Patrick and I have corresponded together on this topic before. We should have, he was one of the applicants I voted for on our MVWSD Board Facilities Committee! The debate is not cut or don't cut Performing Arts investments. We both favor investment! The discussion is rather "of proportion".
What proportion of Patrick's acceptance to Stanford University was due to his stellar work and performance on STEMS in high school (& undergraduate) and what proportion was due to his 'added value' as a 'performer'? My eldest son also graduated from Stanford (BA Economics with honors and academic distraction). Andrew's work in 'performance' (GMS 2003 musical Bye Bye Birdie, 4 yrs MVHS Madrigals & marching band, Stanford's infamous Fleet Street Singers) has helped him both get into Stanford and land a great post-college job.
But that success for my son was proportionately much more STEM (the cake) rather than 'performance' (the icing). $10M/$25M is 1/4 = 25% investment, GMS Performing Arts related. Is PA really "the huge driver"? For post-graduate educated families, maybe, but for our many poor families ??
Mr. Nelson was a Peace Corps teacher in West Africa 1973-75, it changed his perspective on life.

OOPS! lets get that percentage right 2/5 = 40% (as it was in 1st Opinion)

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?