But as soon as we start talking about education, teach students to do mistakes appears to be wrong. Isn't that ridiculous to hear from a teacher something like this: "Look what a beautiful mistake did Picasso make in every painting. Let's stop practicing with drawing and start learning how to get away with this, meaning verbally explain to people that this is considered beautiful now... Renoir, van Gogh, Courbet did this, why shouldn't we ...?"

Many works' psychological power, comes largely from choice of posture and exaggeration/accentuation of anatomy:

Classical Art often has a somewhat idealized, simplified (sometimes cartoonish) look about it that temporal facsimiles don't give.

Imo proper form probably should be learned initially, but not necessarily adhered to.

What do you offer to him? Cut off drawing classes or reinvent drawing methodology?
Or perhaps drawing classes are absolutely unnecessary?

Our cultural society came to the point when in order to be able to reinvent education we have to increase traditional disciplines because there's not much room to decrease them.
In the middle of twentieth century, when craft and art gradually split up, they started to teach philosophy (Want to do) instead of craftsmanship (how to do) in the art institutes.

I believe that Mr. Seidler developed very well this part of resolving art education problem in his article.
And it seems to me that we can help him only when we have constructive realistic adjustments to what he is offering.

Finally, looks like we are discussing personal taste issues and get very far from our major topic "How to Reinvent an Arts Education for our Public Schools"

Maybe this place http://www.artpapa.com/forum/DCForumID29/2.html will be more appropriate to discuss contemporary aesthetic problems.

Or we can talk about the Seidler School here?

If so, the following two images will probably explain what Mr. Sadler mean by saying "Painting is 75% drawing and value is the most important component in a color decision in classical painting."

Buy comparing this two pictures we can say that there is not much difference between them. Only in the first image some pigmentation illustrates coloring characteristics. Desaturated picture on the right evidently shows to us that the painting looks as much attractive as the colored one.
Like one of the great masters says, you can always go and buy some pigments for coloring
but you never will be able to buy the ability to draw.

The school of happy accident painting has been dead for 40 years and offers nothing for the future. The future now belongs to those who can master the craft to it's highest level and then apply it to those modern thories that demands great knowledge and performance to accomplish.

Er...'Imo proper form probably should be learned initially...'

My first post was solely in response to this statement:
"Painting is 75% drawing and value is the most important component in a color decision in classical painting."
I don't know how this figure was arrived at, nor do I believe it to be true.
My subsequent posts have been replies to replies.
I didn't realize by contributing to this thread, I had an obligation to remark on the opening post also!
(Not that I'm qualified to speak about the "American School System" - being English.)

I have a problem with the example included in your most recent posting; as you seem to be implying that painting is simply "coloring", overlooking at least brushwork and the fact that paintings can be produced without the use of any lines.
I don't agree those images are equally attractive either, as the colour adds extra visual stimulation and warmth.
Modern supermarkets are stocked with aisles of brightly coloured packaging for good reason.

Rembrandt’s impasto

Drawing
22.
a.
To inscribe (a line or lines) with a pencil or other marking implement.
To make a likeness of on a surface, using mostly lines; depict with lines: drew a map of the area; drawing landscapes and still lifes. - www.dictionary.com

'A brush stroke is a pull of the brush,'

Stroke
12.
a.
A single mark made by a writing or marking implement, such as a pen. - www.dictionary.com

Btw I didn't mention or imply pencils anywhere in my previous post.

This method is sometimes called direct painting. The painter will start with broad, general strokes of thin paint to get the general form. Usually, the darks are painted in first. In the next step, paint is applied directly over this wet paint in thicker, more opaque layers.

http://painting.about.com/library/blpaintingtip22.htm