ST RONGE R ARTS AND CULTU RAL ORGANI SATIO NS FO R A . - Creative Lenses
STRONG ER ARTSA N D C U LT U R A LO R G A N I S AT I O N SF O R A G R E AT E RS O C I A L I M PACTBUSINESS MODELSPROFILING OFC U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& PERFORMING ARTSO R G A N I S AT I O N SReport written by Paul Bogen
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SCONTENTS6INTRODUCTION & DEFINITIONS12EXECUTIVE SUMMARY18BACKGROUND & HISTORY23QUESTIONNAIRE & SURVE YISBN 978-91-981793-9-224ARTS / CULTUR AL CENTRES PROFILINGAuthor: Paul Bogen36PERFORMING ARTS ORGANISATIONS PROFILING42REGIONAL DIFFERENCES46AUDIENCE DE VELOPMENT50ABOUT THE AUTHORPublished in Sweden in 2018 by Trans Europe HallesCopyright @ Paul Bogen 2018Editing and coordination: José RodríguezDesign: Therese SeverinsenPhoto: Trans Europe Halles and Creative Lenses Photo Archive.A38 in Budapest, Hungary, Mark Somay (p.4). Kulturmejeriet in Lund, Sweden (p.10).Schlahftof in Bremen, Germany, Jörg Lochmon (p.16). Manifatture Knos in Lecce, Italy (p24).Multi Arts Center Bakelit in Budapest, Hungary (p 36). Farm Cultural Park in Favara, Italy (p.42).Creative Lenses is a four-year project, running from 2015 to 2019, that seeks to make arts and culturalorganisations more resilient and sustainable by improving their business models and developing theirlong-term strategic and innovation capacities.To find out more about Creative Lenses and its publications, visit www.creativelenses.eu352APPENDIX54DEMOGR APHICS64 QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS72STAKEHOLDER QUESTIONCreative Lenses is a project co-funded by the Creative Europe Programme of the European Union.The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute anendorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commissioncannot be held responsi ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.C R E AT I V E L E N S E S PA R T N E R O R G A N I S AT I O N S
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SALTHOUGH THE TERM‘INDEPENDENT’ IS OF TEN USEDTO ME AN INDEPENDENCEFROM GOVERNMENTALCONTROL OR INFLUENCE, 92%OF THE CULTUR AL CENTRESAND PERFORMING ARTSORGANISATIONS RECEIVE SOMEFORM OF PUBLIC FUNDINGFROM EITHER STATE, REGIONOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT5
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SSpecifically, this report attempts to addressa number of questions:INTRODUCTIONAND DEFINITIONS6 What is the ‘DNA’ of non-governmentalArts/Cultural Centres’ and PerformingArts organisations? What are their key characteristics andfeatures? To what extent have and do Arts/Cultural Centres’ and Performing Artsorganisations innovate their Businessmodels? Are there distinctive types of Arts/Cultural Centres’ and Performing Artsorganisations that have similar featuresand so, could be grouped together andgiven generic profiles and names relatedto their business models? Are there major differences betweenArts/Cultural Centres’ and PerformingArts organisations in the differentgeographical regions of Europe and ifyes, what are these and why? How understood, prevalent anddeveloped is audience developmentamongst the Arts/Cultural Centres’project partners?The purpose of this report as defined in CreativeLenses’ detailed project description is to outline the‘Definition of dimensions, features and challengesof the business model innovation and managementapproaches as well as of the audience developmentstrategies distinguishing the cultural organisation’sinvolved in the project’. This brief has been developedand expanded to produce an overall description andanalysis of the current profiles of Arts/Cultural Centres’and Performing Arts organisations.The report findings and conclusionsare based on a combination of desktopresearch, interviews with the projectpartners, a survey of the members of theTrans Europe Halles network1 of EuropeanArts/Cultural Centres’ (2015)2, a 2016questionnaire of seventy-five Arts/CulturalCentres’ and Performing Artsorganisations (primarily members ofTrans Europe Halles and the IETM3networks) and the authors’ experienceand knowledge of the sector, working asboth a director and business managerof and consultant/trainer for over fiftyArts/Cultural Centres’ and performingarts organisations across Europe overthe past thirty years. Although extensive,this knowledge and experience does notcover all types and sub-sectors of Arts/Cultural Centres’ and Performing Artsorganisations (for example, governmentalrun and managed Arts/CulturalCentres’ and New Circus companies),so this report is not attempting to be acomprehensive and all encompassingdefinition of all Arts/Cultural Centres’ andPerforming Arts organisations acrossEurope. Rather, it focuses on specific subsectors of European cultural organisationsrelated to the core target subject andaudience of Creative Lenses.DefinitionsA number of terms are used throughoutthe report, which have different definitionsand meanings in different countries andwith different readers. Therefore, theindented meaning of these terms used inthe report is explained below.Arts / Cultural / CultureArts as a term is primarily used inEnglish speaking countries to mean thePerformance, Media and Visual Artstogether with Literature. In mostTrans Europe Halles is a European based network of 85 cultural centres initiated by citizens and artists. http://teh.netCreative Business Models: Insights into the Business models of cultural centres in Trans Europe Halles. Trans Europe Halles 2016.3IETM is a network of over 500 performing arts organisations and individual members working in the contemporary performing arts.www.ietm.org127
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SINTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONSnon-English speaking countries theequivalent term used is either Cultural orCulture. Therefore, the term Arts/CulturalCentres’ is used to encompass both theEnglish and non-English speaking mostcommon descriptions of the centres thatare the subject of the report.As Raymond Williams said, ‘Culture is oneof the two or three most complicatedwords in the English language. This is sopartly because of its intricate historicaldevelopment, in several Europeanlanguages, but mainly because it hasnow come to be used for importantconcepts in several distinct intellectualdisciplines and in several distinct andincompatible systems of thought. Wehave to recognize three broad activecategories of usage: (i) the independentand abstract noun which describes ageneral process of intellectual, spiritualand aesthetic development, from C18;(ii) the independent noun, whether usedgenerally or specifically, which indicates aparticular way of life, whether of a people,a period, a group, or humanity in general,from Herder and Klemm. But we havealso to recognize (iii) the independentand abstract noun, which describesthe works and practices of intellectualand especially artistic activity. Thisseems often now the most widespreaduse: culture is music, literature, paintingand sculpture, theater and film’.4 As themajority of the reports readers will benon-English speaking, the terms culture84and cultural are primarily used throughoutthe report as defined by the third usageas described by Raymond Williams – theworks and practices of artistic activity.Arts/Cultural Centres’For the purposes of this report and inCreative Lenses, Arts/Cultural Centres’means functioning, multi-disciplinary (seebelow) centres that have some form ofphysical space and location. This is mostlikely to be buildings originating from anindustrial or commercial heritage but canalso include new buildings, farms and evenboats! As the results of this report arepartially based on research on members ofthe Trans Europe Network, it is also worthnoting that its membership criteria includes:a) To be an independent and not-for-profitcentre arising from a citizen’s initiativewith a legal structure.b) To have a multidisciplinary artisticpolicy encouraging interaction betweenart forms, with an emphasis oncontemporary art.c) To be based in user-friendly buildingspreferably originating from a commercialor industrial heritage.d) To run a high-quality artistic programmeof at least regional significance with anawareness of contemporary culture,ranging from local to international art.e) To be aware of the social and politicalaspects of cultural actions with an EqualOpportunities Policy or commitment.Excerpt from Raymond Williams, Keywords. Rev. Ed. (New York: Oxford UP, 1983)Performing Arts, Theatre and DancePerforming Arts are art forms in whichartists use their voices and/or themovements of their bodies. This primarilyincludes Theatre, Dance and Music but canalso include more contemporary formssuch as Performance Art, Live Art and NewCircus. Therefore, although this report doesnot include Music organisations, using theterm Performing Arts is considered moreappropriate than the term Theatre andDance in order to acknowledge the inclusionof Performing Art, Live Art and New Circusorganisations, some of which were includedin the research.Performing Arts OrganisationsFor the purposes of this report andin Creative Lenses, Performing Artsorganisations includes Theatres, Theatrecompanies, Contemporary Dancecompanies, Dance Houses and venues,New Circus companies, Performing andLive Art companies. Most of the includedorganisations produce their own work butsome are what are known as ‘ReceivingHouses’, which means that they just presentwork produced and made by others. Somehave public buildings where they presenttheir work and the work of others andsome do not have a building, touring andpresenting their work to theatres, dancehouses and venues.Independent / Non-GovernmentalThese terms create much confusion as‘independent’ has multiple meanings whenapplied to the cultural sector. One meaningof it that is used much more by PerformingArts organisations than Arts/CulturalCentres’ relates to not being a state, regionalor city owned and managed institutionand therefore, outside of and independentfrom political/artistic control. This issue ismore relevant for organisations located inSouthern and Eastern Europe where themajority of cultural organisations werehistorically and are mainly still governmentalowned and managed institutions. Butalthough the term ‘independent’ isoften used to mean independence fromgovernmental control or influence, 92% ofthe Arts/Cultural Centres’ and PerformingArts organisations that answered thereports questionnaire receive some form ofpublic funding from either state, region oflocal government. And in some cases theseorganisations would not be able to existand function without this public funding.There are far more governmental ownedand managed Arts/Cultural Centres’ acrossEurope than centres that have a private legalstructure such as an association, limitedcompany, foundation, co-operative, NGO,etc. These include the ‘Culture Houses’that can be found in nearly all towns andcities of the former Eastern European,’Communists’ countries. But these staterun centres are not the subject or focus ofCreative Lenses and are excluded from itsresearch and findings. Therefore, the termnon-governmental when used in the reportjust means an organisation that has aprivate rather than public legal structure and9
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SINTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONSFROM THE RESULTS OFOUR SURVE YS, IT COULDBE CONCLUDE D THAT THEAVE R AGE OR ‘T YPICAL’ NONGOVE RNME NTAL CULTUR ALCE NTRE HAS A BUILDING OF2,500 SQUARE ME TRES LOCATE DIN AN URBAN ARE A, PRESE NTS200 PUBLIC E VE NTS A YE ARTO AN AUDIE NCE OF 75,000AND CUR ATES 50% OF ITS10the term independent, means just artisticindependence in terms of artistic practice,form and content.Multi-disciplinaryThis means more than one art form/discipline being part of an organisation’sactivities (production and/or presentation)and relates more to Arts/Cultural Centres’than to Performing Arts organisations, thatare most often single disciplinary.Not-for-ProfitThis means that the organisation has a legalstructure where no individual or individualswill financial gain as shareholders or ownersif it makes a profit. It does not mean thatthe organisation cannot make a profitbut that if it does, this is re-invested inthe organisation. Often, the term profit isreplaced by ‘surplus’ as in some Europeancountries it is illegal for certain legalstructures of Arts/Cultural organisationsto make a profit and because this termis seen as being too closely connectedwith the world, values and core purposeof corporate, for-profit business. However,some organisations included in this reportdo have for-profit legal structures and so,this term is used to describe them.11
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SEXECUTIVESUMMARY12The results of the profiling of non-governmental Arts/Cultural Centres’and Performing Arts organisations provides some interesting insightsinto their models, structures, activities, management, finances andpractices. Although there are many similarities between them, thereare also differences in a number of areas such as their missions,core purpose, artistic practices and financial models. There are alsoregional differences due to a combination of historical, economic,geographical and culture policy reasons.But this preliminary investigation into the profiling of Arts/Cultural Centres’and Performing Arts organisations perhaps raises as many questionsand issues as it provides answers. Quantitative research results cananswer many of the ‘what’, ‘where’, ‘how’ and ‘who’ questions but notalways the ‘why’? For example, all TEH centres have to be multidisciplinaryas a condition of membership. But why are they? Do they have a clearreason and answer to this question and what are the consequences fortheir models, management and work? It may be the case that their initialdecision to be multidisciplinary was simply based on the fact that whenthey started there was little or no other production or presentation ofalternative and/or contemporary arts in their city or town and they wantedto be open to all artists and art forms. But after a number of years thesituation in their city or town could have changed and the centres may bethen competing with theatres, dance-houses, music venues, galleries andart-house cinemas, all of which specialise in and concentrate on just asingle art form. Being multidisciplinary brings with it additional challengesas expertise and knowledge is required across a range of art forms inprogramming, producing and marketing. The questionnaire results showthat compared to the Arts/Cultural Centres’, more of the Performing Artsorganisations have a written vision or mission that is understood andshared by all staff and have a long-term strategy. This may be becausethey are nearly all working in single art form, making it easier to haveclarity on their core purpose and to plan their futures?From the results of the survey and questionnaire it could be concludedthat the average or ‘typical’ non-governmental Arts/Cultural Centre hasa building of 2,500 square metres located in an urban area, presents 200mainly performing arts, public events a year covering eight art form areasto an audience of 75,000, curates 50% of their programme, earns morefrom renting out space than from any other income source, has 19 staff,a budget of 1.25 million, earns 80% of their total income and has a bar ofcafé that produces as much income as they receive in public funding! Butwhile interesting, this information does not fully explain why the centreschoose to do what they do and the way that they do it.One of the criteria for membership of TEH is that the centres should have‘arisen from a citizen’s initiative’. This, together with the requirementthat they be not-for-profit is perhaps, the most important factor that hasinfluenced their models, management and innovation and creates one ofthe main challenges to business model innovation. Having developed outof citizen’s initiatives, most TEH centres have a political dimension to theirwork and working practices that is known by all but rarely admitted orexternally communicated. And this ‘politics’ is clearly of a left wing, liberaland social dimension. Although the members of the network come in allshapes and sizes, have different programmes, structures and models, itis perhaps their shared ‘politics’ together with a belief in the importanceof and power of culture that actually unites them and is the reasonwhy the network has survived for so long? And this political dimensionis considered to be one of the key factors that influence the centres’business models and their innovation. The reason why many people makethe decision to either establish or work in not-for-profit, non-governmentalArts/Cultural organisations is partially because they do not believe in orwant to be part of the for-profit, commercial, corporate world. This is asmuch a political as a cultural decision and through their shared values,affects not only what they do but also how they do it and why! Even usingthe term ‘business’ is anathema to many who work in the sector, so theidea of having, let alone innovating a business model, belongs to a world13
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SE XECUTIVE SUMMARYand set of values that they have consciously rejected and do not wish tobe a part of.But this is not necessarily the view of all who work in the sector or whomanage Art/Cultural Centres’ and Performing Arts organisations. Some ofthe TEH members operate centres that could be described as commercialand receive no public funding, while others main focus is entertainingthe public, putting ‘bums on seats’, selling beer and earning income. Andperhaps, this key issue of Arts/Cultural Centres’ and Performing Artsorganisations having different visions, missions and values is the mainfactor that determines the challenges to developing their business modelsand therefore, their attitude towards and ability to innovate them?14With an organisation’s vision, mission and values, the key issue is whose is itand who has the ownership of it? The questionnaire results showed thatthere is a difference of opinion between the Director’s/CEO’s and the staffon if there is an understood and shared vision within their organisation,with the Director’s/CEO’s believing that there is and the staff believingthat there is not. This supports the view that very often, an organisation’svision is that of a single, individual leader who is often the founder. Theseleaders then recruit a team to deliver their vision that often, have no ideawhat it is or may not share it or the leader’s values. This is probably themain reason why organisation’s fail or at least do not achieve their goals,objectives and ambitions. Far too many Arts/Cultural Centres’ do not havea clear, stated vision, mission or values that are produced by all of the keypeople involved in the organisation and are understood and believed in byall of its team and key stakeholders. And if the organisation’s vision hasbeen produced by and is owned just by its leader, what happens whenthey depart?If the vision, mission and values are those of just the organisation’s leaderthen its business model and how it innovates could also be the soledecision of and owned just by them? If this is the case then the skills,experience and performance of the Director/CEO is the critical factor indetermining the success or failure of the organisation’s business model.The 2015, Creative Business Models project concluded that, “what was themost interesting lesson learnt from the case studies is that the experience,skills, knowledge, motivation, energy and personality of an Arts orCultural organisations leader(s), is perhaps, the most important factor indetermining if it succeeds or fails”.Most non-governmental Arts and Cultural organisations in Europe rely oncontributed income in order to exist and survive in the form of public orprivate funding. Because of this, many have what could be described a‘funding dependent culture’, which relies heavily on being ‘given’ financerather than having to earn it themselves. Organisations that receivehigh levels of contributed income have less incentive and less need toinnovate their business models as long as their funding continues. Butas can be seen from the survey results, on average Arts/Cultural Centres’contributed income is only about 20% of their total income and 80%of it is earned. As earned income cannot be guaranteed even a smallpercentage reduction can have a major impact on an organisation’sfinances, especially if it budgets to only break-even. With an annualearned income target of 1 million, just a 5% reduction in earned incomewould mean 50,000, that could determine if the organisation survivesor not. With finances usually being so limited, arts/cultural organisationsusually having no or little capital or reserves and earned income being souncertain, investing in new business innovations is often either financiallyimpossible or considered to be too risky. This lack of capital and financialinstability may be one of the main reasons why many Arts/Culturalorganisations do not make radical or major innovations to their businessmodels, but rather make small and minor low risk and low cost changes totheir current models?The survey and questionnaire results show that there are geographic/regional differences between Arts/Cultural organisations in Europe.Many of these differences can be attributed to the public funding policiesof various countries and the levels and types of funding available. Forexample, in most of the former ‘Eastern Block’ countries public fundingfor non-governmental organisations is much lower than in Northern andWestern Europe as a percentage of total culture funding and the majorityof it goes to public cultural institutions. Southern European countriesdo not have a tradition or long history of non-governmental culturalorganisations as is the case in Northern and Western Europe, and as withthe former Eastern Block countries, the majority of cultural funding goesto public institutions. As non-governmental Arts/Cultural organisationshave existed for longer in Northern and Western Europe than in Easternand Southern Europe, they have had longer to develop their existingmodels and to test new models as well as having more stable anddeveloped national, regional and local funding policies and systems.Another major difference is the ability of and attitude of audiences/usersto pay for events and activities. In the former ‘Eastern Block’, Culture was15
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SE XECUTIVE SUMMARYTHE L ACK OF CAPITAL ANDFINANCIAL INSTABILIT Y MAYBE ONE OF THE MAIN RE ASONSWHY MANY CULTUR ALORGANISATIONS DO NOT MAKER ADICAL OR MAJOR INNOVATIONS16TO THEIR BUSINESS MODE LS,BUT R ATHE R MAKE SMALL ANDMINOR LOW RISK AND LOWCOST CHANGES TO THEIRCURRE NT MODE LS.seen in a similar way to education and health, as a requirement and a rightof all citizens. Therefore, many cultural events were either free or verylow cost. This historical legacy, combined with low disposable incomeslevels, makes it harder for Eastern organisations to earn high levels ofearned income. Although organisations in the South of Europe do nothave the Eastern European political legacy, they do have relatively lowerincome levels than in Northern and Western Europe. The consequenceof these differences is that the Southern and Eastern organisations haveon average, smaller organisations and buildings, with much lower overallbudgets, lower earned income in real terms and as a percentage of totalincome, fewer events, audiences and staff. But although they receive lesspublic funding in real terms than the Northern and Western organisations,as a percentage of their total income it is higher.In terms of Audience Development, the questionnaire results from theCreative Lenses partners show that there are differences betweenEuropean countries as to its use, practice and understanding. Forexample, in the UK it is well developed and practiced, whereas in Greeceand Finland it is not well understood or practiced within the sector.Only one of the six partners questioned had any form of marketing orcommunications plan and most had not done any audience developmentprojects, audience research or staff training in audience development.The results and analysis of the profiling of Arts/Cultural Centres’ andPerforming Arts organisations raises many challenges and issues forthem in terms of business model development and innovation. It isquestionable if many of them are ready, able and in a position to embarkon such a process without first having a clear and shared vision, missionand values, a long-term strategy, relatively stable finances and thehuman, physical and financial resources required. It is also not clear ifall Arts/Cultural organisations would actually want to do this for politicaland/or ideological reasons? This may just simply require changing theterminology and approach away from that of the ‘business’ world andreplacing it with one that is understood and based on the values of theArts/Cultural sector.Therefore, perhaps what is first required is a form of ‘checklist’, written in alanguage that is Arts/Cultural sector-friendly, that clearly explains whatorganisations must have in place and what their overall situation should bebefore considering developing and/or innovating their business models?17
B U S I N E S S M O D E L S P R O F I L I N G O F C U LT U R A L C E N T R E S& P E R F O R M I N G A R T S O R G A N I S AT I O N SDenis de Rougemont. The Centre playedan important role in the establishmentof the European Cultural Foundation andother European cultural associations andnetworks.6BACKGROUNDAND HISTORYArts/Cultural Centres’Early examples of Arts/Cultural Centres’in much of Europe can be traced back toinitiatives established by labour movementsin the late 19th and early 20th Centuries(up to the Second World War), whichwere extensive in Europe. For example, InEngland they were part of Union facilitiesand also civic buildings called People’sPalaces, in Scandinavia, Folkets Hus(People’s Houses) and in Spain Ateneosor Casa del Pueblo’s. These initiativesemerged from the wider class and grassroots struggles, a result of reactions to themass exploitation of working people withinthe context of the industrial revolution.These centres were not established as Arts/Cultural Centres’, per se, but encompasseda wide range of facilities not available to thewider community, at the that time such as18The 1960’s then saw the advent of ArtsLabs as places of radical social and culturalmovements. The first, Drury Lane ArtsLab was an alternative space in Londonfunctioning from 1967 to 1969.7 It influencedmany arts/cultural spaces across Europe,including the Melkweg in Amsterdam andthe Entrepot in Paris. In 1969 there were 50functioned Arts Labs in the UK including theBeckenham Arts Lab that was co-founded byDavid Bowie. Many Arts Centres’ developedout of this Arts Lab movement althoughmany were more community and/or craftbased rather than radical, politicised artsspaces.education, health care and social services.But they often included spaces for arts andcrafts and venues for theatre and music.After the Second World War, the rise ofthe welfare state across much of western,northern and southern Europe and publicfunding for arts/culture allowed for Arts/Cultural Centres’ to both be establishedand supported by the state. For example,in 1946 the Bridgewater Arts Centre wasthe first arts centre to open in the UK withArts Council support.5 And in the Sovietcontrolled Eastern block of Europeancountries, every city, town and often villagehad a state-run and managed ‘CultureHouse’, many of which still exist today.The 1970’s saw the start of the decline ofmany manufacturing industries in partsof Europe, which increased from the1980’s and beyond due to the growth ofglobalisation and free-market economics,the collapse of the ‘Eastern Block’ from1989 and the rise of the Asian economiesover the past two decades. This resultedin many abandoned or empty, brownfield,industrial, commercial and military sites andbuildings all over Europe. The Arts/CulturalCentres’ that formed in these abandonedsites and buildings can most probably befirst dated to around the early 1980’s suchas the seven centres that met in MarchA European Cultural Centre was establishedin Geneva in 1950 by the EuropeanMovement run by the Swiss ces/theatres/show/1264-arts-centre-bridgwaterSo, the real growth and development ofthe Arts/Cultural Centres’ that are thesubject of Creative Lenses can be probablyThe Penguin Companion to European Union (2012), Anthony ndex.php?year 1969&volume IT-Volume-1&issue 66&item IT 1969-10-10 B-IT-Volume-1 Iss66 016651983 leading to the formation of the TransEurope Halles network (Les Halles deSchaerbeek / Brussels / Huset, Copenhagen/ Kulturfabrik, Koblenz / Melkweg,Amsterdam / Pali Kao, Paris / Rote Fabrik,Zurich and Ny Scen Gothenburg).The first real development of a culturalindustries policy was made by the GreaterLondon Council (GLC) from 1983 untilits abolition in 1986. This advocated fora bottom-up, community led process.It also advocated public investment inthe cultural sector for the purposes ofeconomic regeneration and includedpromo
3 IETM is a network of over 500 performing arts organisations and individual members working in the contemporary performing arts. www.ietm.org Specifically, this report attempts to address a number of questions: What is the 'DNA' of non-governmental Arts/Cultural Centres' and Performing Arts organisations?
2014 – 2015. 2 2014-2015 ARTS CONCENTRATIONS AT DURHAM SCHOOL OF THE ARTS ARTS: Music ARTS: Theatre Arts ARTS: Dance ARTS: Visual Arts ARTS: CTE ARTS: Writing . portfolio to Scholastic Art & Writing Awards _ Newspaper Journalism *Completer Options 1) Editor or Co-Editor . AP Art History - 54487X0Y Writing Through Literature 2-10272YW2 .
A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY v THE ARTS AND PUBLIC EDUCATION 1 Introduction 1 Prior Research on the Benefits of Arts Education 4 Access and Gaps in Arts Education 5 Now Is Our Moment 9 Sidebar: Arts Education in Our Schools and Communities 9 THE VALUES OF ARTS EDUCATION 10 Arts Education Builds Well-Rounded Individuals 11 Arts Education Broadens Our Understanding of and .
8 2016 Americans for the Arts Americans Are Experiencing the Arts throughout the Community The American public engages in the arts in many ways—as attendee, arts maker, art purchaser and decorator, and arts advocate. We consume and share art through technology and are more likely to experience the arts outside of the .
Elyse (Ginger Cooley) Applegate ARTS 332B 786-1683 Marketing and Public Relations e.a@alaska.edu Manager, Performing and Fine Arts Division Cedar Cussins ARTS 333 786-4890 Performing & Fine Arts cedar@alaska.edu Building Manager ART STUDIOS DRAWING Arts 101 (no phone) PAINTING Arts 102 786-1352 CERAMICS-HANDBUILT Arts 106 786-1246
ARTS IMPACT ARTS FOUNDATIONS - Visual Arts: Three-dimensional Form and Texture 7 2. Introduce the concept of creating texture by impressing found objects, taking away clay, and adding clay to a surface. Guide students in experimenting . Part 1 . ARTS IMPACT ARTS FOUNDATIONS - Visual Arts: Three-dimensional Form and Texture 8 3. Introduce .
In the present study, adolescent arts students were less likely than non-arts to be suspended out-of-school. It is possible that arts students are more engaged in school (as visual arts students reported more school attachment than non-arts students), and therefore arts students may avoid behaviors that could lead to a suspension.
102 th Convocation List of Arts and Fine Arts AR03232 Aamena Bano Ansari Noorulhoda M A S T E R of Arts AR00106 Aasefa Bano Muzaffar Ahmad Bachelor of Arts AR03233 Aatequa Ab Rasheed M A S T E R of Arts .
Instructional Topics . 1 : 1: Building a Reading Life . Topic 1: Making Reading Lives Topic 2: Making Texts Matter Topic 3: Responding to Our Reading Through Writing . 2: Nonficti
