General education requirements show disregard for the merits of fine arts

If the Faculty Senate wants to improve general education, then why don't they improve it? According to the outline, on the front page of the Tuesday Daily Wildcat, three courses are required in natural science and only one course in the arts. Proficiency is required in math and a foreign language.

Once again, the fine arts are jilted in favor of math and science. Why don't we have a proficiency requirement in an arts area such as dance, photography, music, theatre, or studio art? What makes math and foreign language superior? Aren't creative visualization and discipline just as marketable in the workplace? The arts instill self-confidence and encourage creative thinking. They are an integral part of any education.

I had hoped the Faculty Senate, when reforming general education, would have taken the opportunity to include more arts and less sciences. Science is not a more valid or intelligent field of study than art and I am weary of the preconceived notion that it is. The arts are often thrown away as electives of small consequence. A well-balanced general education necessitates equal study in all areas without emphasis on one particular subject. Majors and minors are for specialized study.

Every day, a section of the Daily Wildcat is devoted to sports, but apparently they ran out of ink for the arts section.

By Erin Stein (letter)
Arizona Daily Wildcat
March 10, 1997