Tag: Arts

Working-class students feel alienated from their creative arts degrees – here’s how to help

Social class inclusivity is a problem in UK higher education.

Research demonstrates that working-class students report being less likely to apply to university than their middle-class peers – and when working class people do enter higher education they may face discrimination and social exclusion. This is exacerbated in creative arts subjects.

We interviewed students currently studying creative arts subjects at a Russell Group university to hear more about their experiences of social class inclusivity. Speaking to ten undergraduate and eight postgraduate students studying a range of creative fields including music, drama and film, we found that working-class students find it difficult to attend class, are disadvantaged in terms of accessing the cultural resources needed to succeed on their course, and feel excluded from social life on campus.

Economic disadvantage presents a considerable barrier to students completing arts subjects at university. To be inclusive, university staff may have to adjust teaching and learning. We would like to make the case for those working in higher education to consider what classed assumptions are made about students in our institutions and accordingly reassess our expectations of those studying the creative arts.

Many of the disadvantages or challenges that working-class students face are connected to wider structural inequalities that are deeply entrenched in our society. At the same time, there are still meaningful interventions that staff can make to support working-class students. We suggest four ways in which university staff can make their practice more inclusive to working-class students.

Discuss working-class stories as present and live

Universities are middle-class spaces. In creative arts subjects, students often make work referring to their class identity. This can be at odds in institutions where middle-class experience is the “norm”.

Class diversity must be present within teaching. More working-class mentorship and role models would help students to feel like they belonged at university – including visiting working-class creatives. Our participants also advocated for contemporary working-class experience in the curriculum, in academic texts, and in the artworks discussed.

Staff must maintain a supportive and safe space when discussing issues pertaining to social class. Staff should also recognise that not everyone wants to talk about their background or experience. Additionally, staff must be aware of social class-based stereotyping that might exist in other students’ creative work, and be prepared to intervene when necessary if (often unintended) prejudices around work, class, accent, or lifestyle emerge.

Adapt teaching to the multiple demands on working-class students’ time

More and more students are undertaking part-time work alongside their studies. It is difficult to devise our curricula for only those students who can commit all their time to studying, when significant numbers are balancing their studies with multiple part-time, temporary and precarious jobs, or with care responsibilities.

Working-class and carer students may be commuting considerable distances to engage with their studies. This is creating a two-tier system of engagement, and many of the students we interviewed felt that teaching and learning on their courses was not flexible enough to support their participation. The same issues are present when students try to engage in extracurricular and cultural activities.

Working-class students asked for more online resources and access to course materials immediately at the start of modules, alongside concerns over early starts and late finishes and travel costs. They wanted permission to speak to staff about part-time work without feeling like they were “doing something wrong” or not taking their studies seriously. The normalisation of working alongside studying is something that staff may have to accept and work with, rather than try to push against.

Early intervention is important

The early stages of the student’s degree are a key time when social class difference and disadvantage is felt, with high levels of anxiety around finance and budgeting in comparison to more affluent peers.

Working-class students asked for the university to provide information to support their transition into economic independence. Examples include advice on budgeting, lists of free resources, inexpensive alternatives and free access to cultural resources.

Peer support plays a huge role in the transition to higher education. Working-class peer support groups and mentorship are as significant interventions to help.

Adjust assumptions and reassess expectations

University staff can make a difference to the experience of working-class students through simple adjustments of the assumptions we make.

Interviewees believed staff made assumptions about what creative arts students should know, or the kind of experiences they should have had prior to university. These assumptions corresponded with a more middle-class experience, for example knowledge of university life, or access to (and the ability to afford) cultural resources or engagement with extra-curricular activities. Participants were particularly frustrated by assumptions from staff that students could afford to pay for learning resources not available in the library.

Extra work is also needed to ensure that working-class or other marginalised students feel comfortable and entitled to ask for help from staff.

Because many students now must work alongside studying, students may have less time to complete their work outside of class. Stronger steers on the amount of time to complete activities and prioritisation of reading, and the removal of blame for those struggling to balance time constraints of working whilst studying can all be effective.

Working-class creatives

Class inclusivity means students feel like they belong on their course, alongside having the financial security to take the time and space to study.

This is particularly important in the creative arts because the more time and space students have to engage with their course or with extracurricular activities like arts societies, the more working-class stories will be represented in the creative work they make. Creative arts subjects must better support working-class students to engage fully with their studies – and not to be disadvantaged by financial pressure, lack of resource, or through feeling like they don’t belong on their course.

Source link

April 23, 2025
Storytelling and arts education can drive social change
Netflix drama Adolescence has ignited two vital national conversations.

The rise of online misogyny among radicalised young men has seen Keir Starmer weighing in on the issue.

There’s also been a debate surrounding disenfranchisement among boys and young men in primary, secondary and tertiary education.

The latter has long been on the radar of policymakers, academics, and researchers. HEPI recently linked boys’ educational underattainment to a “veering towards the political extremes,” while discussions around figures like Andrew Tate have kept the former on Parliament’s agenda.

Yet both issues remained on the margins until Adolescence – written, produced, and starring Rose Bruford College alum Stephen Graham – catalysed real-world conversations and moved us toward legislative action.

Despite press, and policy, and parliament, the issue broke through because of storytelling.

Power of creative arts

Much like the Post Office scandal – exposed by Private Eye but only widely acknowledged after Mr Bates vs The Post Office (co-produced by another Rose Bruford alumus, Sara Huxley) – Adolescence shows how creative arts can achieve what policy papers often cannot: capturing public attention and driving cultural change.

It highlights a key truth in fostering social change – the arts play a vital role.

As a membership body representing nearly 40 per cent of creative arts students, we’re concerned by the continued perception of creative degrees as niche or non-essential – leading to disproportionate funding cuts compared to STEM.

In reality, our graduates shape public discourse on identity, gender, and social responsibility, shifting public discourse, and ultimately contributing to public policy.

At the same time as a devaluation of creative degrees, there’s another issue hiding in plain sight – working-class boys are falling behind in education.

HEPI has produced compelling reports on this subject, outlining the growing gender attainment gap, particularly for boys from disadvantaged backgrounds and neurodivergent boys (although we note that some of this may be down to underdiagnosis in girls).

Concerns in the report also raised that boys are less likely to be steered toward specific disciplines (while girls have been encouraged into STEM) and that traditional educational structures serve girls better.

Although the authors should avoid biologically deterministic assumptions around how people learn and bear in mind that gendered socialisation probably plays a large part here – regardless of how behaviour and engagement is socially or otherwise fostered, the data shows its material impact – boys academically underperform compared to girls at every age, in almost every subject.

Class acts

But it is essential to be clear – the issue is not boys in general, but working class boys who are most at risk of falling behind. Discussions that flatten this into a gender-only concern risk obscuring the real and compounding impact of class-based disadvantage on educational engagement and attainment.

This issue receives little attention in practice. A rudimentary and quick scan of Access and Participation Plans (APPs) revealed a striking omission: boys are rarely, if ever, mentioned as a specific target group.

Even when John Blake outlined the significant scale to equality of opportunity faced by “boys from working-class communities” back in 2022, it was primarily in comparison to smaller groups who experience more intense forms of disadvantage, rather than recognising the issue of working-class boys attainment as a standalone concern.

GuildHE Institutions like Rambert School, Northern School of Contemporary Dance and AUB are already doing vital outreach work to bring boys into the subject spaces they are underrepresented in. But again, this work often happens in isolation, without the policy recognition or funding it truly deserves.

That’s a mistake. For many boys, especially those disengaged from traditional academic pathways, creative disciplines provide an essential space to connect, reflect, and grow. Dance, drama, music, and film help young men process difficult emotions and identities constructively.

As our recent written submission to parliament outlined, the dance training boys took part in at Rambert School helped them in areas of life such as creative thinking, managing anger and ADHD symptoms. Arts University Bournemouth runs Being a Boy which provides a supportive space for young men to creatively and safely engage with the role of masculinity in their lives.

Add in Prof Becky Francis’s review of the school curriculum – which argues it’s failing students outside the A-levels-to-university pipeline, disproportionately boys – and her call to value arts subjects, and we see an emerging case for education that better accounts for how many boys have been socialised to learn and engage.

This is where creative education comes in. The arts are not just about performance or aesthetic appreciation – they are powerful tools for expression, empathy, and exploration, and a possible way to engage boys who are disenfranchised at an estimated cohort size of half a million from higher education

While the HEPI report calls for a push to get more men into teaching, care roles, and nursing, we believe in the individual and societal benefits of encouraging boys – particularly working-class boys – into, and their contribution to, the arts.

Some of this work is already being done by our alumnus – Stephen Graham discovered Owen Cooper, who plays Jamie Miller in Adolescence, who Cooper describes as “a normal working-class family from a normal council estate”. But there needs to be a concerted policy effort.

That means:
- Valuing arts and creative degrees as critical to both gendered social progress and supporting widening participation in HE for boys
- Including boys as a key demographic in widening participation strategies in HE.
- Supporting cross-sector collaboration between educators, policymakers, creatives, and communities to tackle today’s issues and truly value the impact creative degrees make on individuals and society.
The success of Adolescence in sparking national debate is a wake-up call. If we want to tackle misogyny, and we must remember that Adolescence was fundamentally about violence against women and girls, as well as male disengagement in education, we need to invest in the places where empathy and identity are formed – and value how these are explored and communicated to wider society.
Source link
April 15, 2025
Building a Foundation for Innovation and Empathy Through Arts Education

From fostering creativity and critical thinking to enhancing emotional intelligence and cultural awareness, arts education plays a crucial role in shaping future leaders.

Martine Kei Green-Rogers, Ph.D.

Dean, The Theatre School at DePaul University

Artists want to be in conversation with other artists, artforms, and disciplines of study. An arts education is valuable because we need people who are interested in exploring, highlighting, and sharing our collective humanity. We need people to tell the history of our global societies and help us recognize how to make what may seem foreign to us more familiar.

A conservatory model encourages other artforms and disciplines to play together by establishing a place where artists can fail miserably, pick back up, and start again. Students not only learn the technical skills of their craft, but they also learn creative problem-solving, collaboration and communication, and discipline and adaptability. These are the skills needed for a person to be successful, no matter what they decide to do later in life.

100 years of arts education

At The Theatre School at DePaul University, modeling new paths for what one can do with conservatory training is our future. We are an amazing school with a rich heritage. This year, we celebrate 100 years of training theatre professionals, and this milestone has given us an opportunity to reflect on how our students have taken their training and gone on to do so many phenomenal things both inside and out of the theatre world. Our graduates use their arts training to make the world a better place and to provide opportunities for the next generation of artists.

At the heart of who we are as an educational institution, and as a value based collective of artists, we embody in our spaces everyday why the arts are necessary.

Rebecca Ryan, the director of admissions for The Theatre School, summarizes who we are succinctly: ”Nestled in the heart of Chicago, a city renowned for its vibrant and diverse theatre scene, The Theatre School at DePaul University offers a cutting-edge education with 15 highly specialized Bachelor of Fine Arts programs ranging from Acting and Comedy Arts to Projection Design and Theatre Management, a Master of Fine Arts program in Acting, and a new Certification for Intimacy Professionals in Theatre & Cinema.

“With over 30 productions each year, students engage in immersive, hands-on experiences. Faculty — all professional theatre artists active in the industry — bring their real-world expertise to the classroom, along with their professional network and connections. Students develop skills that prepare them to innovate and excel in the dynamic entertainment landscape.”

More than art for art’s sake

We help students find their path by providing numerous opportunities to delve into the real-world applications for their art that goes beyond “art for art’s sake” (not that this is a bad thing). For example, we devised a theatrical piece in May 2024 as a response to an exhibition by Selva Aparicio at the DePaul Art Museum to bring awareness to domestic violence, we are currently partnering with the College of Science and Health at our university to train emerging healthcare professionals, and provoking conversations about our contemporary society through the lens of historical events via our partnership with the american vicarious and TimeLine Theatre.

These kinds of collaborative projects expand the world of possibilities for our students and the ability to experiment allows for someone to have the fortitude to carve their own paths and create their own opportunities.

While resilience, emotional intelligence, and critical-thinking skills might not be in the course catalog per se, these transferable skills not only prepare students for a wide range of careers, but an education in the arts also deeply connects students to our shared humanity. The world needs more innovators who lead with empathy.

Click here to learn more about The Theatre School at DePaul University

Author bio

Martine Kei Green-Rogers is the dean at The Theatre School at DePaul University in Chicago. She earned her Ph.D. from the Department of Theatre and Drama at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She received her bachelor’s in theatre from Virginia Wesleyan College and her master’s in theatre history and criticism from The Catholic University of America. A director and writer, Martine has a long history in the theatre. She has held several positions in dramaturgy, literary management, writing, directing and creative storytelling in the professional theatre and entertainment industries. Her portfolio includes positions at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival and the Court Theatre in Chicago. Martine previously served as interim dean of the Division of Liberal Arts at the University of North Carolina School for the Arts. She also is the immediate past president of the Literary Managers and Dramaturgs of the Americas and the current President-Elect of the Association for Theatre in Higher Education (ATHE).

Source link

March 30, 2025
Advocate for Investments in Arts Education for All Students
Investing in Arts Education
Arts engagement empowers youth by providing a vital outlet to express their thoughts, feelings, ideas, and passions, while also building their self-confidence, creativity, critical-thinking, and communication skills. This participation directly supports a student’s emotional well-being and academic success.

Yvonne Johnson

President, National PTA

Research shows that students who participate in the arts have higher GPAs, higher standardized test scores, and lower dropout rates. Yet, there are great disparities in the access to quality arts education for many students across the country. It is critical that we advocate for investments in arts education so all students can benefit from participating in the arts.

Here’s how you can help make arts more accessible to youth:
- Ask your child’s school about current arts programs and funding. Talk to other parents about the barriers they face.
- Email or call district leaders about expanding arts access.
- Attend meetings with decision-makers and voice support for arts funding.
- Meet with school administrators to discuss arts opportunities.
- Share arts success stories on social media and with your local news media.
Remember: Your voice matters. Even small actions like attending one meeting or sending an email can help build momentum for better arts access.

If you aren’t already a member of PTA, join us! Our association has long advocated for access to arts education and our popular Reflections program encourages students to explore their talents and express their ideas by creating works of art for fun and recognition.

Together, we can ensure every child has the opportunity to experience the transformative power of the arts. Your voice and actions will help unlock creativity for generations to come.
Source link
March 12, 2025
Why Arts Education Is Essential for Students’ Success

Investing in Arts Education

As events at the federal level unfold in ways that will most certainly intensify the debate on public education, it is important to remember that Americans overwhelmingly support arts education.

In a recent survey conducted by Americans for the Arts, 90% of respondents proclaimed the importance of arts education, and 83% supported government funding for arts education programs. Americans know its importance because research consistently shows that a quality arts education is essential for a student’s overall learning experience. Students with access to arts education and arts-integrated classes demonstrate long-term retention of information and increased proficiency in reading, writing, and math. Beyond academics, arts education also positively impacts students’ mental health and emotional well-being. Engaging in the arts helps prevent depression and nurtures empathy and compassion for others.

The value of arts education

While research and anecdotal evidence clearly illustrate the value of arts education, teachers, parents, school leaders, and other stakeholders regularly face challenges related to funding, scheduling, and competing legislative priorities. Low-income students, students with disabilities, students of color, and other underrepresented groups have less access to quality arts education. Yet, these students stand to benefit the most from it and arts-integrated learning. There is strong agreement about the importance of arts education, and more than half of American adults believe students don’t have enough opportunities to take arts classes.

In addition to its academic benefits and vital role in supporting mental and emotional well-being, arts education also prepares students for the workforce by cultivating originality and creativity. Employers value strong communication, problem-solving, and teamwork — abilities developed in art classrooms, theater rehearsals, and band or orchestra performances. Furthermore, 61% of employed American workers say the arts boost their creativity, which makes them more successful at work.

Unlocking even more benefits

The emerging field of neuroarts provides even stronger evidence for the importance of arts education. Neuroarts is the transdisciplinary study of how the arts and aesthetic experiences measurably impact the body, the brain, and behavior, and how this knowledge can be applied to support health and well-being. Researchers Susan Magsamen and Ivy Ross have been pioneers in this field, finding that artistic experiences stimulate neurons and brain pathways unlike anything else. Their research shows that art can be integrated with medicine to improve mobility, relieve pain and trauma, enhance learning outcomes, prevent disease, and build resilience. For children in particular, participating in the arts supports brain and language development, emotional regulation, self-expression, and overall learning ability.

With so many profound benefits, the case for quality arts education is well-founded. Investing in arts education helps students become healthier and more likely to succeed both in the classroom and the workplace. It is crucial to ensure every student in the United States has access to a strong arts education.

Source link

March 12, 2025
Trust, creativity, and collaboration are what leads to impact in the arts
Impact in the arts is fundamentally different from other fields. It is built on relationships, trust, and long-term engagement with communities, businesses, and cultural institutions.

Unlike traditional research models, where success is often measured through large-scale returns or policy influence, impact in the creative industries is deeply personal, embedded in real-world collaborations, and evolves over time.

For specialist arts institutions, impact is not just about knowledge transfer – it’s about experimental knowledge exchange. It emerges from years of conversations, interdisciplinary convergence, and shared ambitions. This process is not transactional; it is about growing networks, fostering trust, and developing meaningful partnerships that bridge creative research with industry and society.

The AHRC Impact Acceleration Account (IAA) has provided a vital framework for this work, but to fully unlock the potential of arts-led innovation, it needs to be bigger, bolder, and more flexible. The arts sector thrives on adaptability, yet traditional funding structures often fail to reflect the reality of how embedded impact happens – rarely immediate or linear.

At the University for the Creative Arts (UCA), we have explored a new model of knowledge exchange—one that moves beyond transactional partnerships to create impact at the convergence of arts, business, culture, and technology.

From ideas to impact

At UCA, IAA impact has grown not through top-down frameworks, but through years of relationship-building with creative businesses, independent artists, cultural organisations, and museums. These partnerships are built on trust, long-term engagement, and shared creative exploration, rather than short-term funding cycles.

Creative industries evolve through conversation, experimentation, and shared risk-taking. Artists, designers, filmmakers, and cultural institutions need time to test ideas, adapt, and develop new ways of working that blend creative practice with commercial and social impact.

This approach has led to collaborations that demonstrate how arts impact happens in real-time, to name a few:
- Immersive storytelling and business models – Research in VR and interactive media is expanding the possibilities of digital storytelling, enabling new audience experiences and sustainable commercial frameworks for creative content.
- Augmented reality and cultural heritage – Digital innovation is enhancing cultural engagement, creating interactive heritage experiences that bridge physical and virtual worlds, reinforcing cultural sustainability.
- Sustainable design and material innovation – Design-led projects are exploring circular economy approaches in sports, fashion, and product design, shifting industry mindsets toward sustainability and responsible production.
- Photography and social change – Research in archival and curatorial practice is reshaping how marginalised communities are represented in national collections, influencing curatorial strategies and institutional policies.
These projects are creative interventions that converge research, industry, and social change. We don’t just measure impact; we create it through action.

A different model of knowledge exchange

The AHRC IAA has provided an important platform for arts-led impact, but if we are serious about supporting creative industries as a driver of economic, cultural, and social transformation, we must rethink how impact is funded and measured. Traditional funding models often overlook the long-term, embedded collaborations that define arts impact.

To make the impact funding more effective, we need to:
- Recognise that creative impact develops over time, often requiring years of conversation, trust-building, and iterative development.
- Encourage risk-taking and experimentation, allowing researchers and industry partners the flexibility to develop innovative ideas beyond rigid funding categories.
- Expand the scale and duration of support to enable long-term transformation, allowing small and specialist universities to cultivate deeper, sustained partnerships.
In academic teaching and training, knowledge exchange must be reconsidered beyond the REF framework. Rather than focusing solely on individual research outputs, assessment frameworks should value collective impact, long-term partnerships, and iterative creative inquiry. Funding models should support infrastructure that enables researchers to develop skills in knowledge exchange, ensuring it is a fundamental pillar of academic and professional growth.

By embedding knowledge exchange principles into creative education, we can cultivate a new generation of researchers who are not only scholars but also creative change makers, equipped to collaborate with industry, drive cultural innovation, and shape the future of the creative economy.

A call for bigger, bolder AHRC impact funding

UCA’s approach demonstrates how arts institutions are developing a new model of impact—one rooted in collaboration, creativity, and social change. However, for this model to thrive, impact funding must evolve to recognise and support the unique ways in which creative research generates real change.

To keep pace with the evolving needs of cultural, creative, and technology industries, research funding must acknowledge that impact in the arts is about stories, communities, and the human connections that drive transformation. It’s time to expand our vision of what impact means – and to build a funding model that reflects the true value of the arts in shaping business, culture, and society.
Source link
March 11, 2025
Stranger than fiction: The Young Warrior saga at the Institute for American Indian Arts

TAKE ACTION

David John Baer McNicholas’s first novella is inspired by a darkly comedic poem he once wrote about a town that outlawed canned food and built a massive trebuchet, or catapult, to hurl the cans into the distance — only to receive thank-you notes tied to bricks hurled back at them.

Lately, McNicholas has been entangled in a real-life plot eerily similar to his writing. At the Institute of American Indian Arts in Santa Fe, New Mexico, food pantries were empty despite a $50,000 grant meant to support them. When student publication The Young Warrior printed criticisms of school officials for these failures and the Associated Student Government began investigating, administrators swiftly retaliated — kicking students out of housing, putting them on probation, and even threatening them with lawsuits.

This may sound like the plot of a neo-noir film bleak enough to rival “Chinatown,” but for McNicholas, a creative writing student at IAIA and the founder and editor of The Young Warrior, it’s reality.

Young Warrior editor David McNicholas recalls, “Oh shit, they’re going to throw everything at me” for exposing the administration. (Ponic Photography)

McNicholas connects IAIA’s pattern of silencing dissent to broader institutional failures. He recounts how during a faculty meeting with the Board of Trustees, a sculpture professor once dared to mention an academic paper written by a former IAIA department head. The paper showed that even conservative estimates put IAIA’s staff turnover rate at about 30%. McNicholas says when the professor brought it up, “everyone in the meeting clammed up, and later they came down on him hard. They told him he embarrassed the dean of students and demanded he write a public apology and retraction. He wrote a coerced apology and quit the next day.”

The Young Warrior published the academic paper before quickly being told to retract it.

“We want better,” says McNicholas. “Student retention is 50%. Graduation is 25% . . . The faculty, staff, and students here are top-notch people, but the administration just supports the rising stars and lets everyone else evaporate.”

McNicholas’s own showdown with the administration began when he published an anonymous student letter and flyer accusing the dean of students of bullying and suggesting food-pantry funds had been misappropriated. The letter and flyer resonated with the student body, according to McNicholas, and many came forward to thank him and to offer support.

I love this school. I love the community. I love the students and the faculty. I struggle with the administration after this, but I think that that struggle was there long before I came along. I just kind of exposed it.

When McNicholas published the anonymous letter and flyer, he says students were being forced to buy meal plans they couldn’t always use while the dean of students, McNicholas says, dismissed the need for food pantries altogether, claiming, “Students have meal plans; they don’t need food pantries.”

This explanation rang hollow for McNicholas who, like many of his peers, falls below the poverty line and relies on food pantries to survive.

After the letter and flyer came out, the administration promptly accused McNicholas of “bullying” staff with his publication, and IAIA Provost Felipe Colón put him under investigation.

“They came down on me primarily, but also on a peer who had made an Instagram post, of all things,” he recalls. “I said, ‘Oh shit, they’re going to throw everything at me.’”

Anticipating housing sanctions, McNicholas preemptively left campus and lived out of his van.

“It sucked, because I wasn’t prepared for it. I had to go sleep in a friend’s driveway,” he remembers. The forcefulness of the school’s response only made McNicholas more suspicious, bringing to mind Shakespeare’s famous line, “The lady doth protest too much.”

Institute of American Indian Arts Can’t Ignore the First Amendment

Page (Two-Column)

Tell the Institute of American Indian Arts to lift sanctions against David McNicholas and revise its anti-bullying policy.

Read More

The situation escalated when the administration denied that the grant even existed during a meeting with McNicholas and other members of the Associated Student Government who had taken an interest in the matter. Despite the administration’s denials, an anonymous source provided McNicholas with a photocopy of a grant award letter for the rumored $50,000. Armed with this evidence, McNicholas and the ASG president confronted the administration, only to face threats of legal action.

The administration’s behavior took an emotional toll on students, according to McNicholas. One day, the ASG called a meeting to discuss the situation — just ASG members, since advisors employed by the college couldn’t be trusted — and the ASG president showed up in tears. She had just come from a meeting with IAIA President Robert Martin, who delivered a shocking ultimatum.

“She said that he told her the school was seriously considering suing ASG — and her — because of the bad publicity,” McNicholas says. “She came to us and said, ‘They told me to fix it.’ She was in tears, you know, and that made me mad.”

When they confronted the provost with the grant award letter, he changed his tune.

“He showed up at the next meeting and said, ‘Oh, you know what? I did some looking, I researched it, and I think I found the grant that you guys were talking about, and I’d like to come and explain how it was spent,’” McNicholas recalls. “I was like, yeah, I bet you do.”

Meanwhile, Provost Colón’s investigation of McNicholas for publishing the student critiques found him responsible for violating the school’s unconstitutional anti-bullying policy. Exhausted and beaten down, he was unable to attend the meeting where the provost attempted to explain the grant’s expenditures. McNicholas says, “I got the sheet he handed out, which showed budget-to-actual figures, but when pressed to release the ledger, he claimed bank statements might not go back that far. We’re talking a year, maybe two at most. I think he thought you could say that because he was with a room full of like 19, 20 year olds. But if I had been in that room, I would have pushed back.”

Though McNicholas later successfully appealed the housing sanctions and recovered about $2,000 in lost fees, he remains outraged at how other students were treated.

McNicholas never did accept IAIA’s “as little as possible” philosophy, in which truth had no place, power thrived on silence, and the ones who dared to ask questions were the first to pay the price.

“What I really can’t stand is that they did the same thing to a 19-year-old freshman for making an Instagram post. That person didn’t move out on their own accord. They lost all their housing and meal plan money. They lost $2,000,” McNicholas says. “They kicked that person out, kept their money, and made a 19-year-old student homeless. As far as I’m concerned, that’s unconscionable.”

Not only did the sanctions against McNicholas affect his ability to participate in campus life, they also threatened his employment opportunities, including a federal work-study opportunity that should have been protected from administrative interference.

“I was hired to be an orientation mentor at the end of last summer,” he says “And the day before I was going to start, I got a call from the director of that program who said, ‘Yeah, you can’t participate because you’re on institutional probation.’”

Finding himself ruthlessly targeted by the administration, McNicholas turned to the press. Teaming up with a few peers, they went to the Santa Fe Reporter, and the article that followed — which detailed the administration’s retaliatory actions against him — made an immediate impact.

“When that article came out, both the interim director and dean of students were gone within days,” he says. “Like, they were gone.”

Anticipating housing sanctions, Young Warrior editor David McNicholas preemptively left campus and lived out of his van. “It sucked, because I wasn’t prepared for it. I had to go sleep in a friend’s driveway.” (Ponic Photography)

After the Santa Fe Reporter exposé and leadership shakeup, the food pantry miraculously transformed. A 20-foot-long conference table in the Student Success Center, once filled with nothing but cans of tomatoes that no one was using, suddenly became a bounty of groceries.

Last semester, McNicholas delved into the intersection of journalism and free speech through an independent study. His research included works like Dean Spade’s “Mutual Aid” and FIRE’s “Guide to Free Speech on Campus,” laying the groundwork for his evolving understanding of rights and responsibilities.

This semester, McNicholas has already published a new issue of The Young Warrior, which reflects his growing interest in matters of free expression. The issue includes a letter from FIRE written on his behalf and a personal acknowledgment of his own rights and responsibilities as a journalist.

“Yes, the school violated my rights and they need to be held accountable, but also, I could have been a better journalist. And there’s room to talk about that,” he says with characteristic humility. The issue also strikes a lighter tone with a comic poking fun at the provost — because, as McNicholas says with a grin, “why not?”

The intersection of art, politics, and personal freedom is a driving force for McNicholas. “My work is very personal,” he explains. “I live in a political morass metaphorically surrounded by people on both sides of a binary who think censorship is fine as long as it’s censoring the other guy. I’m a non-binary thinker. I’m an anarchist. For an artist like me to make art, I can’t be worried about who I will offend. I can’t tailor my work to thread between all these idiots who can’t think for themselves, who can’t be critical without taking sides. If I worried about that, I couldn’t get up in the morning. I couldn’t be an artist.”

McNicholas never did accept IAIA’s “as little as possible” philosophy, in which truth had no place, power thrived on silence, and the ones who dared to ask questions were the first to pay the price. Nevertheless, he speaks with deep affection about IAIA.

“I love this school. I love the community. I love the students and the faculty. I struggle with the administration after this, but I think that that struggle was there long before I came along. I just kind of exposed it.”

Source link

February 24, 2025
Re-framing the Arts and Humanities
- This blog was kindly authored by Annamaria Carusi, Director at Interchange Research. Annamaria recently joined a HEPI/Taylor & Francis roundtable to discuss advancing translational research.
HEPI, together with Taylor & Francis, recently highlighted translational research’s importance in bridging scientific discovery and real-world applications. This is a much-needed part of higher education strategy, especially given Labour’s framing of its policies in terms of missions. If the government is inspired by Mariana Mazzucato’s conception of missions, it needs policies that will ensure the country fully benefits from the substantial investment made by the State into research and development. Finding better connections between knowledge production and application is a key way of doing this.

Often, the focus of attention in translational efforts is bounded within STEM subjects, with the idea of translation originating in the biomedical sciences, with the ‘bench to bedside’ approach. But the creative industries are just as central to the economic well-being of the country – and its people. This is recognised in the establishment of the government’s Creative Industries Taskforce, which had its first meeting in December 2024.

The Arts and Humanities make a substantial a contribution to the UK’s economy: a House of Lords report gives the figure of £126bn as the creative industries contribution to GVA in 2022, which compares favourably to the contribution of STEM subjects. The UK is recognised as a global leader in art and culture. This is despite disciplines feeding into the creative industries being consistently de-prioritised in government policy since 2009, with decreasing levels of funding. Universities are struggling with their own budgetary constraints, and Arts, Humanities, and creative courses have borne the brunt of redundancies and closures.

Addressing the tension between the potential of the arts and humanities and the financial pressures they are under is a priority for any policy to build bridges between higher education and real-world impacts. Pre-conceptions about different disciplines’ relation to real-world impacts feed these tensions. Here, I suggest three areas where shifting pre-conceptions would be helpful for better positioning of arts and humanities with respect to real-world impacts.

Firstly, we need to have multiple different ways of thinking about translational research, and not fall back on science and technology as the paradigmatic example of this. We need to recognise that there are different patterns of interactions among research and other outputs, skills, practices, processes, communities and society. They cannot all be shoe-horned into one model (in fact, the translation model does not work very well even for the biomedical sciences where it originated). Co-creation is a term often adopted in creative contexts; a better understanding of how it works will unlock more potential social benefit, especially for the arts and humanities, and possibly for other disciplines too.

Secondly, pitting Arts and Humanities and STEM against each other is not only counterproductive, but also creates an obstacle to further benefits of the arts and humanities, beyond those we already see through the creative industries. The need for models of research where different disciplines complement each other is even greater in the mission framework that the Labour government has adopted for its policy.

Missions are not just an ambitious sounding word; they require breaking apart the silos into which research is currently organised and integrating thinking and doing across many different skills and forms of knowledge and expertise. Policy interventions targeted at facilitating and encouraging cross-disciplinary collaborations across STEM and Arts and Humanities will allow researchers to develop flexibility, agility, creativity, and that most invaluable of research skills, the ability to look at problems from different perspectives, and in so doing, will also allow different models for constructing these bridges to emerge.

Crucial for getting the best out of these collaborations – not just for the first goal of research, the peer-reviewed publication, but for those all-important social impacts – is that all disciplines involved should be viewed as equal partners. An anecdote from one of my (many) personal experiences of collaborating as a humanities scholar with scientists shows why: I was invited to be an Arts and Humanities representative in a synthetic biology network, a cross-disciplinary collaboration that, at the time, was required by funders. When I asked what that might entail, I was told: ‘Anything, so long as you don’t put obstacles in the way of our research.’ But maybe disruption sometimes is a useful part of research and innovation? Further, there was nothing in the funding structure of the network that equalised the collaboration or tried to work towards a genuine integration; ultimately all the partners were in a loose network and mostly everyone researched and published in their own pre-set disciplinary journals.

When collaborating across these domains, we must understand that the arts are not secondary vehicles for science and technology. They are not merely communicators of scientific ideas already worked out by the scientists; the humanities are not there only to bring their particular brand of empathy or analytical and critical thinking skills, but also for the substantive content and ideas they bring. As equal partners addressing complex societal challenges together, the outputs and innovations that make their way into society are more likely to be implementable, with fewer unthought-through consequences for society. Additionally, the recognised and incentivised outputs of a collaboration should be broad enough to accommodate research publications, data sets, and products (such as a drug, a device, a policy, or a piece of software) but also the very wide array of direct and indirect outputs of the creative sector.

Thirdly, we need to tackle perceptions about employability, beginning with those of students as they make their course and degree choices. The lower numbers of students choosing arts and humanities courses at university goes hand in hand with the lower numbers choosing these subjects for AS and A-levels. In the case of English A-levels, one of the contributing factors is that there is a clearer career pathway for STEM subjects. This is despite the fact that Arts and Humanities are no slouches regarding employment. In 2022, 620 000 workers were employed in the arts sector and a further 350 000 were self-employed. It is often proposed that couching the Arts and Humanities in terms of their employment or economic impacts diminishes their intrinsic value. The intrinsic/extrinsic binary is not helpful, especially when it serves to fuel the perceived differences between arts and humanities, and science and technology. All of these disciplines have intrinsic values: as a researcher who has followed scientists around their labs, I have seen first-hand that often what holds them there is their passion for their subject for its own sake.

The more Arts and Humanities are seen as only one side of a binary between ‘intrinsic’ versus ‘extrinsic’ values, the more they become the precinct of an elite class, who go on to shape the arts sector in their image. Instead, what is needed is a concerted effort to change these perceptions and to show students that they can have both intrinsic and extrinsic values. Whichever model is used for bridging across higher education and real-world impact for the arts and humanities, be it translation or co-creation, should capture the complex relations between these two forms of value. The right forms of career support need to be co-designed with the whole sector and highlighted for prospective students. As we form strategies to realise more fully the direct and indirect benefits of arts and humanities, the economic survival of those practising them cannot be placed on a lower rung than those practising other disciplines.
Source link
February 11, 2025
At the Institute of American Indian Arts, criticism of school officials is ‘bullying’

Criticism of government and public officials is at the core of First Amendment protections. But the Institute of American Indian Arts in New Mexico is ironically using its anti-bullying policy to browbeat student critics into silence.

Last spring, David McNicholas, senior editor of the Young Warrior student magazine, published two student submissions reacting to recent news of the abrupt resignation of Karen Redeye, a beloved student success advisor at IAIA.

The first submission was an anonymous editorial urging students to speak up against IAIA’s “oppression” and accusing Redeye’s supervisors of bullying her to the point that “good people have no choice but to leave or sacrifice their own mental, emotional well-being.” The second submission, also from an anonymous student, was an image of a flyer referencing rumors that Nena Martinez Anaya, the dean of students, misappropriated grant money meant for food aid. The flyer read, “Karen Redeye keeps pantries full[.] Nena Martinez robs them[.] Redeye Redemption[.]”

Immediately after the magazine’s publication, IAIA Provost Felipe Colon told McNicholas he was being investigated over complaints that the publication constituted bullying. Specifically, he was told that the “damaging and defamatory content” and “derogatory and unfounded misinformation” violated IAIA’s expansive anti-bullying policy — which bars everything from “teasing, name-calling” and “taunting,” to “telling others not to be friends . . . with someone” and “offensive text messages or emails.”

A third complaint, filed by Lorissa Garcia, interim director of the Student Success Center, echoed the others but added a new accusation. Namely, that in his role as public relations officer for the student government, McNicholas used its Instagram account to “promote and distribute derogatory and unfounded misinformation and rumors” concerning Garcia’s role in Redeye’s resignation.

Garcia based this allegation on the claim that the student government’s account “liked” a student’s post sharing an image of the “Redeye Redemption” flyer.

Colon found McNicholas responsible for bullying, placed him on probation through the end of the 2024–25 school year, suspended him from student housing, and ordered him to issue written public apologies to Garcia and Martinez Anaya — and publish retractions in the Young Warrior and on the student government Instagram account.

Redeye then emailed IAIA President Robert Martin to explain that she had indeed resigned from IAIA due to “maltreatment” and “bullying from direct supervisors.” Despite Redeye corroborating the editorial’s factual assertions, an appeals panel lifted the other sanctions but upheld the probation.

FIRE wrote IAIA last month, urging it to rescind the remaining sanctions and revise its overbroad and vague anti-bullying policy:

The First Amendment protects the freedom of the press to publish vehement criticism of government officials (including college administrators) like that contained in the anonymous editorial submissions printed in the Young Warrior. In fact, such criticism is at the core of the Constitution’s guarantee of expressive rights. . . . As the Supreme Court has explained, “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and . . . may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”

IAIA cannot ban “teasing” and “offensive text messages” simply by labeling them bullying. In order for so-called “bullying” speech to be punishable, it must rise to the level of actionable harassment — that is, it must discriminate based on protected status and be severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive, among other criteria. An anti-bullying policy expansive enough to cover “taunting” and “telling others not to be friends . . . with someone” is unconstitutional.

But IAIA refused to rescind the sanctions or amend its policy. According to the school, its actions did not violate the First Amendment:

Mr. McNicholas was not disciplined because he published critical commentary about IAIA officials, as you state; he was disciplined for publishing harmful, hurtful, unsubstantiated and damaging statements about the persons and reputations of members of the IAIA community. There is a big difference between critical commentary and the spreading of unsubstantiated and injurious statements claiming illegal activity.

Contrary to IAIA’s assertion, constitutional protection for speech and the press extends to criticism that is “harmful” or “hurtful.” The Supreme Court has been clear: “Criticism of [public officials’] official conduct does not lose its constitutional protection merely because it is effective criticism and hence diminishes their official reputations.”

Nor does the published material lose First Amendment protection simply because it contains unproven claims. Even false or misleading statements are protected unless the expression meets the high standard for unprotected defamation. Here, that means IAIA would need to show that the published claims about Garcia and Martinez were not only false, but that McNicholas published them despite knowing — or with a “high degree of awareness” — they were false.

IAIA cannot do so. Despite throwing around a lot of terms like “misinformation,” “libelous,” “defamation,” and “slander,” IAIA has not offered any evidence to show the allegations are false, let alone that McNicholas knew they were false. Indeed, the available evidence shows he had good reason for believing the truth of the published allegations.

FIRE defends the rights of students and faculty members — no matter their views — at public and private universities and colleges in the United States. If you are a student or a faculty member facing investigation or punishment for your speech, submit your case to FIRE today. If you’re faculty member at a public college or university, call the Faculty Legal Defense Fund 24-hour hotline at 254-500-FLDF (3533). If you’re a college journalist facing censorship or a media law question, call the Student Press Freedom Initiative 24-hour hotline at 717-734-SPFI (7734).

Source link

February 10, 2025
Going against the grain? Arts Based Research and the EdD: Resistance, activism and identity

by Tim Clark and Tom Dobson

There has been growing interest in the potential of arts-based research (ABR) methods to enrich educational inquiry (Everley, 2021). However, minimal attention has been given to how accessible or relevant ABR is for practice-based researchers (including lecturers and teachers), who undertake the professional doctorate in education (EdD) pathway. We believe that this lack of attention is significant, partly because institutional frameworks for doctoral programmes are often informed by traditional models of PhD research, which may constrain the creative possibilities of practice-based study (Vaughan, 2021), and partly due to the nature and ‘uniqueness’ of the EdD as a research degree (Dennis, Chandler & Punthil, 2023).

We have previously argued that ABR potentially holds particular promise for EdD research due to its alignment with the programme’s highly relational and contextual nature and its engagement with diverse audiences. In our 2024 paper, which was part of a special issue of Teaching in Higher Education, we mapped the theoretical similarities in understandings of ABR and the EdD, exploring this alignment across aspects including practice, audience and reflexivity (Dobson & Clark, 2024). Our paper called for colleagues to ‘embrace hybridity’ and provide permission for creativity in EdD research and we attempted to illustrate this within the paper itself, entangling examples of creative nonfiction writing with a traditional scoping review to embody our theorisation. However, we also concluded with a realisation that maximising the potential of ABR requires careful attention to how design, practice and regulations support students’ identity development and agency (Savva & Nygaard, 2021).

To build on this, throughout 2024 we have been working with a group of nine EdD students studying at our respective institutions, who are all exploring the potential of ABR for their work. These students span professional roles from early childhood through to higher education, and disciplines including the arts, business and science. Following initial narrative interviews with each student, we developed an online cross-institution action learning set (Revans, 1982) to facilitate dialogue and learning relating to some of the key problems and opportunities students were experiencing in relation to their engagement with ABR. As a group we met 6 times, each time agreeing an area of focus, and providing opportunities for individuals to present and group members to ask clarifying and open-ended coaching style questions. This process culminated in creative analysis, where we collaboratively analysed and reflected on the learning that had taken place, and each student presented a creative interpretation of their learning to the group. We are currently working with a group of these EdD students to co-author a paper which captures and illustrates this learning and shares these creative outputs.

Alongside this, the second paper from our project (Clark & Dobson, forthcoming) explores some of the key learning arising from the initial interview phase – in particular the idea of ABR as a form of ‘resistance’ involving potentially either a deliberate, or more hesitant, decision to ‘go against the grain’. Using Glăveanu’s 5A’s theory (actors, actions, artifacts, audiences and affordances) to understand creativity as embedded in social relations, we developed the interview transcripts into vignettes for each student and identified three key strands of the students’ perceptions of their experiences – many of which continued to be key areas of focus as we worked through the action learning set process. The process highlighted the students’ understanding of how methodological expectations were reflected through key audiences and structures, how methodological choices aligned with their sense of self and identity and the role of ABR in promoting action and agency. The vignettes offered a nuanced illustration of the tensions in these areas, which we feel offers wider value due to the fact that, unlike any previous work we had identified in this area, the understandings related to students both with and without previous artist identities, backgrounds or experiences.

The focus on audience and structures highlighted the numerous audiences which exist for students’ EdD research, often spanning academic, professional and community spaces and how these can create tensions in terms of expectations of what research ‘should’ look like. Some students talked of an ongoing battle to justify and ensure their ABR projects were taken seriously, whilst others positioned their decision to use ABR as an active decision to resist academic or managerial structures they perceived had been unhelpfully imposed on them. This also highlighted that whilst valuing creativity in research within the micro context of an EdD programme itself (through teaching and supervision) was significant and built confidence, students also needed support to consider how to frame their work in wider contexts, including through institutional processes (such as those for ethics approval) and professional and academic communities. One student, for example, highlighted feeling ‘junior’ and ‘a bit insecure’ about engaging in wider university processes designed for what they felt was understood as more ‘serious research’.

In relation to identities and self, we explored a complex and nuanced understanding of students’ perceptions of the need for ongoing negotiation of the entanglement between professional, researcher, and in some cases, artist identities. Where students identified pre-existing artist identities, for some this created an obvious alignment with their research, but for others they identified tensions, including feeling ‘nervous’ about bringing this identity into their research and apprehensive of their relevance to an academic audience. Where students had no prior expertise or experience in the arts, they often expressed hesitance regarding using ABR, but strong feelings about its potential to align with aspects of their professional identity and values. For example, they appreciated ABR’s affordances in ensuring research was accessible to wider communities and supporting children’s voices to be heard.

This also connected with the final strand, action and agency, where ABR was positioned by the students as having the potential to facilitate an emancipatory process in education, promote agency and in some cases play a role in research as a form of activism. This was often associated with ideas of social justice, with one student, for example, talking of ABR as providing agency for him to ‘push back against’ an education system that marginalises certain groups. Alongside this, another highlighted ABR as having stronger potential to be participatory and action based, maximising the benefits of the research process itself on her participants who were also her students.

As we continue our work on this project, the learning it has generated allows us to begin to reflect on its implications: implications that are both within individual EdD programs, where teaching and supervision have strong potential to offer spaces to explore, and reflect on, the potential value of ABR within EdD research, and at an institutional level, where regulations need to continue to respond to growing focus on the social and professional relevance of doctoral research and the range of models, and methodologies, they encompass. A key part of the action learning sets has also been their role in highlighting the value of facilitating methodological dialogue and creating a community of doctoral researchers exploring ABR. As one of the students reflected, this has helped with their sense of ‘validation’ for their work and provided a space to navigate some of the key tensions.

Dr Timothy Clark is Director of Research and Enterprise for the School of Education at the University of the West of England, Bristol. His research focuses on aspects of doctoral pedagogy and researcher development, particularly in relation to academic writing and methodological decision making on the professional Doctorate in Education (EdD). https://www.linkedin.com/in/drtimothyclark/

Dr Tom Dobson is Professor of Education at York St John University, where he leads the Professional Doctorate in Education (EdD) programme. His research explores creative writing in education as well as the use of arts-based research by EdD students. https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-dobson-84860388/

Like this:

Like Loading…

Categories: Research | Tags: arts-based research, doctoral research, EdD, educational inquiry, Identities, identity, Professional Doctorate in Education, social justice, students, Teaching in Higher Education | Permalink.

Author: SRHE News Blog

An international learned society, concerned with supporting research and researchers into Higher Education

Source link

January 29, 2025