ChoralNet logo
The Global Choral Community
Amazon holiday

Then why are we cutting Fine Arts Curriculum?

Philip posted a great article yesterday outlining the benefits of teaching fine arts in school programs.  Sadly, the arts curriculum in the school system of Alberta Canada are currently being revised, and not in a beneficial way:
Alberta Education is currently reviewing the fine arts curriculum for kindergarten to Grade 12 students.

A draft of the curriculum framework released in June highlights a number of possible changes.

One of the most controversial proposals is replacing five credit courses for high school students--where 125 hours is dedicated to an artistic discipline-- with single credit courses with only 25 hours of instructional time.

The intention of these one credit courses is to provide students with choice, flexibility and variety, said Alberta Education spokesperson Erica McDonald.

Many students who wish to try a fine arts course may find it challenging to dedicate a full semester to it when faced with all the other subjects they require to enter post secondary, said McDonald.

"Students or groups of students may choose Arts Education Project courses to extend their learning in an individual arts discipline or to explore the possibilities of combining two or more arts disciplines," the draft curriculum also states.

Read the full article, and how students are protesting the changes here.  Protests and petitions are out in vast numbers, but as with most government decisions surrounding the arts, it is virtually impossible to change their minds.
on December 8, 2009 7:43
The problem is much the same here in the States.  Part of the problem is a cultural bias against the arts - they're not "practical," they don't "bend metal," as I like to put it.  Furthermore, the administrators see the arts as an easy way to recover money - which, in the current economic circumstances is, if reprehensible, understandable.  You see, cut the arts in schools, you don't have to pay teachers' salaries, you don't have to then provide benefits (medical, dental, etc.) AND you don't have to buy all those pesky, expensive instruments.  That the society you get with the culturally uninitiated tends to want to sit passively in front of the boob tube or the computer screen is also one that is readily controlled (or at least intellectually disengaged) and is to boot unaccustomed to teamwork (such as you have to have in the arts, and not in a competitive way) makes it a society far more inclined to accept whatever nonsense you as a government official may spew out there.  Now, I'm not going to suggest that this is a carefully planned out conspiracy by government officials - I don't give them that much credit.  Nonetheless, that would be a result.  So, if you don't mind your children following along like sheep, unquestioning, unthinking, just do whatever the government says, then go ahead and support the gutting of the arts at the elementary level - or, better yet, since that requires some effort, do nothing at all.  If you don't mind your society becoming drab, gray, uninteresting, unchallenging - then just sit back and relax - it'll happen without the slightest effort on your part.  But if you like some interest, some challenge, in your life - then for God's sweet sake, don't sit back - stand up and let the beancounters in government know that this is totally unacceptable, and that if this passes, you'll have their jobs - someone in a position to decide also has to go to the voters.  But it DOES take effort - how many are willing?
 
Ron Duquette
Catholic Choir Director
Fort Belvoir, VA
on December 8, 2009 8:10
 
I think some of you might appreciate the comments made in this article by Riccardo Muti, music director designate of the CSO about how the cooperative efforts of music making should be an example to the rest of society.
 
Pat Smith
Acappellago