I am an ardent defender of the passive voice. It is a perfectly legitimate English construction and should not be treated as unlawful, indecent, or diseased.
To be sure, a high proportion of the time it is better, more effective, more interesting, and more economical to use an active verb. But when the passive is right, it’s right, and it makes no sense to banish it unilaterally. Some teachers and even some editors are overzealous executioners of passive constructions.
But what strikes me as infinitely worse is that so many of those who declare the passive to be anathema misidentify it. They will reflexively mark any instance of the verb “to be” in any form as passive. They will call a sentence such as “We were late for class” passive. It is not. They may even go so far as to ask a student to recast “I was born” in the active voice! Why?
Kneejerk marking of each use of “was,” “were,” “am,” “have been,” and so on as passive is far more ignorant than a native speaker’s natural use of the passive voice, in my firm opinion. Terrorizing writing students with accusatory labels when all they are doing is writing in the past tense is an astonishing educational lapse that warrants active opposition.