Music Mark's Summer Summit, held on 26 June, started with a lively warm-up session led by the New Young Voices Choir. This was followed by keynote speeches from Newham mayor Rokhsana Fiaz, and Darren Henley, Arts Council England head and writer of the report which formed the basis of the National Plan. The contrast was stark, with Fiaz discussing the role of music in resisting authoritarianism, followed by Henley's distinctly apolitical speech which acknowledged the shortcomings of the National Plan without apportioning blame.
Then came a panel discussion consisting of Henley and representatives from seven other organisations. One floor question asked why the panel failed to include a single teacher, with no real answer given. I asked what the panel thought of Henley's use of language like ‘efficiency’ and the need to do more with less – shouldn't music hubs expect ACE to be on the offensive? Henley answered that, as a service funded by the taxpayer, hubs should aim to provide value for money, an understandable ambition but one requiring context: who defines value for money?
The afternoon saw the attendees split between three different sessions: ‘Progression Pathways’, ‘Equity of Access’ and ‘Governance’. I sat in on the last and found myself among hub heads discussing and comparing their own methods of running a hub. It was interesting to hear the areas of difference and overlap that arose from a plan which didn't mandate a particular way for hubs to operate. From what I heard, this flexibility has allowed hubs to respond to the needs of their region quickly, without waiting for directives from above. It would be great if a new plan retained and supported these differences.
In the plenary, a recurrent idea that was fed back was a desire to see a new plan incorporate both early years and higher education, from birth to 25, as several hubs are already funding these without public funds. The equity of access feedback advocated an approach similar to the social model of disability – where disability is viewed as a societal problem, not an individual one.
As Bridget Whyte closed the session, she informed us that representatives from the Department of Education had also been in attendance. Hopefully, they were listening.
Hub perspective
I attended at the request of my local Music Hub to contribute to the debate about the future of music education. Darren Henley, in his keynote speech, reflected on his original review and plan, and then outlined what he felt the priorities should be for the music education sector going forward. This session was very informative and Henley presented a much more reflective view on his vision for music education than when I have heard him speak in the past. I previously saw him talk about the National Plan at the International Society for Music Education conference in 2016 but this presentation was more nuanced – Henley accepted the original plan's limitations and the potential scope for a new plan to feature elements of music education on which he had not previously focused.
I felt that the prepared questions were very good and raised interesting perspectives about whether hubs were achieving their targets; some of the questions from the floor were a little bit off topic and not that relevant. A long discussion about ‘teaching creativity’ (rather than teaching creatively), while interesting, didn't feel like the best use of the panel and the use of the delegates’ time. The panel also felt slightly too big for everyone to contribute fully and, given the number of hub personnel present, it might have been useful to have a greater number of hubs represented – hindsight is a wonderful thing.
The ‘Progression’ session provided much more of an open forum. After two case studies from hubs, everyone got to discuss how progression might look in the next iteration of the music education plan within smaller groups. This session felt the most useful of the three and allowed the perspectives of more delegates to be heard.
The whole day felt productive and it seemed that hubs and music education personnel had been heard. However, what happens next, of course, remains to be seen.
TIM HALLAS
