4 Day Week Schedule: Is Cramming 21 Classes in 4 Days the Best Way to Manage a Short Week

By Lauren Laskowsky ’29 and Jay O Park ’30

When the students of St. Mark's checked their calendars, many were shocked by the upcoming second week of school. In big and bold letters, a daunting 6-class Monday sat on their laptop screens, the beginning of a four-day week packed with 21 classes. This led students to wonder, “Why on Earth do we need to meet with our teachers 3 times in 4 days?”

September 7th, and the start of the second week of school, immediately plugged kids into the intensity of the shortened schedule. Six classes meant students had to move nonstop, and the additional homework was unending. Justin Yang, a 4th former, says, “I had almost four hours of homework every day.” For some, the schedule was so packed that there was barely enough time to eat lunch before moving on to the next commitment. The shortened lunch time, along with the incredibly long line to wait for your food, turned what normally would be one of the few breaks in the academic day into something students had to rush through.

The next day was like Monday all over again: six classes, back to back with what felt like no breathing room. The homework load showed no mercy, and neither did our sleep schedules. Ms. Plimpton, English department head and teacher, had shared some of her thoughts with us, and she said, “To launch the year with two back-to-back irregular weeks felt super disorienting. The four-day week drained me of all life force. I blame my cold on the whiplash!” She described the four-day week as draining and almost sucking the life out of her. We can attest that everyone else felt the same exact way, Ms. Plimpton.

By September 9th, it’s hump day. Everyone was trying to make it through the week on very little sleep, along with athletic games stacked on top of the heavy workload. A normal Wednesday schedule consists of three one-hour and five-minute classes; now it has four 55-minute classes. The four-day week schedule was like jumping on a treadmill moving 200 miles per hour, with no training at all. Your brain is moving faster than you physically can. Is meeting your teachers three separate times in four days really worth the sleepless nights and shoving two pieces of pizza in your mouth in under 5 minutes because you don’t have time to sit down? We think not.

On Thursday, it was the final stretch. The feeling that the hellish schedule is finally coming to an end. But no! A new activity has been implemented for Friday. Form day! When you finally think you’ll get some reprieve, you have to do form bonding with your grade for the entire next day. Come on, wouldn’t you be excited to make cardboard chariots with your classmates at 8 A.M. right after what it felt like being thrown in the wringer? It seemed to never end. Emily Tian ‘29 said, “I’m taking 7 classes this semester, and I can’t seem to take a break. I am going to sleep at the wee hours of the morning, and it’s only the second week of school.” She seemed like she’s going through it, and that was just a taste of it.

What does the Student Life Office have to say? The student body monitors are meeting with the Student Life Office on September 30th to explain themselves and what they can do. Will the monitors make a change? Will the students' voices be heard?

Phone Policy: Solution to Social Media Addiction or a Barrier in Student Life?

By Serena Lin ’28 and Nina Zhang ’29

A buzz of excitement, along with the never-ending chattering, ran down the hallways on the first day of the new school year; along with that, though, something was missing: the constant checking of phones. An email was sent out before the school year officially kicked off; an uproar of student dissatisfaction began, cell phones were no longer permitted on campus. Not for checking schedules, not for knowing the time, and not for looking out for emails.

You know that wide-eyed look you get when you’re new to a place and you can’t find anything? We usually see that look on new students trying to find their way around; however, this year, it appeared on every single person trying to find their friends after chapel or an all-school assembly. It was practically impossible, with every person in the school having a different place they needed to get to.

The first day was beyond chaotic, with lost students everywhere and people pulling out laptops in the middle of the hallways to check their schedules or where they were supposed to be headed. Yet, this phenomenon continued; students were often late to classes, without easy access to a clock or their schedules; we were like ships without rudders.

Student dissatisfaction grew. In past years, students were able to pull their phones out of their pockets and check special schedules. Under the restriction of the phone policy, students are not allowed to do this. Although there are reminders at events that tell students where to go, there has been inconvenience in passing them around. The phone policy also caused inconvenience in terms of academic learning. Previously, students were able to take photos of notes or do a quick revision on their phones before class. Now, this can only be done on laptops and iPads.

“I feel like the phone policy doesn’t change anything except that I cannot text my friends to find them,” said a student in response to the phone policy. The phone policy limits communication to in-person and excludes online texting.

Still, changes were noticed; people began to interact more with each other and talk to people they’ve never really acknowledged before. Voices began to increase in common spaces, and the laughter that accompanied Instagram reels no longer existed. In a world where digital communication and technology have already been engraved into our lives, this policy is forcing us to try something new. We, as a community, managed to engage much more during the academic day.

Though the phone policy appeared to be a pointless restriction to some students, it does prove to have a positive effect on other parts of the student community. In past years, when passing through the center, the hallway, and even the library, there were student yelling and laughing while scrolling through their TikTok. The digital connection cuts off in-person communication, as social media pulls away the attention of students. Pulling students away from the digital world forces students to focus on the real world, corresponding to the theme of this school year, “Listening to Learn, and Learning to Listen”. By extricating themselves from the digital world, students manage to focus and learn how to listen to others in the community.

Whether the phone policy is reasonable remains a live controversy in the student body. The pros and cons of this policy are both illustrative. Personally, the author thinks that the phone policy is effective in allowing students to focus more on the St. Mark’s community instead of being trapped in their own isolated digital world. However, at the end of only the second week since back-to-school, the long-term effects of the phone policy are still open to discussion. Will the phone policy make the community more interconnected? Or will it waste student vigor through its inconvenience? The outcomes are still unclear.

Opinion on PDGs

by Justin Yang ‘29

The first time I saw “PDG” on my schedule during club block, my immediate reaction was probably the same as most III Formers’: “Seriously? We have to go to another boring class instead of hanging out back at the dorm? Nobody wants to give up free time to sit in a circle talking about ‘feelings’ with people they barely know!” So I dragged myself into the classroom, expecting awkward icebreakers and an hour that would somehow feel longer than an actual class. Instead, my PDLs, Feifei and Rohan, walked in carrying a giant box of donuts and managed to lead one of the most memorable icebreakers I’ve ever enjoyed. We wrote down three facts about ourselves, crumpled the paper into balls, and started throwing them across the room, waiting for someone else to pick one up. Within minutes, people who barely knew each other were laughing, guessing whose paper belonged to whom, and arguing over whether certain facts were believable. Somehow, a room full of strangers stopped feeling so unfamiliar. As the weeks went on, the PDL meetings became something more meaningful than I expected. The conversations became less about awkward introductions and more about the realities of being a III Former at St. Mark’s. People talked honestly about stress, balancing workloads, friendships, and the pressure of trying to seem like you already had everything figured out when most of us really didn’t. 

What makes PDGs special is the people they bring together. PDGs force you to be with people you usually wouldn’t talk to. Suddenly, you find yourself sitting next to someone from a completely different friend group or background, talking about things you normally would never bring up in everyday conversation. This can feel a little uncomfortable at first, but over time, it becomes one of the best parts of the experience. In a school where it is easy to stay inside your own circle, the groups quietly push people to connect with others they otherwise might never really get to know. Furthermore, you get the chance to connect with older students who have already gone through the exact experiences you are facing as a III Former. Talking to Feifei and Rohan is different from asking teacher questions because they had just been through the same things we were dealing with. 

Looking back now, I think the biggest reason PDGs matter is that they make a large and intimidating school feel smaller. Most III Formers probably walk into their first PDG meeting expecting the same thing I did: awkwardness, boredom, and a waste of free time. But somewhere between the donuts and paper-ball icebreakers were the conversations that helped St. Mark's feel more like home. 

Shoutout to the BEST PDL’s this year, Rohan and Feifei, and all faculty who supported the process.

The Comeback of Lions Den

by Serena Lin ‘28

In my first year at this school, I have always heard the legends of the Lions Den. But I have never seen the place despite passing frequently through Burnett and by the Lions Den. The only stories that I have heard about Lions Den were from some upperclassmen who were crazy fans of fries from the Lions Den, especially the fries. But with some pity, though I have always heard that the school is trying to reopen the Lions Den, they can’t find people to run it. So the Lions Den remained closed for a long time.

After one and a half year of hibernation, the Lions Den finally revived in January 2026, ran by staff of Flik. While old students are happy for the Lions Den to be back, new students are also interested in exploring this new food stop in the school. The Lions Den has now become a new highlight of school life. Available from 3-7pm, the Lions Den becomes a good place for students to take a break from regular school and practice while eating a snack.

I was astonished by the Lions Den when it was first opened. The space was way bigger than I thought. The large kitchen and friers differed a lot from my preconception of a small convenience shop. The Lions Den has a large menu, hot food includes fries, marinara sticks, and chicken fingers (which is not on the menu). There are also a large choice of different snacks and drinks. Whenever I walk by the Lions Den to get fries, the few minutes waiting for the fries to get prepared by the chef was almost the hardest to get through. But the freshmade hot food always cheers me up after a long day. 

The Lions Den indeed changed the students' lives a lot. Every time I pass by the Den, there's always a few students standing there, waiting for their food to be prepared. The comeback of the Lions Den also extended onto the Lion Term project for IV formers: making furniture, instruments, and games to put in the Den with recycled materials. Roughly around the same time as the Lions Den reopened, a vending machine was inserted in Burnett where Day Students stay. 

As a new aspect of student life, the Lions Den not only provided a new choice for food, but also provided a chance for students to communicate and boost the community. The hot food has always been a place of hapinness and peace for students. Thank you for the Flik staff who put effort in running the Lions Den and the School Faculty who put work in making the Lions Den run again.

Lion Term Across Forms

by Ingrid Namala ‘27

During Lion Term this year, Vth formers embarked on an entrepreneurial journey called “Lion’s Tank.” Students employed the hard-earned skills they cultivated in their III and IV Form years to formulate pitches and present them to a panel of Shark Tank-like judges from all walks of life.

Students were divided into five groups, each producing two presentations that were then voted on by select faculty members to determine which would proceed to the final Shark Tank showdown in the Class of ‘45 Hall. While the overarching goal of these pitches was to create a compelling, business-savvy narrative for the judges, the underlying theme was one of service. Each group prioritized creating a product that gave back to the world in some way. Five presentations advanced to the final round, and the top three groups received gift cards as prizes. When asked about her main takeaway from this year’s Lion Term, Manasa Mahesh ‘27, a Lion’s Tank finalist, said that “Entrepreneurship itself is pretty cool,” and that she “liked how [the] problem at hand didn’t need to be super big. It’s just a matter of finding a gap that needs to be filled, and coming up with a feasible solution.” This statement encapsulates the core of Lion’s Tank as it challenged students to identify a need, craft a realistic solution, and pitch a plan of action. 

Lion Term III Form

by Joanna Cheng ‘29

From March 9th to March 13th, students at St. Mark's stepped beyond the traditional classroom to participate in Lion Term. Lion Term is an annual five day experiential learning program where all students engage in a Form-based courses designed to engage in immersive, interdisciplinary, hands-on, responsive learning. For freshmen, Lion Term centered on the question: What is Service Learning?

Over the course of five days, my classmates and I moved between classroom lectures and off campus fieldwork. We began with lesson plans on food insecurity and housing insecurities, learning about the systemic causes behind these urgent issues. We also had the honor of hearing from Rwick Sarkar (2019 graduate from St.Mark’s School), a Food Project Youth Manager. Rwick spoke about how young people like us can meaningfully address hunger in local communities. From there, we put our learning into action.

Our group traveled to multiple service sites. At the Habitat for Humanity ReStore, we helped organize secondhand furniture and household goods. At Vets Inc., we sorted and organized donated items for veterans. At the Marlborough Community Cupboard, we arranged clothing donations. At Urban Missionaries, we similarly sorted secondhand items for those in need. At the end of the week, we ended with reflection sessions, in which we mapped out our community commitments and shared how our experiences connected to larger civic responsibilities.

I will admit, however, that I began the week with uncertainty. Before Lion Term, I viewed community service as something done primarily to fulfill a requirement.  I had wondered whether short-term volunteer work could truly make a difference and I questioned whether my own efforts would matter at all. 

However, I saw how small acts, from sorting clothes, organizing donations, listening to community leaders, directly support real people. My perspective shifted. After one of the sessions, I heard a staff member praise us for our efficiency, and how it had made a shopping room accessible for families was a powerful moment. 

Lion Term is more than a week of activities, it is rooted in "the power of experience to transform understanding." For me, that transformation was personal. I entered the week with biases I did not even know I had and left with a sense of my own responsibility. Lion Term did not just teach me about food insecurity or housing. It taught me that service is meaningful.

Rwick Sarkar’s presentation 

Students working at Habitat for Humanity ReStore

Students at Vets Inc.

Is Zesty Orange Chicken (Or Any Chicken) the Remedy to Seated Meal?

by Catherine Zhang ‘26

Short answer, no. 

Long answer, chicken parm might be the short-term relief, but no chicken is a long-term corrective. 

The problem with seated meals is not just the food; it is that our current system contradicts its community-gathering goal. I assume that there are several purposes of seated meals: first and foremost, a great opportunity for the whole community to get together; second, allowing people to build connections with others, ideally people outside of their regular social circles; third, ensure sugar intake because chocolate chips are only good during seated meals. 

In reality, if you sit in the main dininghall, your advisory is likely to cluster at one end of the table, while staring at another advisory. Food is often depleted before you even have a chance to dig in. It’s loud, boisterous, and you can barely have a conversation without getting interrupted by others. Small dining hall, in my opinion, except that some of the tables are tilted, is the best place to be in. But if you sit in Hinkle, you will likely have to cram yourself in such a limited space, constantly worrying about hitting the person behind you if you move your chair, or even just finding a way out. Finally, if you sit in the hallway, you benefit from being able to dismiss early, but you feel secluded from everyone else. I mean, who wants to eat in the hallway? 

And those are just the issues with the space, not to mention the limited food options and lack of proper utensils (sometimes). Let me draw the lines, though. I am not a hater of seated meals. I appreciate having the opportunity for the whole community, but I think the execution does not meet its purpose. 

So what is fundamentally paradoxical about seated meals that causes grudges in the community? 

The issue is, if we are claiming that we are an “intentionally small” community, why do people still have to sit in the hallways? If we are prioritizing fostering community connections at these events, why do we still end up talking with people in our advisory? And of course, why are we served with either fried chicken nuggets glazed with some sauce or braised beef most of the time? 

As for the first matter, that is up to the administrations to decide, which will certainly have to come with major changes at St. Mark’s. But what I am suggesting is that we need to re-imagine the spaces we have for dining. At least, provide a cozy, not-overcrowded setting for people to catch up, to talk, and to connect. A community is only stronger when people care for one another, and in this case, an undistracted conversation starter will do the job. 

Second, there needs to be a new system of table assignments if we are hoping to make community members interact with each other, especially people with whom they don’t normally interact. One promising solution can be putting everyone’s name (faculty included) into a random group generator of 47 groups (that is how many tables we currently have during seated meals), with some advanced setting of a number cap for each group according to how many can sit at a table and rotation throughout the year. There will be awkwardness and discomfort at first, but it will help spark conversation and foster new relationships. 

Finally, there needs to be a balance between community input on meal choices and dining service. It is hard to satisfy everyone’s taste buds and personal preferences, but the dining service can improve the situation by taking in more suggestions from community members, thus diversifying the menu. Ideally, there should be more food options, which depend on the dining service budget.

Again, there is nothing wrong with the idea of a seated meal or its purpose. But this longstanding tradition at St. Mark’s needs better execution as we move forward. If we truly believe in the power of a small community — not just the idea of it — then changes are necessary. Because right now, we are gathering the whole school together just to sit apart. 

The Backpack Ban

by Dingyi Ling ‘28

The Rule

The central corridor of the main building connects classrooms, admissions, and administration. Every student walks it daily. Every family of future St. Markers tours it.

Last fall, the administration banned students from leaving their backpacks there. 

Students must now leave their bags in designated zones, approximately 25 feet away, in either direction. The hallway is cleaner. The designated areas are not being used; bags are piling up, and students are taking longer to retrieve them. Especially after seated meals, the hallway has never been as crowded. 

Students were told two things: backpacks hurt the school’s image and obstruct access for individuals with disabilities, as sourced from the School Meeting announcement. It was not until this week, three months later, that the fuller picture emerged. The policy is tied to fire code compliance and ALICE safety protocols. The school is required to keep corridors accessible for emergencies. 

Though the fire code explains the rush behind the rule’s establishment, students were not given a proper explanation for all this time. Students, including the monitors who bridge the gap between students and the administration, do not have an opportunity to express their opinions. 

The Data

Does the student body agree with the school's perceived reasoning?

The St. Marker surveyed 101 students (27.2 % of the student body) to gain deeper insight into their opinions on the policy. The questions are centered on their acceptability and views on the rule’s necessity: What are your thoughts on the policy? Do backpacks in the hallways affect the school's image? Is the hallway difficult to access with backpacks present? The survey was sent before the student body was informed of the fire code and ALICE protocols. Each response below reflects what three months without a sufficient explanation yields.

The survey does not include administrators, faculty, or disabled students — those voices will be the focus of a follow-up report, beginning with an interview with Dr. Robert Fish in the next issue.

As shown in the graphs, 74.3% of students dislike the policy. Furthermore, the majority of the sample disagreed with the school’s rationale for installing the regulation, where 84.2% of all respondents did not approve of either reason.

A further cross-tabulation based on the three opinion groups (“Hate it”, “don’t care”, “like it”) is conducted for the following two questions.

*"Like it" group (4 students) is omitted — sample too small for meaningful comparison.

Among the 75 students who oppose the policy, more than 80% oppose both rationales.

The more telling demographic is the "Don't care" group. Since these 22 students have no objection to the policy, they have no reason to reject its reasoning out of frustration. Yet more than half say the backpacks make the hallway hard to access, and 72.7% disagreed that backpacks affect school image. The results imply that with nothing at stake, students still do not accept an incomplete explanation for exclusion. 

This data does not dismiss the accessibility concern, as the survey cannot capture the experience of disabled individuals navigating this hallway. What it documents is simpler: when teenagers are asked to accept an inconvenience without the complete picture, the result is rarely cooperation, but resistance. These numbers reflect the predictable outcome of a communication gap.

The Argument

If the administration led with the fire code, the controversy would likely have ended before it began. Instead, students were given two justifications that did not align with their daily experience, and three months of silence in between.

Students were given two justifications: image and accessibility. The data shows the majority did not find either convincing. With fire code now the stated reason, the question is not whether those justifications were wrong — it is why they were the only ones students heard for three months.

The deeper issue is straightforward. When teenagers are asked to accept an inconvenience without a sufficient explanation, the result is frustration. The fire code would have been a sufficient explanation for most students and would have encouraged more students to follow the policy. 

The safety code mandates the backpack policy, and the initial decision had to be made quickly. But three months have passed. During that time, students could have been asked to suggest ways to improve the policy. St. Mark's is a boarding school. Most students do not leave at the end of the day — they live here. Every rule shapes a daily life, not a work shift. That should matter — not in whether the rule exists, but in how it is carried out. 

What Comes Next

Beginning with the next issue, The St. Marker will cover school policy as part of its regular reporting. A follow-up article on an interview with Dr. Fish on the backpack policy, including the fire code requirements and the reason behind the inadequate communication with students, will be featured.

Going forward, this publication will interview administrators and policymakers to report the reasoning behind decisions to the student body. The goal is a channel that does not currently exist — one where students learn why decisions are made, not just what they are. 

Though the backpack policy is small, it reveals the lack of transparency behind it. This is our St. Mark's — every St. Marker deserves to understand how it is run.

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.