Mastery, Not “Creativity,” Should Come First in Arts Education
At issue, of course, is the fact that the purpose of the traditional music education
At issue, of course, is the fact that the purpose of the traditional music education
As we replace, for the sake of politics or expediency, the teachers who quietly loved and maintained the classical music tradition with those who have made a career of loudly condemning or refuting it, the discipline will be chipped away from the inside by a myriad of tiny careerists and ideologues happy to attack or cheapen the long and living tradition of Western classical music for the sake of a petty promotion or a hearty pat on the back.
Since at least the 1920s, America has done a fine job of nurturing its budding classical musicians within a large and well-funded network of conservatories that function either as independent institutions or else as colleges within larger universities. The grand venture of transplanting the pinnacle of European artistic achievement into the fertile soil of the New World has been a spectacular success. So can we say, then, that all is well in the world of higher music education on this side of the pond? Perhaps surprisingly, almost everyone you ask today will answer that question with a “no,” for all the wrong reasons.
State authorization policies govern the approval of new schools and degree programs; many of the affected institutions are for-profit, vocational, and online schools. North Carolina is one of several states called out in a recent American Enterprise Institute report for having cumbersome, ineffective authorization policies. The report offers several solid proposals that, if implemented, would reduce for-profit schools’ regulatory burden and open the door for new innovators seeking to expand in the Tar Heel State.
William G. Bowen and Eugene M. Tobin, both former college presidents (Princeton and Hamilton, respectively) grasp the crucial fact that the good old days of higher education are gone. In their new book, Locus of Authority, they tackle the traditional shared governance system (that is, the division of responsibility between the administration and the faculty). That system needs to change because it is getting in the way of the flexibility that is now essential.
Higher education has already become an important issue in the 2016 Democratic Party presidential primary race. It should receive considerable attention in the first primary date, scheduled for October 13 on CNN. In general, Democrats have been more specific and more vocal about their higher education plans than the Republicans. This is nothing new; higher education has long been a favored interest group and source of power for Democrats.
This year the North Carolina State Board of Education is lowering grading standards in all North Carolina high schools, while the College Board is rewriting the SAT to align with Common Core. Because of these two changes, it’s imperative that UNC raise its minimum admission standards. And uncertainty surrounding the new SAT leaves GPA as the only potentially reliable measure. Raising the minimum required GPA to 3.0 for all 16 UNC institutions would preserve academic quality in the system and provide a clear, consistent standard for admissions officers to apply to incoming students.
“Free college” makes for a neat sound-bite in Democratic primaries. But turning higher education into another middle-class entitlement isn’t going to improve outcomes, isn’t going to promote economic mobility, and isn’t going to encourage the kind of structural reforms that are long overdue.
This issue of Governance is dedicated to First Amendment rights on North Carolina’s campuses. We provide free speech ratings for each UNC system institution and explore the creation of the…
It is common knowledge that students who have amassed large college debt burdens cannot discharge those debts through bankruptcy. That “knowledge,” however, is not really the case—the laws are written to permit discharge of student loan debts in some cases. And, with the federal government pushing for broader interpretations of those laws, they are now an incentive for students to amass debt and then dump it on the taxpayers.