Talk:Punahou School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peer review Punahou School has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Punahou School article.
Article policies
Hawaii Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hawaiʻi, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Hawaiʻi. Please participate by editing the article Punahou School, or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a brief summary at comments to explain the ratings.)
WikiProject Schools This article is related to WikiProject Schools, an attempt to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Schools Portal
High This article has been rated as High-Importance within Schools.

This article is within the scope of the National Register of Historic Places WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of listings on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] Track and Field

It's not called "athletics" in America 128.12.186.192 11:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Faculty

Removed McCoullough, who is merely a famous historian's son.


[edit] General POV Questions

Michelle Wie has never won a PGA golf tournament.

Punahou is not Royal School.

The article only mentions that the land was gifted to the school, it does not imply that the school is or was otherwise connected to the Hawai'ian Royal Famly.

There was a redirect from the Royal School entry to Punahou before I revised the Royal School entry. The error of the person who created the Royal School entry in the first place. I wanted to make sure that anyone coming back since the revision would know the difference.--Gmosaki 06:47, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Racism

The best way to know is to test it yourself. Call around to all the private schools on Oahu and get your 4 year old an application, and see that 4 year old through the testing and admissions processes at the schools. Since I myself went through the same process when I was 4 and remember it clearly, I have two time periods and two sets of administrations to compare and can say that Punahou's process is still MORE hidden than any of the others and has more barriers to entry, never mind the number of applications they receive. Having spent a very significant amount of time dealing with Punahou over a lifetime, I can say the school is in the habit of controlling information about itself, socially and professionally to an extent that other schools don't care about, except for maybe Kamehameha. This habit of hiding things and controlling information and the degree to which it is practiced in the admissions process is what I'm talking about; Punahou's habit of broadcasting the guidelines for entry to the school and then "hiding" the process by which students are really chosen behind closed doors (and I don't mean just literal doors, but behind the invisible divider of class.) It's not impossible in Honolulu to make friends with or meet the people who are in charge of admissions at private schools. After a lifetime of social interaction and casual information exchanged by word of mouth, it's my impression that Punahou has significant invisible barriers to keep in who needs to be kept in and keep out who needs to be kept out--because it all comes down to money and who can donate it--and other Oahu schools, by comparison, with what can be observed and what people say or imply, do not. 12:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Specifics please? I'm still not sure if I understand the difference between one form of "hiding" and another. For example, when I applied to private schools for my son, each of the rejection letters was boilerplate, with no indication on exactly why he was denied admission. Their selection process was "hidden". I didn't know which people made the decisions, or by what criteria, or why others may have been chosen ahead of him. It's my impression that every private school works this way. Although for the most basic qualifications they may give you a letter saying, "sorry, but your child did not pass our test", I doubt any private school would tell you, "we had 3 equal candidates, and chose one over the other two because we wanted to maintain a balance of boys and girls".
Now if the allegation you're making is that during the admissions process at Punahou, if they have 3 roughly equal candidates and only 1 opening they will go with the richest family, that would be an interesting policy to investigate and bring to light (and incidentally, one I wouldn't doubt was true). By the same token, a private school like Maryknoll may give preference to the family that tithes the most at church would also be interesting to investigate. But unless other schools are openly admitting all the criteria that they use for each particular decision, each school is "hiding" similarly. Do we have any evidence that other schools are more transparent with their admissions process? Does any private school in hawaii clearly tell you in the rejection letter the reasons you were passed over? Or is your assertion that the admissions departments at Punahou are more close-lipped than other admissions departments, so informal information is harder to obtain? --JereKrischel 12:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
It's the degree and type of occlusion, not the fact that the admissions process isn't open for inspection. The occlusion begins when you call for an application, and then gets murkier from there. I'm refering to the many small barriers, some cultural, set up that can discount your child in the admissions process at Punahou (before the application is even filled out) as a way of keeping out the "foreigners". And these small "barriers" don't exist in their subtlety or number at any of the other parochial schools, which would make the other schools admissions processes more "transparent" in the sense that they are straightforward. We're speaking about the ruling class here. Wouldn't you say, by defnition, the practices of the ruling class tend to be less transparent?
Class bias would have worked against the principal's son, considering the principal and his family were working middle class compared to other alumni and students. The reason for the son's return was probably more realistic, like, as a business decision, the principal's son was allowed to return to insure that the principal, who would have been costly to replace, wouldn't pick up and move somewhere else. 06:23, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
How can you say that these small "barriers" don't exist at any of the other parochial schools if their admissions process isn't open for inspection? I'm sorry, but I'm not sure if I see a difference between "occlusion" and "opaqeness". We cannot one way or the other judge whether or not admissions of any school is "straightforward" unless the process is transparent, and I don't know of any private school with a particularly transparent admissions process. Please inform me if you know of an example, I would be interested to learn more about it. --JereKrischel 06:19, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
Punahou doesn't have racial quotas in its admissions process, but it does have preferential policies. That might have changed recently, but the preferential policies are for admitting descendants of the original missionaries to Honolulu, family members of alumni, Hawaiians and the childeren of faculty and staff when choosing between equal candidates based on test scores. These small preferential policies are all you need to keep out the unwanted. You don't need to discriminate based on race. Punahou's admissions process is also one of the most clouded and un-transparent of all the admissions process at private schools in Hawaii. The secretiveness is also a way to keep out the unwanted. Race is not so much a factor these days as class is. And the principal's son wasn't expelled for drug posession; he was removed from enrollment before he could be expelled. Why he was let back in is anybody's guess. But that's not a very good example of buying admission for your child. There are far more blatant examples in what is usually a subtle unspoken process. 01:25, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
I didn't realize that the principal's son managed to avoid official expulsion by being "removed from enrollment"...certainly a tricky way around the drug and citizenship policies of Punahou. I wonder if anyone else has tried that trick since...in any case, as you say, there is definitely class bias, and I would not doubt that it was through that influence that the principal's son was allowed to return.
That being said, I don't know of any private academic institution which has an open and transparent admissions policy. Private schools, colleges, all make their decisions behind closed doors, and I don't believe any of them publicy publish the statistics of who they chose and who they didn't and why. I understand that these admissions processes are often terribly subjective, and such statistics may not be of great use, but they certainly would be interesting.
Any examples of more open and transparent admissions policies and procedures in hawaii? --JereKrischel 20:59, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Punahou was founded by the Protestant missionaries to educate their children away from the native population. The missionaries felt that the native children were posessed by the devil. It is a bit ironic that Punahou now makes an effort to recruit students of native Hawaiian ancestry. However, they have a quota system that limits the number of students from various races and ethnic groups that are admitted into the school. Gmosaki 04:31, 5 August 2005 UTC

Regardless of opinion of the above comment, I reverted it back into existence as I think Awotter made a boo-boo. (S/he simply deleted it with the note "This is an undocumented charge of current racism which more properly belongs in the history of Hawaii and not in an entry describing a K-12 private school" as the change description.) My understanding of WP culture being that rather than simply expunging remarks from a Talk page the appropriate way to challenge them is to add one's own comment? It might be different if Gmosaki had put POV into the article itself, but a Talk page is another story, there's supposed to be free rein to hash stuff out on Talk pages as long as one does not overstep the bounds of WIkiquette... Deletion is IMO an overreaction... --IslandGyrl 20:55, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, I disagree in that Gmosaki simply makes unsubstantiated comments and edited the article by placing an NPOV flag on it with no supporting reasons which appears to violate Wiki policy, which is why I deleted the comments, which I do not think I should have done. The article itself however does not appear to violate neutrality so I have edited it to its original state.

In the interest of full disclosure I did briefly attend Punahou, as well as Leilehua in Hawai'i. Racism is and remains a problem in the Islands, however, Punahou (or more correctly O'ahu College) was formed as one of the first upper level schools on the island and early on admitted Hawaiians. The school currently has no racial quotas, although preference is given to alumni for admissions.Awotter

My mother was told that there were too many smart Asian girls applying to Punahou the years I applied. I surpassed the test scores and made the required GPA. Asian Americans can experience racism, too! My brother was admitted, but only because they thought he could play football. --Gmosaki 06:12, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

When was the last time you actually looked at a group of Punahou students? The racial quotas were eliminated long ago (circa 1930 I believe), and Asians now make up an overwhelming majority of the student body at the school, with a higher percentage every year. The fact of the matter is that Punahou is very difficult to get into, and they turn away lots of qualified applicants. Would you say that my incredibly bright white cousins were racially discriminated against when they did not get in? I wouldn't - even though there is a policy giving preference to Native Hawaiians (and children of alumni and missionary descendants), it acts only as a tiebreaker and makes no difference in most cases. In short, it's time to let go of your strange bitterness toward aprospective high school. -- Class of '02
Racial quotas were officially eliminated a long time ago, but were kept alive and well unofficially by members of the board of trustees and major donors who put pressure on the president and admissions office to keep the school white far closer to the present than is comfortable to admit. Yeah, not so many haoles these days. I just counted the class of '06. Seventy-seven haoles (not counting the very light skinned Hawaiians) out of 411 graduating seniors. Nice annual this year, by the way. Why would you call the bitterness "strange?" Considering the history of Hawaii or what it's like to work at a job in Hawaii, I would call the bitterness "commonplace." But I guess it would seem "strange" to a Punahou student '02 who wasn't used to interacting with non-Punahou types. Hmm...I just thought of something while looking at each senior in this year's graduating class. A more illuminating statistic would be household income for the 411 grads, because a quota would have to indirectly exist for that statistic. Can't run a school if you don't let in kids whose parents can pay for it (and will in the future donate towards it).--66.133.248.240 11:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Did Punahou School actually tell you that you were denied because of an excess of smart Asian girls? I know that private school admissions are very competitive, and in some cases they try to balance the sex ratio of their classes...I was told that outright when I was applying my son to Chandler School in Pasadena. It almost seems like you may have been a victim of sexism, not racism. I also know that what grade you apply in makes a big difference. In Punahou's case, I beleve that the big years for admission are Kindergarten, 4th grade, 7th grade, and 9th grade. In most cases I'm sure they have a large stack of highly qualified candidates and only a very few openings, if any.
My personal experience with Punahou has been that the real discrimination that happens there is based on money, not race. It seems that if you are rich enough, you can get in despite behavior, skill or race. The classic case I always referred to was when the principal's son was expelled for drug possession, but after a large cash donation was allowed to attend his senior year after being expelled for only 1 year. Typically expulsions are permanent.
Anyway, I'm sorry to hear of your experience. Punahou, despite it's faults, was a good place for a poor chop-suey mixed breed to get an education. Being poor among the rich is no fun at all, but the education is top notch. --JereKrischel

There are reasons for NPOV. For one, some people thing that 'Iolani is the most respected Academy in the islands or other schools. McKinley, a public high school, is also held in high regard. The article also fails to tell the true history of the school, including its admission policies. The dress code or lack there of in the school as well as the lowering of their spoken English standard in recent years are also missing.--Gmosaki 06:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Two of us were accepted to Punahou in 7th grade from my primary school. We were both at the top of the class. I am from an upper-middle class family (with no previous ties to Punahou). The other student was the son of a Portugese immigrant who drove taxis. He received extensive scholarship money his whole time at Punahou. Many of my friends were on scholarships. Yes, many old-family rich kids go to Punahou, but that isn't everyone. -- [pineapplenan 9/11/06]


I'm not sure where you guys get this idea of racial quotas. The underlying debate over Punahou should be whether it takes smart kids or makes kids smart. I think it's a mix of both, with heavy leaning on ability in the lower grades. K-5 seems almost entirely based on the kids' inherent abilities, it's gotten to the point where they are rejecting boys far more because the girls outclass them in intelligence and potential. There's no reason why Punahou would waste money on a student that lacked the potential, hence why I see very little merit or fact in the idea of racial quotas. And it seems that many of you are simply making claims aganist the school without actually understanding. I had many friends with some level of financial aid. Some had full scholarships and weren't that bright comparatively. There are rich kids who aren't that bright, but that is found in all private schools, how many private schools can say they offer and pay for the housing and education of poor students? The Jason (apt building) across the street has housed several highschool students. Singling out Punahou for criticism when everyone else does it is hardly professional and reeks of a grudge rather then a legitimate concern. Futhermore, Punahou has such a large donation base that it can easily afford to allow a poor bright student in and reject a smart rich student despite the fact that it costs them significently more to educate them. The real argument should be aganist Punahou's (and to a degree all private) history of taking the smarter student (and teacher) away from the public system, but that maybe a simple market effect due to the difference in educations found between the private and public methods.

JereKrischel is correct in the behavior of asian girls displacing and disportionally taking the open slots. What we see at Punahou is a smaller scale of what is happening to mainland colleges. Except that mainland colleges try to even things out, Punahou does not. Kindergarten has a ratio close to 60:40 female to male, or at least did in 2002. The school used to be heavily Caucasian. That's clearly not the case today where whites are clear minority. As for the explusion, Punahou tends to let seniors return their final year and graduate with their class. It's not a good policy but it has a long history of occurance, whether you have money or not. Also the school has a tendency to overlook the behaviors of the children of its faculty, but I suspect this happens at all private schools.

- ['04 Grad 1/7/07]

[edit] "Local kine" vs. North American POV

It's probably very difficult to attain 100% NPOV on any Hawaii-related topic. Consciously or not, we all tend to accept an established North American perceptual frame that sees Hawaii and its institutions as perhaps a wee bit different for historical reasons, but basically nowadays just like any other part of the U.S.A.

This glosses over various sorts of stuff which only folks who grew up there (and sometimes not even they/we) know about. Facts that other folks, no matter how well educated, are often astonished (if not angered to the point of reflex denial) to hear about for the first time (see a surprised reader's remark at Talk:Bayonet Constitution).

Case in point: the "English standard school system" peculiar to Hawaii, whereby Lincoln elementary, RL Stevenson intermediate and Roosevelt were maintained as a more Americanized, more college-prep track ("uncontaminated" by pidgin speakers), and Washington, Kawananakoa, and McKinley as a more "local", more vocational-training type track (for pidgin speakers). One of us should probably create a Wikipedia article about it one of these days.

During the late 1920s, the Hawaii Department of Public Instruction–which became the Hawaii State Department of Education in 1960–responded to pressures from influential segments of the community by designating certain schools as English-standard schools. The criterion for admission to these schools was the demonstrated ability to speak the English language satisfactorily. Thus, a de facto segregation on the basis of language ability existed in Hawaii's educational system, a situation that lasted until the time that the English-standard schools were formally abandoned in 1940. Operationally, however, vestiges of the English-standard school system existed until as late as 1960, when the last English-standard class at Roosevelt High School was finally abolished (Office of Instructional Services, 1985). [1] (emphasis mine)

Punahou was only one piece of the whole puzzle. I too went there, only for 3 years—at a time when they still had race quotas, maximum limits on "Oriental" admissions—which they unapologetically declared were necessary in order to maintain the school's "American" cultural character.

Encyclopedia scholarship demands verifiable facts and citations; but compared to North American POV, "local" folks' life and opinions are much more likely not to have been documented anywhere. Even now, who has heard of "local" writers like Lois-Ann Yamanaka, poets like Eric Chock or Wing Tek Lum, publishing outfits like Bamboo Ridge? For generations, North American culture and media were a mirror in which a "local" person might stare for a lifetime and see everyone else's reflection—just never his or her own.

This is how something like Wikipedia can be different. If one doesn't see oneself in what the reference book in the library says, one can add to it and collaborate with other, unlike-minded people (!) to rewrite it. --IslandGyrl 19:02, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

I attend Punahou and I just got in last year. The process wasn't confusing at all, and there are no "barriers" they fail to mention. Punahou just wants its students to have a wide variety of extracurriculars, like me for instance: I do kung fu, play violin, go to church, do community service, swim competitivley. I also served as secretary for student council and still managed to get a 4.0 GPA my whole year at a public middle school. I also scored above or in between the median scores for the SSAT test. It was my first time applying to Punahou, too, so I don't think that Punahou was being unfair in any way. They just choose the candidates that meet the the criteria best.

Wow, what luck. An actual Punahou student responds and unwittingly proves the particular point about "barriers" using Punahou dogma and a personal anecdote. For a minor to have access to lessons that teach kung fu, violin and competitive swimming, and to be in a position to do community service and serve as secretary for student council, that minor has to have some form of capital backing her up, meaning she has to have a family who is in a position to afford a life that will allow her to do these things. Punahou prides itself on students who are "well rounded," who engage in many "activities." Punahou picked you because you are "like" the other kids in that you engage in varied interests, which also means your family can afford them. You seem to take this situation at face value, using the word "just" twice during an explanation of why you were let in, as in Punahou was "just" looking for... or Punahou "just" chose... Your use of the word "just" is another way of saying "there is nothing out of the norm about Punahou's choices." What would happen during the interview process if there was a student who scored just as well as you on the SSAT and had a 4.0 GPA, but who didn't have a family that encouraged or could afford music lessons, sports lessons and other kinds of lessons? Would you be let into the school over this theoretical candidate because of your wide variety of activities? Maybe if she had a family with capital to back her, she would be more "like" you and would "fit in" at Punahou. This scenario is an example of an institutional barrier. Punahou says nothing during the interview process about a student's family's financial situation coming to bear on admission, but there are financial realities that can render a student with good scores "not a good fit" and make her "not like" other Punahou students and keep her from not "meeting the criteria best." This particular phenomenon of choosing students who "meet the criteria best" without a clear spoken institutional recognition that rich kids have an easier time fulfilling the criteria over poor kids, is an example of an institutional barrier. Punahou is a place, after all, of people who have gathered together around their similarities and are often surprised to learn that those outside of the school resent the way its members blithely and exclusively seek out individuals who are "like" themselves already, while rationalizing the process as "normal." The admissions office at Punahou is a good example of a group who views its actions as seemingly "normal," as they go about "just" looking for well rounded students or "just" looking for students who are a "good fit" who "meet the criteria best", where the word "just" inspected a little closer reveals more than it suggests, perhaps even a process hidden, unintentional and unexamined within the admissions officer himself. By the way, the paragraph you contributed had several errors of punctuation and word choice. I took the liberty of correcting them for you. You can view the changes by checking against the different saved versions.
Incidentally there are many extra-curricular activities that are not expensive and require little by way of financial standing. For example I sing in the Hawaii Youth Opera Chorus, and while it charges a tuition, it's hardly a dent and most people in any need at all can get a scholarship, either in part or in full. There are other like activities that require little other than some talent and interest. And even those can be supplimented somewhat. Also, I really fail to see how finance has anything to do with being a Student Council secretary. I'd think that requires a bit of popularity, some skill, and good communication skills. I may be biased, but I would like, at least, a better understanding of this percieved bias. Keakealani 08:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
You didn't list any activities that are "not expensive" and require "little by way of financial standing." What are they? Are you able to consider any activities that you don't personally participate in, or do you only have yourself as an example? Is your situation a normal situation compared to all other school age children in Hawaii? Do you know how many school age children there are in Hawaii? How much is tutition to the Hawaii Youth Opera Chorus? Do you have to wear a uniform to perform? How much does it cost out of pocket? How do you get to practice? Does your family own a car? How much does it cost to own and operate a car? Is there an adult that drives you? Do the practices and performances take place during work hours? If there is a tution waver, what kind of paper work must be submitted? Is the paperwork available only in English? So many variables to take for granted.


1) Please sign your posts with:
--~~~~
2) This is thread drift, I know, but just to give the perspective of an impoverished kid who got into Punahou, my experience in there during the 1980s clearly had a wildly diverse student body, even in regards to "have/have-not". Granted, us "have-nots" who worked the pineapple fields in the summer instead of skiing in the Alps were not nearly representative of the have-nots all throughout society (that is to say, taken as a whole, the sample of Punahou students is going to skew towards the wealthy), but there was representation there. Frankly, I would probably assert that parental expectations, regardless of family income, were the most important thing - very few folks, of any economic level, could survive Punahou if they didn't value education. YMMV, of course. On the whole I would support more financial aid and outreach to low-income folk for all private schools, but then again, maybe if we were able to take OHA funding and plow it into public education, the gap wouldn't be so enormous. --JereKrischel 22:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taking a swing at Kam School? Comments please

Personally, I find the sentence inserted by JereKrischel on racial discrimination and Kam School out of place, and liable to be misunderstood, for instance as "Punahou article officially disses Kam". What do other folks think? --IslandGyrl 21:44, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I think the entire section is rather difficult to be sure. It seems that we're mentioning historical race limitations with Punahou rather prominently (within the first few paragraphs), but for the only school in hawaii that does have race-based restrictions, we save it until the end of the Kamehameha Schools article, and it is couched in a much different tone. One alternative would be to make a similarly prominent and immediate mention of Kamehameha's race-based admissions within it's page, so that we're treating schools evenly. The other alternative would be to move the race-based commentary within the Punahou School article lower down in a "controversy" section or something similar to what exists on the Kamehameha Schools site.
I'm probably more supportive of moving the race-based controversy to a lower section in the Punahou School article than placing it more prominently directly on the Kamehameha Schools page. I wanted to place some context around the section to make clear that if someone is interested in the various forms of racial-discrimination in schooling in hawaii that not only is there the history of Punahou, but the present of Kamehameha. The entire section most likely doesn't belong in the Punahou page at all I suppose...any votes for removing it entirely?--JereKrischel

I've added the {{POV check}} header until this is resolved. JereKrischel appears to be making a false analogy. --Viriditas | Talk 11:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

There is something to the observation that Punahou and Kam are receiving different treatment. A prominently linked separate article, e.g. "Hawaii schools and discrimination", might indeed be a better solution. With a direct link to sections coded thus:
See also [[Hawaii schools and discrimination#Punahou School|Punahou School and discrimination]]. in the Punahou article
See also [[Hawaii schools and discrimination#Kamehameha Schools|Kamehameha Schools and discrimination]]. in the Kam article etc.
Or perhaps a better way of organizing the "Hawaii schools and discrimination" page would be to have a History section with: Punahou specifics, Kam specifics, treatment of Hawaiians (the story is that teachers would strike them on the hands or face if they used their own language), schools under World War II martial law, the English standard school system, tensions in the 50s (vandalism by Punahou and Roosevelt students of each others' schools that culminated in the two administrations creating the "Paintbrush" trophy for their ILH football league games to seal the "peace treaty"; Kam ROTC cadets standing guard in the bleachers of Honolulu Stadium in full uniform to prevent "incidents" when they played Punahou, and the like), reports of "mokes" bullying white students at certain schools …. And then a section The present: Punahou specifics, Kam specifics, …. The hard work is putting together an encyclopedic treatment with citations, as opposed to a few persons' individual recollections which, unless put in proper context, break the WP policy against "autobiography" or "original research".
Cautionary note: In the political context of all Hawaii-related topics, the phrase race-based (as opposed to, say, ancestry-based) is a meme which can be taken as expressing a POV. When used with a certain "spin", the meme evokes a picture of a Hawaii where in general it is now primarily white people or non-Hawaiians who are the victims of institutionalized discrimination. This is the position of, for example, Aloha for All, a political advocacy non-profit founded by Kenneth R. Conklin, Bill and Sandra Burgess, and Thurston Twigg-Smith.
Kamehameha Schools supporters would argue in defence that admissions policy goes back to Princess Pauahi Bishop's original will and testament under Kingdom of Hawaii law, etc. Certainly the will has been reinterpreted by courts and politicians again and again. For decades there was a controversial understanding among the powers-that-be that only white Protestants could be appointed trustees. This was finally broken when, IIRC, financier Chinn Ho became the first non-white Bishop Estate trustee.
It would be nice to have Gmosaki's and Awotter's opinions as well, since the passage being debated originated as kind of a compromise between them. --IslandGyrl 12:50, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
I think IslandGyrl outlines a very good strategy for dealing with this topic evenhandedly and gracefully. The place for a discussion about discrimination is probably in it's own page so that context may be had.
Insofar as the ancestry-based verus race-based, she makes an incredibly potent point. It is quite a different read to hear of 'ancestry-based' admissions policy versus 'race-based'. Of course, when you add the word 'discrimination', it also alters the tone and tenor. I believe that her caution note should be prominent on the page discussing "Hawaiian schools and discrimination".
That being said, I must admit I am of the opinion that 'ancestry-based' is a euphemism, and in the case of Punahou may indicate preference to children of alumni, whereas in Kamehameha it would clearly mean based along racial lines (as well as children of alumni). As a mixed breed with family that still goes to Kamehameha, I am both sympathetic to the desire to preserve hawaiian culture and hurt that it should be limited only to a certain racial group. Although the 'toe-nail' hawaiians that go to kamehameha certainly make it more racially inclusive than people would have you believe when they tout around "race-based" admissions, is there really an important difference between someone who is 95% japanese and one who is 100% japanese? 99% versus 100%? I jokingly talk with my wife about starting up a blood transfusion business that withdraws blood from kanaka maoli, and gives 1 pint to anyone who wants to claim that they have "hawaiian-blood".
I also think the "Hawaiian schools and discrimination" page would be a good place to talk about the economic discrimination that goes on in hawaii with public versus private schools. Preferences for children of alumni are particularly abhorrent in my view (for any institution).
Anyway, I'm also interested in the opinions of the original posters. Although I've read the threads they left, I couldn't quite tell if they met halfway. --JereKrischel

As clunky as the language I inserted was, I did feel it contributed to clarifying for readers the concerns Gmosaki brought forth (in a less anecdotal way) in regards to history specific to Punahou both racial and religious.

I have an issue with including Kamehameha in the discussion for several reasons; Hawaiian ancestory is a criteria for admission, but the policy has also been to allow qualified students of non-Hawaiian ancestory admission if places were available, so part of what has been inserted is incorrect.

In addition, it has been the policy on the mainland to recognize sovereign Native American tribal schools as being able to limit admission based on race. Rightly or wrongly, that is also an issue (sovereignity) that is before the Congress and if passed would make the Kamehameha issue moot.

Perhaps a better category than "Hawaiian schools and discrimination" would be "Hawaiian Society-Island Paradox" Awotter

Good point on the non-Hawaiian ancestry admission if places are available Awotter, although the last time that happened there was quite an uproar (Brayden Mohica-Cummings). So although both Punahou and Kamehameha may have official admissions policies that say one thing, both schools (and perhaps all private schools in hawaii) have a history of discrimination. Just as IslandGyrl spoke of a time when oriental admissions to Punahou were limited to keep the "american" character of the school, it seems that Kamehameha makes the same argument for the token amount of hawaiian blood necessary to attend. Neither seems very defensible to modern sensibilities.
I guess I'm concerned that if Punahou School had been created by a trust left by Hiram Bingham, and his will stated -
...to devote a portion of each years income to the support and education of orphans, and others in indigent circumstances, giving the preference to Europeans of pure or part caucasian blood...
- we would all be condemning the will as racist and exclusionary. Apparently Pauahi-Bishop gets a pass.
I'm not sure if we should get into a pro/anti sovereignty debate here, but suffice it to say that not all people make the same connections between Native American tribes and Native Hawaiians. And even those who do may still take umbrage with racial/ancestral preferences.
Depsite our differences of opinion, I think I'm hearing consensus that such controversial topics belong on a separate page to allow for a more thorough discussion in proper context. I think either category ("Hawaiian schools and discrimination" or "Hawaiian Society-Island Paradox") would be appropriate. Does anyone else care to chime in before we effect those changes? --JereKrischel

I agree with the above in making a separate page. It should be noted here that Kamehameha Schools has always been open about their racial policies unlike Punahou. However, the reverse is true with regard to religion and hiring faculty. Punahou admits it is a Protestant based school, whereas Kamehameha Schools try to gloss over the fact that they prefer faculty who are members of the Congregationalist churches. I know that Kamehameha Schools have refused to hire Roman Catholics to be on their permenent faculty in the past. However, I'm not sure if they still are.

It should also be noted that non-Hawaiians did not seem interested in going to Kamehameha Schools when they were vocational schools, which is what the Schools were when they started. There are certain rights afforded to native peoples in US law, which Kamehameha Schools' policies fall under unlike Punahou. It seems that only when schools catering to native peoples become successful that outsiders make a big stink about the ancestry requirements. --Gmosaki 18:06, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the comments Gmosaki. I was actually surprised to hear from IslandGyrl that at one time Punahou was unapologetic about limiting asian admissions to keep the 'american' character of the school. They certainly didn't mention it to us in the 80's. I would be interested in the admissions history of Punahou, both official and unofficial, over the course of time since 1841.
Insofar as the religous nature of the schools, in the 80's when I was there Punahou was strictly non-demoninational, although I suppose there was some Protestant versus Catholic rivalry with Maryknoll across the street. My mother worked for Kamehameha in the 80's for a while, and she's a Catholic turned atheist (Maryknoll grad), but I don't recall her ever feeling pressured out...I'll ask her next time I talk to her though.
Although some people may decide that only when a school catering to native people gets successful should we care about ancestry requirements, it certainly hasn't been my perspective. I see race/ancestry based requirements hearkening back to a point in time when it was assumed that the natives could not take care of themselves due to their inherent inferiority, and needed extra help to even the scales. It is my assertion that native peoples are just as capable as anyone else, and our concentration for attention should probably lie with the economically disadvantaged regardless of race. For the most part, that will end up aiding more natives by proportion, but I think actual economic disadvantage criteria are much more defensible than blood quantum.
In the interests of full disclosure, my family has gone to Farrington, Maryknoll, Punahou, AOP, MidPac, Iolani, Kamehameha, Assets, and Playmate on Keeamoku. We've got one mostly japanese side, one toenail hawaiian side, one completely mixed side, and some portuguese / filipino tossed into the mix. Some of the family is real haole, some of the family is real local. All of the family are hawaiian since before the overthrow. I guess since we're so mixed up, it's hard for me to judge that only one branch of my family deserves privilege. --JereKrischel

[edit] Steve Case

Steve Case was recently added under faculty and staff section. I'm not sure if he qualifies for this section... how often are the trustees actually on campus? Perhaps an administration section should be created.


My responds to this:

Steve Case attended Punahou School, understands the this school's goals in their priority to the students, and being such a generous donor, he should be entitled to have saying in the direction of this school. Apparently, he had made such an accomplishment in his own life, being a great role model with a straight forward reputation and also in giving back to the local community.

Punahou Alumni

[edit] Historical Correction

I believe the Lahainaluna High School (also founded my missionaries) pre-dates Punahou as the oldest school west of the Mississippi.

Punahou Alumni now on Maui


True. However Lahainaluna High School was founded as seminary school, not a college prep school. Punahou is the oldest college prep school west of the Mississippi. I've never heard Punahou called just the oldest high school west of the Mississippi.

O4' Grad


It doesn't matter. St. Louis University High School pre-dates them both by decades, and has always been a college prep school. It was founded in 1818 as St. Louis Academy, later grew to include a college, and then separated from said college (St. Louis University). - SLUH '04 grad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.139.6.115 (talk) 23:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Weasel Words?

I noticed the weasel word template...please specify the sections. I'll be happy to help out! Sr13 (T|C) Editor review 07:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I suspect it was vandalism. Removed tag, please put something in the talk page if you anyone feels it is necessary to add back in. --JereKrischel 05:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
It was not vandalism. If a statement is made such as "it is well-known nationally, and is widely considered to be one of the top academic institutions in the United States," please provide either a citation to an authoritative source or re-word. --Jwcomo 21:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I've done a good deal of referencing this article; hope others can help! Sr13 (T|C) 05:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IP message

I attended Punahou and can't help but note that this page reads like a p.r. mailer. Punahou is a hugely powerful institution with a long and complex history, none of which is mentioned here. 72.235.245.193 23:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC) JJK

[edit] Alumni

This article contains a shockingly long list of alumni. There are 70 alumni wiki-linked and over 100 others listed (yes, I counted) that do not even have Wiki pages. I realize this is an exclusive prep school with some very notable alumni, but the list should not be exhaustive. Currently, the list of alumni is about 10 times as long as the actual article text. It needs some serious paring down. Maralia 05:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RESPONSE

I am actually modeling the alumni page after schools such as Choate and Exeter. For another example, see Washington University's alumni page, which is not even as prestigious, but which lists lots and lots of people. If you want to fix this page, the text at the top is what is unbalanced and not a good representation of the school. I agree with JJK, above, about the missing textual history. What about the WWII function of Punahou as a military base? What about its math and debate teams, and literary magazine? For instance, why do athletics figure so prominently? I had to work around the fact that Olympians were exhaustively listed before I started. The list I generated is by no means exhaustive. I am in fact only in the G's in the alumni register, and will have to raise the standards. But I do not want to be the one who says that a Bronze Star for valor is not enough. I think eventually we will want to summarize the very non-wiki sections, such as leading medical figures, and link to a separate page of names. I promise to do that once I complete the list (get from G to Z in the register), or once I lose interest in extending it. As it stands, it is a much better picture than it used to be, when it basically listed Case, Preston, and Wie. That's by no means an accurate image. An institution is really quite well judged by its people. I believe the teacher standards are quite a bit lower for inclusion than the alums! Another problem is that a lot of people with wiki pages are not as significant as others who do not have such pages. The picture is accurate precisely because of the diversity of the things that this school's alumni do -- some people will sniff at a Tony award, others will not be impressed by a Chariman at UCSD, and still others think Brigadier General is not much. For example, Kirby Wright and Jason Tam and all the NFL players have wiki pages, but a guy like Johnson, leader of the Nisei at Cassino and KIA, is probably more deserving. How do you include Fairbank and exclude Linn and Gentry, just because they're older so they don't have wiki pages for exactly the same or better notoriety? [[—Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Ronaldloui (talk • contribs) 05:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I note that the Washington University and Exeter Academy alumni lists (which are separate pages from their schools' articles) are both pages shorter than the current Punahou list, which you say is only half done. Choate lists less than 40 people.
I'm puzzled by your approach, for a few reasons:
  • If you agree that the actual article content is lacking and 'not a good representation of the school', why are you spending your time adding alumni names when there are already 200 names there, instead of focusing on improving the article text?
  • By adding nearly every remotely prominent alumnus, you are essentially creating a situation where we'll have to 'cut people out' - this seems needlessly dramatic (and more work for you!) when the alternative is to just add the very most prominent in each field or from each era, using your own judgment.
I don't want to quibble over notability of those with & without wikipedia pages; I agree that having an existing page (or not) is not a clearcut indication of notability (or the reverse). However, I would argue that if a page for the person could not be accepted (i.e. would not pass WP:NOTABILITY) then said person is not notable for purposes here. Maralia 14:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest a good solution here would be to have a few paragraphs in narrative form, along the lines of:
Main article: Punahou School Alumni
Punahou School has produced a number of notable alumni. The alumni include athletes such as golfer Michelle Wie, hall of fame swimmer Richard Fitch Cleveland, and 3-time World Karate Federation World Champion Elisa Au; political office-holders such as the first Territorial Governor of Hawaii and Federal Judge Sanford Dole, Commodity Futures Trading Commission chairman Wendy Lee Gramm, and Justice of Washington State Supreme Court Mary Fairhurst; and entertainers such as Kingston Trio founder Dave Guard, actress Kelly Preston, and Tony-award winning Broadway producer Kevin McCollum.
Many Punahou alumni are notable for multiple reasons. For example, Buster Crabbe won medals in both the 1928 (bronze) and 1932 (gold) Olympics, and also went on to a very successful career as an actor. Fred Hemmings, Jr. was the 1968 world surfing champion as well as a Hawaii state senator.
My selection of individuals to include here is more or less random, just to give an idea of a typical approach. You might choose other candidates for this list. This short list, set out in this way, fits the encyclopedic style and does not dominate the article, and the reader is referred to Punahou School Alumni for a more comprehensive treatment of the subject. -- Terry Carroll 00:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Choate Rosemary Hall does not list numerous graduates as "notable" without a link or citation. I just checked and tagged the 4 that were in need of such citation. This Punahou list really needs citations or significant tightening up. Kukini hablame aqui 15:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No list at all, but a summary instead

Terry Carroll makes a good point that an encyclopedia article tends to have a short list of alumni. Since someone has removed the short list and just put in a link to the larger list, this is a great time to write a short narrative summary of the alums with a few prominent examples. I think I can do that, and that will be even better than the two-list solution I proposed. Citations continue to be added to the longer list as time permits. Ronaldloui 08:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

There are major problems with this section as I see it. The style is not consistent with the majority of articles in similar categories. It is largely unreferenced, especially in regards to living people and the style is inappropriate (see "darling of the paparazzi"). I understand that Wikipedia articles that include alumni lists are inherently problematical, but the solution is to develop a strong consensus about who is and who is not notable beyond being included in a simple list. And by notable I mean someone who is notable in some way directly related to (and verifiable) Punahou in ways other than simply having attended. For example are there sources that reference the type of Western education received at Punahou that influenced Sun Yat-sen? Several major articles have already discussed Barack Obama's time at Punahou in regards to his family situation and what his educational experience consisted of and how that may have shaped him. The Case donation is notable because of the way it reshaped the campus. I think that those types of examples should guide this section and we should err on the side of paring it to roughly rather than being all inclusive. Awotter 20:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Wow! flagged before I even finished... well, editors, go to it! Start your cutting! Ronaldloui 22:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
You have mail. I know how you feel, I had an article flagged for immediate deletion about 30 seconds after adding it. What I hope to do is generate some discussion toward consensus on tone and style. It's not a reflection on your hard work so far. Awotter 22:52, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article balance

After taking a glimpse at the article, I think that the alumni section is way too long and needs to be cut down to a summary. At this state, it almost fails the purpose of the alumni article, which was created to reduce the section. We know the school is not all about famous alumni; there needs to be more balance with other sections such as history, tradition, and other aspects of any regular school that are equally important. I'll wait a week for a response to this, if there isn't, I'll be bold change the section. Singularity 22:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

After thinking, I change my mind...I guess more content can be included in the other sections to create balance. Singularity 08:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] School Mission, School Honor Code sections

These sections were added by a series of edits by 67.49.144.30, who has been recently blocked for vandalizing this article. These edits were made two weeks ago, but their content seems a little suspect. Could someone take a look? Flatscan (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I attend Punahou and have never heard of this apparent "School Mission" or "Honor Code." And like you said, that address sounds suspect. Travis Dos Santos-Tam (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look and removing the sections. Flatscan (talk) 02:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Motto

Albeit I have heard the phrase "Private school, with a public mission" many times (presentations in Chapel, speeches by Dr. James K. Scott, etc.), I don't believe that it has been explicitly stated as the motto of Punahou. Neither the website nor any published materials I've seen state this. Travis Dos Santos-Tam (talk) 05:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I found the closest reference to this supposed "Private school, with a public mission" motto here--http://www.punahou.edu/page.cfm?p=40. However, the statement there, "Helping Students Learn at a Private School Serving a Public Purpose" is in regards to the Luke Center for Public Service. The other reference, found here--http://www.punahou.edu/page.cfm?p=5--states, "As a school, Punahou recognizes our responsibility to serve a broader public purpose." Therefore, I feel it is necessary to remove this motto. Travis Dos Santos-Tam (talk) 08:34, 24 February 2008 (UTC)