Harnessing High Level Support
Arts education advocates have received a call to arms. Now is the time to get out there and gain support for arts learning. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has issued a letter to school and education community leaders that expresses support for arts learning curriculum in public schools. To reinforce his message, he spoke at a NAMM Foundation teleconference and urged communities to think creatively towards strategies that will provide access to high quality learning opportunities that include the arts for all children.
Receiving support from an elected official at the federal level for arts learning is incredibly encouraging and provides opportunity for local-level advocacy efforts. Secretary Duncan stressed the "flexibility" of the No Child Left Behind Act. This means that while arts is one of the core subjects noted in the act, local school districts are able to adapt this in a way they see fit. This makes for the perfect opportunity for arts education advocates to leverage this endorsement to see that arts learning plays an integral role in local school districts.
How would you speak out on behalf of arts learning?
Here are a few ideas:
1. Distribute the Secretary's letter. This letter has been made public in hopes that arts education advocates will pass this on to teachers, parents, community leaders, local policymakers and school administrators.
2. Parents should talk to their children's teachers. With the new school year starting, now is the time to find out what is on your child's agenda for the year. Open houses are just around the corner.
3. Ask your legislator to write a letter that supports Secretary Duncan's. This is a great way to get the message to trickle down to the local level.
posted by Editor @ 3:40 PM
1 Comments
Subscribe to Blog Feed
1 Comments:
I submit that the arts education community should look seriously at changing the technology that underpins its subjects, with the goal of delivering the same (or better) learning outcomes at lower cost.
Here's why.
Once upon a time, the Koreans were illiterate. The Chinese ideographic script was a poor fit with the Korean language, so the efforts to spread literacy among the Koreans failed. Then the Koreans invented Hangul, which fit Korean perfectly; now, "a bright child can become literate in a day, and a dull child in ten."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangul)
Once upon a time, European mathematicians could not conceive of "x to the power of y," because Roman numerals could not notate the concept, and the Roman abacus could not calculate it. Then Fibonacci explained how to use Arabic (actually Hindu) numerals and algorithms, and the scope of European mathematical thought widened dramatically.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liber_Abaci)
Once upon a time, the "value" of a church singer dependend as much on "how many songs he had memorized" as on how well he could sing them, because all songs had to be memorized by rote. Then Guido d'Arezzo invented staff notation and solfeggio, enabling novices to become valuable church singers much more rapidly.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guido_of_Arezzo)
Once upon a time, all mathematical calculations had to be executed longhand, making them expensive and error-prone. Then logarithms were invented, and many calculations could be accelerated by looking them up in tables of pre-calculated logarithms, and later by using a slide rule, and even later by using a pocket calculator.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithms#History)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calculator#Pocket_calculators)
Once upon a time, learning and practicing chemistry was extraordinarily difficult, with the properties of each element having to be learning individually, and its guiding principles (e.g., phlogiston) being fundamentally incorrect. Hence, few gained mastery over chemistry. Then Lavoisier discovered the combustion principle, Mendeleev invented the Periodic Table of the Elements, and Bohr deduced the planetary model of the atom, all of which reduced the investment of time necessary to master chemistry, thereby dramatically increasing the percentage of the human population that could afford to master chemistry.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_periodic_table)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston#History)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model)
YESTERDAY, learning and practicing music-making was extraordinarily difficult, with the patterns of each key, clef, scale, mode, tuning, instrument, timbre, etc., having to be learning individually, and its guiding principles (e.g., 12-tone equal temperament) being fundamentally incorrect. Hence, few gained mastery over music-making. Then [insert here a list of scientific discoveries and technological inventions that, arguably, have not yet been made], all of which reduced the investment of time necessary to master music-making, thereby dramatically increasing the percentage of the human population that could afford to master music-making.
The traditional technology of music-making -- that is, staff notation and musical instruments -- is a very significant contributor to both the high railure rate and the high expense of music education. As with all of the above examples, fixing the technology will fix the problem.
Until we fix the technology of music-making, it hardly seems fair to ask the public to maintain or even increase its support for music education. (Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?)
http://www.godrules.net/para/luk/parallelluk6-41.htm)
Respectfully,
Jim Plamondon
Post a Comment
<< Home