Music Education: State Schools

Baroness Keeley Excerpts

Tuesday 24th June 2025 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Baroness Keeley]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to improve the quality and quantity of music education in state schools.

[Baroness Keeley (Lab)]

My Lords, I am co-chair of the Classical Music APPG, which I have chaired for more than 10 years. I have worked with the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley of Knighton, who has been my co-chair, as well as the noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, the noble Baroness, Lady Fleet, and other noble Lords.

During the last six years, there has been a strong message coming to us of a growing crisis in music education in state schools. I will start with a review of the issues in that crisis, inherited by this Government last July. However, first, I welcome the fact that my noble friend Lady Debbonaire will make her maiden speech in this debate. It was a pleasure to work with her in the shadow team in 2023 and 2024 when she was shadow Culture Secretary and I was shadow Minister for Music. It was also a pleasure to hear her play the cello in the string quartet, the Statutory Instruments.

At the heart of the crisis in music education in our state schools are issues affecting quantity and quality. The ones I want to highlight are the shortage of specialist music teachers and the problems of teacher confidence and expertise, lack of curriculum time for music, and declining uptake and inequalities in access to music at both GCSE and A-level. These issues have been explored in debates, and in reports to Parliament and to all-party parliamentary groups.

In the 2019 report Music Education: State of the Nation by the Independent Society of Musicians, we heard that the policy of the former Government around accountability measures, such as the English baccalaureate, has had significant negative impacts on music education in schools in England. We also heard that curriculum time for music, which is statutory for key stages 1-3, had reduced, along with opportunities for children to pursue music to GCSE and A-Level.

The report posed serious questions to be addressed regarding the music education workforce becoming demoralised because of the increasing marginalisation of music in our schools. It called on the Government to review and reform the EBacc and Progress 8 accountability measures or, at the very least, to add a sixth pillar to the EBacc for creative subjects, including music. The 2019 report of the Commons CMS Select Committee on the social impact of participation in culture and sport also recommended that the Government add arts subjects to the EBacc. More recently, in your Lordships’ House, the 2024 report of the Education for 11-16 Year Olds Committee recommended that the Government should:

“Abandon the EBacc school performance measures and review the other measures in the 11–16 phase”.


A 2022 survey of music teachers by the Independent Society of Musicians found significant variability in music provision, particularly in primary schools. It also found that the key stage 3 music curriculum had been progressively narrowed, mostly in academies, by placing music on a carousel or rota system, where it was offered for only part of the year, in rotation with other subjects.

The Cultural Learning Alliance’s Report Card 2024 highlighted that access to music education opportunities now varies greatly across the country, with 42% of schools no longer entering any pupils for music GCSE, and young people’s take-up of musical instruments and ensemble playing varying greatly by socioeconomic background.

I think we can say that all of this means that far too many young people are missing out on the benefits, experiences and opportunities that music education can bring. The curriculum and assessment review could play an important role in improving the quantity of music education in our state schools, because two of the issues that need to be resolved are the pressures on schools created by the accountability measures for the EBacc and Progress 8, and the lack of curriculum time for music.

Over recent years, Dr Adam Whittaker, of the Royal Birmingham Conservatoire, and Dr Anthony Anderson, of Birmingham City University, have worked on the issue of the significant disparities in access to advanced-level music qualifications across the country. I am grateful to Dr Whittaker and Dr Anderson for making several suggestions to improve the quality and quantity of music education in state schools.

The first recommendation is to ensure a sustained and universal music curriculum throughout a young person’s life. We are nowhere near this, particularly at secondary level, in many state schools, where report after report has shown that music education and opportunities are not being sustained.

I want to mention here the excellent work done up and down the country by orchestras, opera companies, churches, cathedrals and music projects working with schools and in the community. To mention just a few, the London Philharmonic Orchestra has the Music Makers and BrightSparks programmes for schools; the Royal Ballet and Opera’s learning programme reaches 100,000 pupils per year; Opera Holland Park has just held two performances of the opera “Itch” for local schools; and the National Schools Singing Programme has worked with over 36,000 children and young people. These enrichment activities are very important, but we must make sure that music at school is present as part of the curriculum for every young person.

The next key recommendation is for government to support the availability and uptake of formal music qualifications. A-level music has been a long-standing feature of the musical training of many musicians. However, last year there were five local authorities without a single level 3 music entry, including A-levels: Barnsley, Hartlepool, Knowsley, South Tyneside, and Barking and Dagenham. By comparison, in Hertfordshire there were 378 level 3 music entries, and in Essex there were 321. These inequalities start at GCSE, with Blackpool and Middlesbrough having just 35 and 53 entries for GCSE music, compared with over 1,400 in Hertfordshire. Low levels of entry in those areas highlight that music qualifications are not available to all young people in all local authorities. This matters because a child cannot choose a subject that local schools do not offer, unless they can afford to travel out of the area to go to another school—and they should not have to do that to get a music education.

National statistics confirm that there has been a marked reduction in the amount of time teachers are spending teaching music, despite substantial growth of the pupil cohort in secondary schools. Since 2011, the total number of teaching hours for music in secondary schools has fallen by over 6%. Most concerning is the decline in hours taught in examination school years, with school hours for key stage 4 declining by 9%. The largest fall in taught hours for music was for key stage 5, with a catastrophic fall of 40% since 2011. This reduction in hours shows that qualifications such as A-level music are being restricted, or just not offered, in school key stage 5 options in some areas. It may mean that, even where such qualifications are offered, they are not given the same proportion of teaching time that they were in 2011-12, baking in potential disadvantage for those who wish to pursue a musical pathway to higher levels of achievement.

State schools need to be supported by government to offer music qualifications right through to the end of key stage 5, even when only small numbers take up those options. A small subject supplement could be transformative. For example, Dr Whittaker and Dr Anderson estimate that a national 50% subsidy on all school-based level 3 music qualifications could be delivered for less than £750,000. If a scheme were targeted to address the disparities I mentioned, it could be delivered at an even lower level of funding. Support like this from government could help protect the progression routes for pupils into advanced music education.

The next key recommendation is to address the music teacher recruitment crisis and to invest in high-quality, reflective continuing professional development—CPD—for music teachers. There is a continuing and significant shortfall in the recruitment of music teachers, with an almost 60% shortfall against DfE’s recruitment target last year. While there are over 400 fewer secondary music teachers in total than there were in 2011, there are almost 1,200 fewer teachers at key stage 5—that workforce has declined by 35%. That loss of expertise may prove very difficult to recover, as not all music teachers are able to teach immediately at key stage 5, especially during their first year after qualifying.

The Ofsted subject report on music education, published in 2023, highlighted considerable differences in how well teachers teach music. The Ofsted report found that in some secondary schools leaders assume that because their music teachers are specialists, they do not require further subject-specific training, but this can result in significant gaps in their subject knowledge not being addressed. Access to CPD is critical for music teachers but it is problematic, because music teachers are often the only teacher in the department, so difficulties covering their absence mean that they are less likely to be released for CPD.

Dr Anderson and Dr Whittaker feel that bridging the gap between trainee music teachers and early career teachers in music, by investing in that reflective CPD, is one focus that could make a real difference. On costings, they say that, for less than £5 million a year, each secondary school music teacher could be released for one day for CPD, which could improve the musical lives of 3.2 million pupils, at a cost of only £1.56 per child.

We have only a very short time for our debate. I hope I have opened up some issues which need to be addressed. I look forward to hearing from my noble friend the Minister about government action to improve music education in state schools.