Statement response

"Tax dollars should not be wasted on art, music or theater classes in high school. Public high schools should be about training young people to enter the workforce. Period." 

This sounds like something Florida Senator Rick Scott would say. 

I personally do not believe this is true. Rick Scott probably likes to listen to music, or watch a movie like the rest of us. And does he know what propels people to make his favorite movies or music? Early exposure and connection to a field of arts that they love. A notable example in my eyes is Barry Jenkins, a film-maker who grew up in Miami in an overcrowded apartment, and graduated from a historically black high school. He went on to study film at FSU and eventually win the highest film award in all of the land (The Academy Award for Best Picture). This "rags-to-riches" story just goes to show that having the arts in public high schools matters a lot, especially to give opportunities for people who cannot afford them otherwise.

In fact, exposure to the arts in school may be the only exposure to the arts that children in poverty get. Allowing every student to express themselves is imperative to their moral and personal growth, and barring the arts from public schools deprives impoverished students of that right. The first amendment allows students to express themselves, but without exposure to the correct materials their personal foundation will be quite shaky. Any child born into wealth, who goes to a private school, will likely go to many museums, and go to some fancy art class, and that is where they’ll get their exposure to the arts to find their personal voice. They can travel to foreign countries to gather inspiration! A person under the poverty line can’t even dream of getting out of the city. Barring the arts from PUBLIC schools is essentially classist. Also, note how this person specifies “public schools”. So what, private schools get off the hook? I shouldn’t have to pay extra to be exposed to the arts in a private school. The amount of taxpayer funding for public schools has always been a little lower in Florida and the rest of the South. Finally, there are a lot of art teachers who would be out of a job. Therefore, having the arts as an option in public high schools keeps the economy afloat.

Let’s go on a path Rick Scott wants. Say an average child goes through high school without any arts education. High school is already boring, but without electives, there is no break from the harsh environment of core classes. Personally, my electives of Yearbook, Photo I, and AP Psych (which I’d classify as an art because it’s not preparing me for a job in the future) I would be keeling over in boredom. Going to school isn’t fun anymore. Many of my peers only enjoy school due to the electives and the social aspect. Removing electives (they aren’t helping us get into the workforce!) would make school hell for everyone, but like everything else it would disproportionately affect the impoverished. Oh my gosh, with this logic, we shouldn’t even learn history, science or math. It’s not like I’m going to use those subjects in the wOrKfOrCe. Does this person want to turn our schools into a vocational school like MTI?

Again, I believe that not enough tax dollars in Florida are spent on public schools. We have no income tax. In the South, education isn’t properly funded due to its historically agrarian nature (gotta raise the kids to work the farm) and opposition to paying taxes (capitalism). I was lucky enough to be born into a family of wealth, that can acquire inspirational materials outside of school, but for some, that sadly isn’t the case. If we cut tax funding to the arts and focus on workforce training only, we are leaving the bottom half in the dust.