By TONY McCLURE
It is a common occurrence in many school districts today that when a school cannot balance a budget, it looks to drop a program. This program serves as a scapegoat for the school’s problems, sometimes falling on the music department. Basically, music is the reason for American public school failures. Instead of dropping gym or other worthless curriculums, music programs are deemed nonessential. There are several reasons why this happens and why this needs to be stopped.
First of all, music is an art form that is used virtually every day.
Music can communicate feelings or emotions in ways that other art forms cannot do. Music goes beyond poetry in that a listener is subjected to two forms of literature — poetry and music. The music and the poetry together can connect deep feelings of emotion between the listener and the artist that few other forms of art can hope to do.
However, music can survive without words. Music is universal. Sure, there are instruments from other countries that might be used only in their native land, but as rock music in the late 1960s to the early 1970s taught the public, different instruments from different countries can mix to form great pop songs.
So how does this tie in with music programs in schools? Music can communicate in ways that other subjects cannot.
I recently came upon the Web site, coyotecommunications.com. This site offered information on why music should be taught in schools no matter what: “Music education helps young minds to develop creativity and expression of emotions.� It goes on further to say that reasoning and creative learning are easier for students who are subjected to music education at a young age. Also, other subjects may be easier to understand.
Of course, it is essential to note that students who play a musical instrument seem to do better academically than students who do not. World Music Central did several studies on why dumbing down music programs or getting rid of them altogether is the wrong move. Studies that they conducted showed, “Students with coursework/experience in music performance and music appreciation scored higher on the SAT: students in music performance scored 57 points higher on the verbal and 41 points higher on the math, and students in music appreciation scored 63 points higher on verbal and 44 points higher on the math, than did students with no arts participation.�
I hope this gives insight on why music programs should remain in schools no matter what the budget is. Students need this fine art in order to work to their fullest potential.
Tony McClure is a senior at Dallastown High School.
I love music, and was a musician througout high school. But, have you ever wondered why we have an extremely obese America? The answer: taking away physical fitness programs like p.e. and recess. I say end excess spending on athletics, andend health class ( as most information keeps changing).
At my high school, we have fifty minutes for each class. Subtracting time to get dressed, stretch, set up for the period, and leaving time to change again, leaves less than a half-hour of actual activity. Most of the time, students don't even get this much physical activity because they're sitting out waiting for their turn to play, or their waiting for someone to serve the ball/birdie/whatever. It is reccommended that teenagers get at least a half hour of exercise every day with their heart rate between 90-110 beats per minute. Students can't possibly get what they need from gym classes, so why bother? To be physically fit, students need to exercise outside of school.
i believe that, well since im a junior i am no longer participating in gym, but that music should be kept. Music is a free time, a way to rid of stress for a block or period. Drop sports or clubs before msuic or fine arts and yes our grades are higher than most academic non-music students.