World functions on both art and science
I have to respond to letter writer Dennis Hammond’s definition of liberal arts as nothing more than “opinion and memorization,” aka “brainwashing.” (“Math, science are key in education,” July 24).
I am a graphic designer. I have been successful because I can use my left brain for the business and accounting side of my business (thanks to my math education) and because I use my right brain for my creative solutions to complex graphic problems (thanks to my art classes).
What I find most disturbing about Hammond’s letter is that he feels our children will receive an adequate education if they receive mostly just math and science education.
I don’t understand the contempt he has for teaching art, drama and music to enrich the lives of students. He also says, “Math and science help students understand the world in which we live.” Look around, everything you see has been designed by someone who probably took art classes in high school!
I think the iPod illustrates how we should approach educating our kids. Not only is the iPod a technological marvel (science), but it is aesthetically pleasing (art), too. It would not be so successful if either of those two factors were missing.
Cathy Calder, Denver
I was told by my children's Art teacher that their school was going to cut the Art Program in half this year.
I think art and music are important parts of elementary education.
My 4th grader's art last year was selected for an art exhibit at Front Range Community College.She was so proud.My 1st graders art was selected for a in school art show.
Both my children love art and I always make sure my arts and crafts cabinet is stocked. They paint,build contraptions with popscicle sticks and duct tape.This weekend we are going to paint their bedroom windows with tempura paint and clear liquid dish soap mixed together. It a fun project that will spruce up their rooms and will wash off when they tire of it.They have been working out designs and ideas on paper for a few weeks now.
It's a shame people and schools don't think art is a valuable resource for teaching.The learning possibilities are endless.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on August 16, 2007 09:41 AMHence the need for choice and competition in schools. Then you can take your child wherever you like. When the public schools spend the majority of their cash on bureaucracies, the child suffers.
Posted by Dravur on August 16, 2007 10:00 AMDravur,parents will never be allowed to take their money and have a choice on where to educate their kids.The public school monopoly is well entrenched
I agree with your position. However I'm afraid it will never happen.
I think it's wrong to give vouchers to poor students in failing schools and not allowing other parents who want the best for their children not have access to vouchers.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on August 16, 2007 11:16 AMVouchers are only a discount coupon for the rich parents to pocket more money. Poor families still can't afford private schools even with vouchers.
Posted by larry on August 16, 2007 12:34 PMI find this letter disturbing. My father was a design engineer who called his field an art. I remember discussions about aesthetically pleasing mechanical designs.
While I appreciate the value of art, what I was taught in art classes had nothing to do with the art I like. I learned all the Italian words for music and I used to be able to used them to explain why I dislike classical music and opera. I used to be a square dance caller, which involved music and choreography. I enjoy photography and had a dark room before I got a digital camera.
The problem I have with art, drama, and music classes is that they were taught by people with strong views about what was and wasn't art. Art teachers who couldn't see the beauty in mechanical design, music teachers who treated non-classical music as garbage, and drama teachers who seem to believe that if it isn't obscene, it isn't good theater. So my involvement in the arts is really despite my education in it.
The problem I have with Calder is that she seems to believe that business, math, and science do not have opportunities for creativity and aesthetic expression.
To quote a chemical engineering student of my acquaintance (who took drawing classes when she was younger), "Carbon bonds are pretty."
Posted by Yaakov Watkins on August 16, 2007 02:59 PMMy husband is a physicist. I have degrees in economics and applied math. I am a vocational musician. My children cover both sides of this argument. One child is extremely good in math and science and will mostly like follow in her father's footsteps. My son on the other hand, began his struggle with math and science in the eighth grade and we will be thrilled when he graduates next spring despite this major obstacle. However, he is extremely talented in literature, English, and history.
Once students enter the upper level math of high school, it really doesn't matter how well they were educated before. Children simply have different talents and no one excels all the time in everything. We need to acknowledge that both the technical and liberal art academics need to be available and well developed. It is only through this that our children will become successful and find their future career.
You can't force a child to comprehend and understand Calculus just like you can't force a child to write as intricately as Jane Austen.
Posted by L on August 17, 2007 11:01 AM