Curation Not Cultivation: A Critique on Deerfield

To film the promotional video for Deerfield’s 2026 Be Worthy Campaign, a prop team recreated a mock-’80s common room set-up inside Harold Smith, propping up antique wooden skis and lacrosse sticks as decoration, rolling out colorful rugs and draping knit blankets on the gray common room couch — anything that might call to a nostalgic alum. 

This campaign tells the story of honored heritage, tightly knit community and a common Deerfield identity — of memories made by the river, alongside MSB bell chimes, at sit-down meals, consisting of places, artifacts and traditions. And indeed, those memories and sentiments persevered and worked their magic. As of today, Deerfield has raised over $300 million out of their $500 million Be Worthy campaign goal, increasing funding towards financial aid, faculty development and faculty welfare — thanks to the parents, alumni and other donors who felt deeply connected to this Big Green narrative.

Financed through endowments and commercial revenue, a prep school like Deerfield needs to constantly present itself to parents, alumni, donors, visitors and prospective students. I reason that this creates an incentive for legibility — a recognizable, consistent brand that appeals to an audience. Naturally, Deerfield shifts its policy and administration in creating such coherency. What screams more “Deerfield” than boys and girls going to classes in blouses, khakis and blazers? Well, dear prospective families and alumni, be prepared to see blouses, khakis and blazers in winter term too. The iconic Main School Building, face of Deerfield — let’s spend millions of dollars to make it shinier. Deerfield values a tight-knit community — let us create an airtight 100% boarding Deerfield bubble. That number itself proves that we are indeed tight-knit. We honor a traditional education more than any other boarding school — let us implement absolute restrictions on technology use and AI. Yet I worry that these changes are moving us toward worse. I believe that Deerfield is gradually prioritizing image and superficial branding over practical change. These recent institutional shifts are formalistic, and they diverge from the core teaching principles Deerfield promises. 

The exteriors of Deerfield are truly glamorous, yet the insides are slowly emptying out. Seeing 100% heads up walking down Albany Road may impress the passerby, yet phone addiction inside the dorm room worsens, as previous Scroll op-eds have covered. Unless those passerbies read the Scroll, they of course wouldn’t know that over 30 teachers left the school last year, double the faculty turnover rate from previous years — a sad reality that Deerfield largely left out in their public statements. The school puts forth a day student policy advertised to bring the community closer, yet only locals and students know how discouraging this is for day students to enroll. It seems that Deerfield is in dire need of affirming donors that their investments did not go to waste. Deerfield then takes on a rather materialistic way of operation, prioritizing visible improvements and passing policies that paint a curated Deerfield image. 

The things that communicate institutional identity most visibly do not necessarily best determine whether this institution is functioning well. Deerfield is becoming better at displaying what the administrators believe a good school would look like, yet building a school aimed towards genuine betterment of their students would require more scrutiny. Worse still, the school seems uncaring about this genuinity, for student input is not valued in policy changes.

It seems intuitive that a school exists for students. Not for its logo, its traditions, its campaign, not even for its reputation — those things should support the school, but cannot be its final purpose. Deerfield is treating identity as an end rather than a means, operating the school only in a way that enforces its identity. I believe that the identity Deerfield chases should be a natural consequence of the education it provides first. 

This is not a critique on identity and tradition. Far from it; Deerfield’s tradition creates belonging, community and continuity — the Scroll ran on tradition and unified identity for over a hundred years. I acknowledge that an identity that runs through generations, or tradition, has made Deerfield what it is. However, I strongly urge the administration to recognize the distinction between preserving values behind traditions and performing tradition for the sake of appeal.

I, among many students, also raise concerns on a prescriptive, top-down institutional identity and its effect on individual identity. Institutions inevitably shape people, yet are students given enough room to guide the institution in return? 

What does it truly mean to be a Deerfield student? Before the flag ceremony, Ms. Samawi emphasized the importance of a diversely identified student body, stating that there is not only one way a DA student can manifest. Right now, the school is shrinking its definition of a Deerfield student while receiving no student input, and students are given more and more this template by the school of what a Deerfield student looks like and behaves like. Students will become simply recipients of a predefined culture — formalized themselves — and they will lose the ability to make judgments, question and shape communities.