On the day of the National School Walkout, I stayed in the library the whole time. I didn’t have a problem with the 17-minute memorial service. Instead, I was against the idea of sitting and listening to a speaker for the rest of the hour. I didn’t see the purpose of having a speaker talking to the high school when most, if not all, Archer girls are against gun violence; I didn’t think it was going to be effective in making any kind of change.

When I realized Archer students were walking out of school and protesting with Brentwood students, I still stayed in the library. I didn’t understand what it would do. I was confused on who was supposed to see the protest and what would come out of it. From what I understand from the majority of my classmates’ reflections is that people felt a personal accomplishment. Some people said they felt “empowered” or they were :proud of everyone for standing for what they believe in” or “it was the best day of [their] lives.”

I think it was great that people felt they had the power to take action, but for me, the end result fell short. Who was supposed to be affected by the protest?

When I think of protesting, I think of the Civil Rights Movement and Black Lives Matter, and these movements take place because it’s imperative for change to happen. These movements have a specific objective and audience, and the protestors are serious and, in many cases, angry. I’m not saying people have to be visually angry to protest, but the vibe I received from Archer’s walkout thorough pictures and reflections was more fun and at other times unsure.

Even though I don’t agree with a lot that took place on Mar. 14, I think it’s still important that it happened, so Archer can have conversations like these. These conversations are the beginning steps that lead to more planned, educated and student-led protests.

– Karis McCaskill ’20