The Role of Humanities in the School Curriculum

Introduction: Curriculum Debates and Educational Philosophy

The topic of curriculum content in schools and universities is a complex and often contentious issue. Educators are cognizant of the importance of curriculum makeup and content in shaping the educational development and direction of students. Curriculum decisions are also influenced by external factors beyond the simple goal of achieving excellence in education. These include cultural and social trends, demands for increased vocational skills, and prevailing social views about the meaning and necessity of certain types of education. As one commentator observes, "It is no easy schedule for the American politician who preaches 'excellence in education'" (Roediger, 1988). This points to the competing pressure groups and bodies of opinion that shape what is incorporated into the curricula of schools and universities.

These pressures can be seen in debates such as the one between evolutionists and creationists over the science curriculum. It is, however, in the humanities that the greatest debates and shifts in curriculum content have occurred in recent years, both in America and in other developed countries. The question of whether social sciences and humanities subjects — such as art — deserve a place in school and undergraduate education has raised difficult areas of debate and discourse. There is an increasing need to explain and justify why certain courses should be included in the contemporary curriculum at various levels. This paper therefore discusses and explores the arguments surrounding curriculum choices in the humanities.

Any debate about course curricula is linked to various theoretical stances on the aims and goals of education. Three main theoretical trajectories are relevant here. The first is perennialism, which refers to a "teacher-centered philosophy that focuses on 'great books' and the hope of imparting the culture's enduring themes to students. The goal is to develop the ability for rational thought in students" (Cruey, 2006). Essentialism is another teacher-centered approach that emphasizes teaching fundamentals and focuses on the recollection of facts. A more student-centered approach is progressivism, a contemporary stance that attempts to engage with the real-world concerns and experiences of students. Progressivist classrooms are more democratic in governance, and learning is more participatory and experimental than in either essentialism or perennialism (Cruey, 2006).

In practice, many educators draw from all of the above theoretical stances while emphasizing one. The central point is that these general theories exert a significant influence on the selection and determination of curriculum content. A fuller overview of these philosophies of education helps clarify why different stakeholders prioritize different subjects.

The Case for Teaching Art and Literature

One of the central points of contention in the United States and elsewhere is the debate between broad, inclusive education and a more selective, vocationally directed curriculum. Art and the extended arts category have been central to much of this debate. Some educators object to art's inclusion on the grounds that it has little relevance in terms of practical and job-related opportunities. The core argument is that the arts are essentially a specialized subject — not sufficiently pragmatic for a general, employment-oriented curriculum.

This argument reflects a broader trend toward science-based curricula. That trend is linked to the view — which became dominant in the second half of the twentieth century — that only curricula grounded in the sciences and oriented toward measurable outcomes are relevant to the modern world. This view is also connected to the emergence of the sciences as the central mode of knowledge production in the Western world.

Many educators, however, put forward a strong and persuasive argument in favor of including art in the curriculum. In her article Why Teach Art?, Stephens (2008) argues that "teachers — regardless of where or who they teach — should consider that the content of art has the power to impact in positive ways the physical development, cognition, and behaviors of their students." Many educators therefore see the arts as an important component in improving perception and cognitive behavior.

Despite these arguments, many schools in the United States have been discontinuing arts and creative classes. Budget constraints are frequently cited as a reason, but this raises a deeper question about the preference for sciences and more "practical" subjects over the arts (Richard). The issue goes well beyond budgets. In the modern educational environment, the arts and many humanities subjects are often perceived as peripheral — less important than sciences and skills-oriented subjects tied to employment objectives. The influence of marketplace demands on curriculum development is therefore considerable. This preference reflects elements of progressivism — adapting the curriculum to social and economic realities — while the more traditional case for a broad and inclusive curriculum must be balanced against it.

There is nonetheless a strong argument that the arts are a vital element of any effective curriculum. While it is difficult to argue against practical and market-related considerations, what must also be weighed is the underlying meaning and intention of education itself — the trajectory that guides the selection of subjects. Many educators believe the student needs more than practical training; a wider educational background is necessary to function fully in the modern world. This traditional view of a "broader" education holds that students should be stimulated to think and experience reality from multiple disciplinary perspectives, rather than being confined to a single type of learning. This returns to Stephens's (2008) assertion that art develops cognitive and creative powers that generate insight into other subjects and into the world at large.

Cicely Richard states that "the arts [are] an important part in a child's development" (Richard). Numerous studies support the view that general learning skills are enhanced by skills acquired through the arts. The study of art, for instance, is seen as integral to critical thinking:

"Children learn to view the world in a less linear perspective and can think outside of the norm. If they see a painting by Monet, they can form their own opinions of what the artist was trying to convey when working on the work. Thus, art is essential to children becoming a critical thinker in other classes, especially when it comes to formulating ideas for essays." (Richard)

There is also an argument for studying art for its own sake. From a purely aesthetic point of view, art matters to the modern child living in a highly technological environment. Richard observes: "Today, children are so bombarded with technology and plugged in almost constantly. Many of them don't even know what a real painting looks like. Pictures have been replaced with flat screen televisions or home theater systems. Their parents fail to teach them the importance of creativity, doing something with your hands." (Richard)

This argument extends naturally to the inclusion of traditional literary genres in the curriculum. Poetry in particular is sometimes dismissed as irrelevant in terms of practical skills. However, teachers note that the study of poetry helps students grasp the subtle nuances of language and the way words can function on multiple levels across different fields and disciplines. Knowledge of poetry and the intricate connotations of language can even prove useful in legal and business contexts. Many traditional educators believe that neglecting the study of literature and poetry "spells doom" for the educational system in the United States (James, 1992).

Conclusion

In the final analysis, there is a growing consensus that the inclusion of the humanities — subjects such as art and philosophy — in the curriculum is a topic in need of serious reconsideration. While education in recent decades has moved toward more pragmatic and market-oriented curricula, there is increasing awareness that the humanities offer educational advantages that cannot easily be dismissed. The idea of a broad and well-rounded curriculum has its detractors, but there is a growing emphasis on outcomes such as the promotion of critical thinking — outcomes that subjects like philosophy are uniquely positioned to provide. The developers of modern educational curricula are therefore faced with a complex balancing act between outcomes-based and market-driven objectives on the one hand, and a wider, more critically oriented educational approach on the other.

References

Bigger Role for Philosophy in the Curriculum. (2007). Retrieved January 17, 2009, from http://quakerphilosophy.blogspot.com/2007/11/bigger-role-for-philosophy-in.html

Conklin, H. G. (2004). Review of Whose America? Culture Wars in the Public Schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(3), 284+.

Cruey, G. (2006). A philosophy of curriculum: What should we teach? Retrieved January 17, 2009, from http://specialneedseducation.suite101.com/article.cfm/philosophy_of_education

James, A. (1992). Battle of the books: The curriculum debate in America. Abstract retrieved January 17, 2009, from ERIC database (ED383999).

Link, M. A. (1976). Should philosophy be taught to high school students? Social Studies, 67(4), 164–167.

Meakin, R. (2004). Philosophy in the undergraduate medical curriculum — beyond medical ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30(3).

RE studies 'should cover atheism'. Retrieved January 17, 2009, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/3486537.stm

Richard, C. Why teach art? Retrieved January 17, 2009, from

Roediger, D. (1988). Assessment: The secretary of education's new clothes — William Bennett. Retrieved January 17, 2009, from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1132/is_/ai_6394592

Stephens, P. (2008). Why teach art? SchoolArts: The Art Education Magazine for Teachers, 107(6).