I wrote this essay for a college class and thought since it was a relevant issue I would put it under bits and pieces.
———————
While STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) programs may provide a needed boost to our country's floundering test scores, more money and time should be spent on art programs because the arts increase emotional literacy, encourage a well-rounded education, and provide a healthy, non-stressful educational experience for those who are not inclined towards STEM.
When exploring the topic of why schools have as recently as 2001 started heavily pushing STEM programming, we must first look at the introduction of STEM. The entire basis of the concept is, as explained simply by stemschool.com, “At the turn of the twenty-first century, a consensus emerged that U.S. students' achievements in the STEM disciplines were falling short compared to other industrialized countries. The year 2001 saw a push to address the shortfall…- That same year, Judith Ramaley, NSF Director of Education and Human Resources, changed the acronym to STEM.”
At first glance, this may seem like a good thing- after all, if the United States was lagging in STEM areas compared to other countries, it only seems natural to focus more on those subjects. However, the answer is not quite so simple. As Fareed Zakaria in his opinion piece mentions, the very fact that the United States has not shown glowing success in testing may be the reason that keeps us on top in terms of innovation and GDP.
Zakaria also makes another interesting observation in the fact that all of the top countries in regards to innovation and GDP (those countries being Israel, Sweden, and the United States) have similar traits, namely, that all three are open societies, willing to let in ideas, goods, and services. However, the most important factor in this observation is the infinitely interesting detail that all of these countries, when surveyed, were supremely confident in their abilities in mathematics- even though the United States and Israel came, respectively, 27th and 30th in their mathematics testing.
So, in theory, then, our strength lies in our almost catastrophic self-confidence and not our distractingly bad test scores in math and science. In which case, why do we keep pushing STEM on a population that obviously could use a better literacy and reading rate? Again, it seems linked to a poorly thought-out plan that only looks at test scores and not overall success.
When we look at the overall success rate of certain individuals in the United States who have arguably changed their fields of study for the better, we can see an interesting trend towards the humanities having a better influence on these same individuals. Take for example Mark Zuckerburg, who was a classical liberal arts student who studied Ancient Greek extensively in high school and who majored in Psychology while he was in college. All would agree he changed the landscape of social media… Obviously, a lack of formal study in computer programming and other STEM topics didn’t harm his future ventures.
There are still other benefits to the arts/humanities than just creating a well-rounded person. According to Subin Park, MD, PhD and his colleagues, it is imperative that we consider “Twenty-nine nonclinical children participated in a 15-week arts education program that was composed of either creative movement or musical arts. Children completed the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, clinical scales, and brain magnetic resonance imaging before and after the intervention. Following program completion, performances on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, the Children’s Depression Inventory scores, and conduct disorder scores were significantly improved…- cortical thickness in the left postcentral gyrus and superior parietal lobule were increased, and the mean diffusivity values in the right posterior corona radiate and superior longitudinal fasciculus were decreased. Positive correlations between changes in cognitive measurements and changes in cortical thickness were observed. This preliminary study suggests a positive effect of arts education on executive functions in association with brain changes.”
Along with positive mental health benefits, it can improve all academic subjects that students take, as Amirah Johnson notes, students in the arts indeed excel academically. Different arts help improve cognitive function, which in turn positively influence math proficiency, reading skills, reasoning, and content organization- all of which by manner of association these same students’ test scores.
Yet, this is not the only benefit. It benefits children socially as well. As Daniel H. Bowen states, “Increasing students' arts educational experiences has positive effects on student discipline, writing achievement, school engagement, and empathy. At participating schools, 13.8 percent of students received disciplinary infractions compared to 17.4 percent at non-participating schools--a difference of 20.1 percent. Students' writing scores are 13 percent of a standard deviation higher than at similar schools with less arts education. School engagement increases by 8 percent of a standard deviation, and students' emotional and cognitive empathy grow by 7.2 percent and 3.9 percent of a standard deviation, respectively…Arts education is a promising option for policymakers interested in improving social-emotional learning outcomes and student behavior.”
This in turn leads us to question why so much government funding is going towards STEM, if it is not the roaring success that its proponents claim. Edu.gov reports state that, “Of the FY 2020 STEM education investments, the Department awarded $141 million in new grants and $437 million to continue existing projects that are making substantial progress toward their goals. Approximately $156 million supported projects with a focus on computer science”
It might behoove us to look at these numbers in comparison of the amount averagely spent on the arts and humanities. According to americansforthearts.org, “Since 2002, Congress has approved about $448 million for the Arts in Education program, and of that total, at least $5 million was targeted for dissemination and evaluation specifically.” These stats, coming out to about $34 million in one year are a far cry from the $734 million in one year approved for funding in STEM programs, especially since the above statistic is from 2002 to the time of the articles publishing in 2015.
So, how to address this massive and obviously unhealthy imbalance? Firstly, we might consider moving some of the funding from STEM to arts/humanities programs. Secondly, encourage parents and teachers to push for more art and humanities programs; some such programs include such things as regional or cultural arts.
For example, let's take the region of New England. If we were to address the issue of, quote-unquote, ‘Too much STEM’- we might start with the funding issue. Create grants, add, or adjust the school system’s budgets to accommodate the arts and humanities, and have more available and interesting programming aimed at students. Some ideas of arts/humanities programming that would be encouraged might include such things as Traditional New England Social Dancing (also sometimes known as contra dance, but it isn’t limited to that.), basket weaving, dance classes in general (such as ballroom dancing or other group dancing), mainstream art classes like drawing, painting, and pottery, and humanities-related programming based around the history of the region and the people therein.
The benefits of the above-mentioned activities and programming are manyfold. As evidenced by one source, creative movement and dance influence basic motor skills in preschoolers. Yet another article explores in depth how Contra-dancing is inherently mathematical. All of these things point to beneficial outcomes in schools.
In conclusion, if we wish to address the visibly unfair and unbalanced view of STEM v Arts/Humanities, we must explore all the different avenues available to us, both regionally, and culturally, even artistically. Without the arts, all school subjects suffer, and when all school subjects suffer, students suffer. Something must be done- and it seems we know how to do it.
Works Cited:
Park, Subin, et al. “A Preliminary Study of the Effects of an Arts Education Program on Executive Function, Behavior, and Brain Structure in a Sample of Nonclinical School-Aged Children.” JOURNAL OF CHILD NEUROLOGY, vol. 30, no. 13, Nov. 2015, pp. 1757–66. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1177/0883073815579710.
Mui, Wing L. “Connections between Contra Dancing and Mathematics.” Journal of Mathematics & the Arts, vol. 4, no. 1, Mar. 2010, pp. 13–20. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1080/17513470903188182.
Americans for the Arts, www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/AFTA_Decade-of-Fed-AIE_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov. 2023.
Zakaria, Fareed. “Fareed Zakaria: America’s Obsession with STEM Education Is Dangerous.” Dallas News, 26 Aug. 2019, www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2015/04/09/fareed-zakaria-americas-obsession-with-stem-education-is-dangerous/.
Bowen, Daniel H., and Brian Kisida. “The Fine Art of School Engagement: How Expanding Arts Education Affects Learning, Behavior, and Social-Emotional Growth.” Education Next, vol. 23, no. 3, June 2023, p. 48. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgov&AN=edsgcl.753089411&site=eds-live&scope=site.
U.S. Department of Education Stem Investments FY18-20 FY 2020, www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/documents/stem/stem-investments-18-20.pdf. Accessed 23 Nov. 2023.
Johnson , Amirah. “The Arts Deserve More Funding in Schools.” THE HORNET NEWSPAPER, 15 Mar. 2022, thehornetonline.com/2022/03/15/the-arts-deserve-more-funding-in-schools/.
