In 2012 Michael Rosen published an article in the Guardian that set out to make a case for arts education. The political narrative at the time focused on the need for ‘school improvement’ with increased testing, more selection, more homework and more rigorous inspections all towards the goal of climbing up the international league tables! So what was the point of the arts, how could we make the case? Maybe as a tool in the wellbeing agenda, or to feed the workforce needs of the  multi-billion pound creative industries, or perhaps it was ‘Art for Arts sake!’ In Michaels article he shifted the debate towards the ‘how’ of arts-education and what makes it worthwhile for the pupils - he centered the arts as a place where ‘humane and democratic educational practices’ could flourish.

On one level the practice is ‘instrumental’ but that is only part of the story. Those benefits come about because the practice is creative, because the child is placed at the centre of that creativity, because it is humane and democratic and because each week one child’s story is acted out by their peers for the sake of the art!

In 2023 the pressures on schools have increased further and the ‘sporadic’ ‘patchy’ arts education offer that Michael identified in 2012 is even more true. The pressure for pupils to ‘catch up’ the crisis in staff recruitment and retention, the budget pressures in a cost of living crisis make it increasingly difficult for school leaders to take risks, to go beyond the ‘have to do’ even though they want to ensure that all their pupils experience a rich cultural offer.

When Dr Penny Hay reposted the article it seemed more relevant than ever, and just as I did in 2012 I used it as an audit tool to look over our Speech Bubbles practice. In the face of all the challenges are we offering Speech Bubbles in a way that make it worthwhile for the pupils? 

So here’s my audit using the original ten suggestions…

2) Pupils have a sense of possibility, transformation and change – that the process is not closed ended with predictable, pre-planned outcomes, but that unexpected outcomes or content are possible

We work in the ‘I wonder…’ mode. Working with the children to explore the creative possibilities of the story that we are acting out. We always have a plan and the flexibility to expand on it. This balance of awe and wonder with routine and consistency of practice gives the pupils the feeling of being in a safe predictable place where creative can flourish.

4) Pupils feel the process can be individual, co-operative or both, accompanied by supportive and co-operative commentary which is safeguarded and encouraged by teachers

Throughout the practice we have a balance of the individual and the collective. Single author stories performed by the group, moments of individual acting and lots of ensemble moments.

6) Pupils feel they are working in an environment that welcomes their home cultures, backgrounds, heritages and languages into the process with no superimposed hierarchy

Children are encouraged to tell whatever story they want in the way they want to tell it. We are explicit that our language aim is ‘mutual intelligibility’ that we strive to understand each other and there is no hierarchy of how we speak. The dominant spoken language of the project is however English and where children tell stories in other language we will have them translated so their peers can act them out.

8) Pupils are encouraged and enabled to find audiences for their work whether in the same school, other schools or in the communities beyond the school gate

As many of the children who attend Speech Bubbles are in the process of finding their confidence we are cautious about external audiences. Every story is acted out in the small group with the group members all taking turns to be audience, player and story maker. We often hear that Speech bubbles children are now taking central roles in class assemblies or school plays – taking their newfound performance confidence onto a bigger platform.

10) Pupils are encouraged to think of the arts as including or involving investigation, invention, discovery, play and co-operation and that these happen both within the actual making and doing but also in the talk, commentary and critical dialogue that goes on around the activity itself.

Yes, yes, yes! The work is made meaningful by the way we think about it together, about how we solve creative challenges, how we discuss the ways it made us feel!

Original Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/culture-professionals-network/culture-professionals-blog/2012/apr/30/michael-rosen-arts-education-principles?CMP=share_btn_tw

Dr Penny Hay on X https://twitter.com/PenAHay