Mojo

You would need some serious statistics to prove that an education in music is actually going to be of an advantage to someone to convince me that it should be a mandatory part of a childs education.

If a kid wants to learn then sure it should be encouraged but outside of school. Our music classes were rubbish and full of kids who either didn't want to be there as it felt like an after school activity or kids with a keen interest in music who either didnt need to be taught how to play or who didn't pay any attention anyway and taught themselves to play the way they wanted to play. To be fair our music teachers were crap though.

__________________

Last.FM | Echoes and Dust

Arya Stark

I didn't see the second choice.
When I wanted to be a music teacher, my top reason was because I wanted to teach older kids that wanted to be there.
As opposed to English- which I'm doing now- where all of the kids are forced to take the subject.

__________________

MB Journal.
Azucar y Especia. My blog.

Astronomer

For anyone familiar with child psychology and developing minds, it has been a long-known fact that music helps children learn (I'm talking about primary school aged children here.) Here are some links if you're at all interested:

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2004/09/09/4638.aspx

Music Education Can Help Children Improve Reading Skills

BBC NEWS | Health | Music 'makes the brain learn better'

Language Development and Music: Music Can Help Children Learn to Talk and Communicate

I could go into more academic resources but I don't want to bore anyone.

This is why music education should be a part of primary schools. Why should art be part of education but not music? Music is a great way for kids to become better at maths, reading, vocal articulation, and coordination. Not to mention it allows them to let off steam and express themselves after some serious brain fatigue in the classroom. I always notice that kids come back to my class much more relaxed, calm and also alert after their weekly music and art classes.

Here, primary school aged children participate in music and art lessons once a week. I think this is perfect and should not be changed. In my opinion it benefits their learning and their educational experience. And our music lessons in primary do not consist of music appreciation and music history, they usually consist of: singing, clapping, playing musical instruments, dancing, and learning the very basics of music theory.

High school however, is a totally different story. I think music in high school should not be compulsory and but should be available only to those who want to take it as a subject.

__________________

TheBig3

Lets, for the sake of argument, say that it does help develop brains.

Is the quality you get in schools worth the effort?

__________________
I've moved to a new address

duga

ok...let's pretend there is no benefit.

let's screw history as well...what use is it for my future?

cognitive advantages aside, music is part of worldwide human culture and even a small amount of exposure has relevance.

__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph...

Astronomer

The quality we get in our schools is definitely worth the effort. Like I said, at a primary school level music classes have nothing to do with music appreciation or music history. The classes involve learning very basic music theory (different lengths of notes and beats etc), and involve activities like singing, clapping and dancing. The younger grades often get involved in playing various percussion instruments while grades 3-6 often partake in learning the recorder and performing various pieces in front of school assembly etc. The music education I've seen at the primary schools I've been in has been fantastic - I've seen it benefit children from their cognitive development right through to their self-confidence and attitude towards school.

Like I said though, at a high school level I think the debate about music education is completely different and I don't think it should be a compulsory subject for grades 7 - 12, but rather an elective.

That being said, I can only really speak for Australia and New Zealand and have no idea what music education is like anywhere else in the world. Our music education is definitely at a standard that is beneficial to students of grades prep to 6.

__________________

duga

^

it was the same in the US before we started getting rid of our music programs. as little grade school kids, we would be exposed to some classical and the history (granted, a little boring for a kid) and then we would be aloud to mess around with instruments. it was a lot of fun and was very beneficial to me.

__________________
Confusion will be my epitaph...

Burning Down

That's exactly how it is here in Canada.

Also, I don't think I mentioned this in my previous post, but the music teachers (at all grade levels) need to be entertaining and good at what they do. The teacher I had in elementary school was amazing - she made everything fun, even while she was teaching the basic history, by making her lessons into games. Compare that with my music teacher in middle school (grade 7-8). He knew his stuff, but was not good at conveying the information in a way that we would understand. He was also a terrible band conductor...

Astronomer

^ Yeah, well with any subject I think the teacher needs to be fun, enthusiastic, interesting and passionate about what they are teaching. You're absolutely right in that bad teachers can really put students off certain subjects.

__________________

Seltzer

Music should be a secondary subject in high school as time and effort is better spent educating students in maths, English and science to a lesser degree. I think it should be mandatory in primary school though... my only complaint there is that singing along to Yellow Submarine and Octopus' Garden every day for a year tends to ruin them for years afterwards... can't teachers stick to shitty songs like Puff the Magic Dragon and the Wheels on the Bus?

__________________