The Arts in Schools - Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation

eyond the immediate, needs of the economy. It was fundamentally to do withideology, with conflicts of values in education, and ultimately with the questionof who should control the curriculum. The Great Debate brought into the openthe conflict between 'progressive' and 'traditional' styles of education whichhad been gathering force from the late 1960s. In doing so it drew in deeplycontested questions about standards, about discipline, values and politics ineducation.In the terms of the Great Debate the arts were at risk from two misconceptions.First, to those who argued that the main role of education is to prepare youngpeople for work, arts education evidently seemed unnecessary except for thoselooking for arts jobs. Second, through the emphasis in some teaching oncreativity, self-expression and personal development, the arts had becomeassociated with non-intellectual activities, and therefore seemed to lie outsidethe priorities of those who argued for a return to 'traditional' academic values.The Arts in Schools report was written with four objectives. The first was toput the arts firmly into the debate on the future of state education. Hardly anyof the many statements on the curriculum, which flowed from all quarters afterthe Ruskin speech, had mentioned the arts at all: none had dealt with them indetail. The second objective was to put the case for the arts as clearly as possibleto policy-makers at all levels. Much of the existing literature on arts educationhad been written for specialists of different sorts: none of it was addressedspecifically to the economic and ideological issues raised in the GreatDebate. Our third objective was to identify the real problems—practical andotherwise—that faced the full development of the arts in schools; the fourthwas to identify ways ahead.The report attracted an immediate and positive response from all sectors ofeducation and its influence continues to grow. Head teachers, LEA officers,professional associations and politicians of all parties strongly welcomed TheArts in Schools as an essential counterbalance to much of the prevailingargument in education. At the initiative of Lord Beaumont the report wasdebated in the House of Lords on 5 April 1982 (Hansard, page 100). Thedebate drew an assurance from Lord Elton:'. . . lest there be any doubt . . . that the Government fully accept thecase that the arts are not merely a desirable but an essential componentof the education offered in schools. This means not only fostering thetalents of the artistically gifted, important as that is, but providingopportunities for all pupils ... to participate in artistic activity and tolearn about the arts.'Commenting that the school curriculum is 'first and foremost the responsibilityof local education authorities and schools' and that the government 'cannotand indeed should not dictate what they should do', Lord Elton believed thatthe report would be 'widely read and will influence thinking and it will do sodeservedly'. It was and, I think, it has.Many of the report's specific recommendations have been taken up. In theyear following publication over forty local education authorities organisedmajor conferences or in-service events to publicise and consider the report,xii