Robert Halfhill wrote:
Some people in this discussion of what is most important -- math,
science, literacy vs the arts have been arguing as if it a question of all
of one and none of the other. Some people have been arguing as if it is a
matter of whether somone would be better off with a lot of math, science and
reading/writing proficiency and no artistic proficiency or no math, science
and reading/writing proficiency and a lot of artistic proficiency. Any
decent and adequate educational system will have some of both. Then we can
discuss how much relative emphasis there should be on the different areas.
To my mind, the main reason for the poor average performance of
Minneapolis students is the number of poor and minority children who are
limited to inadequately funded schools and not any alleged over emphasis on
the arts.
Mark Anderson here:
As I recall, the initial posting that started this discussion on the arts in
school questioned why we spend as much money as we do on arts education when
there are so many students who still can't read or do simple math. I think
we need to return to that question. Sometimes I think we shouldn't spend a
dime on the arts in the schools because it's simply more important for kids
to be able to read a book and make change at a store than it is to draw a
picture or play the piano. The latter skills are nice to have, but the
former are needed for any adult to survive on their own in today's society.
There seem to be two arguments in favor of the arts:
1) Students actually do better in reading and math when they take
art as well as academic subjects, than when they take only academic
subjects.
2) Art is simply necessary for a well-rounded life, so we need to
teach it.
Argument #1 has been banned from the List by David Brauer (unjustifiably in
my opinion, but I don't wish to argue that here). I have tried to keep the
discussion going offline, starting with my initial e-mail critiquing
Elizabeth Greenbaum's links showing correlations between arts education and
academic skills. I don't know if this will go anywhere, but if you wish to
be copied on the discussion, please let me know at [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and I'll include your e-mail address.
Argument #2 is still being argued here on the List. I don't think it is a
valid argument. It's not like the arts will disappear if they are no longer
taught in the schools. It is very easy to get access to the arts today --
turn on the radio to get some music, or the TV to get some drama. These
examples may not be up to the standards of some folks, but it's what most
people like. I somehow doubt that these common art forms would disappear
even if we had zero art education in the public schools.
I'm not saying that arts should not be taught in the schools, but I don't
see how anyone can say they are as important as teaching reading or math.
Every adult needs reading and math to get even minimal employment. One also
needs these skills to purchase goods and to deal with government agencies.
I can't see how the arts have any such broad-based benefits, especially
since we are all perfectly capable of participating in the arts with no
schooling whatsoever. So when budget cuts happen, or when we find out we
need to focus more on teaching kids to read and compute, it makes perfect
sense to me to cut the arts budget.
In my mind there might be one exception to this. A skill that all adults
need that is normally neglected by the schools is the ability to speak
clearly and fluently. Just like reading and math, it is needed for
employment, purchasing, and for everyday life. I wonder if theatre should
be a basic subject taught in the early grades, much like math and reading.
But I don't see the basic necessity of teaching the other arts.
Finally, I agree that students may need some kind of break from heavy
academics all the time, and the arts may fill the bill for that, at least
for some students. But for such a purpose it needn't be art, it could be
sports, or video games, or just free time. My son is in middle school, and
I think it would be nice if he had half an hour of free time during the day,
instead of one class after another for six hours.
Of course this relates to Minneapolis because this may be that time when we
need to cut some art education to make room for teaching academic skills.
It certainly makes no sense to me to teach kids art if they can't handle the
basic adult skills of reading and adding/subtracting.
Mark V Anderson
Bancroft
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
before continuing it on the list.
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
