Staff – Page 6 – Celebrating "Open" curriculum at The Open University

Open as in choice

We are delighted that Professor Martin Weller has been appointed as the new Chair of the Open Board of Studies in our 50th anniversary year!

Martin is Professor of Educational Technology with an interest in the application of new technology to academic practice, open education and digital scholarship. This post was originally published on Martin’s personal blog here.

(Image made with Bryan Mathers’ Elemental Remixer Machine)

I’ve recently taken on a new role at the Open University, as the Chair of the Open Board of Studies. This means I’ve got responsibility for our Open Degree. When the OU was founded you could only get a BA(Open) – there were no named degrees. This was an explicit attempt by the OU’s founders to make an OU degree different not just in mode of study but in substance. Students constructed their own degree profiles, meaning our modules were truly modular, you could pick and mix as you saw fit. My colleagues Helen Cooke, Andy Lane and Peter Taylor give an excellent overview of the history, philosophy and approach of the open degree in this paper.

The OU’s first Vice-Chancellor put it like this:

a student is the best judge of what [s]he wishes to learn and that [s]he should be given the maximum freedom of choice consistent with a coherent overall pattern. They hold that this is doubly true when one is dealing with adults who, after years of experience of life, ought to be in a better position to judge what precise studies they wish to undertake Sure, most universities offer options and electives, but a truly flexible, open choice is very rare. Specialism is of course, a desirable mode of study in many areas. But the reasoning behind the original open choice was that the changes in society and work places in the 70s meant that a wide ranging degree was suitable for many vocations. If that was true at the founding of the OU, then it is doubly so now. While we should be sceptical of the “preparing students for jobs that don’t exist yet” claims, it’s fair to say that flexibility and breadth of understanding will be useful attributes in an evolving, digital economy. Let’s take my own area (field/discipline/rag tag bundle of vaguely connected ideas) of educational technology. You can create a degree programme that covers much of what you want, but actually it’s a varied domain, and half of the work involves having an understanding or appreciation of the demands of different subject areas. So a degree that has rich, and unpredictable, variety in it might well be exactly what you want for an educational technologist. And that is increasingly true for roles that evolve around tech, but are not necessarily TECH.

It is often claimed that in order to solve the complex, ‘wicked’ problems that the world faces, such as sustainability, climate change, social inclusion, then interdisciplinary thinking is required. But our degree profiles continue to prioritise narrow specialisms instead of encouraging students to develop knowledge and skills across a range of topics. This gives them empathy with other viewpoints and a broader toolkit of conceptual models.

Perhaps more significantly than the employment argument though is that constructing your own degree profile and taking responsibility for your pathway gives agency to learners. George Veletsianos asks “in education, what can be made more flexible?”, to which I would respond the whole degree structure.

Coming to this from a broader open education perspective, I see the work of OER, open textbooks, open access and MOOCs as laying the necessary groundwork for a wave of more interesting exploration around what open approaches offer. Open pedagogy and Open educational practice are examples of this. I would argue that although it is already 50 years old, the truly open choice of the OU is another one and it’s time has come round again.

“Sailing the choppy seas” into the Fourth Industrial Revolution

Rehana Awan is Student Communications and Engagement Manager in Curriculum Innovation, working primarily on designing and enhancing the student experience for Open Programme students and Associate Lecturer on the People, Work and Society Access module. Rehana is a Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (SFHEA) and Fellow of the Staff and Educational Development Association (FSEDA). This blog post originally appeared on Rehana’s personal blog available here.

I have been talking about and referring to the 4th Industrial Revolution (4IR) or Industry 4.0 recently in meetings and presentations. I’ve been hearing the term a lot. I know it’s ‘a revolution that is changing the way we live, work and relate to each other’ (Schwab, 2016); but what does it really mean? Here is a bit of research as a starter-for-10; it’s related to my own environment of interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary (ID/MD) studies, as I believe this to be one the ships we should be boarding to sail the choppy seas into the 4IR.

This piece is not especially academic, it’s not particularly detailed, it may even be naïve and simplistic, but it’s enough as an introduction.

To start, a couple of definitions. The 4IR is an:

‘..intelligent, interconnected ecosystem’ (Wong, 2019)

and it is about:

New technologies bringing together the physical, digital and biological, cross-disciplines, economies and industries (Schwab, 2016)

The major technologies driving this revolution are:

artificial intelligence (AI)
precision medicine
robotics
mobile, cloud computing,
analytics,
automation,
the Internet of Things (IoT),
3D printing,
autonomous robots, and augmented- and virtual reality (AR/VR)

According to the experts, the 4IR has the potential to:

reverse damage, particularly to the environment, from previous industrial revolutions through the way resources are managed
challenge what it means to be human
connect the world through digital networks
improve efficiency

But there are raises concerns and issues with the 4IR, like how it will:

create greater inequality
shift power
make governments, economies, countries unstable
break-up societies
mean some organisations might not be able to keep up or change
mean some governments might not be able to harness the developments or regulate them (e.g. issues of cyberspace security).

This significant technological change promised by Industry 4.0 ‘means that our systems of health, transportation, communication, production, distribution, and energy…will be completely transformed’ (Wong, 2019). My children’s school is telling them it’s not known what the jobs of the future will look like and according to a study carried out in the U.S by the Mckinsey Global Institute, they are right! Their study states that between 8-9% of jobs by 2030 will be in new occupations that won’t have existed before. (Manyika, 2017).

Even though they may not have existed before, there is a bit of an idea of what they might look like. The World Economics Forum (WEF), suggest that new occupations may exist in the fields of AI and robotics and in non-tech fields like sales and training (WEF, 2018). The McKinsey study supports this view and goes further to say that careers which care for the elderly (to manage an aging population), are in green technology and consumer goods and services may see growth and off-set job losses caused by the shift to automation (Manyika, 2017).

To chart these waters, manage this change and this new context of multinational and national cooperation, it’s argued we’ll need new frameworks and new models of education (Wong, 2019). Whilst upskilling and reskilling of workers will be needed, which employers will need to take responsibility for, individuals will also need to take ownership of their lifelong learning (the government will also need to support and empower individuals). One of these educational frameworks, the model of ID/MD studies, isn’t that new but might be a possible solution that can be developed further. ID/MD studies already addresses the drawing together of learning across boundaries to solve complex real-world problems. A raised awareness of the benefits and values of ID/MD studies, the ability to articulate these to employers and University qualifications supporting this might enable us to ‘collaborate across geographies, sectors and disciplines to grasp the opportunities it [4IR] presents’ (Schwab, 2016).

We’re starting to see this in some parts of the Higher Education sector, for example the London Interdisciplinary School is offering transdisciplinary courses across the arts and sciences which are partnered with paid work-placements. This isn’t new of course, The Open University (OU) has been doing this since its inception in 1969. It offers students the opportunity to select modules that are of interest to their needs, motivations and career aspirations, with many students already in employment. The OU’s largest degree programme is the Open Programme which enables students to ‘pick n’ mix’ their modules to create a personalised and individualised pathway. Society, governments and employers need to wake up to the possibilities this type of studies has for our future.

The 4IR means we are moving to a new era; whether we can capitalise on this and succeed depends on whether we (individuals, organisations, government, education and so on) can adapt in time…

Reference list

Manyika., J. (2017), Technology, jobs and the future of work, Executive briefing, Mckinsey Global Institute, https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/employment-and-growth/technology-jobs-and-the-future-of-work

Shwab., K., (2018), Globalisation 4.0 What does it mean? https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/globalization-4-what-does-it-mean-how-it-will-benefit-everyone/

Wong., C. (2019), Industry 4.0 could create millions of new jobs, Futir ithmic, https://www.futurithmic.com/2019/02/13/industry-4-0-could-create-millions-new-jobs/?utm_source=ppc&utm_medium=googleads&utm_campaign=ind4jobs&utm_content=0001&gclid=CjwKCAjwue3nBRACEiwAkpZhmU3Qq13EErfYyg86-Ei7lbrbEta7cQHfRBQVmli7pdVamL6jrf-puBoCwlgQAvD_BwE

World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/about/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-by-klaus-schwab

World Economic Forum, The Future of Jobs Report, 2018 http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Future_of_Jobs_2018.pdf

Revisiting the “Kettle Plan”

Professor Peter Taylor is the current Chair of the Open Board of Studies and Qualification Director for the BA/BSc (Hons) Open degree.

In July 1974, not long after my 21st birthday, the OU Senate agreed the “Kettle Plan” [1]. This was not a proposal to ensure that OU staff were never more than 20 metres from a means of boiling water but the equivalent of the OU’s current Curriculum Plan. Professor Arnold Kettle chaired the working group that put the proposals together and it provides a lens on the vision for the university in those early years.

Effectively, the Kettle Plan said that, based on the future size and resources of the OU, the number of ‘full credit equivalents’ (modules) produced by the university would be 87. However, you have to remember that the units are different here. A ‘full credit equivalent’ then was what we call a 60 credit module now. The fact that in 2017/18 there were 335 undergraduate modules and 119 postgraduate modules (a mix of half and full credit equivalents in old money) suggests we have long ago busted the plan set out in Professor Kettle’s report.

However, the important point is that the Kettle Plan promoted three types of course “that must have equal priority”:

a) Foundation courses
b) The more specialist or ‘intrinsic’ courses
c) The more general, broadly-based course… “that don’t necessarily fit conveniently within any one discipline or even Faculty”, known as ‘U’ courses.

In fact, it was proposed that about 22 full credit equivalents (say 11 60-credit modules and 22 30-credit modules in new money), about 25% of the University’s output, should be produced.

The Kettle Plan goes on to argue that:

“Between the relative educational merits of the latter two types of course there is, as in all universities, a good deal of disagreement within the OU. Some people (students and academics) are suspicious of the broader courses fearing they can turn out to be superficial. Others are equally convinced that most conventional university degree patterns are greatly over specialised and that the OU neither can nor should compete in attempting to provide the more specialist type of degree”.

At the time, some argued that “U courses are bound to lower degree standards” [2] while others argued “the specialised ‘hons’ is a brontosaurus” [3].

Article from the OU’s student magazine Sesame, December 1974

Article from the OU’s student magazine Sesame, May 1974

Now, nearly 50 years later, there is little hint of broadly-based modules that “don’t necessarily fit conveniently within any one discipline or even Faculty” in the OU’s current curriculum portfolio. Our silo mentality, our inability to work out how to finance such modules and our need to defend and promote our disciplines has practically erased them from the face of the university.

Almost exactly 50 years ago, the Report of the Planning Committee to the Secretary of State for Education and Science stated:

“The degree of the Open University should, we consider, be a “general degree” in the sense that it would embrace studies over a range of subjects rather than be confined to a single narrow speciality.” [4]

Part of the driver for this was employability:

“Furthermore we are aware of the great need and demand in the country….for an extension of facilities for such general degrees… We have become accustomed to the idea that the career of an individual spans only one major technological phase: it is certain in the future that it will span two or even more such phases… The university will have an important role arising from the changes in, and increasing rate of change within modern technological society.” [4]

These employability messages don’t seem to have changed over 50 years and the Institute of Student Employers (2018) suggests that only 26% of employers focus on recruiting students from particular disciplinary backgrounds [5], yet over the years as a university we have still drifted down the path of specialisation.

Maybe we can’t buck market forces and so we have followed the crowd; but in doing so, we have lost a lot of our uniqueness and lost the vision of our Founding Fathers.

1) Undergraduate Course Provision, Council paper, The Open University, July 1974 (C/XLVII/15, see also Senate paper S/37/9)

1) Sesame, August 1974, p5

2) Sesame, December 1974, p5

3) Sesame, January/February 1975, p13

4) Report of the Planning Committee to the Secretary of State for Education and Science, 1969, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London

5) Institute of Student Employers (2018), ISE Annual Student Recruitment Survey 2018: Trends, benchmarks and insights, ISE, London [Accessed 8 April 2019]

A multidisciplinary adventure to the OU Archive!

Jay Rixon is a Senior Manager in Curriculum Innovation and responsible for the new MA or MSc Open qualification.

On a rather cold and wet day in December last year myself and a few Open Programme colleagues visited The Open University Archive. This was no dusty Library visit, or a trip to the damp basement but a fascinating exploration of books, papers, student magazines, prospectuses and equipment that used to be sent out to students, such as the McArthur microscope.

In the OU’s 50th Anniversary year, it was wonderful to be reminded of the amazing history of the OU, its founders, dedicated staff and amazing students. Not only did I enjoyed pouring over a couple of books and reading about how the University was created, but I was also reminded of the role and mission of the university to be ’Open to all’. I especially valued the words that were in the Inaugural Address by the Chancellor, Lord Crowther (which was delivered on the 23rd July 1969):

‘We are open, first, to people. Not for us the carefully regulated escalation from one educational level to the next by which the traditional universities establish their criteria for admission… ‘The first, and most, urgent task before us is to cater for the many thousands of people, fully capable of a higher education, who for one reason or another, do not get it, or do not get as much of it as they can turn to an advantage.’

I have worked for many years in the education sector, and often in environments that support students who have had to overcome previous poor experiences of education and those who have missed out on chances to pursue education due to personal challenges or unfair situations. So to be a part of an organisation, whose mission to be ‘open to all’ and inclusive is firmly rooted in its DNA, is extremely meaningful to me.
In the course of our visit to the OU Archive, I also learnt a new word – axiomatic – which means ‘self-evident or unquestionable’. The OU Planning Committee (at the same ceremony on the 23rd July 1969 referenced above) stated that:

‘We took it as axiomatic- that no formal academic qualification would be required for registration as a student.’

Again, the OU was unquestionably stating their commitment to provide education that was open to all. And for me, I might say, education that can be made bespoke, and personalised to the student. This is particularly relevant in the case of the BA/BSc (Hons) Open degree, the very first (and only) degree offered by The Open University in 1969.

I work on the newest qualification to be added to the Open Programme’s portfolio, the MA/MSc Open. This is a new masters qualification which allows postgraduate students to create a personalised course of study across a range of academic disciplines. Not only is the qualification unique in the sector, it adopts a innovative approach to teaching and learning which surely reflects the imagination and bold ideas of the founders of the university. This just goes to show that, 50 years later, aspects of that pioneering creativity remain.

Peter Taylor and Jay Rixon delving into the OU Archive…

The Archive team in the OU Library were so welcoming, showing us the original Charter’ Seal, amazing photos of early graduating ceremonies, and even some of the Shakespeare records in their collection that were used in the early days of OU teaching. There was also a very impressive OU mug collection (!) and I was intrigued by footage of TV programs recorded to be broadcast late at night to students studying after work, or to be recorded for playback later.

This visit to the OU Archive reminded me of the history of the OU and the passion, dedication of its founders, staff and students. It also excited me about the future of this institution. We have new educational challenges, an increasing need for learning to be lifelong and for that learning to have both breadth and depth, that can be used to question whether is it only specialist knowledge that needs to be acquired in the fast-paced, changing landscape of modern society. Instead, should we not also embrace study that is both inter- and/or multidisciplinary, enabling us all to develop the skills and knowledge in complementary and contrasting areas that will help propel us forward in our professional roles and in our learning passions and pursuits.

I’m looking forward to celebrating the OU in this 50th anniversary year and will value the ongoing discussions with colleagues and students alike in looking back at all that has been accomplished and, most important of all, looking forward to exploring what the next 50 years might be like…

Multipotentiality and me

Helen Cooke is a Senior Manager in Curriculum Innovation and responsible for the day-to-day running of the Open Programme. She is a Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (SFHEA) based on her work supporting multidisciplinary students in an online environment.

Buzzwords are pretty common these days, especially in higher education. In fact, it’s rare for me to get through a working day without being introduced to a new one, and as such, they don’t often stick in my consciousness. But every now and then, all it takes is one single word to change your perspective and help you see things in a whole new light…

This happened to me last year when I stumbled across Emilie Wapnick’s fabulous book How to be everything. Not only has the word in question been a revelation to me in a professional context but it has forced me to reflect on, and appreciate, how my own learning journey has resulted in me finding a job that I love, and ultimately a better understanding of my place in the world.

Now I realise these may sound like grand claims and you’re probably starting to ask yourself how one little word could possibly make such a difference to someone’s outlook on life? Well, for a start, it’s not such a little word – a whole 17 letters in fact…

…I’m a multipotentialite.

Not in the ‘gifted’ sense of the word, where the term has traditionally been used to describe children with incomprehensible intelligence in many subjects, but because I have a genuine curiosity and passion for many (many) things.

Even though I chose to study a straight Geography degree at university, I discovered that as much as I loved wading around in rivers and studying avalanches in the Swiss Alps, I was equally fascinated by modules on consumerism and international development (much to my surprise) and my dissertation topic was focused on gender and tourism.

So, does this make me a “jack of all trades”, unable to apply myself to one specialist area? Does my choice of degree mean that I will never know enough about other subjects to fully succeed in the workplace? Well, if career is measured by job satisfaction and ‘learning gain’ (another current buzzword in higher education), then finding a career that suits my multipotentialite skills and interests has made me as successful as any multimillionaire.

Of course, some might argue that I have become a “specialist” after all. Working in higher education on a truly unique undergraduate degree programme – and now fascinated by applying concepts like multipotentiality to my work – is actually turning me into a specialist in interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary education. But I’m not an academic, teacher or research scientist. Nor am I a straightforward project manager, administrator or student support adviser. At different times during my working day, I’m any one (or more) of these things. My job requires me to know as much about finance, marketing, and politics (internal and external) as it does about technology enhanced learning, social media and curriculum development. I once even taught myself to use a computer program written in French.

But I still haven’t even got to the best bit yet…

Whether or not they identify themselves with the term as much as I do, I’m surrounded by other multipotentialites!

With almost 25,000 students studying towards an Open qualification at The Open University, that’s almost 25,000 individual study journeys, 25,000 personalised qualifications and an unimaginable number of different module combinations. It’s simply mind-blowing (and very difficult data to analyse!). Not only am I constantly amazed at the commitment, tenacity and perseverance of these students to balance their studies with busy, challenging lives, but their wide-ranging interests and motivations continue to fuel my new-found multipotentialite interests by simply making their own choices and finding their own way in the world.

As individuals, we all have the opportunity to make our own choices and choose what is right for us at any given moment in time. As education providers, we need to ensure that there are learning opportunities that are focused enough for the specialists amongst us, and flexible enough to accommodate those whose strengths lie in studying across different disciplines.

At the end of the day the most important skill that any of us can learn is how to learn – and how to keep on learning.