Last year, Phaedrus presented their first proposal, which failed for lack of quorum. This year, Phaedrus returned to the Student Government stage and succeeded.
When Phaedrus introduced their first proposal, it had “some fundamental flaws,” Upper School history teacher Jeanne Barr said. Specifically, Barr pointed out the appointment of the Editors-in-Chief. “My beef was with the way they structured [the] succession of who would be next. It was this year’s editors picking next year’s editors with no real input with anyone else,” Barr said. Another reason why the initial proposal may have fallen short was clarity to the student body. “Simplifying it and making it more concise, taking all the input from the student body last year, that’s why it passed this year,” senior and Student Government President Ella Goodman said.
Since the last proposal, the Phaedrus Editors-in-Chief worked to “reorganize it to make it clearer to the student body,” senior and Phaedrus Editor-in-Chief Delilah Davis said. Additionally, they aimed to create a more defined system of checks and balances. One of the ways they did this was a focus on involving staff members this past year. “They built in a procedure for recusals, and they built in procedures for having their Editorial Board work in tandem with the editors and the faculty advisor,” Barr said. Aside from the technical changes, the Editors-in-Chief changed the number of heads from two to three “because the student body really placed an emphasis on it in last year’s round of comments,” Davis said. Overall, the proposal ensures an Editorial Board and the appointment of Editors-in-Chief instead of a Student Government election, with the student body ratifying the appointments. “If we have heads that are more equipped to run the magazine, it’ll produce a higher quality magazine,” sophomore and Phaedrus Editor-in-Chief Wallace Davis said. “With the addition of a dedicated staff, it’ll achieve the same effect.”
Outside of long-term changes to the bylaws, students can expect to see the proposal playing out by spring. “Trying to be heads and campaign wasn’t productive, so now we’ll have more opportunities to improve the magazine,” Delilah Davis said. The lack of an election season, according to Phaedrus Editors-in-Chiefs, will “be more productive, especially when trying to release our issue in March,” Wallace Davis said. Without an election season, the Phaedrus Editors-in-Chief expect a higher quality magazine.
The introduction of the Phaedrus proposal invoked mixed reactions among the student body, with some students arguing that the proposal will have a positive impact on the magazine. “As the head of another publication, I absolutely understood their reasoning,” junior Sonali Herwick said. “I was glad to see it passed.” On the other hand, others call for increased student input. “I think it’s less committee-like and student focused when student input isn’t prioritized,” junior Ayan Chawla said. In response to this perspective, Wallace Davis said that the student body was heard because “…they voted on the change.”
In terms of the publication itself, more engagement is expected because “it’s more on students’ radar,” Barr said. From a broader Student Government perspective, the proposal “shows how committees have the power to reframe how they function,” junior and Student Government Parliamentarian Sam Goldblatt said. After two years and two proposals, Phaedrus has set a new precedent.
