NiTRO + Creative Matters

Perspectives on creative arts in higher education

Contingency, instrumentality and social responsibility in creative arts education – what can we do?

A contingent part of the creative economy, tertiary creative arts education has a responsibility to its community of students, alumni and partners, to the broader arts sector and the political landscape that surrounds it. We are therefore subject not just to the politics of cultural policy pertaining to the arts, which affect the forms of support and types of arts forms and practices we include on our curricula, but to education and economic policies which shape the conditions under which we teach and undertake research.

By Dr. Abigail Gilmore

A contingent part of the creative economy, tertiary creative arts education has a responsibility to its community of students, alumni and partners, to the broader arts sector and the political landscape that surrounds it. We are therefore subject not just to the politics of cultural policy pertaining to the arts, which affect the forms of support and types of arts forms and practices we include on our curricula, but to education and economic policies which shape the conditions under which we teach and undertake research.

Arts and humanities academics have an ambivalent relationship to politics: it is near impossible to have a sustained engagement with culture and society whilst remaining arms-length and disinterested. In the UK, we have recently benefitted from the £30m cross-Council Arts and Humanities Research Council Connected Communities funding which is opening up research and knowledge exchange collaborations between universities and communities, engaging in local heritage and often using creative practices. However when the fund was first launched there were initial concerns that funding was political under Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ approach, since the programme explicitly aims to support community-led development. This debate is an oft-repeated refrain concerning the contested role of cultural policy intellectuals, most famously played out between Tony Bennett, Jim McGuigan and others in the 1990s (see Sterne, 2002).

The desire for demonstrable research impact is of course only sharpening the debates about instrumentalism of tertiary institutions. So too are the rising fees for undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, transforming education to a private rather than public good, and consolidating the marketization of higher education.

With rising fees, applicants to creative arts degrees do so with projections of lifetime of debt (which they may never repay) and with an understanding that only the few become stars. Little wonder the creative workforce is found to come from an increasingly smaller, less diverse demographic pool made up of those who can access resources from their backgrounds to navigate these systems (O’Brien et al, 2016).

For those hoping to enter creative professions, a progression route already riven by contradiction, structural inequality and class barriers (Campbell & Khaleeli, 2017), this is not good news. The traditional place of art schools as spaces for risk, experiment and transgression of both aesthetic norms and class boundaries is challenged by curricula aiming to improve employment outcomes (Banks and Oakley 2016) but in economies which are precarious and unjust (Banks, 2017).

With rising fees, applicants to creative arts degrees do so with projections of lifetime of debt (which they may never repay) and with an understanding that only the few become stars. Little wonder the creative workforce is found to come from an increasingly smaller, less diverse demographic pool made up of those who can access resources from their backgrounds to navigate these systems (O’Brien et al, 2016).

Furthermore there are economic geographies which shape and determine the outcome of these talent pipelines, causing great variety in the ways universities feed their hinterland creative economies. So London retains more of its creative arts graduates than any other city and draws in those from elsewhere (Comunian et al, 2013) but is far less affordable, adding to precarity.

University participation should be a means of both geographic and social mobility, of introducing and opening up new worlds, not only through taught curriculum but through fostering social capital and third spaces. For the early career visual artists interviewed in recent research (Gilmore et al, 2016) professional development came primarily through peer learning within a large studio collective in the regional city of Manchester, a place which is beginning to rival London in access to international connections and markets, and which outpaces the capital in affordable rents and liveability. The progression routes of the artists are complex (involving temporary periods in different cities, including London, for art school education) and intimately bound up with their habitats and their capacity for mobility.  Access to peer mentoring from people at different stages of their career, with different practices from those they were ‘taught’ in art school is crucial to post-graduation survival.

It is incumbent on tertiary education therefore to find ways to challenge inequality within the creative sector. As a programme director for a Masters’ in Arts Management, Policy and Practice programme, I’m fully aware of the need to teach more than core functional skills such as marketing, strategic development, finance and fund-raising, leadership. We don’t want just be part of mitigation, however, but to develop activists who will create more democratic arts worlds and change the conditions for creative artists. Our role is to nurture criticality, resourcefulness, the desire to change the status quo and to be pioneers for social responsibility, cultural democracy and creative justice.

It is incumbent on tertiary education therefore to find ways to challenge inequality within the creative sector. As a programme director for a Masters’ in Arts Management, Policy and Practice programme, I’m fully aware of the need to teach more than core functional skills such as marketing, strategic development, finance and fund-raising, leadership. We don’t want just be part of mitigation, however, but to develop activists who will create more democratic arts worlds and change the conditions for creative artists. Our role is to nurture criticality, resourcefulness, the desire to change the status quo and to be pioneers for social responsibility, cultural democracy and creative justice.

I’m aware of the biases towards those from better off backgrounds in our admissions, and know it’s a tough call when you are asking young people to risk their economic futures on a potentially precarious career. So we strive to give our graduates the resources to make their own work alongside skills which are transferrable to the wide range of vocations which require diplomacy, advocacy, case-making, strategic management and resource development.  They learn about ethical practices for community engagement and socially engaged practice. Their time on placement gives them new networks for peer learning, just as important as the classroom based seminars. We also connect students with alumni who have made their way in arts management roles in all parts of the world, and collaborate closely with local cultural institutions and policy makers to ensure that teaching is always based on current practice.

Perhaps most importantly, our curriculum is grounded firmly in the multi- and inter-disciplinary research base for arts management and cultural policy studies. Masters’ students incorporate theoretical perspectives into their own practice, which help them to critically analyse and challenge the contexts for creative arts. Just as the Arts and Humanities Research Council has recently advocated in its strategy for creative clusters, this research is on, with and for the creative economy.

Only this combination of practice-based research and socially responsible teaching can help change creative arts education and progression for the better.


References

Comunian, R. Taylor, C. and Smith, D.N. (2013) The role of universities in the regional creative economies of the UK

Connected Communities (2016) Connected Communities: Understanding the changing nature of communities in their contexts and the role of communities in sustaining and enhancing our quality of life. London: Arts and Humanities Research Council http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/documents/publications/connected-communities-brochure/

Banks, M (2017) Creative Justice: Cultural Industries, Work and Inequality. Rowman & Littlefield, London.

Banks, M. & Oakley, K (2015) The Dance Goes on Forever? Art Schools, Class and UK Higher Education, International Journal of Cultural Policy 22, 1, pp. 41-57

O’Brien, D. l Laurison, D. Miles, A. & Friedman, S. (2016) Are the creative industries meritocratic? An analysis of the 2014 British Labour Force Survey Cultural Trends Vol. 25 , Iss. 2,2016 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09548963.2016.1170943

Tom Campbell & Homa Khaleeli (2017) Cool Britannia symbolised hope – but all it delivered was a culture of inequality, The Guardian, 5 July 2017 available fromhttps://www.theguardian.com/inequality/commentisfree/2017/jul/05/cool-britannia-inequality-tony-blair-arts-industry

Gilmore, A., Gledhill, D. & Rajković, I. (2016) Staying and making it in regional creative cities – visual arts graduates and infrastructures for professional development, Comunian, R. & Gilmore, A. (eds) Higher Education and the Creative Economy, Abindgon, Oxon: Routledge available from http://www.tandfebooks.com/userimages/ContentEditor/1478516842596/9781138918733_oachapter9.pdf

Sterne, J. 2002. – Cultural Policy Studies and the Problem of Political Representation, The Communication Review 5 pp.59-89 http://sterneworks.org/culturalpolicystudies.pdf


Dr. Abigail Gilmore is Senior Lecturer in Arts Management and Cultural Policy, and Head of the Institute for Cultural Practices, The University of Manchester (see http://www.alc.manchester.ac.uk/icp/). Her research concerns local cultural policy, management, evaluation and participation.  She is Co-Investigator on the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) Connected Communities project, ‘Understanding Everyday Participation – Articulating Cultural Values’.  Recent projects include AHRC Research Network ‘Beyond the Campus: Higher Education and the Creative Economy’ and the NESTA/Arts Council England/AHRC Digital R&D Fund for the Arts project, ‘Culture Metrics’.

More from this issue

More from this issue

The gradual shift from social democracy to neoliberalism in the west since the 1980s has significantly affected the apparatus of higher education. University and college heads have shifted their priorities from developing knowledge through education and research for social benefit, to increasing the wealth of the institution (and their own salaries) through competing for student numbers and positions in league tables.

Professor Gary Foley was a key member of the Aboriginal Black Power Movement and a critical figure in establishing the Aboriginal Embassy protest of 1972. He has been at the centre of major political activities in Australia for more than 45 years. In 2011 and 2012 he created and performed his one man show Foley with Ilbijerri Theatre, Jon Hawkes and Edwina Howell, for the Melbourne Arts Festival and the Sydney Festival. In 2015 he was the recipient of the Australia Council’s Red Ochre Award for a lifetime achievement in the Arts.   Dr Edwina Howell has worked with Professor Foley

The contemporary world faces an array of inter-connected daunting challenges - geopolitical, enviro-climatic, economic-developmental. While science and technology address many of them, their agenda is only half the story.

A bleaker aspect of writing for an intellectually self-conscious publication like NiTRO is the obligation to respond rationally to what are, in the end, irrational points of view.  As the political Right dissolves into its constituent pathologies, its policies transmogrify into a mix of prejudice and panic. . . This injects an air of unreality into the policy-making process.  “Data” is obsessively gathered, but selectively deployed.  Some areas of government expenditure must repeatedly account for their “impact”.  Others are judged of self-evident merit and anything that contradicts this is downplayed or ignored.

The DDCA’s 2017 conference took place at the Victorian College of the Arts during Melbourne’s recent respite from the cold weather - quite disconcerting for those of us from ‘up north’ who had dressed for the ‘polar extremes’ of our southern states. In a program designed to prompt discussion we welcomed a wide range of artists from within, and outside, academia to consider the theme ‘Beyond Research: Creative Arts in the Impact, Engagement and Innovative Agenda’.

There is a growing sense that something is happening in the arts and creative sector.  The sector is finding its collective voice at state, national and regional level, with terms such as ‘artist-led’, ‘artist-driven’, ‘sector-driven’ being used in the development of programs and policy. This visibility and attention to the arts and contribution of such to the sector does not appear to be similarly matched in education and learning realms.

In this edition of NiTRO our contributors consider the contemporary relationship between tertiary art and politics from the perspective of the role of art to engage with the political message, but also to explore how the political message, and political decisions that affect arts and education, are influencing tertiary arts.

In August 2017, I curated a week-long festival at the Sydney Conservatorium of Music and the Seymour Centre, University of Sydney, entitled “Out of the Shadows: rediscovering Jewish music and theatre”. This was the fourth of five festivals staged around the world, part of a large research project called Performing the Jewish Archive, funded by the British Arts & Humanities Research Council.  Together with ten colleagues from three other continents, the research focus was the aesthetic creations of Jewish artists in the 20th century, artists who were affected by persecution, flight and internment.

Academics convinced of the folly of user pays systems of education have long complained about the steady decline of equity resulting from the ratchetting effect applied to the HECS scheme since its introduction. This is compounded by the attendant impact on quality as each school and program must approach revenue neutrality through a combination of fees and research income.