How important are subjects like science and math in education compared to the arts?
It’s a question that comes up pretty often, especially when the arts programs are getting cut to meet a budget or to fit in more preparation for state tests. And on the surface, it is easy to understand why some subjects are deemed more important than others.
But are they really? Or more appropriately, can they be important in different ways? Or reinforce each other?
The following is an interview of Sir Ken Robinson by British reporter Riz Kahn. I havepreviously posted a (very excellent) presentation by Sir Ken Robinson from the 2006 TED Conference, but the interview below is worth watching even if you have seen that one.
It is important to note that what Robinson is talking about here is not simply that the arts deserve more attention. He is not advocating for the arts as much as he is advocating for a more holistic approach to education. People have different strengths, different types of intelligence. And many people’s creative intelligence is squashed by the traditional (as we know it) education system.
Those types of intelligence should be given an equal chance to grow because they can lead not only to a profession in the arts, but any profession. This, I think, is the answer to one of the viewers’ questions about there being more of a need for workers with a certain skill-set (math, science, etc.).
Been listening to this one a lot, pretty much the whole way through.
This novel was published after the Chilean-Mexican author's death, and I'm not even sure if it was entirely finished or not. It is broken up into five parts which, while connected, stand pretty much on there own. I have not yet made it to the grim part about the murders of hundreds of women in Mexico, so I have so far found it enjoyable and even funny despite some dark underpinnings. It's had a ton of critical praise, and I like it much more than my last foray into the violent novel genre: Blood Meridian.
