In Hungary, within the TÁMOP 3.1.1. project entitled “21th century public education and development, co-ordination” a complex art educational program is compiled to support extra-curricular activities. In order to develop the programme, the Educational Research and Development Institute professionally manages and supports research and development activities during which complex developmental possibilities are experimented on in close collaboration with schools and based on their art educational practice. Connecting different scientific areas in education is not a new thought, so the aim to integrate different subjects or implement complex development has also been present in the Hungarian education system. Our school practice, however, is based on a disciplinary approach system. Complex artistic education is therefore also present in schools, but firstly, it is not generally accepted, so it functions more as an experimental programme or as part of school experiments, supporting alternative pedagogical concepts, and secondly, complexity is interpreted in various different ways. Consequently, if the aim is to compile a complex art education programme, it would be of vital importance to clarify the interpretation of complexity and the conditions needed for its implementation. Prior to development, in order to assess the situation properly, it is worthwhile analysing issues backed up by research, issues which point to how we can interpret the concept of complex art education, how we can implement the complex art education within the framework of the formal school due to the lack of such tradition; what the conditions of a complex art education are and how the stakeholders relate to this complex approach. The complex art education and training pilot programme uses specific tools of art education, which interpret the art’s roles of culture-transfer and creation, creativity, problem-solving, self-awareness and the role of social culture development in a complex way. According to the follow-up experience in school testing of the co-developed programme, on the one hand, we can precisely describe the impact of the programme, and on the other hand, we can thus formulate recommendations, which characterise the conditions of use of the complex art education programme.

Arnold, Arnold (1975): The complete book of arts and crafts. An encyclopedic sourcebook of techniques, tools, ideas and instruction. New York, Scarborough, Ontario,Plume Assesment of Performance Unit (1981): Understanding Design and Technology. HMSO, London Bánki Vera - Bálványos Huba (2002): Differenciálás a művészeti nevelésben. Okker, Budapest Bibler, Vladimir (1982): Az alkotó gondolkodás. Gondolat Kiadó, Budapest C. Okoli - s. d. Pawlowski: The Delphí Method as a Research Tool, http://www.sciencedirect.com Collings, Elisworth (1929): An Experiment with a Project Curriculum. The Macmillan Company, New York Deme Tamás (1976): Javaslat az esztétikai-művészeti nevelés integrációjára. In: Az MTA állásfoglalásai és ajánlásai: A távlati műveltség tartalmára és az iskolai nevelőtevékenység fejlesztésére. MTA, Budapest Dewey, John (1934): Art as an Experience. The Macmillan Company, New York Kokas Klára (1984): Gyermekek zene-befogadása és önkiejezése különböző művészetformákban: Kodály-i segítség a problematikus gyereke nevelésében. Kodály Intézet, Kecskemét W. Stitt-Gohde - T. B. Crews: The Delphi Technique: A research strategy for Carreer and Technical Education, http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JCTE/v20n2/stitt.html