• Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Archives
    Archives Contains a list of blog posts that were created previously.
  • Login
    Login Login form

One of the saddest stories of 2014

Posted by on in Studentcentricity
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 2539

I found it in in Valerie Strauss's column in the Washington Post, with the title, "Kindergarten show canceled so kids can keep studying to be 'college and career ready.' Really." It makes me want to scream in frustration every time I read it.   

Here’s the letter, sent by the school’s interim principal and four kindergarten teachers, to parents upset by the cancellation:  

We hope this letter serves to help you better understand how the demands of the 21st century are changing schools, and, more specifically, to clarify misperceptions about the Kindergarten show. It is most important to keep in mind is [sic] that this issue is not unique to Elwood. Although the movement toward more rigorous learning standards has been in the national news for more than a decade, the changing face of education is beginning to feel unsettling for some people. What and how we teach is changing to meet the demands of a changing world. 

 The reason for eliminating the Kindergarten show is simple. We are responsible for preparing children for college and career with valuable lifelong skills and know that we can best do that by having them become strong readers, writers, coworkers, and problem solvers. Please do not fault us for making professional decisions that we know will never be able to please everyone. But know that we are making these decisions with the interests of all children in mind.  

There are so many things wrong with that letter that it's hard to know where to start. But let's begin with the clear implication that the arts are considered of so little significance as we prepare children to become “college and career ready” that even in kindergarten children are learning there are only certain skills worth having.  

Next there's the statement that reading, writing, and the abilities to work collaboratively and to solve problems are “valuable lifelong skills.” I agree wholeheartedly. What frosts me is the idea that these skills are better gained by “academic” subjects and test-taking than through the arts.  

What is the better way to ensure a love of the written and spoken word – being forced to read assigned stories, to memorize spelling words and definitions, on which they’ll be tested, or bringing words to life through a play? Perhaps by writing poetry and songs?  

What is the better way for children to prepare to become coworkers? Sitting at individual desks prepping for tests and then filling in bubbles? Or could it be by having them collaborate on a project that brings them joy and a sense of fulfillment?  

The same can be said for learning to solve problems. I hardly think that being force-fed information that’s later regurgitated on tests is the best way to acquire this skill. Instead, why not give students the opportunity to solve actual problems – such as those that might arise in the creation and production of a play?  

How about the last sentence in that letter – about having the interests of all children in mind? Are they kidding? Are there not children with the potential and passion to go on to become brilliant chefs, landscape designers, master craftsmen, and architects? To become writers, painters, choreographers, composers, and actors? What will happen to their potential and passion when given no soil in which to grow? When the focus of their education has been “drill and kill?”  

Is creativity (the ability to solve problems and to see beyond what already exists – and an essential element of the arts) not going to be required of our future scientists, entrepreneurs, doctors, inventors, and technologists? Is creativity not necessary in all aspects of life? How is it supposed to be fostered in students if all they’ve been taught is to follow directions – and that there is only one right answer to every question?  

Further, how will today’s students learn to look for and appreciate aesthetic beauty when it becomes clear to them in their earliest years that it’s not valued? A life without beauty is nothing to aspire to.  

Finally, there’s the contention that the “demands of the 21st century” are responsible for this action. If ever there was a century demanding imagination and self-expression – both of which are nurtured by the arts – it’s this one.  

I honestly can’t believe I have to argue these points; they seem like so much common sense. But, sadly, as I find myself saying on far too many occasions, common sense has gone the way of the dodo bird where education policy is concerned.  

It frightens me to imagine that even some of the parents bought into this nonsense. 

 

This piece was first published at www.raepica.com, where the author asks, "WI?"

 

Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:

Rae Pica has been an education consultant specializing in the development and education of the whole child, children's physical activity, and active learning since 1980. A former adjunct instructor with the University of New Hampshire, she is the author of 19 books, including the text Experiences in Movement and Music and, most recently, What If Everybody Understood Child Development?: Straight Talk About Bettering Education and Children's Lives. Rae has shared her expertise with such groups as the Sesame Street Research Department, the Head Start Bureau, Centers for Disease Control, the President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, Nickelodeon's Blue's Clues, Gymboree, Nike, and state health departments throughout the country. She is a member of the executive committee of the Academy of Education Arts and Sciences and is co-founder of BAM Radio Network, where she hosts Studentcentricity, interviewing experts in education, child development, play research, the neurosciences, and more on teaching with students at the center.

  • Guest
    RENEE MOORE Tuesday, 13 January 2015

    That these educational leaders ignored the well-known fact in education that giving children a well-rounded curriculum that includes arts actually helps raise their academic performance (high performing schools and countries know that and their parents demand it) is only on of several appalling things about this decision.

    I would like to know the demographics of the students in this school. Why do these supposedly well-meaning educators think these particular children need such restrictive instruction? Reminds me of a piece by Kylene Beers, former president of NCTE, on how some educators believe poor and minority children NEED only discipline, structure, and basic skills.

Leave your comment

Guest Wednesday, 07 December 2016