• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Model for arts education

Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
708
I'm wondering what you all might think is the most effective path for arts education to take in the public school sphere. The aesthetic, arts for arts sake approach has been and continues to be the dominant philosophy in most arts ed, especially in music. I was certainly brought up and trained in this way. However, the more I've learned and experienced, I feel myself being drawn a bit more to the praxial, arts for practical use stand. In a general sense, most art, particularly for younger people, is not an aesthetic object to be contemplated but one to be used and absorbed.

Ultimately, shouldn't arts education be more accessible to more of a broad population and in the ways they experience art? If more students are brought under the guidance of a skilled arts educator and allowed the time space and skill development to help achieve their own goals, are they more likely to perhaps "branch out" slightly from their praxialism to include an aesthetic point-of-view?

Personally, I don't think it's an either-or proposition but American schools, from top to bottom, have largely supported the aesthetic view. Consequently, students may participate in arts programs briefly but few take what they do in school beyond those walls into their lives. Many students choose not to take arts classes at all. What can arts education and educators do to bring more students into the fold and feel as though their creativity, opinions, tastes and interests will be served rather than looked at as an obstacle to be overcome?
 
Oddly this is how I feel about science and math education. Early on I was told that my "thing" wasn't math and science, and since my talent was obviously art I should focus on that. Only now that I'm out of school can I enjoy physics and astronomy and all the science I missed in school. Does it have a practical use for me? yes! It really enables me to see what's "real" and what's woo. Also, I get those insider "Schrodinger Cat" jokes now. Frankly there is a wonder and beauty in science which sadly my school did not see.

A broad general education benefits everyone. Music and art and science and math for all, not "well you got a B in that math class... you don't need to learn anymore"...
 
Oddly this is how I feel about science and math education. Early on I was told that my "thing" wasn't math and science, and since my talent was obviously art I should focus on that. Only now that I'm out of school can I enjoy physics and astronomy and all the science I missed in school. Does it have a practical use for me? yes! It really enables me to see what's "real" and what's woo. Also, I get those insider "Schrodinger Cat" jokes now. Frankly there is a wonder and beauty in science which sadly my school did not see.

A broad general education benefits everyone. Music and art and science and math for all, not "well you got a B in that math class... you don't need to learn anymore"...

I am inclined to think that your experience is similar to most peoples in America. We end up teaching a "one size fits all" style as well as a "everybody should know all of these technical facts and skills" by the time they graduate. No exploration, no practical application. The argument against that is that kids should have a mass of "basic skills or fundamentals" and then experiement and explore their own interests. By the time you're 18 and you haven't had a chance to be curious or pursue your interests under the guidance of a competent advisor (teacher), you inevitably lose much of that curiosity and end up believing that education is lame and only about learning remote facts on uninteresting topics.
 

Back
Top Bottom