Day of Rushed Dialogue

As I walked into my Day of Dialogue classroom on Saturday, it was evident that most of us did not want to be there, myself included. While a lot of worthwhile topics were discussed at the table such as the school’s values and whether or not its actions live up to them, there were many problems with the execution of the event.

First of all, there was no clearly established goal for the sessions. The students in my group talked about changes that could foster a healthier and more inclusive school environment such as improving the culture around mental health, being more tolerant of diverse opinions and adding another dorm-centric Academy Life Day—which were all plausible, constructive ideas. However, there was no real sense of consequence after the discussion, as it was never explicitly stated to us that the improvements we all supported would lead to tangible change. The idea of this event was generally hazy and not well defined, which made students lose interest and heart in the conversation.

If the administration was paying attention to the content discussed, why was that aspect of the event not emphasized? And if these discussions won’t result in concrete change, why are we having them in the first place.

While I appreciate the administration’s effort in offering us a space to talk about how the school can better accommodate us and our needs, it’s time for the ideas that we have discussed for so long to be implemented. Hopefully, this will be the last time we repeatedly address the same issues without taking substantial steps to tackle the root causes of the problem.

The Day of Dialogue also wasn’t advertised well and was tied to the twice-a-term, contentious concept of Saturday classes. I remember finding out about the existence of this event from a proctor in one of my classes, who wasn’t even sure of the details himself. When we received emails about our groups, I had a clearer sense of when the event was occurring, but I still didn’t understand the reasoning behind involving the entire school in it. The fact that it occurred on a day of Saturday classes also contributed to the fact that some students didn’t leave their conversations with a new perspective or ideas about what they think could be better– if the Day of Dialogue had taken place on a weekday, when most students are still in a proper learning mindset, we would’ve been able to have more productive discussions.

Finally, there was no real way to gauge the students’ response as a whole about what they prioritize and what changes they want to see realized in the school. A physics teacher, Mr. McLaughlin, actually suggested a great way for that to be accomplished—we could have students input in their biggest concerns on a form or some type of media, and the more students type in the same concern, the bigger the word appears on the graphic, which we could then use to identify what students feel are Exeter’s most critical concerns. While many great solutions were discussed through the Day of Dialogue, a lot of them weren’t physically recorded and we weren’t able to compare them with other groups’ ideas in order to create the most feasible resolutions to a range of widespread issues.

While I appreciate the administration’s effort in offering us a space to talk about how the school can better accommodate us and our needs, it’s time for the ideas that we have discussed for so long to be implemented. Hopefully, this will be the last time we repeatedly address the same issues without taking substantial steps to tackle the root causes of the problem.