The 2019-2020 school year begins on a string of promising weather, rejuvenated sports teams, and a new advisory program. Incorporated into the tightly packed school days comes a four-day club rotation schedule, in which waves of student-organised clubs dedicate themselves to academic excellence, acts of service, and interests unable to be supported by their courses.
Along with the new advisory program, however, comes new points of conflict for the student body and their extracurricular commitments. As the student council and Mr. Clapp altered the club rotation schedule to accomodate the new program, many student executives and members of multiple clubs were forced to drop overlapping clubs––of which some had founded––that had posed no conflict of time in the years prior.
So why is this becoming an issue this year?
According to Mr. Clapp, head of the PDHS Club Council, the new advisory system means that “half the teachers have meetings during the club time on Mondays, and half on Fridays,” thereby limiting teachers to only supervise clubs on specific days. “And because of that, clubs were placed on Mondays or Fridays based on who their advisor was.”
“I know that some students think it [club day assignment] was based on random selection,” he said, “but it was really based on advisor availability.”
Clapp went on to further explain how club applications move from student club executives’ hands onto the club rotation schedule. “I start by putting together a draft, and I have the student council [STUCO executives] look at it, and they [offer input] like, ‘hey, there’s limited conflicts if we move this club to this day.” From there, the finalised draft is passed onto Dr. Lee, where the official schedule is published in the first weeks of the school year.
When asked about the lack of representation of clubs the student council executives were less informed on, he said that “the clubs we knew less about were really placed based on their advisor. And maybe that’s not the best way to go about it, and maybe we get input from those students in the future.”
Among the student body affected by the club day assignments, there seems to be certain consensuses on how clubs should be organised. David Lu, a senior and co-president and co-founder of the French Club, co-president of Operation Hope, and former member of National Art Honor Society (NAHS), agrees that having a teacher supervisor and prioritising academics over club commitments should remain constant.
“What ends up being is that, some kids are the execs of one club, but they’re also the execs of another club. But given the schedule restrictions, there wasn’t anywhere to place those clubs, and so they got placed on the same day,” said Clapp, illustrating the reoccurring issue among students who have approached him. This lies in accordance with Lu’s view of the issue, who also notes the challenge of having to balance club days with the new advisory program, and the limiting effect of it on where teachers can supervise.
Disagreement lay in a wholly other aspect of the problem: the approach towards resolving the issue.
In both a Schoology post on September 3rd, 2019, as well as the interview, Clapp’s message to the students affected by overlapping clubs centres around one mantra. “My message to students has really been, ‘life is full of choices,’ and this might be one of those instances where you have to choose which one is more important to you,” he said. “I hate that that’s the case, but given the nature of the schedule, it’s been difficult to find alternatives.”
Clapp also maintains a relatively positive opinion on the rotation schedule. “I think the rotation is good, in terms of having four rotating days––I think it allows students plenty of time to meet.”
The sentiment is less than reciprocated among the student body. The first major issue they see is the lack of student voice when deciding club days, especially concerning clubs STUCO executives are less familiar with. “During the mid-term club applications, they did ask for our preferred club days, so I think they know to an extent the club days each club wants to be on,” said Lu. “But this year the club application looked a lot different–– I don’t think they actually asked which day we want to be on.”
The input of students in deciding club days, however little it may finally weigh next to other logistical demands, remains crucial. The lack of including student voice ties in with a pervading issue, most prominently felt among the senior class––many of the graduating class have founded and lead clubs since their freshman year, and are only now facing the issue of overlapping, long-term commitments. Lu cites Jasmine Liu, vice-president of NAHS and president of Operation Hope. In previous years, NAHS meetings occurred on Club Day 3, and Operation Hope on Day 4. This year, however, both were placed on Day 3. “She’s been in the club [Operation Hope] since freshman year, and her sister was also one of the founders. So she had to make a choice to quit Operation Hope, which I knew meant a lot to her. And she was forced to make a choice. And we’re [Operation Hope executives] pretty salty because we had planned a lot of stuff together, and we had had high hopes for this year.”
Students also question the practicality of the club assignments on each day. “I think their thinking was to spread an even amount of interest, service, and honor clubs on each day––I don’t think that’s good, because, like others in my case, all your interest, service, and honor club could end up on one day,” said Lu. He then proposes an alternative to the current balance: to split the four club days by interests, honor societies, and service clubs, rather than having a mix on each day. “People mainly want to focus on one interest, and Some people only join one service––or you should only join one service, because it allows you to focus on one community to help. If it’s spread out like that, I believe that they would have [fewer] conflicts.”
Another proposed change was to remove the extended learning periods, so that the entire rotation could fit into one week. “If I can only meet with my members every other week, sometimes even longer due to breaks, it would take much longer to plan out stuff. Additionally, it makes it harder for me to check up on their progress, their questions, et cetera,” said Lu.
The final debated feature of how clubs are organized is the forced attendance list––teacher supervisors must send in a Schoology form of the members present at the start of every meeting. “For Operation Hope, our system is more based on contribution, and not just meetings–it’s pretty pointless to show up for meetings and not help out outside [of them],” said Lu. Operation Hope’s original system operated more on a sign-up sheet basis, where people attended or made up for missed in-school meetings with outside work. “I don’t think [the attendance list is] the best way of determining who should be part of the club or who is actually contributing.”
Logistically speaking, the club rotation issues seem to have reached a stalemate. Both the student body and the administrative powers behind the scheduling understand that the biggest obstacle, the advisor system, exists as an external force to which neither have decisive power.
Regardless, the issue remains a valuable learning opportunity for both the student body and its representatives. The arrival of the advisory program challenges both parties to be flexible and open to change; the surplus in club conflicts this year unveiling an unbalanced relationship in voice and choice among those who represent and those who are represented.