Spotlight on Coach "Emac"

By Devin Munroe '16

Seven Questions with Coach "EMac"
In light of the spring season beginning, The Anchor staff interviewed our very own girls varsity lacrosse Coach, Erin McCarthy, as she takes on her first year as head coach. From this interview you will get a window into Ms. McCarthy as a coach, and get her thoughts on the upcoming season.

How long have you been a coach at Severn?
This year will mark my ninth season as a lacrosse coach for Severn.

How would you define your coaching style?
I would say my coaching style is intense, well organized, but fun at the same time. I work to find a balance between intensity and showing the girls how to love the sport.

What qualities do you look for in a player?
The first things I look for in a player is her work ethic, skills, lacrosse IQ, and the ability to be a team player.

The Admirals have come off of two strong seasons the past two years. What do you think will be the strengths of this year’s team?
For starters, we have sixteen returning varsity players and seven new members to the team, so we feature a good mix of experience and youth. In addition, having Coach Domenech as a member of the staff is a great asset due to his defensive expertise and exceptional college coaching experience. On the field, Maddie McDaniel returns as the leading draw controller on the team. Her strength on the draw controls and leadership on the attacking end will be a huge help to the team. We are also lucky to be returning our entire starting midfield line-up: juniors Brooke Robbins, Ally Hall, and Tess Bradshaw. Their experience and speed will help us control the midfield. On the defensive end the anchors of our team return with Rachel Sindler and Devin Munroe controlling the defense, as well as our two phenomenal goalies, Zoe Bennett and Abbey Dengler.

What skills have you learned from your college career in having a successful team?
From my time at Salisbury I learned that in order to be truly successful you have to be willing not only to work hard every day, but also have a true love for the game. You also need your coaches to be there to teach you the fundamentals and your teammates there to push you hard every day in practice. Team chemistry is also a huge component to being successful.  

What are your short-term goals?
My short-term goals are to bring the team together and infuse the returning players with the new players. I also want to be a competitive force within the IAAM-A conference. It is my goal to build upon what Coach Sot established these past twenty years.

How do you plan on improving as a coach from year to year?
I think that improvement as coach will come from putting in the time for Professional Development, and attending coach’s clinics and coach’s conventions.

(Photo by Matthew Cole / Baltimore Sun Media Group,  Courtesy of Capital Gazette)

Read More »

The Mourning Meating: Spring Break

By: Zachary Rosen '16

Next week represents the last before the beginning of Spring Break: a two week long period during which students can unwind, relax, and have some fun. Here are some plans some students have for how they will spend their fortnight hiatus:

- Catching some rays on a beach. More specifically some gamma rays. It is a very unusual beach.

- Sitting in a dark room and staring at the walls without blinking.

- Stumbling around in a closet until finding Narnia; becoming the divine right monarch of Narnia; ruling for thirty years until returning to the mundane world; regretting that decision.

- Game hunting unicorns in Montana (that's where the unicorns live, right?)

- Screaming into the void.

- Chilling on the couch watching Netflix with my cats; and my dogs; and my lizards.

- Wandering the empty halls of Severn thinking longingly about times gone by and the impending threat of graduation and assimilation into the real world.

- Convincing Elon Musk to run for President. Please Elon. You are our only hope.

- Working on my fellows oh God please help me I'm so far behind SOS.

- Definitely not returning to Russia, because I am definitely not a spy for Putin. Definitely not. Why are you asking if I'm a Soviet era spy? Maybe you're the spy. Yep. Check and mate. Take that comrade.

These are some of the more interesting Spring break activities. If you've got an activity that you think might be interesting, feel free to write an article about it and send it to your friendly local neighborhood anchor editors. Please. We are low-key really desperate. Why else do you think they keep letting me write this column? The Mourning Meating has less journalistic integrity than Buzzfeed.

Read More »

Trials and Tribulations

By: Zachary Rosen '16

This year’s case for the annual Maryland Mock Trial Competition is as engrossing as it is timely, featuring a high school senior (Sarah Perez) who suffers a tragic concussion while playing lacrosse at a local club league. The girl suffered a head injury the year prior under a different coach, and her mother (Casey Perez, played by Mariah Saunders, ’19) is suing the imagined league (referred to in the case as the Springfield County Lacrosse Club, or SCLC for short) and coach (Shannon Dempsey, played by Caroline Bayless, ’19) for damages resulting from her permanent brain injury.

The team, though it is almost half made up of freshmen, has done exceedingly well, having beaten perennial top competitors Annapolis and Severna Park. The competition has been strange; many members of the team would say that they have lost several trials undeservedly as a result of inconsistencies in judging. Mock trial is a great opportunity to practice public speaking, critical thinking skills, and improvisation, as there is nothing like a sustained objection forcing someone to immediately rewrite all of their questions while standing in front of the entire court. Not to mention all the drama that ensues; the backstabbing, the lying, the he-said-she-said, and the contradictory evidence that comes out makes it as fun to watch as it is to participate in. Though the season is over, next year's should be equally intriguing, and individuals are encouraged to try out.

Read More »

How White are the Oscars?

By: Zachary Rosen '16

Since the announcement of Oscar nominations a few weeks ago, the Academy has come under fire after another year without any people of color nominated for any of the acting categories. Various industry professionals, such as Spike Lee and Jada Pinkett and Will Smith, have publicly criticized this dearth of diversity and did not attend the academy awards on Sunday. Chris Rock, the host this year, also touched upon this issue extensively over the course of the evening. So, in the midst of all this controversy, we must ask the question: is the Academy racist? Though the question is simple, the answer is much more complicated.

One can look at the problem from a purely statistical perspective: each acting category has five nominees every year; since the year 2000 (which is the arbitrary bench mark for this article), there have been 85 nominations in each category. For this article, we will use 2010 census data available on Wikipedia, which indicates that African Americans make up 12.6 percent of the U.S. populations, Asian Americans make up 4.8 percent of the U.S. population, and Hispanic Americans make up 16.3 percent of the U.S. population.

Since 2000, there have been ten nominations for black lead actors (11.8 percent), four for black lead actresses (4.7 percent), six for black supporting actors (7.1 percent), and nine for black supporting actresses (10.6 percent). These are all lower than the 12.6 percent for the U.S. population.

Since 2000, there has been one nomination for an Asian lead actor (1.2 percent), no nominations for an Asian lead actress (there has actually only been one, ever, in 1935), two for Asian supporting actors (2.4 percent), and three for Asian supporting actresses (3.5 percent). These are all lower than the 4.8 percent for the U.S. population.

Since 2000, there have been five nominations for Hispanic lead actors (5.6 percent), three for Hispanic lead actresses (3.5 percent), four for Hispanic supporting actors (4.7 percent), and five for Hispanic supporting actresses (5.6 percent). These are all lower than the 16.3 percent for the U.S. population.

It is important to note that the Academy Awards reflect the talents of actors from across the globe (in fact, Hispanic actors or actresses born in the continental United States were not nominated in any of the acting categories since 2000), and we are comparing nomination percentages to U.S. demographics. 85 people per category is also a small sample size. However, the fact that every ethnicity undershot in every acting category indicates that there is a problem. Additionally, the Academy is overwhelmingly white (94 percent), male (77 percent), and older. This fact is likely to subconsciously influence Academy voters.

This is not to accuse the Academy of purposeful, malicious racism; this issue is related to larger issues in Hollywood and the film industry. People of color are less likely to be cast in large roles (and roles that should go to people of color, based on their source material or geographic location of the story, often are whitewashed and played by white actors). Movies that typically feature people of color are often independent movies that get less press, are less popular, and make less money (which affects the likelihood of nomination, even though on paper it isn’t supposed to, and which produces fewer industry professionals of color who then become Academy members). However, the Academy, as an influencer of culture, needs to actively work to make sure these less well known, less profitable, but still great films, starring extraordinarily talented but perhaps less well known actors, are looked at. The Academy has a responsibility to work to fix institutional racism; otherwise, it is part of the problem.

Read More »

Opinion: Why I Have Lost Faith in Our Government (Hint - It's not Trump this time)

By Neel Lakhanpal ‘16

Sadly, within hours of Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, his memory had faded and a complicated political battle had just begun. In the wake of this tragedy, the Supreme Court is in a precarious position in the eyes of many; the conservative Scalia’s loss has translated to the potential for a liberal majority in the court. In this situation, as has been done for hundreds of years, the President nominates potential justices and the Senate approves them if they seem suitable for the position. Republicans (who hold a majority in the Senate), knowing Obama will nominate a liberal with views compatible to his own, have vowed to not approve any nominee the President presents them. The Republicans claim that the American people, in an election year, ought to be able to choose their nominee by way of choosing the presidential candidate this November. Or, in other words, they are terrified of the prospect of a liberal majority in the Supreme Court.

Personally, I would not have voted for Obama if I could have in 2012. But he won by over five million votes. The American people democratically and constitutionally elected Obama to be the president and fulfill the duties of the office. That being said, I do not like most of Obama’s policies. But he is the president. The Republicans, however, are preventing him from doing his own job. It is frankly disgusting to see this hypocrisy occurring in our government. The Republican Party obsesses over the Constitution and is all about cracking down on government ineptitude. Now they are violating the former and contributing to the latter. For candidates like Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz to talk about loving the Constitution so much and adhering to it, it is inconceivable to me why they would then claim that this year the President doesn’t need to do his job, leaving a vacancy on the Court for an entire year. Elizabeth Warren, an all-but-socialist Massachusetts senator with whom I agree on just about nothing, did sum up the situation quite well in a Facebook post a few weeks ago:

“Article II Section 2 of the Constitution says the President of the United States nominates justices to the Supreme Court, with the advice and consent of the Senate. I can’t find a clause that says ‘except when there’s a year left in the term of a Democratic President.’

Senate Republicans took an oath just like Senate Democrats did. Abandoning the duties they swore to uphold would threaten both the Constitution and our democracy itself. It would also prove that all the Republican talk about loving the Constitution is just that – empty talk.”

This controversy has all proven to me a sad reality as a first time voter excited to participate in the political process this fall: our leaders are in it for the power and the political expediency. The Senate Republicans are showing me and everyone else in this country that they put party politics above the Constitution and the people they were elected to serve. I personally am very saddened by these developments, and I am sure that Justice Scalia would be too if he could witness them today.

Photo courtesy: http://www.albertmohler.com/2016/02/14/a-giant-has-fallen-the-death-of-justice-antonin-scalia-and-the-future-of-constitutional-government/

Quote courtesy: https://www.facebook.com/senatorelizabethwarren/?fref=ts

Read More »

Recap: Model UN Conference

By Neel Lakhanpal '16

Two weeks ago, a group of Severn students left for a four day weekend in Baltimore. From February 18th- 21st, these students represented the tiny but mighty nation of Singapore in JHUMUNC (John's Hopkins Model United Nations Conference). One thing was missing, however; there was not a single upperclassman. This was something quite new for a club whose annual conference attendees tend to be all or all-but-one upperclassmen. Although this was due in part to a complicated weekend for the conference, it is indicative of the club's bright future and engaged younger students.

Broadly speaking, this conference really is a model United Nations summit. Each school is the equivalent of a country. We got Singapore this year, and generally the bigger a delegation sends to a conference the more influential of a country they get (i.e. McDonogh or similar would get America/ China/ Britain, we got Singapore, and a three person group from, say, Indian Creek, may get Burundi or the Bahamas). This was quite lucky for our delegation as we have had much worse assignments before -- cough, cough, Uzbekistan. The group was able to delve into the astounding economic success of Singapore as well as some of the challenges it is facing, namely in human rights.

Then, armed with this knowledge, each Severn student did what a delegate from Singapore would do in the real-life United Nations: represent Singapore at a situation-specific committee. For example, sophomore Sophie Connors was in the Legal Committee. She worked together with people from across the country to draft international law resolutions for the topics of capital punishment and lethal autonomous weapons systems.

When I talked with about her overall experience, she told me, "I had a lot of fun. I met a lot of people from cool, unique backgrounds, and I always love being able to do so outside of Severn's community."

Jared Dove, meanwhile, was on the IOC (International Olympics Committee). This committee, in real life, works to identify cities interested in hosting the olympics about a decade out, then hears bids from across the world and ultimately votes on who will host.

He described, "I was on the Olympic Committee and we discussed the host city for the 2024 Olympics, as well as worker's rights for the people that build the facilities. Ultimately, we chose Doha, Qatar."

Both he and Sophie really enjoyed their times at JHUMUNC, both for the people they met and the topics they explored. Having gone in a previous year, I too can attest that it is a great experience for anyone even remotely interested in foreign affairs. I encourage you all to join Model UN and try to join in on this great experience next year!

Photo courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_Nations

Read More »

SEV-LECTION

     
By Annie Mott '16

       On March the first, Severn held its own Super Tuesday, of sorts. Students were sent out a link to a survey that contained all questions pertinent to this election, from abortion rights, to foreign policy, to a pseudo-election itself. The results-- surprising. Severn, a historically conservatively-dominated student population (the last Severn election had students in a happy uproar as Romney won in a landslide), has chosen a candidate that rejects every definition of the word. To put it frankly, if Severn were America, we’d all be feeling the Bern.

        

In a historic turn of events, self-declared Socialist Bernie Sanders has received the most votes, with 28.57% of the school in support. Granted, it’s not a majority, by any means, but if you had told me two weeks ago that almost one-third of Severn students would want Bernie to win the election, to put it mildly, I would not have believed you. Hilariously, 4% of students wrote in the “Other” category that they wanted none of the candidates to win, and one person wrote that they would rather move out of the country than have any of them as president.

 What’s most interesting, though, about this question, is when you compare it to who Severn students actually think are going to win the election:

                     

Hillary Clinton, with 54.19% of the votes, is the clear winner. Only 18.29% of students want HRC to win the election, but over half of them think she will. Trump was a solid second in both categories, with exactly one-fifth of students in favor of him, and 12.4% more thinking he is going to be the next president. Of course, someone did write that they hoped none of them would win because in their opinion, they’d all be ‘absolutely horrific.’ I don’t doubt that a few other people agree with you, Anonymous.

Students didn’t just stop there in their liberalism, though. When asked if they support Donald’s wishes to build a wall between Mexico and the US (and whether Mexico should pay for it), 68.33% of students said no-- and only 14.44% thought that it was a logical plan for Mexico to pay for it.

                               

When confronted with the issue of abortion, a hot topic considering the recent closure of countless Planned Parenthoods across the country and the (majority of the) GOP’s attempt to close more and pass legislature allowing increasing restrictions on abortions, an overwhelming majority was on the pro-choice side. Only 4.44% of students felt that there should be no abortions ever, no exceptions-- leaving 95.56% in favor of at least some degree of pro-choice. 59.44% of students felt that they were pro-choice, regardless of the situation.  

The next question tackled a hotly-debated topic of economics: the minimum wage. Surprisingly, almost half (44.13%) of students believe that yes, it should be raised, and only 31.84% thought it shouldn’t. 24.02% of students said that they didn’t know enough to answer the question, which is actually a pretty hopeful statistic. Over a quarter of kids who didn’t think they had enough information to answer the question actually admitted it, instead of forming an opinion based on others’ without bothering with the facts (something that, unfortunately, happens all too often in politics).

                

The greatest thing about these results is that the voters on each of these questions were pretty much bi-partisan-- that is, to say, that there wasn’t a clear majority of Republicans or Democrats in this pool. 32.58% of voters said that they were Republicans, 35.96% of voters said they were Democrats, and in a surprisingly large representation, 26.4% were Independents. There was even one voter who told me that they were an Anarchist, and that they were ‘serious, Annie, don’t disregard this.’ There was no real party skew to the data-- but if you were to look at all the data without knowing this, you’d say this was probably a poll taken pretty much by only liberals. The truth: the party sizes were pretty evenly split. It is true that not everyone in the upper school took the survey, but the more interesting result is that the students of two major parties who, historically, are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum actually agree on more issues than one would think.

 Quite honestly, the only thing I can truly come up with to summarize this election is that, one, this is pretty much the weirdest election of all time so far-- in real Donald-Trump-is-probably-the-GOP-candidate life, and in Severn-School-picks-Bernie-Sanders life-- and, two, everyone at Severn is a lot more liberal than we (or at least, I) thought. Go figure. 

 

-Annie Mott ‘16

Read More »