Community service is no foreign concept for many students around the nation. Many school districts, including Princeton High School, require their students to fulfill a certain number of community service hours during their time in high school, ticking off the graduation requirement prior to leaving their senior years. While this requirement can be extremely beneficial and helpful for communities and students alike, it also raises many questions pertaining to the ethical aspect of mandating community service hours: Does requiring community service in schools undermine the intrinsic nature of what community service is? Does it instead build a strong foundation for the students while opening new pathways for students to explore their interests? While there is no definite answer, mandating community service for students infringes upon the intrinsic nature of what community service is supposed to be, despite still posing as a pathway for students to explore their interest and give back to their communities.

Community service at its core has been defined and recognized as an act of voluntary help for one’s community. The essence of community service is based on the foundation of volunteering, rather than a mandated requirement. By setting requirements for students to accomplish for the sole purpose of graduating, schools directly infringe upon the very nature of what volunteer work is, thus damaging and reducing the noble act of giving back to your community from the selflessness of your heart, to yet another “assignment” that needs to completed before the end of high school.

Reduction of such sorts can also prove to be harmful to not only students, but communities alike. By mandating community service, students may start to draw parallels by comparing it to schoolwork for classes, assigned homework, or class credits that need to be fulfilled in order to graduate. Such activities that usually carry negative connotations, due to their mundane and stressful natures, may in turn inflict a similar message upon community service. By requiring community service for graduation, students may start to shy away from taking part in any form of community service after they fulfill their hours or even after high school due to the weak first impressions they experienced as it being a requirement. As such, mandating community service may end up damaging the future of community service, rather than fostering one.

However, despite the concerns raised pertaining to ethics of mandated community service, the system can actually be beneficial for some students. The required hours for community service have created many opportunities, both in the school and within the community. Students are exposed to various forms of community service around their towns, and can pursue different passions or interests that they might have, while at the same time fulfilling their hours for graduation. With more than 20 community service clubs in the school and many more outside in the community, students are given a plethora of options to choose from when deciding how they want to complete their hours, and as part of that process, students may find a passion for a service project. They might continue pursuing that passion for the rest of high school, and maybe even carry that passion beyond, building a strong foundation for students to carry with them into the real world.

While the premise of mandated community service infringes upon the intrinsic nature of what community service is meant to be, its positive impacts can be seen reflected upon the school and community. Students can find boxes of canned goods filled to the brim, elementary children refining their musicality after school, and empowering posters to spread awareness on issues in the PHS hallways. These actions of the student body come as a result of a simple graduation requirement, and while the main intention is to tick that box, the process of reaching that point often leaves a positive mark on our school community, expanding our worldview and making new connections.

College apps or kind hearts: the truth behind community service

On October 11, 2023, sophomores and juniors at Princeton High School spent their day taking the PSAT, with many juniors hoping to achieve the honor of National Merit Scholar. But there was one catch: it was digital. While this may not seem so bad at first, a further look into the inner workings of the digital PSAT and digital SAT reveals more than one first imagines. 
Previously, the PSAT was made up of a total of 139 questions with two hours and 45 minutes of testing without breaks. On the other hand, the current DPSAT is made up of two 32-minute modules for reading and writing combined and two 35-minute math (calculator) modules, with one ten-minute break between the reading and math sections. This makes up for a total of 98 questions and two hours and 14 minutes of testing (excluding the break). Both standardized tests are still scored on the same 1520 scale. The difference? The DPSAT is adaptive. 
The DPSAT being adaptive means that your score for your first reading module affects the type of questions you get for your second reading module, and the same for your math modules. It is still yet uncertain if your score for your overall reading section affects the type of first math module you get, though. Overall, the difficulty of your modules places students on different tiers to be eligible for certain scores on the PSAT. There are a multitude of problems with this. First, what if a student needs time to get into the test-taking mode and they improve as time goes on? Should they be penalized for this by no longer being eligible to reach a certain score? Of course not. Second, how can a test be standardized if people are no longer taking the same test? “Standardize” means to conform to a standard, or to make something consistent and comparable. How can we compare students that are answering entirely different questions? 
Aside from this, this also creates a detrimental change to SAT studying. As we all experienced during the era of the COVID-19 pandemic and Zoom, being on the computer for hours on end is detrimental to our eyesight, attention spans, and mental health. Staring at a piece of paper for three hours was bad enough, but at least you could physically bubble, cross things out, and write annotations, which is helpful for the more hands-on learners. Now, not only do you have to focus on a computer screen for over 2 hours while taking the test, but you also have to include the hours of studying and practice tests you take beforehand, adding at least 2 hours a week to your already far-too-high screen time. 
Still, despite its many weaknesses, there are definitely some advantages to the DPSAT. The reading questions have become much more straightforward and easier to understand. Instead of trying to decipher a dense historical or scientific passage, which can often be subjective and left up to interpretation, students are now more tested on their ability to comprehend the meaning of individually isolated paragraphs. 
Overall, a standardized test is, ultimately, a standardized test, meaning whether students take it now or they wait until January to take the SAT, the tests will still be equally comparable. Furthermore, if students still wish to take a standardized test on paper after January 2024, the ACT is still available on paper. And, with many schools going test-optional, the SAT in college decision-making becomes less and less important each year, so remember to keep in mind that standardized tests will not be the final decision-maker and there are plenty of other things in your control to determine your future college. 

Was the Digital PSAT Unfair?

On Friday, March 17, at 5:30 p.m—just an hour and a half before former Principal Frank Chmiel’s scheduled appearance at the annual Asian Fest—an email from Dr. Carol Kelley and the Board of Education vaguely declared Chmiel’s departure from PPS. With no forewarning on the sudden announcement and no information on the rationale for his termination, frenzy ensued among PPS students and parents. An hour after the email, Ashley Chen ’23 and other C.A.R.E leaders created a petition, named “Chmiel Has Been Fired. We demand transparency and that the Board rescind his termination.”  Within 24 hours of the announcement, the petition had garnered over 1,000 signatures.

From the start, students never knew if demands for more transparency and a repeal of his termination would be met. Despite the uncertainty, students created petitions, demonstrated peacefully, and made statements to the BOE with passion and power, catching the attention of local and state news. Activism may not produce an obvious outcome, but that should not stop people from voicing their concerns: the indirect effects of an action may drive the most important changes.

When the PPS administration dismissed Chmiel, we could have laid low and complied with the difficult decision. Instead, students voiced that Valley Road seemed to be oblivious to our visions of PHS — and how much of it Chmiel brought to life — prior to the dismissal. The vision of PHS that students have is an environment where students could unite under school spirit and where they could feel represented, safe, and taken seriously. Before Chmiel, there was no principal who was as engaged with the students nor took student input as seriously. He instilled an enjoyable and entertaining spirit that balanced our traditional rigorous academic routine. With the first Hispanic Heritage Month and Black History Month assemblies, students felt their culture and identity was more respected than ever. 

Although Chmiel’s dismissal is unlikely to be overturned, this situation has empowered the student body to request that the Board of Education take our voices into consideration. When the Board makes decisions regarding our education and our school environment, we must be permitted to stand up against them. It’s been made abundantly clear that no matter what decisions the PPS administration will take in the future, the students and parents in our district will not be afraid to challenge these resolutions. Our district has already seen improvements made thanks to our activism. The Board of Education held a meeting on March 21st as well as the 28th, in which the board members addressed student and parent comments and concerns.

Most often when people think of student activism, they imagine students protesting against their college administrations for campus issues. On the rare occasions that high schools have protests or speak out about issues in their educational facility, they tend to be based around very threatening issues such as gun control in schools, inclusion of LGBTQ+ youth, or issues regarding mistreatment or abuse of students by teachers. Considering that Principal Chmiel’s termination amassed a peaceful protest, petitions and student outcries for transparency from the BOE, it is clear how seriously students are taking this issue. Student activism is an important tool which we must use in order to voice our opinions regarding decisions made in our very own school hallways.

The Tower calls on the Board of Education to consider the student body vision of PHS’s future when making future decisions and appointing our next principal. Only then can we close this perceived disconnect between administration and students. 

Demanding acknowledgment for our vision of PHS

“Live to learn, learn to live” is the motto that Princeton Public Schools strives to achieve  every day, and being ranked within the top four percent of school systems in the country, PPS has had undeniable success in doing so. In recent years, there’s been an increase in awareness and education on Black History, LGBTQ+ rights, and Latinx heritage, all of which are steps in the right direction to produce a more informed and understanding student body. However, with around 17 percent of the PPS student body needing an individualized education plan (IEP) or learning accommodations, according to the PPS Comprehensive Special Education Review in 2021, awareness and education about disabilities rarely seem to be a topic of discussion within PPS. 
According to the CDC, 26 percent of the total U.S. population currently lives with at least one disability — a physical or mental condition that limits a person’s movements, senses, or actions. Disability awareness is important for understanding the inequities that these individuals face in all facets of society and how to break down the barriers that are caused by an inherently ableist society. 
In the PPS elementary schools, students, for the most part, learn side by side with their peers who have disabilities. While learning with peers with disabilities can help young students recognize what disabilities look like, students should be explicitly taught about what disabilities are and why people with disabilities should be treated with respect. This education can come in the form of assemblies or a “Disabilities Awareness Week” dedicated to disability awareness. Other districts around Princeton have already implemented these types of activities successfully. For example, at Brunswick Acres Elementary School in South Brunswick, there is an annual “Autism Awareness Month,” where the students learn about what it means to have autism, as well as the importance of treating students with disabilities the same as they would with other students despite the treatment that those students receive from the administration. Furthermore, there is an annual “Disabilities Awareness Week” where students can learn about the struggles of having a disability from special education educators as well as how to respectfully speak about the disabilities of others. This education helps students to not only be respectful peers, but also informed and understanding citizens of the world.
Teaching inclusion in elementary schools is only the first step in raising awareness about disabilities, though. When students advance through the grades, the focus on advanced classes and intense extracurriculars increasingly isolates students with disabilities who might not be able to thrive in those environments. As a result of this, students with disabilities may find their class options to be limited and struggle to fit in with others. However, this doesn’t have to be the case. For example, students could be provided with the option to take a musical appreciation course. Instead of focusing solely on perfection and excellence in music, the subject would be taught in a more inclusive and less competitive way. Not only would this allow students with disabilities to have a similar educational experience to students without disabilities, but it would also help students with disabilities to combat the isolation that can come with age.
Moreover, at PHS, ableist slurs such as the R-slur are so integrated into everyday speech that students don’t even seem to understand the implicated ableist undertones. If there is increased education and emphasis on the harmful effects of using such language, our school will be a much more inclusive environment for students with disabilities. 
By initiating programs and activities to promote disability awareness, PPS can create a student body that respects students with disabilities and understands the harmful implications of ableist language. It’s clear that our academic achievements at PHS show that we “live to learn” every day, but by educating students about disabilities, we can be one step closer to “learning to live” in a more equitable world.


The importance of educating students on disabilities

You  see  the  first  question  on  the  math  test  and  freeze.  You  try  to  recall  anything  —  the  notes,  the  review, the textbook problems — to help you solve the  question,  but  your  mind  remains  completely  blank. Anxiety builds and when the bell rings, you shakily hand in your work, already certain that the test did not go well for you. How much better would you feel if this one bad grade, wouldn’t affect your quarter average? Or even better, what if you were able to drop your lowest grade in every class each quarter? Everyone has bad days, and it is unfair to have one bad day affect your overall average. Occasionally, a wave of assignments and responsibilities all converge upon a single day, leaving a student with almost no time to study for that test tomorrow. If a student is consistently getting As on assignments, but one or two flunks are pulling their quarter average to a B, that is a skewed representation of their overall work that quarter. Dropping the lowest grade each quarter provides a more holistic representation of how each student is performing. Even mathematically speaking, outliers decrease the accuracy of the average. In  addition,  dropping  the  lowest  grade  can  encourage  improvement.  At  the  beginning  of  the  year, students are just getting used to the demands of a course and it is normal for a student’s first few grades to be below where they’d like it to be. Of  course  it’s  true  that  grades  aren’t  everything.  Students  should  not  be  conflating  their  self-worth  with the amount of As that they have or their ability to maintain that extolled 4.0. But for an undeniably academically motivated student body, it is still false to say that grades shouldn’t be a student’s focus or that they really don’t matter. For the college admissions process, grades still count for a significant portion of  a  student’s  application—they  affect  our  futures.  Therefore,  it’s  valid  that  grades  are  a  primary  stresser for PHS students and the school should take reasonable measures to relieve that stress. More  often  than  not,  students’  obsession  with  grades in a class surpasses their real interest in the subject,  and  this  common  mindset  results  in  less  enthusiasm in the classroom. A flunk on a large test or assignment can do serious damage to a student’s motivation  to  keep  trying.  With  the  help  of  this  policy,  students  who  would  otherwise  shy  away  from the scarier classes would have the opportunity to challenge themselves intellectually and focus on learning.  This is not to say that when students do poorly on an  assignment,  they  should  just  be  able  to  drop  it  and forget about it. On the contrary, it is crucial that they evaluate, correct, and reflect on their mistakes. Teachers should require that their students complete corrections for their assignments to ensure that they grow and improve. These policies have been effective in many English and history classes, where students are  commonly  required  to  reflect  on  their  essays,  setting them up for sucess on their next. This should be extended to all math and science classes. Instead of  feeling  the  sense  of  panic  that  a  singular  grade  can instill, students should instead feel motivated to push themselves when they don’t initially succeed.  Universities have been successful in implementing similar  grade-dropping  policies.  For  example,    Princeton University allows math students to drop two of their lowest homework grades. In fact, a 2013 study done by Raymond MacDermott demonstrated that  when  students  were  able  to  drop  their  lowest  grade, their performance on final exams improved.  Instead  of  letting  students  sulk  over  their  worst  moments, PHS should teach students to learn and grow from them. Just like how one bad time, perhaps because  of  fatigue  or  an  injury,  doesn’t  define  an  athlete’s abilities, one bad score, whether it be a test, essay or lab report,  shouldn’t define a student’s overall grade.  By  letting  students  drop  their  lowest  grade  in each class, students are less fixated on perfecting every grade, and more focused on their learning. 

How to make grades fairer

It’s hard to find anyone at PHS who wants to return to  remote  learning.  The  last  couple  years  of  Zoom  meetings in lieu of in-person classes resulted in social isolation and a poor learning environment for students at PHS. With the world slowly recovering, the district debuted a new policy surrounding remote learning. The administration decreed that students are no longer allowed to learn virtually. This new policy, intended to bring a sense of normalcy back to PHS, means that even if a student is out of school because they have to quarantine with COVID-19, they are not allowed to participate in their classes using Zoom. However, such a policy is a step back for education.
Despite  the  obvious  downsides  to  learning  on  Zoom,  such  as  the  inability  for  students  to  truly  connect  with  teachers  and  peers,  the  application  is  still  a  valuable  tool  and  should  not  be  disparaged.  Zoom  is  just  one  of  many  beneficial  technologies  that  we  were  introduced  to  during  the  pandemic.  For example, we all adapted to Canvas and are now comfortable using it for almost all of our assignments. We also adapted to online textbooks, eliminating the need to lend out physical copies which are easily lost. The district’s efforts to move on from virtual learning ignore the benefits that it has offered and will be able to offer its students. 
Requiring students to quarantine after contracting COVID-19 while simultaneously taking away their ability  to  virtually  participate  in  class  makes  it  difficult for them to stay up to date with their work. Therefore, this new decision encourages sick students to  come  into  school  when  they  are  supposed  to  be  quarantined or opt to not test for COVID-19 at all. While infection rates are low right now, our town is still not quite in the clear yet, with Mercer County still exceeding 150 reported active cases as recently as  October  5.  Ignoring  the  reality  that  COVID-19  is still with us and making it harder for students to isolate will encourage transmission at the high school, and ultimately keep the pandemic around for longer. 
Even beyond COVID-19, the district should also consider allowing students who are absent for other reasons to use Zoom; for instance, if a student had strep throat, they would still be able to follow along with a lecture from home. But if they were not allowed to listen in virtually, they would be compelled to attend school to understand the material, which could cause the contagious disease to quickly spread through the student body. Of course, students shouldn’t be able to just stay home for any reason — the school should still  enforce  the  absence  limit  and  ask  for  forms  of  verification like doctor’s notes. 
Such a policy would not be without precedent: at Princeton University, professors are required to either Zoom sick students into class or record their lectures for  the  entire  duration  of  the  students’  quarantine,  thus ensuring that their students can remain engaged throughout the semester. While high school courses may  not  be  as  fast-paced  or  rigorous  as  university  classes, they are still demanding — missing just one math  class,  for  example,  could  leave  a  student  an  entire unit behind the rest of the class. The pandemic was a painful period for everyone, but it would be a mistake to try to wipe away all of the  things  that  it  left  behind.  The  district  needs  to  reconsider its decision to cancel online learning. The worst thing PHS can do right now is forget all of the lessons  that  COVID-19  taught  us.  Permitting  the  careful use of applications like Zoom would benefit everyone at our school. 

The value of online learning 

Throughout history, certain books have emerged as  “classics”  —  literary  works  considered  to  be  so  significant that they remain must reads for centuries after  publication.  The  genre  itself  encompasses  everything  from  the  masterpieces  of  ancient  civilizations  to  more  modern  classics  like  “Moby  Dick” and “Pride and Prejudice”. They often serve as a measure of how educated and scholarly we are as individuals, because although it may sound cliché, we do in fact get smarter as we read more classics. Reading the classics brings attention to prominent social issues that are still left  unresolved today, sharpens critical reading skills, and allows us to think more insightfully. When  many  of  us  think  of  classics,  we  often  don’t  consider the multitude of benefits that we can get by reading them. Overall, this has resulted in students losing sight of the importance of reading the classics
Arguably the greatest misconception that we have towards the classics is that we don’t have enough to gain from them since they are “outdated.” It is obviously true  that  attitudes  towards  prominent  issues  like  race  and  gender  were  different  a  few  centuries  ago  from how they are today, and the classics are often inappropriate  and  distasteful  with  respect  to  these  matters. However, rejecting the classics outright for this  reason  is  doing  us  a  great  disservice.  Reading  about  past  cultures  can  demonstrate  the  societal  progress we have made, while also highlighting the progress that still needs to be made. Although many of the author’s perspectives on social issues are indeed outdated, the issues themselves aren’t. Whether it be mental health in Sylvia Plath’s “The Bell Jar,” race in “To Kill a Mockingbird,” or even social isolation in “The Scarlet Letter,” many of humanity’s past problems still  exist  today.  The  fact  that  these  same  struggles  have  plagued  mankind  for  centuries  is  a  testament  to their gravity and difficulty. When reading a classic, you will be surprised to find that many similarities exist between the racist, bigoted past and our present. These similarities highlight the work that we still have to  do.  Until  the  enduring  problems  found  within  the classics are fully addressed, these books cannot become obsolete. 
Reading the classics can also boost a reader’s critical thinking  skills.  Because  the  classics  are  written  in  more antiquated language than what we use today, the reader needs to think more critically about the message the author is trying to convey while reading their  work.  We  live  in  an  age  when  information  is  rapidly conveyed and consumed, where we have access to  practically  the  whole  world  at  our  fingertips.  A  drawback to this development is that we have become lazy with the media that we consume. We don’t look deep  enough  into  what  we  read  to  understand  the  nuances of the author’s statement. Instead, we take things at face value and become agitated when we don’t immediately understand things. Classics prompt us to be more patient and have a more nuanced perception of the world around us, both of which are crucial to becoming a well-adjusted member of society. 
Aside from just paying attention to classics more in school, it’s more important that we also change our perspective towards them. For those of us who don’t have an innate passion for literature, reading anything can  seem  like  a  chore,  let  alone  reading  dense  and  challenging books written in bygone eras. Needless to say, the primary purpose of reading is for pleasure and enjoyment, and each student is entitled to read whatever absorbs them. However, it’s important that we, as readers, step out of our literary comfort zone. We  must  not  be  discouraged  by  the  complexity  or  unfamiliarity  of  a  new  book.  In  fact,  being  able  to  handle novel or difficult experiences is part of what makes a person more interpretive and intelligent. 
Living in the 21st century comes with its blessings and pitfalls, and it is important that we take advantage of what it has to offer, while also not succumbing to its negative repercussions. Our generation prioritizes convenience: We always want to get straight to the point. We all know the frustration of having to reread a sentence because it didn’t make any sense the first time around. But making progress is never easy — struggling is part of the process. Reading the classics counteracts the urge to speed through what we read, and  forces  us  to  dig  a  little  deeper.  As  a  result,  we  become  more  inquisitive,  open-minded,  culturally  aware, and more of an authority on several subjects. The  depth  and  complexity  that  lies  at  the  heart  of  all  classics  is  what  makes  them  special  —  they’re  representative of human nature itself.

Editorial's Work

The Tower