So finally the
cultural education review has arrived. Like a difficult second album, this one
has taken far longer than Darren Henley’s excellent music education review
(although not quite as long as Kevin Rowland’s notorious second solo album – my
friend Jon was working for the record company that waited twelve years for that
gem to arrive).
The delay might have
been caused by Darren’s creative angst, but my guess is that it was probably
down to torturous back and forths between the DfE, DCMS and possibly the Arts
Council. As a member of the Cultural Learning Alliance’s steering group, the
process was frustrating. Despite being promised consultation and early sight on
recommendations, yesterday’s news was genuinely news to most of us.
The report has hardly
been eagerly awaited – that’s part of the problem. Cultural learning is
generally somewhere on everyone’s list of priorities, but despite the fantastic
efforts of the CLA, it generally scrapes along the bottom of people’s ‘to worry
about’ lists, especially in these meaner, more blinkered times. We all knew
that key decisions on the future of cultural learning lay outside the
boundaries of this review: in the now-delayed national curriculum review, and
the space it leaves or doesn’t leave for schools to develop a whole curriculum;
in the changes to the accountability system so that not every subject matters;
and in the budget decisions made, relatively autonomously, by thousands of
schools, youth centres, local authorities and cultural institutions.
So, has the review been
worth waiting for? Plans for a £3m BFI Film Academy, or the £2.7M going to English Heritage to pay for brokers to foster links
between schools and historic sites, made reasonable Tuesday headlines. But if
you know your history (as Michael Gove might say), they don’t really cover up
the financial holes created by Arts Council and Government decisions. Nor do
they answer the bigger questions about quality, access, the role of schools,
colleges and HEIs as cultural institutions, and how we target, target, target
resources at those most risk of missing out culturally, often through lack of
demand rather than supply. I still worry that in a few decades this government
may be remembered for precipitating the UK’s creative and cultural decline.
Henley’s focus on
newly qualified teachers feels like the right pressure point in the system –
the Teaching Outside the Classroom programme I established always found it difficult to
compete for space in a student teacher’s calendar, With money attached, this idea could fit well into a teacher’s first or second year, when they are just
looking beyond the exhausting parapet of behaviour management, and might link
to Masters’ qualifications.My thoughts on Gove’s thoughts about ‘data not being the plural of evidence’ (borrowed from Dylan William) will have to wait for another post.
The Review also makes a good effort to define cultural learning. When leading Find Your Talent (a programme which appears to have made a depressingly minimal impact on the future of cultural education) I stepped on the shoulders of Raymond Williams and other giants to define culture as 'the means through which we understand and create our identities'. This film by Billy Pols, shown at the Turner Contemporary exhibition on youth culture, fits with my definition. Would it make the Henley cut?
Although the national plan for cultural education will be important, bigger news for cultural learning may well have come the
week before. According to Arts Industry, thanks to a big rise in National
Lottery ticket sales, The Arts Council can expect an extra £1.25 billion in
extra income over the next five years. I know it’s not all about the money, but
even if a proportionate amount was spent on children and young
people, that would give an additional £50 Million per year to play with. Now,
where did I put that proposal I wrote for a redesigned Creative Partnerships
3.0?
