Search this site

On January 21, one day after the rest of the nation observed Martin Luther King Jr. Day, the Deerfield community came together in a keynote address, question and answer session, and a series of workshops and musical performances with a specific goal in mind: to deliberate on the legacy of the Civil Rights Movement from […]

Favorite part about living on Field 2? Y’all are y’all are really funny, really funny and we’ve got some great guys in here. Sometimes you make some unfortunate decisions, but at the end of the day, you all know how to have a good time. It’s really funny. Least favorite part? Yeah, I would definitely say some of the some of the “poopier” stories. Favorite “brain-rot” term? I love “Unc” as a term, but I don’t know if that’s technically brain rot or just lingo. What’s it like being a Gen Z teacher? It’s funny. I think that students are always surprised that I’m tapped in or that we’ve lived through similar things and similar phases of life. But also it can be hard, because I also grew up chronically online. Is Brain Rot the modern Shakespeare? No, no, I don’t think it’s the common, modern Shakespeare. I mean, I do think that what’s interesting with brain-rot is that there are so many words. I mean, I don’t know a time during my life where so many new terms became so popular so quickly, in a way that’s likely similar to Shakespeare during his time in introducing a lot of new vocabulary and coming up with new words and merging words the way that kids are doing it now. Shakespeare’s different and often slightly more sophisticated. What’s one of your little known hobbies? I’m not a good cook, but I’ve been trying to cook. I love to exercise. I like to sing, music. What’s something you wish you knew before coming to Deerfield? There’s no way to know this, but I wish I could have, like, understood how intense it would feel to be kind of like, constantly, go, go, going. There are very few breaks in the day in a way that’s different from being a student. There’s more responsibility, and I’m more anxious about what could go wrong. What was the most transformational book that you’ve read? Beloved by Toni Morrison. Every sentence is gold in that book. I genuinely think it is the best book. In what moments have your students taught you? I think they’ve taught me to enjoy some of the little moments and to have fun in the classroom and to lean into moments of fun as moments of learning. I came in very much kind of in my head, like one day I want to be a serious teacher. And like, I think being a good teacher, being the best teacher is being able to enjoy just being present in the moment with people and learning together. What’s your favorite part about teaching English? I love the light bulb moment, like the aha moment, or when the kids teach me things that I didn’t notice when I was reading it. I’m like, Oh, I didn’t see it that way. Or the kids will be talking around an idea. And they will be like, “Oh, my gosh. It’s this!” Like, it’s an electric shock. What is a book that you’ve read and would like to include in one of your classes’ curricula someday? So when I was in high school, I read A Tale For the Time Being by Ruth Ozeki, which I thought was wonderful. Klara and the Sun is another book that kind of revitalized reading for me at a time. What inspired you to become an English teacher? I had really, really influential English teachers when I was in high school, English and theater teachers. I kind of wanted to pay that back in a way. I also think it’s a really important skill, and I wanted to try teaching. I really like school as a space. I really like exploring through ideas, like the way it makes you slow down your thinking. And in a time when thinking happens so rapidly, or people are trying to augment that process all the time or have you not think at all and just shoot ideas into your brain in a million seconds, I think it’s really important to be able to slow down.

Pizza was supposed to bring us together. Instead, it tore us apart. What started as a controlled experiment to determine the best pizza around the Deerfield area quickly took a dark turn when one pizza met a tragic and untimely demise on the Kendall building’s basement floor. The culprit? Still at large. The typically quiet and peaceful—well, if one has their headphones on— Scroll News Room erupted in finger-pointing, baseless accusations and defensive claims as board members scrambled to piece together the events leading up to the crime. The Procedure The experimental design was foolproof and laboriously crafted to eliminate all biases as the rigorous standards of authentic pizza-science demands. The experiment was conducted by facilitators Associate Editor Josie Kalish ’26, Digital Managing Editor Karen Park ’26, and Associate Editor Caylah Yang ’26. We ordered one pizza from three local pizzerias through Deerfield Academy’s prized food delivery service—Doordash. The three pizzas were labeled Treatment A (Village Pizza), Treatment B (Georgio’s Pizza), and Treatment C (Magpie), to maintain anonymity and thereby guarantee an integrious process in our ambitious endeavor. The purpose: ask each subject their favorite slice out of the three to determine the store with the greatest proportion of votes and arguably the “best” local pizzeria. The experiment followed a Matched Pairs Design , where each subject tested all three treatments in a randomized order, determined by a random number generator. To further preserve the integrity of the process, we conducted it as a Double-blind experiment , meaning neither the subjects (the Scroll Board members) nor the statisticians (us) knew which slice came from what store until after the experiment. Pre-Disaster As journalists, our commitment to objective and ethical reporting made us the ideal candidates to evaluate and determine the best pizza Deerfield’s Doordash has to offer. We report nothing but the truth. For a while, everything went as anticipated. Board members participated enthusiastically, delivering complex, insightful, and persuasively reasoned reflections of crusts, grease levels, and tomato sauce. The kind and definitely-not-dictatorial Deerfield Scroll Editor-in-Chief Anna Guerrini ’25 affirmed her enjoyment of all pizzas before endorsing Treatment A (Village Pizza) as the best “Saturday-night pizza.” She declared, “the crust… fire… that was what sold it.” What exactly makes a pizza “Saturday-night” material? A mystery, considering this pizza tasting occurred on a Monday night. Managing Editor Yoonsa Lee ’25 offered a more complex analysis. She stated, “Pizza C is what I’d go to if I wanted to Doordash a meal, but for a Saturday night, I’d agree with Anna.” Ultimately, Lee cast her vote for Pizza C (Magpie), citing her reasoning: “I’m not the biggest fan of tomato sauce.” A daring take, considering both Pizza A and C contained tomato sauce, an essential component to pizza. Meanwhile, Associate Editor Katherine Ni ’26 stated confidently, “Cheese is the best because it’s the lightest and least greasy.” A compelling argument—except that all of the pizzas in question were cheese pizzas. When asked when she would ideally consume the pizza, Ni delivered a revelation: “Probably like when I’m hungry.” Everything was in place to ensure a controlled experiment and a resultant objective conclusion. No one could have foreseen what would happen next… Crime Scene Evaluation Crime: Pizza Murder Time of Pizza Death: 8:45 p.m. Date: January 20th, 2025 Once unified under the noble pursuit for the ultimate cheese pizza, the Scroll room descended into pandemonium and cacophony. Pizza was scattered across the floor, rendered dust-covered and inedible. Each board member attempted to clear their own name while implicating others. We are still trying to get a clear picture of what happened but here’s what we know so far: Upon accusation, Associate Editor John Woo ’26 vehemently denied any complicity and passionately declared “I did not touch it, I did not touch it, no part of my body was in contact with the fallen pizza.” His overly defensive pleas seemed to have had a counter-productive result, prompting Associate Editor John Liu ’26 to insinuate guilt. Among Woo’s claims of innocence, Liu interjected “a real man takes accountability.” Fueling the fire, Liu began pointing fingers seemingly arbitrarily. He claimed, “Karen [Park ’26] knocked it over, just cause… I don’t know?” Moments later however, he accused Ni, reasoning, “Katherine’s hand is more… you know what I’m saying.” No, John, we do not. Liu’s accusation prompted Ni to fire back an accusation of bias. Tensions in the Scroll room continued to rise and derailed the experiment entirely. The hope for a unified Scroll community crumbled and pizza politics took over. Who caused the fall? Who can be trusted? And most importantly, will the Scroll community ever recover? Amidst the uncertainty surrounding this event, one thing remains clear: January 20, 2025, will go down in Scroll history as a tale of betrayal. We cannot disregard the numerous biases that may prevail. Firstly, the subjects did not comprise the entire Scroll Board—with a slight lack of time and preliminary planning, the experiment was merely conducted with voluntary response sampling on the eager pizza-craving members that showed up. Thus, we cannot draw precise conclusions regarding the best pizza on behalf of the board as a whole. In addition, due to ambiguous miscommunication with Magpie, we got a margherita pizza instead of a cheese pizza. Did subjects choose Treatment C for their purest appreciation for the pizzeria itself or were they merely picky pesto-lovers? The mystery will forever remain concealed. Because of the superficial data collected, we cannot conclude that Magpie is the pizzeria our Scroll members would really choose to enjoy on a Saturday night after all. However, the most detrimental flaw of the experiment was John Liu’s malicious transgression as he deliberately consumed water after testing Treatment A—breaking the paramount control variable of our meticulous procedure. True science, after all, demands sacrifices—and a willingness and compliance from both the statisticians and all subjects to do whatever it takes in the name of integrity.

On dorm room doors, Bennett Stankovits ’19 saw name tags that said Deerfield welcomes every race, religion, and ethnicity, and couldn’t help but notice that “ability” wasn’t included on it. As a person with Tourette’s syndrome, he hoped to improve disability accommodation at Deerfield. So he took initiative to found Deerfield Academy Disabilities Alliance (DADA) with the goal of addressing the stigma around getting accommodations or having a disability. Specifically, he hoped to educate students about disabilities that weren’t immediately visible. Since then, DADA’s purpose has evolved to encompass all disabilities, including physical disabilities, and adopted increasing accessibility as a key goal. DADA has also started educating adults and other community members alongside students. However, the essence of the alliance’s goals has stayed the same: to make sure campus is accessible, to make sure those with disabilities are receiving fair accommodations, to de-stigmatize disabilities,    and to educate the Deerfield community on disabilities. This year, DADA has created an email template for students to communicate to their teachers about any disabilities they might have and how they best learn. Alliance Co-Chair Gracie Spencer ’25 said, “Even if you don’t have a classified disability, if you still have some sort of learning difference that you want to be addressed to your teachers, you could still use this template.” Spencer wanted to emphasize that the template is a resource for every student. She expressed her worry that many students might not know the template exists or that they think only those with diagnosed disabilities can use it. DADA has also created an accessible tour route for those with physical disabilities, which made navigating the Deerfield campus easier for students and visitors with mobility challenges. The Disabilities Alliance has also held many club meetings and block parties. In these spaces, students can both learn about others and their experiences as well as share their own experiences. 11th Grade Class Dean and Student Life Office Member Brian Barbato, who serves as the DADA faculty advisor, emphasized that they allow students to be heard. Spencer’s description of the discussions was similar. She said, “We want to create a strong community of people so that you have other people to talk to about things, or just other people who either know what you’re going through or are interested in learning from your experience.” Block parties are another way DADA educates the greater Deerfield community on disabilities. They include snacks, food, fidgets, learning sign language, or activities that can challenge students’ perspectives on disability or sensory experiences. Additionally, DADA has put together a display in the Boyden Library with different books about and relating to disabilities so that Deerfield students can easily begin to learn about them. DADA has many plans for the future. In the next 20 years, the Alliance plans on talking with members of school administration to discuss how to renovate buildings on campus, such as the dining hall, the Main School Building, and Arms, to be more accessible. Furthermore, they aim to continue allowing special accommodations in classes as fairly as possible. While students with learning disabilities might receive extra time on tests, they don’t receive extra time on homework (in which time limits are placed based on class level and apply to all students). They may have to spend an unfair amount of time on their assignments, and this is an aspect current accommodations don’t address. Finally, continuing efforts to de-stigmatize disabilities is another ongoing goal. While the Deerfield community has made great progress towards understanding accommodations, it hasn’t been entirely successful yet. “I think we’re better than we were,” said Mr. Barbato. “But you will still hear a student say, ‘Oh, if I had extra time, I’d get the perfect score on the SAT, right?’ And that student who says that is not really trying to be negative towards somebody. Most of the students who get extra time would love to give it back and love to not need it.” Mr. Barbato also expressed his hope that the Deerfield community can get to a point where people can start seeing disabilities not as a handicap but as a unique part of an individual that may allow them to see things in ways others might not— their very own unique power.   YONG DING/DEERFIELD SCROLL

“Just because I’m running doesn’t mean you need to run—it’s not Deerfield academics.” But in fact I did need to run, because I was two minutes late to curfew that night. When Andy Chen ’25 passed me on Albany Road, running with his Namaste dinner in hand, something told me I needed to run as well. Instinctively, or more likely out of fear of having to spend the few precious Accountabiltiy Points I had left, I joined his sprint. Hearing my footsteps, he assured me that I wasn’t getting graded on getting back to my dorm on time. Although thrown as an out-of-pocket joke, Chen’s comment reflected what compels Deerfield students, myself included, to run academically. Losing sleep to study for that math test or to finish writing that history essay, we are pressured by an ever-increasing internal. and external burden to not fall academically behind—all while teachers tell us to get more sleep. There’s been a lot of op-eds written about grades and grading in the Scroll , and the most recent one by Opinion Page Editor Chloe Xue ’25— “Deerfield Should Abolish Grades”—goes as far as to argue grades shouldn’t exist at Deerfield. While I don’t believe grades shouldn’t exist entirely, the new, unannounced changes made this year to Deerfield’s grading system add even more burden to the pressure cooker that this school already is. Opening DAInfo the day comments were released, I doubt I was the only one to be surprised by the new scheme for effort grades. Replacing ME (meets expectations) at the top of the grading pyramid was its more flashy, desirable counterpart—OU (outstanding). I assume the most compelling reason for this new category was so it could more accurately reflect students that showed “outstanding” levels of commitment in-class, but performed poorly on assessments, leading to lackluster grades compared to their engagement. But the way effort grades work at Deerfield, as more of a box to be checked rather than a grade to be earned, this new change places uncalled for pressure on students. If a student has shown such considerable effort in class that it’s considered “outstanding,” the numerical grade should reflect that. There’s no need for a separate distinction. The primary reason students listen, participate, and show effort in class is the expectation that we will do well in that class if we do. If a student shows outstanding effort in class and their numerical grade reflects it, the new “outstanding” grade isn’t necessary. Conversely, if a student shows outstanding effort in class but their numerical grade doesn’t reflect it, that’s more of an indicator that a teacher’s grading system is unnecessarily punitive or unduly weighted toward assessments rather than there needing to be an “outstanding” category. Additionally, by changing the effort grade from a checkbox grade to basically another grade to be earned, we, the students, feel an undue burden. As Chen’s quote reveals, there’s enough academic competition and stress at Deerfield already. The benefit of adding the “outstanding” grade is far outweighed by the drawback of increased anxiety and stress amongst students. If the administration cares so much as to have the Health Center hold anxiety clinics, it seems contradictory to add a new source of worry for students. The policy is two-faced, and it shows these decisions aren’t considering the perspectives of students, because they were made without student input. Because number grades are more important than effort grades, only the former being included in official transcripts, effort grades should remain a checkbox. I also doubt that I was the only one to be close-reading my teacher’s comments— certainly much closer than I read Emily Dickinson in English class—psychoanalyzing every word my teachers wrote for a hint of what my numerical grade could be. I shouldn’t have to do this. While the reason for releasing numerical grades two days after comments is that it incentivizes students to actually read them, similar to the addition of the “outstanding” effort grade, this policy only induces more stress amongst students without providing substantial benefit. Comments don’t fall out of coconut trees. They exist within the context of the numerical grade. The number tells me how well I’m doing in that class, and the comment justifies why I earned that grade and how I can improve. It doesn’t make much logical sense to explain a number that we haven’t received yet. Furthermore, because Deerfield students want to do well in class, as repeatedly echoed in Chen’s quote, we’re incentivized to read comments. Because the number grade only tells us on a relative scale how we are doing, students will naturally pay more attention to comments because they provide actionable feedback. In reflection of receiving midterm grades, there’s a trend that exists throughout—uncommunicated change. Many students only found out about the addition of the “outstanding” category the Friday grades were released, and the fact that we were receiving comments only during the Wednesday advisory meeting they were released. This lack of communication is infuriating; not only were students not involved in any conversation whatsoever, there was also no centralized communication between the administration and the student body that told us these changes were made. Deerfield, as an institution, exists for its students. Without us, Deerfield wouldn’t exist. But these recent grading reforms not only neglect the perspectives of students, but actively go against our interests. It’s time that major changes such that affect student life consider our point of view, instead of being made from the isolated ivory tower that is the Deerfield administration.

Head of School Dr. John Austin has a long connection with the concept of institutional impartiality, first calling it principled neutrality then disciplined nonpartisanship in A Framework for Schools . Published in May 2024 and authored by Dr. Austin, A Framework for Schools is a much cited pedagogical work outlining ambitious objectives for independent schools to build a culture of student autonomy and self determination. However, disiplined nonpartisanship is seldom implemented effectively in practice. For example, the school failed to address influential partisan speech and stance taking by school leaders. Dr. Austin has repeatedly stated in the book that schools are not spaces for political activism or advocacy, but are “places of inquiry and exploration.” A Framework for Schools called for two main ways to accomplish this mission: stance-taking by school leaders and stance-taking by faculty. School leaders are expected to maintain silence on heated current issues and uphold the school’s core values while faculty are expected to remain impartial due to their disproportionate power over students. However, the framework missed out stance-taking by invited speakers and other inherently biased sources brought to student attention. Take the example of the visit and speech of United States Ambassador to Ukraine Bridget A. Brink during spring term last year. The ambassador was invited by the school administrative body, which presumably includes the Student Life Office, the Academics Affairs Office, and very likely Dr. Austin himself, to give a speech spanning an entire school meeting about her work and advocacy for Ukraine in the Russo-Ukrainian war. The speech was deeply political and advocacy-centered, appealing to a young audience which probably already has a pre-understanding of Russian turpitude in the war. She even went into gross simplifications of the war, comparing the conflict to Star Wars and identifying a clear protagonist and an all-evil antagonist. Although there exists a general consensus regarding the conflict in Ukraine within this country, it is nevertheless disagreeable to label moral terms onto the sides of the conflict. As with all wars, there are no simple, justified sides. Ambassador Brink’s visit defeated the purpose of disciplined nonpartisanship. The ambassador’s speech only reinforced a widely-accepted opinion into the minds of “younger students more susceptible to adult influence,” to quote the framework. For many, this could tilt their opinions of the war to axiomatic truths that they will dogmatically accept. One might say that as the ambassador, Brink’s job was to advocate for Ukraine. In that case, the school has contradicted their framework by inviting her to make a speech to the student body in the first place. Worse still, the school administration failed to address this catastrophe by offering simply silence. To maintain the alleged “disciplined nonpartisanship” the school administration should have made a public apology or invited a pro-Russia speaker to represent both sides fairly. Without either, we have neither discipline nor nonpartisanship. A lesson should be taken from the “24 for ‘24” event thus far. Whenever a politically inclined guest is asked to broadcast opinions, a counterpart from other side of the partisan divide must be invited to do the same. To allow an unbalanced partisan argument to reach students is no different than a form of active interpretation by the school. An underlying argument which the framework contended is that no interpretations should be disseminated from school leaders and administration. Therefore, events similar to Ambassador Brink’s visit are breeches to the integrity of disciplined nonpartisanship at Deerfield. On the other hand, systematic stance-taking by faculty is equally undesirable. The framework proclaims that there is an imbalance of power between faculty and students, and that teachers should refrain from extraneous stance taking in classrooms and structured classes ridden with political and partisan tilt. This part of the framework could not be said to be exactly in current practice. To visualize what would happen in actual practice, a European History class could be called Eurocentric for devoting much attention to a more limited scope of history than an Asian history course. Furthermore, the current Honors European History class could be said to be overly German-centric with it barely discussing Scandinavian or Balkan history. If we take the framework for its words, all curricula have to be rewritten to eliminate bias. Contrary to the ideal assump- tions of the framework, disciplined nonpartisanship on behalf of the faculty will infringe upon academic freedom, as these two ideas do overlap in practice. The result of all this is a form of academic McCarthyism. The fear of bias will drive excessive caution and ultimately an unwillingness for teachers to discuss controversies. The potential negative side effects will compromise expressive freedom and intellectual diversity, the other pillars of the framework. Instead of strict constraints, it would be much more productive for the framework to construct a better versed system encouraging student disagreement with teachers and empowering the students, as the framework puts it, to “[prepare] students for the freedom, rights, and responsibilities they will enjoy as adults.” In the real world, there will always be partisan opinions, even from those who have the most authority or influence, and it is more pragmatic to train students with an aptitude to think and respond critically to these moments. Disciplined nonpartisanship, as argued by Dr. Austin in A Framework for Schools , has failed in its translation into actual practices at Deerfield. The stronger argument of the two, on stance taking by school leaders, yielded to bad implementations, while the worse argument, on stance taking by faculty, never saw its words fully realized. Aiming around a desirable, truly disciplined nonpartisanship doesn’t create impartiality. Rather, functional impartiality stems from good discretion that moderates between draconian rules and no discipline.

There’s something curious about the way international students are viewed in America, especially at elite boarding schools like Deerfield: no one ever stops them and asks them truly why they are here. Americans have accepted international students on their campuses as an unquestionable norm. Their unspoken assumption (rooted in American Exceptionalism) is that, of course international students would want to be here. Why wouldn’t they? The United States has long projected itself as the “city on a hill” for education and opportunity. American universities occupy the highest global rankings and host the largest number of international students. As a Chinese student at Deerfield, I’ve noticed that very few students question why I chose America to finish my high school education. This assumption glosses over the agency of Chinese international students, exposing a blind spot in how Americans perceive their educational institutions and the role of said institutions in the wider world. In reality, international students are active participants in a more complex—and frankly more interesting—exchange of soft power. Coined by American political scientist Joseph Nye, soft power shapes the perception of others through attraction rather than coercion through a country’s culture or values. For decades, American education has been one of its most potent soft-power tools. International students come, experience American values and democracy firsthand, and leave with an appreciation for its ideals. They return to their home countries almost as unofficial ambassadors, helping to spread those values abroad. However, the hidden narrative here is how international students shape the cultural landscape of American campuses through introducing our own ideas, values, and ways of thinking to American students. Speaking directly to my identity as a Chinese international student, this two-way exchange is an underappreciated form of diplomacy, and in an era of fraught U.S.-China relations, it’s perhaps more critical than ever. In light of the presidential elections, both candidates have adopted a hostile attitude towards China, framing it as the primary threat to America, stating that the war with China must be won. During such an important election year where China plays such a big role behind U.S. policies, students should be aware of the soft power international students bring – foreign politics happens in front of their eyes each day. Perhaps it’s the way a Chinese student responded when watching the presidential debate with their friends in the dorm, a multicultural friendship, a bowl of Chinese noodles shared, or a class discussion, Chinese international students can impact American students’ perception of China. This could perhaps bring in more positive narratives that advocate for the collaboration between the two nations, rather than the current zero-sum mindset. As internationalization specialist Aicha Adoui echoes in her book International Higher Education and the Rise of Soft Power as Cultural Diplomacy : “In addition to promoting cultural diplomacy and contributing to global understanding, international higher education can also contribute to a country’s nation branding and position in international relations.” Thus, simple everyday interactions between students are shaping the tone of international relations. In order to get more of a grasp on Deerfield’s conscious decisions on this topic, I interviewed Head of School Dr. Austin. Dr. Austin pointed out that we have a very unique and important opportunity as a boarding school to have a diverse student body with people across the state, nation, and globe something that would be difficult to accomplish at a day school. One interesting statistic that Dr. Austin brought up was the “6 question pulse survey” sent out to the student body in recent years. Though the majority of students responded that they are eager to interact with perspectives different from their own, only a small fraction of students expressed comfort in expressing their own opinions. This oxymoron raises attention to an important issue that plagues Deerfield and the broader national trend of America today – the growing reluctance to engage in open and honest dialogue despite the pressing need for these discussions. Current polarization and political sensitivity amplify these effects to the maximum. Overcoming his gap must be one of Deerfield’s priorities in order for its students to engage deeply with its diverse student body. This is an opportunity to learn something when people think differently from you, and when the conversation truly becomes important and interesting. Dr. Austin illustrated that Deerfield has already intentionally built spaces within the school where students can interact with people and perspectives different from their own – sitdown, dorms, co-currics, classrooms. For example, my U.S.-China Relations class could not have been possible elsewhere. In our class, we have diverse perspectives from Mainland China, Taiwan, America, Europe, and Africa. Most times, I find myself disagreeing with the opinions of my classmates, but that leads me to understand more complex international relations. Furthermore, Americans should be encouraged to study in China—not merely as SAIS tourists of culture but as engaged participants in its academic, social, and political life. Currently, far more Chinese students study in the U.S. than American students in China, that power balance further exacerbated by Covid-19 (China only had about 350 American students in 2023). I was overjoyed to see Deerfield hosting a summer Center for Service and Global Citizenships trip to China. A former American international student in China’s Nanjing-Hopkins Southern Association of Independent Schools program—Amy Celico –told me that she wished to have more exchange Americans and Chinese students to foster more empathy and understanding about our different cultures, histories and lived experiences. “Even when we disagree, having shared experiences make disagreements easier to manage,” Celico said. Even though Amy’s experience was a couple decades ago, if she felt an importance to engage with China then, it is even more important to do so now. With rising tensions between the U.S. and China, and distrust growing between the two nations, what we need is more personal understanding that comes from experiencing the nation hands-on. The U.S. and China are clearly in a state of competition, and if they want to carry that out strategically, they need to increase their communication. Many believe that there must be a hegemony, and “The U.S. and China are clearly in a state of competition, and if they want to carry that out strategically, they need to increase their communication. Many believe that there must be a hegemony, and one of these two nations must rise on top. But I believe that China and America can and should co-exist, which comes at the basis of understanding each other at a deep level. Ultimately, this is about more than just education; it’s about shaping the future of U.S.-China relations. The next generation of leaders, policymakers, and entrepreneurs will emerge from schools like Deerfield, and the relationships they build—or fail to build—will have long-lasting consequences. As Kenneth Liberthal (Brookings Institution) notes in Debating China , “Thus, U.S.–China relations are not merely a diplomatic phenomenon. The relationship is grounded in dense ties that increasingly encompass the younger generation, too, on both sides.” Chinese international students are not just here to learn; we’re here to teach, to share, and to challenge. At Deerfield, I interrogate my own international student identity, bringing awareness to the soft power outreach that Deerfield may be exhibiting of American values but also my own powers in shifting the tone of American sentiments towards the U.S.-China relations. The Deerfield experience is supposed to be timeless, yet in a timely dire situation of U.S.-China relations, how has the experience shifted for international students? The next time you see an international student, realize the remarkable international relations which are taking place within your interactions.

On Wednesday Oct 23, the LA Times was blindsided by the resignation of their editorial chief Mariel Garza, who quit after the newspaper’s owner Dr. Patrick SoonShiong blocked the editorial board’s attempt to endorse Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. Garza’s resignation was followed by other members of her editorial board including Pulitzer […]

While recognizing that Global Updates is an attempt to promote engagement with current events, I  agree that the format of Global Updates is dangerous, as it only gives  quick snippets and summarization of events into a small paragraph. As I keep thinking about how to grab people’s attention for longer in the Global Updates section, […]

This past week, I’ve spent my afternoons adjusting the lights up the grid of the Black Box theater. The older, halogen lamps reach hundreds of degrees Fahrenheit, and I find myself contorting my body into odd angles on the mesh of wires to focus the beams of light, hoping to avoid burns on my exposed forearms. The lights get so hot that I sometimes have to fan my hands to clear the air of smoke; spotlights burn dust. By the time we will have published this issue, the election has already occurred. Donald Trump will be the 47th President of the United States of America. However, beyond the simple fact that President Trump will take office in a couple months, I can make not further predictions about what the next four years of history hold. However, I can say with utmost certainty that in the weeks to come, journalists from across the nation will be working overtime, publishing opinions and news articles about all the prospective cabinet members. Regular citizens will be loudly declaring which policies they think are evil and which they think are created by God to save our broken nation. Common rooms will grow raucous with debate long after curfew. The spotlight of the election will shine brightly on the various political figures, yes, but it will also shine brightly on the personal beliefs of every person invested in the future of this nation. The sheer omnipresence of the election may cause us to question our own political opinions and critically shape our thoughts about our nation for the first time in our young lives. An election can, even at Deerfield, burn away the obfuscating dust of daily routine and insignificant worries. It shines a focused and piercing light on what you value, how you deal with ethical dilemmas, and how you choose to navigate difficult conversations. And as any seasoned actor or techie might tell you, that light will cause you to sweat. Deerfield, I ask that you handle the spotlight of the election with grace and humility. When someone inevitably says the wrong thing at the wrong time, be graceful enough to let your peers have another chance to get the line right. When the play reaches its inevitable cli- max in the second act conflict, re- member that you are friends once the curtain falls. When the lights begin to dim, don’t forget the clos- ing lines of the play. This election matters, Deerfield. But on our campus, what matters most is how we conduct ourselves in its midst and in its wake. Do not abandon the principles of kindness and open-mindedness toward your fellow students in the name of a tax policy. Do not reduce intellectual curiosity and breadth of interest to a footnote in the name of following the party line. And above everything else, don’t turn off the spotlight because it gets too hot. Politics are uncomfortable. We are told from a young age not to discuss them around the dinner table at home, and politely (if wordlessly) asked to refrain from them at the sit-down table. In our increasingly polarized society, calling into question someone’s political views is beyond rude: in high school, it can be socially ruinous. I would hope that we all find the courage to embrace this discomfort. It’s healthy to feel confused, angry, or upset when discussing such contentious and emotional issues as abortion, immigration, and gun violence. While it’s pertinent to be mindful of expressing these emotions in a controlled manner, don’t avoid these discus- sions to avoid feeling them. To continue my long-winded, theater-kid metaphor, actors don’t ask to turn off the spotlights if their costume is getting a little stuffy. Otherwise, how else would the audience see the show? I am looking forward to the in- auguration day; I am just as eager as the rest of you to see what the next four years of American history will entail. But even more than that, I am looking forward to the night of sitting in an abandoned class- room with my friends and watch- ing Trump’s second first State of the Union address projected over half erased geometry problems turn red and blue. I am looking forward to community time in the weeks to follow, debating my friends over coffee and bagels in the D-hall with the ferocity of professional parlia- mentarians. In the months to follow, I am looking forward to editing OpEds covering Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s possible appointment as the Dirctor of Department of Health and Human Services. I can’t wait to see the spotlight shine on us, and to have it reveal the thriving setpieces of curiosity and compassion that our community has meticulously built. The lights are on, Deerfield. Break a leg. Yours faithfully in writing, Anna Jo Guerrini

This season, Deerfield Academy’s Thirds Volleyball team maintained their undefeated streak of two years to achieve a third undefeated year. Captain Fiona Van Nice ’25, a four-year member of the team, attributed the team’s energy to their winning streak. “Our team has so much energy and are excited to do anything,” said Van Nice, “…bringing the energy, that’s probably our strength and that’s thanks to our energetic freshmen.” She further emphasized that this spirit is fostered by the tight bond between the players. “It’s a really closely knit team,” Van Nice acknowledged, “and I think our inclusivity with every member on the team fosters a great team spirit, like team culture.” One of the freshmen players, Maura Glynn ’28 remarked on the team culture that existed both on and off the court: “We just care, we care about each other,” she said, “and I think that we’re just a really fun team, and we know how to work together as a team so I think that our teamwork is really great.” Additionally, Helen Yang ’28 from the team spoke to the bond she has with the team. “Overall we’re encouraging and it’s the communication between players that makes the team really tight,” she said. Furthermore, she expressed how the team’s empathetic culture promotes improvement and confidence in their players. “People won’t be mad at you if you mess up. They allow you to try new things, making me more positive about myself,” she said. Glynn further emphasized the impact of the team’s positivity on their athletic development. She said, “Before, I would only focus on the things I was bad at, but because of the good sportsmanship and community in Thirds Volleyball, they helped me focus on the things that I am good at too.” Recalling the recent game against Loomis, she reflected: “At first, we were really stressed and anxious, but we pulled through and got to our more positive selves again.” In addition, the players are not solely responsible for these three years of undefeated seasons. The practices and effort that Science Teacher and Coach Cindie Fidanza as well as Math Teacher and Coach Andy Newlon have put in, the players collectively agree, have shaped the Thirds Volleyball team into the team it is today. “Honestly, I think our high record is in credit to Ms. Fidanza – the drills she gives us and she works pretty hard for a thirds team,” stated Van Nice. Yet ultimately, it is the players’ efforts and determination to improve that have produced the team’s success. “Everybody puts effort into everything they do, and we still get frustrated if we get something wrong. We’re just not at varsity yet,” Glynn said.

As students walk to their classes, they can often spot members of the Communications Office capturing the details of student life. The office serves as the “public relations arm” of the Academy, covering various events such as sports games, performing arts concerts, and alumni news. The eight members of the Communications Office work closely to collect information from the academic and administrative departments and consolidate it into digital newspapers and other forms of media presentation such as email, social media, and the official school website. Multimedia and Digital Engagement Manager David Fraser emphasized how the office works accordingly to upcoming events and the school’s mission. He said, “We want to make sure that it’s [filming and photography] done in a timely fashion… so that when we post it on social media, people will see it and know that, oh, that’s coming up tonight.” The department has helped create behind-the-scenes projects the community may be familiar with. After joining the department in June 2023, Mr. Fraser created athletics videos for each sports team as his first project. Being new to the community, he was unaware of how many teams there were across the fall, winter, and spring terms. Regarding the amount of promotional videos, he said, “It ended up being like 27 different videos throughout the year, which was a little overwhelming, but I guess it kind of was a good feeling, because I got them all done.” Mr. Fraser further mentioned how major achievements in projects serve as motivation and momentum to the office. “It makes me feel good that I’m capturing some of these moments for these kids who are here for such a short time, and helping to promote the school through videography… if I’m able to capture that moment, and we can share that… it’s also a memory for them.” Director of Communications Jessica Day mentions that the general theme for Communications this year is to highlight the student experience. “We’ve partnered with Anneke [Wittink ’25] who runs DAcameraroll [the academy’s student run photography club], so that’s a great way of showing a little behind the scenes of what it’s like to be a Deerfield student.” Student photographer Wittink reflected how the office is significant in “representing Deerfield life online for prospective students, families of current students,” she said, “and anyone else who may be interested in seeing what Deerfield is like.” Another project Mr. Fraser has worked on which supports this concept are the Day in the Life videos. From following the student to breakfast, classes and throughout their cocurricular activities, the video “encapsulates a full day,” said Mr. Fraser. Mr. Fraser described how he attempts “to film all that and then edit it down to maybe a two or three minute video,” he said. The video’s goal is to show a clear overview of the daily life of a current Deerfield student. Not only does Communications focus on the student body, the office also works to support the Academy’s institutional priorities. The school is currently in the state of being in the “quiet phase” of a comprehensive fundraising campaign, meaning that it is not as active in seeking donations. Still, Communications has made efforts in collaboration with the Advancement Office beforehand in raising money for the expansion and renovation of the Dining Hall. The departments plan to launch a public opening campaign of the new Dining Hall in the spring of 2026. Another project promoted the Academy’s new financial aid initiative. Members of the Communications office had worked with a reporter from the Wall Street Journal on a recent exclusive article announcing the policy. One of the office’s major responsibilities is to promote the new publication “Thriving in a World of Pluralistic contention: A Framework for Schools” by Head of School Dr. John Austin. Ms. Day explained the Communications’ goal in sharing news about this important publication with internal and external audiences. “Dr Austin wrote this amazing Framework in support of a set of educational ideals such as non-partisanship and civic dialogue which are really institutional goals, so Communications shares these goals to explain the Academy’s direction to people,” Day said. Throughout the years, the office has supported the school through a wide range of projects, creating a vast network that connects to every other department on campus for various forms of communication. Mr. Fraser communicated his enjoyment and appreciation in working and filming students, saying, “When I first started, they weren’t quite sure who I was and I would be….But now it’s nice that people now know who I am and what I’m doing, so it makes it a little bit easier to kind of walk around and ask people if I can take their picture.”