The mission of my blog has been to press for reforms that will restore the integrity of my alma mater, Phillips Exeter Academy. This is currently on hiatus as I rethink and reformulate how to achieve these goals.
I've taken much of the material offline now. This was always intended to be a first draft for something more substantive. I leave a few of the most popular and informative postings for those interested.
Begin with a sketch of the Academy's current Principal. His unusual background and experience is a good place to begin to understand the current crisis in the institution. This is offered in two parts:
Then, a trio of postings substantiate whatever claim to credibility I may have as an observer and critic of the school. This goes back to my days serving on the faculty.
Begin with The Phenomenology of Exoniensis Narcississma. It chronicles my call for a code of conduct for faculty and administrators in the 1990's. Twenty-two years later, this was finally instituted -- in the wake of countless students unnecessarily harmed and an entirely avoidable scandal.
Finally,Flawed Governance Exposed - and Suppressed - in 1994 describes my vain attempts to communicate this vital information. The failure to address this problem would continue to plague the school for decades.
***
As serious as these matters are, Exeter Unafraid includes a lighter element. That may seem incongruous. But my purpose is simple. "To show the affection and admiration I have for this great institution, I offer Gaudeamus Igitur. I trust you will find these anecdotes and adventures from both my student and faculty days enlightening, entertaining, and entirely Exonian."
"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.”
- Thomas Paine, Common Sense
###
Tips? Suggestions? Comments? Drop a line to: contact (at) ExeterUnafraid (dot) com
"We are working hard to complete our process of reviewing administrator actions in response to past cases. We expect to complete the work this summer, and when we do, we will report back to you with a further description of our work."
Finally last November, he made good. Well, sort of, anyway.
After the new information found in the affidavit for the recently arrested former faculty, this requires a radical redo. Let's see why by first examining this curious document on its own terms.
Let's set aside issues with the composition of the committee for a moment.
The "report" is a masterpiece of obfuscation and obnubilation. It opens with "The committee's findings included..." But what of the findings not included here? You can drive a truck through that loophole.
Setting that aside, let's look at the findings provided, followed with the problems they present. The committee:
"did not find evidence of conscious or intentional efforts to evade the obligation to make a legally mandated report to authorities."
This begs the question: were all the legally mandated reports made? The determination as to whether this was intentional or otherwise is a separate matter.
"did not find evidence of any individual engaging in a pattern of failure to make legally mandated reports."
Evasive language begs the question. Did numerous individuals fail to make legally mandated reports?
"did not find evidence that any individual consciously intended to cause secondary harm to students or otherwise act against the best interests of students."
You can cause students to suffer secondary harm or otherwise act against their best interests and still get a pass here.
"found that in those instances in which employment and related actions have been taken in the past and adverse consequences imposed, those actions and consequences have been appropriate. The Academy, as do most employers, considers such personnel matters personal and confidential."
In other words, "you just have to take our word here." That's that.
"found no evidence that it considered sufficient in any case to support public consequences for alleged failures to report or other failures or omissions."
Move along - nothing to see here!!!
In short, there's more than a few howls in this dog.
Assistant Principal Lassey's Fatal Conflict of Interest
Arresting reading
Fortunately/unfortunately, a few things have come to light since last November.
A close look at the Kaminski arrest affidavit, the latest unfolding of the sexual assault scandal, brings to light manifold failures. This includes Assistant Principal Karen Lassey's conduct. When Lassey waded into this morass of mismanagement she "was concerned about the situation" where both the student and teacher had defied direct orders and the explanation "didn't make sense to her." It was clear to her "that there were pretty clear boundary violations." So what did she do about it?
Before we even go there, we need to throw out the work of the Trustees' ad hoc committee above. It was improperly constituted. AP Lassey, it seems clear, participated in the mismanagement she was assessing.
That's a fatal flaw.
So let's have a look at the affidavit and what it says about Lassey's conduct alongside the others she and the committee gave a free pass.
First, we need to backtrack to gather the pieces of this jigsaw puzzle.
"...two matters involved allegations that PEA and certain of its employees failed to respond properly to certain events on campus, some involving sexual assault, and some involving other student health and safety issues."
The findings?
"(In these) two investigations that did not involve allegations of sexual misconduct by faculty or employees, Holland & Knight determined that in a number of situations PEA employees failed in their responsibilities to address alleged misconduct impacting the health, safety, and welfare of students in a proper and effective manner."
Who were these PEA employees? How did the Academy respond to this determination of the Trustee's "independent investigation?"
H&K's determination was largely based on the 10,000-word report I filed with then Principal MacFarlane and then President of the Trustees Panetta in 2016. "A Sexual Predator at Exeter: Context & Consequences" focused on two episodes. The first was the response to a sexual assault on campus during the Martin Luther King Jr. observance in 1993. The other concerned a series of assaults that took place during the same weekend remembrance in 1995. The same faculty member was involved in both, with their spouse working alongside as the Dean on Duty for the later.
The H&K summary also says that "Among the issues investigated in those two matters were whether PEA and certain of its employees met their obligations to report certain issues internally at PEA and/or externally..."
During the 1995 spree, the assailant harmed at least five students. According to an Academy official cited in a news report of the incident, "although academy administrators did not immediately notify campus security or Exeter police - they were notified two days after the attacks - steps were promptly taken to identify the culprit and expel him from campus..."
Those "steps" included sequestering the "culprit" overnight at the Dean and her spouses' faculty apartment, then driving him out of state the following morning.
The mismanagement of the incident reverberated on campus with one of the survivors speaking out inThe Exonian. She mentions that the faculty member involved here (and also in the 1993 incident) told her "there was some discussion in Faculty Meetings about this specific incident..." which means that then-Principal Kendra O'Donnell must have been aware of what had happened. It would also seem that she signed off on keeping faculty who (as H&K determined) had failed in their "obligations to report...(and) their responsibilities to address alleged misconduct impacting the health, safety, and welfare of students in a proper and effective manner."
Now, let's fast-forward 21 years to 2016.
For all the "crumbs cast upon the current" over this period - the Internet revolution, 9/11 and what Gore Vidal (PEA '43) described as the "caper in Mesopotamia" that followed, a financial collapse and the election (and reelection) of a Black President of the United States - in this ever-changing world, one thing remained constant: PEA leadership's refusal to adopt a code of conduct for faculty, administrators and Trustees.
In other words, the faculty and administrative failures described in the Kaminski affidavit occurred in this code of conduct-free free-fire zone.
Here's the highlights with a focus on the school's failures:
Just before the "grooming" crossed into criminality, the student gave what might have been a last, desperate cry for help that brought them before the discipline committee for a major offence: "Dishonest acts of any kind, including academic dishonesty."
One teacher found the student's explanation there "not believable or honest."
It seems that obvious dishonesty in responding to an accusation of dishonesty should bring severe consequences. Instead, it seems the committee accepted dubious claims at face value.
Worse, the affidavit indicates that the accused teacher leveraged this occasion to sexually assault the student before, then to gain the parent's confidence after.
The first criminal acts allegedly took place as Kaminski met with the student supposedly to prepare for being a "faculty friend." A "faculty friend" is a teacher who speaks on behalf of the student in discipline proceedings. At the discipline committee, the student's former advisor described the "faculty friend's" statement in support as "very long and weird."
This was a crucial moment. Almost any outcome was preferable to what occurred. The committee was apparently content to not get to the bottom of the matter. The parents credited the "faculty friend" with saving their child from being expelled. They would later defend him despite disturbing signs.
The Rank & File do their Duty
After being put on probation for dishonesty, the students was caught in numerous dishonest acts by faculty, staff and dorm proctors who did their jobs dutifully. They observed troubling behavior and reported them. For example, the student wasn't "forthright in (their out of town) slips." "...Paperwork for out of town travel...stated by train...but (the student) had ridden with him (Kaminski)." In the dorm, "there were persistent instances of (the student) being tough to track down." They "...started accumulating minor rule violations such as not checking in at the right time and saying (they) were in the library when (they) were not." The student was specifically forbidden to go to Kaminski's house again, and was observed doing so anyway.
In some instances, these reports were made to deans who specifically requested that such violations be reported to them. After repeatedly, demonstrably being dishonest, none of the deans apparently sat the student down and demanded the truth.
At the same time, Kaminski had been called to account repeatedly. Even so, he disobeyed direct orders to not have the student at his residence again.
Remember Assistant Principal Karen Lassey? At the time, she was dean of academic affairs. She waded into this morass of mismanagement apparently on at least two separate occasions. The first was when Dean Melissa Mischke "expressed concerns about (the student's) relationship with Kaminski..." apparently with the student present. Another time, she was called in as the student and the student's advisor had a chat. The student had just been caught defying the order to not go to Kaminski's house. Lassey "was concerned about the situation" and the explanation "didn't make sense to her." It was clear to her "that there were pretty clear boundary violations."
It would seem that then-Dean Lassey was very much involved in this situation and likely others in what appears to have been a close-knit office. Her participation in the ad-hoc committee considering anything involving this crew would be outrageous.
But what about her actions? She's there to participate in resolving this situation. What did she do about it? Where did the buck stop?
It didn't. You have to wonder - what would it have taken to inspire the deans to send the errant student back for another go at the discipline committee?
As far as Kaminski...now, let's think this through with a little role-play.
Say you're the dean of faculty. You've got a teacher who has defied direct orders that indicate he may be victimizing a student. This is a child you are charged to care for as a parent would care for their own.
Do you:
a.) fire the teacher on the spot;
b.) pass him off to the police.
Well, the dean of faculty punted here. He referred this to the Exeter police who were unlikely to do much better getting to the bottom of this - which is exactly what happened. It is fair to ask if the only real purpose for going to the police was to cover for the deans and the school should this blow up. If so, that's a far cry from providing parental protection.
In my humble opinion, if a teacher is so off-the-mark that you think the police should be involved, that person has NO BUSINESS serving on the faculty of the Phillips Exeter Academy.
Questions for Principal Rawson
Now, let's get to the upshot here - which is racism. The school website now proudly proclaims "Exeter condemns anti-Black racism in all its forms."
Really?
I'll be damned if I stand silent while my effort for accountability for sexual assault victims is perverted by the Academy's institutional racism.
What?
What became of the "PEA employees (who) failed in their responsibilities to address alleged misconduct impacting the health, safety, and welfare of students in a proper and effective manner..."
As I wrote to then-President of the Trustees Tony Downer on September 7, 2017:
"Though my whistle blowing focused on Rev. Thompson's apparent covering for a sexual predator on campus in 1993, I find it troubling that he seems to be the only non-perp faculty member or administrator facing censure. In fact, this is deeply disturbing given the long history of African American males being singled out for punishment in our society. If he is to be held accountable, others should be, too. If you are providing blanket immunity to non-perps in the apparent absence of policy and process, then it would seem necessary for you to restore him to full faculty status - if you are to be consistent."
It seems that all of the deans involved in 2016's morass of mismanagement have apparently been allowed to go their merry way - Mischke, Cosgrove, Shapiro and Kim. Those leaving for other schools likely did so with positive references from PEA.
Meanwhile, the only one publicly held to account is African American. He has been put out to pasture after decades of service to the institution and denied emeritus status.
So...all this boils do to a simple series of related question for Principal Rawson:
From GAA President/ex-officio Trustee Janney Wilson:
"The administration reviewed your concerns and the Academy Archives Policy. Following further consideration of the Policy, the restriction on searching and accessing The Exonian in the online archives will be lifted."
The speedy attention is most appreciated!
I am gratified by the alumni communities' strong affirmation of our commitment to open, unfettered inquiry.
This is an occasion for our appreciation of our shared values despite differences.
I'll have more to say about all this in time. But I wanted to immediately acknowledge the administration's response.
I have also reached out to Academy Librarian Gail Scanlon and Magee Lawhorn, Head of Archives & Special Collections, to see about moving forward with the project I mentioned - gathering the stories behind the stories at The Exonian. I look forward to joining fellow alumni Exonian writers, editors and photographers to remember our efforts.
Here, I am chastened by my own youthful counsel. As Nietzsche observes, “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster. For when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”
***
PS: Somewhere, I have a lovely, handwritten note from Principal Steve Kurtz responding to this. That is just the sort of ephemera that needs to be preserved in The Exonian archives!
###
Tips? Suggestions? Comments? Drop a line to: contact (at) ExeterUnafraid (dot) com
Louis Kahn's design concept for the Academy library is radical. The "open stacks" are truly open.The grand staircase at the entrance lacks a security chokepoint. This free access is a fundamental departure from other libraries. It serves as a symbol of what we treasure most: an expression of our fearless, courageous insistence that freedom of inquiry is the best "defense of the open society against its enemies."
In the transition to digital, Exeter had been demonstrating leadership in carrying this profound belief forward. Three years ago, the newly digitized archives of The Exonian, the "oldest continuous preparatory school newspaper in America," went online. The school afforded "free browsing access to the entire archive" with minimal restrictions.
Now, alumni have been locked out. What's happening here?
The Exonian is an invaluable historical resource for the history of our school, and indeed for the history of secondary education. Until now, access to back issues has been limited to fragile bound volumes in the Academy Archives, but we are now happy to announce that the entire run of the newspaper, back to volume 1, issue 1 of April 6, 1878, is available online at archive.theexonian.com!
Visitors to the site will be able to search and browse the entire historical archive of the newspaper, and clip and save articles as images or text. We invite you to explore the length and breadth of Academy history from the student’s perspective...
Since the launch, many have utilized the archive. You can find numerous alumni postings on social media that link to it (for example, this posting in the "Exonians" Facebook group). The Exonian archive should have been recognized as a signal success in the emerging digital paradigm. While some wonder if the Internet has made the library an expensive anachronism, this created opportunities and occasions for community engagement.
Now, alumni have been locked out. What's happening here?
The Digital Scholia
From the beginning, I wondered about ways to take advantage of this digital reboot. After conversations with Peter Nelson, the now-departed Academy Archivist, I realized how we could use the new capabilities to capture informal
knowledge/social history.
There's really nothing completely new about "New Media." Email, for example, is simply the oldest electronic medium, telegraphy, grafted onto the IP-infrastructure. Of course, that sparked a revolution. What inspired me here is the phenomena of "scholia" in ancient literature. These are the marginal notes that explain arcane, obscure details that explain the text. This came to mind as I discovered the notation capabilities the digital service provider built into their newspaper system.
The idea - that Peter's departure left
unfulfilled - was for a project that could engage every alumni Exonian editor, writer and photographer. There's a treasure trove of Academy history ungathered in the memories of anyone who has worked on The Exonian. We could gather alumni Exonian staff online to add their recollections to the collection. We could preserve the stories behind the stories.
As the archive went online in 2017, I tested the waters. But we never managed to properly organize it. Still, it should
be easy to network through the alumni editors to create an
occasion/event to gather alumni. It would be like the
Wikipedia "edit-a-thon" the library hosted not long ago.
I immediately contacted those in charge to ask what was the situation. My email exchange with the Academy's new Head of Archives and Special Collections and the Academy's Librarian is troubling. They seemed hesitant to acknowledge what has happened. Instead, they insisted that "this 75 year restriction has been in place since the Trustees made it so in the 1980’s."
After pressing the point, they still would not acknowledge there's been a change. However, there is a process for gaining limited access at their discretion. "If there is a specific article that you wrote or that any other alum has written that they cannot get access to they can submit the request through the online request tool and we can help them get access to it."
So much for the dream of the internet creating broad-based engagement.
Oh, and these new restrictions extend beyond the digital archive. We are now locked out of the microfilm and print copies that used to be "open stack" in the library basement.
What makes this even more troubling is that the Academy does not own the copyright on these materials. The alumni who created them do. So we are now locked out from our own property and must ask permission to (hopefully) be allowed access.
Appropriate Access - Insiders vs. Outsiders
That being said, I also fully understand and appreciate a serious evaluation of the privacy issues. I was on the faculty during the arrest and conviction of a colleague in '92. I vividly remember the change in access to PEANs. Prior, they were open access in the reference section of the library. But as reporters began to snoop around, the yearbooks were moved into the library offices where they remain now - available by request.
Nothing changes till you change it
The original policy for these digital archives (which was still posted - and immediately changed once I sent the link to library staff) seemed inadequate. Anyone, anywhere could access. Only the search function was disabled for content newer than 75 years. Now, this limitation has been extended so that there's a wall that excludes alumni.
The proper boundary, I would suggest, is that alumni be allowed unfettered access while limiting outsiders to the community. That should be easy to implement. The security system for the alumni database is the obvious model to follow. If you are allowed access to that, you should be able to access The Exonian archives - and other such content.
Finally, let's be clear about one thing. I have no desire to put the library staff serving my alma mater on-the-spot. These are professionals normally committed to expanding access. It seems obvious that they have received directives counter to that. They are not the problem.
An Academy Principal lacking academic principles?
The reason for shutting out alumni isn't too hard to guess.
What is hidden in the archives that would motivate the current leadership to sacrifice our core commitment to open inquiry? What do they want to keep under wraps?
What does this example teach our students at a critical moment in our democracy?
Finally, if this is about image and reputation, then there's a more fundamental question. Is this an academic institution, or has it become a prosperity cult?
The current leadership's focus on material success and maintaining appearances is telling. Who are the role models offered? It has been a long time since new buildings on campus were named for educators who devoted their lives to the institution. Why don't we have the B. Rodney Marriott Performing Arts Center? Because we now glorify those who have amassed significant fortunes instead. Are their donations a testament to a commitment to Non Sibi selflessness, or are they building monuments to mark their self-full success (while receiving a hefty tax-deduction)?
Larry David, the preeminent philosopher of our times, has reflected deeply on this:
###
Tips? Suggestions? Comments? Drop a line to: contact (at) ExeterUnafraid (dot) com
Mark Zuckerberg is undoubtedly Exeter's best-known alumnus. When I tell people about the school here in South Africa, I mention his connection for immediate recognition. That his fame is turning to infamy should be of concern to those responsible for his moral education.
The Exeter/Facebook connection runs deep. "The Facebook" is the name for the "Photo Address Book." It is the directory with the face of every student, teacher, and administrator on campus. For decades, The Facebook has been a core part of every Exonian's life. It is as central as, say, the phone book in pre-Internet days.
Facebook marks a malignant turn to the Internet. The dream we once had has now turned to a nightmare. During the halcyon days of the Dot Com era, I covered the rise of "New Media" for trade publications in the media business. I explained to broadcasters what the upstart Internet might mean. I had an extraordinary beat speaking with visionaries about how this could be a force for good. I was quite aware of the shadow possibilities, too.
Imagine for a moment how different things could be if Zuckerberg's company aimed to serve the public good as its primary goal? What if, instead of this "willingness to profit off of hate," he embraced the values represented by Exeter's motto, Non Sibi. How would such a Facebook operate? It might be run like Wikipedia, a public charity funded by contributions. A core function wouldn't be looking for ways to leverage our personal information for profit. Instead, it would be to encourage civic participation while protecting our privacy. Zuckerberg's Facebook is geared to fueling confirmation bias, deepening polarization and prejudice. What if it sought to expand our horizons by connecting us to people and ideas beyond the narrow confines of the familiar?
But I digress...
Zuckerberg's lifework has become a force for evil, a product and instrument of "knowledge without goodness." But what of his moral education at Exeter?
A Hidden Change
When I arrived on the Exeter faculty in 1991, a dozen years after I had graduated, I didn't realize a fundamental change had occurred. The school's rules for students as written were different from the rules as enforced. My contract stipulated it was my duty to report if I witnessed students breaking major rules. My first year, I had the dubious distinction of turning the most kids for such things. How did that happen? Was it just my luck, or were colleagues looking the other way?
One such incident resolved the conundrum. In the dead of night one evening, I happened to wake up and look out the window towards a student residence across from my dorm. I saw a student leave the building. Being out after hours is a major offense. So I followed protocol. I called security and met them outside. This wasn't anything I wanted. I was sleep deprived, had a class to teach in hours, and a long day to follow. Suddenly I had a major new task tossed on the "to-do" pile. But this was a crucial part of the job. We were there to enforce these boundaries. This point was explicit in my contract.
When the security guard arrived, he surprised me with an unexpected question.
"Are you sure you want to do this?" he asked.
I explained this wasn't about what I wanted. We had a protocol and would follow it. So we called the dean on duty. A search for the missing student went forward. He was confronted for the rule violation when he turned up. Then he faced consequences in the discipline system. That meant I had to invest time in various administrative duties like writing up a report. When all was said and done, the dorm head for the errant student surprised me with a statement as out-of-place as the security officer's question. "Next time, be sure to call me first," he said.
So the rules varied depending on which faculty were involved. In one grotesque instance, a colleague inserted himself into the proceedings inappropriately. For whatever reason, he took it upon himself to attempt to "rescue" the students up for action in a case centering on dishonesty. Suddenly it was about politics and personalities rather than the student's observed behavior. Whatever value that might have been extracted from this experience was lost.
After, I had a few words with colleagues about how this had destroyed a crucial opportunity in our moral education. The massive investment in student and faculty time was wasted - or worse. We taught an immoral lesson. What you do isn't as important as who you know. What could we do to prevent rogue adults from offering such a toxic education again? Rather than discourage this, the particular colleague's mismanagement was legitimized. He was granted official status as an adjunct to a dorm. Of course, he did this again - played favorites regardless of the boundaries. This led to peculiar, demoralizing discipline decisions with unjust outcomes.
What Would John Phillips Do?
A shadow over the Academy
This is the moral education I saw several years before Mark Zuckerberg arrived on campus. I would imagine this had only become normalized over the intervening years. What would John Phillips think of his part in educating our modern Alcibiades? He founded the Academy just as the American Experiment was getting underway. I'd like to think he'd have shut it down and pursued other interests if he knew his work was destined for this.
After the recent felony arrest of a (newly) former faculty member, maybe people are willing to consider the need for fundamental change. Reading the affidavit, it portrays a school that is simply irresponsible. Forget in loco parentis. They're loco, lousy parents.
Labor Day Weekend, and the living is easy. Well, except for the pandemic...and the arrest of a longtime faculty member. These will overshadow Opening Assembly on Thursday.
So it's high time to soldier on with this blog.
To be honest, I've had to step away for my own wellbeing. It is important for these truths to be told. But it comes at a terrible emotional cost. I often wonder how much happier I would have been if I had simply walked away from the place and never looked back. As an alumnus who had served on the faculty, I had seen the realities. Most people simply refuse to believe them. With this arrest - and the grotesque spectacle of a criminal trial to come - maybe we have come to a moment of truth. Perhaps we will finally get the truth necessary for authentic reconciliation.
To unpack the behind-the-scenes revealed in the arrest affidavit, you need to have some context. Before we go there, let's start over on a different tack. Future historians may attribute the Academy's most famous living alumnus for something more than founding Facebook. He might be remembered instead for being a key figure in the destruction of the American Experiment in self-governance. Is he an aberration or an archetypal product of the "Exeter Experience"?
Zuck: Augustus or Alcibiades?
There is a long-standing tradition of holding teachers accountable for students gone bad. Ancient Athens found Socrates responsible for the monstrosity that was Alcibiades. The master's most prominent student played a pivotal role in destroying the democracy. Whether deliberately or inadvertently, Socrates empowered his traitorous self interest. Plato devoted much of his career to understanding how it was possible that his great moral teacher enabled such immorality.
Zuckstyle hair
Now, the monstrosity that is Mark Zuckerberg threatens to do the same to the United States. "Zuck" likes to think of himself as something like Caesar Augustus. But that's just narcissistic self-delusion. Alcibiades is the better parallel. So how did this product of Exeter's vaunted moral education go bad?
There is a deep misunderstanding about how the Academy achieves its mission:
"Above all, it is expected that the attention of instructors to the disposition of the minds and morals of the youth under their charge will exceed every other care; well considering that though goodness without knowledge is weak and feeble, yet knowledge without goodness is dangerous, and that both united form the noblest character, and lay the surest foundation of usefulness to mankind."
But how to achieve this?
Back when I was on the faculty in the early 90's, Principal Kendra Stearns O'Donnell seemed interested in that question. She asked to meet with the Religion Department to find out. I was excited at the prospect. As the Assistant School Minister and Instructor in Religion, it was a rare opportunity. The Principal was seeking our counsel on how best to carry out the school's moral mission!
I am not sure that I can adequately express my disappointment with what happened. It turned out that the Principal was simply looking for some platitudes and soundbites to spice up her fundraising efforts. So we had been called into service to polish the appearance of providing a moral education. But what was the reality?
You don't have to look far to get what John Phillips believed. He describes the difficult task in the very next paragraph following the oft cited passage above. Here's what the instructors need to do to accomplish this:
"It is therefore required that they most attentively and vigorously guard against the earliest irregularities. That they frequently delineate in their natural colors the deformity and odiousness of vice, and the beauty and amiableness of virtue. That they spare no pains to convince them of the numberless and indispensable obligations; to abhor and avoid the former and to love and practise the latter; of the several great duties they owe to God, their country, their parents, their neighbors, and themselves. That they critically and constantly observe the variety of their natural tempers, and solicitously endeavor to bring them under such discipline as may tend most effectually to promote their own satisfaction and the happiness of others. That they early inure them to contemplate the several connections and various scenes incident to human life; furnishing such general maxims of conduct as may best enable them to pass through all with ease, reputation, and comfort."
Just so much talk?
In other words, you spend a lot of time working with kids to keep them on the strait-and-narrow.
So the moral education at the Academy does not reside in the Religion Department or in any academic studies. Helping adolescents advance into adulthood boils down to a very simple dynamic. The adults in the community establish and enforce boundaries. The adolescents test them. This tension/conflict/energy, properly guided, enables children to effectively enter into adulthood and the responsibilities that go with it. This is where they can learn goodness.
For this to work, the adults have to agree what those boundaries are beforehand and then be evenhanded in enforcing them. Perhaps the single most toxic thing any adult in the PEA community can do - short of outright criminality - is to play favorites. This is especially true in matters of discipline. What happens when personalities instead of rules/principles applied to observed behaviors determine responses to rule-breaking? The students receive a toxic education. They learn that it doesn't matter what you do. What matters instead is who you know and how to cheat the game.
Some might cynically suggest this Machiavellian pedagogy is a better, more honest preparation for life than a rule/justice-based understanding. Great. But that isn't what John Phillips intended. Somehow, this cynicism passing as morality is what apparently guides Zuckerberg. So, if he is a product of Exeter, then the education it offers has come completely off-the-rails in terms of being faithful to its mission.
***
Next up in Part II, a postmodernist rendition of Crime & Punishment. I'll talk about what happened late one night when I inadvertently happened on some rule-breaking. My would-be Raskolnikov? A PG sneaking out after hours.
###
Tips? Suggestions? Comments? Drop a line to: contact (at) ExeterUnafraid (dot) com
Exeter Leadership Weekend (ELW) for 2019 has come and gone! Unfortunately, I was not able to be on hand this year. I live 12,500km away from Exeter. As yet, the Academy does not provide the telepresence options that have become common elsewhere. So it is challenging for me to drop in for the session.
The morning assembly is an extraordinary opportunity for alumni and parents. Typically, they can put their questions to the Principal, President of the Trustees and Chief Financial Officer in an open "town hall" setting. Often, there are more questions than the 90-minute session permits. So, until leadership deems it important to make sure to allow questions from all quarters, it's important to do your homework. Then, if you grab a front seat, you might get a chance to pierce the veil that shrouds the opaque leadership.
Also, understanding that many become swept away in the conviviality of the festivities, often including the dinner with the senior class the night before, being properly prepared for the session may be a challenge for some.
That seems to have been the case with this year's lackluster participation. Nothing too probing or challenging, from what I've heard. That's a shame given how many problematic things are percolating. Out of sight, out of mind does not mean out of trouble.
So how can we improve this? What if we altered the format to foster better communications? One possibility: make the focus a probling one-on-one interview before the audience, then open it to questions.
Now, cast into the role of inquisitive, informed interviewer, let's explore the questions I'd pose. In fact, some have been sent to leadership before. Inexplicably, they have gone unanswered. The importance of getting their responses, I trust, will be self-evident.
I see that Tony Downer, the President of the Trustees, wasn't on the schedule this year. Pity. So, let's start out with a question first sent last year to CFO Marijka Beauchesne (see full email exchange here).
Question 1:
In his Deed of Gift, John Phillips stipulated full, complete financial transparency as an essential element of Academy governance. It provides one of the few checks on the Trustee's otherwise carte blanche authority. As such, it is essential for ensuring accountability.
As he states clearly and unequivocally:
...(the Clerk) shall keep a fair record of every donation, with the name of each benefactor; of the purpose, if expressed, to which it is constitutionally appropriated, and of all expenditures of them; and a true copy of the whole shall be taken and kept in the Academy, to be open for the perusal of all...
John Phillips: a visionary for financial transparency & accountability
For some time, the Trustees have abandoned this. Instead of providing access to "all expenditures," this has been restricted to broad categories of disclosure. With this, the requisite accountability is missing.
Of course, standard accounting procedures are guided by "materiality." You don't include the pencil count in a multimillion-dollar budget. That may apply to other institutions. But this is Exeter, and the Deed of Gift is specific. More important, details material to providing accountability for the school's leadership are now apparently absent.
So, please describe the process and procedure where you determine the level of "granularity" you afford for our perusal?
Question 2:
As a follow-up for Principal Rawson or any of the Trustees present:
Is the Academy to have the transparent accounting stipulated by John Phillips in the Deed of Gift, or the fuzzy accounting that seems to be the current practice?
***
Let me further explain why this point is so essential. The Trustees are already protected from any
personal liability by a provision in the bylaws. So their only exposure? Embarrassment for their mismanagement. What their fuzzy accounting provides is the ability to ensure that never happens. They can grossly mismanage and when those harmed come calling? They have the Academy's money to buy silence. Since no one get to look closely at the books, there's no consequence - for the trustees, anyway. What the victims suffer, well....
His vision in the shadow
Recently, the place of NDAs (non-disclosure agreements) in systematically enabling sexual abuse has come clear. With Exeter, a key provision in the various settlements I've seen is that they require the recipient to NEVER disclose the amounts. They're not silenced altogether - just kept from disclosing the amount of money spent to settle it out-of-court. So why should this be the Academy's #1 concern? I suspect that if the larger community were to know, we'd see senior administrators and trustees held to account for their mismanagement.
In other words, it would confirm John Phillips' wisdom in stipulating complete financial transparency.
Once you read the Deed of Gift closely to understand how the dynamics of the school's governance was intended - and has been distorted - the desperate need for governance reform is unmistakable. This is just the kind of thing that an authentic, intentional Interim Principal might have accomplished. What are the possibilities for this with the current regime?
We will explore that soon - but first some more questions that would have made for a more memorable ELW!
###
Tips? Suggestions? Comments? Drop a line to: contact (at) ExeterUnafraid (dot) com
