… and the editor’s clarification

Naomi Scully-Bristol, Opinion Editor

Dear Andrey,

Thank you for taking the time to reply to this article. It is always important to hear from the student body on issues like this.

I would first like to mention that the article I wrote was a news article and therefore does not necessarily represent my opinions. I interviewed both students and teachers about their opinions and the reasons behind the shift to include more contemporary, diverse books in the curriculum. The hope was reporting an unbiased story which explained this change and gave some insight into how the Woodson community felt about it. 

One of your largest concerns seems to be that these changes are simply “diversity for diversity’s sake” and that newer books have less value, as they have not had an effect on our society’s thought. I am disappointed that this is what you feel my article portrayed. One of the most important ideas expressed by the students and faculty I spoke with was that a driving force behind the inclusion of more diverse books was to expand students’ range of thought. If the school teaches books old enough to have already changed how people think, then students will be exposed only to old, and likely whiter, views which are less pertinent to the world they live in today. I believe that everyone I spoke to would agree with you that classics have changed the way people think, however, they were only able to do that because they were read. The more contemporary, diverse books being included in the curriculum now could also change how people think, which, as I hope was expressed in the article, is why the school is giving students the opportunity to read them. 

Please keep in mind that I was only reporting on a change already in motion within our school. Should you wish to have your opinions heard by someone who can actually do something I would recommend that your opinions and proposals be shared with the English Department and administrators. 


Naomi Scully-Bristol