2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

Actually, P.E. is being cut from Beaverton schools.  And in my college, several sports teams were cut as well.  They are not immune.  Sports are important, but IMHO not as important as the arts.  People keep asking, "Okay, then what should we cut?"  Education is one of those things that needs to be funded.  I am happy to pay whatever it costs in taxes for a well-educated public.  Nothing is optional when it comes to our future.  We might need to re-think the structure, look at salaries of administration positions, but I'm not convinced that there's much waste going on even there.  Education may be expensive, but ignorance is even more costly.

posted 3 years ago
view in context

Tonight (April 27) there's a meeting in which the Beaverton School District is considering cutting its ENTIRE orchestra program.  Obviously, the BPSD believes the value of arts education isn't terribly high, or they wouldn't even put it on the chopping block.

Please tell me what parents who can't afford $500+/year for private lessons are supposed to do if they want their kids to learn serious music?

We've all seen the studies proving that students perform better in math and science if they also study music.  (I'm happy to provide links to those who need them.)  Good gracious, don't the schools WANT children to succeed?

posted 3 years, 1 month ago
view in context

I don't get to hear the show every day, so I may have missed this if you did it already.

Arts education in the schools.  With all the cuts (due to budget constraints), it seems the thing that gets cut first is music programs.  This is deplorable.  The opponents say "We need to concentrate on Reading, Writing, and 'Rithmetic."  To quote Mr. Holland in a movie that was filmed here in Oregon, by the way, "take away art, and they'll have nothing to read or write about."

It has been scientifically proven that children who learn a musical instrument also learn all subjects (especially math) far more effectively than their classmates who don't study music.  In other words, if you want to teach a kid anything, teach her music first.

Tax-payers should recognize this as a long-term savings.  You think education is expensive, try ignorance.

I am a board member of South West Music School (www.swmusicschool.org).  Among other things, we are partnering with a few area schools to bring music education back into the schools.  The whole board would love for our organization not to be necessary, which will only happen when taxpayers decide a full education is worth paying for.

Though I'm sure you can find guest speakers, I offer myself.  As a music educator for almost 20 years, I feel I'm fairly knowledgable on the topic.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context

The discussion of the kid who wanted to wear the Obama mask reminds me of a South Park episode.

In the episode, the city (South Park) was considering changing its city flag because some people found the flag offensive.  The flag depicted a black stick-figure being lynched, and several white stick-figures standing around (presumably doing the lynching).

(Aside edit ... yes, it's offensive ... that's South Park for you.  Nothing is sacred, and the writers of the show go out of their way to be offensive.  That's part of the point of the show.)

The teacher in the show took this opportunity to educate the kids, and asked the kids to prepare a debate about whether or not the flag should be changed.  The kids said no.  Of course, those of you who know the show can imagine that Chef was outraged.  "How can you say that?" he asked.  "I thought you were my friends."

The kids said, "Murder is part of human history, and we shouldn't try to hide it just because some people think it's offensive."  Turns out the kids didn't even notice the racial aspect of the flag.  They thought every one was upset because it depicted murder, not because of the (obvious) racial offense.  Because the kids are so far removed from the days of lynching, they didn't even see it.

When I heard the story about the kid in the Obama mask, yes, the first thing that popped into my head was the old minstrel shows with the black face.  But that's because I studied Theater History, and I am 40.  I doubt most (any?) 11-year-olds have ever seen a minstrel show, and few would "get" the racial offenses they depicted.  I suspect none of the kids at the school, and probably few of the parents, would see a white kid wearing a black face.  Most would see a kid imitating and poking fun at the President.

And, as many posters have said, if someone is offended ... great!  It's an opportunity for education, teaching the kids that there was a time in our nation's history when a white man wearing a black mask said something very specific -- and very degrading -- about blacks.  And halleluia that we don't live in that time any more.

Anyway, great program.  Thanks.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context