Executive Summary
Perhaps it is time for school boards everywhere to step back from the battles over funding, test scores, and curriculum, to look at the big picture and then redefine the terms of the debate over education policy. If we mean business about improving student achievement, we must rise above political pressures, above petty power struggles, and pay close attention to what the researchers are telling us because their message about music and learning truly resonates.
- Joan Schmidt, Director, National School Boards Association 1998
Executive Summary:
Today, the Gallup Poll reported an open-ended survey called “The People’s Priorities: Gallup’s Top 10” asking Americans to name the top priorities for the government and the important problems facing the nation. Education ranked seventh below, among other things, the Iraq war, health care, and the economy. In the United States there is growing concern for the education of our children in school. According to a 2007 survey sponsored by Education Next and the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University, “Americans both care about their schools and want them to improve,” yet most also stated they personally do not know how to take action to help schools improve nor what the solution to better schools would be. This concern does not come unwarranted. The most progressive and accurate graduation rate called the Cumulative Promotion Index (CPI) of 2006 states one in three high school students in the United States does not earn a diploma.
At the heart of the concern for education are learning, growth, and development of all children. At the heart of assessment is testing performance. And, at the heart of local reality, is funding. Mandated by the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), all schools and all levels of educators across the country are in a unique position to balance the learning process of each individual child with curriculum coverage and test preparation. While 56% of Americans support the renewal of NCLB, only 51% think spending for education should increase and 38% believe it should remain the same. Yet, the majority of Americans, 55%, assessed public education in the
U.S at a “C.” As schools struggle to implement the federal statutes of NCLB and ‘make the grade’ on state and local report cards, child development and achievement continues to hang in the balance.
So, what is the answer? What could help students and schools to improve in the United States, and ultimately promote a child’s developmental skill level while retain that child in school? Bill Ivey, Chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) in 1999 said, “it’s time we realized just how much our future depends on how well we integrate the magic and creativity of the arts into the lives of future generations, and that process must begin by ensuring that the arts are essential learning for all children.” What was Mr. Ivey referring to?
In nations where music is a primary focus of the curriculum, students outperform United States students in science achievement. A 1988 test of the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IAEEA) ranked the United States fourteenth among 17 countries on an instrument testing science achievement of eighth and ninth graders. Our students’ scores compared favorably with those of Thailand and Singapore, while trailing far behind Poland, Italy, Korea, English- speaking Canada, and every other participating country, with the exception of the Philippines and Hong Kong. The top-performing students on the 1988 IAEEA Test in science were the eighth and ninth graders from Hungary. In Hungary, the land of Bela Bartok and Franz List, music education has long been an essential and developmental program implemented nationally by the composer Zoltan Kodaly.
Revealing the depth of the correlation between student achievement and arts education comes from a 2005 report by the Business Roundtable, Tapping America’s Potential. When comparing the achievement of students in the United States to international competition in the 4th grade to that of 12th graders, U.S. 4th graders scored well against international competition in mathematics and science. However, they fell near the bottom or dead last by 12th grade in mathematics and science, respectively. In an earlier study called the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988, a study carried out into the mid-90’s, it was found that student involvement in the arts greatly decreases from the time they are in the 8th grade to 12th grade. By the 12th grade involvement has dropped from the 10th grade level, and has nearly halved from the 8th grade level. In addition 12th graders are not as involved in the arts outside the school environment as they were two years earlier. Though these were two independent studies from different populations of students in the U.S. at two different time frames, there seems to be a compelling question; to what extent does music education impact student success in mathematics and science, and perhaps other disciplines as well?
According to Dr. Frances H. Rauscher, a leading researcher in the field of child development and cognition from the University of Wisconsin, the research indicates that “music may act as a catalyst for cognitive abilities in other disciplines, and the relationship between music and spatial-temporal reasoning is particularly compelling. Furthermore, early instrumental instruction may actually physically mold and shape a young brain. A study reported by Dr. Rauscher and Dr. Gruhn in Second Handbook on Music Teaching and Learning revealed a significant increase in kindergartener’s spatial-temporal reasoning after experiencing music training. Growing evidence indicates that learning music has a direct and positive impact on brain development. Recent research reveals that students who learn music, either through individual instruction or school curriculum, are more likely to score higher on standardized tests, and often outperform students in school who have had little or no music instruction. In a 1995 study in Hamilton, Ohio, string students who participated in pullout lessons averaged higher scores than the non-pullout students in all areas of the Ohio Proficiency Test. Sixty-eight (68%) percent of the string students achieved satisfactory ratings on all sections of the test, compared to 58% of the non-pullout students. According to reports by the College Entrance Examination Board, in 2006 SAT takers with coursework/experience in music performance scored 57 points higher on the verbal portion of the test and 43 points higher on the math portion than students with no coursework or experience in the arts. Scores for those with coursework in music appreciation were 62 points higher on the verbal and 41 points higher on the math portion.
This correlation between arts education and student achievement has caused some in Washington to be concerned that NCLB may be in fact causing districts across the country to cut music and arts programs as they financially struggle to implement the statutes of the act and reach the minimum achievement level to be considered an effective school. On May 8th, 2007 Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) sent a letter to David Walker, the Comptroller General of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), requesting that the GAO conduct a study on access to music and arts education in the American public school system since passage of the No Child Left Behind Act. The letter states, “as Congress moves toward reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act, we continue to examine the goals of educating the whole child and the positive impact of rigorous instruction in all areas of the curriculum.”
The most recent information we have on the condition of arts, specifically music, in the public school system is from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 1997 and 1999 assessments of arts education in the United States. From 1997, it was found that only 43% of typical 8th graders receive music instruction three to four times a week, 38% once or twice a week, 10% less than once a week, and 9% of 8th graders do not have music instruction at their school. However, from 1999, we have a commissioned report by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), and the Office of Reform Assistance and Dissemination (ORAD) of OERI that indicates 94% of public, elementary schools in the U.S. have music instruction in their schools, with 74% being instructed by full-time music instructors. What is alarming is that 73% of the public elementary schools offering music education only offer it once a week with an average class time of 38 minutes. In addition, only 6% of the schools offered music instruction everyday. The average number of hours an elementary student received music instruction was 46 for the school year. That is a little over a week’s worth of class time instruction. In 1999, 90% of the U.S. public secondary schools offered music instruction with 93% of those having dedicated classroom space for music instruction. However, only 53% of the schools had two or more full time music instructors, while 47% of the schools offering music instruction funded their programs with non-district monies. There is no data indicating the number of hours secondary students had for music instruction, however, it is known that there is no national fine arts requirement for graduation from high school.
The National Music Education Association reports that graduation rates are better in schools with fine arts programs. The numbers are significant. Graduation rates for those schools with programs are at 90%, compared to 73% for those without programs. In addition, schools that have music programs have significantly higher attendance rates than do those without programs, 93% as compared to 85%. Yet, most state graduation requirements do not include music or fine arts credits and if they do it is usually not more than one credit. For example, in Ohio, there are 6 credit units from the 20 required that are designated as electives from either foreign language, business and technology or the fine arts.
If schools are not requiring or offering arts education, where are children going to receive music education? The research indicates that students do better in school, achieve more, and are more likely to graduate from school with music education as part of their learning experience. Music for Change, Inc. (M4C) is a not-for-profit organization that recognizes the research-based connection between student achievement and arts in schools, specifically music. MFC also recognizes the loss of the arts in today’s educational classroom, where lack of resources and high stakes testing has placed tremendous pressure on schools – both public and private. The focus of the organization is to deliver three different standards-based, music enrichment programs to schools primarily where music education is limited or has been eliminated. The three programs are: Blues History assembly program, Guitar Instruction workshop, and Urban Voices artist-in-residency. The programs feature the talents, passion, and experience of Kelly Richey, performing artist and teacher.
The mission of the organization’s programs is to bring today’s curriculum standards to life through music, while recognizing the importance of music education in the development and growth of the whole child. All three components offer creative hands-on, cross-curricular, music instruction to 3rd through 12th grade students, thereby helping schools to meet the challenges of today’s educational climate. The programs are meant to:
(1) Ignite student interest in playing an instrument.
(2) Develop skills for musical expression.
(3) Motivate through the experience of music.
(4) Improve student academic performance.
(5) Connect students to American heritage and culture.
(6) Inspire hope.
The curriculum for each component is aligned to national and state standards appropriate to the developmental age and region. Music for Change, Inc. seeks to extend its programs to schools in a three-state region: Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana in the first two years.
Emily Riley, Executive Director
Social Networks
Recent Comments