Reinvesting in Success, What is the Problem?: Questioning the Relevance of Art in Education

The National Arts Educational Association (NAEA) cites “10 lessons the arts teach” (http://www.arteducators.org/advocacy/10-lessons-the-arts-teach). Based in the teachings of Elliot Eisner (2002) these lessons give students possibilities of finding more than one solution to a problem as multiple perspectives allow problem solving techniques that can evolve and transform. The discourse of art is complex and demands technical focus of that based in the symbolic and the unspoken.  The capability to express feelings allows unique experiences of relationships that cannot be found in core curricula based only in common core standards.

Art defines culture and explains history. Recently, NPR reported that Spain’s Niemeyer Center for the Arts will close December 15^th after nine months of operation (http://www.npr.org/2011/12/04/143064303/curtain-could-fall-on-a-dazzling-arts-center-in-spain). It is a victim of the economy. Listener Joann Flora responded to the announcement by positing that in 1000 years the economy will not be what is remembered (http://www.npr.org/2011/12/11/143532213/your-letters-spains-white-elephants-meatballs). It is art that will survive and increase in economic value. Eisner (2002) reminds us that art is a cultural artifact and as such, is important to the fullness of a student’s learning experience. Art values are found everywhere and the outcome is technological and economic.

This past spring the President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities published Reinvesting in Arts Education (May, 2011).  As the title clearly states, art is an investment that has “transformed the way we communicate, socialize, and do business.” Furthermore, “creative experiences are part of the daily work life of engineers, business managers, and hundreds of other professionals” (Arne Duncan, May, 2011).

I have difficulty in finding an argument omitting arts education from curricula other than NCLB made us do it.  Duncan (October 17^th, 2011) declared that “Fixing No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is four years overdue” (http://www.ed.gov/blog/2011/10/reforming-nclb-requires-flexibility-and-accountability/). That same day the Secretary of Education proclaimed that “Our schools need to sustain arts and humanities programs where they are robust, and strengthen them where they are not” (http://www.ed.gov/blog/2011/10/the-arts-and-humanities-in-a-well-rounded-education/comment-page-1/#comment-32140).

If “reinvesting” in the arts will help “fix” NCLB and allow students to succeed beyond schooling and become innovative contributors to economic productivity, why is there an argument as to its importance as a necessary part of the education of all children? I recommend visiting the November and December posts of Marilyn Stewart and Jo-Anne Kirkman in NAEA's "Monthly Mentor" blog as they dialogue both the realities and creative connections to art and culture (http://naea.typepad.com/naea/2011/11/index.html)

Take action

Arts is a necessary part of education for all students. Please take a moment to take the action necessary to get involved. When the arts become accessible as an advantage rather than a necessity, the outcome can never be an educational system where no child is left behind. Advocate for the Arts

The link that follows this post is very important!!! When art is integrated into core curriculum, so many voices are heard. Throughout my elementary and secondary experiences as a classroom teacher, I taught students whose knowledge was suppressed as they continually failed due to fear of incorrect sentence structure, stupid or non-existent oral response answers, or the inability to understand the format of multiple choice possible answers. For many, the abstract, the aesthetic, the creative way of thinking needed to be allowed. For all, the artistic opened new possibilities.

As Elliot Eisner (2002) so eloquently reflected "what has been recognized - a lesson the arts teach - is that the coice of an approach to the study of the world is a choice of not only what one is able to say about the world, but also what one looks for  and is able to see. Methods define the frames though which we construe the world" (p. 215). So much of recent educational pedagogy is defined through the lens of  global success. Understanding that when standards of core accountability for some reason forgot to include the importance of the creative, aesthetic, and innovative as a means to enhance critcal iquiry and higher level thinking skills needs to be realized.

I agree with John Maeda when he states that "artists and designers,... are “'risk takers, they can think around corners.'” All students deserve the rush of succeeding.  When educators deny this rush because they are afraid of taking risks or don't understand how to turn corners, both teaching and learning opportunities are denied.

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/12/01/13steam_ep.h31.html?r=1734395764&tkn=SOUF33yOAK2IkI%2BCvYbeMsKPUWP0STvHXAtn&cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1

The Importance of Teachers

http://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/thanksgiving-greetings-from-us-education-secretary?fd=1

I agree with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan that teachers are important. Their value is so much more than that which can be measured in annual assessments of accountability. Their importance is what students remember as being unique as they teach the individual, not the standardized collective. Teachers reveal possibilities that invoke innovation and inspire critical and creative exploration. Teachers have earned more than a thank-you as they engage in “the most important work…in our country today,” commands not just a thank you, but also respect.

The Price of Educational Accountability

In a recent dialogue a colleague asked to share my perspective of how academic success can be measured other than through a lens of economic success. I had referenced Arne Duncan’s November 1^st “Ed.gov” post reacting to the recent NAEP reading and mathematics “National Report Card” results in which he stated that “enhancing education for all is the key to our nation’s economic prosperity” (http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/statement-us-secretary-education-arne-duncan-naep-reading-and-math-2011-results). At first I had a knee-jerk reaction as academic success was perceived as contributing to the “nation’s economic prosperity.” What happened to the importance of self? When did success change from individual to national need?

After I graduated from college, I decided to pursue a law degree. My heart wasn’t in this aspiration. I was an actress and loved to entertain. The legal thing was something I was supposed to do so that I could establish accountability that would translate to economic success. To support my thespian habit, I worked as a waitress. A University of Chicago chemistry doctoral student, who was a regular at the establishment in which I worked, volunteered to help me study for the LSAT. He was from India and was funded by his government to complete his education and return to his country. One night I asked him what he wanted to do with his education. He replied that he wanted to stay in America and own a liquor store. I never took the LSAT. At that moment I realized that becoming a lawyer was not me. The “American dream” was not a part of what defined my success because self-satisfaction and individual happiness was nonexistent.

Educational accountability has somehow become directly equated with not only educational success but also with national economic success. There is no longer anything that resembles the educational pursuit of a personal dream in the concept of the American dream and students have no understanding of why they are deemed successes or failures. Education is a competition of test scores with bubbled answers devoid of inspiration. Students are marked as failures for burst bubbles of empty learning.

Assessments that measure personal understanding must be part of the educational process. Assessments must include achievement that is meaningful to the individual. When students and parents can take pride in achievement, success has been measured, not by statistically processed data, but by individual accomplishment.

Art is Literacy for Everyone

Watching my drama students rehearse an original adaptation of Peter Pan with special needs students always fills me with feelings of pride, happiness, and inspiration. They learn so much from each other as acting encourages risks and challenges many of these kids in ways they would never experience elsewhere. Most high school students wouldn’t dare perform on a stage before an audience. They wouldn’t have the courage to allow their imagination to experiment with all of the physical, vocal, and emotional possibilities. They wouldn’t pay careful attention to subtext that provokes action, reaction, and interaction. They wouldn’t appreciate the discipline necessary to successfully understand and use all of the elements involved in the art of acting. These kids do, and they never fail to move those who watch a rehearsal.

Drama students write, direct, design, construct, and act in a partnership with students who have a variety of handicaps and together they explore the intricacies of literacy that is written, read, and spoken. They create set pieces, props, and costumes, always aware of possible limitations, but never obstructed by them. Every student involved with this project, now in its 6^th year, experiences the magic of theater in all of its glory. For some, this is their first such production. For others, it is their third or fourth. At first, the newcomers are timid, but by the end of the first week, all look forward to the rehearsals.

The drama class is a diversified group in and of itself. There are the gifted, learning disabled, gay, lesbian, bisexual, Mormon, Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Atheist, emotionally disturbed, cheerleader, band member,  science nerd, artist, chess club member, gamer, athlete, FFA/4H  participant, and many other represented diversities. Everyone works together for the same end. When these students work with the autistic, intellectually impaired, Downs Syndrome, emotionally and socially impaired, special needs students, learning occurs at so many amazing levels. The meaningful connections to learning at a number of levels of inquiry, innovation, creativity, and critical thought could not happen over and over again without the universal literacy of art.

Making snow for the 2010 production of "A Christmas Carol"

Creating the snow making device for the same production

The Price of Education?

Today the Walton Foundation (Wal-Mart) announced plans to donate $25.5 million more dollars to the KIPP Charter Network of schools, and tomorrow the Dallas-area Uplift Education is expected to announce its plans for expansion. (http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/District_Dossier/2011/11/kipp_charter_network_receives.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS2).

In her blog with Deborah Meier “Bridging Differences” (http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/) Diane Ravitch posted today that “never before were there so many people, with such vast resources, intent on dismantling public education. What does this mean for the future of public education? What does it mean for our democracy?

Are the foundations of economic power the future educational accountability bodies defining pedagogy, philosophy, and ideology? I have to question, then, the future definitions of student and teacher as curricula fall victim to the “bastions of unaccountable power” (Ravitch, 2010, p. 201). What becomes of teacher and student accountability when the very definition is based on a  price tag of success?

When students become commodities and teachers become producers of economic success, then that which defines pedagogy is driven by predetermined objectives. Democracy is no longer a possibility as learning becomes a product of capitalistic values. Teaching is no longer an art and students no longer experience possibilities built on imagination, creativity, and inquiry. Education will become a business, nothing more and nothing less.