Museums and schools have a long history of working together to facilitate students' learning in and through the arts. While art museums have traditionally served school audiences through arange of single-visit tours, increasingly they offer more extensive school programs in an effort toprovide students with in-depth, comprehensive learning experiences. Studies suggest that a smany as half of American museums offer some form of a multiple-visit school program in which students might visit the museum from two to ten times a year. Museums also offer extended experiences such as pre- and post-visit activities in the classroom

Recent research suggests that many multiple-visit programs focus on creative and critical thinking skills, skills that are considered increasingly important in the general education of young people. Yet, until now, the museum education field has neither articulated exactly what is meant by critical thinking skills, nor how the museum provides a unique environment for learning such skills.

In 2003, the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum (ISGM), in partnership with the Institute for Learning Innovation (ILI), received a 3-year grant from the Department of Education to research students' learning in and from an art museum multiple-visit program. The ISGM's School Partnership Program (SPP) provided the context for this study and focused on three overarching goals described in the report in more detail. Launched in 1996, the SPP is a multiple-visit program serving K-8 students from neighboring inner-city public schools. Over the three years of the study, the pedagogy for the SPP shifted from a Socratic-method to more open-ended questions, using the Visual Thinking Strategies (VTS) questioning model which focuses on learning to look at and make meaning from works of art, as well as gaining familiarity with the museum environment in order to feel comfortable using the Gardner as a community resource.

In the summer of 2010, the Chicago Community Trust (CCT) commissioned Hubbard Street Dance Chicago (HSDC) to undertake a project to better understand dance education programs offered to Chicago Public School (CPS) students by outside organizations, as well as how they are using the newly released CPS Guide for Teaching and Learning in the Arts. Along with HSDC, three other organizations were commissioned to complete similar projects for the arts disciplines of visual arts, music and theater (The Art Institute of Chicago, Ravinia Festival and The League of Chicago Theaters).

The overarching goal for the initiative was to identify how arts organizations can more effectively serve CPS students through arts education programming. Specifically, this included a better understanding of the current capacity of dance education organizations as well as factors that could improve the quantity and effectiveness of dance education programming for CPS students.

Leaders in the nonprofit arts world, many of them founders and builders of their organizations for decades, will be retiring in unprecedented numbers in the coming years. Organizations could become weaker and destabilized during this transition, a prospect that should be addressed with some urgency. Younger professionals should be able to take on these leadership roles and chart a new course in stressful and changing times. Yet an operational divide between the workplace needs and values of Next Geners and those currently in charge threatens this transition.

It does not help that the nonprofit arts field suffers from a paucity of training and professional degree-granting programs, low pay, long work hours, and inadequate career advancement opportunities. The generation that sparked a powerful nonprofit arts movement more than thirty years ago now wonders about their successors: Are they motivated? Prepared? How can we recruit, train, nurture, and retain them?

This study was commissioned by the Center for Cultural Innovation (CCI) as part of a large-scale Next Generation Arts Leadership Initiative funded by The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and The James Irvine Foundation that aspires to strengthen and retain a new generation of administrative talent in California's nonprofit arts field. It addresses nonprofit arts leaders' desire to know more about their younger colleagues and their experiences as professionals, board members, and volunteers.

To explore the experience of Next Geners, the author developed a survey conducted in the summer of 2010. In this report, Next Gen arts leaders are defined as individuals between the ages of 18 and 35 years who are currently working with a California nonprofit arts organization as administrators, artists or board members and who have worked in the field for less than ten consecutive years. More than 1,300 California Next Geners took the survey and with modest exceptions (under-representation of Latinos, African and Asian-Americans, and men, non-metropolitan regions, and certain art forms), their workplaces are generally representative of the size of and variation within the nonprofit arts sector in the state. For example, some 23% of our Next Gen respondents work for organizations with budgets under $100,000, while 22% work in organizations with budgets over $2 million.

For the purpose of this discussion, we posit that there are essentially four overarching reasons we educate. They are: preparing students for democratic participation, providing access to knowledge and critical thinking, enabling all students to take advantage of life's opportunities, and enabling students to lead rich and rewarding personal lives. None of these can be achieved fully without attention to the role of imagination. While we acknowledge that not all would agree with our definition of purposes, our comprehensive vision, we believe, can serve our children and our society well.

While the previous two parts of PAIR report focused entirely on the impact of PAIR on teacher professional development and on student standardized academic test results, Part 3 of the report is organized into seven sections that present the analysis of multiple student arts integration learning assessment results and the intersection among teacher-student outcome variables by the final year of the project. The results are reported in seven different sections, each featuring its own table of contents, list of figures and tables, and an appendix:

A. Snapshots of Arts Integration (SAIL) Interview Response Ratings analyzed for control treatment and within-treatment school differences in students' understanding of arts integration processes and connections;

B. PAIR Student Survey Responses analyzed for control-treatment school differences in the perception of arts integration practices in their classrooms and control-treatment schooldifferences in the presence of classroom culture practices most highly associated with PAIR professional development goals and outcomes;

C. PAIR Partnership Arts Integration Learning (PAIL) Student Work Samples analyzed for qualitative differences among within PAIR treatment school classroom practices and in relation to the documentation and assessment goals for the PAIR project;

D. PAIR Portfolio Conference Performance Assessments of teacher verbal reflections and student individual and group performance assessments analyzed for qualitative differences in PAIR treatment school PAIR student work and portfolio conference performance assessments.

E. PAIR Portfolio Conference Performance Assessments of student individual and group performance assessment data analyzed statistically for their relationship to SAIL assessments, PAIL classroom ratings, and teacher portfolio conference performance data.

F. PAIR Treatment School Teacher-Student Outcome Intersections analyzed for statistically significant degrees of association between teacher professional development variables analyzed and student learning outcome data.

This report is the second part of a three-part comprehensive report filed by both Dr. Burnaford and Dr. Scripp, as Co-Principal Investigators of the PAIR project.

The first report, written by Dr. Gail Burnaford [2010], focused primarily on three years of collecting evidence of progress meeting PAIR teacher professional development goals, the evolution of teacher professional development outcomes in comparison with control group teachers, and speculation on theg eneral impact of high quality PAIRteacher practices on student learning.

The second and third parts of this report, written by Dr. Lawrence Scripp and his research team from the Center for Music-in-Education and CAPE (2011-2012], focus on the impact of PAIR on student learning. This second report (2011) reports primarily on differences among control-treatment statistical comparisons of PAIR student academic test outcomes. The following third report (2012) features an extensive review of qualitative and quantitative aspects all PAIR student arts integration outcome data. In addition, it provides a comprehensive analysis of the possible statistical links between seven teacher professional development factors and four student learning outcomes.

In this paper reports on a research project in arts integration education, conducted in the Chicago Public Schools in partnership with Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education (CAPE), a research-based organization focused on optimizing the impact of artists and arts learning in schools for the benefit of whole-school improvement in arts learning, teacher professional development, and school culture.

Beyond the intrinsic value of music to cultures worldwide, education in music has benefits for young people that transcend the musical domain. The Arts Education Partnership (AEP) reviewed an extensive body of research to identify high quality, evidence-based studies that document student learning outcomes associated with an education in and through music. The results show conclusively that music education equips students with the foundational abilities to learn, to achieve in other core academic subjects, and to develop the capacities, skills and knowledge essential for lifelong success.

Benefits of Music Education

A. Music education prepares students to learn

1. Enhances fine motor skills

2. Prepares the brain for achievement

3. Fosters superior working memory

4. Cultivates better thinking skills

B. Music education facilitates student academic achievement

1. Improves recall and retention of verbal information

2. Advances math achievement

3. Boosts reading and English language arts (ELA) skills

4. Improves average SAT scores

C. Music education develops the creative capacities for lifelong success

1. Sharpens student attentiveness

2. Strengthens perseverance

3. Equips students to be creative

4. Supports better study habits and self-esteem

Forty years ago, there was widespread belief that teachers and schools had little influence on students' achievement independent of their socioeconomic background and context. More recent studies of teacher effects at the classroom level, however, such as those using the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System, have found that differential teacher effectiveness is a strong determinant of differences in student learning, far outweighing the effects of differences in class size and heterogeneity.

Students who are assigned to several ineffective teachers in a row have significantly lower achievement and gains in achievement than those who are assigned to several highly effective teachers in sequence. Teacher effects appear to be additive and cumulative, and generally not compensatory. These issues have been the topic of much other research over the last 50 years . More and more research is conducted with teacher practice and professional development as part of the context for investigating student outcomes. That is what the PAIR project has done during this research initiative.

The Partnerships in Arts Integration Research (PAIR) project was a three-year initiative focused on the intersections between arts and non-arts content learning in two mathematics and science, two world languages and two writing Magnet Cluster Schools in Chicago. This section of the final report will focus on the impact of the project on the teachers, with particular attention to the third year of the project in which documentation was more intentional and systematic in each school. The 6 PAIR schools were matched with 6 control schools also in the Arts Magnet Cluster Schools program in Chicago Public Schools. A Year-End Curriculum and Teaching Survey was administered to 4th, 5thand 6th grade teachers in all twelve schools during Year Three of the project. Other data were also collected from the teachers in the 6 PAIR schools, including professional development session surveys and attendance figures, portfolio conference transcribed comments, student work and teacher practice labels and documentation from work completed at professional development sessions (documentation panels and curriculum maps).