Tourney Round 2, Debate No. 12: Art and/or Music are Important in Grade School

First of all, I would like to point out that my definition of grade school is accurate. Dictionary.com provides the following definition: "A school for the first four to eight years of a child's formal education, often including kindergarten." So you see, we are both right. And though I think there is a significant argument for grade school being equated with elementary school in conventional usage, I will concede that grade school can mean the first eight years of education. In the preceding argument, my opponent made several arguments. They are, as best I can tell, as follows: 1. Art and music classes are just as essential to a child's education as mathematics. 2. Just because a class is not mandated doesn't mean it isn't important. 3. Art is not to be equated with right-brained thinking. Children cannot learn in other classes what they learn in art classes. Before I go any further, I would like to make a major point of clarification which is vitally important in this debate. My opponent has said several times that "we should not remove art and music from schools." But this is entirely beside the point. Look to the resolution. "Art and/or music ARE IMPORTANT in grade school." I do not have to necessarily support removing music or art from the school system. I must merely prove that art and/or music are not "of much or great significance or consequence." And now, on to the debate. In my opponent's first argument, he says that though art and music only make up a small portion of the job market, they are still important. He says that the mission of the educational system is to prepare a student for every possible career. And with this I agree. But I must add one significant detail. The school must do this in a proportionate manner. It does not make sense for a school to emphasize art and music when they are not nearly as employable a skill as mathematics. That's right - I just said that mathematics is an employable skill. In fact, it is difficult to get a career - even a blue collar career - without a sufficient understanding of mathematics. Take a look for yourself. Requirements for iron workers: Recommended high school courses include Algebra, Geometry and Physics. Requirements for electricians: Recommended high school courses include Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry and Physics. Requirements for sheet metal workers: Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry and technical reading Requirements for draftsmen: Recommended high school courses include Geometry and Trigonometry. Sources: American Diploma Project, 2002; The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) http://www.agc.org.... You see, 99% of jobs in America DO require more than an elementary level of mathematics education. Even skills like metal working and drafting require high school courses like Algebra and Geometry, especially if one wants a decent wage. However, one requirement you WON'T see on an iron-working application form is some sort of training in arts or music. All the evidence points to the fact that training in mathematics is far more important, significant, and consequential than art or music. Which leads me to the point I made about art and music not being required by State Standards. My opponent said that the reason they are not required is because it would be difficult to test proficiency in these areas. But this is not the case. State standards do not require a certain sufficiency on a specific Standardized test, but require the passing of a high school course with a curriculum that meets certain standards. It would be easy for a state to mandate that every student take and pass one or two semesters of art or music. States mandate a certain amount of coursework in science, mathematics, and communication skills. But neither South Dakota nor Wisconsin has mandated any coursework in art or music. The reason is that art and music are simply not necessary for employment. In fact, in many nations, instrumental and choral music is not integrated into schools at all. It is something that is done completely extracurricularly. My good friend Masa, a foreign exchange student from Japan, plays the violin extremely well, but he was simply shocked by the amount of curricular music in our school system. Can anyone argue that Japanese students are more dumb than Americans because of their lack of curricular music? No. In a 2007 New York Times article, an international test found that Japanese students consistently test much better than American students in high achieving states like Massachusetts and North Dakota. http://www.nytimes.com... This directly refutes what my opponent said at the end of his first round: "it is still impossible to have a well-rounded education without the arts or music." An educational system without curricular music can and does work well - whereas an educational system without math wouldn't. And as important as my previous three points are, (that art is insignificant compared to skills like mathematics and science, that state standards do not require art or music, and that education without curricular music can work) I believe that it is this next point which is the most important in the debate. My argument is that right-brained learning is best served not through art or music, but through right-brained teaching techniques. And no, I do not equate "art" with "right-brained teaching methods." I say merely that those students whose right-brains are being reached with art can be more effectively reached with right-brained teaching methods in other classes. My opponent says that students cannot learn what they learn in art classes in other subjects. Well, let's take a look: What is it exactly that an art class teaches us? 1. Art class promotes self-expression. (You make a self-portrait that describes your personality.) 2. Art class teaches problem-solving. (You learn how to mix colors and apply them to the canvas in a pleasant fashion.) 3. Art class gives us self-confidence by allowing us to express ourselves. (You try, you make mistakes, you try again, and ultimately triumph.) I am not saying that these are not admirable lessons, but we must ask ourselves, "Is there any other way to learn these things?" The answer is that yes, there are. 1. We can express ourselves through a Science project building an exploding wire-mesh volcano. 2. The Scientific Method teaches us how to creatively solve problems and find answers to our questions, like what gives bubbles their shape. (Mathematicians can be some of the most creative people. Think Einstein and Relativity.) 3. Creating a creative video presentation about Edgar Allan Poe in English class and presenting it to the class can give students self-confidence of expression. This goes back to the very first round of this debate, when my opponent said, "Although teaching right-brained ideas is not always compatible with the institutionalized nature of the school system, art and music classes are ways we can do this." But you see, right-brained teaching methods can be used in EVERY subject, not in just art or music classes. All three of the activities I named above allow us to express ourselves and learn using the right side of our brains, yet all three of these activities were done without the benefit of an art or music class. But did you notice something else? In these three activities, in addition to learning the three main things art teaches us, we learned three other things. We learned how volcanoes work, what quadratic equations control bubble shape, and about how nearly everyone Edgar Allan Poe ever knew died of tuberculosis. It is clear that art and music classes are not important, significant, or consequential in grade school.