Is the educational system one-track

[marleyisalegend]

It seems that our current educational system (and our beliefs about intelligence) seem to be one-way. You work to get a degree, become an expert in a field. However, the first 12 years of schooling encourage a narrow idea of what's considered intelligent, valuable information. It's arguable that the idea of college education is now a BUSINESS, it's competitive, and it's grossly unaffordable by LOTS of people.

(Shut the fuck up about loans and grants, those are TRAPS, and they're traps that aren't available to everyone, so somebody's getting left by the wayside. The ones I know who do/did get loans are living paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by trying to pay Sally back).

Anywho, Jillian Lynn (sp?), who choreographed Cats and Phantom of the Opera, had problems in school. In the 30's, when she was in school, officials suggested that she might have a learning disorder, ADD wasn't "conceived" yet. She was fidgety, disturbing people, late homework, etc...

She was taken to a specialist who left her in the room alone, and took her mother outside. He turned the radio on before he left and she almost immediately stood up and started moving around.

This woman went on to become a world-renowned choreographer, but if she was in the educational system in the 90's or 2000's, she would've been given a prescription for Ridelin and told to sit down and behave.:frown1:

Are we trying to create mindless drones? Are we discouraging creativity? Why are the arts down at the bottom of the well? Where does that put people who's talents lie IN the arts? There are LOTS of people who make decent, moderate living in the arts, so why do we treat them as if they're a dead-end?

Every child isn't meant to be a college professor or CEO.

 

[Principessa]

Ooo, child! This is a topic near and dear to my heart; but I'm about to be late for church so I will get back to you later. I have some very strong opinions on what's wrong with the American public school system and what we need to do to get back on track. Abolishing NCLB is the least of our problems. It goes much deeper than that.

njqt466
Educator

 

[ZOS23xy]

You must understand that the educational systems currently really suck because there are parents that are expecting everything to be done by schools.

Reports of kids coming in, violent and schooled on TV and not by people are fairly routine.

The topic could be volumes long.

My son is hyperactive but as I've said in other threads and topics of this nature, you have to tell the kid in this situation he/she "you are different". If the message does not get through, the child will be a pain.

I've half deaf dyslexic, left handed near sighted and have allergies. I cannot be "like everyone else". I can only cope with knowledge and understanding.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Ooo, child! This is a topic near and dear to my heart; but I'm about to be late for church so I will get back to you later. I have some very strong opinions on what's wrong with the American public school system and what we need to do to get back on track. Abolishing NCLB is the least of our problems. It goes much deeper than that.

njqt466
Educator

LOL, I was just talking about the slaughter of creativity, but asking "what's wrong with the educational system" is like asking "How does the digestive system work?" No easy answers. There are 8 billion things wrong with our educational system, one facet being the suppression of creative-thinking children.

 

[ballsaplenty2156]

Yes, creativity should be encouraged, nourished even; but we cannot allow the educational system to become a slave to it.
Given today's society, as ZOS23xy, has pointed out, people expect television and the school system to totally raise their children, while they, themselves, go off to "complete" their lives. With little or no input from parents actually taking an interest in their childrens education.
An educational system based on a creative path would be fraught with the dangers that instead of learning something, a child could use the excuse of being creative and thinking outside the box. As much as we would like to think we are all special, having gifts or talents no one else in the universe can claim, the simple truth is, one in ten thousand will become that gifted choreographer. Sad, but true.
We cannot allow the educational system to stifle creativity, nor should we allow creativity to overrule actual education.
Our nation's students are falling further and further behind other nations, something we cannot allow.
We need to pay teachers a much better wage, encourage them to not only teach, but continue to learn, weed out the unfit teachers, regardless of tenure. If you're not going into class everyday to teach and expand the minds of the youth; then you shouldn't be there.
There's something drastically wrong with a society that pays an athlete millions of dollars a year to throw a ball thru a hoop, a puck into a net, a football downfield, or hit a baseball over the fence.
Teachers are our single most important resource. Without them, what can we hope to attain?
Parents need to take a bigger role in the educational system. It all starts at home. Yes, I know all the excuses. Single, working parents having to work two and three jobs; don't have time to sit with their kids and help them study or even to check their homework.
That's pure ignorance. Make the time. You brought these beings into this world, it is your responsibility to ensure they get the most out of life and leave this place a better world than they got it.
Jillian Lynn was that one in a million who was able to utilize her gift for dance to make a living, to say she was fortunate, is like saying the ocean is a little damp. We most definitely need creativity in our educational system, a child must have a well-rounded education, but creativity is not necessarily in itself, education.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Yes, creativity should be encouraged, nourished even; but we cannot allow the educational system to become a slave to it.

That's not what I suggested at all, you've dumbed down my intention.

With little or no input from parents actually taking an interest in their childrens education.

Amen.

An educational system based on a creative path

I didn't say "make it 100% about creativity". You've blown up what I suggested.

Parents need to take a bigger role in the educational system. It all starts at home. Yes, I know all the excuses. Single, working parents having to work two and three jobs; don't have time to sit with their kids and help them study or even to check their homework. That's pure ignorance. Make the time.

THAT is pure ignorance, that's like saying "We can solve world hunger by feeding the hungry". It's idealistic and simplistic. What about parents who are ONLY home from the hours of midnight to 6, 7 am?

Jillian Lynn was that one in a million who was able to utilize her gift for dance to make a living, to say she was fortunate, is like saying the ocean is a little damp.

That's misleading. There are lots of middle-ground, moderately successful artists/choreographers/designers/etc.. that make decent livings doing what they do. The "one in a million" refers to marginal success and can be said of traditional employment as well. How many Mcdonald's employees go on to own their own restaurant? Probably not many.

We most definitely need creativity in our educational system, a child must have a well-rounded education, but creativity is not necessarily in itself, education.

Are you just being argumentative? I suggested that creativity is undermined, you blew that up to an irrational proportion, just to agree with me in the end. The bolded part was the point of my OP. I never said "drop everything and teach dance and painting". I agree that balance is required, that's EXACTLY what I was asking for in the OP.:biggrin1:

 

[transformer_99]

Devil's advocate here: What's wrong with today's student ? Gun toting, knife wielding thugs. When they aren't doing that, they're distracted with cell phones, iPods, & have to have a notebook computer and free internet. School issued ? Like that notebook won't wind up at a pawn shop or stolen and resold ? A few bad apples ? Happens more often than we think.

Just me, but the one's you described Marley, those students seem to succeed in spite of the educational system being this awful failure. This nation or any other for that matter, needs a work force to be a successful society. A workforce that can go beyond the 3 R's. Having students pay for their educations, instills a sense of responsibility. And when those students graduate, they make it back over time and then some, while giving back to the community.

Sooner or later we have to be producing something bigger than the next major motion picture blockbuster. If our education system is such a failure, why is the USA one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful nation on this planet. I don't mean to rub that in the faces of the rest of the world, but foreign nations send their people here to our universities, that has to tell you others value our educational system far more than our own citizens. And don't get me going on what our Universities do abroad with international studies. I'd say get our kids involved productively, rather than drone on about what the educational system isn't, because for every gem that is mismanaged, there are significantly more students squandering those 12 years of education away because their parents see the school system as a publicly funded day care center and don't give a damn and their children are just as slack as their parents are.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Having students pay for their educations, instills a sense of responsibility.

VERY true idealistically, but in the real world, responsible kids go into debt cuz of the costs, and irresponsible kids get free education cuz their dad own's a company.

And when those students graduate, they make it back over time and then some, while giving back to the community.

This is a theory. LOTS of people never get the chance to contribute, or even catch up with their debts. I have a friend who has 3 years of school left, and he says he'll be paying off his debts til he's about 55, literally.

I'd say get our kids involved productively, rather than drone on about what the educational system isn't, because for every gem that is mismanaged, there are significantly more students squandering those 12 years of education away.

First, I don't have kids. Second, this is just an observation of mine, one that many experts agree with. Before we continue, I should as you a few questions.

1. Are you aware of the benefits of music education? In general, and in relation to higher reading and math scores?

2. Are you aware how many schools constantly cut funds for music/art related classes?

3. Are you aware of school budgeting, how the public education system is funded, and where that money goes?

 

[ballsaplenty2156]

I never said, nor did I imply, that you were suggesting we abandon a traditional educational system, in favor of just allowing students to be creative and follow their artistic talents.
In fact, if you weren't so looking for an argument, you might have read what I wrote and realized it was in support of 85% of your original posting.
You're a fool to suggest that by not feeding the hungry, we would not end world hunger. If no one is hungry in the world, where is the world hunger?
And what about parents that work those hours? Does that give them the okay to ignore the educational needs of their children? I know it would be very tough for some people, but that's called sacrifice. You bring a new life into this world, so that you can give it better than you had. You push yourself to give your child a better future.
You know Marley, I consider you a very intellectual man, I respect you. But i don't always agree with you. You have a very myopic view of the world. A good bit of it is tainted by your views on race. It is unfortunate that someone so obviously intelligent allows himself to see only part of the picture.
If a parent really wants to see their child / children succeed they will make the necessary sacrifices to help them attain their goals. If that includes getting a job on a shift more advantageous to helping your child, despite the hardships it might cause you as a person; as a parent, you are obliged, no relegated to doing just that.
Yes it will be difficult, but it is the parents' responsibility do ensure a proper education for their offspring, regardless of the inconvenience. That is the decision you made when you laid down and got pregnant.
McDonald's is a job, by the way, not a career. It is not something one would hope one's child would choose as a way of life. It fulfills appetites for greasy, unhealthy food; not dreams of moving beyond a stifling way of life.
I wholeheartedly agree with you regarding creativity in the educational system. But your example of Jillian Lynn, was extreme and poorly chosen. Compare her success to the tens of thousands of dancers and choreographers who never make it. They end up as waiters, doormen, taxi drivers, etc; ..... AND for the sake of making a living, there is absolutely nothing wrong with those jobs, but to infer that ALL students could attain what Ms. Lynn did is ignorance to the max.
Peace.

 

[marleyisalegend]

From this post forward, I'm only responding to people who respond to what I directly said, not those who spin my ideas to sound illogical and irrational. I didn't say "Throw all math teachers out the window and replace them with eccentric, hippie piano teachers".

This discussion requires a bit more thought than some of what's been posted, and I'll refrain from posting until someone with a bit more intellect has responded. I no longer care to defend my words against people who endlessly twist them to make them sound stupid and idealistic. This is a complex situation that doesn't have any 2-paragraph answers.

NJ, where you at gurl?!?!?

 

[B_Morning_Glory]

Ooo, child! This is a topic near and dear to my heart; but I'm about to be late for church so I will get back to you later. I have some very strong opinions on what's wrong with the American public school system and what we need to do to get back on track. Abolishing NCLB is the least of our problems. It goes much deeper than that.

njqt466
Educator

njqt466, i have a question for what do think of homeschooling that some of the parnet's do? my two are homeschooled and they have been better grades then went to public school. i have been doing this for 3 yrs. what does that say? that the teachers didnt care because they were special ed class they dont need a good education. my kids done their homework.and never skipped school when they went to public school. just like this school yr which starts in a couple of weeks. my kids got there school books and everything opened up the boxes and was reading to go. they were excited. something they neveer showed going to public school. marley u r right. i think they should have a class for these types people dancers. i mean they have art class music class why not a dancing class. there is alot of creative people out there.

 

[marleyisalegend]

i think they should have a class for these types people dancers. i mean they have art class music class why not a dancing class.

Exactly. I'm not saying "erase the entire curriculum", I'm saying it's terribly unbalanced. Math is taught EVERY DAY, how often is dance or music or drawing taught? Where does that leave people who aren't good at math or history? It's not as easy as "you're stupid if you don't get math".

The brain is VERY complex, some people can't divide fractions but can look at sheet music ONCE and remember the entire piece. Some people can't throw or catch a football, but gie them a dance routine and they can do it better than a professional.

Again, there's no balance. ANd it's LONG been proven that music education usually leads to better math and reading comprehension, it's all circular.

 

[vince]

Marley. You are being too defensive and stifling discussion. I was going to post in this thread until I read your last missive.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Marley. You are being too defensive and stifling discussion. I was going to post in this thread until I read your last missive.

Sorry, I get antsy when every thread I make turns into "Marley your ideas are illogical and this is why" and an essay is written on what's wrong with my perception.

Sorry but it annoys me when people spin logical, rational thoughts into illogic and insult my intelligence based on their spin of my opinion.

I just said "schools downplay the arts" I didn't say "throw all math teachers into gas chambers and replace them dance teachers".

 

[lucky8]

It seems that our current educational system (and our beliefs about intelligence) seem to be one-way. You work to get a degree, become an expert in a field. However, the first 12 years of schooling encourage a narrow idea of what's considered intelligent, valuable information. It's arguable that the idea of college education is now a BUSINESS, it's competitive, and it's grossly unaffordable by LOTS of people.

Ok, I love talking about education, so i'll bite. The first 12 years of schooling are meant to give people a GENERAL education. This is because public eduaction is basically free. If everyone was super educated coming out of high school, why would people go to college? Contrary to what you believe, I believe high schools actually provide a BROAD idea of education, introducing students to every aspect of education, and letting them choose which fields interest them, and if they are interested in a certain topic, encouraging them to continue their education after graduation in order to become experts in the field of their choice. Those who believe a high school degree will help them if they don't go to college are drastically mistaken. A high school degree is not a big accomplishment, it's the norm.

College education has always been a business. Not everyone can go to college, if they did our economy would collapse because there would be millions of jobs that require unskilled workers that would go unfilled. Of course college is competetive...i woulnd't be going if it was just a walk through the park.

(Shut the fuck up about loans and grants, those are TRAPS, and they're traps that aren't available to everyone, so somebody's getting left by the wayside. The ones I know who do/did get loans are living paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by trying to pay Sally back).

At this point in time, I'll agree, it is very difficult for a lot of people to get student loans because of new stringent policies (we can thank the banks for that one). If you have bad credit, you're basically fucked. It's the only way banks can tell if you're responsible enough to pay back your loans though. I wouldn't call loans and grants traps though, maybe traps for those who can't stick to a budget, but for everyone else who is responsible, it's a matter of working your ass off and paying your bills on time, or getting a loan that you won't have to start paying off until you graduate. (my mother put herself through 4 years of general college and 3 years of law school with loans and paid them all off, so it can be done if you're responsible, responsibilty is key here)...

Anywho, Jillian Lynn (sp?), who choreographed Cats and Phantom of the Opera, had problems in school. In the 30's, when she was in school, officials suggested that she might have a learning disorder, ADD wasn't "conceived" yet. She was fidgety, disturbing people, late homework, etc...

She was taken to a specialist who left her in the room alone, and took her mother outside. He turned the radio on before he left and she almost immediately stood up and started moving around.

This woman went on to become a world-renowned choreographer, but if she was in the educational system in the 90's or 2000's, she would've been given a prescription for Ridelin and told to sit down and behave.:frown1:

This should prove to you that you don't have to go to college to be successful. The most successful person I know didn't even graduate from high school, but he's worked his ass off since he was 14, and now owns 2 airplanes and one of the biggest houses in my city...the choice of a child going on Ritalin or Adderall ultimately falls onto the parents, not the school. That stuff IS horrible for kids, I'll agree with you there, altough I can't say if it stifles creativity or not because to be honest with you, I have a prescription for adderall, and I am extremely creative. I'm not on it because I'm ADD and I don't take it very often, but it's definately the cure for college teachers who don't seem to realize i'm taking 4 other classes besides theirs...I'd say 1 out of every 4 students currently in college have taken adderall to study, now what does that tell you...

Are we trying to create mindless drones? Are we discouraging creativity? Why are the arts down at the bottom of the well? Where does that put people who's talents lie IN the arts? There are LOTS of people who make decent, moderate living in the arts, so why do we treat them as if they're a dead-end?

I wish i could be a rockstar, i really do. There are millions of unrecognized musicians who are better than most of the popular musicians are, it's irritating. Unfortunately, it's next to impossible to become rich or even have a stable life being purely a musician. But going into the arts is very risky these days, which is why a lot of people are discouraged by it. I don't think anyone is discouraging the arts except for record companies. Plenty of high schools have band and drama, plenty of colleges give scholarships for playing an instrument, acting, and all kinds of arsty stuff, you just have to be good. The blame lies on radio, pop music, and money, not education. Sadly I'm beginning to see the arts as more of a hobby than a means of life anymore...

This reminds me of a quote from John Adams...

"The science of government it is my duty to study, more than all other sciences; the arts of legislation and administration and negotiation ought to take the place of, indeed exclude, in a manner, all other arts. I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain."

I'd say we've reached the point where we can freely study the arts if we choose, it's just that there isn't all that much money in it, and it is by far one of the more competitive fields to enter if you really want to make it. My entire life I've been hearing from people "you should go to college for music, you have tons a talent," and in all honesty, money and stablitly are the SOLE reasons I'm not majoring in music. I love making music, but I just don't think I'll have enough stability to provide for my family the way I want to by being a musician.

Every child isn't meant to be a college professor or CEO.

 

[Northland]

It seems that our current educational system (and our beliefs about intelligence) seem to be one-way. You work to get a degree, become an expert in a field. However, the first 12 years of schooling encourage a narrow idea of what's considered intelligent, valuable information. It's arguable that the idea of college education is now a BUSINESS, it's competitive, and it's grossly unaffordable by LOTS of people.

Newsflash-it's always been competitive and grossly unaffordable for the majority of people looking to get into the top schools. Even the not so top schools have cost a fortune. I went to school back before you were born and the dollar went further then, but still it didn't go far enough. In those days something new and tragic happened. Free education vanished. In about 1977 the City University of New York (known as CUNY and including Hunter, Baruch, City College, and several others) started charging! Admittedly it was a low cost all things considered; but it meant money. Back then New York had TAP (Tuition Assistance Program) and that was free money for those quallified to receive it-no paying back. There was also BEOG (Basic Educational Opportuinity Grant) which did not need to be paid back. Thern there was SEOG or something like that which was another grant. All this before loans. YaHOOOO! Ralph (a nutcase friend of mine) proposed going to school, registering for classes and then fleeing to Europe where he would sing in the streets for money. I passed and headed off to Northland (hence my name). I worked hard at a few part time jobs during the year, and full time in the summer and took a small loan out as a way to build a credit record. Then again, Uncle Jim (Carter) supplied me with 800 bucks a month due to a dead father. I guess my example is not very good. Axeshoe-ullee it iz. There are still free grants out there if a student looks for them and a little work on the side will be good for the student to start building a work history. If they're slated to go into the arts (painting,dance, theater, writing, etc.) they will do that and then the whole education thing won't mean as much.

Well, that's not entirely true. Back in the summer of 1978 I applied for a job-I was that friendly guy you'd call about to learn more about the Bullworker and hopefully order the piece of overpriced crap. They required a high school diploma for me to get that job. I worked long hours (1900 to 0100-they used military time) and was given a paltry paycheck. Fortunately I also had another job. The thing here is, that, many actors. dancers. would-be writers, and the such, need to have a job to live (unless they're good with collecting cans and bottles for the nickel deposit) that narrow education led them to the high school diploma and that gets them a marginal job answering phones or doing data entry which in turn pays their share of rent on a 1 bedroom apartment shared by them and 8 other actor/dancer/singer hopefuls until they get their big break.

Now, back to the education and the need and don't need. The narrow range is all that can exist-there's far too much stuff to learn in the world to compress and convey it all in 12 measely years. It is however a start. That narrow band of learning was enough to entice me. It was enough to pique my interests in botany and history (and even the history of botany). Was it everything? Hardly. However, it gave me the blueprint and what happened next was up to me.

Of course back then Vocational schools were still big-they seem to have falen out of favor. For the academically challenged, the academically disinclined, automotive, carpentry, electrical, plumbing, printing were options. One of the schools I attended had a nursing program and a co-op program. Co-op was in a few of the schools. It was one of the best things out there-students were students one week, taking the standard courses required for graduation (English) and business courses, in the other week they worked, then back to school, then work, then schoool...
it was a great program and set many students on a path for life. Not sure if it still exists.

(Shut the fuck up about loans and grants, those are TRAPS, and they're traps that aren't available to everyone, so somebody's getting left by the wayside. The ones I know who do/did get loans are living paycheck to paycheck, barely getting by trying to pay Sally back).

Anywho, Jillian Lynn (sp?),-that would be Gillian Lynne- GILLIAN LYNNE official website and IBDB: The official source for Broadway Information
who choreographed Cats and Phantom of the Opera, had problems in school. In the 30's, when she was in school, officials suggested that she might have a learning disorder, ADD wasn't "conceived" yet. She was fidgety, disturbing people, late homework, etc...

She was taken to a specialist who left her in the room alone, and took her mother outside. He turned the radio on before he left and she almost immediately stood up and started moving around.

This woman went on to become a world-renowned choreographer, but if she was in the educational system in the 90's or 2000's, she would've been given a prescription for Ridelin and told to sit down and behave.:frown1:

Are we trying to create mindless drones? Are we discouraging creativity? Why are the arts down at the bottom of the well? Where does that put people who's talents lie IN the arts? There are LOTS of people who make decent, moderate living in the arts, so why do we treat them as if they're a dead-end?

Every child isn't meant to be a college professor or CEO.

Yeah, yeah, blah, blah, blah, blah and blah and in case I forget it, blahbeddy blah.

Point being that, no, education ain't the only thing of importance. Many people just ain't educayschunullee sooted. Yet there is something to be said for education. Education gives a base. With that base a person can decide where they want to go next.

I was deemed a failure in school-I didn't do homework, drew maps of imaginary towns (with imaginary houses and stores and bus routes). In the 4th grade I failed long division. In the 6th grade I had daily report cards-given to the student who never does any assignments. I didn't get the Cats-woman special treatment-I was left in a class and had to learn or fail. This was in the 60s and 70s. The most I got was in 1972 with 4 other pieces of trouble-there was me, Ambrose, and the others. We all were trouble in one way or another. Once a week we had what I suppose was group therapy. We sat in a classroom after school and talked. It was strange to say the least. The good part was I got to sit next to Ambrose (are Albanians allowed to be gay?).


So, what's my point? (yeah what is my point?) The teachers put some basics in front of me. I took some things and rejected other things. Point being the stuff was there. There was history, there was science, there was English, math, Spanish, Electronics, and dozens of other subjects as well. All of that gave me a starter kit. As the guy from Apex says: "I can't call you, you've got to take the first step and call." That's what the basic narrow education gives-a chance at an opportunity and a massaging of the brain to get the cells activated into deciding what direction to go-be it educational, vocational or in something artistic.

Part of what has happened is that the nation (known mostly as The United States) has pushed education as the most important thing. Of course, they only have done this verbally. The actual education standards which they (government) claim to want are not something which they truly try to help people achieve. And God forbid if the kid has a cell in their body which is not governmental standard. If the child is into music or dance or theater or design or anything outside the proverbial box, they are santioned and dismissed as failures. Mockery from most teachers will follow (unless you're the teacher's pet). The nation hasn't yet figured out how to allow people to be individuals.

Why is education (English, Science, Math, History) pushed while music and art and literary skills are squashed? DOLLARS! It's money, It is known that a doctor can make money and so can a lawyer. An actor or a songwriter has a much lesser chance at the big dollars. Big money means tax revenue which makes the bureaucrats very very happy (and wealthy).

 

[marleyisalegend]

This is because public eduaction is basically free.

Free? Property taxes pay for education. In that sense, the higher your areas general property value, the better eduation ur likely to get.

I believe high schools actually provide a BROAD idea of education, introducing students to every aspect of education, and letting them choose which fields interest them, and if they are interested in a certain topic, encouraging them to continue their education after graduation in order to become experts in the field of their choice.

This is the case....sometimes. Some high-schools want to head you in one direction. Arts classes get cut, there are 4-year requisites for traditional courses, and some arts subjects don't go beyond 2 years of study. AKA, you HAVE to study math for 4 years, but you CAN'T study photography for more than 2. There are certainly areas that receive more attention, in the classroom, on the curriculum, even in the guidance office. I told my guidance counselor I wanted to pursue music, specifically vocal, and she ridiculed me for 20 minutes.

That stuff IS horrible for kids, I'll agree with you there, altough I can't say if it stifles creativity or not because to be honest with you, I have a prescription for adderall, and I am extremely creative.

I was referring more to the current obssession with labelling everything as ADD. He's a bully? He has ADD, give him Ritalin. He didn't do his homework? He has ADD, give him Ritalin. He challenged the teacher's explanation of the origin of man? Individualistic thinking and challenging authority? Give him a double-dose!!

Unfortunately, it's next to impossible to become rich or even have a stable life being purely a musician.

That's astronomically untrue. Lots of people survive as musicians, sometimes they work part time to help, but there are LOTS of people who tour, have managers, but don't get played on MTV.

Plenty of high schools have band and drama, plenty of colleges give scholarships for playing an instrument, acting, and all kinds of arsty stuff, you just have to be good.

In that case, some people have an unfair advantage. Some people get exceptional music education, others get minimal music education.

The blame lies on radio, pop music, and money, not education.

That's terribly untrue, someone who goes to a school with great arts programs, others go to school with minimal to no educational programming. The requisites are all in traditional fields, so arts as electives fall by the wayside.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

I am grateful to my parents and the taxpayers of California and Oregon who subsidized most of my educational expenses right through graduate school. I was always cognizant of that expensive investment in me and, in return, I showed my gratitude by working like a devil to earn top grades and gain work experience. Partying and goofing off was held to an absolute minimum lest it ever interfere with the reason I was in school: academics. I can proudly say I succeded in that goal.

Through a combination of living inexpensively, summers spent painting fences, on-campus work washing dishes and stacking books in the library I was able to avoid taking student loans. It was a hardnosed grind for 5 years but I did it. These days, though, it seems like even those sacrifices wouldn't be enough to get a student through college at even a state-supported school. I fear the ethic of public funding for higher education is lapsing and that upcoming generations of Americans are going to find college prohibitively expensive at a time when the US is going to need more well educated and trained employees entering the workforce.

 

[BIGBULL29]

This should prove to you that you don't have to go to college to be successful. The most successful person I know didn't even graduate from high school, but he's worked his ass off since he was 14, and now owns 2 airplanes and one of the biggest houses in my city...

Yeah, I here this from rednecks day in and day out. It all depends on what you define as "successful." Americans define success by power and money. I know lots of morons in my hometown who have both. Some never went past the 8th grade, in fact.

The real intent of the university was to educate and bring a degree of prestige to the learned, not to become wealthy.

"The science of government it is my duty to study, more than all other sciences; the arts of legislation and administration and negotiation ought to take the place of, indeed exclude, in a manner, all other arts. I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain."

Artistic expression preceded science and technology. In our day and age, we don't realize how important the arts really are. They define us as a people, not our computers and medical breakthroughs. Our cultures has an innate need to identify itself.

All in all, universities and colleges are big business in the US. They'll take anyone as long as you can fit the bill.

Point of irony: They put more money into athletic programs than learning (Big 10 college football, for example).

American kids want to be athletes, rappers and rock stars, not linguists, chemists and philosphers. Universities adapt to the culture, and that's why sports programs take precedence.

 

[transformer_99]

VERY true idealistically, but in the real world, responsible kids go into debt cuz of the costs, and irresponsible kids get free education cuz their dad own's a company.

This is a theory. LOTS of people never get the chance to contribute, or even catch up with their debts. I have a friend who has 3 years of school left, and he says he'll be paying off his debts til he's about 55, literally.

First, I don't have kids. Second, this is just an observation of mine, one that many experts agree with. Before we continue, I should as you a few questions.

1. Are you aware of the benefits of music education? In general, and in relation to higher reading and math scores?

2. Are you aware how many schools constantly cut funds for music/art related classes?

3. Are you aware of school budgeting, how the public education system is funded, and where that money goes?

Your first response sounds like sour grapes because some parents do better than others. How is that a broken school system, that's more an issue of equitable distribution of income and wealth that has cascaded to a funding issue for education, amongst other things.

The 2nd response, some loans are affordable, do better in college and land a FT job lining it up before you graduate in your field. Walking out of college very few are stellar corporate contributors, even based upon excellent grades. If you can't swing the job lined up at graduation, the best way to get experience in the corporate world is to get on with a temp agency. The education gives you an opportunity to compete, the tools to present yourself and win a better job. I've been thru a lot of this myself, so it's not like I'm using this as a tool to keep others down.

The last response of yours, I don't care what the benefits of a music education is, I suck at playing an instrument and singing. But that doesn't stop me from finding other ways to earn a decent income. To be honest, you can take a lot of the music that's made billions and really scrap that as crap. 90% of it I didn't listen to when it was popular and never will. I'm glad others were able to parlay it into their 15 minutes of fame and fortune, but somewhere along the way, we really have to discern between what is music and what is some wealthy kids marketing gimmick the rest of us fund somehow. Like that retard that used to wear his clothes inside out and backwards. That wasn't music and it wasn't fashion either. You want good music, listen to this, it'll stand the test of time:

Echoes: Ambient Music on Public Radio

nobody shoots up drugs, punches fans, goes beserk throwing cell phones at others in a tirade of rage, gets shot at, wounded or killed, makes racist remarks while making profits on others victimizations.

Usher, Diddy, Other Celebs Rushed To Safety After Atlanta Nightclub Shooting - News Story - WSB Atlanta

Some of the best musicians and their music never go mainstream.