The Wall Street Journal recently published Joanne Lipman’s essay “A Musical Fix for American Schools: Research shows that music training boosts IQ, focus and persistence.” Lipman (co-author of the book Strings Attached) focuses primarily on issues of students’ IQ, ability to process sounds, cognitive abilities, links to reading abilities, and brain expansion. She ends the article citing an economic analysis from the Journal of Economic [sic] Finance [I believe it is possibly the Journal of Education Finance] to demonstrate the cost of supporting music education in schools and suggests that schools ought to have music education programs. It is wonderful to have an article supportive of music education in schools in venues such as the Wall Street Journal. Perhaps allies of music education who write for the mainstream press might see this as a starting point for expanding such dialogue. For instance, as with many other articles on arts education in the mainstream press, teaching and learning are framed as “training.” Hopefully over time we will see a shift in thinking to move from a paradigm of writing about “training” to one of education, scaffolding learning, co-constructing understanding, facilitating skill development, or similar aspects of music teaching and learning. We might also seek to expand such discourse to include additional benefits of music education (NAfME’s Broader Minded Campaign seeks to assist with such a process). It is positive, that Lipman wrote in a way that supports funding music in schools without resorting to the common “music eduction no longer exists in schools” trope that is present in so many news articles. Additionally, as with any other online article regarding music education, it is worth reading and contributing to the dialogue taking place in the comments section.
I would imagine that music educators could do a nice job of expanding the discussion to address other aspects of music teaching and learning. If nothing else, it is positive to acknowledge those who write positively about arts education in the mainstream press. At the same time, we might provide some additional insight and nuance to the public discourse. So, consider adding a comment to the essay.
For those interested in the 2011 analysis to which (I think) Lipman refers, see below:
Evidence suggests that accountability and financial pressures are causing schools across the country to reduce investments in subject areas that are not assessed for accountability purposes. However, due to the design of financial reporting systems in most states, inadequate data are available to analyze spending levels and patterns for specific subject areas that may help to shed light on the magnitude and ramifications of these actions. This article presents the findings of an in-depth analysis of expenditures for music education programs in a large suburban school district by breaking down the spending for music programs by school, object, and program area—such as general, instrumental, or choral music. The findings show district expenditures for music instruction comprised only about 1.6% of the district’s total operating budget. The source of most spending for music, 90%, was the district’s general fund. Nearly 90% of spending was for instructional staff salaries and benefits. While per pupil spending varied significantly from school to school, student characteristics such as poverty or minority status had little influence on this variation. Instead, factors such as total school spending, teacher education and experience, and music participation drove differences in school spending levels.