According to Rupert (2006), the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is driving the data craze. Since Bush enforced NCLB, accountability is a new buzz word and data, another new buzz word, must justify what educators are being held accountable for. This is a very scientific way of thinking and scientifically-based research is expected to be the driving force of education reform. I work in education evaluation research and our company never did as well as during the Bush years. Politicians say that the United States will not leave any children behind. We must work harder to improve student achievement so that they will be prepared to compete in the global economy. People in other countries are developing their skills and competing for our jobs. Even worse, other countries will compete with America to be the most powerful, and richest, country in the world.
Teachers are being criticized like no other professionals and student achievement is discussed as though the fall of the United States is dependent upon its outcome. Assessments are test based and quantitative. People are criticizing the movement towards testing and the push for student achievement. Much of it is unclear. Have education programs been compared across countries? What factors are included in standardized test results for each country? What are the differences in preparation for these tests across countries? How sure are we that tests tell us so much? How much have we questioned and dissected empirical research in education? Nobody questions using scientific research, developed by psychologists who wanted to make their field more scientific, for something that's questionably science.
How does this affect arts education? The No Child Left Behind Act recognizes the importance of the arts by naming them a core subject. However, there is not enough time or money to provide children with visual arts, music, theater and dance instruction. There are already 4 other core subjects (ELA, math, science and social studies) that will remain intact, as well as other subjects such as foreign language and physical education. Many schools, districts and states cannot adhere to the arts requirements and they often seem as though they do not exist. However there are still pockets of successful public school arts programs, such as CAPE in Chicago - http://www.capeweb.org/
Arts education is feeling the pressure of accountability. School administrators must justify their programs as they are held accountable for students' academic achievement. With the lack of money invested in schools, and the current financial crisis, allocating money for the arts can be a risky decision. NCLB has inspired numerous research studies that "scientifically" prove that the arts offer intangible benefits such as self-esteem, engagement, etc. We can even say that the arts enhance 21st Century Skills such as problem-solving skills, persistence, and creativity. Yet, there is no scientific evidence that it directly enhances academic achievement. Researchers are still trying. However, more and more, support is shifting to arts-integration. If the arts are infused into other content areas then students can have the benefit of the arts, while still focusing on academic achievement. The arts can indirectly enhance academic achievement and arts-integration seems like a great way to do this. Teaching artists and arts organizations are being hired to temporarily go into public schools to offer coaching that will transfer their arts skills to classroom teachers and arts instruction to public school children. Some administrators say that quality arts teachers are hard to find, and teaching artists can offer more art forms (they can hire more than 1). Will arts integration take the place of arts classes taught by art teachers? I'm not sure what this will mean for arts teachers. Hopefully when the economy gets better, arts teachers will benefit. For now, it seems as though the arts are still being eliminated due to budget cuts.
Currently the NYC DOE is trying to mandate that all children have access to all art forms. They must first figure out what arts are in all of the schools throughout NYC, which is not an easy task for them. They are currently attempting to measure the quality of the arts with a survey that investigates quantity. A qualitative investigation is just too much money. Can they really measure quantity and quality in the same way? With the same survey? Surprisingly, they, people with arts education backgrounds, seem to think so. Is it just that they are pressured for time and money? I don't know. It seems as though it all comes down to time and money.
Rupert. (2006). Retrieved from http://www.keepartsinschools.org/Research/Materials/CriticalEvidence.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment