In Switzerland, Curriculum 21 positions art and aesthetic education as a key element of comprehensive schooling. It is framed not only as subject-based learning (e.g. visual arts, music, languages/literature), but also as an overall responsibility across subjects that promotes perception, expression, judgement, and creativity, while supporting students’ personal development and engagement with cultural diversity. In the Swiss field of art education, influential policy and program texts circulate among key stakeholders and shape prevailing understandings of what art education should achieve in schools (Manifeste Arts & Education, 2010; Mörsch, 2014). Expectations are ambitious: beyond acquiring artistic techniques, creative expression and competent reception of art, art education is also expected to generate transfer effects and even stimulate changes in classrooms and schools, thereby supporting school improvement (Abs et al., 2017).

Against this background, the present study examines art projects within a cantonal program in Switzerland that aims to support arts education through collaboration among teaching artists / art mediators, and schools, from a school improvement perspective. Analytically, we draw on a practice-theoretical perspective (Moldenhauer & Kuhlmann, 2021) that understands school improvement as change in social practices. From this viewpoint, transformation becomes visible when new practical or embodied knowledge emerges (new routines, forms of doing, and professional know-how) and when temporal-spatial arrangements are reconfigured (e.g., new uses of time, spaces, sequences, and organizational procedures) (see Moldenhauer & Kuhlman, 2021, p. 259). At the same time, the maintenance of these newly established routines and arrangements relies on ongoing efforts and persistence. We also attend to materialities (artefacts, spaces, infrastructures) that support or constrain the continuation of changed practices. We speak in this context about arts-based school improvement and focus on improvement processes aimed at strengthening the aesthetic dimension of everyday schooling and establishing a school profile, fostering art and creative and cultural processes in school life (Fuchs & Bösel-Fuchs, 2017).

We build on previous research indicating positive effects of art projects on schools (Buck-Pavlick, 2025) and on the students’ learning and development (Bowen & Kisida, 2023). While acknowledging ongoing debates about the purposes of cultural education (Shaw & Bernhard, 2024), we place an analytical emphasis on the qualification function of art education. From this perspective, art and aesthetic education offer a distinctive learning field in which questioning, experimentation and creative problem-solving can be cultivated, even if effects are difficult to measure empirically (Bilstein & Zirfas, 2017).

Within a partly retrospective mixed-methods design, the study addresses the following questions: (1) How do art mediators/ teaching artists translate specific art education conceptions – required in the application procedures - in project descriptions? (2) What experiences do external and internal school actors report in relation to the projects? (3) Which school-level changes are initiated in connection with the art projects? By combining document analysis, interviews and case studies, we aim to contribute empirically grounded insights into the conditions under which externally funded art initiatives move beyond isolated project effects and become embedded in school practices.

This study employs a partly retrospective mixed-methods design combining document analysis, expert interviews, and multi-site case studies. The analytical orientation is informed by a practice-theoretical perspective on school improvement, focusing on traces of changed practices (e.g., routines, forms of doing, temporal-spatial arrangements, and material conditions) in connection with externally funded art projects. Document analysis: First, we conducted a systematic document analysis to map and compare the range of projects descriptions as they were submitted for funding applications. A coding framework was developed inductively and iteratively to enable cross-project comparison. During the analysis, we observed that funding applications and project proposals often contain implicit assumptions about collaboration and implementation; therefore, the document analysis was extended to also address the first research question on guiding conceptions of art education embedded in funding rationales. Core categories included: project timeframe (duration), range within the school and target group(s), connections to the curriculum and learning, art form(s), roles of actors (school-internal and external), and modes of student participation. Interviews with key actors: Second, semi-structured interviews were conducted with purposefully selected key actors representing different stakeholder groups (e.g. funding bodies, cultural intermediaries, and school actors). The aim was to capture diverse perspectives and to generate in-depth information on backgrounds, assessments, perceived tensions, and developmental processes across projects. Interviews addressed: project-specific implementation, process dynamics, meanings attributed to art education, as well as questions of sustainability and further development. Interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis following Kuckartz (2014). Case studies: Third, five case studies were carried out to examine art projects within their specific school contexts and to identify context-sensitive enabling conditions and constraints. Each case study integrated multiple data sources: project documents (application and process documentation), interviews with school leadership, teachers, and art mediators, as well as group discussions with students and teachers focusing on experiences and learning processes related to the art project. Fieldwork procedures were adapted to local school conditions. The analysis followed a triangulation strategy, integrating findings across data sources to capture both schools’ orientations towards art education and the ways art projects were enacted in practice.

The study shows that art projects facilitated by teaching artists/ art mediators in Swiss compulsory schools can generate substantial pedagogical and relational benefits, yet they rarely translate into school-wide improvement. In the analyzed project proposals, art mediators and teaching artists typically justify their initiatives by pointing to perceived gaps between established school and classroom practices and artistic–creative approaches. This implicit devaluation of existing school practices can hinder collaboration and mutual recognition. Most projects are designed as multi-week or multi-month processes rather than one-off encounters. From a practice-theoretical perspective, such temporal extension supports school improvement, as the emergence and stabilization of new practices depend on continuity. However, the reach of art projects within schools remains limited: in most cases, only one or two classes participate. This restricted scope constrains dissemination, as new practices are more likely to persist when multiple actors within a school are involved. Interviews and case studies reveal a recurring tension between the desired openness of artistic processes, emphasized by art mediators, and the planning and accountability demands of schooling, which are particularly relevant for teachers. The dilemma of “open process versus final product” proves productive when both elements are balanced. Problems arise when end products are overemphasized, leading to corrective interventions by art professionals, or when they are devalued, resulting in low visibility and reduced recognition. Teachers report adopting practices from artists: collaboration broadens their methodological repertoire and can shift professional attitudes, including new ways of seeing students and classroom interactions. Students describe high motivation, a sense of agency and belonging, and durable memories of the projects even after a year. From a school improvement perspective, structural and organizational conditions—strong teacher autonomy, limited teamwork, and weak involvement of school leadership—remain key barriers to sustainable school-wide change. Beyond Switzerland, findings inform European debates on art-based school improvement addressing societal challenges through creativity and critical thinking.

Abs, H., Stecher, Ludwig, Knoll, Katrin, Obsiadly, Magdalena, & Ellerichmann, Marie. (2017). Entwicklung Kultureller Bildung in Schule durch das Modellprogramm «Kulturagenten für kreative Schulen» 2013-2015. Gesellschaft zur Förderung Pädagogischer Forschung; Deutsches Institut für Internationale Pädagogische Forschung. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:14637 Bowen, D. H., & Kisida, B. (2023). Investigating Arts Education Effects on School Engagement and Climate. Educational Policy, 38(5), 1077-1107. https://doi.org/10.1177/08959048231174880 Bilstein, J., & Zirfas, J. (2017). Muss das sein?: Zur Anthropologie der Kulturellen Bildung. In G. Weiß (Hrsg.), Pädagogik (1. Aufl., S. 29–50). transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839437315-002 Buck-Pavlick, H. (2025). Dance for ALL: innovative approaches to school improvement. Arts Education Policy Review, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2025.2476959 Fuchs, M., & Bösel-Fuchs, A. (2017). Kulturelle Schulentwicklung. Eine Einführung. Beltz. Kuckartz, U. (2014). Mixed Methods. Methodologie, Forschungsdesign und Analyseverfahren. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93267-5 Manifeste Arts & Education. Pour un saut quantitatif et qualitatif de l’éducation culturelle et artistique dans le système éducatif suisse. (2010). Commission suisse pour l’UNESCO. https://www.google.ch/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjyrpCUwJ2KAxXSzAIHHTYNB0QQFnoECBcQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fedudoc.ch%2Frecord%2F38962%2Ffiles%2FManifeste-Arts-Education.pdf%3Fln%3Dde&usg=AOvVaw04KGczEPNQgfmVSAu7TKyz&opi=89978449 Moldenhauer, A., & Kuhlmann, N. (2021). Praktikentheoretische Perspektiven auf Transformationen von Schule. In A. Moldenhauer, B. Asbrand, M. Hummrich, & T.-S. Idel (Hrsg.), Schulentwicklung als Theorieprojekt: Forschungsperspektiven auf Veränderungsprozesse von Schule (S. 245–266). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-30774-5_12 Mörsch, V. C. (2014). Arbeitsprinzipien im Programm «Kultur macht Schule». https://www.ag.ch/media/kanton-aargau/bks/kultur/kultur-macht-schule/veroeffentlichungen/bksak-kms-arbeitsprinzipien.pdf Shaw, R. D., & Bernard, C. F. (2024). “Turning the prism”: school improvement and the arts. Arts Education Policy Review, 125(4), 276–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2023.2212183