The Department of Education cut per pupil arts funding in 2007, according to the article, which was before the huge economic downturn that led to even less funding. With pressure for schools to excel on state math and reading tests, art programs were pushed aside.
However, New York City Council Member Robert Jackson, chair of the education committee, said, "the real irony is that students with access to arts education have been shown to produce superior academic achievement on standardized test, the very goal that is being pursued".
With so many reasons why there should be art programs in schools, it completely amazes me that schools continue to push these programs aside or isolate them from the core curriculum. Just like sports are a place for athletic students, and the math and science club is there for the academic kids, the arts are a home to those who participate in them.
As I continue to do research on this topic, I wonder what other alternative programs that are important to the student population that might be cut back due to funding?
I agree with you that it seems strange that schools would cut funding in art programs when student participating in them tend to generate higher test scores. It's also unfair that schools would choose to cut art programs over other extracurricular programs. Being an athlete, I would be very disappointed if the school made any cutbacks on the athletic programs, so I can understand where you are coming from when you are saying that it's unfair for art programs to be cut. Why should one extracurricular department be favored over another? There should be more of an equal playing field.
ReplyDelete