Recent statistics from the Anti-Defamation League and the Council on American-Islamic Relations highlight the urgency of addressing antisemitism and Islamophobia in schools. According to the ADL, U.S. antisemitic incidents reached their peak after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, a 337% increase from the year before. Similarly, in the four weeks following Oct. 7, CAIR received over 1,000 reports of anti-Arab and Islamophobic behavior, a 216% increase from the previous year.

Teachers play a crucial role in fostering analytical and critical-thinking skills as students try to grapple with complex geopolitical conflicts. Acknowledging this, PAUSD Board Policy 6144 mandates that instruction be presented in a balanced manner, addressing all sides of an issue without bias or promoting a particular point of view. While total objectivity may not always be possible, through presenting facts from a variety of reputable sources and holding space for informed discussions, teachers can allow students to form their own opinions while respecting others’.

The challenge, however, lies not in the absence of resources — materials were provided to teachers post-Oct. 7 to guide discussions on the war — but in the confidence and preparedness of teachers to engage with these topics openly and effectively, according to social studies teacher Tara Firenzi. Alongside being able to understand the conflicts themselves, teachers must be able to appropriately confront hate in the classroom. PAUSD has already implemented several equity and wellness trainings for teachers, including the New Hire Equity Training, which explores race, diversity and tolerance. However, the training fails to explicitly cover Islamophobia and antisemitism in the context of events in the Middle East, including the Israel-Hamas war — an incredibly complex subject that cannot be navigated simply with knowledge from general equity trainings. The complexity arises not from the conflict being more important than others, but from its deeply rooted history and the multifaceted political, religious and cultural tensions unique to the Middle East. This omission can lead to scenarios in which educators find themselves ill-equipped to navigate such a sensitive subject in the classroom. As a result, students may feel uncomfortable, unsafe or unsupported in their learning spaces. A staffwide antisemitism and Islamophobia education training that teaches staff how to identify microaggressions and biased learning materials will equip teachers with the necessary tools to discuss current events with students who are both deeply impacted by them and those who may just be curious.

This doesn’t mean that educators have to deviate from their planned curriculum to address current events. While all teachers should have the resources and training to discuss global events if they choose to, it is equally important for those who may not feel it is within their purview — including non-humanities teachers — to communicate their support to students. It is most essential to create an atmosphere of understanding, in which students know they have supporters among faculty who are prepared to assist them in navigating complex discussions and emotions.

This dual approach — equipping teachers with the necessary tools to address sensitive issues directly when possible, and fostering an environment of support regardless of the curriculum — ensures that all students feel seen, heard and valued in their educational journey at PAUSD.

In many ways, teachers are on the front lines of combating discrimination in classrooms, including tackling subtler microaggressions. PAUSD’s messy response serves as a call for a change in how its schools should approach the teaching of global conflicts as they arise. By equipping educators with the necessary tools to address sensitive issues like Islamophobia and antisemitism thoughtfully, PAUSD can foster a more empathetic and informed student body.

The former student was diagnosed with substance use disorder — specifically alcohol use disorder — as a sophomore at Gunn. After they completed a rehabilitative inpatient program, they transferred out of Gunn and are currently in early sustained remission. According to the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision,” a patient is in early sustained remission if, within a year, they have not had symptoms of alcohol use disorder other than the urge to drink alcohol.

Throughout their years at Gunn, the former student struggled with the early stages of their addiction, which gave way to active addiction, or active substance use disorder, defined by the DSM-5-TR as “patterns of symptoms caused by using a substance that an individual continues taking despite its negative effects.” “People who aren’t affected by substance use disorder — people who aren’t addicts — are going to break their heads trying to understand what it’s like,” they said.

To many, “Don’t do drugs” sounds simple enough — it’s as easy as just saying no. Students are often taught the street names and psychological and physiological effects of various substances in middle school so they know exactly what to avoid and why. They encounter YouTube thumbnails with jarring before-and-after images of heroin addicts. These scare tactics should discourage young adults from future drug use, but ultimately don’t: An anonymous Paly senior who also struggled with alcohol use disorder emphasizes that addiction is often unexpected, and not a conscious choice. “People think it’s the life someone wanted to live, but it’s not,” they said.

The stakes of substance abuse disorder have become especially clear in recent years. According to the California Department of Education, fentanyl deaths accounted for more than 80% of all drug-related deaths among California’s youth in 2021, and the annual crude mortality rate for opioid overdoses in Santa Clara County in 2021 increased by 73% from 2019. In response, PAUSD has implemented staff opioid trainings and fentanyl overdose prevention and harm reduction strategies. Although the district doesn’t condone substance use, its response reflects knowledge of student use, according to Assistant Principal Harvey Newland. “It’s naïve to assume that students do not engage in any substance use over the course of their time at Gunn,” he said.

The American Addiction Centers cite “proximity to substances” as a risk factor for addiction, alongside aggressive behavior in childhood, parental neglect, poverty and peer pressure. However, the Paly senior says it’s not that simple. “A lot of people who use substances never become addicted,” they said. “You don’t know you’re going to be an addict until you are an addict.”

After completing a recovery program in an inpatient treatment center this past summer, the Paly senior is now five months sober. “I have a good set of therapists, my parents have been supportive and my friends have been supportive,” they said. “But at the end of the day, sobriety is one of those things where it has to come from within. Nobody can force anyone else to get sober.”

Mental health complexities

Many explanations of addiction fail to address it with appropriate complexity or confuse addiction with misuse. “Substance misuse and irresponsible use of substances is common and well-understood, but treatment for actual substance use disorders is completely misunderstood,” the former Gunn student said. “A lot of high school students misuse substances, but not a lot have substance use disorders, which is why people don’t understand them fully.”

Often, addiction is framed as a result of bad choices. Although the former Gunn student acknowledges the detrimental choices they made while struggling with alcohol use disorder, they explained that such choices were a result of the addiction, not the other way around. “On one hand, I put myself into a spot where I was severely addicted to alcohol, and I could’ve chosen to stop and put actual effort into recovery earlier on,” they said. “It was my fault, but when I was in a state of active addiction, I had no control over myself. I didn’t even know myself. I was barely a person.”

Psychology teacher Warren Collier explains that addiction at its most fundamental level is a product of repeated and regular drug use. “Usually, a person is using some kind of drug to achieve some kind of high or some pleasurable experience, and they enjoy it,” he said. “They go back and try it again because they want more of that experience, and if that happens over a short period of time, they will start to develop a tolerance and use more.”

Many substances, such as opioids, cocaine and nicotine, cause dopamine to flood the brain’s reward pathway. The brain remembers this flood and associates it with the substance. According to Collier, after a significant period of consistent drug use, students’ brains are no longer able to achieve the emotions or high without external assistance — the drug.

The Paly senior’s experiences with alcohol use disorder reflect this phenomenon. “I started drinking because it was a good time,” they said. “It was something to make the bad thoughts go away. Then, it ramped up, and I would think to myself, ‘I can make it more fun if I drink more.’ And that’s when I became dependent on it, so I couldn’t stop having fun, even if I wanted to. And then it stopped being fun.”

The Paly senior also began using cocaine at the end of their sophomore year. What began as an experiment with some friends turned into addiction. “I was spending a couple hundred dollars a week on it,” they said. “I accidentally detoxed at work one time because I miscalculated how much coke I had that day. I was throwing up in the bathroom at work. And after that day, I said, ‘Screw this. I can’t do it anymore.’ So I told my friends, ‘You need to keep me in check, I’m not doing this anymore.’”

Individuals are sometimes able to pull themselves out of addiction on their first try. Sometimes, they aren’t. The former Gunn student went to an inpatient rehabilitation center twice before exiting active addiction. Either way, both the Paly senior and the former Gunn student were supported by empathetic people around them who encouraged them on their distinctive paths to recovery.

Sometimes, mental-health struggles can lead to substance abuse. The Paly senior explains that their addiction developed partially due to depression. “I didn’t think I was going to have a future,” they said. “If you want to have the best year of your life and nothing past that, you should do a whole bunch of drugs. But if you want more than a year — you want a life — then drugs aren’t an option.”

The former Gunn student used substances as a coping mechanism for mental-health struggles as well. “I was at the worst point in my life with my mental health, and I found that being intoxicated distracted me from the reality of my situation,” they said.

A 2005 research paper published in the National Library of Medicine explored the comorbidity of substance use disorder and mood disorders. The researchers ultimately pointed to psychiatric treatment, which tackles both substance use disorder alongside the mental health issues that commonly occur simultaneously or are the root cause of addiction. “Nobody says they’re going to be an addict for fun,” the former Gunn student said. “Usually, they have an outside problem that they want to cover up. A lot of people’s way of coping is with drugs.”

Supporting students

According to Newland, the Gunn administration has no standardized protocol for supporting students with substance use disorder. In general, administrators first try to holistically assess the student’s situation and the factors contributing to their substance use through a Student Success Team meeting involving families, counselors, administrators and teachers. “It’s really up to them in terms of what they want to share with us,” Newland said. “We need to work with whatever we are given and come up with support and resources that we can provide.”

He explained, however, that situations which place students in urgent harm must be dealt with immediately under mandated-reporting rules for staff. “If something comes up that falls under the guidelines set for Gunn teachers and administrators, we have to report it and follow that exact protocol,” he said. “Administrators are not required to intervene beyond the protocol.”

The former Gunn student noted that, in their case, these protocols were not always helpful. “I appreciate that (Gunn administration) has been understanding and tried to see it as a mental health condition,” they said. “But aside from one counselor, I have not received any support or outreach from them — not when I was in active addiction, nor when I came back from rehab.”

The severity of addiction also informs staff response. “Are you calling paramedics?” Newland said. “How immediate is the situation? Those types of questions guide us in how we provide resources and move forward in supporting the student.”

Na

Regardless of the level of severity of a student’s substance use, both the Paly senior and the former Gunn student believe that schools should intervene with empathy. “I was lucky to have that one counselor who really empathized with me,” the former Gunn student said. “He was in contact with my (parents) a lot and understood the mental health aspect of (addiction). But if he wasn’t there and the Gunn administration didn’t have his input, I think the administration would’ve thought I was just a lost cause.”

Sometimes, this means repeated check-ins with students. “If someone was caught with a (wax) pen in their hand, the administration would confiscate it, send a letter home and maybe enforce disciplinary action,” the former Gunn student said. “But also make them meet with the counselor. Make them meet with one of the school therapists. (Students) should be able to see that it’s not normal to feel the need to be intoxicated at 11 a.m. More times than not, substance use is about mental health.”

According to the Wellness Outreach Worker Rossana Castillo, the Wellness Team’s first step when supporting a student suffering from addiction is to identify the origin of their substance abuse, whether it’s emotional or mental. While Gunn Wellness can provide immediate and short-term support, in situations where students require specialized treatment, the team works to connect the student and their family to long-term specialized resources.

The Wellness Team also highly encourages students to notify the wellness staff or any trusted adult when a friend may be struggling with substance abuse disorder. They will connect the struggling student to resources as well as connect with their friend to ensure that they don’t carry the load of supporting their friend on their own.

The abortion debate in the United States reached a turning point in the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade, which established the constitutional right to an abortion. Since the court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned this precedent, abortion is no longer considered a federal right, but rather a matter for each state to decide. This shift has resulted in stark contrasts between the abortion laws of states that protect access to abortion and those that have banned or restricted it. These laws, both protective or restrictive, have had tangible, immediate consequences on women’s autonomy, spurring women who may have been dispassionate before to become more politically engaged.

In this charged context, candidates are calibrating political strategies. Democrats are leveraging the issue to consolidate support among pro-choice voters by framing Republicans as staunchly anti-choice. President Joe Biden’s $25 million ad campaign “These Guys,” launched on Aug. 25, asserts that reproductive health care decisions are personal and rebukes leading Republican presidential candidates Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis for their stances on abortion.

On the flip side, Republican presidential candidates’ approaches are more divided. To appeal to religious and conservative voters, several Republican candidates are adopting uncompromising pro-life positions on abortion. Republican presidential candidate Tim Scott, for example, has espoused a national ban. “Republicans should not be retreating on life,” he wrote in a July 31 post on X, formerly known as Twitter. “We need a national 15-week limit to stop blue states from pushing abortion on demand.” This stance contradicts the data from most polls, including a July 2023 Reuters/Ipsos poll, which show a majority of U.S. voters oppose presidential candidates who favor strict abortion restrictions.

On the other hand, some Republican candidates, including Trump, are steering clear of providing definite responses. In an NBC interview from September, Trump evaded questions about whether he would support a federal ban, saying he prefers that the issue be left to state legislatures.

The varying strategies in the party suggest that Republicans are attempting to walk a fine line between appealing to their core supporters and mollifying the general electorate. This balancing act becomes more complicated when considering the influence of female candidates and voters.

A Sept. 7 CNN poll showed Republican candidate Nikki Haley leading President Joe Biden by six points, establishing her as the only possible GOP contender with a clear lead over President Joe Biden in a hypothetical general election match-up. Haley signed a 20-week ban in South Carolina as governor but believes a nationwide 15-week ban is not feasible. “No Republican president can ban abortions any more than a Democrat president can ban all those state laws,” she said during the first presidential debate. “Don’t make women feel like they have to decide on this issue when you know we don’t have 60 Senate votes in the House.” Her call for a national consensus on abortion includes banning late-term abortions and making contraception widely available. As the only female Republican candidate, Haley’s nuanced stance on abortion sets her apart from her male opponents and could resonate with a broader demographic, including more centrist women and young voters.

How women vote may change the outcome of the 2024 election: Women voters swinging from Trump helped deliver the White House to Biden in 2020, and midterm exit polls showed that a bump in young voters — especially women — helped Democrats keep the Senate in 2022. Today, the Democratic Party has an edge over the Republican Party in terms of young, female voters: According to a poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation, 36% of independent young female voters say Democrats best represent their abortion views compared to 13% who say Republicans best represent their views.

Furthermore, an uptick in female voter registration, indicated by a New York Times article from September 2022, suggests that women will be increasingly pivotal players in the 2024 elections. Since the June 24 Dobbs decision, 64% of new registrants in Kansas, a historically Republican-voting state, have been women. In the six months before Dobbs, women outnumbered men nationally by a three-percentage-point margin among new voter registrations. After Dobbs, that gender gap skyrocketed to 40 points.

For Democrats, focusing on female voters, particularly those who are pro-choice, could solidify a base that is already leaning their way, making them an indispensable ally for a successful campaign. Republicans, too, have a compelling reason to prioritize women, particularly those who are pro-life.

Abortion rights are an issue that crosses the boundary between policy and personal values, making it one of the most hotly debated topics of the year. Women’s reproductive health rights have been a hard-fought battle for decades, and a changing abortion-rights landscape has galvanized many women to become politically engaged. And this debate will not only take place in the presidential election — it will be held in the hallways at Gunn, in classrooms and in clubs. Gunn students, who are navigating this divisive issue amid an already polarized climate, can hopefully look to nuanced positions for a different lens through which to view the ongoing debate on abortion rights as they approach voting age. The upcoming election isn’t merely a spar between candidates but a pivotal moment that will shape the world in which students live, vote and make choices about their own bodies.

Affirmative action is defined as an active effort to improve employment or educational opportunities for historically underrepresented groups. While approaches can vary — some address race, while others address socioeconomic status, ability and gender — the Supreme Court specifically overruled race-conscious admissions policies that use race as a factor in deciding which qualified applicants will be admitted to universities.

Although Gunn’s counselors don’t plan on making large-scale changes in response to the ruling, they will encourage students to capture a holistic view of their identity in applications, according to Gunn college advisor “I really want to stress to the students that opportunities continue to exist in the application to express who you are,” he said. “Use these opportunities to represent your identity and what makes you unique as a person — whether that be race, background, experiences, things of that nature.”

Some universities have already facilitated this approach through changing their supplemental essay prompts for the upcoming admissions cycle. Stanford University, for example, changed a prompt asking students what was meaningful to them to one telling them to “describe what aspects of (their) life experiences, interests and character” make them good candidates for the university.

Fidani also believes that many institutions will still strive to establish diverse, inclusive communities. “The Supreme Court made a law, and colleges must respectfully abide by this. I’m encouraged by the language coming from colleges, which affirms their commitment to finding ways, within the context of the ruling, to continue to build campus communities that represent students from a wide range of backgrounds and identities.”

Still, the ruling has been jarring for students such as senior Amrit Joshi, who feels it exacerbates an already inequitable admissions process. “It goes to show what and who the system is supposed to help,” he said. “It’s not meant to help people of color, underprivileged people, minorities.”

Some point to the continued existence of legacy preferences as an example of this bias. The cases’ plaintiffs argued that Asian Americans lost out to less-qualified Black and Latino applicants. Yet many private universities continue to offer advantages to students whose parents attended or donated money to their institutions — students who are usually white and wealthy. One study based on Harvard University data found that 70% of legacy and donor-related applicants are white. Several groups filed a complaint based on these statistics following the Supreme Court decision, and the Department of Education has since launched a civil rights investigation into legacy admissions.

Moving forward, Fidani thinks that colleges and universities may begin to look to how the University of California schools — which have not used race-conscious admissions since 1996 — admit students. Although the number of Black and Latino students decreased following the ban, the UCs still have a relatively diverse student body: In 2022, 22.5% of enrollees were Latino, 4.5% were Black and 32.2% were Asian.

For senior Sophia Tilghman, this knowledge has made the Supreme Court decision less frightening. “The Supreme Court decision really does not impact me because I am intending to apply to the UCs and Cal State schools, which don’t use affirmative action,” she said.

As applicants navigate an altered landscape, they are seeking proactive approaches to come to terms with the ruling and ensure successful admissions. “I would talk to college admissions counselors and officers and ask them what they are looking for, and look around at what your peers are doing and find encouragement from others,” Joshi said.

Fidani also recommends exploring all resources the Gunn counseling team provides during the application process, including parent nights, PRIME offerings and individual meetings. “We want to encourage students to step into those and to ask questions,” he
said. “It’s a big process, and there is so much unknown, so please, share thoughts and opinions. Let’s talk and try to work them out together.”

Over the years, LGBTQ+ literature has navigated changing social tides and legal restrictions. These stories serve to educate readers who do not identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, as well as provide characters and messages that LGBTQ+ readers can relate to.

A few recommendations: James Baldwin’s “Giovanni’s Room” is a groundbreaking novel that delves into complex themes of homosexuality and queer identity in 1950s Paris, when these topics were taboo. The novel centers around the relationship between an American expatriate named David and his lover Giovanni, a young Italian bartender. Through their experiences, Baldwin highlights the complexities of love and the ways in which societal pressures can impact personal identity.

“Close to the Knives: A Memoir of Disintegration,” by David Wojnarowicz, is a powerful memoir that recounts the author’s experiences as a gay man living with HIV/AIDS during the 1980s. Its portrayal of the devastation wrought by the epidemic makes it significant in LGBTQ+ history and literature.

If you’re planning on visiting, wear sturdy shoes, as the inclines and declines can be relatively steep. Also, be sure to avoid poison oak on unestablished trails, and expect strong winds. Sunrise and sunset are the best times to visit if you want to avoid crowds (as bonus, the view is most picturesque at these times). Still, be wary of thieves, as there have been several recent incidents of robbery after dark.

To get to the Twin Peaks, hike up the 0.7-mile trail, or one of the various more strenuous hikes to the southern or eastern sides of the park. Whether you are looking for the perfect shot or simply want to bask in the beauty of a San Francisco sunset, Twin Peaks is a must-see.

Aside from the scenery, Point Reyes also offers several hiking trails that cater to all levels of physical ability. Hikers should keep an eye out for diverse wildlife, including elk and coyotes. It’s a good idea to wear comfortable walking shoes and dress in layers, as the temperature can vary widely throughout the park. Spring and fall are the best times to visit, as the weather is mild and the crowds are thinner, allowing visitors to enjoy the stunning scenery in peace. Whether you’re a nature enthusiast or simply looking for a peaceful escape, the park’s awe-inspiring landscapes are sure to leave a lasting impression.

To show support for survivors of sexual assault and harassment, the Title IX Club hosted a lunch event called “Chalk Flowers for Survivors.” Junior Annabel Honigstein, co-president of the Title IX Club and a Forum editor for The Oracle, emphasized the importance of commemorating the day. “Every year we draw flowers and positive, kind messages on concrete surfaces to show our support for survivors,” she said.

The Title IX Club also organized an informational session with district Title IX Coordinator Robert Andrade. According to Honigstein, the event aimed to educate students about district policies and reach a wider audience through advertising.

Junior Anika Jayanth participated in the session and found it to be informative. “I learned how the district goes about (handling) sexual assault complaints,” she said. “I learned how there are varying degrees of intensity when it comes to sexual assault and how each of them is dealt with differently.”

Before working to combat misinformation, it is essential to understand what political polarization truly is, as well as how social media has contributed to it. Britannica describes political polarization as “extreme and long-lasting partisanship in a two-party system that results in the division of a country’s entire population into two diametrically opposed political camps.” According to social studies teacher Laurel Howard, as this polarization intensifies, the incumbent party’s followers behave in a more autocratic manner to stay in power. On the other side, opponents are more willing to resort to undemocratic means to undermine their potence. Consequently, those on the opposite extremes of the political spectrum tend to be less likely to work with one other on bipartisan efforts. This is relevant now more than ever: A Pew Research Center analysis from 2022 found that, on average, Democrats and Republicans are ideologically farther apart today than at any time in the past 50 years. This dynamic can severely damage democracy and encourage citizens to become blindly loyal to their parties.

In the U.S., extreme points of view have been easily disseminated on social media in the digital age. This contributes to the widening gap between political parties by providing avenues for extreme groups to circulate fake news. In the #pizzagate conspiracy, the false theory was promoted on social media through the use of apps such as Reddit and Facebook. More recently, far-right groups helped organize the insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, over social media sites.

Social media algorithms also make it easier for the average citizen to confirm their own political beliefs, rather than explore others, thus facilitating further polarization. These algorithms personalize the content that users see on the app based on their past behavior and interactions, using previously liked or shared posts to continue to recommend similar or related content that the user might want to engage with. This can lead to a bubble (or echo-chamber) effect in which users are only exposed to content that reinforces their beliefs, contributing to intense confirmation bias. Interacting with different points of view necessitates strong media literacy skills so students can draw their own opinions. Interacting with others who hold diverse perspectives, sentiments and experiences can extend our knowledge, shape our viewpoints and enhance our societal connections. However, if individuals opt out of these conversations, instead isolating themselves from those with different political beliefs, it only fosters and encourages division.

In a 2021 survey conducted by research foundation Reboot, 27% of respondents said social media made them “less tolerant” of people who have opposing points of view. When people fail to interact with those with opposing viewpoints, they lose an essential part of their critical thinking abilities. As future—or current—voters, it is crucial that Gunn students learn how to be responsible and knowledgeable citizens who are able to engage with those that may have beliefs differing from their own.

A significant part of this issue is learning to identify the information’s credibility. There are several ways to assess a piece of information’s credibility, whether it be an Instagram post discussing recent news or a retweet of an article. First, simply slow down: When skimming through an article, one may forget to be analytical and critical of the writing and might blindly follow disinformation. It is crucial to determine whether the information is echoed in multiple sources. For example, if one finds something on social media, they should look to see if there is similar content in other reputable sources, such as the Associated Press or perhaps a textbook. Additionally, people tend to get pulled in by statistics that lack context. For instance, if a news source states that 20% of people are affected by an issue, take a moment to check the subtext and see how many people were surveyed. 20% of a small sample of the population is different from 20% of the entire population. Put the statistic into perspective. Finally, it is important to assess word choice in the media. When reading the information, search for inflammatory words, specifically adjectives, that may imply biases and specific narratives that the source is trying to push. Word choice, specifically in regard to adjectives, can shift the entire meaning of a text.

These steps may seem minuscule, yet their impacts are great. Making these efforts to improve media literacy can stop the mindless resharing of the type of disinformation that pushes our society further and further apart.