High Fine Arts Programs Should Be Funded

Section Two: History: Since public schools across the country have faced budget cuts in the past decade and a half, a common cost-cutting measure is to lessen the funding for arts education, prioritizing what are deemed more essential subjects such as math, reading, and science. Yet in fact, the current iteration of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, also known as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, lists that the arts are among the core academic subjects, requiring all schools to enable all students to achieve in the arts and reap all the benefits of a comprehensive arts education. Yet the economically prioritized curriculum is still draining the sources from these imperative programs leaving instruments, paintbrushes, and other artistic pieces in closets to collect dust, because no one will be there to teach or use them. Most impacting in the history of

All around the United States, art programs are being cut out of the budget in public schools. The arts include dance, band, chorus, theatre, film, drawing, painting, photography and literary arts. Some school board members feel these art programs are not necessary and do not benefit the students in any way. Elementary, middle, and high school students are forced to quit their passion and feel that their talents are not supported by their schools. Although many are not aware, there is a strong connection between arts education and academic achievement. Unfortunately, due to budget cuts in many public schools, the art classes are first on the list to be cut. It is important that the students, parents and teachers

Art programs in schools across the nation are in danger of being diminished due to budget cuts and lack of funding. Due to budget cuts, “... schools have been relying more on private funds and patrons of the arts to provide creative outlets for students” (Hambek). Because art is deemed as less important than other core classes, budget cuts that have been put into place almost automatically go straight to cutting funds for art

Throughout history there have been many public funding’s that contributed to the world of art. Whether anyone realizes it or not, artists have a lot of responsibilities to try and please the public when they are working for the public. Also, there are numerous regional issues that greatly influence decisions about publicly funded art. Art is very important when forming a sense of nation character, therefore, we should support the public funding of art in America. Art is an important part of society and it can also be a very valuable part of our everyday lives. However, there are many positive and negative effects when it comes to the public funding of art in America. Supporters claim that subsidizing the arts pays for itself. These supporters suggest that the arts are what drive the economy of businesses within a community.

Having posted this on World-Post, which is a news and blog website created through a partnership between Liberal news aggregator Huffington Post and a nonpartisan powerhouse, the Berggruen Institute on Governance, allows for this essay to not get exposed to the pro STEM or anti-arts parties. Sparking up the discussion of reintroducing the arts back into everyday society’s curriculum, you need to direct this essay towards both the audience, and the individuals who have the power to make this change. If Ma bring up a primarily pro-art focused paper, and only shares this piece of writing with mostly fellow supports of the arts, Ma misses the “equilibrium” that he spoke so highly about. If we can’t have both sides of the spectrum be able to analyze and discuss the ideas presented in this paper, then it’s going to be close to impossible to enact any change within society to reintroduce more of the arts back into

Fine arts gives students a chance to pour their hearts into something beautiful; a chance to be a part of something that is bigger than just themselves. Some schools are facing financial troubles with the current economy, and one of the first programs they consider cutting is fine arts. The removal of fine arts programs would be absolutely devastating to countless members of the community. Many students would lose their favorite class, in some cases the one class that helps them get through the day, and many teachers that truly care fir the students would lose their dream jobs. Fine arts should not be cut from schools; they build confidence, help with the application of other academic concepts, and even help to prepare students for their

The United States is a country based on equal opportunity; every citizen is to be given the same chance as another to succeed. This includes the government providing the opportunity of equal education to all children. All children are provided schools to attend. However, the quality of one school compared to another is undoubtedly unfair. Former teacher John Kozol, when being transferred to a new school, said, "The shock from going from one of the poorest schools to one of the wealthiest cannot be overstated (Kozol 2)." The education gap between higher and lower-income schools is obvious: therefore, the United States is making the effort to provide an equal education with questionable results.

In this detailed and shocking book, Jonathan Kozol describes the horrific and unjust conditions in which many children in today’s society are forced to get their education. Kozol discusses three major reasons for the discrepancies in America’s schools today: disparities of property taxes, racism, and the conflict between state and local control. The first of these reasons is that of the differences of available property tax revenues. Kozol discusses the inconsistencies in property tax revenues and the problem that the poorer districts aren’t getting the same opportunities for education as the more affluent neighborhoods. He says the reason for this is that the

Public school funding is unfair and unequal in most states. However, more concerning is out of the 49 million children in public schools, students living in poverty are affected the most. There are wide disparities in the amount spent on public education across the country, from a high of $18,507 per pupil in New York, to a low of $6,369 in Idaho (Baker, Sciarra, & Farrie, 2015). The question that all stakeholders should be asking is school funding fair?

With the many diverse characteristics of the Unites States, perhaps the most troubling is the rising gap in the distribution of wealth. As the wealth gap in the United States rises exponentially, the gap in the quality of public schooling rises with it. For a country that prides itself in prestigious outlets of education, the system of public schooling seems to be miserably failing. Public education, a system that some fight to destroy while others fight to preserve, is perhaps the only source of academic opportunity for many individuals living in this country. The fact that someone can live in a certain area and receive a higher quality of public education than someone else living in a different area in the same country—even in the same state—is a problem that should not trouble a ‘progressive’ democratic society. Unfortunately, areas of lower socioeconomic status receive much less funding than areas of higher socioeconomic status, where property taxes account for 45% of funding in public school districts. Naturally, the impoverished residents of poor neighborhoods pay a harsh price in this situation, sending their children to an underfunded school with little to no resources, where sometimes teachers must supply the classroom from their own pocket. As Rogerson and Fernandez note, “a system that allows the accidents of geography and birth to determine the quality of education received by an individual is inimical to the idea of equal opportunity in the marketplace”

The education system has been the cornerstone of freedom and equity for economic success in The United States. However, the history of education has never been so crucial to the collective future of our nation and to the young people. The public schools must struggle to provide equality in educational system as never before. The demand for education has become necessary and growing to provide education for all students to comply with the rigorous academic standards on a global scale (Baker, B. D., Sciarra, D. G., Farrie, D. (2010, p. 1).

The school finance reform is focused on the distribution of funds across rich and poor district schools. The reform was based on the thought that rich neighborhoods and households were better in spending on education. These scholars would access better programs and their family backgrounds could put them in the most precious and advanced institutions. Poorer neighborhoods on the other hand struggled to raise fees and sometimes students were forced to drop-out due to financial challenges. The historical development of the school finance reform has always sought to fund schools differently based on students’ family backgrounds (White, 2014). Poorer schools are given priority, low income districts also enjoy more federal aid that high-income district schools. The significance of school finance reforms was poised on previous researches. Studies indicate that a student educated in a school that received 20% higher funding than that of his peer, the scholar was likely to perform 20% better and his chances for adult poverty were 20% lower (White, 2014). Low-income government schools, either at district or state level, will perform better if given adequate financial assistance.

“Students who study art are 4 times more likely to be recognized for academic achievement and 3 times more likely to be awarded for school attendance” ("11 Facts about Arts in Education"). Music and art are clearly not two subjects that schools today can afford to cut off funding for based on this evidence. Music and art programs are responsible for increasing school attendance, which can lead to being one of the most important things in a student’s academic success in school. Students have to attend school and be present in order to attain the information from their classes and teachers if they wish to succeed. Better attendance means more students are in class, which means more students are getting the information they need to excel from their teachers, which ultimately means better grades and test scores for schools. As of today, arts are defined as core subjects in only twenty-six states in America (Mandel). If only twenty-six states are treating art education as a core subject, that means that twenty-four states are currently neglecting art programs and not considering them important to their student’s education. If more states are educated on the importance of art programs for young students, and the arts are defined as core subjects nationally, then there will be a

In the United States, public schools get their funding from their respective state. As a student, it can be seen as concerning when one compares how much states spend on their schools. Many schools are inadequate in both an aspect of safety and effectiveness of the learning environment. As a result of inadequate subsidy across America, schools resort to taking drastic measures. Not only are the unequal sources of subsidy a difficulty, but the concept and execution of budget cuts also exacerbate the issue. In order to give every student in America equal opportunities for success, funding should be controlled by the federal government with a policy that enforces equity rather than equality. This is also a viable option that could be carried

Results taken from the executive summary of the Education Law Center in New Jersey show that a small percentage of states who have funding systems put in place and provide greater funding to high poverty districts remain the most progressive states yearly. Whereas a larger percentage of states have funding systems where districts with higher poverty rates receive less funding, these states remain the most regressive. (School funding disparities persist, analysis shows).