>My point is that conditioning children to think of art in this formulaic way can only be attributed to ignorance or malice.

I can believe that that this is your contention.

>There is no need to test for reading comprehension using a banal interpretation of poetry.

You say things as if they were obviously true.

>For evidence of the significance of art in the human experience, check the historical record.

OK.

I'm not sure what this red herring is supposed to do for your argument.