Art Charters v. Traditional No Art Schools
Why are the arts removed from traditional public schools while at the same time charter schools are given carte blanche to create art schools? The New York Timeshas an article about Voice Charter School where students sing and “outperform” their peers….
Academically, students at Voice did significantly better than the city average on New York State math exams last year, with 70 percent of its students passing, compared with 39 percent citywide. Their English performance was less impressive, but with 39 percent passing, it still beat the citywide average of 30 percent.
Aren’t Americans tired of such comparisons? I am also tired of children being used as pawns in the effort to privatize public schools.
For years there has been an intentional drive to remove the arts from traditional public schools, especially in poor areas. In all public schools there is a decline of the arts and an emphasis on math and English/language arts. High-stakes testing and Common Core leave traditional public schools blending the arts if students are lucky. But blending the arts into other subjects is not the same as exposure to a variety of art programs—painting, singing, drama, and even dance. And a visiting artisan once in a while is not the same as a credentialed art teacher who consistently lets students explore the arts.
Voice Charter School also sounds a bit pushy with the singing. I will explain in a minute.
While many traditional public schools have lost their art programs, the Obama administration subscribes to “I need proof that the arts matter” with a program called Turnaround ARTS which zeroes in on only eight select traditional public schools with Art Charters v. Traditional No Art Schools:
