The Valedictorian who sued her high school--the Blair Hornstine case

This has been in the news for some time, and I am sure some of you have heard about it. For those who haven't, here's a sketch of the events, with more details to be provided by the links below.

Blair Hornstine, a senior from a suburban high school in New Jersey, had some auto-immune disease that caused her chronic atigue and hence, claiming disability, she studied under a special plan approved by the Board of Education. Towards the end of her senior year, someone broached the issue of fairness, complaining that her "special treatment" from the school board had tilted the playing field. After reexamining the matter, the superintendent, Kadri, decided to revise the one-valedictorian-only policy to make Miss Hornstine to share her title with the Salutatorian. The Hornstines objected, sued and won the case in which the judge issued an injunction restraining the school board from enacting any ex post facto policies about multiple valedictorians. Incidentally, the Hornstines also sought for punitive damages amoutning to 2.7 million dollars.

The outcome of the case stirred resentments and anger among the people of Moorestown, some of whom retaliated by leaving death threats, dropping innuendos, airing the Hornstines' dirty linen in the press, egging the house and defacing Miss Hornstine's picture in the school yearboook, among other personal attacks. Of course, some teachers and friends also rose in defense of the Hornstines. Eventually, the controversy got the attention of the national press, which opened another can of worms. Because of all the spotlight and personal attacks, Miss Hornstine was so upset that she did not attend her graduation ceremony. Students at Harvard, where Miss Hornstine planned to attend in the fall, circulated a petition to rescind her acceptance, and--guess what? The Harvard Admissions Office did revoke the admission recently.

I am afraid that I might be inexact and biased in my account, not to mention that I omitted some circumstantial details for the sake of brevity. So, for more accurate, complete and detailed reports, please do visit the links below:

From the WEEKLY STANDARDARD:First in her class

From the Harvard Crimson, which has followed the incident in detail and with an insider's view:

Articles on Hornstine


What do you think?

On the side of the community, I'd say much damage is fueled by jealousies, resentments, suspicion and schadenfreude. Nothing charitable can be said about them.

As for Miss Hornstine herself, her neighbors and classmates treated her unfairly, even cruelly, but while the Law was on her side, she broke the unwritten rules of society. Is sharing a valedictorian title really so big a grievance that she must take it to court? As for her lawsuit, the question is not really whether reason was with her and she would win, but whether she should have sued in first place. Considering the aftermath of the lawsuit, was the victory worth the consequences she had suffered ever since?

Broadly speaking, while there is a hedonistic teen culture that makes moms shudder, there is also another culture, driven by ambition, college admissions and perfectionism, that applies mostly to the youngsters on the right end of the SAT bell curve. (This mentality prevails in some upscale suburbs in Blue America. I live in one, and have experienced it myself.) What does that say about parenting and education? About the go-getting ambitions of some people? And, and, those are some of our brightest kids.

I would like to hear your opinions on this.

 

Okay, first of all, I can understand the desire to hold the #1 rank exclusively. It is very important when competing for scholarships, and some do not just ask you your rank - they ask how many students shared that rank. If you've worked hard to achieve the top spot, you shouldn't have to share it with someone who didn't earn it.

That being said, it's hard to say that she earned her rank. There was definitely some manipulation of the system - such as dropping a gym grade even though she'd attended for most of the year, and taking Latin I when she'd already taken 2 years of Latin in junior high. Perhaps, too, she should have been asked to select a schedule that corresponded to something she could have taken had she been attending classes in person - she definitely had an advantage by being able to select the maximum number of honors classes without being bound by scheduling conflicts.

I think the spirit of the Americans with Disabilities Act is to level the playing field for those with disabilities. But what happened here was an overcompensation - instead of leveling the field, they tilted it in her favor.

 

This may be harsh, but I think perhaps she should have been grateful to having even a share in the prize.

Valedictorian is an academic award, and if one does not adhere to the rigors of the academic requirements, one should not expect to be considered for that award. She was considered despite all the exceptions made on her behalf; she should not be ungrateful for the consideration.

 

I think it teaches a valuable lesson about picking your battles and such.

She won the top spot, but she couldn't even enjoy it, and to top it off, she got rejected from Harvard.

However, from what I understand, she plagerized a newspaper article and THAT's why she was rescinded admission from Harvard.

 

Right, her admission was taken back because of that plagarism case. She maintained her admission status through the storm before that, but Harvard decided to rescind the admission after the plagarism seemed to be proven.

 

About her rejection from Harvard...

Yes, I read about it in the NEWSWEEK, which reported that Hornstine had lifted quotes from Clinton, Justice Brennan and other writers and pasted them into her articles. I am not sure whether it was negligence or plagiarism, but Harvard did find out...which brings me back to my original question. Was litigation really that good an idea?

Now, once in a while, high schoolers blunder and forget to cite their sources. (On my old school newspaper, student journalists sometimes forget to attribute properly in their first or second drafts.) As long as such blunders are not intentional, parents and teachers just reproach, forgive and correct the kids. Everything is private and informal.

For Hornstine, however, I think the outcome of lawsuit had made her mistakes public and formal by touching off some malice. As her English teacher told the press, it probably was improper of the local newspaper to go back, dig up her old stuff and air her dirty linen. The revelation could not have been an accident. Nonetheless, if it happened, then it happened: it made it to the national news and hence to Harvard.

During my stint on the school newspaper, I was taught that a news story must have some "human interest" value. And Hornstine seemed to be made for "human interest": Harvard, valedictorian, dispute, ambition, litigation, etc. Perhaps she should have consulted a PR agent before she hired her lawyer.

 

I think she sounds like a spoiled little brat-according to various stories, her volunteer work was done almost entirely by phone and often by her father.

She dropped gym not because of her disability but because the way it was weighted, not as an honors course, it would have brought her GPA down.

She and her family completely manipulated the system, and made a mockery of the AWDA, which is supposed to help people who need it-not let Miss Prissy Princess be #1.

 

There is a simple sol'n to this problem.

Three words...stop lawsuit abuse!!

$2.7M ?? Are you kidding me?!?!?!

 

this sounds pretty crazy
how did this even make it to court?
i would have thought they would have had trouble filing something like this......

we had a similiar situation while i was in my final year at high school........not over valedictorian, which we don't have....we call it the Dux award...we had a guy in a wheelchair, with severely weak bones, basically he could break bones really easily, so he had to be extrememly careful....

now this guy was a pretty good guy, i was friends with him then, and still am now, although admittedly i got to know him better at university......he was resonably smart, but got a lot of help from teachers and other sources, most of which was needed i think.....for example he couldn't physically stand a three hour exam (which was the standard here) so he usually had special arrangements made.

anyway he was awarded a prestigious award that recognises not only academic performence, but other factors too, like sporting, community etc, and is probably more prestigious than the Dux award in our area........there was a lot of resentment over this from people who thought there were more deserving candidates, as it was percieved that his accomplishments were nothing special (if you disregard the massive physical struggle he had everyday...)
as a result he had a hard time from a lot of people after that, nothing on the scale of this girl, but it must have been pretty hard for him all the same...

 

What school in this country can afford to lose 2.7 million to one individual's complaint? And on a related note, what high schooler has any legitimate complaint worth 2.7 million?

 

i can't see any claim legitimate claim....unless they have a very broad conception of what legitimate actual loss means

 

I think if it hadn't been for the 2.7 mil complaint, she wouldn't have had nearly as hard a time as she did. There is absoultely no excuse for even conceiveing of the idea to ask for that much. I know that's what lost her my simpithy.

 

I am not sure where to go with this, I can only throw out a something I know and see if you all see a similarity.

My senior year of high school. I already had enlisted into the US Army and knew two days after graduation day, 1990, I was off to basic training. As it was, I applied anyway to a number of university's in the area, just to see how I would have done.

As it was, I got accepted to UC San Diego, UC Irvine, and UC Riverside.

What bothered me, though, was that while I scored an 1190 on my SAT's, and while I had a 3.4 something GPA thru highschool, I was accepted to all three of these schools over MUCH more qualified Asian American students. Back then, the UC policy had a racial quotas, I believe back then Asian's were allocated like a 10 or 15 percent of an entering class, and hispanics got something like a 25% of an incoming class or something like that.

I was freaking embarrased by that, when I some of my friends who could blow me out of the water in math and science and on the SAT's were not getting in when they were more qualified then I was.

So I don't know, is that relevant to this topic?