Memorandum submitted by the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER)

 

1 Context

1.1 The Education and Skills Committee is undertaking an inquiry into Creative Partnerships and the Curriculum. While this inquiry will consider evidence from a range of research and experience not related solely to Creative Partnerships, this response from the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) refers only to that research we have carried out on behalf of Creative Partnerships UK. This body of research comprises:

 

· National Evaluation of Creative Partnerships (Sharp et al., 2007, forthcoming)

· The Impact of Creative Partnerships on the Attainment of Young People (Eames et al., 2006)

· Study of Creative Partnerships Local Sharing of Practice and Learning (Lord et al., 2007a, forthcoming)

· Special Effects: the Distinctiveness of Learning Outcomes in Relation to Moving Image Education Projects (Lord et al., 2007b, forthcoming)

 

1.2 The findings from the final project listed above will be shared with the committee through the response from the BFI. Thus, this response is based on the first three studies only. It should be noted that these studies do not offer evidence under all the questions raised by the committee. However, where our research does address a question, we have provided a response.

 

Main findings from the National Evaluation and Impact studies

 

1.3 The national evaluation by Sharp et al. (2007, forthcoming) found that:

· In 2002/3 about 61,000 young people took part in Creative Partnerships activities and in 2003/4 about 83,000 took part

· School co-ordinators had very positive views about Creative Partnerships

· Young people said they particularly enjoyed the opportunity to work with creative practitioners

· Large scale, cross-curricular projects focusing on creativity and involving true partnership working have the potential to make a real difference in schools.

 

1.4 Eames et al. (2006):

· In 2004, young people known to have attended Creative Partnerships activities out performed those in the same schools (but not known to have attended Creative Partnerships activities) by a small but statistically significant extent in their progress in national assessments in key stages 2, 3 and 4.

 

 

2 What are the implications of a curriculum shift in favour of creativity for the training of heads, teachers and cultural animators?

2.1 NFER's research into local sharing of practice and learning in the context of Creative Partnerships (Lord et al., 2007a, forthcoming) suggests that one way to address the training implications raised by a curriculum shift in favour of creativity would be through building capacity at the school-level.

 

· Within-school meetings, in which 'creativity or the creative curriculum' could be an explicit agenda item or not, tended to be effective in raising the profile of creative learning and to build capacity within the school.

· Observations and modelling were deemed to have the most potential to change practice through collaborative and supportive approaches over a period of dedicated time.

· Informal sharing (such as discussion, networking and building relationships) whilst somewhat intangible and difficult to measure, seemed an important stepping stone for teachers' initial engagement with creative practice, as well as for their continued reflection and learning.

2.2 Beyond particular training requirements, a range of enabling and hindering factors to sharing and enhancing creative teaching and learning highlighted the places that one might intervene to enhance the effectiveness of building capacity through sharing. In particular these included: greater provision of opportunities for teachers to take risks in a supportive environment, encouraging a professional learning culture and demonstrating the impact of creative teaching and learning.

 

2.3 Some things to consider in terms of enabling heads, teachers and creative professionals to embrace a shift to a creative curriculum will be:

 

· funding (to enable training or capacity building either through externally provided training courses, attending local network meetings or within schools)

· time (available for sharing or training)

· internal support (within school i.e. the senior management team recognising and supporting creative teaching and learning, developing a post for a 'creativity' coordinator as a member of SMT)

· external support (from Arts organisations, the local authority and from central Government)

· networks (e.g. using existing networks to share learning on a creative curriculum (such as LA-wide networks for early years, specialist schools...), establishing networks between schools with common interests, or setting up a school-school mentoring model to enable a shift to a more creative curriculum)

· promotion and dissemination (e.g. developing web-based resources offering practical ideas for introducing creativity/creative activities into specific subject or curriculum areas)

· changing thinking (e.g. developing a shared vision and language for creativity between individuals, schools, creative practitioners and others and apportion resources to Initial Teacher Training in order to instil creative and sharing practices from the very start of a teachers' career).

 

2.4 The Lord et al. (2007a, forthcoming) study has also developed some practical tools to support capacity building and sharing creative learning and teaching ideas within and between schools.

 

 

3 How can creativity be embedded across the curriculum and within the philosophy of schools?

3.1 The national evaluation (Sharp et al., 2007, forthcoming) found that successful partnerships were those in which the Creatives and schools had a good idea of what they wanted to achieve and of their own skills and needs. They took time in the planning stage to negotiate the content of their project, rather than replicating a project that the Creative or school had done before. Many involved a number of teachers working together on projects that crossed subject boundaries and involved a large proportion of pupils and staff. Successful Creative Partnerships projects placed creativity at their heart and included elements of CPD for teachers, through both participating in project work and through separate training sessions with Creatives.

 

3.2 The planning process adopted by Creatives was different from the process of lesson planning familiar to teachers. Creatives took the main project ideas as a starting point and planned to offer certain activities, but left sufficient flexibility to build on young people's ideas and to adapt to their responses. They tended to focus as much attention on the quality of the learning experiences as on the quality of the final 'product'. This approach meant that project content and outcomes could not be completely dictated at the beginning, thereby involving a certain amount of 'risk taking' from all parties, especially for teachers who were unused to this way of working.

 

3.3 The Creatives who established a successful relationship with young people demonstrated and shared the creative process, working alongside teachers and young people to model skills. This had the effect of encouraging teamwork and acknowledging all participants as creative individuals. Successful projects distributed responsibility among the participants and invested in the quality of the creative process to achieve outcomes that were of a high standard and could be shared with parents and the whole school.

 

3.4 While the Lord et al. (2007a, forthcoming) study did not specifically consider the question of how creativity could be embedded across the curriculum and within the philosophy of schools, it did recognise that as with other areas of school or staff development, in the light of the scarcity of time and funding for embedding creativity, internal support will be crucial to the sustainability of creative activities and to sharing learning. The following practical suggestions were mooted.

 

· Building sharing into school structures and staff development programmes by:

Ø validating/safeguarding time for creative learning and sharing

Ø developing whole-school INSET opportunities around creativity and creative learning

Ø establishing groups (e.g. working, steering, teaching and learning) to look at creative learning together, especially effective if these are cross-curricular and cross-hierarchical

Ø building creative learning into the curriculum structure of schools and look at opportunities to expand these

Ø delivering CPD in schools in a creative way

Ø capitalising on opportunities for modelling, observation and peer-to-peer sharing.

· Prioritising creative learning by:

Ø writing creative learning into the school development plan

Ø finding dedicated funds to employ creative practitioners

Ø funding a creativity co-ordinator management post to work across departments to keep creativity on departmental and school agendas (see also Ofsted, 2006).

· Securing the support of the senior leadership team e.g. in leading working groups involved in developing creativity across the curriculum. This would enable dedicated staff time, validate the activities and raise the profile of creative learning and sharing in the school.

3.5 The research also indicated that external support from the local authority and from government departments would be needed to raise the profile of creativity and a creative curriculum. In particular, putting creativity higher in the policy agenda, to better match the emphasis placed on 'standards' would encourage schools and teachers to invest in a creative curriculum. The role of the local authority in supporting the development of creativity in schools was felt to be an area of lost potential at the current time. Practical suggestions for sharing the lessons of Creative Partnerships more widely included:

 

· linking up with advisory support within LAs

· the LA prioritising creativity at a strategic level to encourage wider interest in developing creativity in schools

· offering INSET/CPD on creative learning, perhaps exploiting school-level expertise

· co-ordinating a network of schools in the sharing of learning around creativity

· using Advanced Skills Teachers (in the authorities that employ them) to share and help schools develop their creative curriculum.

 

 

References

Sharp, C., Pye, D., Blackmore, J., Brown, E., Eames, A., Easton, C., Filmer-Sankey, C., Tabary, A., Whitby, K., Wilson, R., Benton, T. (2007, forthcoming). National Evaluation of Creative Partnerships. Slough: NFER.

 

Eames, A., Benton, T., Sharp, C. and Kendall, L. (2006). The Impact of Creative Partnerships on the Attainment of Young People: Final Report. Slough:

 

Lord, P., Downing, D., Jones, M., Martin, K. and Springate, I. (2007a, forthcoming). Study of Creative Partnerships Local Sharing of Practice and Learning. Slough: NFER.

 

Lord, P., Jones, M., Harland, J., Reid, M., Bazalgette, C. and Potter, J. (2007b, forthcoming). Special Effects: the Distinctiveness of Learning Outcomes in Relation to Moving Image Education Projects. Slough: NFER.

 

August 2007