Lower-income pupils are steered away from creative subjects in schools such as art, music and drama, research suggests, with particular concerns about the impact on girls.

The study highlights “institutional pressure to prioritise ‘academic’ or ‘practical’ subjects over creative ones” in pre-16 education.

The University of Cambridge’s faculty of education, which published the report, argues that this “narrowing pathway” contributes to creating “substantial inequalities in who ultimately accesses creative careers”.

‘Active discouragement’ from taking arts subjects

Students are “actively discouraged” from taking arts subjects or being steered towards “traditional” academic subjects such as geography and history, the authors write.

This discouragement comes with an “explicit rationale” that creative subjects would limit future A-level choices and career prospects, they add.

Sarah Hannafin, head of policy at the NAHT school leaders’ union, said that the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) had disincentivised the take-up of creative subjects and “skewed” curriculum and qualification choices in schools.

The government announced in November that it would scrap the EBacc in response to the curriculum and assessment review.

The “framing of creative subjects as risky or illegitimate choices appeared embedded in some institutional cultures”, say the authors of today’s report, which was funded by social and economic wellbeing charity the Nuffield Foundation.

Schools, families and social pressures are channelling young people - especially girls and poorer students - away from studying creative subjects because they are considered low-status or financially “risky”, according to the report.

The authors argue that the underrepresentation of women and people from lower-income backgrounds in the creative industries reflects a “narrowing pathway” that begins at school.

The report, Creative subject choices: student pathways through education and into employment, uses the educational records of 1.7 million students in England and longitudinal data on the progress of 7,200 young people into work. Researchers also conducted interviews and surveys with people studying and working in creative fields.

Almost half of 14-year-olds expressed a preference for a creative subject, but by their early thirties, only around one in 25 was working in the creative sector, according to the report.

The study finds that participation drops at every stage in between: GCSE, post-16 education and higher education.

The fall-off is especially steep among poorer students and girls, with girls from lower-income backgrounds facing a “double disadvantage”.

Currently, the EBacc measures the number of students entering GCSEs in English language and literature, maths, sciences, geography or history, and a language.

Ms Hannafin said: “High-stakes accountability means schools have had little choice but to go along with this as they are measured on the number of pupils who take GCSEs in these core subjects and how well young people do in them.”

‘Snobbery’ around qualifications

Professor Sonia Ilie, from the University of Cambridge’s faculty of education, said: “If you have a university degree in a creative subject, you are much more likely to end up in a creative career.

“Young people from low-income families, however, and especially girls, are less likely to reach the point where studying for a creative degree is even an option.”

This reflects wider societal inequalities, cultural messaging and pressure on schools to deliver academic results, she said.

“We need a more thoughtful conversation about the value of creative subjects, and frankly about the snobbery that still surrounds certain qualifications,” added Professor Ilie, who conducted the research with University of Cambridge colleagues Professor Pamela Burnard and assistant research professor Konstantina Maragkou.

The report recommends a focus on “actively promoting the value of creative subjects for all, while recognising the complexities of progression into, and experience of, creative employment”.

Ms Hannafin added: “While this should improve student choice, and open doors to arts careers, the government must ensure schools can recruit the specialist teachers they need and invest in the resources and equipment required to increase their offer in these subjects after years in which they have been squeezed out.”

Professor Ilie said: “If things stay as they are, the patterns that develop throughout students’ educational careers are more likely to perpetuate inequalities in the creative industries, rather than disrupt them.”

Dr Emily Tanner, education programme head at the Nuffield Foundation, said: “With creative industries identified as among the highest-potential sectors in the UK’s industrial strategy, this research is timely. It shows that ensuring equitable access to opportunities will require concerted action to remove barriers for girls and young people from disadvantaged backgrounds.”