We wanted your opinion of who you think should be responsible for making sure our school music programs are being adequately funded? Do you think the traditional means of using parent backed band booster clubs for additional funding are meeting the goals of these programs?
We look forward to your feedback on these questions.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Who's Responsible for Funding Our School Music Programs?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I'd like to see music and art programs funded as part of the educational curriculum for any number of educational reasons. They help students learn discipline and give them evidence of steady improvement; right now, a variety of athletic programs are funded, and we should have the same respect for the arts, especially since they are likely to have much more longterm impact on self-confidence, self-respect, and general seriousness of personal endeavor. It's no accident that, at least around where I live, the more upscale communities have thriving music programs (supported by parents), while the less upscale communities have to scuffle for support. That means to me that the economically successful (i.e., college graduates, professionals, or successful businesspeople who might not have the same educational level) think highly of music and art as part of the recipe for success in life. Well-roundedness and a fuller sense of humanity follow from these arts/disciplines. More than athletics, they are lifelong sources of satisfaction--you don't have to be in the greatest physical shape to play in community orchestras and bands. They are also sources, as much as golf, of professional connection and friendship. The people who have decided that music and the arts are educational "frills" are simply on the wrong track and ignorant of the genuine value they represent. We ought to be willing to pay the extra tax dollars to give our young people this added dimension to their education. Even if it cost $100 a year, it's worth it. This is also, from a practical standpoint, a plus for students' college application, along with school clubs and class officership. In this case, we've become too narrow-minded and stingy with our educational dollars.
I'm a former public school music educator. You're really asking about two issues; funding of public schools , specifically music and, additional funding provided by booster clubs. This additional funding should be just that, ADDITIONAL. The funding of public school education is a very complex issues with multiple tentacles including but not limited to tenure, core curriculum, university entrance requirements, college teacher training programs, accountability on all levels, inaccurate perceptions by the education as well as the public at large. I say all of this to say that there is no easy or sound bite answer. It has taken years to get into this and it will take years to get out of it HOWEVER, before any of this can move forward we have to think in a different manner and consider all options keeping the educational welfare of the students paramount.
Music is part of the core curriculum. It is a basic subject. There should therefore be no doubt that music programs should be funded as part of the regular school budget. This applies to both classroom music courses such as general music or music theory and hands on music courses such as bell choir, band or string orchestra. It is all music instruction.
A Speyer, New Britain CT
A bigger threat to music education in CA is schedule. Now over 50% of music classes have been scheduled out of existence since 2004. No Child Left Behind is the culprit.
Here in Idaho the school district picks up some of the tab but mostly the individual musician as well as the teachers are expected to pick up the majority. Music and musicians are a dying breed here.
The wording of the question here offers up some ambiguity. Are you asking "Who IS currently responsible..." or "Who SHOULD BE responsible for funding our school music programs?" I'll choose the second interpretation of the question and answer it as follows. We all as citizens of a civilized, cultured, urbane and sophisticated democracy OUGHT TO fund the serious study of music as a regular part of the school day at no additional cost to the student in Public School. Anything less is an affront to our ideals as Americans. If we were serious about educating our youth in this country this question would not need to be posed. P.Carey, Skowhegan, Maine.
I am a student in college, minoring in music performance.
I agree with vibistry...
Students in music programs are proven to do better academically than other students, they are usually more emotionally stable than other students (when was the last time a band student was on national news for going on a killing spree?), and students with a musical background tend to do better in "the real world" because of the group skills they develop and, in many cases, the leadership skills.
Fund of Education is a parental responsibility. Music should be one of many of the ARTs to be offered but are not offered. I dont like paying for it but I have payed for Sports for my other children. We have four children, (30, 21, 12, & 5). We have paid in the past & will do so in the future. If we were to look for some tax relief then the cost would escalate & the Federal/State would exert more control.
Post a Comment