When school districts flunk the basics

Parents in the Manheim Township school district near my home in central Pennsylvania are fighting what looks like a losing battle with the school board. In an attempt to balance the budget, boost test scores in targeted subjects and increase the district's chances for meeting the new Common Core Curriculum guidelines, the board is making significant cuts in art, music and physical education instruction to make room for more math and science.

Granted, it's important to have at least a basic understanding of math and science. But is it fair to penalize students who aren't strong in these areas, or who perhaps are strong in math and science but could be more creative, well-rounded humans if exposed to the arts and physical education more extensively in school?

The role of exercise in reducing the risk of physical ailments is by now well known, but the connection between physical activity and cognitive function isn't nearly as well publicized. In his book, Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain, Dr. John J. Ratey tells of schools that saw significantly improved tests scores after making students exercise first thing in the morning.

So exercise is good for everything. But what about music and art? Are they luxuries?

Philadelphia's dilemma

Of course school budget cuts in art and music won't prevent children from experiencing the arts elsewhere. On the other hand, consider the often-touted benefits of team sports:

They build character, teach people to work together for a common goal while learning to be disciplined, and encourage friendships that may last a lifetime. All great stuff— but some people aren't very good at sports. That's where the orchestra, band and choir come in—if the programs weren't being cut (like sports, come to think of it).

When music was a science

The fact that art is generally a solitary pursuit doesn't diminish its value, because creativity is a very important factor in workplace success. Global companies seek out more liberal arts graduates because they have the flexibility to adjust as business needs change.

More important, creating art is a therapeutic act. Cramming more hours of math and science into students' brains may backfire because those same students need subjects like art just to get them through the day.

During the Renaissance, music was considered a science and art was revered. It's no accident s that men like Leonardo da Vinci were both artists and scientists. Mozart, in the 18th Century, was both a mathematical and musical genius.

"Genius" is the operative word here. Since U.S. math and science scores have lagged for years, it's time to get back to basics— which includes more than merely science and math.

Why the dropouts?

I heard a radio ad recently claiming that one student drops out of high school every 26 seconds, or something like that. What would keep those students in school? No one can say for sure. But it's a good bet that narrowing the curriculum, and excluding the very subjects that inspire and enlarge the human soul, will only exacerbate the problem.

If America is to compete with the rest of the world, our scientists and mathematicians need more than mere aptitude. They also need passion and creativity.

I speak as a music teacher who has taught piano students who play all the notes accurately but without feeling. My question for cash-strapped school boards currently weighing their options is: Where will the country's necessary passion, creativity and teamwork come from, if the daytime school experience is uninspiring?