I recently watched a TED talk featuring Ken Robinson where
he asks, “Do Schools Kill Creativity?” Ken Robinson is a former professor of
Arts Education and advisor on art’s role in education. Robinson believes that
the important role creativity plays in student learning has been largely
ignored by traditional educational systems. Creativity and the Arts are given
less attention than other subjects. Robinson states that, “every traditional
educational system has the same hierarchy of subjects.” Mathematics and sciences are valued more
highly than the Arts. According to Robinson, this hierarchy exists because of
the modern university system, a system designed to produce students with skills
valuable for an increasingly industrialized society. Robinson claims that an
educational system that values subjects like math or science over the Arts
causes a loss of creativity in students. Ken Robinson believes that, “creativity…is
as important in education as literacy.” I agree that educators should place a
higher value on creativity and attempt to foster creativity in students. I
think that any education would be incomplete without some instruction in the
Arts. As a future educator, I will take Robinson’s message to heart and strive
to encourage and foster creativity in the classroom.
However, I don’t fully agree with Robinson on the extent
of which we should focus on creativity and the Arts. Are they important? Of
course. But how important? How much of the limited time that children are in
school should be devoted to creative arts? What subjects would be diminished by
more time spent on instruction in creative arts? The Arts are an essential part
of a complete education, but are they more valuable than basic scientific or mathematical
knowledge? Isn’t it more important to
provide a foundation of general knowledge to students that allows for later
specialization? Does public education even have the ability, time, or resources
to develop individual talent, like dance, considering the small percentage of
the student body these students represent? I was actually involved in the Arts
throughout my school career. I did theater and dance for years. Regardless of
how much I enjoyed dance, I would never have wanted my public education to
revolve around it. Dance was an extracurricular activity completely separate from
my public education. Robinson would have schools focus on providing opportunities
for students interested in such creative arts to an extent that I find
unrealistic. I agree that creativity
should be fostered in the classroom, because we recognize the important role it
plays in both society and the individual. But I think this can be achieved without completely rethinking our current educational system.