STATE OF THE ARTS - Office of the New York City ...

[Pages:56]Office of the New York City Comptroller

Scott M. Stringer

Bureau of Policy and Research ptroller.

STATE OF THE ARTS

A Plan to Boost Arts Education in New York City Schools

April 2014

Office

of

the

Comptroller ? City @scottmstringer

of

New York ? One Centre Street, New York, scottstringOerfnficyec of the

@NNYsecw1o0tYt0om0r7skt?rCiPnihtgyoeCnr eo:m(2p1t2ro)sl6tlre6inr9g-S3ec5ro0tht0te?Mocr.oyS.mctorpimntrgoellrer.nyc.g1ov

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................................1 II. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................3 III. THE HISTORY OF ARTS EDUCATION IN THE NYC PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM...................4 IV. FINDINGS: NYC SCHOOLS AND THEIR ABILITY TO PROVIDE ARTS

PROGRAMMING AND SERVICES..................................................................................................6 V. RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................13 VI. APPENDIX.......................................................................................................................................14 VII. TABLE I: SUMMARY OF ARTS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK CITY........................................15 VIII. TABLE II: INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL BREAKDOWN.....................................................................49 IX. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..............................................................................................................51

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Arts education has long been recognized by experts around the world as having a tremendously positive influence on children and their academic attainment, social emotional development and future employment. The skills learned from arts education are more relevant today than ever, as New York City's economy is increasingly focused on industries that value creativity, innovation and problem solving.

Despite these widely-acknowledged benefits, as well as clearly established mandates in New York State Education Law requiring that students in grades 7-12 receive core arts instruction taught by certified teachers, the provision of arts education in New York City's public schools has become both inequitable and underfunded. Instruction in visual arts, music, dance and theater has been weakened by a decade of disinvestment and disincentives and a school accountability system ? based on federal and state priorities ? that fails to fully recognize the value of comprehensive arts education.

Figures from the New York City Department of Education's (DOE) Annual Arts in Schools Reports show a 47 percent decline in spending to hire arts and cultural organizations to provide educational services for students, and an even steeper decline in spending on arts supplies and equipment over the past seven years. While schools have had access to "supplemental arts funding" intended for arts education, many schools have opted to divert these funds to non-arts related areas.

As a result, many of the City's public schools are in violation of New York State Law, which sets minimal instruction requirements that schools must meet for the arts at each grade level, and deep disparities exist between schools at all grade levels. This report provides a first-ever school-by-school breakdown of the state of arts education in the public schools, and contextualizes the results with data on the city's economic landscape. Findings include:

? 419 schools in New York City (28 percent) lack even one full-time, certified arts teacher, including 20 percent of all high schools (76), 22 percent of all middle schools (59) and 38 percent of all elementary schools (232);

? 306 schools (20 percent) have neither a full- nor a part-time certified arts teacher, including 14 percent of all high schools (53), 13 percent of all middle schools (34) and 30 percent of all elementary schools (182); and

? 16 percent of schools have no arts or cultural partnerships and 10 percent of schools have no dedicated arts room.

Furthermore, it is clear that reductions in arts education have fallen disproportionately on the City's lower income neighborhoods, especially the South Bronx and Central Brooklyn. While these two neighborhoods are home to just 31 percent of all City schools, this report found that:

? More than 42 percent of schools that lack either full-time or part-time certified arts teachers are located in the South Bronx and Central Brooklyn; and

? Nearly half of the schools that lack both a certified arts teacher and an arts or cultural partnership are located in the South Bronx and Central Brooklyn.

1

State of the Arts: A Plan to Boost Arts Education in New York City Schools

With new leadership at the New York City Department of Education, now is an ideal time to identify challenges that exist to meeting State arts mandates and expanding arts education to all City neighborhoods, and offer recommendations for achieving these goals. In the cultural capital of the world, arts education and the opportunities it provides must be equally accessible to all.

The report makes the following recommendations:

? Broaden the DOE accountability framework, including School Progress Reports, to include arts education. As part of a larger review of School Progress Reports, the DOE should include information in every school profile about certified arts teachers, partnerships with arts and cultural organizations, dedicated arts rooms and compliance with State mandates in arts instruction.

? Promote strategies that build schools' capacity to have at least one certified arts teacher on staff. Every elementary, middle and high school should have at least one certified arts teacher, and more where appropriate. DOE should work with schools serving grades 7-12 to comply with State mandates for certified arts teachers. Where feasible, small schools should be encouraged to share arts teachers.

? Build schools' capacity to provide a robust arts education by expanding outreach to potential cultural partners. The DOE should provide additional supports to schools lacking cultural partnerships, including helping to connect and pair them with arts and cultural organizations. The DOE currently hosts one "Cultural Fair" each year to encourage arts and cultural organizations to partner with city schools. This outreach should be expanded to include similar fairs in all five boroughs at least once a year.

? Adopt a "no-net loss" of space policy as part of a larger effort to increase arts rooms and to ensure that every school has places equipped for the arts. Although finding or creating new space for dedicated arts rooms in New York City will always be a challenge, the DOE should ensure that there is "no-net loss" of arts rooms when district schools are co-located with other district or charter schools. DOE's Educational Impact Statements (EIS) should clearly specify how DOE will preserve existing dedicated arts rooms. Further, future school planning and construction should include dedicated arts spaces.

? Ensure adequate funding to support quality arts education at all city schools. The DOE should prioritize supports for arts education in schools that have yet to meet at least the minimum standards set by the City and State, and break out arts spending in its budget so the public can see how much is being spent on a school-by-school basis.

In the end, providing every child in New York City with a robust arts education should be more than an aspiration. It should be viewed as an essential component of a 21st century curriculum ? one that all our students should have the opportunity to enjoy.

Office of the New York City Comptroller Scott M. Stringer

2

II. INTRODUCTION

Arts education has long been recognized by academics, teachers and parents for its positive impact on students inside and outside the classroom. In a 2012 analysis of longitudinal research on the relationship between arts engagement and students' academic and social outcomes, the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) found that youth of low socioeconomic status with a history of high arts engagement1 had better grades and higher college enrollment and attainment rates than youth without such involvement.2 In addition, the NEA found that high school students who had in-depth arts engagement:

? Had higher GPAs than students with low levels of arts engagement;

? Enrolled at higher rates in competitive and fouryear colleges than low-arts-engaged students; and

? Were three times more likely than their artspoor peers to earn a bachelor's degree.

in SY 2006-2007, schools spent $10.7 million on arts supplies and equipment, compared to $1.7 million in SY 2012-2013 ? an 84 percent decline. While principals have had access to "supplemental arts funding"6 that is intended to be used for arts education, many have opted to divert these funds to non-arts related areas.

This report provides New Yorkers with a school-byschool breakdown of the state of arts education in our public schools, based on the most recent arts data provided by the New York City Department of Education in its individual Annual Arts in Schools Reports for 2012-2013.7 The Office of New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer analyzed information provided by principals at 1,487 schools across the five boroughs in response to the DOE's 2012-2013 Arts Education Survey.8 The Survey provides data on the state of arts education in public schools, including student participation, teachers assigned to teach the arts, arts and cultural partnerships and space.9

Despite the documented importance of arts education in schools, clear mandates for arts instruction in State Education Law3 and New York City's status as one of the foremost cultural centers of the world, the City's public school system continues to confront challenges providing all of its 1.1 million students with equitable access to a robust education in the arts.4

The Comptroller's Office analyzed data in three areas that shed light on a school's capacity to deliver arts services and programming to its students:

1. Whether schools employ full-time and/or parttime certified arts teachers;

2. Whether schools have formal partnerships with arts and cultural organizations; and

Data from New York City Department of Education's Annual Arts in Schools Reports indicate a significant decrease in spending for the arts over the past seven years.5 In School Year (SY) 2006-2007, schools spent $25.7 million to hire arts and cultural organizations to provide educational services for students, compared to $13.6 million in SY 2012-2013 ? a 47 percent decline. Additionally,

3. Whether schools dedicate rooms solely for instruction in core arts areas, including the visual arts, music, theater and dance.

The data were mapped to determine geographic patterns, then compared with economic data for further analysis. These maps ? set against a backdrop of median income level by U.S. Census

1 "High arts engagement" is defined on page 9 of the NEA report: 2 Ibid 3 4 5 . html

6 7 Found under the "Statistics and Budget" link on individual NYC DOE schools' websites. 8 1,545 principals completed the DOE's survey, including principals of 58 District 75 schools that are not part of this report's analysis. 9 . html

3

State of the Arts: A Plan to Boost Arts Education in New York City Schools

tract ? reveal deep inequities in arts opportunities. Students attending schools in parts of the city that have historically experienced significant economic challenges ? including the South Bronx and Central Brooklyn ? have disproportionately poorer access to arts resources than those in more affluent areas.10 Although schools in the South Bronx and Central Brooklyn represent only 31 percent of all City schools, more than 42 percent of schools that lack either full-time or part-time certified art teachers are located in these neighborhoods.

This report proceeds in three parts. First, in order to understand the current plight of arts education in City schools, it is essential to understand the complex history of arts education. Over the past 40 years, New York City has confronted a range of challenges, from fiscal crises and budget cuts, to rigid accountability measures and shifting educational priorities, all of which have contributed to inadequate provision of arts education in the public schools.

Next, the report summarizes the findings culled from the DOE's data sets, with a focus on certified arts teacher staffing levels, partnerships with arts and cultural organizations and dedicated arts space in our schools, all key elements that reflect a school's commitment to the arts.

Lastly, the report offers recommendations on how to ensure that all City schools have the resources necessary for students to access high quality, creative arts programming ? programming that acknowledges that the State's mandates are a floor and not a ceiling for what can be accomplished in the cultural capital of the world.

III. THE HISTORY OF ARTS EDUCATION IN THE NYC PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM

Since the fiscal crisis of the 1970s, New York City public schools have faced a series of challenges in their effort to provide students with comprehensive arts education. From budget cuts and shifting educational priorities to the space limitations that come with inhabiting one of the densest urban centers in the nation, New York City has long struggled to bring the promise of arts education to every school in every neighborhood.

According to a 2003 New York City Council report, arts education has historically been one of the first areas targeted for cuts when the city has experienced periods of economic distress.11

In the 1970s, funding cuts had a devastating effect on schools' ability to provide students with basic courses in core arts areas, including the visual arts, music, dance and theater. At the same time, arts teachers were laid off, schools converted dedicated arts rooms into classrooms and training programs for higher education arts instructors ? with nowhere to send their graduates ? all but disappeared.12

Over the next twenty years, New York City's artistic and cultural institutions did their best to fill this void.13 However, it was not until the late 1990s that a more systematic approach to providing arts education in the public schools emerged ? the result of an influx of grant funding targeted for the expansion of arts education, the establishment of The Center for Arts Education (CAE) and the creation of a dedicated fund for arts in the public schools called Project ARTS.

10 While current findings are relatively consistent with previous years' data from the DOE's Annual Arts in Schools Reports, the NYC Comptroller's Office recognizes that individual schools may have made changes in the numbers of certified arts teachers, arts and cultural partnerships and arts spaces since the release of these reports.

In 1995, New York City was awarded $21.5 million to develop a comprehensive and coordinated network of "customized partnerships" between cultural institutions and schools, as part of the Walter H. Annenberg Foundation's "Annenberg

11 12 Ibid 13 20030606friday.html

Office of the New York City Comptroller Scott M. Stringer

4

Challenge" ? a $500 million initiative to improve urban school districts.14

A year later, a new non-profit organization, The Center for Arts Education, was formed to carry out this mission. CAE received a $12 million, two-forone matching grant from the Annenberg Challenge to "institutionalize arts instruction as part of the core curriculum and...[to] use the arts as a catalyst for whole-school change."15 CAE performed this work in partnership with the NYC Board of Education (BOE), the Department of Cultural Affairs (DCA) and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT). Through a combination of separate City and grant funding, CAE also implemented arts initiatives focused on expanding parent engagement and career and professional development.

In 1997, the BOE created Project ARTS, the first per capita funding allocation for arts education since the 1970s.16 Project ARTS funds were targeted for direct instruction in core arts areas, related equipment, resource materials and supplies and partnerships with arts and cultural services.17 In Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, the City committed $25 million to Project ARTS.18 It then doubled funding the following year to $50 million, and Project ARTS hit its peak in FY 2000 and FY 2001 at $75 million: an allocation of $63 per student ? creating, at a minimum, a baseline of equity for all students.19

During fiscal years 2002-2003, Project ARTS funding dropped to $52 million, bringing per pupil spending down to $47. In SY 2007-2008, the administration eliminated Project ARTS, folded funding for arts education into the general school budget and implemented ArtsCount, "a new set of strategies to enhance arts education in New York City public schools."20

ArtsCount was designed to build upon the DOE's

14 15 Ibid 16 cov_center.html 17 arts%20education%20draft%20testimony%20final.pdf 18 19 20030606friday.html 20

Blueprint for Teaching and Learning in the Arts, which delineated benchmarks in the core arts areas. It was intended to create accountability for arts provision by incorporating arts metrics into a school's performance for the first time.21

However, without money or accountability, ArtsCount proved ineffective at ensuring that schools provided students with a robust education in the arts. Indeed, the increasingly troubled state of arts education in the City's public schools stemmed not just from the elimination of Project ARTS, but also from the DOE's decision to omit the arts in its central accountability metric, the School Progress Report.22 These reports were part of a broader school accountability system that were "driven largely by the mandates of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, [which] placed a heavy emphasis on measuring accountability and achievement based on state assessments in just two key subject areas ? English language arts [ELA] and math."23

As schools in New York City and elsewhere confronted high-stakes accountability standards that were tied directly to student performance on State ELA and math exams ? among them, the possibility of school closure ? principals were forced to make difficult choices about where to invest scarce resources. As a result, some opted to divert a portion of "supplemental arts funding" to non-arts related areas.

Absent meaningful public, school-level data on arts spending, there has been virtually no way for parents and others to discern how much funding individual schools may be devoting to certified arts teachers, arts supplies or other basic components of arts education. Evidence exists, however, of a progressive weakening of arts education in City schools over time.

In 2013, the Arts Advisory Committee to the City Panel for Educational Policy ? established by the DOE in 2010 to assess and recommend reforms to improve arts education in the public schools ? raised

21 . html 22 23

5

State of the Arts: A Plan to Boost Arts Education in New York City Schools

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download