36 154 Xanthoudaki et al (2003:3) 155 www.engage.org 156 Enquire (2009) 157 www. inspiringlearning<strong>for</strong>all.gov.uk 158 Hooper-Greenhill (2007: 44-62) Growing future Innovators: a scoping study studies is rare, consistency <strong>of</strong> measures are <strong>of</strong>ten non-existent, terminology can be poorly defined or vague and also that this work can too <strong>of</strong>ten adopt an overly advocacy-like approach. In addition, criticisms have been made about the absence <strong>of</strong> control groups, the small scale and sample sizes <strong>of</strong> research projects, and that the field at large has an over reliance on the case study method. This complexity <strong>of</strong> metrics and design is further compounded by a general lack <strong>of</strong> longitudinal critique, making it difficult to accurately assess learning and impact <strong>of</strong> arts learning over a substantial period <strong>of</strong> time. As already noted, measuring capabilities such as imagination, intuition and creativity is an ongoing project <strong>for</strong> researchers. More thinking and experimentation is required to generate new and reliable assessment tools and methodologies concerning innovation, but also arts learning. To satisfy many <strong>of</strong> the concerns, only a diversity <strong>of</strong> quantitative, qualitative and creative-based approaches is likely to provide a thorough, inclusive picture. As many <strong>of</strong> the interviewees <strong>for</strong> this scoping study confirmed, the implementation <strong>of</strong> programs is <strong>of</strong>ten so demanding that longitudinal evaluation and research by internal staff alone is rarely possible. This echoes the findings <strong>of</strong> an international group <strong>of</strong> arts education researchers who state that: …in the rush <strong>for</strong> lively programming which is so <strong>of</strong>ten imposed as a result <strong>of</strong> institutional pressure or expectations, a great deal <strong>of</strong> innovative practice goes unreported and many educational issues do not get adequately debated in the wider world. 154 Evaluation is undertaken to the extent that funding is able to be acquitted or program approaches and relationships can be refined. But to explore the broader connections deeply and over time, and to bring a <strong>for</strong>mal rigour and analysis to this body <strong>of</strong> work will usually require collaboration with research partners and networks. Previous research into the impact <strong>of</strong> museum learning can be used to in<strong>for</strong>m the cogent design <strong>of</strong> new research models <strong>for</strong> understanding innovation within the educational programs <strong>of</strong> cultural institutions. Much can be learned, <strong>for</strong> example, from the gallery-based learning organisation Engage, 155 who coordinated the largest systematic review in England to focus on how children and young people can learn through galleries, contemporary art and artists. From 2004 to 2008, the enquire programme was carried out through clusters—or teams—<strong>of</strong> galleries, partner schools/youth groups and artists, and higher education institutes which constituted the national research consortium. The aim was to work collaboratively across the pr<strong>of</strong>essions to develop exciting opportunities <strong>for</strong> children and young people to learn through engagement with contemporary art, whilst researching the learning benefits and conditions <strong>for</strong> that learning. 156 Much <strong>of</strong> the work <strong>of</strong> enquire deepened the findings <strong>of</strong> an earlier UK study, the Learning Impact Research Project (2001- 2004), undertaken through the Inspiring Learning For All initiative. 157 LIRP refined a succinct framework <strong>for</strong> understanding aggregated learning outcomes <strong>of</strong> museum and gallery learning, which, in generic terms, are described as the capacity to 1) provide enjoyment, inspiration and creativity, 2) enhance attitudes and values, 3) impart skills, 4) develop knowledge and understanding, and 5) improve action, behaviours and progression. 158 If the idea <strong>of</strong> educating <strong>for</strong> innovation is brought to bear on these five points, then we may well develop a tool to understand and evaluate the impact that contemporary arts institutions and their educational programs can create. That is, we could evaluate: the enjoyment and inspiration <strong>of</strong> innovation; the values and attitudes <strong>of</strong> innovation; the innovation skills; the knowledge and understanding <strong>of</strong> innovation; and the innovative actions and behaviours. Whilst drawing on the richness <strong>of</strong> existing research projects like LIRP is important, in this scoping study we have also attempted to survey first-hand the way leading contemporary arts and cultural institutions can connect schools and young people to innovation. These findings are outlined in the following section on the <strong>for</strong>m <strong>of</strong> seven associative links.
4 The Learning area at the BALTIC <strong>Centre</strong> <strong>for</strong> Contemporary Art, vinyl drawing by Yoshitomo Nara. Photograph by Dan Brady, Courtesy <strong>of</strong> BALTIC, Gateshead, UK. Seven ways contemporary arts institutions connect schools with innovation Growing future Innovators: a scoping study 37
![Plebiscite (Riegert chapter) revised FINAL [Feb 14].pdf](https://img.yumpu.com/8710373/1/190x245/plebiscite-riegert-chapter-revised-final-feb-14pdf.jpg?quality=85)
Change language