Student, home, and school socio-demographic factors: links to school, home, and community arts participation

Abstract

This study explored the role of student (e.g., age, language background, gender), home (e.g., parent/caregiver education), and school (e.g., school type, size) socio-demographic factors in students' school (e.g., in-school arts tuition, arts engagement), home (e.g., parent/caregiver-child arts interaction), and community (e.g., arts attendance, arts tuition) arts participation. The sample comprised 1172 elementary and secondary school students from 15 schools. Findings revealed that student and home socio-demographic factors were the most salient in predicting arts participation across school, home, and community contexts. Age, gender, and prior achievement were the key student socio-demographic factors, while parent/caregiver education and occupation were also associated with students' arts participation. Implications for practice and intervention pertinent to young people's arts participation are discussed.Research has demonstrated the benefits of arts participation in promoting a range of academic and non-academic outcomes for young people. In the context of the present study, ''the arts'' encompasses dance, drama, film/media studies, music, and

Art in my world: Exploring the visual art experiences in the everyday lives of young children and their impact on cultural capital

“…Support from family members could take the form of either providing expertise (Crum, 2007) or resources (Crum, 2007;Rose et al, 2006). Mansour et al (2016) found that the education of parents and their occupation are significant factors in terms of children participating in arts activities. A limitation of these studies however, with the exception of Crum (2007), is that they have been conducted within the school environment where the power relations could have influenced the findings.…”

“…They also each provide a snapshot of a particular set of circumstances drawn and analysed using a variety of methods with a variable sample size (e.g. Mansour et al (2016), n = 1,172; Tan and Gibson (2017), n = 4) which makes comparison between them difficult and generalisations even trickier.…”

“…There is debate concerning the level of influence that a parent, with perceived high levels of cultural capital, has over a child's interest in visual art. Larger-scale, quantitative studies such as Mansour et al (2016) and Melnick, Witmer, and Strickland (2011) demonstrate that this level of influence is strong. In contrast, small-scale, qualitative studies suggest that there is potential for high levels of parental cultural capital to inhibit a child's interest in the visual arts (Debenedetti, Caro, & Krebs, 2009;Savva & Trimis, 2005;Szechter & Liben, 2007).…”

“…The arts are a broad field so for the purposes of this paper the focus will be on visual arts. Research has been undertaken that focuses on where children experience the visual arts (Crum, 2007;Haanstra, 2010;Mansour et al, 2016;Richards, 2014;Rose, Jolley, & Burkitt, 2006;Szechter & Liben, 2007;Tan & Gibson, 2017). Few however have explored the value of these experiences in any depth drawing on the voices of children (Haanstra, 2010;Richards, 2014).This paper is therefore focused primarily on this issue.…”

The development of a student engagement instrument for the responding strand in visual arts

“…While it is important to conduct diagnostic assessment about what students know, it is also important to measure how students feel, as affective responses to education impact on students' achievement and retention in schooling (Appleton et al 2008;Gray and Hackling 2009;Mansour et al 2016). Furthermore, engagement influences students' perceptions about the importance of learning itself (Christenson et al 2012).…”