The arts community in England is celebrating a significant victory as the government takes a bold step towards revitalizing creative subjects in schools. This move comes after years of concern from cultural leaders, who have argued that the diminishing arts provision in education is undermining the sector and fostering an elite industry. But the government's proposed curriculum overhaul has sparked a wave of optimism, with one prominent figure declaring it a potential end to a decade of 'madness'.
The Department for Education's recent announcement aims to increase the uptake of creative subjects at the GCSE level, marking a significant shift in educational priorities. This decision is a direct response to the curriculum and assessment review, which emphasized the importance of arts subjects as an entitlement rather than an optional extra.
But here's where it gets controversial: While many artists and educators applaud the decision, some raise concerns. The playwright James Graham, known for his advocacy against class inequality in the arts, celebrates the end of the 'madness' that devalued culture subjects. He urges a forward-thinking approach to designing a modern arts curriculum for 21st-century students, considering the challenges they face.
The renowned composer Andrew Lloyd Webber agrees, stating that arts and music are fundamental rights in education. However, he cautions that the government's plan lacks detail regarding funding, curriculum structure, and addressing the shortage of music teachers. This sentiment is echoed by Turner Prize winner Antony Gormley, who celebrates the departure from former Education Secretary Michael Gove's policies, and sculptor Anish Kapoor, who highlights the empathy arts education fosters in young citizens.
The decline in arts education is stark. Since 2010, arts GCSE enrollment has dropped by 40%, and the number of arts teachers has decreased by 23%. Research reveals a concerning trend: the proportion of A-level students taking humanities subjects has significantly decreased, with arts subjects like music, design, and media studies particularly affected.
Beth Steel, an advocate for working-class representation in the arts, passionately argues that art, music, and drama are foundational, not extracurricular. She shares a personal anecdote about a school trip to the Tate and National Gallery, where she encountered Rothko paintings at 14, a pivotal experience that shaped her path.
And this is the part most people miss: The curriculum review highlights a critical issue—schools struggle to find time for creative subjects. Tate director Maria Balshaw confirms this, sharing that teachers often lament the lack of space in the curriculum for the arts. She believes creative subjects are essential for developing well-rounded individuals and welcomes the review's emphasis on arts 'enrichment'.
National Theatre's director, Indhu Rubasingham, shares stories of drama teachers leaving the profession due to subject cuts. She pledges support for the curriculum changes, emphasizing the importance of arts and creativity in schools, which she credits for her own success.
The government's proposed changes to performance measures, including the removal of the Ebacc suite of subjects, aim to encourage more students to take up arts GCSEs. This shift is hailed by the Barbican's new chief executive, Abigail Pogson, as a critical move towards recognizing the holistic development of young people.
Sadler's Wells' artistic director, Alistair Spalding, welcomes the commitment to strengthen dance within PE but calls for investment in teacher training to address the decline in GCSE and A-level dance students. Royal Ballet and Opera's Alex Beard highlights the arts' role in fostering critical thinking, empathy, and understanding in an increasingly digital and divided world. He also advocates for curriculum-based arts access to ensure art forms represent societal diversity.
Saxophonist and composer YolanDa Brown, whose life was transformed by music education, enthusiastically supports the move to make music and creativity core parts of the curriculum. She stresses the need for proper investment in teachers, instruments, and rehearsal spaces to ensure equal access for all students, regardless of their location or school resources.
Young Vic's artistic director, Nadia Fall, believes that bringing arts back into the curriculum is long overdue and critical. She challenges the notion that arts education is only for those pursuing arts careers, arguing that it stimulates the brain and person in ways that can benefit all students, even future physicists like Einstein, who played the violin from a young age.
The arts community's response to this educational reform is a mix of celebration and cautious optimism. While the decision is a step in the right direction, the devil is in the details. Will the government's plan address the funding and structural challenges? How will it ensure that all students, regardless of background, have equal access to quality arts education? These questions remain open for debate, inviting diverse perspectives and potential solutions.
