Wonderful.

It's terrible, but the US really is that way. Math/science > Arts/humanities. The latter two don't fuel the capitalist machine and are therefore not prioritized.

Yes, it really is disgusting. Not to mention in terms of extra curriculars, athletics tend to get more funding. My high school had THREE gyms and no auditorium. We had to merge with the other high school in town for the fall musical every year, which was a major hassle because everyone from my high school would rush over there after school, and since the talent pool is twice as large, really talented performers get screwed out of decent roles. My high school also has one of the best choral programs in the state, and we had to perform in a gym, with a few exceptions for special concerts when we got to perform in a nice city auditorium.

I fail to see the issue with maths and science being considered more important that theatre. They are.

It's not just theatre, it's performing arts/humanities in general. That's more than just theatre. It's not that math/sciences aren't important, because they are (although I will admit I personally dislike them greatly because there are not my strong suits and no one should be forced to to a career concerning them if that is not their passion), it's that arts and humanties are given such a shaft they are percieved as basically useless by some school districts. When really, students who are involved in performing arts and music are even more likely to excell in math and sciences. Some people are just more creative/artistic thinkers, they need a creative outlet to use their brain efficiently. The best math students I knew in high school were also extremely invovled and talented with music/theater as well. I personally believe taking away or limiting music/arts/athletics/extra curriculars budgets and giving all the funding to academics will create even more a problem. There needs to be more balance. But I really don't want to turn this into a debate on American education, that's just my opinion on the matter since it was brought up.

Ultimately, there are outlets outside the school where teenagers can flex their creative and artistic muscles. Community theatres, private music lessons, the arts and crafts aisle at Wal Mart. The arts don't need to be taught in schools. It's great if they can be, but if the budget is under strain, statistics and chemistry can't be sacrificed to save drama or mariachi band. It's a matter of priorities, and classes that are actually academic do and should be put before classes that are extra (and, frankly, when I look at the high schools that offer a grand total of three or four sciences, yet have full sections of jewelry-making, five trimesters' worth of photography (that may or may not even involve the skill of using real film), yoga, four different levels of choir, and everyone's favorite bird course "Cooking for Singles," I can't help but think we're better off being even more stringent, especially since I'm footing the bill to teach the art of making single-serving cheese quesadillas to kids who will never set foot in a calculus, economics, or pre-reformation history class.

As far as extra-cirricular activities offered by the school, there is a little more weight for a valid argument that arts suffer in favor of athletics... still, athletics generally serve more students than arts, so they will prevail in a budget crisis almost every time. As a student, I never felt that it had to be tit for tat. Fact: more teenagers want to play a sport than a violin - budget accordingly.

When exactly do you think I was the average teenager? It may not have been yesterday, but it hasn't quite been a century, either. I know perfectly well what goes on in the lives of teenagers, and while they have little in common with the Cleaver boys (and never really did at any time in the past, either), the cast of Rent is an even farther cry. Get over yourself, and while you're at it, make sure you're home by midnight so your mom doesn't take away your phone.

'

That is very annoying, provoking and limited minded. Art, philosophy and the humanistic traditions are what make us human.

Whoa whoa .... I'm surprised Pippin is not on this list ... just saying ...

And believe me, I hate how the arts not looked on favorably by a lot of US school systems. In fact, the public school systems in my county were thinking about cutting some of the music ed programs. Doesn't anyone realize that a student involved with the arts have their test scores a lot higher sometimes? :sigh:

Arts and humanities are important. They must always be offered. I'm all in favor of keeping them in schools. However, you can't argue with one logical point: Compared to all the other countries in the world, America isn't failing at arts and humanities, but it is failing at sciences and math.

Yes, but that does not make them priorities for schools to teach. Your life will be in no way hampered if you can't read music, but it will if you can't read.

Teach them, yes (certainly here, anyone can do music and art. It is compulsory to a point.) but they are not the focus of a school.

Community theatre directors don't usually give roles to young actors with no voice training or acting training. And lots of kids simply can't afford private music lessons and/or acting classes. If public schools don't foster an environment in which students can learn to develop their talents, many will never have the opportunity to pursue artistic careers.





LOL. Read Cherie Currie's memoir Neon Angel. TONS of kids struggle with drugs, disease and homelessness. The amount of stuff that Cherie Currie went through during her teen years alone would be enough to burn out even the most mature of adults, and she came from an extremely average suburban family.


Maybe you know what goes on in the lives of teenagers who are shut up inside their homes by overprotective parents but that doesn't mean that there aren't kids who get around.