Morrison Institute for Public Policy Publications Archives

A study of 55 school districts and a group of opinion leaders examined the status of arts education in Arizona. Information from surveys collected and interviews conducted throughout 1995 and 1996 was analyzed to determine whether or not improvement occurred following the 1988 "Vision 2000" program. Survey responses and interviews suggest: (1) signs of improvement appear along with indications of status quo maintenance; (2) four out of ten respondents thought the overall status of arts education was better now than five years ago, another third thought it was about the same; (3) significant support for arts education exists among school personnel and parents; (4) funding, staffing, and curriculum were identified as the most critical need over the next 3 years; (5) arts education remains vulnerable to funding cuts, neglect, and competition from other educational priorities; (6) local sources of external funds are often used to supplement district funds but the potential for private funding of the arts has not been fully tapped; and (7) Arizona schools compare reasonably well with schools nationally in terms of the provision of visual art, music, and other arts programs. Recommendations are made for continued study, establishment of arts education quality indicators, monitoring, and mechanisms for reporting and sharing statewide data regarding the status of arts education.

In step with other organizations, the Greater Phoenix Economic Council (the Valley’s regional public-private economic development organization) published a comprehensive 10-year economic development strategy that codified its change in direction to quality economic development in aerospace, bio-industry, advanced business and financial services, technology, and software. In early 2004, the Governor’s Council on Innovation and Technology issued Building Arizona’s Knowledge-Based Economy with scores of recommendations on venture capital, higher education, collaboration, workforce development, and other topics. Separately, each of these items would have been notable. Taken together, they demonstrate a strong commitment to the growth of a knowledge economy and to the multifaceted approaches needed to develop it.

This report both updates statistics and perceptions and adds new features. Thus, readers may look at quality of life based on how residents feel or on the trend lines revealed in the numbers. What Matters reports what people think about Greater Phoenix, how they view their own lives, and whether they believe the region is on the right or wrong track. The sections are presented in the order of importance assigned to them by the survey rankings (i.e., Education appears first, Public Safety and Crime second, etc).

What Matters is intended to support decision-making on public issues and to provide a reference for policy makers, civic and business leaders, community activists, and other residents. In response to feedback on previous issues, this edition includes additional indicators for healthcare and more information on higher education. Price and income data have been adjusted for inflation, and more information has been added where appropriate for a fuller picture of trends. Different approaches or completely new sources of data were required in some of this issue’s indicators because of changes in data sources. While every effort was made to choose items that would be stable, there is no way to control for how data are collected or reported over the years. On the whole, however, the 1997 baseline remains intact.

This document profiles 11 examples of arts and education institutions across the country that are working to solve community problems. Programs, which reflect a number of purposes, are organized by category.

Large Urban Profiles, look at:

1. "Bridgemaking" in Chicago: Chicago Arts Partnership in Education.
2. Learning by Working: Young Artists at Work, Arts Commission of Greater Toledo.
3. Arts Education: Local Priority: Arts Integration Program, Tucson/Pima Arts Council.
4. Communications and Vocations: Arts Talk/Arts Workers, Rhode Island State Council on the Arts.

Small Urban Profiles, look at:

5. SPECTRA Plus: Cultural Council of Santa Cruz County.
6. Art for Science's Sake in Fairbanks, Alaska: Arts & Science Collaboration, Denali Elementary School and Visual Enterprises.

The Suburban Profile is:
7. "Strategy for Economic Development and Education: Blue Springs Arts 2000 Partnership.

Rural Profiles present:
8. Big Ideas in Small Places: Artists in Minnesota Schools & Communities, Minnesota Rural Arts Initiative COMPAS.
9. Parent Power for the Arts: Moms for Fun, Silver City, New Mexico.
10. Art for Every Student: Art in Education Special Project, Idaho's Salmon Arts Council and Brooklyn School.
11. Theater Development Through Arts Education: Dell'Arte, Blue Lake, California.

Common keys to program effectiveness are shown to be: leadership, vision, planning, community involvement, professional development, cooperative relationships, innovation, evaluation, and high quality services. Appendices list additional programs and contacts for the profiled programs.

Afterschool youth-development programs (AYDs) have grown significantly during the past 15 years in Arizona and nationally. Many providers have moved beyond simply providing a safe haven to actively promoting young people’s development. However, there is still tremendous opportunity for growth. There is also a continuing need to enhance coordination and collaboration among programs in order to extend their resources and heighten their impact.

Morrison Institute worked with AzCASE and VSUW to construct a 55-question survey using Qualtrics on-line software. While the term “afterschool” was used, the survey was designed to measure all types of out-of-school programs, regardless of whether they operate before or after school, on weekends, or during school and summer breaks. Approximately 1,800 questionnaires were distributed to individual program sites in Maricopa and Pima counties via a list provided by AzCASE. Though the survey did not utilize a random sample, its 38 percent response rate (681 returns) suggests that its findings can help educators, youth-development professionals, policymakers and the business community understand the scope, characteristics and needs of afterschool services in Arizona’s two largest population centers.

It is an oversimplification to describe the new economy as a technology revolution, something that is mostly driven by and affects business. Clearly, new technologies and business practices are central to the concept of a new economy. However, that’s the easy part to understand. The bigger challenge is to grasp—and then develop strategies to take advantage of—how public policies in the new economy can most positively affect people and places. This report is meant to help Arizonans do just that.