New report bears bad news about arts education

Posted by Philissa at 7:44 AM

Yesterday the DOE released its long-awaited "Annual Arts and Schools Report" (pdf), an optional survey completed by 1,079 principals about their arts offerings in the 2006-2007 school year. The DOE says the report is important because it ushers in a new era of detailed reporting on arts education data, but the real story is that few elementary or middle school students get the bare minimum arts education required by the state. The New York Times, unlike the Sun, got the story right: Only 4 percent of elementary schools have the resources to provide the range and depth of arts instruction the state requires, and the vast majority of middle schoolers — 71 percent — receive less than the state-mandated two half-unit arts courses in the 7th and 8th grades.

The city is "not providing a well-education" to its children, said Richard Kessler, the director of the Center for Arts Education, which is ramping up its role as an advocate for arts education. He told me the city's anemic arts education has a lot to do with the inexperience of many new principals, who have never been taught the importance of the arts and whose own educational experiences likely lacked quality arts programming as well. Giving the arts and other marginalized subjects the role they ought to occupy will require "major in-service and pre-service" training for principals, Kessler said, but the DOE's plans, outlined in the report, represent only "tinkering around the margins" of existing programs.

Kessler was a member of the DOE's arts education task force, convened last summer when ArtsCount was announced in part to address criticism that the elimination of special Project Arts funds would lead principals to reallocate funds from the arts to other subjects. Ultimately, it sounds like the task force played a minimal role in creating the report or recommending its outcomes. The DOE also appears to have backed away from a major goal it outlined last summer: to use the arts data to hold principals and schools accountable for meeting state requirements in the arts and to make the school-by-school arts data transparent and accessible so parents can use the level of arts programming as a factor in choosing a school. The level of deficiency in elementary and middle school arts offerings indicates that principals can't justifiably be held accountable for a nearly systemic failure.

The report's "next steps" section includes news that the DOE will make lesson plans and standards-aligned curriculums available to teachers and that efforts are underway to make principals "better consumers" of existing arts resources. But with deep budget cuts looming and math and reading test scores continuing to make up 85 percent of schools' grades, what resources and incentives do principals have to spend their limited funds and time on the arts?

Parents — answer a survey to help the arts

Posted by Philissa at 4:07 PM

Parents — looking for something to do during this week off? Take a survey about the arts in your school. The Center for Arts Education is surveying parents about their opinions on arts education and the role of art at their schools. By taking the survey, you'll be helping CAE advocate for better arts programming in the city's schools — at precisely the time that principals are feeling like they have to cut arts funding.

Music critic: Schools aren't really teaching the arts, even when they try

Posted by Philissa at 6:39 AM

Here's something new to worry about. Allan Kozinn, a music critic for the New York Times, recently argued in the Times that arts funds are too often going to arts organizations that provide "flyby" arts experiences, instead of building coherent and cumulative arts programs within schools. He writes:

If you look at how music was taught in public schools 40 years ago — and for decades before that — you’ll see exactly what’s needed now. Back then it was simple: Music was part of the curriculum, like math, science and social studies. ... Even more crucial, if you wanted to play an instrument, lessons were free, and the school would lend you an instrument until you felt sufficiently committed to buy your own.

My mother graduated from MS 158 and Bayside High School. Her music training at those schools was strong enough that she was first bass in the Queens College orchestra. Certainly going to see the orchestra perform would not give the same results. But if the many arts organizations offering "flyby" experiences didn't exist, I wonder whether most schools would spend money on the arts at all, especially since there are no longer any special funds earmarked for arts education. A couple of lessons by a "teaching artist" isn't ideal by far, but at least they replace test prep with something that might intrigue kids to learn more.

How does your school teach the arts? Do your kids learn real skills and techniques? Or is Kozinn right that kids are spending too much of their arts time with visiting artists and on field trips?

The Money Mom: Who will fund your grant?

Posted by Jennifer Freeman at 12:02 PM

In my last post I discussed how the first step to getting a grant is identifying what the biggest "grantable" needs are at your school. Once you’ve decided the priorities at your school, the next step in finding grant funding is identifying the funders who are right for your project.

What funding category does the project fit into? Is it Arts--a visiting playwright, poet or printmaker, a spring musical, trips to museums? Is it Literacy--visiting historical sites and then writing about them, or buying biographies for classroom libraries? Is your grant for a Capital Expense--permanent physical improvement to a space, like planting a garden or renovating a community room? Is it Environmental Stewardship--studying where city water comes from, or connecting science curriculum with local parks?

There are often different funding organizations to help schools in each of these categories, and it’s easier to find them if you know which category your grant fits into.