Actually, it’s my understanding that historically graduations were voluntary though well-nigh-univerally-attended ceremonies, and this remains the case in many school districts, but there are a growing number at which attendance at the graduation ceremony unless excused is the final requirement for graduation in the other sense – the satisfactory completion of schooling and consequent award of diploma.
Do you have a cite for this? That’s not the impression I’ve gotten.
Irrelevant.
Irrelevant. She’s been invited by the adminstration to speak. That means she’s speaking on behalf of the adminsitration, and is therefore an agent thereof. It’s nothing to do with authority over the administration, or an employer-employee relationship.
Legally? Yes, they have that right. Morally, of course, they’d be a pack of cocks to make that decision, and I’d be happy to say so to their faces, but they’re certainly allowed to do it.
Of course. The administration has absolute right to dictate what is or is not said during their ceremony, except for things they are specifically restrained by law from saying, such as endorsing a religion.
So even after the criteria provided by silenus, you maintain that the the title of valedictorian, and the right to speak that comes with it, is not earned? But rather, an invitation, left to the whim of the school. I’m amazed.
Man, I sholud have been nicer to the administration, if I would have known they could have just picked me to invite I’d have been a lot more obsequious. And all this time I thought it went to the kid with the highest GPA. :smack:
:rolleyes:
God bless America is clearly a form of the ceremonial deism that is allowed. if a President started to go on about Jesus, and end the State of the Union with the wish that all Americans would let Jesus in their hearts, don’t you think there’d be hell to pay? Since there is no one to punish the president (and I’m not sure this would be an impeachable offense) I’m not sure what the penalty would be. But don’t conflate the kind of religious expression even someone like Bush is using to this very particular expression of the valedictorian. I doubt any school would cut the mike of someone saying “God bless America.”
You know, if you’re going to snark at me for not reading another poster’s words, it would probably look better if you took the time to read them yourself, first:
There is no “right” to speak at a graduation. Not for the valedictorian, not for the principle, not for anyone. How the valedictorian is selected has nothing to do with what I just wrote. The valedictorian could be the student with the highest GPA, picked out of a hat, based on who has the nicest teeth, or annointed by God Almighty Himself and a Choir of Angels. It still doesn’t give them the right to speak at graduation. This right does not exist. You’ve shown no evidence that it exists. And someone who has decades of experience, as a teacher, in organizing school graduations, has told you that it does not exist. You are simply wrong on this point. Will you let it go already?
Don’t some schools go with the “whole person” approach for selecting valedictorian? Besides high GPA, they need to have a certain amount of community involvement such as volunteer hours.
Covered in this post.
Thanks, Miller. So in a lame attempt at recovery (just kidding), let me ask a silly question anyway. Doesn’t that post imply that the other two are used if the valedictorian candidates have a tie in GPA? I was wondering ('cause I heard it a while back) that some schools use some kind of formula that on occasion selects a student who does not have the hightest GPA.
Or maybe I’m just totally confused.
It is *entirely * relevant to Monty’s claim that “The valedictorian is performing a function at the request of a government agency, said function a required event for students to attend.” (Emphasis added)
Unless, of course, you think that the statement “Students are not required to attend graduation ceremonies” has no bearing on the claim that graduation is “a required event for students to attend.”
That was my impression, too.
Could be. Doesn’t sound like it’s a particularly standardized procedure.
That is not my main point. My main point is that the title is earned. You keep saying and implying that the kid is chosen, or invited.
You are wrong. With whatever flavor of your opinion you wish to present next, the valedictorian title is, historically, earned by the student by meeting predertermined criteria. That can be the highest GPA or picked out of a hat. Your continually uttering that they can choose or invite whoever they want does not make it true. If you can point to one instance, just one, where a school administrator ignored the the predetermined criteria for selecting the valedictorian and just gifted it to another student, I will concede the point.
If you can’t, it will fall to you to do the same.
And for the record, here is what silenus said concerning this:
The previous quote points that the title of valedictorian may or may not come with the right to speak. That is up to the school. I’ve stated this numerous times. Although it wold be difficult to argue that havig the kid speak is not very much the norm.
Just because the student earned the title valedictorian does not negate the simple fact that the school has invited the student to speak at the graduation.
Not necessarily. It depends what comes with the title. Usually, it comes with the right to speak. Certainly the school can say that the title does not come with that honor. Then they could invite whoever they want. Or no one. But, I maintain what they cannot do is have pre-existing criteria in place for the title of valedictorian, which most, if not all do, and then ignoring that criteria and gift the title to a student of their choosing.
A friend of mine was one of four or five students with a 4. GPA when he got his Associates Degree at a state technical school. He and the others were asked to submit essays on a given topic and the one who submitted the best essay (according to a faculty committee, as best I remember) was chosen to give a speech at graduation). That wasn’t a very subjective way of deciding who was the speaker. I feel certain that this happens with some frequency.
As a former high school teacher, I can vouch for the fact that it is the school’s responsibility to see to it that the contents of any speech given at school events complys with the law of the land. The school sponsors the graduation ceremony and therefore, the school sponsors any speaker. We are expected to vet speeches before hand so that no one’s Constitutional rights are violated.
magellan, you ask a reasonable question about where to draw the line. Administrators are required to take courses in school law and they still get it screwed up. Many teachers also take courses in school law and shake in their boots. silenus has spelled it out as well as anyone can. The line is just a little faint and just a little blurry, but it is definitely there. Yes, you can mention Jesus. You can say that he was a major influence in your life. You may be able to even work in a thanks. But I surely would move on after that.
I would talk about other things that influenced me. I would NOT talk about other religious doctrine and I would NOT encourage others to follow a Christian path. It would be okay to talk about compassion, love for your fellow man, patience, courage, peacemaking, and lots of things that Jesus talked about, but just don’t mention that they were part of the teachings of Jesus. Why not draw the line in that way?
I’m always suspicious of people who feel they have to push God by name anyway.
The norm for a student’s speech in high school is five minutes or less.
By the way, I tend to like the speeches that show some of the rebellious spirit and that encourage your classmates to think for themselves. Why do you think I lingered so long on Emerson and Thoreau? (But pardon me if I scowl and lift an eyebrow when you suggest as much.)
What the fuck are you talking about?
No, I’m just basing it on various threads relating to graduation ceremonies over the past few years, here and on other boards. Particularly a few in which the member posting seems astounded that they do things differently than has been his experience somewhere else, on both the mandated and the voluntary attendance things. And I could be purely out to lunch; I said it was"my understanding"-- which I intended to convey “the impression I’ve formed.”
Not as long as she is a student rather than an employee. There’s a difference, which is why teachers are not eligible.
She’s invited to speak as a student. Since she has no influence over policy, there is no question that she is making an establishment of religion on behalf of the school. If there were any doubt, a simple disclaimer in the program to the effect that “the opinions expressed at this ceremony are not necessarily those of the administration” would be enough to make the distinction clear. Certainly a less intrusive option than trying to create a special prohibition on religious speech, which is afforded special protection under the Constitution.
Of interfering with the free practice thereof, as in this case.
Regards,
Shodan
What the fuck do you mean, “What the fuck are you talking about?”
You conceded you were wrong here, and that the school can’t just choose whoever they want to be Valedictorian:
I’m not sure, but I hope that leads you to admit that the title itself is earned, not one handed out at whim. Assuming so, that there are criteria in place well before the school knows who will be valedictorian, there would also have to be some definition of what it means to be Valedictorian. Is there a scholarship attached? Does the student get a jacket with a big 'V" on it? Will the student have earned the opportunity to address the class at the commencement ceremony? In essence, what does it mean to be Valedictorian? Now, the school may say it means none of these things, or any combination of other things. But those things are in place before hand so the student, whoever it is, is treated fairly. I was one of the brighter students in my class and got the second highest SATs. But the school would not have been pleased to have me achieve the title because they knew I didn’t give a shit about what they thought. It was a turbulent relationship. So, if I had won, would they have been able to break with the school’s 100% consistent seventy-something-year tradition and decide I couldn’t speak. IANAL, but I doubt it. I would have taken them to court just to bust their balls. I think I would have won.
Miller, in the real world, the valedictorian is selected—or more accurately, selects himself—by satisfying a set of predetermined criteria. In return he receives something. It is the norm that one of those things is the opportunity to address the class. If there is nothing attached to it, it is rather meaningless. Your assertion that the main benefit is the assistance it provides in getting into college is wrong:
In all but Bizarro land, the title is dependent on, at least in part, the students GPA. Since the GPA is dependent upon grades, and the last semester’s grades are issued at the end of the semester, a student who wants his title of valedictorian to be a factor will have to be applying to colleges after the issuance of the final grades. But most students, particularly those who will be vying for the title, will have selected a college long before that. Certainly their applications will already have been submitted. So no, that is NOT the benefit of being Valedictorian. The one benefit that is usually tied to the title is the opportunity to address the class. I am NOT saying that it has to have this benefit attached (they can predetermine the benefits to be whatever they want), but that is the way it operates in the vast majority of schools. And if it is, they are not “choosing” the kid to give the speech. He has earned it.
To recap: we have a title that is earned by a student fulfilling a predetermined set of criteria. And we have the title defined as having certain benefits or prizes atttached to it. Sometimes one of those benefits is the opportunity to address the class. In those cases, which I maintain is over 99.X% of the time, the student has therefore earned the right to address his class.