Tourney Round 2, Debate No. 12: Art and/or Music are Important in Grade School
First of all, I would like to point out that my definition of grade school is accurate.
Dictionary.com provides the following definition: "A school for the first four to
eight years of a child's formal education, often including kindergarten." So you see,
we are both right. And though I think there is a significant argument for grade school
being equated with elementary school in conventional usage, I will concede that grade
school can mean the first eight years of education. In the preceding argument, my
opponent made several arguments. They are, as best I can tell, as follows: 1. Art
and music classes are just as essential to a child's education as mathematics. 2.
Just because a class is not mandated doesn't mean it isn't important. 3. Art is not
to be equated with right-brained thinking. Children cannot learn in other classes
what they learn in art classes. Before I go any further, I would like to make a major
point of clarification which is vitally important in this debate. My opponent has
said several times that "we should not remove art and music from schools." But this is entirely beside the point. Look to the resolution.
"Art and/or music ARE IMPORTANT in grade school." I do not have to necessarily support
removing music or art from the school system. I must merely prove that art and/or music are not "of much or great significance or consequence." And now, on
to the debate. In my opponent's first argument, he says that though art and music only make up a small portion of the job market, they are still important.
He says that the mission of the educational system is to prepare a student for every
possible career. And with this I agree. But I must add one significant detail. The
school must do this in a proportionate manner. It does not make sense for a school
to emphasize art and music when they are not nearly as employable a skill as mathematics. That's right
- I just said that mathematics is an employable skill. In fact, it is difficult to
get a career - even a blue collar career - without a sufficient understanding of mathematics.
Take a look for yourself. Requirements for iron workers: Recommended high school courses include Algebra, Geometry
and Physics. Requirements for electricians: Recommended high school courses include
Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry and Physics. Requirements for sheet metal workers:
Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry and technical reading Requirements for draftsmen:
Recommended high school courses include Geometry and Trigonometry. Sources: American
Diploma Project, 2002; The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) http://www.agc.org....
You see, 99% of jobs in America DO require more than an elementary level of mathematics
education. Even skills like metal working and drafting require high school courses
like Algebra and Geometry, especially if one wants a decent wage. However, one requirement
you WON'T see on an iron-working application form is some sort of training in arts
or music. All the evidence points to the fact that training in mathematics is far
more important, significant, and consequential than art or music. Which leads me to the point I made about art and music not being required by State Standards. My opponent said that the reason
they are not required is because it would be difficult to test proficiency in these
areas. But this is not the case. State standards do not require a certain sufficiency
on a specific Standardized test, but require the passing of a high school course with
a curriculum that meets certain standards. It would be easy for a state to mandate
that every student take and pass one or two semesters of art or music. States mandate a certain amount of coursework in science, mathematics,
and communication skills. But neither South Dakota nor Wisconsin has mandated any
coursework in art or music. The reason is that art and music are simply not necessary for employment. In fact, in many nations, instrumental
and choral music is not integrated into schools at all. It is something that is done
completely extracurricularly. My good friend Masa, a foreign exchange student from
Japan, plays the violin extremely well, but he was simply shocked by the amount of
curricular music in our school system. Can anyone argue that Japanese students are
more dumb than Americans because of their lack of curricular music? No. In a 2007
New York Times article, an international test found that Japanese students consistently
test much better than American students in high achieving states like Massachusetts
and North Dakota. http://www.nytimes.com... This directly refutes what my opponent
said at the end of his first round: "it is still impossible to have a well-rounded
education without the arts or music." An educational system without curricular music
can and does work well - whereas an educational system without math wouldn't. And
as important as my previous three points are, (that art is insignificant compared to skills like mathematics and science, that state standards
do not require art or music, and that education without curricular music can work) I believe that it
is this next point which is the most important in the debate. My argument is that
right-brained learning is best served not through art or music, but through right-brained teaching techniques. And no, I do not equate
"art" with "right-brained teaching methods." I say merely that those students whose right-brains
are being reached with art can be more effectively reached with right-brained teaching methods in other classes.
My opponent says that students cannot learn what they learn in art classes in other subjects. Well, let's take a look: What is it exactly that an art class teaches us? 1. Art class promotes self-expression. (You make a self-portrait that describes your personality.)
2. Art class teaches problem-solving. (You learn how to mix colors and apply them to the
canvas in a pleasant fashion.) 3. Art class gives us self-confidence by allowing us to express ourselves. (You try, you
make mistakes, you try again, and ultimately triumph.) I am not saying that these
are not admirable lessons, but we must ask ourselves, "Is there any other way to learn
these things?" The answer is that yes, there are. 1. We can express ourselves through
a Science project building an exploding wire-mesh volcano. 2. The Scientific Method
teaches us how to creatively solve problems and find answers to our questions, like
what gives bubbles their shape. (Mathematicians can be some of the most creative people.
Think Einstein and Relativity.) 3. Creating a creative video presentation about Edgar
Allan Poe in English class and presenting it to the class can give students self-confidence
of expression. This goes back to the very first round of this debate, when my opponent
said, "Although teaching right-brained ideas is not always compatible with the institutionalized
nature of the school system, art and music classes are ways we can do this." But you see, right-brained teaching methods
can be used in EVERY subject, not in just art or music classes. All three of the activities I named above allow us to express ourselves
and learn using the right side of our brains, yet all three of these activities were
done without the benefit of an art or music class. But did you notice something else? In these three activities, in
addition to learning the three main things art teaches us, we learned three other things. We learned how volcanoes work, what quadratic
equations control bubble shape, and about how nearly everyone Edgar Allan Poe ever
knew died of tuberculosis. It is clear that art and music classes are not important, significant, or consequential in grade school.
Pro vs. con view
Topic space view
