« January 2007 | Main | March 2007 »
February 28, 2007
Not on the Test
Go on to sleep now, third grader of mine.
The test is tomorrow but you'll do just fine.
It's reading and math. Forget all the rest.
You don't need to know what is not on the test.
These opening lyrics from the song, “Not On the Test” do a nice job of summing up the painful realities of the testing frenzy that has become the cause célèbre of No Child Left Behind. The first time I heard this song I fell out of my chair laughing. Then I realized… it was funny because of how accurate the sentiments expressed are. Regardless of what administrators and policymakers may want to believe, or what they tell others in public forums, the mania behind teaching to the test is real. The ship has sailed on this fact. Arguing the point that teaching to the test is not happening is like arguing that the earth is flat. Saying it isn’t true does not make it so.
I have occasionally used this space to write about how other nations around the world are moving away from standardized tests. I’ve written about how creativity is the emerging force in the 21st Century Economy. I have discussed the need for the arts to be embraced into the core fabric of education for our children. I have spoken of the importance of data. I have written about my belief that the major revisions coming to No Child Left Behind, or as the new Congress refers to it, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, will benefit music and arts education.
Accountability
In keeping with the theme from our lyrics above I am now moved to address accountability.
Each box that you mark on each test that you take,
Remember your teachers. Their jobs are at stake.
Your score is their score, but don't get all stressed.
They'd never teach anything not on the test.
The idea of considering accountability was stimulated by the lyrics above, as well as recent events in New York City. The chancellor of New York City’s Public Schools, Joel Klein, recently announced plans to give principals new discretion over the spending of millions of dollars that have been historically designated for arts education. This change is part of mayor Michael Bloomberg’s and chancellor Klein’s plans to give principals more say over how they run their schools and spend this money.
This funding had been developed over the past decade to help restore music and arts programs from the major cutbacks that occurred in the 1970s. This designated funding had been augmented by money from outside sources and has been widely acknowledged as being one of the main reasons there has been some optimism about arts programs successfully returning to the New York Public Schools.
Word of the removal of the restrictions on this funding was met with great concern by arts and education leaders alike. The New York Daily News ran the headline: Killing $68M art plan paints bleak picture for schools.
Sleep, sleep, and as you progress
You'll learn there's a lot that is not on the test.
According to comments in the New York Times, David Cantor, a spokesman for the New York Department of Education stated: “We don’t earmark funding for reading or math — we just demand results. The same should be true of arts.”
Bravo! Finally, someone is saying what many of us in arts education firmly believe. The arts should not be considered as “special” or “different” in comparison to other subjects. The arts should be held to the same high level of accountability, just like reading and math, in an environment that embraces a “demand for results.”
There is only one problem with this statement. New York City’s Board of Education does not demand results for arts education. There is no mandate to provide arts instruction or accountability to see what students “know and are able to do” in the arts like there is for reading and math. In New York, results are expected for reading and math, but there are no expectations for the arts. Period. Reading and math are “On the Test.” Music and arts education are “Not on the Test”… metaphorically speaking of course.
New York City has developed standards for what children should be learning in K-12 arts education, but without a system of accountability to know who is being taught what and where! As we have seen before, standards without accountability are meaningless.
Debate is a skill that is useful to know,
Unless you're in Congress or talk radio,
Where shouting and spouting and spewing are blessed
'Cause rational discourse was not on the test.
Talk is Cheap
So… here is an opportunity for the New York City Department of Education to be true to their word: Don’t just say “the same should be true for the arts.” The Mayor and the Chancellor are in charge. Make it happen.
Saying it and doing it are two different things. And since the city is intent on removing restrictions on funding for more than $67 million, the least they can do is build an accountability system and demand for results that they themselves have suggested.
Thinking's important. It's good to know how.
And someday you'll learn to, but someday's not now.
Go on to sleep, now. You need your rest.
Don't think about thinking. It's not on the test.
I know that mayor Bloomberg is a huge supporter of the arts and believes in the value of arts education. I know chancellor Klein understands the important role the arts play in developing a culture of learning and community within a school. Their challenge of managing the nation’s largest school system is indeed daunting. Their commitment to improving the system is genuine and we should provide them the opportunity to make good on their word.
Now is the time to move from rhetoric to reality and include the arts in the high expectations for all schools and all children. The mayor and the Chancellor expect more from our schools and these expectations should now include accountability in arts education.
Omitting the arts from this culture that “demands results” will only lead us back to where we were when we started this conversation: No expectation, No accountability. In essence they will go on to reinforce the sad, but true statement from our song:
The School Board is faced with no child left behind
With rules but no funding, they're caught in a bind.
So music and art and the things you love best
Are not in your school 'cause they're...NOT ON THE TEST!
Lyrics excerpted from:
“Not On The Test”
by John Forster & Tom Chapin
© 2007 Limousine Music Co. & The Last Music Co. (ASCAP)
To see the complete song and to purchase a copy visit http://members.aol.com/chapinfo/tc/
Tell them Bob sent you!
Posted by musicforall at 5:47 PM | Comments (0)
February 19, 2007
Mentions are Nice - Mandates Matter
I have been asked over the years why I have been such a forceful proponent of mandates. Many individuals, and even organizations have commented we should be happy with standards and to be included in lists of core curriculum. I am not suggesting these have not been important accomplishments in the evolution of music and arts education… they have been. Recent experiences though have shown clearly that if we want to be certain music and arts programs are available to every child we have to insist on mandates and an accountability system to ensure what is mandated is actually being carried out at the school level.
We shared with you last month former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee’s comments from his book From Hope to Higher Ground about the steps he took to make music and arts instruction mandatory in his state. In a conversation with the Governor, he told me “Without the force of law an idea becomes nothing more than a suggestion. People ignore suggestions all the time. If you want something done it should be couched as a “must do” not a “may do” through the force of law.”
So, in Arkansas, there is a mandate for every child in grades K-6 MUST have music and art instruction provided by a certified teacher. Nothing fuzzy about what the requirements of the schools are here!
A more recent example comes to us from the city of Providence, Rhode Island. I have been fortunate to work with the fine members of the Rhode Island Music Educators Association and their leaders over the past several years to address the erosion of music education in the Providence School System. It started when Diana Lam was the Superintendent and was accelerated when she left town and Melody Johnson became Superintendent. Using a severe budget shortfall as the backdrop - music and arts programs across the city were eliminated leaving nothing more than a shadow of what was once a vibrant and celebrated music program.
As is the trend with superintendents – Ms. Johnson moved on. Dr. Donnie Evans arrived as the new Superintendent he was stunned by the lack of music and arts instruction. He also had a huge budget hole t o fill. Moving the music and arts education troubles to the top of the priority list was going to have to wait.
In the mean time, teachers began to complain to the Rhode Island Department of Education. And then…
Last month, the Rhode Island Commissioner of Education Peter McWalters – responding to the complaints from the teachers in Providence - decided it was time to step in and wrote the following excerpted letter to Dr. Evans:
Dear Superintendent Evans: As you know this department has received complaints alleging that the Providence Public Schools are failing to fully comply with the requirements of the Basic Education Program (BEP) in the following areas:• Access to libraries [BEP Section 15: Library Media Curriculum]
• Access to music instruction [BEP Section 17: Music Education Curriculum]
• Access to art instruction [BEP Section 6: Art Education Curriculum](Note: We have excerpted the music portion of the letter)
II. Access to music instruction [BEP Section 17: Music Education Curriculum]
Status: BEP violationDiscussion: Section 17 of the BEP requires that a music program be provided in all grades, K-12. That program must “offer all students opportunities to perform, create and compose, develop aural and cognitive skills, read music, evaluate and criticize. At the high school level, coursework shall also be offered (in each high school) in at least one vocal and one instrumental activity.” [Section 17 (a)]
Further, “the music education program shall provide coursework in the following: rhythm; melody; harmony; form; timbre; expressive qualities; notational skills; styles (types); history and literature; and performance skills.” [Section 17 (c)]
Section 17 states that “[t]he goals of music education are to help every student develop sensitivity to music, develop abilities to translate traditional and graphic symbols into sound, understand cultural and musical heritage, develop the ability to make informed choices about music, and build a lifelong appreciation of music. To these ends, and to meet the needs of all students, the music program shall have three components. One is the opportunity to study music as a separate subject of study. The second is to encounter music as part of a general basic education. These are both important for all students. The third component recognizes the role that music can play in the education of students with special needs, including those who are handicapped, gifted and talented, bilingual and/or disadvantaged. [BEP Section 17 – emphasis added]
The regulatory requirement is unequivocal in its emphasis on the necessity that all students at every level K-12 have access to formal music instruction as a separate subject of study. At the high-school level, this must include specific vocal and instrumental instruction. The coursework-content requirements are also clearly delineated.
Based on information received from the district, it is clear that many students in Providence Public Schools have no access to music instruction as a separate subject of study. This is particularly unacceptable given the regulation’s emphasis on access to music instruction for students with disabilities, students who are English language learners, and students who are otherwise disadvantaged. In combination, these three categories account for the overwhelming majority of Providence Public Schools students. The requirement to provide a comprehensive program of music instruction, available to all students in all Providence public schools, is therefore not less urgent than in districts with a smaller proportion of students who are educationally disadvantaged, but rather, according to regulation, more urgent, given the demographic makeup of the Providence Public Schools.
Remedy: The district is instructed to provide a corrective-action plan within 30 days, setting forth how the district will come into compliance by providing access to music instruction as a separate subject of study to all Providence Public Schools students at all levels K-12 in every school, including vocal and instrumental instruction at the high-school level.
Based on our several conversations on these issues during our regularly scheduled intervention meetings, I am aware that the Providence Public Schools administration is committed to providing access to library, arts, and music programming for Providence Public Schools students in every school. I am not unaware of the severe budgetary constraints under which the school district is operating. However, budgetary incapacity is not a defense against the failure to provide the programming required in the BEP. In fact, the Rhode Island Supreme Court has ruled that the BEP establishes the mandatory program elements that provide the basis for determining the adequacy of a school-district budget when BEP requirements are not met. (West Warwick School Committee v. Souliere, 626 A.2d 1280, 1283 (R.I. 1993))
Thus the Providence Public Schools must come into compliance with these long-standing regulatory requirements for providing daily library access for all public-school students and art and music instruction in every Providence public school. I look forward to working with you, based upon the Corrective Action Plans you will submit as required by this finding of noncompliance with the BEP, to ensure the access of all Providence Public Schools students to the library, art, and music programming to which they are legally entitled…
… Without meaningful access to programming in the arts and music as mandated by the BEP throughout their K-12 educational experience, Providence Public Schools students will have no prospect of fulfilling the graduation requirements for proficiency in the arts.
Powerful Stuff!
As I sit and write this column the Providence Public Schools Administrator of Fine Arts has informed the music and arts educators that programs will be restored, teachers will be recalled, and the new Chief Academic Officer will be developing the plan to bring the city into compliance with the requirements of the BEP.
After 5 years in the wilderness music and arts education returns to the “Renaissance City.”
The point to all of this is simple. Requirements were in place. Requirements were ignored. Teachers complained. Requirements were enforced. Programs returned.
Without the advocacy efforts of music and arts teachers to ensure the arts requirements were part of the Rhode Island Basic Education Plan (BEP) there would have been no recourse for the people concerned about the elimination of these programs.
Mandates Matter!
Superintendent Evans clearly inherited a terrible situation. The Commissioner of Education has given him an opportunity to make things right.
For the sake of the children in Providence, let’s hope he does.
Posted by musicforall at 4:19 PM | Comments (0)
February 11, 2007
Grammy Prexy Hits a High Note for Music Education
Our great partners at the Recording Academy came through as Neil Portnow, Recording Academy President, took to the stage of the 49th Annual Grammy Awards to ask the country to take a stand for music and arts education. We were proud to have worked together with the Academy and many other like-minded groups including the California Alliance for Arts Education, NAMM, the California PTA, The LA Music Center and many others to help make a difference.
Thank you Neil and everyone at the Recording Academy for being such great partners in our shared struggle to create a word where we have music for all!
What if the GRAMMYs had to give up the Best New Artist category because there weren't any? Well, as long as The Recording Academy has anything to say about it, that's not going to happen! Tonight, we've already met some of this year's remarkable Best New Artist nominees, and in a few minutes, we'll see a fresh new face experience her "ultimate" GRAMMY Moment provided by The Academy.When I was just 6 years old, I watched Elvis on TV, and knew what I wanted to do with my life. And thanks to my parents and the dedicated music teachers at school, I realized my dream of a career in music. Now, we need to make sure that others have that same chance.
Let me show you exactly what I'm talking about. Meet Anne Lee, a very talented 15-year-old public school music student, and Christian Sands, a 17 year old who won a spot in our GRAMMY Jazz Ensemble.
Our GRAMMY Foundation programs like GRAMMY in the Schools and GRAMMY Camp teach and encourage thousands of kids who love music, and whose lives are better for it. This underscores the most fundamental point - every child deserves exposure to music and the arts in school!
There are some encouraging signs out there. Just this year, The Recording Academy and the music community rallied their forces here in California to reverse the trend of reduced funding. The result: more than 100 million dollars for music education with millions more for instruments in schools.
The time is now to contact your elected leaders. Tell them that music is just as essential to the next generation's development as any other subject. We'll make it easy for you - go to GRAMMY.com. We'll connect you directly to your representatives so your voice can be heard.
You're here - or out there - because music is an important part of your life. Together let us all ensure that music stays just as vital and alive for generations still to come.
Lend your voice to the effort here!
Posted by musicforall at 10:33 PM