Remember that special time way back in elementary school when you were given the opportunity to learn a musical instrument? When you were invited to become a part of one of the most enjoyable aspects of society? Taking part in creating and experiencing music can be very exciting for many students in grade school. However, the future availability of music classes is in question since many schools are under political pressure to place more funding on courses in which the curriculum is tested. For example, regents courses in New York State. There is significant evidence that participating in music can lead to greater success in other regions such as mathematics. Also, many students find their “escape” from the stresses of core classes in music. The removal of funding that is essential to music courses for use in other areas would lay a wall of obstacles in front of those looking to learn a musical instrument, without having to rely on private tutors, at a time when it has never been easier to get involved in music. So why would we want to support such funding cuts, when research shows that music is immensely beneficial to a student’s ability to learn?

Over the course of the past few decades, a great deal of time, money, and effort were dedicated to making music more accessible to the average student. Particularly in New York City, it has been difficult to organize music programs and overcome the financial barriers of getting students involved. In a recent article from the New York Times, titled Should All Schools Offer Music Programs, author Natalie Proulx details the struggle to establish such programs in the city both now and in the past. She places emphasis on the fact that it takes numerous resources, many of which are not cheap, to provide students with the materials they need to excel in music. One of the most successful attempts to build music departments in New York’s schools took place in the 1990s with funding from “the Annenberg Foundation, and [from] a dedicated arts funding stream known as Project Arts, established by Rudolph W. Giuliani.” (Proulx) The important lesson to be learned from this article is that music is very much in the interest of the community. Proulx likely wrote this article with the intent of reminding politicians that all the historical attempts made to allow music to flourish in our schools were made for a reason. The focus should be supporting such attempts rather than bringing them a halt.

While the popularity of music programs is obvious, one counter claim suggests that such programs may not necessarily require as great a deal of money as estimated. An article published in The New Criterion magazine asks readers to step back and investigate where the funds are actually placed. The author states that funds intended to bring art to the inner city offer “little more than a direct subsidy to the cultured, upper-middle class.” (The New Criterion) In other words, rather than educating the poor in culture and art, funding is applied to materials for those who already have them and know how to use them. However, this article cites no specific examples and discusses issues from the mid-late 1900s. Also, the author does not offer an alternative suggestion but rather leaves the reader to decide for themselves. This deducts from the credibility of his claim, since there is no dependable evidence against funding music programs that is relevant to this era.

The United States is not alone in this struggle. In Wales, the Welsh Government has been cutting off the flow of funds to public music departments consistently over the past few years. According to BBC.com, there has been a call for a national body to protect and serve the musical interests of the public. The situation is urgent enough that even “Ministers said there had been moves to find alternative funds for music education and have pledged to work with the committee.” (BBC) The demand of the Welsh Government from its subjects is loud and clear: “both pupils and staff working within the music education sector, regardless of their location or social background, are afforded equitable opportunities.” The difference between the situation in Wales and that in the United States is that the Welsh citizens are fighting to preserve music in terms of the public, for example, the ability to go to a theater and listen to an orchestra perform. There is no mention of the state of music as an educational course accessible to students. However, a comparison can still be made to the United States: There is a public concern to preserve music and its accessibility based on the role music plays in everyday life. This article serves as a model to the United States, communicating that it is necessary to have provisions set aside to protect and preserve music as an opportunity to learn, prosper, and inspire.

One of the most convincing arguments for the accessibility of an education in music came from a lady named Alice Hammel, who works as a music instructor for students with disabilities. Her story was published by Lori Schwartz Reichl, in an article titled Music is for All of Us, in which Reichl describes the significance of Hammel’s work. The reason Hammel’s story is so captivating is because she doesn’t just teach music, she teaches music to students who have a learning disability. Hammel has seen her students flourish in other regions after learning how to read and play music, more so than those who did not study music. This article would prove to be most useful to politicians and school boards, who are looking for a way to assist students with special needs. After seeing the tremendous progress of her students, Hammel vowed “to make sure every child, even those who are unintentionally forgotten, have access to music education.” (Hammel)

For so many students, music is an essential part of life. There should be no reason for a student to be deprived of access to learning a musical instrument. Government funding is imperative to the survival of music as an option for young students; an option that holds the potential to open countless doors for those considering a career in music. Indeed, it is important to fund core classes like math and science, but it should not, under any circumstances, come at the cost of music.