12 May Jihan Nur- Investigation Piece
Have budget cuts in schools directly affected Art subjects for sixth form and colleges?
Government research shows that the likely funding shortfall in a standard secondary school will be over £400,000 by 2019. With the current cuts, it also means more staff will be losing their place in schools, which will more likely cause stress and restrains to the remaining staff to mark and teach more classes.
Haverstock head teacher John Dowd states that the creative subjects are being treated differently to the rest of the subjects. It is the pressure schools and colleges are facing to be so outcome driven, that they invest on exam results in subjects (particularly at key stage four and sixth form) that will give them the best return. On top of this matter, school funding is very constricted to an extend where Haverstock School had to lose around 1.4 million pounds from their 10 million pounds’ budget over the last two years. This is a large amount of cost that have been cut, which naturally led into the marginal courses becoming unaffordable for the school. Dowd states that by marginal he means subjects that get less than 12 applicants. He further states that these subjects have no value for money.
Nevertheless, John Dowd rationalises that budget cuts don’t necessarily target creative subjects, but they tend to be the least popular amongst the sixth form students. In many educational institutions, students only have a choice of three subjects in contrast to the previous years of four subjects. Dowd explains that when students had the choice of four subjects, the likelihood of one of those subjects being a creative one were high. However, having only three options leads to potentially having 12 students or less than half a dozen in creative subjects. Which are financially impractical.
Sunshine Coward head of art in Haverstock claims: “This of course as had a knock-on effect. Schools are slashing budgets. Creative departments have seen a drop-in number. Staff when they leave are not replaced. Student uptake on creative courses is low.” Coward added that this leads to a reduction in the range of courses offered. For example, at Haverstock School, the Fine Art a Level Course has been dropped from the curriculum (not enough students apparently want to take up the subject and it is therefore too expensive to run). She further states that at present only 4 students are taking AS level Photography, this is down from 5 last year and 30 the year before. She is concerned that this situation can only get worse until attitudes and funding change.
A numerous fraction of educational institutions are experiencing the same situation, many of them also offer only three subjects for A-level students. Though the school curriculum has not intended the outcome to affect the creative field, the financial pressures they face and tensions on students tends to make the institutes focus on core subjects as they obtain more students within a class. An example in Haverstock is in English and Science, they acquire 20 students in a class and that breaks even, past 12 it breaks even financially if it’s less than that then it does not.
This affects the dynamic of the school environment; students who pursue the arts leave which causes an immense gap in the variety of characters. John Dowd says: “It means you get an imbalance in the sixth form community because those students who bring that artistic aspect, because art isn’t just about product, it’s about process, and you lose some of the edge, you lose some of the innovation, you lose some of the creativity that you would normally have in the sixth form and a sixth form community really needs to be a comprehensive one, it needs to be completely rounded and include lots of different views, lots of different skills, lots of different views of the world.”
He describes fine artist, performing artists and visual artists as people who view the world differently from those who for example, are scientist. Therefore their view complement each other. He continues stating “Ultimately, it’s a very negative thing for schools and it’s a negative thing for education and for society because you marginalise the arts and then you have to save the arts out”
Zakariya Nur from GOOD Agency and postgraduate from Falmouth University claims: “The division between creative and core subjects creates a segregation. Although the creative industry can be really abstract and out there, there are many benefits that have positive impacts on society. It’s an untapped source and the core subjects certainly need a touch of creative thinking, as everything requires creativity. Core subjects and creative subjects are not mutually exclusive and by separating them, our students will have less room to explore their career paths in the future.”
Those who want to practise art but do not have the facilities are at a disadvantage as well, students that are already financially unstable will be limited therefore may not be able to reach their full potential in the arts.
Nur adds: “Especially now that we are seeing progress which allows students from all socio-economic backgrounds to have the same opportunities. By cutting funds, talent won’t be the deciding factor, this will marginalise those who don’t have the means to express their creativity and the creative industry won’t be filled with rich material”
Sunshine Coward says: “Students are disadvantaged if they are financially restricted. They will be more likely to go into another industry as they feel they will be more likely to get a higher paying job at the end. Parents (particularly if money is an issue) will persuade their child to not take up a creative subject at a higher level of study as there is this misconceived idea that there is no money in art. If a student has special needs however, this can open a series of doors, as colleges cannot discriminate and will also get additional funding for these students. I have known in some cases for colleges to be more likely to take a person with special needs.”
Though the cuts aren’t directed at the creative field the government plays a huge role in the influence of these effects. Not enough is being done to promote or educate students of the importance the creative field impacts everyday life; John Dowd believes there is a way to balance the instability of subjects in schools. He says: “The government has an important role in making sure that arts funding both in education and beyond education is maintained and again, in a climate of austerity, which we’ve been in for the last seven years arts funding is reduced and that if it’s not careful it erodes away the broader base of the arts agenda in the arts environment”
Sunshine Coward believes education has come under enormous pressure with the recent financial restraints and cuts. She states: “The arts are at more risk than other students as they are not included in the E- Bacc qualification and are therefore viewed in the eyes of the public and the government itself, less important. How can you actively promote your subject (in my case Art and Photography) when the former education secretary only until very recently was actively encourage students not to take up the arts!”
In response, Haverstock partnered with The National Portrait Gallery, Olswang, Shakespeare’s Theatre and the Roundhouse. It supports pupil’s idea of art and widens their horizon, as well as opening more doors and opportunities for them.
Zakariya Nur says: “I reckon the creative industry will always find ways to thrive, but the cuts will be felt most by those that don’t come from a privileged position which can result in a one-dimensional pool of available talent.” He expresses, “Now more than ever, the creative industry has access to creative talent from all types of cultures and backgrounds and this diversity means that more of the population can have access to art and enjoy it. More funding means more talent and more talent means more stories and more stories results in better understanding.”
After the research and finding of this report, it is evident that budget cuts do effect the educational institutions. Moreover, it is accurate that the creative subjects are obtaining more consequences of the budget cuts. Nonetheless, the government has yet to step up and support colleges and sixth forms when it comes to the creative subjects. However, during such circumstances, it seems like a far stretch to expect immediate change and progression within the government regarding educational institutions. Schools are proactively taking matters in their own hands by partnering with theatres, galleries and more, instead of passively waiting for budget support from the educational administration.
Those who cannot afford art colleges may shortfall back if creative subjects continue to be cut in government funded schools. Unless the government starts to act in encouraging students that there are many jobs available in the creative field.
Jihan Nur
All three contacts have are primary research done !
