Principal interrupts valedictorian's criticism of Mainland

Principal interrupts valedictorian's criticism of Mainland

this is a story that ran in our paper yesterday regarding the speech the valedictorian of this year's graduating class gave at our local high school. it is of interest to me for several reasons, none the least of which said valedictorian's brother (who was also a val, himself) is one of ben's best friends. he unfortunately missed his brother's speech because he is studying this summer away in egypt.

from what i gather, this young man had two speeches prepared: one he presented for approval, one he knew would be rejected by administration because it made some strong points against the education he clearly feels he did not receive during his tenure at our high school. my questions are thus:

1. should his speech have been interrupted?
2. are students to be allowed to voice their opinions, or it is a "right time and place" issue?
3. has kareem, as valedictorian of his class, earned the opportunity to speak out against something he feels strongly about, namely, the lack of education he received while attending this high school?
4. is he to be applauded or condemned?

i don't know, myself. on the one hand, i believe he has every right to voice his opinion, as long as there were no ad hominem attacks against specific teachers, if he feels he was denied something that was his due, namely, a great education from what is supposedly a "blue ribbon" school system. i don't know that it truly diminishes the education received by his classmate - simply because i don't care for the french toast at a restaurant doesn't make it the worst french toast ever made, does it?

on the other hand, it made people feel awkward and uncomfortable. but doesn't something that speaks out in truth usually do that?

what do you think?

No comments: