Speak Up

If you are holding an event outdoors on a hot, sunny Sunday in May, make every minute of it worthwhile.

Duke's annual commencement ceremony, held at Wallace Wade Stadium, traditionally features a speech given by a graduating senior. And each year, the student speech sounds more like a pre-game pep rally and less like a thoughtful reflection on an issue that has touched the speaker's life.

All in all, the pep-rally style student speech amounts to a tiring exercise and is no more residual than the sunburn that accompanies it.

The concept of having a student graduation speech is a noble one, if the speech is interesting, well-delivered and-most importantly-is entertaining and thought-provoking. Unfortunately, the speaker selection process seems to weed out these kinds of students.

The first step is to change the membership of the selection committee. Currently, the student members of the committee-which also features several administrators-are selected by Duke Student Government. This results in a committee made up of non-legislators as opposed to a solid group of student leaders. Student leaders, such as those who serve on the Intercommunity Council, have more insight and will likely choose a more thoughtful speaker. Furthermore, the committee should consult professors and work to recruit a strong pool of applicants.

The application process itself is also flawed. Applicants are asked to submit their speech in advance to the committee; finalists are then interviewed. The required submission of the speech is unreasonable and antithetical to the open, permissive environment of a college campus. If the ritual purpose of commencement is to "welcome students into the company of educated men and women," Duke should trust these educated students and not require the speaker to submit his or her entire address in advance.

Out of respect, the University does not censor the keynote graduation speech. Unfortunately, University officials do not offer this level of respect to the student speaker. While it might seem like a good idea to screen a speech in advance in order to be certain the student is an apt writer, this policy deters students who might have more unique perspectives from even applying.

Instead, students should be asked to submit an abstract of their speech. An abstract would facilitate easy decision-making but at the same time would give the writer greater freedom to mold their words into a final product. Once a speaker is selected, the committee ought to help the student prepare to give the speech as well. Perhaps the student should be required to consult with a professor who teaches public speaking.