Decisions about equity have always been difficult. You may be personally familiar with the United States Supreme Court unanimous decision of 1954 of “sperate is not equal”, and for all I know it may have been the original spark for all modern equity discussion. That was a decision dealing with segregated schooling, but there has been a whole string of equity arguments before and since.
These discussions can be trivialized into who does the dishes, takes out the garbage, and vacuums the house, but the interpretations of equity on a grander scale refers more greatly to the profile of a fairer and effective existence for all of humanity. Eventually that grander scale does filter down to the particulars of many daily situations and in this discussion that is where I would like to be.
The practicalities of a functioning world don’t always centre in on equity when it comes to the phrase “get the job done”. It reminds me of a comment on social media that I read recently, where people were commenting on the emotional side of life and the insistence of a parent who replied to a student dwelling to heavily on her emotional concerns “I don’t care what you’re worried about just get your homework done”. Which in the end is the only concern of some parents who want to make sure that priorities are on your studies rather than on you ever changing emotions when you are a teenager. Is that equity?
Equity dilemmas go all the way back to Solomon and illustrate that decisions about this issue are not always easy to make where practicalities of daily living are concerned. This roadway leads us to education for The Arts and the involved practicalities of administering them.
The guiding lights for such administration could be very different. For example, if we were discussing a general education for every student and ‘the curriculum for visual art’ we would almost certainly say that every student should receive education in visual art. Every student should have the opportunity to express their creativity through drawing and painting and any visual arts medium.
Some would say that giving a student a blank piece of paper and asking them to fill it would be the most demanding and creative development for their brain that could possibly be given. Although that is an interesting viewpoint and a good basis for a theory it might not be true for those who have mathematical or scientific minds. It is at this point that ‘equity’ becomes a difficult subject.
Not every kid can become a ballerina, or an oboist, or an opera singer, or a painter. The airy-fairy idea that any student can become a concert pianist just doesn’t fit in a world full of equity centered beliefs.
It is at this point that other factors come into play. Can we afford equity for pianists when it comes to an advanced level of education or should the majority of money available be used for those who can demonstrate the most talent? If every student is to study an art curriculum, should we set aside special equipment and supplies for those who demonstrate an innate talent for artistic endeavours. And moreover, should we hire expert teachers for those who demonstrate the most potential.
At what point should educational administrators consider that on a global scale Canada has a very small population and those who show the most advanced education and talent for their artistic endeavours will be the ones who can represent Canada competitively on a national and international scale. And, perhaps equally important, be the most useful in their own national society.
It is well known that children/students start to play the piano at an early age if they wish to be at the top of their game in their teens. Even the English premier League has realized that soccer academies can help young people strive for excellence and competence at the public-school stage.
Older Canadian artist on the other hand can tell you that art wasn’t considered very seriously in their high school youth in terms or recognition of subject matter that would give an individual with artistic talent a full range of developmental programs leading to personal excellence. I personally remember one fella who received one hour only of pedagogical instruction in the summer teachers’ curriculum before starting his first job as an art teacher!
The ensuing decades of the twentieth century saw the introduction of considerably more art schools as education board’s administrators finally found The Arts. Toronto’s Central Technical School was added to with Etobicoke School For The Arts, North York’s Claude Watson School For The Arts, and Scarborough’s Wexford Collegiate Art Centre (later to be renamed Wexford Collegiate School For The Arts). They aimed for excellence as their populations became more diverse with the influx of many immigrants. In the last decade excellence and being ‘the best in the world’ has long since been abandoned in favour of equity. In order to make things as equitable as possible portfolio interviews where students formerly demonstrated their interest and ability have been swapped for a lottery system where any student can apply without demonstrating either.
With that revolution having been installed there are now lessons to be learned, perhaps the greatest of which is, equity doesn’t produce excellence. Excellence, as in aiming to be the best in the world, is a well-planned outcome, dependent on a pedagogical sequence of significant instruction, approached with ability and enthusiasm. Just the way it used to be.
Peter Marsh November 7th 2024
