“Earnings is only a small piece of that puzzle,” said Lee Ann Scotto Adams, executive director of the Strategic National Arts Alumni Project (SNAAP), a nonprofit that studies the careers of arts graduates.
She and Doug Dempster, the president of SNAAP, worry the new test might lead colleges and universities to preemptively slash low-earning creative arts programs in music, theater, studio art and design. Dempster says that could lead to a further devaluing of jobs that are critical to a well-functioning society.
“We know we need nurses. We know we need journalists. We know we need early childhood educators,” he said. “We don’t know how many artists we need, but I can guarantee that if you eliminate access, we will impoverish our cultural life nationally.”
Either extreme is clearly wrong. As always it comes down to balance.
I don’t think anyone has argued for only arts and no science
True, but it’s a little more readily apparent when there’s no one at the powerplant or water distribution center. Still though it’s a balance. All work and no play makes jack a very dull boy.
Edit: didn’t know it was such a hot take that the electrical grid going down due to a lack of engineers would likely be more apparent to everyone than a lack of people in theater in plays.