By Anya Weerapana, Banner Staff

Open Winsor’s website, and you’ll instantly see a celebration of a “diverse community” where “authentic engagement” is not only encouraged, but found everywhere. This was the marketing that appealed to me as a prospective Class V student: Winsor was the place, I thought, where I could find lots of people to discuss politics openly, without fear of reproach or backlash. 

After arriving on campus in 2021 I found that, in some ways, these promises were true. Classes certainly discussed topics like racism and misogyny in their day-to-day curriculum, and I felt empowered to share my own opinions; when speaking to my peers outside the classroom, however, I discovered that different perspectives were bubbling under the surface. My peers did not feel as open or empowered as I did, and so they removed themselves from the conversation—or engaged in self-censorship. 

I have long been curious about the true feelings my classmates have about Winsor’s political environment, and this two-part article sets out to explore the topic of Winsor’s political climate. I started my investigation by gathering data about viewpoints in the Upper School through a Google Form and then interviewing several students to explore their perspectives. 

What I discovered during this process were perspectives that were nuanced and heavily influenced by personal and family stories. This first article will lay the foundation for Winsor’s political climate by looking into the responses and data collected from the Google Form; the second article, which will appear in the next issue of The Banner, will feature interviews and tackle the more difficult questions that emerged from preliminary data, providing an in-depth “Winsor” perspective. 

“Winsor offers adequate time in its classes to discuss current events.” Would you agree or disagree with this? Despite whatever you may believe, know that this question had the strongest general consensus amongst the 177 participants of the Google Form: 62% disagreed, and 12% of respondents said they agreed. The rest were neutral or had no opinion. This figure did not shock me in the slightest—it’s one of the reasons that I chose to write this article in the first place. 

I’ve heard the general murmurings of “Winsor isn’t doing enough” for a long time, but what shocked me was how many respondents said they read the news on their own time. The number was rather evenly split: 35% said they rarely or never read the news, 35% said they sometimes read the news, and 30% said they often or always read the news.

What I see in these two data points is not a group of unmotivated teenagers who don’t care about today’s world but Winsor’s untapped current events potential: even though they are not necessarily reading the news on their own time, the student body feels that their classes are not making enough connections to current events and that Winsor is not doing enough to prepare them for the real world. 

Thanks to social media (which 76% of respondents said was one of their primary news sources), students are still being exposed to news stories, just not in a way that many teachers are used to. The group that gets their news on a daily basis from social media might be familiar with events talked about online but are not necessarily acquainted with the facts behind them; therefore, they just don’t feel that they can speak about topics without being judged for what they don’t understand. Winsor should adapt to this kind of student by providing more outlets inside and outside the classroom where students can learn about basic facts behind current events in a structured setting. 

This fear of judgment is what I think best defines Winsor’s political climate, and it comes from all areas. Students are afraid of being judged by their teachers or peers about not only their understanding (or lack thereof) of a subject but also of “being canceled,” where a “wrong” opinion is condemned and continues to be talked about outside of the classroom. This fear is why 50% of respondents said they “sometimes” self-censored, 23% said they “often” self-censored, and 4% said they “always” self-censored while at Winsor. That is a whopping 77% of Upper School students who self-censor.

These numbers are abysmal to me, but it’s important to note that self-censorship is not just a problem at Winsor: educational institutions across the country are grappling with how to deal with differing political opinions and make every student’s voice heard. But that does not mean Winsor should stay the way it is—its students are dissatisfied with how the school is handling current events education, and improvements need to be made. But what can be done?

In the next installment of this article, I’ll be listening to Upper School students’ takes on Winsor’s political climate and what they think Winsor can do to make them feel more comfortable. I want to thank all who participated in the process of making this article, whether by anonymously completing the Google Form or by taking the time to speak with me in-person. Without my peers, this article could not have reached the level of depth that it did. Until the next Banner issue! ☐

If you would like to speak further with me about your experiences and beliefs on self-censorship at Winsor, please reach out to anya.weerapana@winsor.edu.