Finding Every Child: Why Arts Education Must Become a Civic Entitlement

For generations, access to an arts education has depended on luck; the luck of where you live, what school you go to, what teachers you get and what community you grow up in.

At the heart of my essay, Finding Every Child (which forms part of “Made in England”, a published collection of essays and creative contributions to mark 80 years of the Arts Council) there is a simple argument: access to arts and culture shouldn’t be an optional extra. It should be a fundamental entitlement for every child. Drawing on historical examples, contemporary research and my own experience, I argue that an arts education is essential to how young people discover who they are and build confidence, agency and belonging.

Personal stories often define professional ones; mine was shaped by the luck of an English teacher joining the school I attended and introducing Drama into the curriculum. 40 years later I have a life and career I would never have imagined.

In the essay, I trace a history of arts education across the past eighty years. One of the most compelling examples is Steward Street Primary School in Lozells in the heart of Birmingham. During the 1940s and 1950s, under the leadership of Arthur Stone and later Ken Scott, the school placed creative arts at the centre of learning. Children painted, danced, built, performed, debated and helped shape the life of the school. Academic standards improved alongside creativity, confidence and participation.

Visitors travelled from across the country and internationally to observe what many regarded as a radical experiment. Yet when those leaders moved on, and with the introduction of the 11+, the experiment ended. Such stories reveal a recurring pattern; we have case studies of possibility as opposed to universal practice.

The same pattern can be seen in more recent decades. The landmark Gulbenkian report The Arts in Schools in 1982 helped secure a place for the arts within the National Curriculum. Yet subsequent reforms, accountability measures and funding pressures reduced the status of arts education in many schools. Pockets of excellent practice continued, access became increasingly uneven.

What makes this particularly frustrating is that the debate about whether the arts make a difference has surely been settled. Over the last two decades, a substantial body of research has demonstrated the impact of arts participation on young people.

This year the Royal Shakespeare Company celebrates 20 years of transformative partnerships with schools, theatres and communities in England. Across those two decades, we’ve built a compelling evidence base that has shown improvements in literacy, confidence, critical thinking and academic self-belief when children engage with Shakespeare through active, performance-based approaches. More broadly, the RSC and the Cultural Learning Alliance co-commissioned rapid evidence reviews covering over 1,100 studies across dance, drama and music, and art, craft and design. They all revealed remarkably consistent findings.

Arts education contributes to wellbeing, communication skills, empathy, collaboration, creative thinking, interpretation and personal agency. These are not marginal benefits. They are fundamental capabilities that help young people navigate education, employment, relationships and civic life.

Yet despite this compelling evidence, access is patchy and unequal.

At the heart of the challenge is a question of public value. People instinctively understand why public money funds certain things. We invest collectively in parks, libraries, schools and hospitals because they are forms of civic infrastructure that help communities thrive.

The arts are strongest when they are framed as – and when they behave as – civic infrastructure.

When arts organisations work alongside schools, community groups, libraries, local authorities and health services, they cease to be peripheral activities enjoyed by the few. They become part of the social fabric that helps communities flourish. They help develop connected, creative, healthy and engaged citizens.

This requires a shift in thinking. For too long, we have relied on celebrating isolated examples of excellence: a brilliant project here, an outstanding school there, an exceptional teacher somewhere else. While these stories matter, they aren’t enough.

The future of arts education depends on creating systems of opportunity rather than exceptions.

I argue for better national data, stronger evidence sharing, targeted support for areas with limited provision and a coherent national infrastructure that guarantees access for all children. A future National Centre for Arts and Music Education could play a significant role in helping achieve this ambition.

Ultimately, the challenge is bigger than any one institution. It is about creating joined-up systems of opportunity where every child grows up making, creating, performing, writing, designing, composing and imagining. Not occasionally, not as a privilege, and not by chance, but as a normal part of childhood.

That matters not only for the individuals directly involved. It matters for society as a whole.

When children experience arts and culture as a normal part of life, they become our audiences, artists, advocates and future taxpayers who understand why culture matters. They grow up recognising the contribution it makes to personal wellbeing and community life.

The question facing policymakers is not whether an arts rich education has value. The evidence is overwhelming. The real question is whether we are prepared to build the systems that ensure every child can benefit from it.

If we are serious about opportunity and belonging, then arts education must cease to be a matter of luck. It must become a civic entitlement.