secretary J.T. Scarry

<http://lhs.lexingtonma.org/senate>

Agenda

For the March 13, 2003 meeting

1. Announcements

2. Committee Reports

3. Voter Education Bill

4. New Business

Minutes

From the February 27, 2003 meeting:

[Quorum reached, 7:53 AM]

[Minutes Approved, 7:53 AM]

[Agenda Approved, 7:53 AM]

Announcements

Williams: I just got permission from Dr. Seasholes to hold a Peace Teach-In next Wednesday. It will involve students and have tables in themain hall. It is a chance to write letters. Any group with opposing views that supports President Bush's policies or in anyway wishes to take part is welcome. The group is called "Students United for Peace." We may have speakers. Dr. Seasholes would like a dialogue.

Committee Reports

[No Committee Reports]

Proposed Assembly Discussion

Dhanani: I included the text of the Mandatory Assembly Bill, which explains our role in the assembly process. Above it is the proposal that Dr. Seasholes gave us when he last spoke to us. We may approve it or not approve it. We should not discuss this for too long.

David: I am not sure how fruitful this assembly might be for seniors. They will be graduating in two months. They are unstressed as it is.

Lubershane: I move to call the question.

[Question is Called]

[Proposal Passes, 26-4]

Discussion of Next Year's Schedule

Williams: I would like to support Senator Vachani's idea that we pass a resolution. I am concerned that, although lots of things are right with this proposal and it finds favor, Dr. Seasholes did not come to the full faculty or the Student/Faculty Senate for approval. We should remind him that the school runs better within the bounds of a democracy. I wish the Executive Committee would remind him that it would be nice if he would consult before these changes.

Kafrissen: I do not know if the answer is known, but this essential schedule came forward a year or two ago and was not approved at the time. Why was it not approved then and approved now?

Jehle: It may have been related to the issues of part-time faculty and faculty moving from one school to another.

Dhanani: The way this one is scheduled is such that the new Minuteman-linked ten credit course can proceed.

Scarry: Whether or not this schedule is approved, we should take into account that one of the essential reasons for it is homeroom. This year, one homeroom a week was proposed as a trial of the homeroom concept. This is not the military, nor is homeroom a ballistic missile defense; there must be some definition for success and failure. If this year's homerooms have been a success, what would a failure have looked like? And if the trial was an utter and abject failure, why are we adding another homeroom? Regardless of the merits of the schedule alone, we need to look carefully at this added homeroom.

Bogart: I do not disagree with the schedule, but the initial trial was supposed to be one homeroom for one year, followed by a discussion of merits. We never got a chance to discuss the merits of the first trial. I like the two homeroom idea, as it has the potential for really building school spirit, with competitions and a Homeroom Games. The best homeroom in the school could win fabulous prizes like a new car or a van for field trips. Though you are laughing and think that I am being facetious, I am quite serious.

Catsouphes: I really do not see the purpose. If one homeroom does not work, why would two?

Vogelzang: I agree with Senator Bogart, and I agree with Senator Scarry. Homeroom as a trial did not work, so why would two? I like the new schedule. The homeroom is a nice break in the week. We don't need to rush around with this scheduled unproductivity.

Choi: I was thinking that there is not much we do in homeroom in the first place. Is there the demand or the need for a second homeroom? We sit there and we do nothing, and when there is aught to be passed out there is ample time for it already. I was wondering whether we really need a second homeroom. Shield: I have a friend at a private school, and they have milk and cookies. It is like snack time! For fifteen minutes! I hear tell it is the very best part of the day, and they can make up homework that they have forgotten while they talk and snack on cookies, and, of course, when you give a high-school student a cookie he is going to ask for a glass of milk. Although it is not a free block, kids should not be complaining about this cornucopia of friends, homework, and snack.

Catsouphes: I move that the discussion be ended.

[Motion fails]

Kafrissen: To piggyback, I am interested to know if this is going to be circulated among a wider variety of people, with discussion among the faculty. The Policy Committee is working on a bill to use homeroom for communication with the school. If we are going to have two homerooms or even one, we can be more proactive. We could not quite manage the Olympics, but on a smaller scale we have ways to make it more useful.

Inouye: This discussion does not need to focus on whether homeroom could be good or not. The problem is that homeroom was supposed to be a trial and this is not a one-year trial as promised. I propose that someone form a committee to write a resolution.

Murphy: I would suggest that we go back to last year's homeroom section, having a homeroom only if there was some real need therefore: report cards, schedules, and the like. We do not seem to use homerooms, and there is no need to have a ten-minute break in the day. If you are not using it for doing homework, why have it? I just see kids sitting and staring at one another.

David: I have three points to make. First, dealing with Senator Shield's excellent oration in favor of milk and cookies, while it is good to know what they do elsewhere, in private schools there is no mandate on how much time is to be spent in class, and they need not worry about contracts and the like. Moreover, Governor Romney is allegedly planning to cut the state milk and cookies budget by 150%. I am frustrated by the situation; it was supposed to be a trial, and while we were not lied to we were definitely misled. It was a trial, it was for one year, and now by the way it will go on for another year. I want to have us discuss this on Monday [at the faculty meeting]. I am flustered by the paradox; some supporters say that homeroom is to be free and unstructured, while others say it is for community bonding. Until we know what we want it will never succeed. Can this bring a better community?

Lubershane: Having small games in homeroom is a good idea, but kids straggle in a couple minutes after the bell rings, and it is a ten minute homeroom; there is no time.

Hannah Tristram: At the school I go to, we have a fifteen-minute break after two blocks. It is really useful and helps us to focus on the next block. It is really good to have a minute to breathe and focus.

Lessin: We might have made an oversight last year in not defining a successful trial. Maybe this year was successful because people actually went to homeroom; maybe the administration would view failure as a boycott of homeroom. We need a definite idea of what success and failure are for next year.

Inouye: I move that the Policy Committee draft a resolution stating that we are dissatisfied by the process by which the new schedule came about but advocating usageof homerooms more productively next year.

Kafrissen: I offer the friendly amendment that instead of having the mandate to the Policy Committee be so extensive, we have Policy write a resolution and discuss its contents in Senate.

Inouye: I do not know; it is important that we know what we are writing about. What we are discussing here is what should go into the resolution.

Bogart: I have a question to the chair: this schedule, as it stands, is it still a suggestion for the faculty to discuss?

Jehle: It seems to be a done deal.

Dhanani: While it is tentative, it is pretty much definite. We are in a position where even if we say we do not want it, it may go through anyway. We were notified a little late, and I wish we had been consulted when it was more flexible so that we could give opinions on the merits of homeroom. Fiveash: I hope that, as Senator Inouye very wisely said, the Policy Committee gets its direction from what was said today.

[Motion Passes]

Bogart: I move to end discussion.

[Motion Passes]

Voter Education Bill

Dhanani: Ms. Burson, the author of this bill, is not here. I have lots of things to say about this, but I will let others speak first.

Gingrande: I do not think that assemblies such as the one proposed are successful. They result in a lot of people becoming bored. If you pressure people running for office into giving a speech, they might not be comfortable. There are alternatives, such as using homeroom or writing down the speeches. That would be more effective

Lessin: I want to tell a story about 7th grade, when, running for class office, I wrote a speech, got up in front of everyone, and froze. I mentioned my name approximately eight times. People were clapping nervously. I did not win that election. Not everyone has a lot of charisma at any age, and if you force people to make speeches some will freeze and they will not be elected. It has nothing to do with qualifications. Elections should be based on merits, not charisma.

Dhanani: I have a couple of issues, firstly the rationale that paragraphs are not read. I disagree. I am not sure that it is worth having time-consuming elections, with more pressure to vote, and then the assemblies too. How much can you say in two minutes? If you have three years of experience you are going to need more than one minute! This bill is cynical vis the student body. The stick is not the best way to make it active. Finally, I am not sure that this measure would force them to vote conscientiously. They would still vote for their friends.

Law: I agree with Moderator Dhanani vis the attentiveness of each class. When you go and see DSI, there are still kids who shout out obscene things and laugh at the people rather than the jokes. If people cannot sit still for DSI, an assembly about changing the school could only make them more bored and ruder.

Inouye: I support the bill. It has more logistical problems than anything else. Even if the student body reads the paragraphs, they only tell it that much. This bill allows you to identify the person for whom you are voting. Telling about why you are a good candidate and your preparedness is a good thing. A question to the chair to Senator Girondel; how many students are usually involved per class?

Girondel: Very few in the freshman classes, but upwards of eighty and ninety in other classes.

[Senate Adjourns with the Bell]

Senate Absences: February 27, 2003 (* denotes excused)