How Community Projects can respond to the needs of Leeds, UK

This essay aims to explore my practise as a teacher and community arts facilitator within the context of my local geography (Leeds, UK). I will begin this essay by reviewing current and historic academic literature regarding the common aims and objectives of community music projects as a means of focusing my funding application. I will also analyse the methods of local organisations for delivering charitable work.

I will explore quantitative data representative of Leeds and the UK in order to identify social, geographical and economic factors that inhibit potential students from participating in workshops. This is intended to focus my audience development outreach within my community, aligning my workshops with the policies of Arts Council England, whom I intend to propose my community workshop to - “At its heart are a series of goals: we want arts and culture to thrive and to be excellent, and we want to make sure we and others create the right conditions for that; we want as many people as possible to be stimulated by arts and culture wherever they are; and it is important that children and young people are exposed to culture and can gain from it either as audiences or as people with a talent to pursue. Underlying these three fundamental goals are two supporting ones; we want the models of provision to be resilient, and the leadership and workforce to be truly diverse, reflecting the population and able to support the right talent to make great art for the country” (Davey, 2013).

Finally, I will review the current state of government policy in order to understand the relationship between the Department of Education, state school curriculum and how these two factors affect a student’s access to music education.

During the research of this report, 10 Leeds based educational establishments were approached in order to gather 1st hand qualitative research. Only 1 business agreed to comment on my research regarding child education, poverty and how the Department of Education’s policies affect them, on the premise that their identity remains anonymous. For the purpose of this report they shall be referred to as interviewee A. With this information I aim to provide a local and professional contextualisation of the issues that educators within Leeds experience who provide music tuition.

Community Projects, Aims and Objectives and Funding Bodies

Community music’s effectiveness lies in the fact that it avoids definition and remains malleable in its aims, methodology and implementation (Swingler, 1993, pg. 32). Most literature sources regarding community music policy present common aims and attitudes shared between community music service providers. The Arts Council England quotation (Davey, 2013) and MacCarthy (2008, pg. 40) seem to be congruous, with both sources acknowledging the importance of musical activity on creating culture and developing participants through self-realization.

Comparing the Arts Council England (Davey, 2013) quotation with Goldbard (2006, pg. 43), Macdonald (1995, pg. 29) and Higgins (2012, pp. 4-5), it is evident that community music should aim to deliver musical education outside of formalized environments. Interviewee A believes “there are a number of associated issues around the culture and ethos of a lot of music education provisions that act as a deterrent to a number of groups, not least of which is those that are from poorer backgrounds. Things like more "traditional", formal or strict approaches to music education seem outmoded in general but I think this can be an additional problem in increasing participation, even when those financial barriers are removed or mitigated” (2019, personal communication). All sources above suggest that diversity, equal opportunity and participation be at the centre of the practise in order to facilitate social/personal development. Goldbard, Macdonald and Higgins all suggest that music is a valuable resource in engaging participants in musical and cultural practises that facilitate intercultural development. They also state that music should engage the disenfranchised and disadvantaged, and “Work in such a way to show respect for the cultural property of a given locality and/or community” (Higgins, 2012).

Companies in Leeds such as Opera North are supported using public funding from Arts Council England. Their audience engagement model has children from underprivileged communities within Leeds participate in orchestral and opera activities, giving them agency to cultural activity they might not have engaged in otherwise. This is evident in their In Harmony project (2019) which sees 20 children from the Hunslet area perform new orchestral commissions at the Liverpool Philharmonic Hall. Opera North’s website cites that “school work is at the centre of their education programme” and that “children and young people are central to [their] ambitions and purpose”. This mode of outreach work aims to include the general public in artistic activities which the public might view as non-relevant to their lives (Jancovich, 2011).

Previous evidence supports the claim that barriers to engagement are not practical but psychological (Bunting et al, 2008); presently, work that the Opera North commissions aligns with Bunting’s hypothesis, challenging preconceptions within social demographics, destroying political preconceptions and increasing interest in cultural activities associated with ‘high art’ ethics, particularly from a young age. Speaking critically of this means of outreach work, Jancovich (2011) states “audience development and engagement targets assume a consumer deficit model, which sees the problem to be addressed as people’s lack of engagement in art rather than the type of art being offered to engage with”. Whilst cultural preservation outreach projects are successful in their social reach, it is argued that the work offered is not culturally democratic. Historically it is believed (Braden, 1978) that outreach should reflect the public's chosen forms of cultural expression and not be prescriptive in nature.

The goals of community music are predominantly reactionary, reflecting the needs of society. Research suggests that community music workers provide a service which the audience will participate in, and that the process of engagement is the product in and of itself (Higgins, 2012, pg. 30). “The attitude of the community artist differs from practitioners of the more established arts in that they are chiefly concerned with a process rather than with a finished product” (Kelly, 1984, pg. 16). Community music workers’ socio-political engagement strategies can be reactionary to the conventional and hegemonic traditions of high art. Braden (1978) suggests that the artistic practises of the elite, privileged and formally educated overshadows the work created in local communities which are equally as important to the fabric of culture and community. In the 1970’s, art created from financially impoverished geographies, made by the working class, or non-western culture was deemed marginalised and oppressed by the conventions of western music models. It is apparent that this realisation is as important to the values of community music today as it was in the 1970’s. This is evident in the many funding application processes of charitable bodies such as Arts Council England (2019) who commision audience engagement campaigns and explicitly state that any work funded must not be for-profit. The work of a community practitioner therefor has to face the public and not be self-serving in nature. Community engagement policy is designed to reflect and develop the many cultures within the local geographies of society; “the theory of cultural democracy assumes that there is not only one culture, but many cultures in a society” (Graves, 2005, pg. 11). Cobussen & Nielson (2012) explain that communitarianism relies on collective intelligence and social learning in order to flourish successfully. Selznick (2002) believes that “a community shows collective responsibility when it provides the resources and opportunities people need for personal responsibility”.

Establishments such as Wharf Chambers and Chunk are examples of community co-operatives working within the Leeds geography. Wharf Chambers is a multi-purpose venue operating from the city centre providing a hub for music, art, film and politics. The events space is free to use, subject to being a member of the co-operative. The classes are provided by members of the public and in turn allows Wharf Chambers to reflect the broad interests of their audience that use the facility. Chunk offers communal resources to their subscriptive members that pay for membership of the establishment. A community of musicians, artists, designers and promoters with similar interests all serve to help develop the community and its resources.

Since the Department of Education established Music Hubs across the UK in 2012, it has been the job of Arts Council England to fund these cooperatives financially (Gove & Vaizey, 2012). The responsibility of such hubs is to deliver music education, supporting the national curriculum. The Artsmark Programme (Artsmark, 2015) works with primary, secondary, independent and special schools, pupil referral units​, youth offending teams and sixth form colleges. Their aims and objectives include supporting schools to improve their curriculum and to support “EBACC and STEM priorities, giving the curriculum breadth and balance”. In Leeds, Artforms have been the awarded Artsmark Partner status and provide the local geography additional music resources (Artforms, 2016). It is contested as to how accessible and effective the Artsmark Programme is as a report from Arts Professional suggests that “despite over £10m of investment in the scheme since 2007 and a ‘refreshed articulation’ of its offer in 2015, there was only a 1% increase in the number of schools participating in it between 2005 and 2017” (Romer, 2019). Artforms also provide education for children with additional needs in partnership with Yansen, as well as offer workshops centred around live music and world music within schools. Leeds Music Education Partnership currently subsidise Artforms’ services as a means of making music tuition more affordable in financially strapped schools. Artforms also currently administer eight music centres within the greater Leeds, with 1-1 tuition from £151 per year (+ £35 administerial fee) and group lessons costing £110 per year.

Developing Audience Engagement

Grants will only be awarded to projects in communities which are prioritised as under-exposed to arts due to a plethora of sociological, political and economic signifiers. This has an effect on where community artists can work and will ultimately shape the services the arts animateur can provide to their community. In order to provide a strong application to Arts Council England, I figured it was necessary to find statistical data representative of Leeds, the area in which I live and want to conduct my charitable workshops.

According to data provided by Loughborough University (Validez-Martinez & Hirsch, 2017) for the charity End Child Poverty, Leeds Central has the 19th highest level of child poverty with reference to the other 650 parliamentary constituencies in the UK at 43.57%. Within Leeds Centre falls Hyde Park and Woodhouse; at 53.4%, more than half of children here are living in poverty (1562 children) (Miller, 2018). Similarly, the Harehills and Gipton ward has a poverty percentage of 48.95% (4834 children) and City and Holbeck have a child poverty percentage of 47.94% (2517 children). All three of these wards surround the city centre which may explain similarity between these child poverty percentage rates. Further research into the sociological, economical and political factors of these wards would strengthen the weight of this research.

Child poverty statistics are increasing throughout the UK and have been rising since 2011/2012 (Barnard, 2018). The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRS) report that “4.1 million children now live in poverty in the UK – an increase of 500,000 in the last five years” (ibid, 2018). The total percentage of child poverty cases have increased by 15%, a figure much larger than the overall population of children which has only increased by 3%. The JRS report appears congruent with the IHS Markit report (Moore, 2018). Both reports suggest that poverty is on the rise almost exclusively for the working classes; “in the last five years, poverty rates have risen for every type of working family; lone-parent or couple families, families with full and part-time workers and families with different numbers of adults in work. This is the first period in the last two decades when this has happened” (Bernard, 2018). The JRS report also identifies children whose parents do not work at all as the most at risk. Since 2012, the risk of poverty for that demographic has risen by 10%, from 63% chance of poverty to 73%.

Data sets released by the Office for National Statistics and compiled by IHS Markit (Moore, 2018) show that the average household wage in Britain has dropped, leaving the UK poorer. The report shows that although the national living wage was set at £8.45 in 2018, an estimated figure of 5.75 million employees were earning less than this. This figure has grown from 5.55 million in 2017, signalling the increase of poverty within our society. The total amount of jobs that pay less than the living wage have also increased at 22% and this figure has grown by 1.2 million jobs since 2012. Statistical data also suggests that if you are part-time employed you are more than three times likely to be paid below the living wage as opposed to employees in full time employment. Currently in 2019, the national living wage is set at £9 (Citizens UK, 2019).

Child poverty affects a student’s access to musical education and resources. In 2018, the Musician’s Union (Ames, 2018) published research exploring the relationship between prospective music students and poverty. Findings revealed that “families with a total household income of less than £28k are half as likely to have a child learning an instrument as more affluent peers with a family income of £48k or more” despite both poor and affluent children exhibiting similar levels of interest in music. Students from lower income families report cost as the primary barrier between them and education, with 41% of lower income students admitting music lessons are beyond their household’s budget. This also affects the type of learning a lower income student can be exposed to, as music tuition involves interaction with a personal tutor who has specialised in a specific practise. “The educational attainment of parents also plays a factor in whether children will pick up an instrument. Nearly half (48%) of children who have parents who are educated to university level will learn an instrument, compared with one-fifth (21%) at secondary school level” (ibid, 2018). Interviewee A had this to comment on educational costs; “I am constantly aware of family budgeting from all participating families, regardless of socio-economic deprivation, though I can clearly see a wide variance in the severity of this. A significant part of my role is helping families to arrange a lesson schedule that fits with their lifestyle and, more importantly, their household budget. I have always been very conscious of a regular commitment to obtaining payment for lessons, as many music schools operate a serious cash flow issue at best and a real financial risk at worst, and that's the main reason I've always been very clear that lessons can be operated on a less-than-weekly or ad hoc basis, and payment is never made termly or as a longer-term commitment. Financial changes and mounting financial pressure are, sadly, one of the main reasons for young people stopping or pausing lessons here and this is despite the fact that I have priced everything to be more accessible than the vast majority of private music lessons in Leeds” (2019, personal communication).

Research from Stewart, Watson and Campbell (2018) details the detrimental effects of child poverty on education. Prospective participants from poorer families might not be able to access cultural enrichment activities provided due to lack of finance and inability to travel. Despite the fact that Interviewee A’s business is established in an area identified by the End Child Poverty Report (Validez-Martinez & Hirsch, 2017), “most [of Interviewee A’s students] live in North Leeds within 10 miles, though we have/have had a number of regular students who travel from surrounding areas, including Bradford, Pontefract, Wakefield” (2019, personal communication). It is therefore clear that the majority of students accessing musical education within this establishment are from more affluent families that can afford the costs of additional education and travel, not the children from the immediate geography. Lack of finance and additional pastoral support are now recognised as one of the primary contributors towards the attainment gap between richest and poorest of students, contributing two-thirds of this gap by the age of 14 (Alexander, Pitcock & Boulay, 2016). In a recent survey of over 1000 primary and secondary schools in England, 77% of primary school leaders and 60% of secondary school leaders voiced concern about summer learning loss among their students, recognising travel and finance as a barrier to obtaining extra-curricular education (Key Insights, 2014).

Government Education Policy

The policies of the Department of Education impact music services across the UK and their ability to provide quality education. The introduction of the Baccalaureate system as a means of measuring a school’s academic success has been criticised for its exclusion of artistic subjects in its assessment criteria. The House of Lords recently debated the current state of musical education within the UK and acknowledged this criticism; “In 2017, researchers at Sussex University found 59.7 percent of state schools believed the introduction of the Ebacc was having a negative impact on the provision and uptake of music in their school” (Scott, 2018). Speaking critically of the Baccalaureate system, Robinson (2018) warns that the English Baccalaureate acts as an incentive for school bodies to reduce the amount of funding available for musical activities because of the curriculum prioritisation of english, maths, science, geography, history and language. Currently, academies and independent schools do not have to teach music compulsorily which incentivises music budget cuts. Interviewee A believes that “people are probably forced into private music education substantially more as a result, more widely it just means people from upper-middle class backgrounds are engaged in music-making or given the opportunity to equip themselves with the skills to create or perform music, despite the fact that research shows there's no discernible difference in interest in music demonstrated in young people from lower, middle and upper income families (2019, personal communication).

Robinson (2018) is also critical of the amount of funding that youth services are currently receiving as are other research organisations such as Unison (2016). Unison report that since 2010, £400 million has been withdrawn from youth services, with Yorkshire & Humberside bearing the brunt of this budget deficit. Key findings from Unison’s survey (2018) quantifying the damage of budget cuts to youth services paint a depressing picture for local government youth workers. Interviewee A confirms that lack of financial support “is a really big problem for music education (and other community/arts orgs in general), as there's no ongoing support for projects that want to create longer-term impact for their beneficiaries” (2019, personal communication).

It is the policy of government which designates finance to each local authority and spending has gone down, seeing a decrease in local authority spending on community arts projects. The Musician’s Union has spoken critically of the government and their Music Hub scheme in the past, blaming the government's separation of music from school curriculum and ring-fencing three years of funding for Music Hubs as the reason why local authorities are not providing funding for these projects (Widdison & Hanley, 2014). As it stands, The Minister for School Standards Nick Gibb announced in January 2019 that ABRSM will be drafting the new non-statutory Model Music Curriculum, expected to be announced Summer 2019 (Bray, 2019).

As more schools are prioritising their budgets for subjects which align more with STEM and the Baccalaureate award, music courses are being funded less and students from state schools are missing out on opportunities to study music. Music education is becoming solely accessible to those who can afford it which is damaging socially, economically and culturally. The Royal Musician’s Association reports that Bingley Grammar School in West Yorkshire are charging their students £5 per week for compulsory music theory lessons, to be completed alongside their Music GCSE programme. “GCSE music also usually necessitates the learning of an instrument. Unsubsidised, this could represent costs of well over £400 a year, an unattainable sum for many families” (Robinson, 2018). Considering that this sum of money is already out of budget for over 41% of lower income families (Ames, 2018), and that the UN states the average household is set to lose £400 by the end of the year (Alston, 2018), it is not surprising at all to discover that the UK music conservatoires are among the most inaccessible educational institutes for students of state schools, with the Royal Academy of Music accepting only 48.5% of students from state school backgrounds (10% lower than Oxbridge) (Robinson, 2018). The private sector of education currently only provides education to 6.5% of total school children in the UK and 15% of all students over the age of 16 (Stevens, 2019). “The principals of The College of Music and Royal Birmingham Conservatoire, Colin Lawson and Julian Lloyd Webber respectively, have both blamed this on poor music provisions in schools.” (Robinson, 2018). The eight specialist arts institutions that accepted less than 90% of their new undergraduate pupils from state schools were:

Royal Academy of Music (44%)

Courtauld Institute of Art (55%)

Royal College of Music (65%)

Guildhall School of Music and Drama (72%)

Royal Northern College of Music (78%)

The Royal Central School of Speech and Drama (83%)

Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance (84%)

Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (84%)

(Romer, 2018)

Feversham Primary Academy, another educational state school in Bradford, West Yorkshire made national press on the merit of their integrated musical programme. Naveed Idrees, the current headteacher has managed to pull this school out of special measures and it is reported that this success is from students participating in creative arts. Students have access to a maximum of six hours of free musical activity a week and this in turn has had positive effects on students’ advancements in reading, writing and maths. “[Feversham Primary Academy] is in the top 10% nationally for pupil progress in reading, writing and maths, according to the most recent data. In 2011, the school was 3.2 percentage points behind the national average in English. This year 74% of its pupils achieved the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, against a national average of 53%. It is 7.1 points above the average for reading and 3.4 above for writing. In maths, the school was 2.4 points behind the national average in 2011 and is now 6.5 above it. Its results for disadvantaged pupils are well above average” (Halliday, 2017). There is plenty of research to suggest the importance of musical activities on the development of children and currently, the policies of the government are failing to provide this service to children who currently attend academies and state schools which do not prioritise this. Bradford East is currently 9th of the top 25 parliamentary constituencies with highest levels of child poverty across the UK, with 46.73% of all children below the poverty threshold (Validez-Martinez & Hirsch, 2017).

Conclusion

Looking at the social, political and economical factors that affect educational practise has revealed ways to construct and conduct my workshops. It is important to keep the focus of my workshop facing my target audience and the curriculum non-prescriptive, allowing for the workshops’ objectives to better reflect the individual needs of those who participate. It is generally agreed upon that community music should not reflect more traditional and formalized modes of pedagogy which can deter prospective students from engagement in extracurricular activity. The planned activities should aim to be inclusive by nature, and provide opportunity for personal/social growth. Community music has both the capacity to look backwards and forwards; there are projects in Leeds that aim to preserve historical artforms and challenge sociological preconceptions within target geographical areas, as well as projects that reflect the current interests and contemporary forms of expression, focused on developing new creative output. Workshops need to be participatory in nature and aim to engage prospective students in the process. Workshops also need to provide something which the participant is not already receiving for it to be relevant and successful which may involve non-conventional/traditional methods of engagement, reflecting the needs of the community. Communitarianism is an important aspect of community led work and the strength of this philosophy lies in the strong relations built between other service providers, support in kind, shared resources and knowledge and active participant engagement.

Looking into data representative of Leeds and the UK, it is clear that poverty is problematic, creating barriers between society and their access to cultural activities. Poverty in Leeds appears to be highest among the areas closest to the city centre. Poverty rates have been rising within the UK since 2011, with working class families affected almost exclusively. Wages are falling within the UK, leaving working households poorer and unable to afford music provisions, despite similar levels of interest in art between all social classes. 41% of all families in the UK report that music education is unaffordable and so my workshops need to be accessible to this demographic either by subsidy or charitable donation. Research suggests that vulnerable children need provisions most during the summer in order to bring the attainment gap between poor and affluent students closer together and I will aim to reflect this in the scheduling of my workshops. I will also advertise my workshops as free for prospective students who can prove their household income is less than £28k a year or in receipt of tax credits or benefits.

Musical charity projects are necessary because the current educational climate does not prioritise artistic practises as indicators of a school’s success. It is argued that the Ebacc incentivises budget cuts in music provisions which removes working class students from musical environments. Further social environments are removed from working class families as youth services are stripped from communities and local authorities are providing less financial support for projects seeking longevity. As music is gradually being removed from state schools/academies, music culture is gradually becoming unattainable and inaccessible for poorer students who cannot afford instruments and private tuition which is having an adverse affect on our conservatoires within the UK.

Bibliography

Alexander K, Pitcock S and Boulay M (2016) The Summer Slide: What We Know and Can Do about Summer Learning Loss. New York: Teachers College Press.

Alston, P. (2018) Statement on Visit to the United Kingdom, by Professor Philip Alston, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights. [Online Source] available from <ohchr.org> [Accessed 02/05/2019].

Ames, K. (2018) Understanding How Income Affects Likelihood to Learn an Instrument. [Online Source] available from: <https://www.musiciansunion.org.uk> [Accessed 01/04/2019].

Artforms. (2016) About Leeds Music Educational Partnership (LMEP) [Online Source] available from: <artformsleeds.co.uk> [Accessed 25/04/2019].

Arts Council England. (2019) Arts Council National Lottery Development Funds: New Creative People and Places. [Online Source] available from: <artscouncil.org.uk> [Accessed 18/02/2019].

Arts Council England. (2019) Arts Council National Lottery Project Grants: How to Apply. [Online Source] available from: <artscouncil.org.uk> [Accessed 18/02/2019].

Arts Council England. (2018) Children, Young People and Learning. [Online Source] available from: <artscouncil.org.uk> [Accessed 19/02/2019].

Arts Mark. (2015) How to Bring Creative Learning to Life. [Online Source] available from <artsmark.org.uk> [Accessed 20/04/2019].

Barnard, H. (2018) UK Poverty 2018. [Online Source] available from: <www.jrf.org.uk> [Accessed 01/04/2019].

Braden, S. (1978) Artist and People. Routledge. London, U.K.

Bray, C. (2019) ABRSM to Draft New Model Music Curriculum. [Online Source] available from: <www.rhinegold.co.uk> [Accessed 18/03/2019].

Bunting, C. Chan, T. Goldthorpe, J. Keaney, E. and Oskala, A. (2008) From Indifference to Enthusiasm; patterns of arts attendance in England, London Arts Council Publications.

Caillois, R. (2001) Man, Play and Games. University of Illinois Press. Chicago, U.S.A.

Chapel Arts Studios. (2019) CAS Presents: How to Apply for Arts Council England Funding. [Online Source] available from: <www.youtube.com> [Accessed 18/02/2019].

Citizens UK. (2019) Living Wage. [Online Source] available from: <citizensuk.org> [Accessed 26/04/2019].

Cobussen, M. & Nielson, N. (2012) Music and Ethics. Routledge Books. London, U.K.

Davey, A. (2013) Great Art and Culture for Everyone: 10 Year Strategic Framework 2010-2020. [Online Source] available from: <artscouncil.org.uk> [Accessed 15/04/2019].

Goldbard, A. (2006) New Creative Community: The Art of Cultural Development. New Village Press. Oakland, U.S.A.

Gove, M. & Vaizey, E. (2012) The Importance of Music: A National Plan for Music Education. The Department for Education. [Online Source] available from: <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk> [Accessed 20/04/2019].

Graves, J. (2005) Cultural Democracy: The Arts, Community and the Public. University of Illinois Press. New York, U.S.A.

Halliday, J. (2017) How to Improve the School Results: Not Extra Maths but Music, Loads of It. [Online Source] available from: <www.theguardian.com> [Accessed 12/03/2019].

Higgins, L. (2012) Community Music In Theory and Practise. Oxford University Press. Oxford, U.K.

Jancovich, L. (2011) Great Art for Everyone? Engagement and Participation in the Arts. [Online Source] available from <leedsbeckett.ac.uk> [Accessed 19/04/2019].

Joss, T. & Price, D. (1993) The First National Directory of Community Music. Sound Sense. Suffolk, U.K.

Kelly, O. (1984) Community, Art and the State. Comedia, London, U.K.

Key Insights (2014) Summer Learning Loss. [Online Source] available from: <http://insights.thekeysupport.com/2014/07/28/summer-learning-loss/> [Accessed 25/04/2019].

Leeds Art Gallery (2019) Our Learning Programme. [Online Source] available from <leeds.gov.uk> [Accessed 19/04/2019].

MacCarthy, M. (2008) The Community Music Activity Commision of ISME 1982-2007: A Forum for Global Dialogue and Institutional Formation. International Journal of Community Music 1 (1).

Macdonald, I. (1995) The Leiston Statement. Sounding Board (Spring).

Miller, C. (2018) Revealed: Shocking Levels of Child Poverty in Leeds’ Most Deprived Areas. [Online Source] available from <leeds-live.co.uk> [Accessed 25/04/2019].

Moore, T. (2018) Living Wage Research for KPMG. [Online Source] available from: <https://ihsmarkit.com/index.html> [Accessed 01/04/2019].

Opera North (2019) In Harmony Pupils to Play World Premiere. [Online Source] available from: <operanorth.co.uk> [Accessed 19/04/2019].

Pavlicevic, M. & Ansdell, G. (2004) Community Music Therapy. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. London, U.K.

Robinson, P. (2018) On Music in Education: A Current Assessment. [Online Source] available from: <rma.ac.uk> [Accessed 12/03/2019].

Romer, C. (2018) Specialist Arts Colleges Among the Most Elitist in the Country. [Online Source] available from: <artsprofessional.co.uk> [Accessed 02/05/2019].

Romer, C. (2019) No School ‘Good’ or ‘Outstanding’ Without Arts, Says Arts Council England. [Online Source] available from: <artsprofessional.co.uk> [Accessed 26/04/2019].

Sarath, E. (2013) Improvisation, Creativity and Consciousness: Jazz as Integral Template for Music, Education and Society. University of New York Press. New York, U.S.A.

Scott, E. (2018) House of Lords: Music Education in Schools Debate on 18 October 2018. [Online Source] available from: <https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk> [Accessed 12/03/2019].

Selznick, P. (2002) The Communitarian Persuasion. Woodrow Wilson Centre Press. Washington DC, U.S.A.

Stevens, D. (2019) Independent Schools Council: Annual Census 2019. [Online Source] available from: <www.ics.co.uk> [Accessed 02/05/2019].

Stevens, J. (2007) Search and Reflect: A Music Workshop Handbook. Rockschool. London, U.K.

Stewart, H. Watson, N & Campbell, M. (2018) The Cost of School Holidays for Children from Low Income Families. [Online Source] available from: <journals.sagepub.com> [Accessed 15/03/2019].

Swingler, T. (1993) Comment. Sounding Board. (Autumn).

Unison. (2016) A Future at Risk: Cuts in Youth Services. [Online Source] available from: <www.unison.org.uk> [Accessed 15/03/2019].

Unison. (2018) Youth Services at Breaking Point. [Online Source] available from: <www.unison.org.uk> [Accessed 15/03/2019].

Validez-Martinez, L. & Hirsch D. (2017) Compilation of Child Poverty Local Indicators, Update to September 2017. [Online Source] available from: <endchildpoverty.org.uk> [Accessed 15/03/2018].

Widdison, D. & Hanley, F. (2014) Music Education Hubs: The Picture so Far. [Online Source] available from: <musiciansunion.org.uk> [Accessed 28/04/2019].