Michael Young’s vision? Harold Wilson’s pet?

Tuesday, December 7th, 2010

On his blog Labour Party activist Paul Richards argues that modern Britain has been shaped by the movements and institutions that Michael Young (1915-2002) inspired. Young, he suggests 

added to the sum of civil society by launching new entrants to it. By empowering individuals through new forms of organization, he hoped to build new forms of egalitarian community… Young’s ideas were often the spark, but his gift was to be able to cut loose his creations as fast as possible, and allow new people to take over. He launched ships; he didn’t captain them.

While  a recognition of Young’s enthusiasm to broaden educational opportunities is welcome, there may be some who will take issue with Paul Richards proposal that The Open University is one of a number of institutions which ‘owe everything to Young’s vision’. (more…)

Voice of America

Tuesday, December 7th, 2010
William Burnett Benton (1900-1973) was a US Assistant Secretary of State from 1945 to 1947 and a United States senator from 1949 to 1953. He also promoted teaching through radio. For example he was very supportive of the educational radio programme ‘The University of Chicago Round Table’ (see See  Cynthia B. Meyers, ‘From Radio Adman to Radio Reformer: Senator William Benton’s Career in Broadcasting, 1930–1960’, Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 16, 1, 2009, pp. 17 – 29).  The reason he features here is that he was an enthusiast for the Open University and very close to Harold Wilson. (more…)

Early research on the student population

Tuesday, June 15th, 2010

Has the OU got a history?

Monday, May 17th, 2010

For David Sewart, at first the OU was:

like Athena springing fully grown and fully armed from the head of Zeus [it] appeared to have no mother and never to have had the opportunity to have been an adolescent, let alone a child … I began to realise that the UK OU was part of a world wide phenomenon – and a late entrant at that, to the world of distance education.

Review, Open Learning, June 1995, pp. 62-63, (p. 62). 

 


Reciprocity lay at the heart of Young’s understanding of socialism.

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

The tap-root of socialism was in working-class communities like the one in Bethnal Green… In the turnings of Bethnal Green the poor were helping the poor, looking after children of broken marriages and caring for the old, coming to the rescue of neighbours who fell on hard times having a whip round in the pubs, of which almost every street could boast one, in order to collect money for his widow whenever a man died.

Michael Young, ‘Education for the new work’ in Nigel Paine (ed.), Open Learning in transition. An agenda for action, National Extension College, Cambridge, 1988, p. 5.

Happy 41st birthday

Thursday, April 29th, 2010

On 23 April 1969 the Royal Charter of The Open University was granted and the institution officially became a university. Indeed, this time a year ago the University was marking its official 40th birthday with futher celebrations throughout 2009. For more details see here.

The Charter stated that ‘the objects of the University shall be the advancement and dissemination of learning and knowledge by teaching and research by a diversity of means such as broadcasting and technological devices appropriate to higher education, by correspondence, tuition, residential courses and seminars and in other relevant ways’.

Uniquely, the University was also ‘to promote the educational well-being of the community generally.’

It was this obligation to the wider community that led to the development in the 1970s of the ‘Continuing Education’ programme with courses such as P911 ‘The first years of life’ and P912 ‘the pre-school child’.

It is this same obligation within the charter that informs continued University collaboration with the BBC on current popular programmes such as Bang Goes the Theory, Child of our time and Coast. For more information see here.

The history of The Open University: foundations

Tuesday, April 6th, 2010
This blog is, in part, an appeal for help. It is motivated by the research which seems to indicate that blogs can promote a sense of community and reciprocity, that if we are encouraged to reflect and share our ideas and skills then the research outcomes will be all the better. I’d like to work with those who have got memories or ideas which will improve our understanding of the development of the OU. One of the difficulties about starting any history is where to begin. While the roots of any organisation, or shift in consciousness often evolved over generations, there is often a catalyst which accounts for the formal foundation. In the case of the OU the three people who are credited with playing significant parts in the creation of the OU, Jennie Lee, Michael Young and Harold Wilson might be taken as exemplifying longer-term trends and understandings. Michael Young’s passion for using television for education and for social justice aided the foundation while from Harold Wilson there derived the enthusiasm for a technological future, for a society with modern science at its core. Jennie Lee’s input was more focused on the traditions of the Labour Party’s interest in providing equal opportunities for adults to better themselves. While Michael Young had worked for the Labour Party, it was the latter two politicians who helped to structure an idea of a ‘university of the air’ into the reality of the OU.
Does this account uncritcally reflect the ideas expressed by Walter Perry in 1976 ? He wrote:
The concept of the Open University evolved from the convergence of three major postwar trends. The first of these concerns developments in the provision for adult education, the second the growth of educational broadcasting and the third the political obhjective of promoting the spread of egalitarianism in education
This blog is one of the places where new ideas about the origins of the OU can be aired.  If the OU was an outcome of concern about adult education why was it a university rather than a more vocational college? If educational broadcasting was of such significance why have most of the teaching materials in print form and if it was a response an interest in ‘egalitarianism in education’ how come many of its users had already been socially upwardly mobile longf before they registered as students? If this framework looks unreasonable, if you have an understanding of the foundation which is at variance with the above focus, do let us know.