By: Neda Ghomeshi / Assistant Opinion Editor
The study of the arts provides students an opportunity to actively participate in an imaginative world and can bring every subject to life, turning abstractions into a concrete reality. However, the challenges of this half of the century demand more time in the classrooms and less time with the arts.
I strongly believe that more time needs to be allocated to textbook education. Unfortunately, the continuously disappointing public education system in the United States promotes the arts while losing focus on textbook education. This is proving to be detrimental to our society as countries such as China and India continue to excel in math and science.
One of the most difficult issues that our society struggles with is the moral development of our adolescents. In this secular yet multicultural society, students are lost with no moral direction. Educators need to focus on teaching students about math, science, philosophy, current events and memorable occurrences. Through education, students will learn the concepts of right and wrong, and those concepts will become practices that are later applied to our nation.
Economic success is dependent on education standards because the global economy is a knowledge-based one. Today, the global economy is becoming much more competitive with more people earning a higher education. Children in our nation need a quality education in order to become engaged, productive and innovative citizens, allowing students to develop ideas that will improve our economy.
President Barack Obama believes that this nation is lagging behind in education, too. During his State of the Union address, he emphasized the importance of education in this rigorous global competition. He said, “We need to win the race to educate our kids.” I believe that in order for the U.S. to compete globally, proper education needs to be enforced and we need to take drastic measures in educating our students with only the necessary material.
Students are dedicating too much of their valuable time to the arts. In the process, they are losing focus on scientific education. According to the Time magazine, the U.S. is ranked 25th in math and 21st in science, putting us behind developing nations. This is a crucial reason why students need to spend more time in the classroom and less time in the art studio. With more focus on reading, science and other vital subjects, our students can comprehend the same concepts and strategies as students abroad.
Ellen Winner of Project Zero, an arts-education program at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, said, “When kids take a lot of art [classes], they don’t improve in their core subject areas.” Although, I do believe the arts are beneficial, it should not dominate a child’s time in school.
Students have become so enamored with the study of arts that they have lost focus on non-art education. Americans are not earning the same education as students abroad because of the added focus on art in classrooms. Art is a great education to complement science, reading and math, but not a substitution.
Unfortunately, the nature of global competition is significantly different than it was half a century ago and the U.S. needs to be more cautious of dominating nations.
In order to excel in this rigorous competition, the U.S. needs to revamp the education system. The U.S. cannot lose focus on the fundamentals of learning and more time needs to be spent on textbook education.
“Unfortunately, the continuously disappointing public education system in the United States promotes the arts while losing focus on textbook education.”
Does it? I don’t know that textbook education is suffering because of the arts. Where is the evidence of this? I don’t have statistics to back this up, but I recall phys ed and art programs getting their programs cut across the nation as our economy worsened. They were viewed as supplementary to, not a critical part of, education.
“In this secular yet multicultural society, students are lost with no moral direction.”
Have anything to back that up? Because this seems like a pretty major claim.
“Educators need to focus on teaching students about math, science, philosophy, current events and memorable occurrences. Through education, students will learn the concepts of right and wrong,”
The only thing enumerated here that would possibly teach right and wrong is philosophy, or perhaps the teacher’s interpretation of these memorable occurrences.”
Still, this seems wrong. Parents, and not teachers in a classroom, ought to instill morals onto children. It is the sole dominion of parents to do so. I can see a lot of parents having a problem with teachers imparting *their* view on right and wrong onto children.
Also keep in mind, that right and wrong isn’t a hard science. It is very much subjective. So unless a teacher’s opinion exactly matches that of the parents of every student, there is a problem.
“I believe that in order for the U.S. to compete globally, proper education needs to be enforced and we need to take drastic measures in educating our students with only the necessary material.”
Sure, but again what is necessary is a matter of opinion. There are studies to back up that the arts improve creativity in children, as well as help develop other modes of thinking. And considering that we will need innovative solutions, I see a problem in halting this creative thinking.
For example, the number of patents being filed by Americans has gone down in recent years. And many of the patents that are being filed, 40% are being co-filed with a foreigner (CNN I believe). I don’t think less creativity is the way we want to go.
“Students are dedicating too much of their valuable time to the arts. In the process, they are losing focus on scientific education. ”
I don’t see how the arts and scientific education are mutually exclusive. It is not as if students have to choose between science or art, when it comes to scheduling. Simply removing the hour of art, and replacing it with a science, would risk overloading students. Of course, if there was more funding, that hour could be used as a lab, and that could be very useful indeed. Nevertheless, I’d argue that the cost wouldn’t be worth this gain.
“the U.S. is ranked 25th in math and 21st in science, putting us behind developing nations. This is a crucial reason why students need to spend more time in the classroom and less time in the art studio.”
A simple, but wrong conclusion. Simply adding an extra hour per day to the study of science won’t necessarily yield a big improvement. Do foreign students spend more time per week studying science? Is their education that much better than ours, because they spend that many more hours per week in classrooms? Are there cultural differences? How do they spend their time outside of classrooms? Do they study more? What is their curriculum like? What type of students, what type of people, are the products of their education?
““When kids take a lot of art [classes], they don’t improve in their core subject areas.” Although, I do believe the arts are beneficial, it should not dominate a child’s time in school.”
When do the arts dominate a child’s time in school? From my understanding, kids take one, maybe two art classes versus 4+ core curriculum. Thats a 1-2: 4+ ratio. I don’t see arts dominating a child’s time in school.
“Students have become so enamored with the study of arts that they have lost focus on non-art education.” Have they? How do you know? Honestly, in my experience, I saw most kids in my art classes goofing off. I certainly didn’t see them enamored.
“Americans are not earning the same education as students abroad because of the added focus on art in classrooms. Art is a great education to complement science, reading and math, but not a substitution.”
Where is this added focus? How do you conclude that art is substituting science, reading, and math? I don’t see schools focusing primarily on the arts, and then offering a paltry 1-2 hours for math, science, and reading. What you seem to be arguing for is the removal of arts, to make *more* time for science, math, and reading (I’m assuming that students will be reading philosophy and memorable occurrences).
“In order to excel in this rigorous competition, the U.S. needs to revamp the education system. The U.S. cannot lose focus on the fundamentals of learning and more time needs to be spent on textbook education.”
Our fundamentals of learning *are* the problem. They completely, and totally, suck. Its our fundamentals of education that need to be revamped, seeing to it that students actually leave school educated versus being the ignoramuses that schools seem to spit out.
I commend your wanting to improve our education. You are right that it needs to improve. But, what you are proposing would, in the long term, make things worse.
Part of what makes us human is our creativity. And the best and brightest of humanity, have in many cases shown themselves to be creative thinkers. How many of these men and women also painted, wrote poetry or plays?
Whats more, by eliminating these supplements to education, such as phys ed and the arts, we would be developing more one dimensional people. Is that what we want? Is that the sort of people we want to make up our society?
Thanks for commenting. This is an opinion piece; therefore, the article reflects my opinion on the current public education in the United States and the lack of focus on math, reading, science, etc.
You believe that it is a parent’s duty to instill morals and I do not disagree. However, the U.S. cannot monitor what is being taught in the home. Therefore, as a result of poor parenting, educators should take on the role of teaching students the difference between right and wrong.
In your response, you said, “what is necessary is a matter of opinion.” Well, this is an opinion piece.
You are right, the number of patents in the United States has decreased. In fact, it is reported that China will surpass the United States in patents by the end of this year, 2011. Creativity is not the only factor in innovation. Creativity and the education of science combined leads to new technology and patents.
In your response, you said, the United States “would risk overloading students.” Well, I think that is a risk worth taking. Firoozeh Dumas, a New York Times best selling author, compares the teaching methods implemented in the US versus the teaching methods in Iran. Her beliefs are similar to mine. In her memoir, she said, “School in Iran had been a whole other experience…We attended school six days a week; Fridays were our only days off, but we received enough homework to keep us busy eight days a week…And if I could send my children back in time to school in prerevolutionary Iran, I would.” This is just one of the many examples.
Again, in your commentary, you said, “Simply adding an extra hour per day to the study of science won’t necessarily yield a big improvement.” I am not anticipating a dramatic 180 degrees anytime soon. For the time being, minor improvement is better than remaining stagnant or further declining.
Your comment, “Our fundamentals of learning *are* the problem. They completely, and totally, suck. Its our fundamentals of education that need to be revamped, seeing to it that students actually leave school educated versus being the ignoramuses that schools seem to spit out,” simply reiterates my point.
Once again, thanks for commenting.
-Neda Ghomeshi
I agree. I have always considered myself a math and science guy, and I never understood why people considered arts to be important. However lately I have become more open minded and I strongly believe that an education in arts has a lot to offer. I was searching online both "why arts education is important" and "why arts education is not important" and I have to say that a lot of what I read about makes me believe that there is true value to being educated in the arts.
Some of the results I saw show that arts help build confidence, teamwork, creativity, and individuality. These are skills that can be taken with you anywhere you go.
Supporters of the "non-arts" simply made a lot of arguments that the arts are fake, or do not lead to a job, but were not showing anything beyond opinions. I was open minded, willing to go either way, and was even looking out for results like "education in math and science lead to higher SAT scores, individuals with more creativity, or critical thinking skills", but surprisingly I find these results to be true of being educated in arts!
I agree. I have always considered myself a math and science guy, and I never understood why people considered arts to be important. However lately I have become more open minded and I strongly believe that an education in arts has a lot to offer. I was searching online both "why arts education is important" and "why arts education is not important" and I have to say that a lot of what I read about makes me believe that there is true value to being educated in the arts.
Some of the results I saw show that arts help build confidence, teamwork, creativity, and individuality. These are skills that can be taken with you anywhere you go.
Supporters of the "non-arts" simply made a lot of arguments that the arts are fake, or do not lead to a job, but were not showing anything beyond opinions. I was open minded, willing to go either way, and was even looking out for results like "education in math and science lead to higher SAT scores, individuals with more creativity, or critical thinking skills", but surprisingly I find these results to be true of being educated in arts!
Yeah, but even opinions need some backing if you want them to be taken seriously. I didn’t see anything in your article that verified your points. Ellen Winner’s comments didn’t have enough context to them – was this an excerpt from an interview? All she said (within your article) was what happens when students take too many art classes. Without a broader context, she could mean something different from your point.
You invoke Firoozeh Dumas’s comparative study in your comment. Why not in your article to give it some grounding? That would be relevant information to support your point.
Also, given how many articles I’ve come across about schools cutting arts programs nationwide in favor of taught-to-the-test subjects, I’m surprised to be reading that more attention is being paid to the arts than what you personally deem as necessary courses. I’d like to see some sources on this.
I am in the process of reading Dumas’ second memoir. I read that excerpt after the story was published. You are right, it is relevant information. I am glad I am able to incorporate it into this discussion.
Just to reiterate my point: the United States is lagging behind in the global competition. Here is an example to support my belief:
Chinese students go to school for 250 days of the year. In the United States, students only attend school for 180 days of the year. Also, an average school day for a Chinese student is 8 hours versus 6 hours for an American. These disparities in the time dedicated to education puts the United States behind China in the global competition. We do not have the time to lose focus on essential subjects such as math, science, reading, etc.
Ellen Winner is a professor of Psychology at Boston College, and Senior Research Associate at Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education. The excerpt within my article is from an interview with the New York Times.
Thanks for commenting!
“Are there cultural differences? How do they spend their time outside of classrooms?” and “What type of students, what type of people, are the products of their education?”
Both of these apply to your example of China. Keep in mind, that while adopting a more free market approach China hasn’t grown more fond of freedom for its people (Beijing Consensus and all) and I’d say quality of life for these kids is not so great. Its in large part *because* of China’s culture that they dedicate themselves so strongly to education.
It is important to note that while Ellen Winner does not support the idea of integrating the arts into curriculum for the sake of academic improvement, she remains a strong proponent of the arts in education.
The following is from the New York Times article:
“We feel we need to change the conversation about the arts in this country,” said Ms. Winner, a professor of psychology at Boston College and a senior research associate at Project Zero. “These instrumental arguments are going to doom the arts to failure, because any superintendent is going to say, ‘If the only reason I’m having art is to improve math, let’s just have more math.’ “
…”The arts need to be valued for their own intrinsic reasons. Let’s figure out what the arts really do teach.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/04/arts/design/04stud.html?_r=0
Ellen Winner did a study with Lois Hetland in 2000 which found that art education improves visual analysis skills and the ability to make critical judgments…
Your quotes mean nothing. They are absolutely useless because you have taken away any context that might have given some insight into her actual point. You might as well have quoted the president saying, "The sky is blue."
And worst of all, you have no arguments strong enough for me to disprove which is not helping with my homework essay.
This is really stupid. Teaching to the book only creates robots, not humans.
American students are failing because america is FAT. It is deeper than textbooks, Art is AWesome and necessary for life. The problem of failing kids has nothing to do with textbooks.