I absolutely agree with this. Taking students out of Art, Music, and
PE sends a message that only some parts of the curriculum are
important, and also deprives children of equal access to the
curriculum and, subsequently, a well-rounded education. There are
lessons to be learned in Art, Music, and PE that are intrinsic and
exclusive to those subjects, AND there are also lessons to be learned
in Art, Music, and PE that enhance, supplement, explain, clarify,
synthesize, and support literacy, mathematics, science, and social
studies. In a society that boasts an increasing number of obese
children, excluding a child from PE is counterproductive in the long
run. Excluding children from Art and Music deprives them of
connections to cultural knowledge that are not particularly
accessible in other ways. Not to mention, that those children who are
strong visual or musical or kinesthetic learners NEED these
strategies just as much as they NEED to learn to read, and in fact
might find it easier to learn to read if their learning styles are
considered.
Sadly, too many people consider the arts and humanities to be "fluff"
and "frill" because they do not see the supportive, supplementary,
enhancing role that these subjects play in the overall education of
the future leaders of society. Perhaps if our current batch of Wall
Street moguls and corporate leaders had had a little more education
in the humanities, we might not be in the mess we are in today.
There is a wonderful and very short article in Edutopia that speaks
to the humanities:
http://www.edutopia.org/blog/humanities-twenty-first-century-bill-smoot
And I would reiterate that the 10 Lessons the Arts Teach are
important lessons for all children, not just those who play around in
the boxes we invent for them:
http://www.arteducators.org/advocacy/10-lessons-the-arts-teach
This is a big, big issue for me, since I am very much a visual
learner, while my son is very much a musical learner, and my daughter
is very much a verbal learner. Three totally different learning
styles and three totally different ways of approaching the world. We
should not be taking these important differentiations away from
children; in fact, they do not get enough of them.
Sorry about the soapbox.
Renee
On Jul 22, 2011, at 8:58 AM, jayhawkrtroy fredde wrote:
Yes they need intensive instruction, but they should not be taken out
of art, music, PE at least not completely.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Denise Diana Saddler
<[email protected]> wrote:
I agree with the fact that if a child is unable to read by the 3rd
grade then the child should be taking out of extra curricular
activities for one year in order to catch up on the reading
instruction necessary for the child to be successful. Many
statistics has proven that if the child can read on grade level
then he or she have a higher chances of passing test in other
areas; examples, math and science. Other area that is affected
when a child cannot read is the child's behavior when he or she
cannot complete class work or homework assignments, also the
child's self confidence. Yes, a child should be given extra
reading instruction for a minimum of one year in order to decrease
all the other negative possibilities that can take place if the
child is just moved through the system.
Denise Saddler
"Sometimes it's a little better to travel than to arrive."
Robert Pirsig - Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
_______________________________________________
Mosaic mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to
http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org
Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive
