Dear Future President,

The issue of more funding for the arts programs deserves more light than it is currently given. According to National Association of State Boards of Education, $250 million are sent to the arts, while $5 billion are sent to science. That is twenty times as much money spent on science than on all the different types of art education! When the allocation of money for the arts is compared to those of other core subjects, it is obvious that the government believes the arts to be less important. But why is this the case, when there are scientifically proven benefits?

Arts programs such as dance, band and orchestra, art, theater, etc. are proven to enhance the academic lives of students. According to the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, those students consistently involved in music has shown increased math skills, those involved in dance showed increased thinking skills, and those involved in theater showed an increase in literacy skills. The positive correlation between a form of art and an academic skill shows that art has benefits beyond the art itself. Math, literacy, and thinking skills are not only helpful academically, but are also a necessity for life in the future.

Arts programs also indirectly contribute positively to the college application process. According to the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, a national study shows that those students who have high participation in the arts perform better on standardized tests, most notably the SAT, than their peers who have lower participation in the arts. This idea appeals to more and more students, as the SAT has become an essential part of the college preparation process. In addition, college admissions officers look for well-rounded students who perform well on standardized tests, in school and in extracurricular activities. Those who are deemed to be a failure in sports may take up an art and excel there instead, providing them with another pathway to college.

Consequently, first-hand experience shows no positive results stem from reduced funding. As a member of the school band, I have experience the drawbacks of these budget cuts. I discovered that the level of the music program has deteriorated over the past two years and this is in part due to lack of money. With less money in the bank account, we are either not able to participate in as many competitions or we are forced to pay more for overnight trips. The budget is also more focused on purchasing instruments and music than it is on traveling to different places. Although instruments and music are necessary for the music department to function, funding for trips is also an enriching part of the program. Not only does the class satisfy my performing arts requirement for graduation, but the experiences are a great way to learn, socialize, and build up a personality that will carry through the rest of my life.

With proven academic and social benefits, why are the arts still considered a less important aspect of school? Emphasis is placed on STEM because it is believed that it will take people farther in life than something creative, say for example, music composition. A career in STEM is less risky and there is a higher chance of getting a job, whereas a singer has to trump all the other singers and stand out from the rest in order to make it big. In addition, arts classes are time consuming in and out of school, and can be very expensive to pay for, especially for low income families. It is even more taxing on those families when they have to pay admission to concerts and shows. However, even with the money made from performances, it is still not enough to balance out the money spent on creating the performance.

My solution is this: don't take huge sums of money from the arts, but instead reduce the funding evenly throughout all subjects. This way, all programs will still exist and they'll all exist together at a slightly lower level. It is fairer than reducing the abilities of one department and maintaining the same level of another, because it makes one seem more important than the other.

So Future President, I urge you to take this issue of funding public school's arts education into consideration. Consider the lives of the older generation, where it is never too late to learn something new. Consider the lives of the younger generation, who want to pursue a career in the field of arts. Consider the lives of posterity, who may not receive an arts education if a lack of proper funding reduces it to nothing.

Sincerely,

Rebecca C.

photo credits: http://www.sjsu.edu/education/events/mcc/