There’s a lot to love about both The Open University and The Independent. However, The Independent really ought to stick to proper journalism rather than re-hashing what looks like a PR piece put out by the 48 strong OU communications department. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the OU promoting itself. It’s a fabulous institution and their recent initiative to ask former students to act as “ambassadors” for the OU on Facebook is a splendid idea. As all OU students and alumni know, the . . . → Read More: Oh(U) dear. The Independent blurs the line between fact and fiction]]> “Today, Rita could have signed up to Open University on Facebook“

There’s a lot to love about both The Open University and The Independent. However, The Independent really ought to stick to proper journalism rather than re-hashing what looks like a PR piece put out by the 48 strong OU communications department. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the OU promoting itself. It’s a fabulous institution and their recent initiative to ask former students to act as “ambassadors” for the OU on Facebook is a splendid idea. As all OU students and alumni know, the perceptions many people have of the OU are strange at best and are often just plain wrong.

Which is why I think that it’s a real shame it appears that the OU felt it necessary to put out such a distorted view of itself, manipulating statistics to paint a misleading picture of the organisation which I really can’t believe does the OU, The Independent or prospective OU students any good at all.

Specifically:

1. The claims of increased student numbers from 250,000 last year to 260,000 this year may be true (but the PR week article announcing Mr Hudson’s appointment to the head of the communications team in mid 2011 said that the OU had 264,000 students at that point in time – so haven’t they suffered a drop of 4,000 already?) but this increase is not comparable with the 8.7% fall in UCAS application numbers for 2012. Any current students are of course paying around £750 per 60 credit module rather than the £2,500 that will come into effect this autumn.
2. I can’t believe that OU students don’t want to go to “summer schools” anymore (or “residential schools”, to give them their proper title). For example, you only have to see the positive reviews from students who loved the residential version of the psychology project compared with the mixed reviews for its online equivalent to start to question this assertion. And even if OU students don’t like attending residential schools, it’s no reason not to insist on them for pedagogical reasons – as the History of the OU blog points out.
3. I’m not convinced that the OU is ahead of the game in all aspects of its offer to potential students. For example, I want to do a distance learning psychology MSc. The OU withdrew its version for new students in May 2011, along with all other social science masters courses (which will mean that the university loses around 8,000 students a year as far as I can work out). In the meantime, traditional universities such as Leicester continue to expand their distance learning offer. While the use of the internet to support distance learning may be something the OU does well, it’s also accessible to every other university in the world. Totally unlike access to the BBC in the early days of the OU, which exclusively broadcast the fondly remembered OU programmes of old.
4. The assertion that the current vice-chancellor: “… came from a job as Microsoft’s general manager in the USA and is thus well versed in the requirements of the student in the modern digital age” has no evidence to back it up. It’s rather like suggesting that Lord Browne was the best person to lead the review of HE provision in the UK because he used to run Shell. They may well both have been the best people for their respective jobs, but just because Martin Bean came from Microsoft, it doesn’t follow that he’s the best person to lead the OU. Other qualities would have been far more important in his selection (particularly given the OU’s commitment to an open source VLE in Moodle!)
5. While the increase in the numbers of younger students choosing the OU is welcome, it’s still rather small compared to the overall number of students. There’s also a little voice in my head saying that this wasn’t really what the OU was set up to do … as the History of the OU blog confirms. Will the hoped for increase in younger students really be sufficient to sustain the university into the future? According to none other than Martin Lewis of Moneysavingexpert.com , the appeal of ‘lower fees’ to first time students using a fee loan for study is moot, as the monthly repayments will be the same anyway regardless of whether the headline yearly fee is £5,000, £6,000 or £9,000 (and for all but high earners will never be paid off in full).
6. Finally, ‘Educating Rita’ always was (and still is) an entertaining piece of fiction. As I keep on saying to my eldest daughter when she gets over-enthusiastic or over-serious about Dr. Who, “it’s not real”!

The OU never really was quite how Willy Russell portrayed it – and an article which suggests that it ever was the case is disingenuous at best.

And by the way, don’t try signing up to the OU on Facebook – it’s far better to click here instead.

The six months’ notice period means students will be able to register for OU modules using Tesco Reward vouchers up until close of business on 31 July. Students will be able to sign up for modules that begin after this . . . → Read More: Real money only please – the OU ends its association with the Tesco Clubcard]]> Further bad news today for anyone hoping to redeem their Tesco Reward vouchers towards the cost of a module at the OU. Just over a year ago, the OU announced that the scheme would in future only apply to level 1 study; today they have announced it will end completely on 31st July 2012. From the message published on StudentHome:

The six months’ notice period means students will be able to register for OU modules using Tesco Reward vouchers up until close of business on 31 July. Students will be able to sign up for modules that begin after this date, subject to the module being open for registration, and payment options being arranged and registration being completed, by close of business on 31 July.

Changes to the way higher education is funded in England have reduced the OU’s income by more than £90 million. The OU is therefore reviewing all of its costs in order to protect services to all our students and keep fees as low as possible, while sustaining high quality and remaining true to its mission of being open to all.

While this may not matter much to first time undergraduates who will be taking out a student loan to fund their studies, it’s yet another potential funding difficulty for new ELQ students and current students on transitional arrangements to overcome.

Simon Hughes, the coalition’s Advocate for Access to Higher Education has just issued a press release following the announcement of today’s UCAS application numbers. He makes a series of very valid points, including that applications for University places are at an all time high (excluing last year), that young people do not appear to have been put off by the headline cost of tuition (which he appears to be arguing acts as a time-limited graduate tax rather than a fee) and that monthly repayments will be lower (but of course, many graduates will . . . → Read More: Simon Hughes: Young people have not been put off university …]]> … but maybe mature students have been?

Simon Hughes, the coalition’s Advocate for Access to Higher Education has just issued a press release following the announcement of today’s UCAS application numbers. He makes a series of very valid points, including that applications for University places are at an all time high (excluing last year), that young people do not appear to have been put off by the headline cost of tuition (which he appears to be arguing acts as a time-limited graduate tax rather than a fee) and that monthly repayments will be lower (but of course, many graduates will pay back more overall and will have to pay contributions for a longer period than at present).

It’s this paragraph which concerns me however. Simon says:

There has been a larger drop in the number of older students applying to university. The Government will have to take a serious look at why this has happened, particularly as mature students for the first time also do not have to pay for their university education  in advance.

Now, the trend towards mature students being put off by the increase in fees (at least for full time courses in traditional universities, which is what the UCAS figures cover) has been apparent for some time, so it’s somewhat disappointing that the Advocate for Access to Higher Education only just appears to have noticed. He’s obviously not a fan of this blog.

But what is more alarming is the assertion that for the first time, mature students do not have to pay for their university education in advance. He presumably is talking about “in England” too. It’s a false assertion for two reasons:

1. If you are a student in England studying for a first degree today, then it would appear that entitlement to finance is exactly the same regardless of whether you are 18, 38 or 83. The crucial difference seems to be whether you are a full time or part time student – not your age. All part time students currently have to pay up front (unless they qualify for funding on the basis of a means test).

2. It’s also false if you are an ELQ (equivalent or lower qualification) student – which many mature students are. You do still have to pay up front under the new regime, regardless of whether you are studying full time or part time. Anyone who wants to re-train for a new career or study for personal development reasons is hit very hard indeed by this, despite both of the coalition parties being opposed to such discrimination against ELQ students when in opposition. For example, the impact for England-resident, new Open University students from October will be a fees rise from around £750 to an eye-watering £2,500 per 60 credit module.

But Simon’s right about one thing in this paragraph.

The government will have to take a hard look at providing loans for mature and ELQ students. I suspect the first casualties if they don’t could well be the Open University and perhaps Birkbeck, who both have a significant proportion of their current undergraduate cohort in this position.

And a quick note to fellow Lib Dem Mark Pack – mature students have noticed and we are talking about the problems caused by changes in HE funding. It’s just that no-one seems to be listening yet. However, there are currently more than 46,000 signatures on this petition, so perhaps someone at BIS will begin paying attention soon.

I don’t think I even returned to the campus until the weekend of my 40th birthday – very nearly 20 years after graduating. It wasn’t that I didn’t enjoy my time there, but initially I couldn’t wait to get out into the world of work and then, after a bit of the shine of having money for the first time had worn off, I didn’t want to go back because I knew I might want to stay. Even the numerous times throughout the . . . → Read More: Lurking]]> When I graduated from Warwick University in 1985, I couldn’t wait to get away from the place.

I don’t think I even returned to the campus until the weekend of my 40th birthday – very nearly 20 years after graduating. It wasn’t that I didn’t enjoy my time there, but initially I couldn’t wait to get out into the world of work and then, after a bit of the shine of having money for the first time had worn off, I didn’t want to go back because I knew I might want to stay. Even the numerous times throughout the 1990s when I visited Sun Microsystems at their offices on the Science Park I made a point of not going onto campus!

I know how ridiculous that sounds. But what I’m about to tell you is equally ridiculous. Probably more ridiculous if I’m being honest.

Having graduated from the OU in December, I’m still lurking around.

Logging into StudentHome and reading the messages and wincing at the redesign; posting the occasional message in support of a social sciences “cafe” in the OUSA forums; reading people’s blogs; looking at the prospectus and even complaining to the OU that the information about postgraduate courses on one of the Open University’s advertising sites potentially breaks the advertising standards authority code of conduct as it’s misleading – you can’t, of course, currently start new postgraduate studies with them in either psychology or the social sciences.

So I need to stop lurking and get on with my application to Leicester University if I’m going to have a chance of studying again later on this year. I’ve already had the good news from my employer that they will part sponsor an MSc in much the same way they helped with my BSc, so I’ve no excuse not to get on with my application.

Now, what was the question on their application form that keeps making me smile? Oh yes:

Outline the changes you would make in your work and/or own time in order to accommodate the demands of a postgraduate distance-learning course

Been there, done that, got the scars.

One of the reasons for my disenchantment with football is the constant nonsense spouted by many of the people running the game. Such as Paul Jewell’s recent pronouncements on female assistant referees or the ludicrous assertion by Adrian Bevington of the FA (and many others) that the next England manager should be . . . → Read More: Arsene Wenger and the fundamental attribution error]]> I’m not what you’d call a football fan. Yes, I always listen out for Derby’s result and occasionally listen to Radio Derby’s commentary, though it really hasn’t been the same since Graham Richards retired. But I’ve probably been to fewer than 10 professional games in my entire life.

One of the reasons for my disenchantment with football is the constant nonsense spouted by many of the people running the game. Such as Paul Jewell’s recent pronouncements on female assistant referees or the ludicrous assertion by Adrian Bevington of the FA (and many others) that the next England manager should be English. Surely we’d be better off picking the best person for the job, regardless of their nationality – or gender for that matter.

However, one person who nearly always makes me reach for the off switch is the current Arsenal manager, Arsene Wenger. It’s not because I dislike him or his club – I’m decidedly ambivalent about both – but that he is forever reminding me about the fundamental attribution error (FAE) from DD307.

Put simply, the FAE is an argument which states that there is a tendency everyone has to overvalue dispositional or personality-based explanations for the observed behaviours of others while undervaluing situational explanations for the same behaviours. For example, the FAE could be argued to be operating when Arsene Wenger claims that a poor decision was made because the referee isn’t very good at their job (a dispositional attribution) rather than because of the difficulties of refereeing a game where most of the participants don’t know how to spell sportsmanship, let alone understand what it is. Just occasionally when Arsenal lose you’d expect Wenger to acknowledge the possibility of situational explanations, but he seems to invariably make dispositional attributions about other people’s behaviour instead.

So when Arsenal were beaten 3-2 by Swansea last weekend, Wenger is reported by the BBC as claiming that their defeat is in large part due to a poor decision made by the referee. Earlier on that week he appeared to be blaming Arsenal’s problems on the television schedulers. In December, when they lost to Manchester City, Wenger attributes their failure to the inability of the referee to understand the offside rule. Look at the match reports on the BBC Sport website if you think I’m exaggerating!

There is a point to this rant. Most people exhibit this attribution bias even if it’s not to the extent that the Arsenal manager appears to. So do I.

The danger is that our tendency to make such attributions means that we – I – miss the real reasons for success and failure. I’m not sure if I can do anything about my own tendencies, but at least I’m now aware of the possibility that my own explanations of other’s behaviour might just be wrong sometimes …

Back in the mid to late 1980s, . . . → Read More: ICT bad, Computer Science good – an unproductive dichotomy]]> In some ways I’m rather encouraged by today’s announcement by the education secretary that he wants to see a greater emphasis on the teaching of computer science in the schools curriculum. But I think the suggestion that he seems to be making, or at least the media interpretation of it, that teaching someone how to use popular computer programs like office suites (his definition of ICT) is no longer worthwhile and what should be taught instead is how to program them (his definition of Computer Science) is an unproductive dichotomy. Let me explain.

Back in the mid to late 1980s, everything taught in schools around the topic of computing was computer science focused. It had to be. If you wanted to get any benefit from a BBC micro or Sinclair ZX81, you had to learn how to program it first – usually in one of the many weird and wonderful dialects of a programming language known as BASIC. I still have an attic full of Computing Today and Practical Electronics magazines which were crammed full of BASIC listings that you had to type into these machines to get them to play games or do more worthy calculations, such as working out how to obtain a non-standard electrical resistance from two resistors placed in parallel. The often buggy nature of these listings and the non-standard features that many BASIC dialects had helped you to gain a deeper understanding of how computer programming worked. I spent (probably far too many) happy hours as a teenager translating programs to work on my Sharp MZ80K and its own peculiar BASIC dialect.

My brother using our Sharp MZ80K, aged 15

At some point during the 1990s, what schools taught the majority of pupils changed from programming activities and the understanding of how computers worked to focus almost exclusively on the use of commercial packages, particularly office productivity suites. I still despair at what my daughters were taught in their ICT lessons. There was lots of stuff about how to use word processors, spreadsheets and small databases, with nothing at all about how these things were built in the first place.

The thing is, both aspects of computing are important. It’s a bit like cars. It’s true that most people simply need to know how to drive (use) them rather than how to build a car in the first place or even service one. But having an understanding of how they are built and serviced prevents you from being ripped off by the garage or from attempting things in your car that it wasn’t designed to do!

Similarly, it’s important that the use of common software applications is taught as today such knowledge has a direct impact on your prospects in the world of work. But perhaps having just a little understanding of the complexity involved in even the simplest forms of software engineering or computer programming should mean that there are fewer failed technology programmes in future. With knowledge that you are able to apply, you become harder to fleece as well as becoming better able to understand the art of the practical – as anything is possible with computer software given enough time and money. Despite all appearances to the uninitiated, computers are not magic – but that we can get them to do anything for us at all is the result of hard logic and clever algorithms. When software really works well, it’s also the result of disciplined engineering processes.

So my nagging concern with today’s announcement is not that computer science will be back on the curriculum – its more widespread return within our schools is long overdue. Instead, it is the false dichotomy being peddled that learning how to make a computer program that someone else has created do something useful for you is somehow boring or a second class pursuit. It isn’t.

Such skills are every bit as  important today as understanding how to use shorthand and slide rules were for the engineers of my father’s generation.

It’s also been my first week back at work after the Christmas and new year holidays and I’ve been very busy, so I haven’t (yet) been able to reply to everyone who’s contacted me and I apologise if you’re one of the people on that list. I will try to get my act together over the course of the next few days.

It wasn’t until late 2008 that I started again. I was between OU modules and was due to start ED209, but I didn’t start this one with any particular intent to blog about my OU experience. However, for most of the last 3 years that’s . . . → Read More: Why this blog went dark over Christmas]]> tenpencepiece.net is my second attempt at blogging. My first, which was created during the early days of blogger, ran out of steam at some point during the early 2000s. I eventually deleted it and I don’t have a backup, but I know that it wasn’t very good. Fortunately, I’m certain that almost no-one read it.

It wasn’t until late 2008 that I started again. I was between OU modules and was due to start ED209, but I didn’t start this one with any particular intent to blog about my OU experience. However, for most of the last 3 years that’s the way it turned out. Simply by having it around made OU study a far less solitary experience for me than it was during 2007 when I took DSE212. As more OU students discovered it, the blog provided useful additional motivation when I needed it – as you noticed if I hadn’t been keeping up with the timetable!

We’ve also managed to do some good collectively for others. I’m still overwhelmed by the £600+ readers of this blog raised for the HOPEHIV charity in 2010.

I’ve shared my highs and my lows in what I hope has been an open and honest fashion. I’m proud of what I’ve managed to achieve with the OU and I’m really looking forward to my graduation in May.

However, just before Christmas, two anonymous obscene and threatening comments from the same person left in the space of an hour genuinely shocked me. Other than spam or duplicates, I’ve always published every comment I’ve ever received here. I’m not easily spooked and I have a pretty thick skin, so I really don’t mind criticism, honest or otherwise, justified or not. But these comments went way beyond criticism – and were certainly not written in a way that I could even edit for publication, much as I’ve thought about how I might do so.

So I took the blog down and debated if I wanted to carry on.

I’m still undecided. Even if I do keep going, I suspect that the next few months (or even years!) might be quite dull for some readers – particularly if you’re here because of the OU psychology courses or are interested in if I ever manage to find somewhere (and the time and money and can persuade the family etc. etc.) to start a masters. I apologise for any boredom you might experience in advance – but this is my blog – my voice – and you can always go elsewhere if you don’t like what I write.

But for the time being I’m back and working out what to do next. Stay tuned!

Dear Tim Holyoake

I understand from PGSS colleagues in Region 07 that you have enquired about studying psychology at postgraduate level with the OU/Faculty of Social Sciences. I note from your academic record that you have recently achieved a first class honours degree in psychology with us. Warmest congratulations . . . → Read More: News from the OU about postgraduate psychology provision]]> … has just arrived in my inbox from the Faculty of Social Sciences. It confirms what I’d been told by the Yorkshire region a few weeks ago, with the merest hint that something may be resolved in time for late 2012. The email is reproduced below, with my thoughts in italics.

Dear Tim Holyoake

I understand from PGSS colleagues in Region 07 that you have enquired about studying psychology at postgraduate level with the OU/Faculty of Social Sciences. I note from your academic record that you have recently achieved a first class honours degree in psychology with us. Warmest congratulations – this is a splendid achievement!

Thank you!

As you will be aware, the Faculty of Social Sciences has taken the difficult decision to withdraw its current postgraduate qualifications. This is due to the significant cuts in government funding of higher education institutions, as a consequence of which, it is no longer possible for the Faculty to sustain the number and diversity of its existing postgraduate modules and qualifications.

But the Browne review specifically excluded postgraduate study and funding from its remit. So this statement would seem to suggest a number of  concerns that the OU might have – such as the demand for postgraduate courses declining rapidly due to their potentially being far fewer graduates in future or the expectation that graduates will increasingly regard postgraduate study as unaffordable if they are worried about paying off loans incurred through undergraduate study. Either that or it’s simply a false statement – and frankly, I’m inclined to believe the OU on this rather than the politicians.

This ‘crossroads moment’ has afforded the Open University as a whole an opportunity to undertake a wide-ranging review of its postgraduate teaching and curricula.

I understand the need to review provision, but I think that most students were under the impression that this review was due to be completed in mid 2011, not sometime in 2012. The OU is about to lose a whole cohort – and possibly two or three cohorts – of suitably qualified graduates who would otherwise have gone on to postgraduate study with them. I certainly wouldn’t want to be one of the first students through a brand-new set of postgraduate modules!

As you can appreciate, all Universities need to refresh and renew their academic programmes in order to meet the challenges of an ever-changing world with ever-increasing demands for a more sophisticated and highly skilled workforce.

Indeed.

The University-wide review of postgraduate teaching is due to conclude in 2012. The Faculty is therefore not able to provide details of any future postgraduate programme at this time but we will publish information on our websites http://www.openuniversity.co.uk/pg-psychology and http://www.openuniversity.co.uk/pg-socsci when our plans are confirmed.

So no change from the situation of almost a year ago – except an apparent delay in the university-wide review of at least six months and probably longer?

I appreciate that this uncertainty makes planning further study with us somewhat tentative but would like to take this opportunity to wish you well with any future studies that you may undertake wherever this may be.

“Wherever” is the right word! It’s not only the OU which appears to be affected by the way in which HE provision has been mishandled by the current government. However, I’m still thinking that Leicester looks like a good option for me.

Kind regards

Hilary Canneaux

Senior Manager, Taught Postgraduate Studies

Faculty of Social Sciences

Thank you for taking the time to write to me Hilary. It’s not exactly the Christmas present I was hoping for, but at least it’s a clear confirmation of what I already understood to be the case.

So – one final thought - sign the petition if you haven’t done so already and are a UK resident. Please.