Dec 1, 2020 | Editorial, Meghan Durkin
By Meghan Durkin (VI)
I fill my time with endless technological stimulation; when the weekly notification pops up, informing me of an alarmingly high screen time, I’m embarrassed. I balance my phone on my laptop to watch two shows at once, fall asleep clutching my laptop more often than I’d like to admit, and wonder how numerous hours have passed, it’s dark, and I’m still on a “quick Netflix break.”
It’s normal though, right? Everyone is constantly on their phones; there is simply no downtime from technology. Phones offer a nice distraction, an endless Band-Aid that coats our worries with instant gratification and content. That’s our normal, and I find it fascinating.
So, when the recent buzz around The Social Dilemma surfaced, I grabbed my phone, opened Netflix, and sat down for a watch. The documentary explores the negative impacts of social media, from its ramifications on mental health to its addictive properties. Not only does The Social Dilemma stress the cruel motives behind social platforms, but it also uses the creators of these platforms to deliver the message. These creators range from former executives at Twitter and Facebook to the former president of Pinterest and numerous other early team members from the world’s most popular social media platforms. It’s scary that even those who helped build these “tools,” fear the damage they’ve inflicted.
Unfortunately, there is no group more at risk from these technologies than teens; the platforms we’ve inherited present one of our greatest challenges as a generation, especially in terms of mental health. As The Social Dilemma mentions, the rise in suicide rates for teens has skyrocketed since the birth of social media. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide rates increased 56% over the last decade, an distressingly rapid increase.
Though there is nothing new to the claims that social media is “harmful,” The Social Dilemma got me thinking: if we know how harmful it is, why can’t we stop using it? Here’s my thought: we can’t stop using social media because even those who tell us to “put the phone down” can’t help but force us to use it more and more.
Take Pingry’s social media presence for example. While we are constantly told to get off our phones, or focus in class, the school itself uses social media platforms to endorse itself or inform its community. With the addition of Pingry Plus this year, a platform directly aimed at students, the irony cannot be lost. The same people that urge students to waste less time on our phones, give us more reasons to use them.
Thus, more than anything else, The Social Dilemma opened my eyes to the greater hypocrisy of social networking. The platforms are created by those who denounce using it, are criticized by schools who profit from it, and complained about by older generations who swarm to the platforms. And through it all, we are the generation that ultimately suffers for it.
It’s terrifying to think we never free our minds from our screens; we inhibit the wandering of our thoughts and contemplation of wants by filling our space with social media. We watch videos while we eat breakfast, listen to podcasts while we walk, and play music while we exercise. Though, I’d like to think it’s not exactly our fault. These platforms, created by an older generation to monopolize on the weakness of a younger one, are meant to be addicting. Even Netflix, the greatest time-suck of them all, knows we aren’t the ones at fault.
Dec 1, 2020 | Editorial, Noah Bergam
By Noah Bergam (VI)
I get a lot of snail mail these days. Almost each letter falls into one of two categories: college advertisements or campaign literature from the local Malinowski vs. Kean election.
College season and election season. What a fun combination. One moment, I’m skimming through my second copy of UChicago’s “The Life of the Mind,” and the next, I’m bouncing between Toms, comparing the “Dangerous Pelosi Liberal” to the Pingry grad who is purportedly “bought off by the healthcare industry.” But really, my investigation is more cursory than thorough. Smooth pictures, flashy text, the ephemeral feel of fresh ink––then it’s off to the pile, and I return to my college essays to spend hours tweaking the prose of a single paragraph.
Marketing yourself and your content is a draining process. I think we all know it. Every little detail seems to matter so much as we craft applications, performances, newspaper layout––and yet, when we absorb the content of others, we naturally skim and simplify, reducing hours of someone’s painstaking work into a fleeting glance.
To an extent, such behavior is warranted. The Internet, and, by extension, the world, inundates us with enough content and worries to last each of us literally thousands of lifetimes. Sometimes I feel like I’m barely staying afloat in the great ocean of information. I feel like my laptop, operating on eight measly megabytes of marginal storage. One more Zoom call, one more Chrome tab, and I’ll crash.
I suspect this is a common apprehension among our student community. We’re all overworked, keeping tabs on a thousand different endeavours in and outside the classroom. All the while, we’re trained to chase leadership and become the best at whatever we do––but we’re not all that disposed towards appreciating the things that others do, whether it’s trying out a peer’s club, or reading a student publication, or cheering on a friend at a sports game.
We can all fancy ourselves to be stars in our own respective realms, but ultimately, we’re bound to be part of the audience more often than we are to be on stage, and it would probably benefit our school culture to take that concept to heart a little more often. We ought to truly consider who we are as audience members, as readers, fans, and listeners. Is your experience in this community just a cursory flip through fancy pages, or is it something deeper, more connected and appreciative?
Instead of immediately recycling the letters, I decided to keep them in a pile for a little while longer. It stings a bit to let them go so fast, because I know someone, somewhere in the universe, worked hard on these magnificent missives. They deserve a little respect.
Dec 1, 2020 | Aneesh Karuppur, Opinion
By Aneesh Karuppur (VI)
A few weeks ago, during a Morning Meeting announcement, Pingry laid out some preliminary norms for conduct during the election season. The main takeaway might have been the emphasis on civility and respectful discourse, goals to which we can all agree are admirable.
However, more subtly, was the emphasis on debate as such a form of discourse. At first glance, this recommendation to debate civilly fits with Pingry’s ethos: from the Harkness table to lab research, Pingry emphasizes discussion and lively verbal argumentation of ideas. Yet, in this election cycle, I fear that the push to debate civilly will not be carried out in the manner we respect in our classrooms.
Books and biological organisms are, at the end of the day, objects that we extract knowledge from and then discard, metaphorically and physically. When reading, we develop an appreciation for what is being said rather than the exact edition and copy of the book in hand; when performing research, methodical data collection supersedes consideration of the procedures and inputs. The attachment to a story or discovery is more about the concept than the physical means to attain it.
As much as I would like to say that our political discourse can be treated in the same manner – that is, filtering out the substance from the delivery method – the two have become inseparable components of a toxic political rhetoric. We center our debates around candidates and labels rather than political substance, as it is easier to be attached to a person and a motto rather than some technical policy proposal. When we debate verbally, important policies get lost in an emotional connection to a candidate or ideal. Over the past few years, the shared values and proposals of a group have shifted drastically, chasing after demagogues rather than logical consideration.
So, I suggest that we stop debating in person. The oral argument is no longer a useful tool of common political debate until the arguer’s attachment to affiliations and politicians can be removed. Instead, focus on reading fully formed written communication that clearly articulates a vision. Moreover, focus on reading articles that vehemently disagree with one’s point of view.
In essays and articles, there are no interruptions and no need for mute buttons. If there is an insult, it is addressed silently by the reader and not by the other side in a vicious act of reciprocity. Perhaps most importantly, the process of explaining a position on paper forces the author to have a detailed and thorough set of arguments. It is easy to ascertain a good written argument from a poor one because the reader has time to process the link between data and conclusions.
But take this a step further: it’s not enough to simply read political essays and shut the laptop and move on. I have personally gained the most value from reading perspectives I disagree so strongly with that there are hardly any common points between my ideology and the author’s. There is a difference between reading a moderate piece of writing and so-called radical one; I urge the reader to err on the side of the latter. A moderate viewpoint can always concede some points to one’s side; an extreme one cannot concede because it fundamentally disagrees with what one believes. Thus, the aforementioned detailed and thorough arguments are fully expounded upon and crafted to target counterarguments.
It is important here to draw the distinction between extreme written viewpoints and extreme solutions. A compromise need not be a winner-take-all situation, as that defeats the purpose of a consensus agreement. The extreme viewpoint ought to be incorporated into the discussion of such an agreement because it pushes one to defend the most important parts of their ideology; they must acknowledge the points where the other side has the logical advantage – a moderate solution, if you will.
As elections and political events come and go, society can break the habit of increasingly aggressive rhetoric if we step back from the emotional feelings and attachments of arguing; instead, we must lean into thoughtful and peaceful expression of the written word. Reading subdues visceral reactions because the author – the opponent, the adversary, the antagonist, the enemy – cannot hear the reader’s cries of frustrations and desires to erupt. Instead, there is just enough room for a controlled and introspective release of steam.
In a political world characterized by anger, perhaps the time and space provided by written arguments can assuage the wounds driven by verbal ones.
Dec 1, 2020 | Eva Schiller, Opinion
By Eva Schiller (V) When I heard of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s passing, I immediately took to Instagram. My first post was a simple black screen with white letters: “RIP RGB. A legend.” Trust me, I know . . . In my haste, I had instead memorialized “Ruth Gader Binsburg.” Oops. Minutes later, I reposted a Tweet frantically wondering whether President Trump should be allowed to nominate her replacement.
Looking back, it isn’t hard to find the flaws in my actions. After a single pathetic attempt to recognize the value of her life, I dove immediately into the political implications of her death, and I’m not the only one. Of the hundreds of Instagram stories I tapped through that night, the vast majority were about the vacancy she had left. Painfully few gave proper recognition to the incredible space she had filled during her career. Is this woman – who is a feminist icon, who fought relentlessly for a chance to succeed, who gave her entire adult life in service to future generations of Americans – worth so little? Of course not.
I’d prefer to believe that in the sheer panic and emotion of the moment, staring down a loss that could impact our political environment for decades, we were thrown off balance. Our fear-driven self-preservation instincts emerged, and we forgot that it was not only a Justice we had lost, but a human.
While unacceptable, our lackluster response is understandable. Over 200,000 people have died from COVID-19 in the U.S, and the murders of innocent Black people have been shared across social media; Migrants are dying in camps on our borders, and Uyghurs are dying in camps abroad. Justice Ginsburg was a Jewish woman – there was a record high of 2,107 antisemitic hate crimes in 2019 according to the Anti-Defamation League. Each of these causes is crucial and demands our attention, but our increased awareness comes at a cost: when I say I feel myself becoming a bit desensitized to death, I don’t think I’m alone. It feels more comfortable to forget to mourn and instead turn to face problems that affect the living. In the case of RBG, this meant forgetting to celebrate her accomplishments and instead focus on her death’s repercussions.
With all of that said, we do not have to continue this way. We can acknowledge the political changes brought about by Justice Ginsburg’s death but still take the time to honor her life properly. With this in mind, I deleted the ‘Gader Binsburg’ post and the frantic tweet and began thinking of ways I could properly process the death of one of my idols. I admit it’s a difficult task: the “Notorious RBG” deserves more than even the most reverent Instagram reposts. Yet, sitting in my room with only a phone, laptop, and page-long to-do list at my disposal, I have little else to offer.
So, what next? I believe that the best we can do is try to learn from her words and incredible career. I’ll start us off with three examples.
First, on the direction of women’s rights: “Women belong in all places where decisions are being made. It shouldn’t be that women are the exception.” Justice Ginsburg believed that workplace equality stemmed from educational equality and reproductive rights; She argued against excluding pregnant women from the workplace and helped determine that schools funded by taxpayers couldn’t bar women. She has also been a powerful advocate of the Supreme Court Case Roe. v. Wade and equal wages. While her accomplishments for women are incredible, her legacy is in our hands: if we don’t continue pushing for abortion rights and workplace equality, we will quickly lose momentum.
Second, on dissenting: “The greatest dissents do become court opinions, and gradually over time their views become the dominant view. So that’s the dissenter’s hope: that they are writing not for today, but for tomorrow.” In our increasingly divided government, there is significant pressure to fall in line with the party’s ideals and save ‘radical’ ideas for less tumultuous times. As Ginsburg’s message of dissent suggests, I don’t think that ‘settling’ – whether that be for former Vice President Biden or President Trump – means shelving those discussions entirely: we can accept the situation of today, but continue to argue progress for tomorrow.
And third, on nonpartisanship: in her tribute to the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, she says, “We disagreed now and then, but when I wrote for the Court and received a Scalia dissent, the opinion ultimately released was notably better than my initial circulation… It was my great good fortune to have known him as a working colleague and treasured friend.” Ginsburg’s willingness to see the human behind the opposing political opinion is reminiscent of Pingry’s stance on political discussions: that we have much to gain from listening to the other side. I too believe that as long as our political differences do not involve hatred or discrimination, Ginsburg’s friendship with Scalia is a powerful model to follow. By engaging in discourse, we stand to learn about each other’s perspectives and refine our own; after all, democracy cannot exist in an echo chamber.
So yes – write tweets, post Instagram stories (and check for typos!), be vocal about your concerns, and rally for change, but do not forget to look back and appreciate all that trailblazers like RBG have already accomplished. There is much to learn.
Dec 1, 2020 | Andrew Wong, Opinion
By Andrew Wong (V) By the time this article has been published, you will hopefully know who the next President of the United States is––either Joe Biden or Donald Trump. But does that mean months of incessant conflict will finally come to an end?
As America wakes up from this nightmare of an election and picks up the pieces, you, the reader, along with the rest of our nation, will now have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. Perhaps the candidate you rooted for did not win. Or maybe they did. You may be thrilled at what has occurred, or you might be getting ready for the impending apocalypse. Whatever happened with the presidential election, however, the task at hand is straightforward: we must begin the process of rebuilding the broken ties of a deeply divided nation.
Writing this in October, with less than three weeks to go before the general election, I don’t have that privilege of hindsight to see what will happen after the election. During these closing days, emotions are running high. There’s no doubt that America faces challenges it has never seen before. The global coronavirus pandemic, economic chaos, glaring racial injustice, and crime in our streets have all contributed to a general unease about what lies ahead. Many believe that the future of our republic rests in the outcome of this election, and many believe that, should things go awry, it could quite possibly mean the end of our storied history. A quick scan of recent headlines from media outlets only confirms our nation’s general anxiety over our future: “The Threat to Democracy” from CNN, “I Fear We Are Witnessing the End of American Democracy” from the New York Times, “Can American Democracy Be Saved?” from The Atlantic, and so forth.
While one may attribute these headlines to media sensationalism, the underlying tension and conflict that permeates our society right now cannot be understated. Republicans vs. Democrats, the rich vs. the working-class, urban vs. rural. Divisions are incredibly evident in our modern society. If we are to continue down this road, perhaps the Founding Fathers’ warning that “united we stand, divided we fall” will indeed come to fruition. So how do we stop this slow burn to the end?
In Federalist Paper No. 10, Founding Father James Madison writes of the dangerous yet fundamental nature of division, stating that “a zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government … an attachment to different leaders contending for pre-eminence and power … have divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them more disposed to vex … rather than to cooperate for their common good.” When the Founding Fathers first created our republic, they understood that division and factionalism would be a threat to our nation, but they had a solution.
In enshrining the civic virtue of civil discourse within our very own First Amendment with the right to free speech, the Founding Fathers intended for citizens and government to overcome such division through civil discussion and compromise. Yet, as shown by the chaos in our nation today, we’ve failed to live up to these ideals. We’ve thrown civil discussion out the window in exchange for glorified shouting matches, replaced the debate of ideas with insults, and instead of seeing those on the opposing side as fellow Americans, we treat them like they are our worst enemies. The symptoms of this are everywhere, be it in the First Presidential Debate, TV political panels, social media, or sometimes even within Pingry’s own community.
In spite of these tensions, I implore you, Dear Reader, to keep in mind the ideals of our republic and try to navigate the future after the election with some sense of civility. Rather than turning political debates into melees, as we all have been guilty of at some point, perhaps try to listen to the ideas of the opposition. Maybe change the news or the radio to a different source and listen for a bit. Attend a Pingry Politics Club meeting, and listen to your peers discuss various political topics in a safe environment. Or engage in some casual conversation with peers who have opposite views on certain issues and try to find common ground. Who knows? Maybe you will realize that your ideas were a bit flawed, or maybe come up with better counterarguments to the opposition by learning from them.
Such things cannot occur, however, if we continue to regard our opposition as personal adversaries. At the end of the day, we all are Americans. We all salute the same flag and enjoy a common set of freedoms and liberties. As we set about rebuilding a fractured nation, let’s push forth past our differences and halt America’s downward spiral into faction.
Dec 1, 2020 | Emma Drzala, Opinion
By Emma Drzala (V)
With my face shield in one hand and mask in the other, I stared at the campus in awe on the first day of school. I wondered how Pingry would be able to pull off full days with almost all the students, faculty, and staff in person. Everyone had witnessed the results of COVID-19 and seen how other schools wouldn’t dare to invite their students in for full days. However, as I entered the school, I was able to see how Pingry beat the odds and was capable of staying open. Seating areas were taken away, tents were put up outside, and not a single plexiglass divider was out of place. Countless meetings and emails were set up informing students about the importance of wearing our masks; we learned about every precaution the school was taking to prevent the spread of COVID-19, as Pingry sought to keep their students healthy. Pingry has been finding innovative ways to ensure its students’ safety, including a weekly coronavirus test and required face shields or goggles in hallways. We have been reminded of social distancing, and the repercussions if we don’t follow guidelines; within a few weeks, the freshman tent closed, the junior area was taken away, and the decision to have study halls during flex seems inevitable.
However, even with these extreme rules in place, Pingry is continuing the one thing that will diminish all the rest of the school’s efforts: athletics. As a member of the girl’s tennis team, I have experienced the risk of athletics firsthand: while all coaches are making an effort to enforce social distancing, it doesn’t prevent the contact on the field or court. Groups of kids still run together or touch the same ball, and it makes me question why specific protocols need to be followed during the school day if, from 3:45-5:15, everyone will be together without masks.
For some students, face shields impair learning, but it has been made clear that the whole student body will be punished if we do not wear them. Students are reprimanded for sitting together outside during lunch if they are not far enough apart. Yet, when they run six inches from each other during athletics, there is no consequence. If there are no repercussions for breaking social distancing rules during athletics, these exceptions should also be enforced during the day. So, if all students get tested for coronavirus each week and are allowed to interact during athletics, why are we not allowed to have three people at a table outside?
The problem goes behind just athletics at Pingry, but also outside of school. All athletic teams, including contact sports, continue to participate in games with other schools, who may have less strict COVID guidelines. While I am not making the case for lifted regulations, I believe Pingry needs to reassess its priorities. It can be as simple as keeping athletics within Pingry, instead of risking students’ safety by coming into contact with other schools. As the winter season draws near, Pingry needs to decide whether it wants to put more of an emphasis on sports or in-person learning.
As much as I have loved returning to tennis, and being with the team, these athletics increase the risk of an outbreak; Pingry is indeed playing with fire. Other schools have closed because of positive tests on athletics teams, and it is only a matter of time before Pingry experiences the same.
Nov 11, 2020 | Brian Li ('22), Summer Experiences
After witnessing the far-reaching and debilitating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on our communities, a group of Pingry students, public school students, and I looked on anxiously, wondering if anything could be done to help alleviate this dire situation. With virtually all schools going remote during the pandemic, many students did not receive the same quality of education that they usually would have, stunting their learning and putting them at a disadvantage compared to their peers. We wanted to help such students continue to learn and enrich them with knowledge that could benefit them down the road.
Thus, STEMinPlace was born: a group of high schoolers who wanted to help the community during the COVID-19 pandemic by providing high-quality, free, interactive, and fun learning opportunities for middle schoolers. “STEMinPlace started as just an idea; I knew I had the goal of teaching middle schoolers these STEM topics, but I wasn’t sure how to get there,” founder Ryan Arrazcaeta (V) stated. After forming a team and creating our website (steminplace.com), we decided on a structure for our program that would effectively educate our students and set us apart from similar organizations. By offering six STEM courses––Chemistry, Physics, Computer Science, Astronomy, Genetics, and Game Theory, we hoped to provide students with various courses that they could choose from, stimulating their interest and potentially sparking a passion for a subject that they were previously unaware of. In addition, we invited guest speakers every week to demonstrate how these topics apply in the real world.
While the structure of our program was coming to fruition, we were worried about raising awareness. Finding enough students for a fledgling organization seemed nearly impossible. We reached out to family and friends to spread the word, unsure if we would even have 10 students. One day, to our surprise, we checked the responses to our signup form and saw over 100 registrations and counting. This shock quickly turned to horror as we were initially overwhelmed by this sudden influx of students. Nevertheless, we adjusted our curricula, prepared for a much more exciting than we previously imagined, and with our combined teamwork, successfully taught just short of 1000 students over the course of six weeks.
Our classes and commitment to education were much appreciated by our students and their families. In part, we continued to receive more signups because of students and parents recommending our program to others. They also expressed their gratitude by commenting on our program. One said, “Volunteer high school kids pulled off remote learning better than the paid professionals at my kids’ private school. What more can I say? Amazing.” Several parents offered donations, but we asked them to donate to other organizations with similar missions, namely the “I Have a Dream” Foundation, Teaching Matters, and the Michael Aymar Foundation.
STEMinPlace has also been an enriching experience for our team. We learned how to run an organization, developed valuable leadership and educational skills, and for some of us, gained a passion for teaching and community service. Connor Chen (V) discovered that he “thoroughly enjoyed teaching others about topics that [he] knew a lot about and realized that sharing [his] knowledge with others is very gratifying. [He] also learned how management works behind the scenes and gained valuable experience in how to run a program with a motivated team to work alongside [him].” We hope we helped our communities in any way possible and provided students with an education that they will never forget.
Nov 11, 2020 | Mirika Jambudi, School News, Sidebar News
By Mirika Jambudi (IV)
In place of traditional class trips this year, each form in the Upper School had a special orientation day the week before school started. These orientations started with briefings on Pingry’s new safety procedures and were followed by a team bonding activity centered on diversity and inclusion.
Afterwards, students spent time with their advisory groups and reconnected as a grade in the new Pingry “Student Village” tents. Spikeball nets and ping pong tables were also set up, such that students were able to mingle with each other outdoors in a safe and distanced manner.
Traditionally, Form III students would go on an overnight retreat in Pennsylvania with their peer leaders to bond as a grade. However, this year, they stayed on campus at Pingry, participating in back-to-school safety procedures and spending time with their peer groups. “Despite the unusual circumstances, [the] peer leaders did try to make it a fun day for us all, with activities like UNO, icebreakers, and Jeopardy,” Divya Subramanian (III) said.
The way the Pingry community has adapted during these times is an example of our resilience and commitment to the Honor Code. The administration and students put in a lot of effort to ensure that the events ran smoothly and everyone stayed safe. Even though orientations and class trips were not the typical experiences students have had in the past, students could still catch up with other members of their grade while also having some time to relax and enjoy the last week of summer before the start of school.
Nov 11, 2020 | Mirika Jambudi, School News, Sidebar News
By Mirika Jambudi (IV) On Wednesday, September 30, the Upper School gathered together in Hauser and over Zoom to celebrate student achievements and exceptional academic effort in the 2019-2020 school year.
The ceremony started with recognizing the Form VI students who were distinguished for their scores on last year’s PSAT/NMSQT exam by the National Merit Scholarship Program. This year, thirty-three Pingry students were named National Merit Commended Students, a significant increase from last year. A total of fifteen seniors were recognized as National Merit Semifinalists, allowing them the chance to advance in the selection process and potentially become finalists in the spring. These seniors were Noah Bergam, Joseph Castagno, Monica Chan, Zara Jacob, Rhea Kapur, Aneesh Karuppur, Dean Koenig, Jemma Kushen, Julian Lee, Justin Li, Guanyun Liang, Helen Liu, Katherine Overdeck, Eva Schiller, and Avidan Shah.
Following these distinctions, Upper School Director, Ms. Chatterji, presented the Citizenship Prize, which is given to one student in each grade who best represents the Honor Code’s spirit. Afterward, the Faculty Prize was awarded to students who showed dedication and commitment to their school work during the past academic school year. Finally, the Scholarship Prize was awarded to the student(s) with the highest GPA in each grade.
Next, seniors excelling in math and science were recognized with awards from the respective department. The Rensselaer Mathematics and Science Award and the Whitlock Prize for Math were among some of the awards given.
As per tradition, Mr. Levinson and Dr. Dinkins went on to present the College Book Awards. Each award is given to a senior class member who best meets the selection criteria provided by the particular college. Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Mount Holyoke, Penn, Princeton, Smith, Wellesley, Williams, and Yale were represented this year.
On behalf of the English Department, Dr. Dickerson announced the winners of the annual Justin Society writing contest. Students submitted their entries last spring, which the English Department then reviewed. Writers and poets from each grade received awards for their creative writing, poetry, memoir, and more.
The annual Fall Awards ceremony is a celebration within the Pingry community of student achievement, excellence, and honor. It serves to recognize the efforts that every individual puts into school every day. The Pingry community looks forward to another year of student achievement and hard work, and congratulates all the students honored at the ceremony.
Nov 10, 2020 | Andrew Wong, COVID-19, Front Page News, School News
By Andrew Wong (V) As a tumultuous 2019-2020 school year came to an end this past June, and the COVID-19 pandemic stretched into yet another month, many members of the Pingry community were questioning if in-person learning would be possible in September. With teachers, administrators, and students desperately wanting to go back to school, Pingry Anywhere, the framework to try and facilitate school in the era of COVID-19, was created. The goal of the project was simple: get Pingry safely back in session this fall. However, it was less clear at first how this would be done. Head of School Mr. Levinson underscored the complexity of the task, summing up how Pingry Anywhere needed to “strategically [align] all dimensions of the School, from teaching and learning to technology to operations and facilities.” A leadership team, consisting of various teachers, administrators, and outside consultants, overseen by Mr. Levinson himself, was formed to manage this Herculean endeavor.
Throughout the summer, Pingry was transformed into a construction site, as facilities staff worked daily to install plexiglass safety barriers, set up massive outdoor tents, and convert the Hyde-Watson gym into a massive cafeteria. Student volunteers and faculty members spent countless hours packaging and distributing thousands of face masks and shields for the entire Pingry community. Meanwhile, the tech team installed speakers, microphones, cameras, and TV monitors in the classrooms to facilitate Pingry’s new hybrid learning model. Teachers rewrote their curricula to make sure that their plans for the year could handle both in-person and remote environments.
After a great summer-long effort, Pingry Anywhere was ready to be unveiled to the community. On September 14th, Pingry students walked back into campus to begin a school year like no other. Each student was required to fill out a pre-screening form before arriving on campus, wear a mask and shield, and try their best to spread out. Classes were hybrid, with some students joining via Zoom from home. After so many months of preparation, Mr. Levinson said of the occasion, “it was just so uplifting and gratifying to see months of planning come to fruition to bring our community back together.” Students were also extremely happy to be back.
“It was by far the oddest school day I’ve ever had,” said Dean Koenig (VI). “Seeing hundreds of faces in the same building for the first time in months, I thought there was no way in-person learning would last more than a few weeks.” While many students and faculty were initially doubtful about how long Pingry Anywhere would last, the new hybrid model proved to be extremely successful and resilient, in even the face of an uptick of local COVID-19 cases. Daily information on the spread of the virus was provided via the Pingry Anywhere Dashboard, and the addition of weekly pooled COVID testing provided by Mirimus Labs has helped to further ensure student safety.
Now almost two months into the new hybrid model of learning, Pingry Anywhere has proven to be a reliable system for learning during the COVID-19 era. As Mr. Levinson stated, Pingry Anywhere has “strengthened the sense of belonging that students feel as part of the Pingry community and has allowed us to come up with new ways of delivering on our promise of excellence.” Mr. Fahey, director of Pingry’s Health and Wellness Task Force, agreed, speculating on how “maybe the future of Pingry Anywhere is the future of education!” In the weeks that lie ahead, the limits of Pingry Anywhere will most definitely be tested, as the nation prepares for a possible winter spike in COVID-19 cases. Nonetheless, thanks to the flexibility of Pingry Anywhere, regardless of what happens, Pingry students and faculty can be assured that they will be well-protected, and the school will adjust to whatever circumstances arise.
