This Ignite Talk addresses the theoretical foundations of a doctoral research focused on curriculum construction in Classical Guitar education within public music conservatories. Rather than presenting empirical findings, the contribution foregrounds curriculum as a conceptual, cultural and political problem in specialised artistic education, drawing on contemporary curriculum theory and critical debates in arts education.

The central research question guiding this theoretical reflection is: How can curriculum in instrumental music education be conceptualised as a negotiated space between autonomy, equity and artistic legitimacy in the absence of national curricular reference frameworks? This question emerges from the observation that, in several national contexts, comparison between Portugal and Spain, instrumental curricula are weakly regulated, highly localised and often sustained by tacit professional norms rather than explicit curricular agreements.

The theoretical framework integrates four complementary strands. First, classical curriculum theory is revisited through the work of Tyler (1949) and Taba (1962), whose objective-oriented and developmental models have strongly influenced instrumental teaching traditions. While these approaches provide structural coherence and technical progression, they tend to marginalise the cultural, ethical and political dimensions of curricular decision-making in the arts.

Second, critical curriculum theory (Apple, 1979; Giroux, 1997; Torres, 2015) is mobilised to challenge the assumption of curricular neutrality. From this perspective, curriculum is understood as a selective cultural tradition that legitimises certain forms of knowledge, repertoires and pedagogies while excluding others. This lens is particularly relevant to Classical Guitar education, historically shaped by Eurocentric canons and master–apprentice pedagogical cultures, often naturalised as universal standards of artistic quality.

Third, post-critical and reconceptualist approaches (Pinar, 2004; Aoki, 2005; Slattery, 2006) frame curriculum as a lived, negotiated and unfinished process. Here, curriculum is not reduced to formal syllabi but conceptualised as the dynamic interplay between planned curriculum, enacted curriculum and experienced curriculum. This perspective enables the recognition of teacher–performer identities, student subjectivities and institutional cultures as constitutive elements of curricular meaning in artistic education.

Finally, the framework engages with contemporary debates on autonomy, equity and governance in arts education within a European context. Drawing on comparative curriculum scholarship (Young & Muller, 2016) and policy-oriented critiques of neoliberal educational governance (Torres, 2015), the talk highlights how curricular autonomy, when unsupported by shared reference points, may inadvertently reinforce territorial and institutional inequalities rather than promote pedagogical diversity.

In response, the Ignite Talk proposes the concept of a “curricular contract” as a theoretical construct capable of reconciling autonomy with responsibility. This notion refers to the establishment of shared curricular reference frameworks, focused on learning outcomes, artistic practices and educational values, while preserving pedagogical freedom and contextual adaptation. Rather than advocating standardisation, the contribution argues for curricular coherence as a condition for equity, transparency and student mobility across institutions.

By focusing explicitly on theory, this Ignite Talk aims to provoke critical dialogue on curriculum as a cultural, ethical and political endeavour in music education, resonating with broader European concerns regarding justice, diversity and the public role of the arts.

The doctoral research underpinning this Ignite Talk adopts a qualitative and interpretative methodological approach, grounded in a multiple case study design (Yin, 2014; Stake, 2006). Although the present contribution focuses exclusively on the theoretical framework, the broader study provides the empirical and analytical context from which the theoretical problematisation emerges. The research involved the analysis of seven public music conservatories, selected to ensure institutional and territorial diversity within the Portuguese educational system. Data collection combined semi-structured interviews with school leaders and Classical Guitar teachers, questionnaires administered to students, and systematic documentary analysis of curricular, regulatory and institutional texts. This multi-source design enabled the triangulation of perspectives and the construction of a nuanced understanding of curricular practices in instrumental music education. Data analysis followed the principles of thematic content analysis (Bardin, 1977), supported by intra-case and cross-case comparison. Coding procedures were iterative and theory-informed, allowing empirical categories to be interpreted in dialogue with curriculum theory and critical perspectives on arts education. Particular attention was given to how curricular decisions were justified, enacted and experienced by different actors. In addition to empirical data, the study incorporated an extensive theoretical and policy-oriented literature review. This review functioned not merely as contextualisation, but as an analytical lens through which empirical findings were interpreted and problematised. European policy documents and comparative studies on specialised artistic education were also examined to situate the research within broader debates on governance, autonomy and equity in arts education. While this Ignite Talk foregrounds theoretical reflection rather than methodological detail, its arguments are grounded in this rigorous qualitative research design, ensuring that the proposed conceptual insights are empirically informed and analytically robust.

Although the doctoral research includes extensive empirical findings, the conclusions foregrounded in this Ignite Talk are primarily theoretical and conceptual. The study demonstrates that curriculum in Classical Guitar education cannot be adequately understood as a neutral or purely technical framework, but rather as a cultural, political and ethical construction shaped by institutional autonomy, professional traditions and implicit value systems. A key theoretical outcome of the research is the identification of a structural tension between pedagogical autonomy and curricular equity in specialised artistic education. The analysis shows that high levels of institutional and teacher autonomy, when operating in the absence of shared curricular reference frameworks, tend to generate fragmentation, unequal learning opportunities and limited student mobility between institutions. These effects are particularly visible in instrumental music education, where curricular decisions are often informal, tacit and weakly regulated. The research further contributes to curriculum theory by articulating the concept of a “curricular contract” as a heuristic and analytical tool. This concept reframes curriculum as a negotiated agreement between policy, institutions and practitioners, combining common reference points—such as learning outcomes, artistic practices and assessment principles—with contextual flexibility and pedagogical freedom. Rather than advocating standardisation, the curricular contract is proposed as a means of ensuring coherence, transparency and equity while respecting the artistic specificity of instrumental education. From a broader perspective, the study reinforces post-critical understandings of curriculum as a lived and contested process, shaped by teacher–performer identities, student subjectivities and institutional cultures. By situating Classical Guitar education within European debates on governance, equity and the public role of the arts, the research contributes to ongoing discussions on how curricula in arts education can balance tradition, innovation and social responsibility. These theoretical conclusions aim to inform future curriculum development, policy design and comparative research in music and arts education across European contexts.

Apple, M. W. (1979). Ideology and Curriculum. Routledge. Apple, M. W. (1990). Ideology and Curriculum (2nd ed.). Routledge. Aoki, T. (2005). Curriculum in a New Key. Lawrence Erlbaum. Giroux, H. A. (1997). Pedagogy and the Politics of Hope. Westview Press. Pinar, W. F. (2004). What Is Curriculum Theory? Lawrence Erlbaum. Slattery, P. (2006). Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era. Routledge. Torres, C. A. (2015). Education and Neoliberal Globalization. Routledge. Young, M., & Muller, J. (2016). Curriculum and the Specialization of Knowledge. Routledge.