Introduction
It is not a secret that school curriculum is literally the issue of wide all-national discussion. No wonder, the effectiveness of students’ education is the main prerequisite of human future.
However, very frequently one allegedly insignificant detail is not taken into account: in particular, the spectrum of skills, on which the main emphasis is made. No doubt, there would be many people, who would fervently defense the opposite position, insisting on the fact that children do obtain all necessary skills.
Nevertheless, this paper is aimed at the proving of simple statement that any curriculum, which considers art education as minor, optional factor is undoubtedly less effective than one, which makes art the integral part of day-to-day education. Apart from illustrating clear arguments concerning positive effects of special art curriculum, this very work also shows how ideas of contradictors of integrated school program are in fact additional arguments for the developing of art in primary and secondary schools as well.
Surprisingly, but exactly the effectiveness of education is in the direct relation with creative art disciplines. In other words, including art subjects means not the addition of completely unimportant disciplines, impossible to fair examination, and not the diminishing of serious level of school discipline, but it means the teaching of priceless communication, social, thinking skills, which will benefit their ability to learn in general.
Main Body
Have you ever noticed how a kid spends his/her day? It is an unbelievable mixture of miscellaneous activities, which are changing each other with the great speed. A kid is curious of every single thing and every process in house and outside, and a kid tries every possible activity, and disregarding of the fact that he/she is not an expert in a new field, a child gets satisfaction both of failures and successes.
The point is that a child gets enjoyment of new experiences, feeling no fear of potential mistakes, as a kid is open for life in all its manifestations. Unfortunately, not each child manages to save the same happy approach for new experiences, having overcome the particular period of maturity (in adults such bright feature of character is extremely rare phenomenon).
Who is to blame for destroying such child’s innocence and openness? Perhaps, parents, who are taking child’s attempts for granted, considering examples of kid’s creativity as unserious and childish, teaching child to hide any unique imperfections? Or maybe – teachers, who use competitive approach, developing selfishness of ones and low self-estimation of others? Or those, who are elaborating such strange principles of education, and curriculums, which extinguish children’ creativity?
In fact, words like “fun”, “joy”, “awe” or any positive affectation are ill-suited to the language of those, who could be called “effective curriculum delivery officers” (Hickman 32). The point is that the importance of such essential subjects as Science, Math etc. is undoubted, however creative child’s energy is able to create more significant results even in these subjects, when it called to action.
In other words, teachers frequently identify their main instructional goals as helping children build cognitive and social skills, but in fact, the greater engine that drives innovation in society comes from those, whose flame of creativity was kept alive in childhood (Mayesky 6).
Therefore, broadening the borders of school curriculum to some art experiments is able to preserve plainness and genuineness, which are irreparably destroyed by tough school curriculum, where children are taught to be silent, well behaved and uniform.
Very common situation is that students, and then – adults, are confident in the fact that they are absolutely miserable in particular kind of arts/sports, however they haven’t had any single attempt. Such mistakes are easily to be corrected by curriculum, which encompasses particular art disciplines and/or includes art elements in other lessons. The aim of such curriculum is not to transform a child into professional artist, musician, actor etc. (there are specialized educational institutions for such goals), but to broaden his/her horizons, open previously unknown world of art and sides of student’s soul.
Furthermore, the aim of teacher, who works with integrated curriculum, is to help a child open the source of intrinsic motivation. The point is that creativity does not have any comparative degrees, hence, there is no sense in poison competition between classmates, a child gets the aim to improve oneself exclusively in comparison to own previous results. The whole process is enjoyable – the stage of creating something unique, the joy of sharing own miracle with others, the amusement of observing the successes of friends.
Such learning also reminds students how to be passionate (exactly – “reminds”, not “teaches”, as such feature is natural for human being, but it is insistently obliterated from child’s habits). For example, students often speak of having "had" history after a course, whereas the study of the violin does not end at graduation (Perrin n.p.). It does not necessarily mean that due to music classes, student is to become world-famous musician, but a person gets beloved hobby, which serves as harbor for the soul disregarding of special skills or recognized achievements.
The next point is that art education contributes to the development of communicative, social skills, aesthetical and ethical education. Surprisingly, but frequently general knowledge in art topics values more than all other knowledge in specific subjects. It is because a person, who from young age is accustomed to observe art objects, reflect on them, create own examples of art, is always noticeable in every social group. Such person possesses an exquisite style of language, polite manners and the most crucially – creative thinking.
In addition, many lessons in such curriculum are built in such a way that classmates are to interact with each other, developing communicative skills and tolerance to ideas of others. There is not any more expressive and vivid argument than experience of those, who did take part in such group art lessons. For instance, 7th year student has said, “Like in dance, drama, music and arts, if you are working in a group, you do find a lot about other people’s personalities (Harland 166). Apart from understanding classmates, dealing with common problems due to different opinions, students also are taught to understand the inspirational motives of artists, guessing what has enforced them to create such works – the other creative process, during which a student transforms into the co-author of a masterpiece.
Obviously, art education also contributes to the moral development of a child, as observation and creation of beauty are the best teachers of Morality and Culture. A child directly touches the heart and the core of Aesthetics, as ecstasy of being fully part of something larger and deeper then oneself, that glimpse into the transcendent, can come exclusively through the arts (Perrin n.p.).
In addition, such form of curriculum in an advantageous way serves to the valuable interaction between teachers and students. However not every teacher willingly considers the idea of curriculum, integrated with arts (such issue will be discussed further), but in fact such integration is beneficial even for teachers (which in turn leads to advantageous situation for students).
The point is that teacher, experiencing such new approach to education, opens new sides of own personality as well. For instance, literature teacher, who was not very acquainted with works of outstanding artists, may propose for students to write an essay on the happy birthday party for a particular painter/musician/actor of student’s choice. Such simple exercise will combine the learning of directly needed for this very subject skills (correct structure, complying with grammar rules etc.) and will improve creative thinking and art understanding of both teachers and students.
Furthermore, teachers engaged in arts education programs are able to provide greater variety during lesson, they also learn recognizing children for their unique talents, develop closer relationships with class, have fewer behavior problems and use minimum of external evaluation (Mayesky 13).
Despite all obvious arguments on inevitable positive effect of teaching arts in primary and secondary schools, there still are some counterarguments of opponents of such integrated curriculum. Let us consider them as well in order to verify whether art education is really irreplaceable and beneficial.
Actually, they are right, but this fact does not make art education less attractive for both types of children. The congenital factors mean only that a particular child needs less efforts in particular discipline, but they do not mean that all other possibilities are just closed for a child.
In addition, even “congenital mathematician” can obtain the amusement from Math lesson with shades of Art. For instance, students may explore angles, being inspired by Pablo Picasso and the Cubism movement (Schwartz n. p.). Art education is not aimed at the transforming every student in Picasso, it merely helps to enact creativity and critical thinking.
Opposing parents are also likely to state, “The elementary school is already behind, now is the time for serious learning!” People may be afraid of art education, estimating it as continuing of games and playing, which will distract children from the acquiring of knowledge. Such commentaries are also common, as there is a superstition that every artist is a cheat and gambler, who just did not succeed in “real” life. Nevertheless, such biased judgments are easily forgotten when we are enjoying great actor’s play, breathtaking dance or passionate picture.
Those, who limit school education with “important subjects” believe only in logical-mathematical and linguistic intelligence, however schools should strive to identify and develop all intelligences in children, including bodily-kinesthetic, musical, spatial, interpersonal, and intrapersonal (Perrin n. p.). What’s more, it is literally unforgivable to estimate art education as servant of other subject, or lower type of education, as in fact it opens the world of human magnificence.
Last but not least argument of those, who are against further integration of arts in common curriculum, is the following, “The assessment of creative work is impossible. Besides, by whom? Common teachers are not art experts!” One of the most serious counterarguments is that the common type of examination is inappropriate with art assessment, therefore, students cannot understand whether their performance becomes better or not. In addition, such assessment is inevitably subjective, therefore it is connected with unfairness, which may harm feelings of students. What is more, many parents are convinced that common teachers are not professionals in art topics, hence, their point of view cannot be regarded as authoritative by their kids.
No doubt, these remarks are right to some extent, however, they do not serve as irretrievable obstacles for the establishing of art curriculum. To begin with, of course, such way of teaching demands special level of preparation, as art teaching strategies are quite different from recognized in traditional schooling.
Firstly, teachers are to understand that standard system of marks as well as encouraging students by creating a competitive atmosphere is not workable in art education. Teachers’ aim is to awake internal motivation in student, which will lead him or her during the route of better performance. In addition, examination is an inappropriate form for monitoring children’s progress in art (Rayment 30).
Nevertheless, it does not mean that children are to idle hours away, as art subject do not provide any perfection. In fact, child’s success is to be compared to child’s previous results, motivating a student to perform today better than yesterday. Hence, teachers are not to be art critic or a gallery owner, their task is only to assess the learning that has taken place (Rayment 33).
Concerning the internal resistance of teachers to be engaged in art curriculum, the truth really is that art scares people who are not in the arts, as without special experience or feeling like they are good at anything in the arts, it becomes a personal insecurity issue for them (Schwartz n. p.). Actually, teachers are not to be professional critics or artists in order to open for children the magnificent world of beauty. They only need to be passionate, open for new experiences and sincerely value every tiniest artistic work of reflection of every child.
Conclusions
The notorious fact is that if you ask American children at the age of five if they can dance, sing, and draw, they will reply enthusiastically "YES!", but when asked the same question in middle school, they say "NO." (Perrin n. p.). In order to eradicate such bitter consequences of educational system, it is high time to develop it in the integration with basic arts.
Such curriculum allows bright opportunities for students, who are not limited in traditional conservative system and are not bounded with alien stereotypes, but whose eyes are opened so that they can notice own wings of creativity and unique fantasy. Students, who experience the studying of art in combination with other disciplines, illustrate their amusement with following words, “you feel as though you are important, and you can do something different that someone else can’t do, you have got this special quality about yourself”.
In addition, all allegedly problems regarding such education are not problems at all. For instance, teachers are merely to understand they are able to feel art as well, and assess children’ creative works with open hearts. Simultaneously, parents should believe in talents of their children and give them the chance to change this world for better with the healing power of art.
The art cannot be considered as lower education, it is the charming world, in which children’ creativity, sense of beauty, thinking, cognitive and communication skills are improved. Taking all these factors into account, the beauty cannot be destroyed by tough curriculum. Therefore, the work can wait while teacher shows the child the rainbow, but the rainbow will not wait while you do the work (Mayesky 45).
Works Cited
Harland, John, et al. Arts Education in Secondary Schools: Effects and Effectiveness. Berkshire: National Foundation for Educational Research, 2000. Print.
Hickman, Richard. Why We Make Art and why it is Taught. Chicago: Intellect Books, 2010. Print.
Mayesky, Mary. Creative Activities and Curriculum for Young Children. Stamford: Cengage Learning, 2014. Print.
Perrin, Stephanie B. Education Through the Arts in Secondary Schools. Center for Arts in the Basic Curriculum, 1997. Web. 21 May 2016. http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/ strategies/topics/Arts%20in%20Education/The%20Center%20for%20Arts%20in%20the%20Basic%20Curriculum/perrin2.htm
Rayment, Trevor. The Problem of Assessment in Art and Design. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2007. Print.
Schwartz, Katrina. How Integrating Arts Into Other Subjects Makes Learning Come Alive. KQED News – Education Blog Mind/Shift, 13 Jan. 2015. Web. 21 May 2016. http://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2015/01/13/how-integrating-arts-into-other-subjects-makes-learning-come-alive/
