For students who have to park on Eggers, the options are not much better. Not only is there an extremely limited amount of parking space, half of Eggers has been made into a “loading zone” from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. This is a ridiculous time constraint because for the most part no one drops off students during school hours, and even before school many parents simply stop in the middle of the road to let there students out. Often after school you can see parents stopped in the red zone of Eggers, despite the multitude of signs announcing “no stopping at any time.” This poses a considerable danger to students and drivers coming through Eggers before and after school, with the entire street clogged with cars that are all jockeying for a better position.

For student drivers who come after the rat race to a decent parking spot on Eggers, there are really only a few options, and none of them are desirable. Parking in the “loading zone” although it is convenient, is risky considering the hefty $60 fine levied against violators. If you really want to take a chance, you could choose to park on Fabian, and pray you don’t get towed. What is especially outrageous is that although Fabian St. is reserved for the apartment residents, who have reserved parking spaces within the apartment complex, Fabian St. is usually empty save for a handful of cars. The immense amount of parking space is being wasted and not being put to good use, and no one seems to be doing anything about it. If you don’t like either of those options, you could always park in the teacher lot as many have resorted to doing, but you risk angering teachers whose spot you may be occupying, which could lead to Officer Foote coming and having a talk with you. Your final option is to park all the way in the Quikstop parking lot, where you could potentially be a victim of a hit and run, not even mentioning the even longer walk from Quikstop to school than if you had just parked on Country Way.

The real answer to the parking problems of Washington High School is to create another parking lot. This would lead to a decrease in accidents and citations, as well as in increase in everyone’s total happiness. This way, the police wouldn’t have to deal with violators, and teachers would no longer have to deal with students pirating their parking spots. It could potentially lead to a decrease in tardies as well, because students arriving in the morning before school, or after ROP wouldn’t have to spend time searching for a parking spot. Apartment residents would no longer be plagued by illegally parked students on their street, and residents of houses on Eggers wouldn’t be blockaded by the multitude of cars plaguing their driveways and sidewalks.

There are several areas that could serve this purpose. Converting a portion of the gigantic freshman football field would be easy and convenient, while not taking a great deal of space from the sports teams or the P.E. classes. Another option would be coming to an agreement with the apartment complex on where students could park on Fabian St., especially because the apartment complex residents never take advantage of the street’s parking opportunities.

Although a solution to the parking problems of high school is most likely several years off, getting the ball rolling on discussing the atrocious parking situation is the first key to obtaining a better parking situation. The student drivers of Washington, if they ever want a solution to the problem, will have to begin a dialog with school administrators if they ever want change. Hopefully in a few years time, the horror of parking at Washington High School will be a distant memory.

There are few incentives for people to strain themselves on the test. We rely on people to be motivated through pressure coming from their parents or peers, or the posters and announcements we observe in the weeks preceding the STAR test. It is easy to call the students who choose not to give their all on the test “slackers,” but to me that is a pretense that is met without real consideration of what the STAR test really means for the individual and the school itself.

Good scores on the STAR test improve our rank in the state, and can help to give the school a bigger budget. The higher our score is, the more money we get. This is great, but most of us will be gone before the effects of an increased budget can be noticed.

I don’t see the random numbers we are asked to attain as further incentive to push ourselves. I have never before heard of the number 801 being something that should be achieved, and I’m confident that the number will fall back into obscurity as this year passes. The idea behind the number is clear: to give people a goal to shoot for, but the number 801 has no real meaning that people can relate to.

Incentives could make the test more effective in measuring student’s abilities, and would make people want to do well on the test. In the past, the Governor’s Scholarship Programs provided a $1,000 scholarship to students who scored high on the STAR test, while the Governor’s Distinguished Mathematics and Science Scholars Award could provide a possible $2,500 scholarship. People personally benefiting from doing well would be the best way to motivate students to improve their test scores.

With the loss of the Governors scholarship, a disconnection developed between the STAR test and its impact on college. Without the link to college and student’s futures, a drop in motivation on the test should has been an expected outcome. College is a high priority for students, and a test that has no real impact on college is shovelled to the back of priorities as unnecessary.

To say the least I have mixed emotions about the STAR test. I personally tried my best every year I took it; I even read, sometimes multiple times, all of those boring, often corny little articles that were followed by response questions. But every year I sweated over my answers, I asked myself “why?” The STAR test in many ways is a sad reminder of exactly how over-tested our generation has become.

Even before the new policy was set, this year has had more furlough days than before. As a result, all classes are put under pressure as the teachers try to teach curriculum that were designed with more time in mind. Restricting the amount of homework on weekdays may not seem like it has a big impact on a day-to-day basis, but the time that is taken away from teachers who wish to give additional work to fulfill their curriculum on schedule adds up. Teachers may have to rush their lessons as the school year ends, or on a worst-case scenario, not be able to teach their students the required information.

Teachers cannot hope to cope when up to a month of time that can be spent on projects and homework is suddenly made obsolete. To keep up pace with the shortened years, teachers will have to assign tests on the day that their students come back from breaks to avoid conflicting the new policy. More academically intensive classes such as AP Biology depend on the breaks to make up for the lost days. Upon returning to school from breaks, students will face denser work because the new policy shaved off even more days.

A test given upon returning from break gives students a more difficult, implied workload although it does not conflict the policy.

Not all teachers assign homework over breaks. The option for homework was always present, but it is reserved for when it is absolutely needed.

Especially now with the shortened years, taking away the opportunity to deal with the harsh schedules would be foolish.

The homework policy includes the amount of homework students should be completing by the minute. It also integrates homework by having teachers assign homework that is “cognizant” of homework being assigned in other classes. This makes it a much easier for students taking multiple AP classes.

Part of the school plan wants to enforce communication of results to the community annually and gathering the feedback from families, staff, and students.

It is also admirable for the school board to reevaluate the report annually and want to take an active part of the well-being of students. A closely monitored homework plan will ensure that it is effective and that changes will be made if necessary.

According to the policy, “each teacher shall communicate the homework plan for his/her classes to parents and students. Teachers shall ask parents/guardians to be supportive of the homework plan to strengthen the educational link between home and school.” With changes like these, students are more likely to do homework, especially when parents enforce it outside of school.

Another advantage the policy grants is that no homework or group work should be assigned exclusively for break. This lessens the pressure on students who make plans for vacation. Have you ever had to do a project with a group of people, but then they don’t do their part and your grade is cut in half? With new revisions, the absence of group member cannot negatively affect you, so that will help to motivate slackers to do their part, and cut down stress on the students that have to make up for their ineptitude.

The new revisions provide focus on this neglected facet of a student’s education.

1. Require candidates to make brief speeches.
Speeches are fun and personal; they show the candidate’s character. But when they are done live, viewers have a hard time hearing what applicants took the time and effort to write and memorize. Recorded speeches can eliminate this issue as long as the sound quality of the video is good.

This year candidates weren’t required to prepare or recite a formal speech. Rather, they answered questions that were supposed to reveal who they are and how well-qualified they were for the desired office. Although this is a good supplement, speeches add flair and vitality to the video and the candidates themselves. Prepared speeches also increase difficulty to the election process, showing how well candidates can stretch themselves, which they need to do as ASB and class officers.

Questions hit only the surface of what voters may want to know about candidates, but they can also address points candidates neglected to mention in their speeches. The seemingly random ones reveal how well candidates react and respond, along with adding a fun element to the Q&A format. With speeches, this method can effectively inform voters about their possible ASB and class officers.

2. Fix technical issues.

As The Hatchet staff discussed the new election process, a handful of students complained it was difficult to hear the video. However, another handful of students heard the video just fine. A microphone would make sure candidates could be heard.

3. Make slight changes to the subtitles.

It undoubtedly helped to include subtitles to the video, so good job. However, their color and size made them hard to see. Although orange matches our school colors, the contrast between the subtitles and background was not stark enough. Along with changing the text color, larger font would make the subtitles easier to read.

We hope these suggestions will be considered for upcoming elections so that future voters know exactly who they are supporting.

Until next year…