I've been giving some thought to just how exactly music affects the listener, so I would like to take this opportunity to put forward a thought: music as a personal universal.
What does this mean? Music is universal in that it can, and often does, produce profound emotional responses from the listener. Certain tones, chords, melodies, harmonies, etc, undeniably affect our emotions in a variety of ways, many of which are predictable within, and perhaps between, cultures. But there is more to music than simply the universal human response. This is the personal.
Music is personal in that it affects each individual in different ways. How exactly music affects a person is deeply intertwined into who they are -- the culture they grew up in, their education, their experiences, their tastes. Many people associate certain songs with certain feelings or times in their lives, perhaps the song to which one danced with a high school sweet heart, a song that played during a particularly traumatic personal experience, or a song that simply jumped out at a person and grabbed them for some reason. There are myriad ways through which a person can connect to a particular piece or style of music, and in this, music can be, and often is, deeply personal.
To end with a question: Given the great variety of instruments and musical genres, what might be the most efficient way to introduce students to music, and at what point should this introduction begin?
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Sunday, March 6, 2011
On the Economics of Art Education
A quick romp around the internet seems to reveal some notable statistics about music education. It would seem, at first glance, that music education seems to coincide with high academic performance. People who have received music education score higher on the SAT's. 9 out of 10 people with postgraduate degrees received some form of music education. On the surface, this seems to be an argument for incorporating music education into the standard curriculum.
I find myself with some doubts about the usefulness of these statistics, though. For all the benefits they seem to tout, I see little exploration of the economic side. For example... perhaps those schools with high achievement and music education have the resources to provide a higher quality education (and have the spare resources to devote to music education) because of the affluence of the neighborhoods in which they are located. Perhaps music education simply coincides with a higher academic achievement because those who receive it are already receiving a high-quality education and can afford the luxury of the arts.
Perhaps it is my cynical side showing, but I feel like the complexity of the issue is being skirted for the sake of being able to make such blanket statements about the usefulness of music education. Do not get me wrong -- I am a supporter of art education, and had a fairly diverse background in learning the arts (I took lessons on the piano, guitar, clarinet, and mandolin, was a soloist in my church's youth choir (before I fled from Catholicism), I did a lot of drawing in my younger years, took a couple drawing classes in prep school, and I continue to write short stories and poetry, a habit I adopted in the 4th grade). In addition, I think that there are several valid arguments for the inclusion of the arts in education. But I also think that we have an equally pressing issue to attend to, specifically, insuring equality of educational access and quality for all people.
To end with a question (or two): What role should the arts play in education? And does music education actually improve academic success, or does it merely coincide with a higher quality education within a district that can afford such luxuries?
I find myself with some doubts about the usefulness of these statistics, though. For all the benefits they seem to tout, I see little exploration of the economic side. For example... perhaps those schools with high achievement and music education have the resources to provide a higher quality education (and have the spare resources to devote to music education) because of the affluence of the neighborhoods in which they are located. Perhaps music education simply coincides with a higher academic achievement because those who receive it are already receiving a high-quality education and can afford the luxury of the arts.
Perhaps it is my cynical side showing, but I feel like the complexity of the issue is being skirted for the sake of being able to make such blanket statements about the usefulness of music education. Do not get me wrong -- I am a supporter of art education, and had a fairly diverse background in learning the arts (I took lessons on the piano, guitar, clarinet, and mandolin, was a soloist in my church's youth choir (before I fled from Catholicism), I did a lot of drawing in my younger years, took a couple drawing classes in prep school, and I continue to write short stories and poetry, a habit I adopted in the 4th grade). In addition, I think that there are several valid arguments for the inclusion of the arts in education. But I also think that we have an equally pressing issue to attend to, specifically, insuring equality of educational access and quality for all people.
To end with a question (or two): What role should the arts play in education? And does music education actually improve academic success, or does it merely coincide with a higher quality education within a district that can afford such luxuries?
Rationalization of the "Core Academic Subjects:" A Response
Emily asked: "why are students required to take Math, Science, English, and Social Studies? Why were these subjects deemed the most worthy of learning?"
Simply put, these core subjects are a required basis for functioning in a democractic society, subjects which all citizens should have at least a basic grasp of for the benefit of themselves and the state which they select to govern them.
English gains its importance from communication ability. Without a knowledge of the language, and the analytic skills we gain from writing about literature, a democratic society cannot function. Language and argumentation are the very foundation upon which a democratic society functions -- reasoned, rational debate about issues.
Social Studies are important for a multi-cultural society (such as ours) as a key ground to understand those whom we will come into contact with, both on a daily basis and those once-in-a-lifetime meetings. It is also important to be educated on the mistakes of the past, lest we fall victim to them again in the present.
Math is a skill which benefits all people, particularly in an economic sense. In a free market economy, we must have a firm foundation of how to calculate costs and benefits, how to balance budgets, and how to do the most good for the most people -- in addition to knowing math for skills like adjusting proportions when cooking for multiple people (or for one). Math can also be useful for putting some perspective onto statistics, such as "one person killed by a shark in a nation of 300 million" being such a statistically negligible phenomenon that it's hardly worth wasting our time worrying aboutit, particularly in the face of such statistics as 30-40 million people in our nation being unable to afford health insurance. Social justice, anyone?
Science is important, not only for the growing prominence of technology in our every day lives, but in the functioning of the state. When debates such as climate change and Darwinian evolution are going on in our state houses, it is vital for the population to have at least a basic understanding of science so that we are enabled to make appropriate decisions on these issues.
This, then, brings us to the role of the arts in education (music included). What possible benefit could there be to a democratic state for encouraging art? I certainly have my own views, but I feel I am getting long-winded.
To end with a question: What are some of the potential benefits of incorporating the arts into education? What may be its draw-backs?
Simply put, these core subjects are a required basis for functioning in a democractic society, subjects which all citizens should have at least a basic grasp of for the benefit of themselves and the state which they select to govern them.
English gains its importance from communication ability. Without a knowledge of the language, and the analytic skills we gain from writing about literature, a democratic society cannot function. Language and argumentation are the very foundation upon which a democratic society functions -- reasoned, rational debate about issues.
Social Studies are important for a multi-cultural society (such as ours) as a key ground to understand those whom we will come into contact with, both on a daily basis and those once-in-a-lifetime meetings. It is also important to be educated on the mistakes of the past, lest we fall victim to them again in the present.
Math is a skill which benefits all people, particularly in an economic sense. In a free market economy, we must have a firm foundation of how to calculate costs and benefits, how to balance budgets, and how to do the most good for the most people -- in addition to knowing math for skills like adjusting proportions when cooking for multiple people (or for one). Math can also be useful for putting some perspective onto statistics, such as "one person killed by a shark in a nation of 300 million" being such a statistically negligible phenomenon that it's hardly worth wasting our time worrying aboutit, particularly in the face of such statistics as 30-40 million people in our nation being unable to afford health insurance. Social justice, anyone?
Science is important, not only for the growing prominence of technology in our every day lives, but in the functioning of the state. When debates such as climate change and Darwinian evolution are going on in our state houses, it is vital for the population to have at least a basic understanding of science so that we are enabled to make appropriate decisions on these issues.
This, then, brings us to the role of the arts in education (music included). What possible benefit could there be to a democratic state for encouraging art? I certainly have my own views, but I feel I am getting long-winded.
To end with a question: What are some of the potential benefits of incorporating the arts into education? What may be its draw-backs?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)