Ten dimensions of powerful arts education

What is powerful teaching and learning in arts education—and how do you know it’s happening?

Arts educators and researchers know these questions can be curiously difficult to answer.

Part of the reason they’re difficult is because arts education takes place in a variety of learning environments (in school, after school, out of school, summer camps, studios, living rooms, backyards, and parks), across a wide age range, and for individuals and groups that have different and ever-evolving needs, experiences, and perceptions. Understandably, descriptions of powerful arts education practices that resonate broadly are hard to come by, especially those that focus on the experiences of practitioners and youth.

As a longtime supporter of arts education for youth, the Performing Arts Program team regularly runs into these questions and, like many practitioners, struggles to find tools that can be useful across contexts and conditions. These questions surfaced yet again when the Performing Arts Program commissioned research on arts education to inform its 2020 strategic framework. Roughly four out of five respondents to the 2018 survey linked above reported working directly with young people as part of their regular activities. We believe a similar level of arts education activities exist across current grantees and the nonprofit arts sector more broadly.

Program staff have long been aware that a large number of the organizations we work with provide arts education opportunities, even if the foundation is not funding them specifically for that work. Still, we were surprised by the results.

Moreover, the purpose, shape, and strength of the arts education programs reported in the survey varied widely. For example, respondents named 22 goals for their youth programs, ranging from “21^st Century Skills/SEL” to “arts learning/skill development” and “social justice.” Many programs were based on a specific curriculum; some were not. Some respondents were unsure if their programs adhered to California’s Visual and Performing Arts standards (10.5%), and some were unsure if their program was based on a specific curriculum (4.9%).

The results gave us pause. Arts education programs with youth were both more widespread and more diverse in setting, content, structure, and supports than we had initially understood. The results evoked those persistent questions: What is impactful teaching and learning, and how do we know it’s happening? It also sparked a new one: Was there something we could do to support such a diverse set of organizations, programs, and practitioners working on arts education?

Recognizing and supporting meaningful arts education