Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
Ann Hulbert has a nice piece in the NYT about how Barack Obama -- and many others -- misguidedly invoke research when arguing for arts education in schools:
"Evaluators compared test scores in 19 public schools that participated in the Chicago Arts Partnership in Education (CAPE) — which had artists and teachers leading classes that blended arts instruction into core subjects — with those in 29 otherwise similar schools lacking the arts-infused curriculum. The CAPE schools came out ahead. Yet it isn’t possible to pinpoint the arts component as the cause. Almost any new school program initially stirs up excitement among students and may lure talented new teachers, which has a way of spurring academic improvement. It’s called the Hawthorne effect."
Sure, art is cool, and maybe there's not enough of it in schools these
days. Yeah, some kids really groove on arts education and that helps
them get through the system. But, apparently, there is no killer research out there showing that
arts helps kids read and do math. Read the rest of Hulbert's article
for what happens next. [cross-posted from TWIE]
Digg
Del.icio.us
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:24 AM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
While I can't back this comment up with "killer research" of the sort that would be considered objective, I do beg to differ. What happened to the Mozart effect? Was it refuted? What about the relationship between music and math in general?
Art is more than cool. It is an experience that allows exploration into various subjects, from history to science to sociology and beyond. Art takes math knowledge at times (any kind of perspective drawings will show this) and an understanding of proportions. Painting takes some fundamental understanding of chemistry and the science of color. Looking at a still life of flowers brings forth botany. Human figures-anatomy. And most of all, taking something that is in your minds eye and bringing it to life, whether it is music, drawings, paintings or an experiment with a piece of string, takes a good deal of problem solving, one of the most valuable real life skills a person can have.
So you can't measure it but do you have to?
Art is more than cool. It is an experience that allows exploration into various subjects, from history to science to sociology and beyond. Art takes math knowledge at times (any kind of perspective drawings will show this) and an understanding of proportions. Painting takes some fundamental understanding of chemistry and the science of color. Looking at a still life of flowers brings forth botany. Human figures-anatomy. And most of all, taking something that is in your minds eye and bringing it to life, whether it is music, drawings, paintings or an experiment with a piece of string, takes a good deal of problem solving, one of the most valuable real life skills a person can have.
So you can't measure it but do you have to?
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
Why should (or would) arts education help kids read and do math? The whole notion that the arts are useful only as they relate to improved test scores in other subjects is absurd. History is not subject to being cut out of curricula based on the absence of killer evidence that it improves skills in long division. Neither is science at risk due to a lack of improved test scores in reading.
Effective advocacy for arts education has nothing to do with the Mozart effect, oft-cited correlational (not causal) relationships between student academic success and involvement in the arts, or any other argument external to the arts themselves. Arts education is important because it provides students with another fascinating way to understand themselves and the world and culture in which they live. Not to mention the fact that creativity, beauty, expression, improvisation, critique, analysis, and much more make the arts intrinsically valuable to young people and to education.
Oh...wait...it's not on the test is it? Nevermind.
Effective advocacy for arts education has nothing to do with the Mozart effect, oft-cited correlational (not causal) relationships between student academic success and involvement in the arts, or any other argument external to the arts themselves. Arts education is important because it provides students with another fascinating way to understand themselves and the world and culture in which they live. Not to mention the fact that creativity, beauty, expression, improvisation, critique, analysis, and much more make the arts intrinsically valuable to young people and to education.
Oh...wait...it's not on the test is it? Nevermind.
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:03 PM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
I have done a significant amount of research in arts education and am an advocate for arts education. As rodentface mentioned, research such as the SAT data that shows students with more arts education score higher on the SAT demonstrates correlation, not causation. This is because the research cannot isolate variables such as economic status, school quality, etc. Most arts education researchers do acknowledge this limitation.
I think that a benefit of arts education is that it allows students to express their learning in multiple ways. This connects to multiple intelligences and differentiating instruction. Students need to develop skills to express themselves physically/non-verbally (dance), in images (visual art), verbally (theater), and musically.
It is shortsighted to say that art is "cool," but does not have educational merit because "there is no killer research out there showing that arts helps kids read and do math." The arts are a part of society and an integral part of education on their own merits. No Child Left Behind lists the arts as a "core academic subject."
I think that a benefit of arts education is that it allows students to express their learning in multiple ways. This connects to multiple intelligences and differentiating instruction. Students need to develop skills to express themselves physically/non-verbally (dance), in images (visual art), verbally (theater), and musically.
It is shortsighted to say that art is "cool," but does not have educational merit because "there is no killer research out there showing that arts helps kids read and do math." The arts are a part of society and an integral part of education on their own merits. No Child Left Behind lists the arts as a "core academic subject."
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
This "study" is very unusual. If I understand correctly, the authors of the study showed that because students in arts-education-infused schools had higher test scores, therefore there is no value to arts education. How much money was spent on this study? Why didn't they just state the conclusion without bothering with the study?
We could apply the same logic to test prep. It seems that students who receive heavy doses of test prep in the curriculum score higher on the tests for which they are prepping. Therefore, test prep is ineffective at preparing students for tests.
More seriously, I think the question is this: why doesn't arts education result in lower test scores if it is so far from conventional test preparation?
What is lacking in arts education is more testing and test prep. How many days of test prep do kids get in art class. I bet if art classes were
We could apply the same logic to test prep. It seems that students who receive heavy doses of test prep in the curriculum score higher on the tests for which they are prepping. Therefore, test prep is ineffective at preparing students for tests.
More seriously, I think the question is this: why doesn't arts education result in lower test scores if it is so far from conventional test preparation?
What is lacking in arts education is more testing and test prep. How many days of test prep do kids get in art class. I bet if art classes were
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
Ahh, you all are my people! I'd like simply to echo the comments stated here - that often only rise to the surface when the topic of discussion is arts in education. More evidence for the importance of its role - it tends to be where those who clearly understand the purpose of education to be the inverse to our current understanding reside.
While there is no question that there is value in implementing the arts in education to help those without much access to success in schools attain some of that through test scores, etc. -- the inherent value of their role in children's lives lies deep in the ways in which we are helping young human beings grow into more complete and complex versions of themselves.
While there is no question that there is value in implementing the arts in education to help those without much access to success in schools attain some of that through test scores, etc. -- the inherent value of their role in children's lives lies deep in the ways in which we are helping young human beings grow into more complete and complex versions of themselves.
Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 11:41 PM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
testprep-
The "study" cited is actually a well-known Chicago study by CAPE. The researchers found that schools with their program had improved test scores compared to schools without the program. They did not come to the conclusion that "there is no value in arts education."
This article is just pointing out that there may be other reasons for the improved test scores like better teachers, more excitement among students, etc that could have caused the rise. There is no way for the researchers to isolate all the variables and prove that the arts were definitely the cause of the higher scores. However, the study is valuable and does have a place in arts education research. It is significant that there is a correlation between test scores and the arts.
I recommend that anyone who is interested in further arts education research read Critical Links: Learning the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development. It summarizes and discusses 62 research studies on arts education. It is available through the Arts Education Partnership (aep-arts.org).
The "study" cited is actually a well-known Chicago study by CAPE. The researchers found that schools with their program had improved test scores compared to schools without the program. They did not come to the conclusion that "there is no value in arts education."
This article is just pointing out that there may be other reasons for the improved test scores like better teachers, more excitement among students, etc that could have caused the rise. There is no way for the researchers to isolate all the variables and prove that the arts were definitely the cause of the higher scores. However, the study is valuable and does have a place in arts education research. It is significant that there is a correlation between test scores and the arts.
I recommend that anyone who is interested in further arts education research read Critical Links: Learning the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development. It summarizes and discusses 62 research studies on arts education. It is available through the Arts Education Partnership (aep-arts.org).
Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 3:08 AM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
"...Why should (or would) arts education help kids read and do math? The whole notion that the arts are useful only as they relate to improved test scores in other subjects is absurd..." (Rodentface, earlier yesterday).
Right. And why even bother? Only when every discussion of public schooling has been reductio ad absurdum to meaningless scores on secret multiple-choice so-called "standardized" tests (and some other equally suspicious data, like "dropouts") are we forced to have this discussion.
Even if there were a correlation (or worse, causation) between art interest and the ability to bubble bubble sheets efficiently to produce misleading "data", it would be just another reason why the rest of the developed world is laughing more and more loudly at "school reform" in the USA and the social, economic and political idiocies that are flowing from a test-based "bottom line" approach to raising and educating children.
Right. And why even bother? Only when every discussion of public schooling has been reductio ad absurdum to meaningless scores on secret multiple-choice so-called "standardized" tests (and some other equally suspicious data, like "dropouts") are we forced to have this discussion.
Even if there were a correlation (or worse, causation) between art interest and the ability to bubble bubble sheets efficiently to produce misleading "data", it would be just another reason why the rest of the developed world is laughing more and more loudly at "school reform" in the USA and the social, economic and political idiocies that are flowing from a test-based "bottom line" approach to raising and educating children.
Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:55 AM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
George,
You need some rest! At 3:08 AM, you should be sleeping so you won't be so grumpy about our world!
You need some rest! At 3:08 AM, you should be sleeping so you won't be so grumpy about our world!
Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
Stupid study, bad blog headline. Don't other blogs offer interesting commentary on this kind of thing?
Arts education = engaged students, more well rounded individuals, not better test takers. Which would you rather have?
Arts education = engaged students, more well rounded individuals, not better test takers. Which would you rather have?
Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:09 PM
Arts Education No Big Advantage, Researchers Say
Art for art's sake...
And art (and music; and play) for the kids' sakes.
Earlier today, my littlest one told me that he had planned every birthday from now (he's three) until he's 19 (he has a 19-year-old brother). Then he wanted to make a picture of each one, starting with the 4th, when the cake will feature hungry dinosaurs chasing screaming people across a field of tall grass.
Meanwhile, his next up brother is trying to master Sim City 4. Its predecessor (finally, "Sim City 2000") helped the eldest learn enough so that, beginning college this year, his math class was something to do with vector calculus and all that cool stuff. After 12 years in CPS schools. Plus, of course, soccer, basketball, baseball, and spelling...
Art is very needed, and not because it reduces children's realities to anything other than -- art and fun.
This whole "bottom line" thing was old and cold when it was first force fed to people via the media, and now it's become downright toxic.
But until it's gone, sleep can defer...
And art (and music; and play) for the kids' sakes.
Earlier today, my littlest one told me that he had planned every birthday from now (he's three) until he's 19 (he has a 19-year-old brother). Then he wanted to make a picture of each one, starting with the 4th, when the cake will feature hungry dinosaurs chasing screaming people across a field of tall grass.
Meanwhile, his next up brother is trying to master Sim City 4. Its predecessor (finally, "Sim City 2000") helped the eldest learn enough so that, beginning college this year, his math class was something to do with vector calculus and all that cool stuff. After 12 years in CPS schools. Plus, of course, soccer, basketball, baseball, and spelling...
Art is very needed, and not because it reduces children's realities to anything other than -- art and fun.
This whole "bottom line" thing was old and cold when it was first force fed to people via the media, and now it's become downright toxic.
But until it's gone, sleep can defer...
