Creative Arts Degrees To Be Cut In The UK

Following the devastating news this summer as previously reported by TheatreArtLife that Arts Higher Education funding in the UK was to be cut by 50%, further prospective plans have been considered and announced in order to restrict student numbers on creative courses.

The prospective plans and what they mean

The Department for Education (DfE) have reviewed spending and considered the numbers in the UK Higher Education sector, citing the findings that these creative subjects produce a surplus of graduates who go on to work in low-earning careers. The Institute for Fiscal Studies found that “male creative arts graduates earned less on average at the age of 29 than people with similar backgrounds who did not go to university at all” in a 2018 study.

Rather than addressing the ongoing issue of fair pay within the arts or the overriding lack of a living wage issue that’s also widespread across the UK, the universities regulator has proposed further cuts. Ultimately, this considered proposition is put forward as a solution to stemming the flow of arts professionals who are not earning enough to pay back their student loans fully or quickly enough (despite considerable interest added annually).

Sources close to the government have disclosed rumours that there could be higher minimum entry grade requirements to obtain places on arts courses, which would in turn lower the number of students. One such source explained:

“They would like to control numbers in specific subjects. The Treasury is particularly obsessed with negative return in creative arts subjects.”

Critics have described this proposition as ‘anti-intellectual’. Speaking to The Guardian, Anne Carlisle, the vice-chancellor of Falmouth University explained that the results would be disastrous in the long-term and would create a lack of people working in creative fields.

“How amazing that this government should think they could do workforce planning like this. I think part of the problem is that this particular government appears to have fewer members who really engage in cultural and creative events. It feels like creative disciplines have been collectively forgotten by a group of people who are now coming up with simplistic assumptions about their worth. The government should give up its “crude segmentation” of science and technology and arts and design, when in reality the disciplines work together to solve complex problems.”

Additionally, there has been an eternal problem with elitism in the arts which would undoubtedly be exacerbated by this further exclusion of potential artists. Explaining how this would widen the gap and disparity amongst wealthy students and others, Professor Graham Galbraith, the vice-chancellor of the University of Portsmouth outlined his concerns in saying:

“There is a strong socioeconomic determinant to young people’s school achievements. If the government is to implement a minimum qualification rule, it must ensure that it is based on individuals’ capabilities and not a proxy for the school they happened to go to or the social class to which they belong.”

Undergraduate courses in the UK currently come with a price tag of £9,250 a year in tuition fees, which is already a barrier to some prospective students. What this would mean for creative lecturers and academic teaching staff is also unknown, as is the wider long-term plan for reopening the creative sector fully in the aftermath of the pandemic. Previously, the UK had been a hub of creativity across the arts and entertainment industries, and this latest news makes the future look very uncertain.

If opportunities for higher education are not available in the UK, there will almost certainly be a mass exodus of young artists seeking to undertake their study and professional training elsewhere in the years to come – a very sobering prospect indeed, marking an end to the UK’s once great creative industry.

Also by Michelle Sciarrotta: