The Commentary Section has received a response from a member of the community, Jake Faber, Class of 2014, in regards to an article published last month by Sabrina Merold `13 titled A Successful First Go at June Term. Be sure to check out Sabrina’s article (https://blogs.newarka.edu/minuteman/2012/10/02/a-successful-first-go-at-june-term/) and we’re looking forward to any additional comments you may have on this current topic crucial to our lives at the academy. Please feel free to comment on any of the sections articles or, if you are very moved by one piece or issue, we are open to publishing further letters to the editor. Email any submissions to minuteman@newarka.edu. 

Warmly, 

Trevor Williams `13 and Jake Wieseneck `14

Commentary Editors 

From Jake Faber `14

While I thought that June Term’s purpose, aiming to immerse students in an intensive, scholarly milieu, was commendable, I do not believe that it can automatically be labeled as a perfect success. Granted, though the concept was experimental, its foundation was strong offering 22 assorted courses taught by 41 instructors. But regardless of its foundation, the mini term’s success is dubious. With regards to the poll that stated 91% of NA students enjoyed the term, it is crucial to note that June Term replaced the Spring Term exams, making the decision between the two obvious in comparison—pointing to the major foible of the June Term; It stood at the fine line between a rigorous set of classes and a mentally stimulating ease into the summer. In attempting to satisfy the two, it fell short of both.
One reason for this is the mini term’s grading policy. Providing a pass/fail option for transcripts inherently reduces the incentive for students to provide excellent participation and written work. Because one goal of June Term is to nurture “intellectual rigor”, the course should be intricate and comprehensive while demanding the full attention of the students. A letter grade system based on true merit should therefore be implemented to allow exceptional students to prove their hard work in a course that appears on a transcript.  By the same logic, a student who offers less to the class has a greater motivation to show their “A” level capacity as opposed to “B” level work that is treated as the same caliber by the equalizing word “pass”. As a student, I believe that the feeling of accomplishment after completing 40.5 hours of instruction should reflect more than just a range of two degrees.
Another fault in the plan that I would like to illumine is in its time allotment. It is pivotal to note that standard courses during the school year are 55 minutes per subject per day coupled with the fact that they only meet four times per cycle. Throughout the mini term, each class occupies four and a half hours per day. This massive adjustment can be mind-numbing for students accustomed to shorter classes and is dramatically inefficient. To be able to focus on one subject for nearly five hours proves difficult due to the monotony and lack of topic variety. As a possible solution, the mini term could be divided so as to allow students to enroll in two courses of about two hours each. This will provide a varied learning environment and a wider range of knowledge, while maximizing students’ attention.
The final flaw of the June Term is its bias towards Newark Academy-sponsored immersion experiences. The time allotted to the mini term is replaceable only by an immersion trip offered by the school, excluding all “outside” experiences. That is to say that NA trips take precedence over other possibly more convenient immersions. Either the June Term should be restricted to academic learning or it should embrace the idea of immersion in totality. As the institution accepts outside trips to fulfill the immersion requirement, it follows consistency and rationality to accept them as a clear alternative to the mini term.
As a scholar who has had the privilege to experience June Term in its experimental stage, I can say that I certainly appreciate the concept of the program and its definite potential. It is an innovative idea that displays the ever-progressive potential of Newark Academy in its totality. However, it is far from developed. It is my hope that the mini term decides between academic rigor and students’ mental ataraxy, and in doing so, provides a more comprehensive and beneficial approach to experiential learning and understanding.