>Public schools are filled with children
>of color. So our curriculum
>necessarily has to cater to
>children of color.
Depends on the school. Often schools full of colored children are in resource poor districts. White flight has eroded the tax base for many public schools that teach minority children. The result is usually administrators cutting out music, arts, extra-curriculars, and reducing schools to the events that make money or at least pay for themselves. In Texas that would be high school football.
>If we were as evil/elitist/opportunistic as
>you make us (arts education
>programs) out to be, wouldn't
>we be all up in
>the private schools where all
>the "good" "well behaved" children
Those jobs were taken by the kids with connections or 4.0's. I've known a # of education majors, and the ones with better GPA's were going for the bucks. If they made a difference along the way, so be it. Well education majors aren't as cut and dried as that, but many were not as interested in making a difference. The fact that you are not in public schools doesn't really tell me anything about your altruism.
And with respect to private schools, they are often refuges for the bad rich kids who got thrown out of their local district. But that's all besides the point.
>think about it: if folk were
>really interested in brainwashing young
>people of color about Eurocentric
>values, why not just hit
>up the private schools?
By and large the majority of children of color are not in Private schools. And folks are interested in brainwashing young people of color. It happens on the regular.
>Your point about the push for
>"diversity" ushering in an "inclusive"
>curriculum is well taken, I
>just don't think you have
>enough ACCURATE information about music
>education programs (particularly those in
>PUBLIC schools) to make the
>assumptions/assessment that you're making.
I'm willing to read any studies you have.
>Also, you place value on breaking
>down, "The Chronic" in a
>music education program, and offered
>it as an example of
>a "legitimate" approach to young
>people of color,
I would not call it legitimate, but I would call it an alternative. Still dissecting musical trends might be beyond the grasp of elementary school students.
> but I
>still don't understand the usefulness
>of DE-VALUING teaching kids about
>all kinds of music.
I think of it in terms of valuing. It's not there is an anti-music coaltion, trying to get people to stop all sorts of music in the classroom. Often times, it's school districts trying to decide to keep the girl's soccer team or new band uniforms. There are competing interests. I would argue for more emphasis on the core curriculum than on extra-curriculars.
Personally I believe that extra-curriculars often reinforce the core. And in some cases it is the extra curriculars that make a person go to school in the first place. But we shouldn't be praising band or football for keeping Johnny in school. We should be addressing why school is not fulfilling him.
>the forms of music that
>influenced and continue to influence
>hip-hop. Your assesment seems a
>bit limited. If you love
>music, you love music, so
>why would you advocate for
>a limited view/perspective on the
>power of music?
But isnt't that what we are talking about. I am arguing that the majority of music education is centered around Western understanding of music. What I want would be a paradigm shift. Where as I think I am hearing an argument for you for inclusion of "world" music. I think we should be accomodating western tradition, but focusing on "world" music.
I'm not sure if that is clear.
>we all love and revere
>hip-hop, but not to the
>ends of de-valuing other musical
I like soul, R&B, jazz, soca, calypso, and reggae too. None of which are mainstays of musical education.