An Assembly Proposal
Assembly is not working. And we can see why: speakers cannot give satisfactory, informative talks in the allotted time. Students cannot fully appreciate the shrunken speeches, given so frequently. Assembly must be revamped.
What constitutes a good assembly? An assembly must introduce students to new topics, new ideas and new ways of thinking. An assembly, according to the Academy’s website, must be “the time when the entire campus community meets to share a cultural experience.” An assembly must not always be entertaining, but should be informative.
The current assembly format doesn’t allow any of that to happen.
Supposedly, speakers are given a full half hour to condense and detail a topic of their choosing. But by the time students finish streaming in and the announcements are given, a third of the block has already been taken up. It isn’t long before the yellow light flicks to red at the back of the Assembly Hall and the rustle of coats fills the air.
We must consider making changes because many students simply discard the opportunity to attend mind-opening assemblies, opting to risk an unexcused absence instead. They don’t realize how privileged we are to have these events and have them so often as well: many private day schools, or even top-tier boarding schools, are wholly incapable of bringing in speakers like Jill Abramson, Harvard graduate and former executive editor of The New York Times, or William Leuchtenburg, university emeritus professor and a leading scholar of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
The speakers are experts in their respective fields. Experts should not be limited to 20 minute talks, and they most certainly should have more people attending the lunch block meetings. The current system does not give speakers the respect they deserve.
Rarely, and for good reason, do experts give twenty minute talks on their subjects. So why does the Academy continue to limit them? Mr. Rajendra Sisodia, who gave an excellent talk on Feb. 12, had to severely limit his speech. His previous presentations, at other venues, were at least double the length of the abridged version he used at the Academy. To put the limitations into perspective, Sisodia is an extremely qualified speaker and professor, having spoken at TEDx New England and written seven books on his topic of study.
Dr. Leuchtenburg, if given more time, could have dived deeper into the life of Roosevelt. Instead, students received a general overview and by the end, they were apathetic. He’s written over a dozen books on twentieth century history and is most certainly qualified to give an interesting talk. But very little of his vast store of information came out during assembly because he simply did not have enough time to say anything else.
And before Leuchtenburg, on Oct. 14 last year, we had Dr. William Jelani Cobb, professor of history at University of Connecticut. His speech was riveting enough to garner a standing ovation, but there was much more to be said about Michael Brown and Brown vs. Board of Education. He touched on a lot of issues, but due to time constraints could not dive deeper.
We suggest only holding one assembly a week, but increasing the duration to something much more manageable for incoming speakers. Doing so would most likely force the assembly block to Wednesday but would also benefit the student body. Students would be more inclined to attend assembly on a low stress, two or three class day.
We acknowledge that this is not the perfect solution. The Administration would have to switch the fifty-minute blocks for meditation and assembly, and clubs meeting during those times would have to rearrange schedules. But those are small sacrifices when it comes to altering an Academy tradition for the better.
Each assembly is supposed to be a unique experience. A decrease in frequency would most certainly make the talks much more “special” and appreciable. A decrease in frequency would insist quality, not quantity. A decrease in frequency would ensure greater student attendance.
Limiting assembly defeats the whole purpose of assembly. It doesn’t give speakers time to introduce students to new ideas and ways of thought. Too often conversations about a certain assembly dissipate after a day.
Under the current system, speeches are short and are unable to develop properly. Students become uninterested and refuse to pay proper respect. We’ve seen this most notably when Dr. Cameron Wake, on Feb. 3, asked if we had any more questions and a large group of students yelled “No!”—very hurtfully, albeit jokingly.
Assembly is a privilege. Since we’re in the middle of Experience Exeter week, we should reflect on how lucky we are to have assembly. Few other schools have weekly, school-wide meetings like ours. Few other schools can bring in Abramson, one of the most powerful women in the world, or Leuchtenburg, a researcher at the top of his field.
The current system doesn’t give assembly its due respect. It’s something that needs to be revamped and give speakers the time they deserve. ♥