Art Decay

After a whole semester of looking at whether or not anyone even cares about the lack of fine arts in the schools I have discovered that there are people that do care about the situation. This is an extremely pressing situation that has been caused by NCLB. There are people out there who are fighting for the arts. I also realized how much of an affect not having fine arts affects other subject areas. Studies have been done and show that kids who have fine arts do better in all of their basic courses and on tests than those who do not have the option of art classes.

 

But, the sad side of the story is that its teachers vs. the government. Teachers are fighting and see the need for these classes. But, the government still thinks that there is no improvements and that teachers aren’t teaching anything. Yet, many government boards still don’t see why it is impossible for school o provide these options to kids. They don’t make the connection between NCLB and budget cuts. Even our candidates for president fail to address the problems with it.

 

As for RSS, it is a really good resource for finding anything you want. I even used it for my other courses. I’m surprised it’s not something that more professors let students know about. Though there are still some bugs and stuff it was rather enjoyable and easy to use. It was actually easier than going and finding articles on your own. It that were the case I would probably have gotten everything from CNN.com.

Recently I attended the Pigeon Creek Shakespeare performance. It was held during my Shakespeare class so that made it easy. The scene that were performed were from Macbeth. At the start of the class the director spoke to us about some of the ideas behind what they do that other performances of Shakespeare don’t.

 

One thing that made all the difference in the performance was that they stay true to the way that the stage was set up. This means that they use a thrust stage since this is what would have been used during Shakespeare’s time. One of the benefits to using a thrust stage is that there is a lot more character audience interaction. The audience is forced into a relationship with the actors and feel somewhat of a connection with what happens in the play.

 

But, perhaps the best part to the performance was when we were told that the setting for the play was going to be in a post apocalyptic punk era. So, the characters would be decked out in leather and fishnets. The director told us that the reasoning behind this was so that audience would make better connections with what was going on in the play. Not being dressed in Elizabethan clothing makes it easier for the audience to understand what is going on.

 

From this I drew a very important conclusion for teaching Shakespeare. If at all possible, being able to update the text to something that students can relate to will make the experience overall more enjoyable and understandable. From a writing stand point, I think it would be great if while teaching a play of Shakespeare’s you had students rewrite scenes. But, rather than write scenes just to make them understandable, write them in the fashion of some popular movie theme.

 

In a paper I just wrote for my Shakespeare class I use this example from Much Ado about Nothing:

 

By having students update the text they are then able to make connections they never saw before. For instance, students could take the scene in which Ursala and Hero are talking about how Benedick is in love with Beatrice so that Beatrice will here them. This is a classic case off girls gossiping, which teenager girls can relate closely to. Students could then take this scene and adapt it to fit a teen comedy, like say Mean Girls. By changing the language the rest of the class is then able what the characters in the play are trying to do. For example, the lines:

Hero. No, truly, Ursula, she is too disdainful. I know her spirits are coy and wild as       haggards of the rock.

Ursula. That Benedick loves Beatrice so entirely?

Hero. So says the Prince and my new-trothed lord (3.1.35-40)

could easily be turned into:

            Heather. For real, Sarah, she is so cynical. I mean she’s crazy.

            Sarah. But Ben still has a huge crush on Trish?

            Heather. I guess so. I mean Dan, the most popular senior, and my boyfriend said so, it   must be true.

So Wisconsin is trying to enhance its schools art programs with an arts task force. The job of the task force, not entirely clear. But according to Elizabeth Burmaster, it seems like all that will be done is a lot of talking about policy. Not a whole lot of action seems to be taking place. If you haven’t noticed I’m a little skeptical as to if this is really going to work.

 

The article didn’t even explain any way that the task force is going to improve school art programs or create more. Just lots of discussions with parents, teachers, and board members. This is all fine and dandy but you need money to create more programs, to pay teachers, and maintain the programs. When budgets keep getting cut it is nearly impossible to maintain these classes. Art supplies is expensive. There was no address to how this money was going to be made.

 

Though the article did make on good point:

 

“Business and industry are calling for students with the knowledge and skills to be innovative and creative.”

 

This is completely true. So many employers look for people who have creativity and so many jobs require people to think creatively. It only makes sense to train students to be able to produce what an employer wants.

 

Though the details aren’t completely figured out yet, at least Wisconsin is making a step in the right direction.

 These are Exciting Times for School Art

By Elizabeth Burmaster

10 April 2008

Full Article

Allie

Ashlie

David

Brad

Desi

Jack

Kristin

Mark

Leigha

Molly

Since I have hopefully made my point by now that fine arts in schools is a pressing issue for everyone, I now turn to some people who have also realized this. In New York teachers are confronting the government in attempt to gain more variety and funding. One of the most interesting points made in the article is how NY is known for making stars in music, theater, film, and art. It is kind of ironic that NY is lacking just as much as everywhere else in the arts. Leo Casey of the United Federation of Teachers explains:

 

“The people who come to New York from all over the world for its theater, its art, dance and music do not know New York’s dirty little secret. Our schools are failing in the arts.”

 

Most of New York City’s schools are barely able to provide one form of art for their students. Because of this the City Council feels as though the schools are failing to teach them and that it is the schools fault.

 

“These schools aren’t teaching anything. They’re not teaching all four art forms. They’re teaching one, maybe. Maybe two,”

 

Jessica Lappin, City Councilwoman, refutes. Well maybe it’s because the schools can’t afford supplies. The schools can’t afford to pay teachers to teach these classes. Let alone, can’t afford risking state test scores. So how does the city expect schools to continue teaching all four forms when budget keeps getting cut back further and further. Also, how can someone assume that schools aren’t teaching anything? That’s a little ridiculous to say.

 

I suppose what blows my mind the most is how many people have spoken up and against NCLB, many being professional teachers, but the issue has barely even been mentioned in the race for President. It is also crazy that teachers are not the ones that get input on what will help and hinder students. If no one is going to listen to the professionals responsible for carrying out these plans you would think that straight forward data would convince them. Study after study after study has demonstrated the importance of art in education. Also, how art influences all other subject areas and helps to improve scores in those. But, there are still people out there, like Lappin, that believe the school systems are doing nothing, so why should the schools get more money for art?

Teachers Stress Importance of Arts Classes to City Council

By Michael Meenan

8 April 2008

Full Article

With some of the negative effect of technology plagued upon me, some how my last post did not get posted at all. Also, it seems to be impossible to locate on my computer. But, I suppose that is the risk we take with technology. Because of this, here is my replacement entry.

While the majority of my entries thus far have focused on the negatives of removing and cutting fine art programs in schools, this article is a little different. Though art programs in public schools are almost hopeless at this point in time for public schools there are still options for parents who want their children to have well rounded educations.

Smith’s article focuses on the benefits of private and charter schools. Now before I get jumped on for promoting religious schools, let me explain that not all private and charter schools are religious, they are just the most recognized I suppose. Also, let me clarify the difference between the two. Private schools are school in which parents pay tuition for their children to go there. Charter schools are described best by Smith as:

“The academic curriculum is free but parents pay for the three hours of conservatory education their kids receive every day. Those conservatories range from several types of dance to creative writing.”

Either way parents receive vouchers from the state to send their children to non-public schools.

Now I know a concern that arises is that, well paying thousands of dollars for art or music classes is only an option for families that make lots of money. But, Smith shows us that that is just not the case:

“Of the 8 million youngsters in grades K-12 in 2005 who come from families with annual incomes of $100,000 or more, 80% (6.4 million) attend public schools and 20% (1.6 million) attend private schools, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, School Enrollment.”

So obviously, the majority of student’s attending these schools parents make bellow $100,000. I myself went to private school for nine years and my parents made no where even close to that much. It is definitely plausible for anyone who believes that the arts a very important part of curriculum.

Another point that Smith makes, which really made me think, is that as it’s been proved, music and other fine arts classes have a direct relationship with good grades. With increased grades students have a better chance to get into college. Interestingly, colleges tend look highly upon extra curriculars. Without many fine art programs, student’s college applications will be lacking. These schools aren’t training kids to pass standardized tests. With universities today marketing themselves as liberal education colleges, it would make more sense for a student to be exposed to a more diverse set of classes. This is preparing students to enter college as well rounded individuals. Though test scores have an influence on college acceptance, many school look for students who have had a variety of classes.

You would think that if our countries higher education universities recognize the importance of liberal ed., the government would take note of this. Its not even as though these schools get to do whatever they want and not abide by standards, these schools have received some of the higher test scores in the country. As public school has its down sides, I’m sure that private ones do too. As for Smith’s article, it seemed to have a slight bias since his daughter attends one of these charter schools. But, at least there are alternatives.

Kids These Days: Going Private

By Steve Smith

8 April 2008

Full Article

In my search for articles that deal with art and education I found one that doesn’t quite deal with art but the concept of a liberal education. It also, some what tied into my previous post (or rant) about standardized tests. This is the perfect example of why standardized test do not test how much knowledge someone has about a topic, but rather how well they can memorize and recall dates, names, and characters. Let alone covers such a broad variety of material that not every high school covers. A survey was conducted by they group called Common Core. The survey was given to teenagers in America over the phone. Sam Dillon reported this for the New York Times, “A significant proportion of teenagers live in “stunning ignorance” of history and literature.”

Based on a series of literature and history questions that were given in this survey Common Core determined that because of “No Child Left Behind” other subjects are being neglected. Interestingly, Dillon points out, that much of the founding board and executives had a part in constructing and approving of the act, being mostly democrats and having much influence when the act was being drawn up.

Dillon also says that:

“In a joint introduction to their report, Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch did not directly blame the No Child law for the dismal results but said it had led schools to focus too narrowly on reading and math, crowding time out of the school day for history, literature and other subjects.”

This is something that makes no sense to me. Yes, I agree that too much time is spent on trying to teach to standardized tests. But, as far as I’m aware, unless something has changed, aren’t all class periods the same amount of time for even amounts of time through out the week?

Ms. Cortese and Dr. Ravitch also say, “The nation’s education system has become obsessed with testing and basic skills because of the requirements of federal law, and that is not healthy.” This much is obvious. I’m not sure if their suggesting that NCLB be done away with or testing in other subjects be required. But, I am getting the feeling that they just want more testing. If this is the case then there is no hope for schools funding or students learning skills that are going to help them in the future. You also may as well kiss art programs behind.

Based on some of the questions that were given in this survey it is as though Common Core just falls into the exact same category as standardized tests. “Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought,” this is what Common Core reported. To be completely honest I haven’t the slightest idea as to when the Civil War was fought. Wouldn’t the more important question be, “What was the significance of the Civil War and what did it mean to Americans?” Students are taught to memorize who, where, and when because of the standardized tests. Rather than teaching students to think about the importance of events and novels, and the relevance that they have to their lives. This survey does no better job than tests for NCLB at gauging how much a student has learned. Either way this survey does a horrible job at proving that students aren’t learning the things they should know because it asks the exact same type of questions you’d find on the test.

On another completely different not, one of the survey questions had to do with Job from the Bible. Why on earth is a question about the Bible being asked to public school students? This pretty much destroys the validity of this survey.

Survey Finds Teenagers Ignorant on Basic History and Literature Questions

By Sam Dillon

27 February 2008

Full Article

Something that I hope has become pretty obvious by now is that I feel that “No Child Left Behind” seems to be the cause for the dwindling funding and fine arts in schools. The next article I read brought up a point that I definitely hadn’t thought about, let alone I don’t think that it was trying to focus on it. But, Jeffrey Galante is Director of Music and Visual Arts at Rush/Henrietta School tells 13WHAM,

“No Child Left Behind’ lists arts as a core subject. It’s just not a tested subject. At this point, the pressure is on tested subjects to raise scores.”

Galante works in New York. In New York two years of art is required for students to graduate. Most people are aware that “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) tests students on in subjects that are determined to be the most important. Students are required to be at a certain level for each subject and if not the school receives less funding. I was unaware that “NCLB” lists art as a core subject. Perhaps this is because it is not tested and schools are being forced to cut art programs because of the lack of funding.

It all comes back to subjects that are not tested do not matter. I hope that it does not come down to having to test art ability to get funding for it. If that sounds ridiculous, that’s because it is. How can we test expect students to be at certain level of artistic ability that is judged by a test? Some people have the ability to create great art and others don’t. I feel that this also applies to all other subjects. Yes, teachers can teach form and technique but that doesn’t mean that a student has required any insight to why art is important or what art has to say about society. This also applies to language arts. Just because a student has the ability to read a short selection and pick out the protagonist and antagonist or select the correct use of a metaphor; doesn’t mean that the student has learned how to make connections between what they have read and their own lives. I feel the same way about the teacher certification test. How can 100 multiple choice questions determine if I am going to be a good teacher or not, but that is another point all together.

The article goes on to explain how even students are recognizing the importance of art education and the two years of it that New York requires. They are able to make connections between the things that they learn in art classes and their science and math classes.

“According to a recent survey conducted by the National Education Association (NEA), 80 percent of registered voters believe the arts develop the imagination and critical skills needed to prosper in the future.” (Roberts).

This shows that art education is an extremely important part of building young individuals. I can’t understand why it is that 80% of the population can see this but our government can not.

Art, Music–Important to Education?

By Chalonda Roberts

29 January 2008

Full Article

Well President Bush has made another awesome move when it comes to education. In the most recent 2009 budget requests Bush has pretty much destroyed any progress that has been made in getting more funding for the arts. The appropriations process basically puts forward a certain amount of money that will go to each of these programs that deal with the arts; National Endowment for the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities, the office of Museum Services, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and the Department of Education’s Arts in Education programs.

To begin with, he cut $16.3 million that he cut from the NEA. The congress originally budgeted $144.7 million for this program. This was “the largest congressionally initiated funding increase for the arts in 28 years”(Shinn). If congress apparently thinks that this is a worthy cause to spend money on then why is it that our President can not see this? I suppose that he thought that it just wasn’t a war worth fighting for.

He also seems to not care about giving the youth of America a well rounded cultural background and would rather spend money killing the youth of another country. I may not have a completely clear understanding about how money gets distributed but I do know that he has no intention in funding education, specifically art education, even the slightest. This is obvious because of his move for funding, or lack there of, for the Department of Education’s Arts in Education programs.

“Perhaps worst of all, Bush asks nothing — not one thin dime — for the U.S. Department of Education’s Arts in Education program in the 2009 budget, compared with the $35.3 million enacted appropriations in the 2008 budget” (Shinn).

Now not only do I see this as a problem for art education, obviously, but education in general. I really feel, as I have said in past posts, that the problem is just starting with art. Soon enough schools could be losing funding from all other subject areas. Core subject areas could be decreased from math science and English down to just math and science.

I don’t see how someone having no background in art education or working in the education field can decide how much money is appropriate, possibly why it’s called the appropriations process, for these programs. You would think that consulting schools and administration about how much money is necessary to keep programs that create well rounded individuals. But, obviously what educations professionals or even the congress has to say about funding for the arts has no significance.

But, budget is not yet finalized. There is still time to write your state senator and house representative and rant about how outrageous this is. You can do this here. There is also an Art Advocacy Day. This is March 31 and April 1. This will be held in Washington D.C.

Bush’s proposed arts cuts bring outcry

By Dorothy Shinn

07 Feb 2008

Full Article

Stephanie Perrin, the head of the Walnut Hill School, Natick, Mass, is a strong supporter of arts education in schools. In her article “Why Arts Education Matters” for Education Week she discusses five different challenges that art education helps students to be successful in our current society. Even though studies have shown that art does have an effect on test scores, Perrin presents the positives of fine arts in a way I hadn’t quite thought about before.

The challenges that Perrin discusses are issues that are a big deal in America today. She then addresses those issues by explaining how art education can help solve some of these. A few on these points really stuck out to me. The first of the challenges “America continues to face declining social engagement and a culture of division.” Perrin explains that art education does the following in schools:

“…one finds self-motivated students, greater parental involvement, intensified student and teacher engagement, strengthened collegiate aspirations, and respect for cultural differences.”

This is something I had never though of before, but it makes perfect sense. Because of arts parents are more involved. The regular curriculum in schools that typically consists of English, Math, Science, and Social Studies provides very few opportunities for parents to really get involved with the things that their kids are doing in school. While practical every art program provides multiple occasions for students to demonstrate the things they have learned in class. Band and choir have multiple concerts through out the year. Drama and theater have a number of performances that are put on. Then arts like photography, painting, drawing, and pottery etc. provide different art shows and competitions for students to participate in. These are all examples of the possible ways students can show and be proud of the things they are doing in school. It’s no wonder kids aren’t passing standardized tests. Their doing work that half the time their parents don’t seen and thus have no reason to take pride in what they are doing.

Also, I didn’t realize how these events that the arts create really do solve the challenge that Perrin proposes. The events create social situations for students. It teaches them how to behave in social engagements. Also, exposes them to various cultures in different forms of art.

The next point that stuck out to me wasn’t because it was completely new to me, but the way it was approached was different. The challenge that Perrin suggest is, “The crisis of this American century is not material or intellectual, but spiritual.” The spiritual conflict of in America is something that we see everyday. Whether if be who’s religion is right and who’s is wrong, or just basic beliefs. Perrin then explains the importance of art in this spiritual clash,

“Unlike traditional academic disciplines, arts education can support an outcome greater than personal success, cultural advancement, or economic influence. The study of the arts asks young people to consider the meaning, both personal and communal, of the work in which they are engaged.”

In short, art helps adolescents examine their own beliefs about the world. Everyone knows that art gives people a way to express themselves, but it also is a way to reaffirm ones own beliefs. With so many different beliefs this gives students a chance to explain their beliefs while experiencing other cultures and other beliefs. This then goes back to challenge one with promoting cultural diversity and providing a practical reason for art education.

Why Art Education Matters

By Stephanie Perrin

29 January 2008

Full Article