Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

MERRIFIELD: Neglecting the arts hurts our children

By Rep. Michael Merrifield, Special to the Rocky

Published October 16, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Speakout

More stories »

I know that "retro" is in, but do we really want to return to the bad old days of education when many districts slashed arts programs in an often-failed effort to boost test scores?

In "Arts are wonderful, but this study isn't" (Oct. 12), the Rocky Mountain News argues against a recent study of the arts in schools, saying it is not scientific and therefore should be discounted because it had "only" a 25 percent response rate. In this age of polling 1,033 voters to reveal what millions are thinking, a one-in-four response has self-evident credibility. Moreover, I take issue with the Rocky's interpretation of the study itself.

I recently said that the hoary "three R's" have sadly come to mean "rigor, regimentation and regurgitation." As chairman of the state's House Education Committee, I am committed to the teaching of so-called "core" subjects, but they must not come at the expense of the arts.

In fact, an article that ran the same day as the above-mentioned editorial is headlined "Arts may lift performance" (at Denver's Kunsmiller Creative Arts Academy, where kids learn core subjects while also studying music, drama, dance and visual arts).

In Colorado Springs, urban, low-income third-graders at Bristol Elementary have had three years of violin lessons, and 76 percent of them scored proficient or advanced on the CSAP reading tests compared to the prior year's third-graders who reached only 52 percent.

Despite this evidence and plain old common sense, more than one out of four administrators in Colorado admit they have cut funding from "noncore" arts, humanities, social studies and physical education to provide more resources for subject areas tested on CSAP.

Parents aren't happy about these backward steps: In the last five years, the number of Americans who believe that too much emphasis is placed on testing jumped by 12 percent. One-half of Americans are concerned about President Bush's No Child Left Behind program, feeling that its focus on reading and math has reduced instructional time in other subjects.

Kids who participate in the arts for threee hours a week for one year are:

* Four times more likely to be recognized for academic achievement.

* Three times more likely to be elected to class office within their schools.

* Three times more likely to win an award for school attendance.

* Four times more likely to participate in a math and science fair.

Students of lower socioeconomic status who took music lessons in grades 8-12 increased their math scores on national tests significantly compared to nonmusic students. They also outscored all other students on the SATs.

A 2005 Stanford University study reveals "that musical experience improves the way people's brains process . . . speech and, consequently, may affect the acoustic and phonetic skills needed for learning language and reading."

The Salt Lake City School District reported that in the four school years ending 2003 to 2006, students in arts programs outscored other students on the state's math test by a range of 16 to 26 points on a 100-point scale.

As the recent well-received study called "Tough Choices Tough Times" said, "Success in the future will depend on creativity and innovation, teamwork, abstract thinking and self-discipline." All these skills are gained through the study of the arts.

So, sure, let's focus on the CSAP-tested skills of reading, writing and arithmetic. But let's also give the next generation the gift of creativity and collaboration, abstraction and the arts.

Democratic Rep. Michael Merrifield represents Colorado Springs.

Comments

  • October 16, 2008

    7:36 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Acemon writes:

    Art classes are typically cut in order to better fund football. What would be the problem with reducing sports subsidies in order to pay for classroom time?

  • October 16, 2008

    12:28 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    yaakovwatkins writes:

    There are a number of methodological issues with the letter. The biggest problem is the the author doesn't make a distinction between a self-selected sample and a randomly-selected sample. Comparing children who voluntarily signed up for music lessons with the whole school district is methodologically unsound. Opinion polls of self-selected samples are worthless. The author needs to learn basic statistics.

    Requiring visual arts in the schools presents legal problems. 10% of boys are color-blind. As a child I was graded down for 8 years because the school district used the cheap version of the standard color test and it didn't catch me. The more expensive one, taken after I graduated from high school, identified me as color-blind. If this had happened now, the school would be in violation of Americans with Disabilities Act and I could have sued. And believe me, after some of the nasty cracks which the Art teachers made, I would have.

    The Stamford study talked about the value of music experience. Does the author truly believe that young people have no access to music without getting it in school? Most of the children I see near the high school on my block have earphones on.

    This article is worthless.