Young people and the arts: lessons from 50 years of arts policy
This week, Culture at King’s at King’s College London published a new enquiry (pdf) into access to the arts for young people. The report was inspired by a pair of speeches in June 2014. One, from culture secretary Sajid Javid, called for arts organisations to do more to increase access, especially for young people. The second, via shadow culture secretary Harriet Harman, launched a Labour party consultation on young people and the arts. It was a welcome statement of commitment from both parties, but to long-standing observers it all felt somehow familiar.
Half a century of arts policy
These statements, from across the political divide, prompted Culture at King’s to ask what we have learnt in the 50 years since Jennie Lee launched the UK government’s first-ever arts policy, A Policy for the Arts: The First Steps. What is the role of institutional memory in policy development? And what does institutional memory mean in the context of changing governments, civil servant turnover and funding body churn?
We decided that a look backwards might help to inform the future. We wanted to understand how successive governments and their agencies have devised policy in an attempt to increase young people’s engagement with the arts. Our approach was three-pronged: to review published literature, to listen to individual testimonies and to research through the archives.
Our initial ambition was to evaluate historical policy interventions by their own measures of success. But for the most part, we failed to find either the objectives that set out success criteria, or the data that could be used to judge them. What we did find was a generation of pioneers, from the 1970s onwards, who advocated passionately on behalf of young people, battling entrenched cultures that reflected wider social attitudes to children – and to what constituted good art. They also had to struggle against early resistance to the Arts Council having any involvement whatsoever with education.
From time to time, there was a distinct sense of Groundhog Day. The familiar debate about the purpose of arts policy weaves its way through the many decades we explored in the project. Should policy be directed towards improving understanding and knowledge of the arts, building audiences for the future, or inculcating civility in preparation for adulthood? Or should it be about fostering young people’s innate creativity?
Perhaps today we finally understand it’s about all those things. We’ve come a long way since Jennie Lee and yet, despite actions by successive governments to improve young people’s access to the arts, there is still a significant engagement gap, with education and affluence the major factors influencing likelihood and levels of engagement.
Lessons learned
So what can we learn from this retrospective focus? Some of the lessons are obvious: that historical precedents should be analysed and insights incorporated into the policy development process. That restructuring organisations such as the Arts Council can lead to loss of institutional memory, and of valuable insight and experience. That longitudinal evaluation is vital to capture the impact of engagement in later life and to measure the relative efficacy of initiatives. Finally, that the Arts Council archives are a hugely valuable, and largely untapped, resource.
The missing elements
For me, though, it was what was missing from the story that provided the most valuable learning.
The importance of early intervention in shaping outcomes in later life is now widely understood. Given the evidence, it’s highly likely that providing arts engagement for very young children would have a significant impact on their engagement in later life. There are excellent examples ongoing in the sector, but we uncovered very little evidence in our research of policy directed at early years, or towards supporting arts engagement outside the school system, despite what’s known about the role of family and social life in shaping identity and later experience. Sure Start centres provide a ready-made infrastructure through which early years and family engagement schemes might be delivered.
We also found it curious that there isn’t more international transfer of best practice, given that we share some of the same policy challenges with different cultures around the world.
Greater attention to these areas – in addition to a continued focus on engagement via schools – might help to address the persistent disparity in arts engagement between those who have high levels of education and affluence, and those who do not. It may even increase the diversity and range of arts audiences and participants in a way that other initiatives are failing to do.
Our aim with this enquiry was to kick off debate in a significant year, when political parties will be setting out their manifestos and policy observers will be remembering Jennie Lee. By setting out the history of policymaking in this area – by highlighting the contribution of some key people and interventions and by unearthing unheard voices – we’re making a distinct contribution to an ongoing conversation.
Deborah Bull is a dancer, writer and broadcaster, and director of cultural partnerships at King’s College London
Download Step by Step: arts policy and young people 1944–2014
Join our community of arts, culture and creative professionals by signing up free to the Guardian Culture Pros Network.