Within this world, wherein we are given only a limited amount of time, we must use that time authentically; that is, we must be able to use time how we truly want to use it.

Dylan Huber

Within Granada Hills Charter (GHC), there is no institution more infamous than that of A5. It’s spoken of only in the most foreboding of warnings that tell of tardy lockouts that force one within its walls. It holds an incredible authority over each and every school day. One cannot merely go to school and ignore the presence of A5; it is always there. And yet, for such a draconian institution, it has become strangely normalized. It is an accepted part of GHC life. I argue it shouldn’t be.

When considering the ethicality and value of an institution, one must first understand why it exists. A5’s ostensible reason for existence is simple: to deter tardies by teaching students the importance of being on time. It does this, of course, by keeping students in a room for most of their class. Teaching why time is important by wasting the student’s own time is A5’s method of choice. This method, and the reasoning that grounds it, must now be examined.

For an institution that so staunchly values the idea of time, at least, the specific idea of being “on time,” one thing is peculiarly clear upon entering A5’s confines; time stands still. The room is quiet and organized; the student is quickly given a form to fill out and then told to sit down. A few motivational posters don the walls, each declaring the importance of time, while the room stays still. The given form is methodical in nature, systematically going over school policy while asking questions such as “What steps do you need to take to avoid A5 in the future?” and “What are some life-applicable situations where being on time is important?” The student will be graciously granted the ability to work on school assignments after the form’s completion; but before then, at the very end of the form, there lies an image professing the “10 lines on Punctuality.” The very last line claims: “Everyone should understand the value of time to live a meaningful life.” The room stands still.

In understanding the reasoning that grounds A5, these 10 lines are essential. They speak primarily of two concepts, which they find to necessarily correlate: punctuality and success. It is unclear what “success” means in this context and, at times, it seems intentionally ambiguous: “Being a successful person means reaching your goal which one wants to achieve in their life.” Nevertheless, it can likely be assumed that economic success is being discussed, as that is the most often associated descriptor of success. Or, at the very least, it may be expected that students will see “success” and correlate it with economic success themselves.

The actual reasoning, however, quickly becomes nothing short of a sort of iniquitous propaganda: “Punctuality is the key to success…a person who does not understand the value and meaning of time…can never achieve success in life.” A bold statement, to be certain. But frankly false. Many are born into economic success, and others are lucked into it by other means; punctuality has nothing to do with it. And if success in this context is actually not economic, then it is even more difficult to ascertain the connection with punctuality: if we desire to find our own successes independent of economics and riches, then why must they be necessarily dependent on an imposed punctuality?

Nevertheless, this is the heart of A5’s propaganda: that if one is punctual, one will be economically successful. Yes, one can possibly find someone who’s both punctual and successful, even, perhaps, someone who’s successful because they’re punctual. But for every one of these people, there are far more who are punctual and unsuccessful; I look to Kevin Ford, the Burger King employee who made internet rounds a year ago due to getting a goodie bag in return for 27 years of perfect attendance. He would get thousands of dollars from internet strangers due to a GoFundMe, but the point is clear: that part is the exception, not the rule. People such as him populate the world, and few are so lucky.

This is the sort of capitalist unreality that A5 lures students into believing. I am certain that many GHC graduates have experienced rude awakenings regarding this, and I am certain that the Administration is well aware that it is a falsehood; it is not even necessarily true regarding academic success. But this idea, distorted as it is, justifies the existence of A5. After all, A5 is supremely based on a singular idea: absolute punctuality is incomparably important. It is why even the most minute tardies still lead to a period there. If this idea is challenged at all – if it is so much as suggested that punctuality may not be that greatly important – the entirety of A5’s empire falls.

It is true that every action, no matter how small, is something that is spent using time. One simply cannot live without spending it. A5, knowing this, maintains that this means there are inherently ways to spend time incorrectly, such as not being punctual, and that these ways must be punished. However, I argue instead that the only way to incorrectly spend time is by directly, and forcibly, restricting another’s use of time.

To directly punish those who are not punctual, to lock them in a room absent the movement of time and tell them that they have to be punctual or they will fail at life, is in direct opposition to that. If one, following the advice of A5, is absolutely punctual for every class and every workday, even if it goes against every single facet of their authentic wishes, then I daresay they have wasted their time and their life. In this sense, punctuality is antithetical to existential success – something far more important than economics.

The simple conclusion from this is that A5 should not exist. Nonetheless, it is still advantageous to quickly consider the consequences of A5’s removal. With A5 gone, students will undeniably begin walking into class late, now free to use their time authentically; however, they may also simultaneously expect to be brought up to speed on all the classes’ events when they enter late. This is exactly the same crime A5 commits. Indeed, it is very likely that the teacher will not want to use their own limited time doing such; that action may go against their own authentic wishes.
In acting authentically, such as in rejecting punctuality, one must also fully realize and accept the consequences of their authentic actions. In regards to being late to class, one of these consequences is accepting that one has missed out on previous class time. Instead, one ought to embrace what is left. A5, it is imperative to keep in mind, would instead waste the entire class.