Cassidy Ott ’25 | Ishani Khanna ‘25 | Emi Enakhimion ‘24
Recent changes in the detention policy this school year have resulted in controversy among the student body, sparking debate about the elevated punishments. While the new detention policy may seem rigid, especially compared to the more relaxed rules in effect during the pandemic over the last two years, they are actually appropriate for dress code violations. However, in terms of attendance policy, EA should consider lessening the punishment for lateness due to the various, uncontrollable factors that affect being on-time to class.
Despite student complaints about punishments for dress code violations, the harsher penalties are suitable when taking the benefits into account. By giving detentions for breaking the dress code policy, students have become better about wearing the appropriate attire day-to-day as well as on special dress days. Lydia Nawrocki ’23 says, “Personally, I do not think it’s ever affected me very much because I have always been okay with the dress code. I will say it makes me more aware of everything.” Gracie O’Neill ’24 agrees with Nawrocki, commenting, “I think the new policies regarding dress code are reasonable and easy for the most part.”
Also, as faculty members and administrators enforce and clarify the policy, students should be able to avoid detentions without trouble. Dr. Melanie Subacus, Richard Lounsbery Chair of Classical Studies, agrees with the policy, explaining, “I think everyone has fair warning, and it is in your control to easily avoid detentions.”
Photo Courtesty of Gianna Trala ’23
However, student concerns regarding the lateness policy are valid and should be met with more nuance. Oftentimes, students struggle to arrive to homeroom on time because of campus traffic and hectic family schedules, so receiving a more extreme punishment, like a Wednesday detention, is harsh because these problems are potentially out of their control. Eleanor Anderson ’25 states, “I feel that the homeroom [policy] is not entirely fair. I see both sides of it, but… also sometimes you cannot always control the traffic and some people live in the city.” Nawrocki also mentions that the “traffic on campus [is] really hard. And then also, with my experience, I’ve had to make detours to go in through the other entrance, because it would take me at least 15 minutes to get to the student lot if I went through the main entrance.”
Although the student body generally dislikes the new attendance policy, Samuel Willis, Upper School English teacher, comments on the policy’s benefits, saying, “I do think that we are allowing for flexibility for students that have transportation issues so there is always an explanation that would be listened to, but it’s also just preparing them for the real world where they have to be on time.” For example, Willis explains that “on days where there’s inclement weather, we will be a little bit more accommodating.”
The requirements and reasoning behind the attendance policy are clear: punctuality prepares students for life beyond upper school, and allows teachers to start class activities on-time but the punishment for this violation is severe. Although the detention policy should be kept for dress code violations, it should be loosened slightly for situations out of students’ control, like traffic, bus-lateness, and familial circumstances. Rather than giving detentions for arriving after 8:05, EA should instead consider demerits for signing in after 8:09, easing the punishment for students who live more than half an hour away––or even allowing students to email their form dean or the front office if they will be running late in the morning.