New Grading Policy

By Janina Manaloto ‘26

This year, the grading policy follows an 80-10-10 format: summative assessment (tests and projects) 80%, preparation (homework) 10%, and engagement (participation) 10%. Though some students view this new policy as a positive development due to the consistency of grading across all their classes, others consider it a drawback since summative assignments carry significant weight. 

Students with opposing voices provide a variety of critiques against the new grading policy. Some believe that the weight of assignment types should vary based on the subject. For example, engagement should carry more weight than summatives in language classes since more emphasis is put on overall students’ interactions with the language through speaking, writing, and listening during class. Other students have expressed their stress over this new system. They may feel at a disadvantage if their stronger areas are in participation rather than test-taking. Yet, the impact of summative assignment grades overshadows the other two grading categories to some extent.

Overall, there are varying opinions among students about this new grading policy. As the school year progresses, many hope that the system will promote fairness and consistency in assessment.

Why Sunday Detention Missed a Mark

By Joey Huang ‘28 and Nathan Zhou ‘29

Every school needs rules. Without them, the classroom would become noisy, deadlines would be ignored, and learning would be impeded. Sunday detention was initially introduced to keep these rules in place, and many teachers view it as a strong, meaningful message to students who do not follow the rules. Via Sunday detention, students may have time to reflect on their actions, finish their homework, and experience the consequences for violating the rules. In theory, this does indeed sound fair! 

Yet from a student’s perspective, Sunday detention feels more like a punishment than an opportunity for self-reflection. Sunday is often the only day students can truly relax after a long stretch of homework, athletic activities, classes, and tests. Especially for IV, V, and VI formers, students are sometimes overwhelmed by excessive coursework and stressed out due to their preparation for college applications. Losing a Sunday morning to detention is not just a lesson or a punishment anymore; it acts as a burden, adding more stress and leaving students with little time to rest or recover before the week begins.

What makes it worse is how easily students can end up in detention. Imagine staying up until midnight fighting through your homework only for your alarm to fail the next morning. Even if it happens just once, you will be drafted to the “St. Mark’s Detention League”. Under the current rules, that tiny slip could cost you your entire Sunday. Instead of encouraging responsibility, this rather creates anxiety over accidents that are beyond our control.

Sunday detention can also have a negative impact on students’ lives in other ways. Missing out on a day of rest after a demanding school week may further contribute to stress, anxiety, and even mental health challenges. Taking that away can increase burnout and lower overall performance in the following week. Furthermore, sitting silently in a classroom does not guarantee that students actually reflect on their behavior, with many just counting down the minutes instead of learning from the experience. Moreover, Sunday detention treats a forgotten alarm the same as repeated misbehavior. It ignores context and effort, making discipline feel mechanical and unfair. 

After speaking with the Dean of Students, Dr. Fish, he stated that the school is actively listening to students’ feedback and working to make changes that benefit them the most. He said, “I love it when students express disagreement with any rules they think should be improved. A healthy school environment is one where students have different, constructive opinions that can help make the school a better place, and the school should genuinely consider any student’s opinion, no matter who.”  

Losing a sleep-in on a Sunday morning certainly is not fun. Having a Sunday detention scheduled stresses the mood going into the weekend, and the dean's office is well aware of that. However, showing up to school and being present is a responsibility that comes with being part of the community. Skipping a commitment not only undermines the sense of belonging but also hinders academic growth. 

Last year, without this detention policy, attendance at chapel and school meetings was miserable. With no consequences for skipping, many students simply chose not to attend. These gatherings, however, are vital—they bring the school together and foster a stronger sense of community. Furthermore, the “bandwagon effect” sets in: once a few students start skipping, others will follow. Sunday detention is designed to break this cycle and encourage students to take every school commitment seriously. 

“When a student violates the community standard, there needs to be a consequence that is both effective and immediate in order for them not to violate the rule again,” explains Dr. Fish, the Dean of Students. An immediate consequence in the same week is thus necessary for a change in behavior. And ever since the Sunday detention policy has been implemented, there has been a notable rise in attendance at assemblies and chapel. Now, the school community comes together to sing, reflect, and pray for one another.

In the long run, Sunday detention teaches responsibility and reinforces the idea that education should come first. Knowing that skipping class will cost part of their weekend, students may think twice before making that choice. Rather than serving as a punishment, this policy emphasizes the importance of being present in school programming. 

The Problem with the Perfect Score

By Saanvi Sandineni ‘29 and Olivia Sun ‘29

Every week, students across the country face another quiz, unit test, or exam— each one promising to measure what they have learned. Grades and scores have become the ultimate markers of “intelligence,” shaping how students see themselves and how others judge their abilities. But can a test grade really capture the depth of someone's understanding or potential? Some argue that tests provide a fair, objective way to track progress and hold students accountable across all schools and backgrounds. Others believe they ignore creativity, critical thinking, and the nuances of stress and anxiety that make tests a sore spot for many students. These are the parts of intelligence that cannot be measured by a set of right or wrong answers. The question remains: do tests reflect real intelligence, or simply the ability to recall information under pressure? 

In Defense of Standardized Testing

Standardized tests often get a bad reputation among students—and it is easy to see why. Long hours of studying, stressful exam days, and the endless bubble sheets can make these tests feel more like a chore than a helpful tool. But take a closer look, and it’s clear that standardized testing actually plays an important role in keeping the student body on track. By measuring everyone against the same standards, these exams ensure that all students, no matter what class or teacher they have, are learning the essential skills they need. A 2018 study from the Brookings Institution found that standardized tests help schools measure student learning fairly and consistently, giving educators a clearer picture of what is working and what is not. To really gauge the benefits of tests, we interviewed one of our own teachers here at St. Mark's. She concluded that tests were indeed “a good way to keep things standard across all classes and ensure all our kids are learning the information they need for the future.” Also, they make it easier to see if students are truly grasping the material rather than just memorizing facts.

But fairness is not the only reason standardized tests can benefit students. They also motivate learners to study more effectively and retain knowledge longer. When a big exam is on the horizon, students cannot rely on shortcuts—they have to review, practice, and truly understand the material. Research from the Harvard Graduate School of Education in 2019 supports this, showing that students who prepared for standardized exams were more likely to remember what they learned over time. While no one is likely to say that standardized tests are “fun,” they do encourage good study habits, accountability, and a sense of academic discipline. In a way, these tests help make sure everyone has the tools they need to succeed, both in school and beyond.

The Case Against the Perfect Score

A test is not a good measure of academic ability because the ability to memorize a set of given information is not the same as being able to consciously understand the reasoning behind the tasks and know how to execute the steps rationally. For instance, while some people fully comprehend all the concepts, they struggle with taking tests due to their test anxiety.

The factor of test anxiety always seems to appear, no matter how much a person studies or prepares. No matter how prepared they are, they might be prone to forgetting the material. Thus, test anxiety is an uncontrollable factor in the process of test taking that can greatly hinder a student’s ability to perform to their best. A personal reflection by a student echoes, “Growing up, I would always feel some level of test anxiety while taking, like, state testing. And I don't think I generally get to perform to the best of my ability.” In addition, data show that high test anxiety can hurt performance regardless of intelligence. In a survey of 200 teens, 187 reported having some sort of test anxiety. 54% of students from the sample fell in the range of moderately high to extremely high test anxiety. The majority agreed that tests are not the best indicator of intelligence, especially when there are more effective ways to address understanding.

Building on this foundation, we interviewed the students and teachers in St. Mark’s, asking for their views on standardized tests. Most comments concluded that tests are indeed not a good measure of intelligence. Though they are held in high regard, there are better ways to evaluate students’ knowledge on a topic. Another belief shared by many is, “Assessment can be useful when employed correctly, but it can’t be the sole factor that determines a student's overall intelligence.” A teacher replies to the opinion, stating, “It simply shows how well you can take the test, not necessarily whether you are good at math or successful as a writer.” For example, a student with a very, very high intelligence quotient could perform very, very poorly on a standardized test if they don’t prepare for it, showing that tests are not great tools for judging subjects, but rather for measuring the ability to memorize all the material instead of processing it cognitively. 

Taken together, these statements are only a few gathered among the student body. The evidence above shows that tests, by popular opinion of both teacher and students, are not known to be a good measure of a student’s ability to understand and utilize the material given. Instead, it is a test on the skill of taking a test, making it, to some degree, invalid when it comes to judgment on a student’s academic capabilities.  

So maybe it is time to rethink how we define academic success. After all, we are taught that learning should be about understanding, not just bubbling in the right answers. 

Maybe it is time to rethink what we are really measuring. Though tests are normally seen as a “fair” way to track knowledge and accountability, they can only show what we remember at the moment, but cannot capture creativity, curiosity, or the pressure that shapes the outcome. Equating scores with intelligence risks valuing memorization over true understanding. In the end, the smartest students are not always the best test-takers; they are those who continue to learn long after the test has ended.

Phone Policy and Dress Code

By Zoey Lee ‘27

Along with the many new administrators this year came new policies, including the phone policy and the enforcement of the dress code using the phone policy. The execution of the phone policy kicked off with a great start at the beginning of the year. Teachers made sure every student turned their phone in at the start of each class. Unsurprisingly, the effort to maintain this policy has quickly waned over the past two months. Teachers no longer count them, and rarely explicitly ask for phones. Nevertheless, the act of submitting phones has not brought a drastic change to my classroom experience. There were two significant effects. One being random alarms going off in class, forcing the teacher to identify the phone causing such cacophony; the other is that students constantly forget to retrieve their phones at the end of class. I think the whole thing is just an inconvenience. Everything you can do on a phone, you can do on a computer. The one thing that has brought me enjoyment from this whole thing is hearing all the different names that people call the phone container: purgatory, phone jail, phone parking lot, phone caddy, etc.

As for the dress code, it has not been enforced in the past years, so there was a developed “norm” separate from the actual dress code. People barely knew what the actual dress code stated. The “norm” seemed to draw the line at sweatpants and busy graphics. I wish the dress code could have been changed to align with the norm rather than its current rules. Also, I find “blouses” to be a vague term. I see people wearing tight t-shirts all the time. Does that count as a blouse? I also do not understand how tank tops are more conducive to a productive learning environment than t-shirts. I have also seen teachers wear t-shirts. Although the administration is trying to enforce the dress code by saying that teachers will take our phones and hand them to the Dean’s office if we’re out of dress code, I have only ever seen one actual case of this. I can say for sure that I’ve seen more instances of people being out of dress code. There is a discrepancy between what they say they will do and what actually gets done. To me, it seems like the administration cares, but teachers don’t as much.

Nothing to See Here, Trustees - It’s Always this Delicious

By Dingyi Ling ‘28

Over the past two years at the St. Mark's Dining Hall, students have repeatedly raised concerns about major fluctuations in food quality, driven by visits from those in power. While the dining hall claims its menu consistently offers healthy, appealing meals, many students' daily experiences suggest otherwise. Ultimately, a school exists to serve students, not to impress trustees or parents only when needed to maintain revenue. Students eat here three times a day and shape this community. It can be said that without the students, the dining hall would serve no purpose. However, too often, when those in power visit campus, everything changes overnight. St. Mark's suddenly becomes a different place: the focus snaps to students, the spotlight steadies, and quality spikes—until the visit ends. That pattern signals a deeper problem: students' voices are discounted, while attention gravitates toward whoever controls the spotlight's plug. No one is faulted for being human: we fault the intuition when it calls us "family" but refuse to be honest or accountable about a student's daily life. If St. Mark's truly centers students, it should not just focus on quality when it is put to the test, but also consider students' feedback. In recent years, food quality has improved, but students' voices are not being heard. 

SDC Transition to SAC

Bella Ong ‘26 & Janina Manaloto ‘26

A significant change to the Student Disciplinary Committee (SDC), a program that has been in effect since the founding of St. Mark's in 1865, has occurred with the appointment of a new dean of students and dean of academics. Under the leadership of our new dean of students, the committee has been rebranded and will now take the name of the Student Accountability Committee (SAC). Instead of the process being similar to a trial, the committee members will have healthy and reflective conversations with the rule breaker to help them reflect on their mistakes and become a better member of our community. This approach is deemed more conducive to supporting students’ growth. Nevertheless, the SAC will assess the comprehensive situation of the student, and they will still suggest a punishment to the head of the school for consideration. 

While many programs and rules have been altered over the past few years, the SDC, composed of elected students and faculty, remained the same. The SDC is responsible for addressing situations involving rule violations and recommending suitable punishments. 

By the end of this first year, the school will assess the effectiveness of this new program. Hopefully, it will create an environment for students to be comfortable with difficult conversations while also reducing rule-breaking, as it is important to hold others accountable for their actions in a way that does not embarrass the student. In this process, it is a student-to-student conversation, as their experiences are more relatable to their peers. The goal of the SAC is not only to deepen relationships between students but also to allow SAC members to grow as leaders. 

There have been numerous changes to St. Mark’s, the SAC being a significant one. The SAC hopes for students to view it as a learning experience rather than an intimidating one. In the past, SDC has been viewed in a negative light. Hopefully, the SAC will allow students to learn from their mistakes in a more lenient manner. 

9/11: Remembering America’s Darkest Day

Sammi Ruzzo ’28

As we settle back into the school year, our main priorities and tasks at hand relate to getting back into an academic rhythm, turning in our assignments, and trying to stay afloat. To most, September seems like a time of anxiety and stress, where our own problems cloud over anything that happens around us in the world. As life continuously gets busier, it seems that we have stopped reflecting on the date that has left an indelible mark on our country: September 11, 2001. The fateful day that sparked tragedy, shock, and an unexpected force of unity has been honored and reflected upon for over two decades. 

In the St. Mark’s community, none of the students is old enough to have been alive on this day. None of us is truly able to understand the weight that this day holds for our country, as the pivotal moment changed the history of the United States forever. However, if the average St. Marker asks their parents or even their grandparents about their memory of this day, the chances are, they will remember exactly where they were. Many were in a pure state of shock, watching the World Trade Center, once standing tall in the bustling New York City, crumble in front of their eyes, transforming into nothing but debris. On this tragic day, 2976 people were killed, and countless more were injured. Today, when people visit the 9/11 memorial, their names are listed more like a cold statistical number rather than actual human beings whose lives were taken. 

As the years go on, the sentiment of this day seems to be fading. Of course, this is natural to the way of life; people tend to forget as time passes. But this day can teach us a few things about unity. After 9/11, this country discovered a new form of togetherness. A majority of American adults collectively experienced fear, anger, and depression all in one. Beyond this, Americans felt patriotism, the purest form of pride there is. 9/11 transcended political division for a short period of time. The date seems like the only event that can truly unite Americans, regardless of beliefs or values. 

The unity that September 11th brought 25 years ago heavily contrasts the political climate of our country today. In the last decade or so, American politics and government have been on a heater, constantly under a microscope, being picked at and torn apart. Political violence has ramped up, becoming a norm in our society. With events such as the assassination attempts on President Trump and the death of political commentator Charlie Kirk, violence has become one main way to settle differences of opinion. On September 11, violence was the enemy, with everyone united under the belief that no fellow American should lose their life. When the incredibly courageous first responders charged into the burning Twin Towers, they tried to save anyone possible. They did not care what political beliefs they held or if they disagreed with their own beliefs. They cared about saving lives. That statement in itself is the most American sentiment there is. This country was built on the principles of looking out for each other, a nation where all beliefs are allowed, and everyone is equally American. The core of America is still with us, but it has been harder to see throughout these past years. 

As we reflect on our September at St. Mark’s, we should also reflect on one of the darkest days in American history, September 11, 2001. This tragic day truly puts into perspective the tainted history of our country, but it also exemplifies what makes our country so great. The response to 9/11 was absolutely fierce and patriotic, qualities that have become gray areas in our American society today. The beauty of the American spirit should be remembered because, after all, forgetting 9/11 is forgetting what it means to be an American.

Schedule Change at St. Mark’s

Hannah Macron ‘26 and Manasa Mahesh ‘27

The 2025-26 school year brings inevitable change, from faculty to food, to most importantly, the new schedule. Instead of the traditional color blocks, the schedule is now organized in alphabetical order.

The alphabet system itself is easy to recall, with blocks shapeshifting to A through G, but events throughout the day are morphed. Chapel is no longer promptly after breakfast. Now, we are all shepherded into the chapel after one morning class, which, admittedly, has hardly seen such consistently full attendance. School meeting feels rather stilted and formal under the bright lights of the PFAC rather than the partially broken couches of the Center, but again, attendance has never been more thriving (likely in part due to the strict policies implemented on it). Getting rid of the frequently interspersed community blocks and x-blocks throughout the week, Dr. Hills and his staff have decided on the office hours twice a week for a rousing 30 minutes for students to track down teachers or make progress with homework, and a singular club/faculty meeting block at the end of the week.  

Nevertheless, the breaks between classes have been extended. The ever-dull passing period between classes, where it normally takes people around five minutes to walk from class to class, has extended to ten. Realistically, it has helped with the omnipresent hunger of St. Mark’s students who are always searching for a way to grab snacks between classes, but it can be irritating when you are not in that position of hunger.  

In all honesty, the new schedule is both a pain and more productive to execute in the long term. As a fourth-year student, I occasionally find myself walking to the chapel in the morning to the beat of the retired schedule, but I also can appreciate that these changes will, in all likelihood, make our community more tight-knit and inclusive in all opportunities offered. 

Robotaxi

Chelsea Cao ‘28

The power of the engine, the comfort of the interior, and the grip and handling of the wheel for generations have defined the quality of the driving experience. In a country in which driving a car is synonymous with freedom and independence, the notion of the autonomous vehicle can be strange and disconcerting, to say the least. However, the age of the autonomous vehicle is drawing near. The idea of the self-driving vehicle is not without its merits. It has the potential to save time and lives. One of the pioneers of this new technology, Elon Musk, has invented an autonomous taxi, called Robotaxi. The technology behind it is creative and advanced: it uses Cameria, which allows the cars to “see” the traffic lights and “read” signs on the road, Radar, which uses radio waves to measure speed and distance, and LiDar, which uses lasers to create a 3D map of the surrounding environment. You may have seen them on the news, or maybe even had the eerie experience of passing one on the road. However, the question remains: does this technology promise a brighter, safer, more efficient future of transportation, or are we creating a future filled with unforeseen problems?

For all autonomous machines, the main concern is safety. According to the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), there were 3,275 traffic fatalities and 324,819 injuries due to distracted driving in 2023 (“Distracted Driving | Traffic Safety Marketing”). On the other hand, with its sophisticated sensors and complex algorithms, the Robotaxi will never experience the physical limits of the human body: getting tired, angry, sleepy, or distracted. More specifically, it will rigorously follow traffic laws, never falling prey to road rage or drunken driving. From this perspective, the use of automated vehicles could reduce the traffic accidents caused by distractions and other human errors. 

On the other hand, people opposed to this new technology criticize its safety record. Unfortunately, since Robotaxi began serving the public in June of this year, several accidents have been reported. According to the posts on NBC News, the sensors of the Full Self-Driving Software (FSD) of the Robotaxi failed to detect the oncoming train when the driver, Italo Frigoli, was crossing the railway (Ingram). If Mr. Frigoli had not manually stopped the car, the autonomous system would have driven him into the approaching train, likely resulting in serious injury or death. If this were the only case, then there wouldn’t be much cause for concern. However, there were six other incidents that encountered the same issue. As a result, scientists and experts criticize the Robotaxi as an impending “disaster.”

The final issue is the ethical dilemma that the vehicles will face. The most popular example is the famous “trolley problem,” in which a person must choose between saving their child or five innocent victims. In a situation when a crash is unavoidable, how will the car be able to make such a choice? Should it choose to prioritize the larger number of people or to protect its own passengers? These moral questions are not easy to answer. Obviously, this is not merely an academic question, as there are very real scenarios that must be taken into account by the engineers who design and the government officials who legislate this technology. 

Innovators like Elon Musk have a strong ambition to improve our world; however, ambition alone won’t solve the challenges and complicated issues that such technology inevitably poses. It requires careful revision, continuous testing, and a willingness to address the complex social and ethical issues. Only when technology, society, and ethics move forward together can Robotaxi be introduced to the public.