Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, thank
you for joining us at our first lecture of
our special 50th Anniversary Inaugural Lecture
series and what an anniversary year it promises
to be.
I am Jhumar Johnson, the Director of Development
here at The Open University.
I am also proud and privileged to be custodian
of the University’s 50th Anniversary celebrations.
This is the year of cake.
I am delighted to say we have built an exciting
programme of events and activities from January
to December across our 4 Nations and globally.
Each one shining a light on the academics
and the OU family who have shaped our much-loved
institution.
At this point I will digress slightly though,
only to welcome the newest addition to our
family, our newly appointed Pro Chancellor,
Malcolm Sweeting.
Welcome to the OU Malcolm.
Each year the Vice-Chancellor invites newly
appointed and promoted Professors to give
an Inaugural Lecture.
Over the course of our year our Inaugural
Lecture series provides an opportunity to
celebrate their academic excellence, with
each lecture representing a significant milestone
in their academic career.
This year the Inaugural Lecture series is
bigger than ever with 12 lectures, and true
to form, has a few surprises thrown in too.
One of those is our opening Inaugural Lecture
with a twist in that it isn’t an Inaugural
Lecture at all.
This afternoon Professor Devendra Kodwani,
our Executive Dean of the Faculty of Business
and Law, will open the year-long series of
lectures with his take on the journey that
is life-long learning, the OU’s role and
the role of Higher Education Instructions
more widely.
But before he does so I would like to introduce
you to our speakers and the chronology of
this afternoon.
We will hear first from our Vice-Chancellor,
Professor Mary Kellett, followed by Professor
Kevin Hetherington, Pro-Vice-Chancellor Research,
Enterprise and Scholarship.
And finally, Professor Kodwani who will then
deliver his opening lecture followed by a
Q&A session.
If cake is an incentive, then I should say
now cake will be available at the end so we
can celebrate together.
There’s quite a few laughing because my
middle name by the end of the year will be
‘cake’.
For anyone in the audience using Twitter please
feel free to tweet like crazy using the hashtags
displayed and tagging @Open University.
Help us in letting the world know and join
us this afternoon.
For members of our audience joining us via
LiveStream please use the email address provided
and keep your comments and questions brief
so that we can address them, especially during
the Q&A.
Before we start some health and safety details.
We aren’t expecting a fire drill so if something
does go off then please do go to the fire
exits and follow the person who knows where
they are going.
Now please join me in welcoming our Vice-Chancellor,
Professor Mary Kellett.
Hello everyone and a really warm welcome to
you all whether you are here in the audience
or joining us remotely.
This afternoon is a very special event.
We finally made it, we are here, we are celebrating
our 50th Anniversary year.
Apart from all the cake that Jhumar mentioned,
I don’t want us to forget why we are here.
We are a University.
We are a very special University and we have
some of the most amazing academics here, amazing
Professors and we do excellent teaching and
research.
So for me it’s a great honour and privilege
to be able to kick this Inaugural Lecture
off by reminding us all of just how good we
are.
Fifty years ago a radical idea was born, The
Open University.
A university ahead of its time.
A university open to people, places, methods
and ideas.
An innovative inclusive university, proud
of its heritage and the impact it has made
in transforming lives.
The year was 1969 and our aim was simple to
open up education for all.
Two million students later, we continue to
break down the barriers to higher education
and advance knowledge in society.
Here in the UK and across the world through
our teaching and research underpinned by innovative
technology.
We pride ourselves on conducting research
that is as pioneering as the OU itself, turning
ideas into solutions that benefit people,
business and society.
Our Inaugural Lecture line-up for this year
is a great illustration of the breadth and
depth of this work.
It won’t surprise you to know that we at
the OU have been engaged in educational research
since our inception, progressing from late-night
BBC programmes to online teaching and virtual
laboratories.
Our long-standing collaboration with the BBC
is a source of great pride and provides the
focus of Professor Mark Brandon’s Inaugural
Lecture on Polar Oceans and Global Climates
in June in the run up to World Environment
Day.
We also have a long history of involvement
in major solar system exploration and converting
that technology into terrestrial applications.
For instance, developing instruments which
aid in monitoring for disease and environmental
conditions on earth.
Later this year we will hear from the Professors
Rothery and Haswell on some new space missions,
the latest findings about Mercury and the
discovery of new exoplanets.
In the meantime, let’s come back down to
earth and to our main event this afternoon.
Professor Devendra Kodwani will launch this
very special Inaugural Lecture series with
a reflection on the need for lifelong learning,
the future of universities and how they can
meet the global challenge of providing learning
opportunities to all segments of society.
It could be no more relevant or important
to kick this off.
But just hold back on your excitement for
a few moments yet before you meet Dev who
is going to give the lecture because I would
like to invite our Pro-Vice-Chancellor, Professor
Kevin Hetherington, who is Pro-Vice-Chancellor
for Research, Enterprise and Scholarship to
introduce our speaker today.
Thank you Mary.
It gives me great pleasure to introduce to
you Professor Devendra Kodwani, more fondly
known as Dev, who joined The Open University
in 2004 in the Department of Accounting and
Finance of the Faculty of Business and Law.
Before that he worked in India at the Indian
Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Gujarat
University and the Tolani Institute of Management
Studies in Gujarat.
Currently he is Professor of Finance Management
and Corporate Governance and Executive Dean
of the Faculty of Business and Law and Head
of The Open University Business School.
He is a busy man.
His teaching portfolio includes Undergraduate
and Postgraduate Accounting and Finance courses.
As Masters Programme Director from 2010-13
Dev led the redevelopment of The Open University’s
triple accredited MBA programme and developed
two specialist Masters, an MSc in Finance
and an MSc in Human Resource Management.
Following on from that as Associate Dean Curriculum,
Learning and Teaching, he shaped learning
design and learning and teaching strategy
for all qualifications offered within the
Faculty of Business and Law.
Recently he also led on the development of
Management and Finance programmes on FutureLearn,
our Massive Online Open Course platform, or
MOOC platform.
He also developed a MOOC on Bookkeeping for
Personal and Business Accounting, which I
am sure many of us would find very useful
to look at.
His current research focuses on the evolution
of regulatory institutions in India, corporate
governance and ethics.
He has been examining the reforms in the electricity,
water and telecommunications industry in the
UK and India, and is currently engaged in
research on corporate governance, institutional
endowments and regulatory capabilities in
India.
His lecture today, Back from the Future, Forward
from the Past – the journey that is lifelong
learning, will draw on his experience of working
at The Open University and his lifelong learning
that continues even now as he is doing an
MA in Educational Leadership at The Open University.
Now Dev tells me he is the first of 6 siblings
and would of perhaps ended up as a monk had
he not got married and chosen a different
career path.
Monkhood’s loss is our gain and we are delighted
that he has chosen another noble cause, that
of teaching here at The Open University.
So it gives me great pleasure to introduce
Professor Devendra Kodwani.
Thank you Kevin for this very generous introduction.
So good afternoon to all and those who are
watching in different time zones, perhaps
in Asia, good evening.
I want to start on a personal note.
In March 2018 a series of events took place
in my professional life that continues with
this event today.
I feel a bit like this athlete, courtesy of
our super Vice-Chancellor Professor Mary Kellett,
who as my line manager has raised the bar
a few inches for me to jump every few months.
A few weeks before Christmas when these lectures
were being planned, Mary nominated me to deliver
this lecture to kick off the Inaugural series
in this celebratory year for The Open University.
Our committee deciding this and the topics,
no less nudged by the Director of Development
at The Open University, Jhumar Johnson, asked
me to reflect on the lifelong learning and
the future of university education.
Thank you Mary, and colleagues, for giving
me this honour and privilege not only for
delivering this lecture, but also to launch
a series of Inaugural Lectures that will be
delivered by 12 distinguished Professors of
this University on many important topics.
I urge you to look out for those dates and
attend those too.
I would like to thank our new Pro Chancellor,
Malcolm Sweeting, who has taken time out of
his busy schedule to attend this lecture.
You have taken over as chair of the OU Council
only this month but have already spent a good
amount of your precious time with us during
this month.
This demonstrates your huge commitment to
the OU, Malcolm.
I also thank other members of the Council
who have come here to attend the lecture,
as well as a special thanks to Professor Alan
Tait who is an Emeritus Professor of The Open
University and ex-Pro-Vice-Chancellor Academic
at the OU for taking time out this afternoon.
I want to thank my wife and my two sons for
being here today.
Your love, support and encouragement give
me energy and purpose.
A big thank you to all of you here in the
theatre and all those who are watching this
online, many of them are my earlier students,
for giving up your time to attend this lecture.
A small point of clarification.
Throughout the lecture I will also be using
the word ‘learner’ rather than the word
‘student’ and I will be using ‘lifelong
learning’ and ‘lifelong education’ interchangeably.
Although I am aware of the subtle differences
between learning and education that are discussed
in policy and academic discourse, my view
is in future such differences will become
increasingly redundant.
I hope you will get a glimpse of that possibility
as I proceed with the lecture.
When the announcement of this lecture reached
colleagues, one of my fellow Executive Deans
said that the title is very interesting.
Yes, the title has a bit of a play with the
notion of time as I believe the time is what
defines the 50th Anniversary.
We in the University are seizing this opportunity
to charter the future course of direction.
As a person of Indian origin, I can tell you,
we have an interesting relationship with the
notion of time.
If you have had the joy of travelling on Indian
roads you would find that everyone is in a
hurry to reach somewhere, but hardly any meeting
starts on time.
Also, if you ever wanted a lesson in disobedience
you must drive through some of the towns in
the sub-continent.
I think it is a hangover from the disobedience
lessons that Mahatma Ghandi gave us, to fight
for independence from the British rule.
I don’t know how he would feel to see his
lesson being used to violate traffic rules
though.
There is another feature of this relationship
with time.
For many Indians time does not move linearly,
it is circular.
If you do bad things in this life, you will
be born in a different species to pay for
it.
Einstein showed that gravity bends time, but
ancient Indian tradition goes beyond to suggest
that creation and destruction of the universe
are cyclical.
On a more serious note, in Indian language
the Sanskrit word used for the world is called
Jagat.
Literally it means ‘that which changes our
moves’.
Not changing our move implies existence of
time.
Unless of course in quantum physics where
a particle can be in two places simultaneously.
There is an interesting story of how this
word Jagat has entered English language with
a different meaning.
On the East coast of India, there is a famous
Temple of Jagannath in the city of Puri.
Jagannath simply means lord of the world.
Every year a massive procession of deity’s
idols is taken out on a large chariot.
Hundreds of thousands of devotees join and
symbolically push the chariot.
Someone narrating on this mammoth spectre
of the Jagannath procession described it in
English a few hundred years ago when it became
the word juggernaut in English.
However, these days if you Google the word
‘juggernaut’ you are likely to find images
like this.
Let me quickly move on to my lecture.
The structure of my lecture is around three
questions.
The first question I consider is ‘what do
expected patterns in demographic change of
the world population mean for lifelong learning?’
I will talk about this under the heading ‘The
Global Bulge’.
The second question I address is ‘What do
emerging possibilities in genetics, robotics,
artificial intelligence and nano-technologies,
the so called ‘green’ technologies, mean
for learning and work?’
This is how I look back from the future.
I will then briefly talk about the persistent
inequalities in adult education as it is relevant
to how we imagine the future role of lifelong
learning and universities.
The third question I will address is ‘Why
despite some of the trends which are now visible,
as we will see shortly, there is not enough
mainstream policy and public debate about
the role of universities in future society’.
The answer I venture to present is excessive
focus on short-term and local issues is at
the cost of long-term and global considerations.
I will also reflect on the nature of learning
and argue that diversity of culture and diversity
in how we learn are important which need to
inform the choice of what universities offer
for learning, who they offer to, and how they
teach.
I will not dwell on the mode of delivery a
lot as I believe that the take up of online
flexible learning is inevitable and is unlikely
to be a matter of choice in the long run.
Harold Wilson and Michael Young both used
the term “bulge” in public discourse to
raise the issue of shortage of places in the
universities to meet demand from the baby
boomer generation who were graduating from
schools to enter universities in the 1960s
in the UK.
This is how Harold Wilson, soon to become
Prime Minister in 1964, said in his speech
at Glasgow about the problem of under capacity
in the universities.
We of course owe a lot to Harold Wilson who
in the same 1963 speech outlined the concept
of The Open University.
When he became Prime Minister of the UK in
1964, he appointed the Minister of Arts, Jennie
Lee, to lead the setting up of The Open University.
The rest is history, as they say.
We are now celebrating 50 years of this wonderful
institution which I will call Wilson Young’s
Cathedral of Open Education.
I will explain at the end of the talk why
I do so.
Michael Young, who was a fellow at Churchill
College in Cambridge, thought being a relatively
new colleague, the college might be more experimental
and do something about the problem.
However, when he got no response from his
colleagues, enterprising and innovative institution
builder as he was, he wrote an article about
the bulge in a magazine in October 1962.
He proposed the steps that could be taken
to create opportunities for more people to
get higher education.
Among the proposals he argued for a double
shift system at the existing universities
and also to use accommodation and facilities
during vacations.
More significantly for our history as an institution,
he also proposed the founding of an open university
that would teach by correspondence, television
and radio, or a combination of all these.
He actually used the words “open university”
which eventually became the name of this University.
Thus it was an idea of open education germinated
in the UK which would later spread to other
parts of the world.
Since nothing much happened after he published
the article, Young and a few others set up
the National Extension College in the Autumn
of 1963 and began experimenting in teaching
using new methods to external students.
Actually, the idea of a distance education
was not new even then.
Michael Young had seen it effectively used
in Soviet Russia where distance education
students were given by law study leave before
the examination.
I see here some student representatives here.
If you listen to Young’s speech in 1973,
it was an interview here in Open Forum, he
actually extols to argue for getting some
leave for studies to employers and the government.
He encourages students to argue for that.
At the same time Michael Young also became
aware of the use of educational television
in the US.
So he was essentially trying to combine a
model of distance education and the possibility
of using media to create an open university.
Young helped set up a college of air in Mauritius
and wanted to spread the movement in Africa.
As it happened subsequently our University
has taken the revolution in education further
by helping the setting up of Open Universities
in Pakistan, India, Arab Open University in
the Middle East, and it has inspired open
education in many other parts of the world,
including in Africa.
It is fitting to recall with pride that the
OU has had a number of fantastic academics,
professional staff, and leaders who value
the social justice as common good and extended
the reach of education beyond the shores of
the UK.
I want to make a special mention of hundreds
of thousands of students who have posed confidence
in The Open University and the Association
of Students at The Open University who have
played a significant part in the development
of the OU.
The Open University is seen as a solution
to the problem of access and opportunity for
those who could not get higher education and
wanted to get it.
However, in 2019 we face another bulge problem
which is different in nature and also much
bigger in its scale and go beyond the national
boundaries.
Let me start by a quick look at the demographic
changes that will emerge from the rapid rise
in the population on our planet.
It took 18 centuries for the global population
to grow from 250 million to 1 billion, and
just 2 centuries to grow by 7 times to 7 billion.
But it will take less than another 100 years
for the planet’s population of humans to
rise to 11 billion.
To provide relevant and good learning opportunity
at this scale is a challenge in itself.
The nature of such provision however will
need to be carefully considered for different
regions of the world.
I will say a bit more around this later.
As you see, currently there are less than
1 billion people aged above 60 in 2019.
This number will rise to 1.37 billion by 2025,
to 2.2 billion by 2050 and will go over 3
billion people by the end of the century.
Some of the potential impact of this aging
profile is showing up in the stress on financial
resources required for care, subsistence and
healthcare required for the increasing number
of people living longer.
However, policy measures to meet these needs
will have to consider the differences in the
way this bulge is going to be seen in different
parts of the world.
Consider this breakdown of the same information
as previously but split by different regions
of the world.
So what you see here is 100s of billions under
the x axis and on the y axis you’ve got
age.
That is people here are in age group 60 and
above, and on the bottom you have these 100s
and millions in different regions.
Most of the population above 60 is in America
and Europe, China and India at the moment.
Note also that the large number of young people
in India and Africa will be causing a different
bulge in future as we can see on the next
slide.
So by 2050 global regional population distribution
will look like this.
The challenge will not only be creating learning
opportunity for the young, but also for the
growing number of people in advanced age groups.
I will make a case for why we will need to
provide learning opportunities for all age
groups shortly, but here is a caution for
Africa, India and some other large countries
like Pakistan where the demographic profile
is dominated by people under 30.
These generations deserve and will look for
high quality learning opportunities both at
sub-university level and university level.
There is a real risk of them finding themselves
vulnerable to the shock that green technologies
are due to deliver in the near future.
By 2100 the bulge looks very different with
a very large proportion of under 60 years
of age in Africa, but a much more distributed
population across age groups in the rest of
the world.
There will be a 100s of million or more living
over 90 or 100 years of age.
The global age profile means lifelong education
will not be restricted to a particular age
group but also will be needed for all age
groups.
A sociological implication from such a pattern
that is emerging is that we will become a
4 generation society from the current 3 generation
society.
The social policies will need to consider
not just child, parent and grandparent, but
also add to this equation great grandparent.
Let me now address the second question.
What do emerging possibilities in genetics,
robotics, artificial intelligence and nano-technologies
mean for learning and work?
These technologies are a manifestation of
continuing human genius, by which we have
discovered many laws of nature, and identified
forces in nature.
We have applied this knowledge to invent technological
solutions, but what do these mean for learning
is my concern.
One easy claim to make is that children born
in recent years and those to be born in the
coming decade or so may be required to do
jobs that probably don’t even exist.
How do we plan curriculum for them?
Thus far in the history of the human race,
we have pushed the boundaries in nature that
were external to us.
Agriculture and industrial revolutions driven
by use of energy intensive technologies.
Chemical and other material sciences allowed
rapid growth in our ability to produce and
fuel our desires to consume.
As a result we have pushed the planetary boundaries
around sustainability which now manifest in
depleting the ozone layer, rising temperatures
and other signs of environmental damage.
However, with green technologies we enter
the human body and mind.
Application of this knowledge presents a realistic
chance of interfering with our very being.
To consider first at a simplistic level, our
need to learn simple calculations and do those
mentally might become increasingly redundant.
The cognitive processes that allow us to memorise
6, 7 or 10-digit phone numbers are even now
challenged by the mobile phones.
Raise your hands, how many of you would struggle
to remember your family members phone numbers.
That’s nearly 70-80%.
The matter may seem trivial but at a cognitive
level it may be significant in 50 human generations
time or maybe much before that.
Similarly, genetic intervention to enhance
certain human and biological tendencies and
to supress others will potentially allow us
to redefine our personalities.
In such a scenario what and how we learn is
a pertinent question that universities will
need to address.
Collection and control of data about our choices,
preferences, behaviours is not new.
The producers and advertisers have for a long
time used such information to design their
marketing campaigns to lure us into consuming
their goods and services.
However, the collection of frequent detailed
data for millions of people, the ever-increasing
power of computers and algorithms enabled
machine learning are very powerful instruments
in the hands of corporations and the state.
These instruments quite often without the
knowledge of most of us, allow them to detect
our biases, follies, prejudices, weaknesses
and vulnerabilities.
At a fundamental level I believe humans are
challenged by such developments.
Dwelling on this challenge is beyond the scope
of this lecture, hence I will just discuss
a few implications as they relate to work,
wellbeing, and quality of living.
It is very clear that we will be working longer
years, later into life to pay for our living
costs, healthcare, and other basic needs.
A longer working life will require continuous
learning to compete in the level market and
competition may not be only with other people.
In 2011 there were 11 industrial robots employed
for every 1,000 people employed in manufacturing
in the developing world.
This number for developing countries was only
.4.
These figures rose significantly in 2015 to
14.6 robots for every 1,000 employees employed
in manufacturing in the developing world.
The number of the developing countries was
two.
In 2015 a total 1.6M robots were employed
in industries worldwide.
The image that you see on the top right side
of the screen is not a crane, but a robot
bricklayer called Hadrian X made by Fastbrick
Robotics, an Australian start-up company.
This robot can lay 1,000 bricks in one hour,
compared to 50-100 that a very experienced
human bricklayer can do.
In November 2018 the company demonstrated
industry standard acceptable construction
of 180sqm house by its flagship Hadrian X
robot in three days.
The robot is mounted on a truck and can go
to different places.
It is only a matter of time before this robot
will have a sister robot with a 3D printer
attached who can print bricks and other hardware
that goes into house construction.
We know in most economies that construction
industry growth is the key variable to project
employment trends.
What will this technology do to these projections
in future?
I will leave it to your imagination and move
on to artificial intelligence.
Here is another illustration which is not
from the future but happening now.
Humans and machines now compete in local transport
business.
Last year, our city of Milton Keynes became
the first city in the world where grocery
deliveries by a robot on wheels was started.
We have also got deliveries by drones.
Riders is the name given to people who deliver
food and other things at home.
In this race humans are bound to lose.
Here is why.
I think there are three aspects to this business
of delivery.
First is information processing about address,
navigation and transactional data.
Naturally computing power and algorithms in
this case are going to be more efficient.
Then there is physical power and manual lifting
etc, where humans perhaps may have the edge
at the moment but for how long.
And finally, the customer experience about
accuracy, timeliness of delivery, and quality
of product which are nearly independent of
human or machine as a deliverer.
Perhaps machines have an advantage as they
are better off in all weathers and there will
be no need to pay a tip.
It is clear though that in this supply chain,
information technology is at the heart of
the operation.
No wonder we see an increasing amount of capital
and intellectual investment in artificial
intelligence.
Here are a few trends that have implications
about the future of work, but before that
a quick reflection on what jobs like Rider
mean is worth reflecting.
This information is from an actual website
of a company that aggregates and distributes
orders for restaurants in London.
The Rider is the new name for a delivery person
or is it a new name for courier.
Anyway, the Rider does not get a salary or
wages, but gets fees.
Riders are thus not employees but self-employed
contractors with no guarantee of work even
if they sign up to become contractors.
They have to make upfront investment in a
mobile phone, vehicle, insurance of the vehicle
and the kit.
I suspect that such human service perhaps
would cost less than investment in robots
or drones as there is hardly any upfront investment
in this for the platform business or the supplier
of actual goods.
But for the reasons mentioned above, I feel
machines will out-compete humans in such lower
skilled jobs.
I want to reflect on what is going on in the
artificial intelligence technology knowledge
creation.
So there is a group of technologies which
are called AI technology patent group.
The patents that are being given for these
technologies which include biological knowledge
base and mathematical models and other AI
technology for which patents are being given.
13,567 patents related to AI technology were
obtained globally between 2000 and 2016.
This group of patents includes biological
knowledge, mathematical and other.
The US Patent Office issued on average four
patents annually related to mathematical algorithms
between 2000 and 2004 which rose to 194 in
2015-2016.
A similar trend is seen in China, Japan, and
Europe.
IBM, the US computer giant, alone obtained
1057 patents in Artificial Intelligence related
technologies.
Compare that to the number of similar patents
obtained by all universities in the world
during the same period which was 1177 patents,
of which 725 came from Chinese universities.
I am confident that this concentration of
intellectual properties will eventually spread
more widely beyond the big technological operations
and universities, as the cost of computing
goes down and access to internet increases.
You only have to look it up for information
on a mind-boggling scale of the explosion
in the number of youngsters working on start
up ideas all around the world.
There is a shift in the patents from biological
knowledge-based patents to mathematical models
as well as algorithms and other AI technologies.
What does it mean for shifts in the skillset
that will be required?
It is very difficult therefore to predict
which type of skills and jobs are protected
from the application of these technologies.
Mostly protected mental and physical tasks
will be taken over by some combination of
these technologies.
However, jobs where emotional intelligence,
team working, and collaborative approaches
are essential, will require skills that we
learn.
This slide shows the predicted shifts in the
skills by 2030 in the US and Western Europe.
As is seen the percentage of shift in the
workforce which needs physical and basic cognitive
skills is likely to 
go down, social skills and emotional skills
is likely to go up.
Higher cognitive skills will not only be relevant
for the jobs but later in life the greatest
challenge will be to stay meaningfully occupied.
We know from neuroscience that there are mental
health benefits from engaging intellectually
interesting and challenging activities.
So you can hope I will be studying more than
MA Educational Leadership.
Maybe something in STEM.
We will be able to leverage green technologies
to the benefit of mankind and improve the
quality of life in many ways.
To grasp the full implication of the green
technologies and demographic bulge that we
discussed, the universities need to commit
significant intellectual power and other resources
to the educational gerontology, that is the
scientific study of the aging process and
related challenges.
Let me briefly mention the problem of inequalities
in opportunities for access and participation
in learning among different groups of communities
before I address the third question.
The survey by the Department of Education
in England shows that as age increases beyond
60 the number of adults engaging in learning
activity is going down.
The following few slides further show that
people who will actually benefit from participating
in learning are less likely to do so.
So what you have here is people with different
income groups and whether they are engaging
in the learning activities or not.
Individuals with a net annual household income
of less than £15,000 are less likely to have
done any type of learning in the past 12 months
as this survey showed.
Those in full-time and part-time employment
are more likely to participate in learning
than those who are unemployed or uneconomically
inactive.
Those with higher qualification attainment
are more likely to participate in any learning
than those who are not qualified or have got
lower GCSE level qualifications.
This is worrying.
What you see on this slide is people with
parental background of qualification.
So people with parents with lower qualification
and people with parents with higher qualification
is what this slide is showing.
It shows that adults with poorly qualified
parents are less likely to participate in
learning.
Similar disparity in the effects of different
parental qualifications on literacy of young
adults as found in most OECD countries.
Combined with the findings that those not
in employment are also less likely to participate
in learning, potentially this perpetuates
the inequality in society.
So far what I have argued is the need to consider
the long-term implication of current and future
scenarios in demographic changes, the likely
impact of green technologies and persistent
inequalities of parental qualifications in
this society.
The third question that arises for me at least,
is this.
Why do we not consider these long-term implications
in the mainstream public policy and political
forum?
French economist and liberalist thinker Frédéric
Bastiat was a brilliant and insightful thinker
who explained some fundamental concepts about
markets and economics and human decision-making.
His argument that considering only short-term
and visible benefits often action can have
serious negative long-term effects is quite
pertinent here.
If one were to access the impact of many economic
and political choices in the past few centuries,
but particularly after the industrial revolution,
there is some profound insight into this short-term
or immediate gratification argument.
Let me illustrate this with some other consumption
choices we make.
So the story goes like this in Bastiat’s
story of why he breaks the window of his father’s
shop.
His father is cross because it will now cost
him to fix the window.
But some spectators argue that if the shop
window was not broken then what will happen
to the glazier.
So that’s the benefit, you have a broken
window and the transaction between the glazier
and the shopkeeper.
So that’s the first effect.
What is missed here is that what would the
shopkeeper do if that money was not spent
on mending the window but on something else.
Let’s say buying shoes which would involve
a number of other transactions.
So that’s the difference that Bastiat is
trying to make.
There’s another example about consumption
that I want to mention here.
There is a particular beverages company with
a footprint in almost every corner of the
world where their bottles, cans and jars are
famous, and you can find them everywhere.
The beverage has hardly any nutritional value.
But its adverse health effects are known.
This is quite an extraordinary product which
is made from water but is somehow sold at
a lower price than the price of water which
is itself an economic logic defining thing.
But what I want to draw attention to is a
couple of unseen consequences that we do not
immediately see.
The first is that given the chemistry of its
production we know that it is more difficult
to digest than lots of plain water.
The human digestive system has evolved over
thousands of years and we chose to give it
such stuff.
Its like fitting a Rolls Royce engine in your
car and giving it kerosene as a fuel rather
than high quality aviation grade fuel.
Other consequences of this product is the
environmental cost in terms of clean water
used and pollution released in the supply
chain.
However, visible impact in terms of profit,
jobs and other things clouds out less visible
long-term adverse impact.
So why does short-term and local impact get
privileged consideration in evaluation of
choices.
Let me first explain briefly.
So why does this happen.
We are now beginning to understand why we
make such choices as individuals.
The research in cognitive sciences suggests
that when emotions take the driving seat in
decision-making and deliberation, careful
evaluation of options is compromised.
The research also suggests that our inability
to control instant gratification leads to
long-term poor performance later in life.
There is established research around this
area and social psychology.
The dominance of short-term consideration
blinds us to the long-term consequences.
In economics and business decisions focus
on quarterly and ever-decreasing time response
to measure performance has led to strategic
errors of judgment.
At collector level evidence of the tension
between short-term and long-term, local and
global seems to manifest itself in decisions
such as Brexit referendum, choice in many
countries around leaders who are obsessed
with narrow short-term agenda.
Politics of exclusion over inclusion gets
votes.
Politics of here and now trumps politics of
future informed present.
The reality however shows that many of the
challenges that the human race faces including
existential traits like climate change are
not local challenges.
Neither are they short-term in their consequences.
The fact is no country is an island in itself.
Even if like the UK it is geographically made
up of islands.
The interdependence among the nations means
the future of the planet is a shared reality
which requires deliberations and choices informed
by a global and long-term view.
For this to become a collective choice, citizens
need to be empowered and educated throughout
their life stages.
That is why lifelong education is a must,
but this does not happen.
I conjecture why next.
There is acknowledgement going back to at
least 22 years ago, in this UNESCO report
by Jacques Delors and others that we need
a holistic view of education which is more
than an instrument of economic prosperity.
However, the educational policies have usually
been guided by economistic consideration with
focus on developing human capital as neoclassical
economists would argue.
Of late this has become more apparent in most
countries and international bodies like OECD.
The state and economic system sees education
as a way of improving productivity and enhancing
employability.
One may pose a philosophical question about
this relationship between society, the state
and markets.
Karl Polanyi for example argued that capitalism
eventually leads to a market society.
He says that it’s going to be difficult
to distinguish between market and society.
That was his logical conclusion.
Jurgen Habermas, Amartya Sen and other philosophers
argue for freedom and human capabilities to
participate in public sphere more effectively.
The Four Pillars of Learning identified by
this Jacques Delors report were these.
These include learning to be which refers
to a whole person.
Roberto Carneiro argues that education must
lead to self-fulfilment and to meaning.
He further argues that learning to live together
builds cohesion and makes communities viable
and enables development.
I don’t want to dwell too much on other
things to know and to do are self-explanatory
constructs of learning.
Learning to live with multiple identities
that we all now have in this complex inter-connected
world, cultivate core citizenship values,
and regard for general advancement of human
beings and sustainability, are preconditions
for the culture of peace and understanding.
I am of the view that if all these pillars
of learning are to be realised, we have no
choice but to consider lifelong learning as
a key policy goal.
One way to approach and concretise this as
a policy goal may be to consider adult education
as a common good.
There is such a construct in academic space,
but it needs to come out in mainstream discussion
in society and policy.
An international level organisation published
a report on the future of work last week,
after I had finished working on this lecture.
However, the proposal in the report is too
pertinent to today’s lecture to miss.
The report proposes that the social contract
between workers and employers and government
needs to be strengthened by what it calls
the human centred agenda for the future of
work.
The report calls for an increasing investment
in human capabilities beyond economistic perspective
and requires I quote “A universal entitlement
of lifelong learning that enables people to
acquire skills and to reskill and upskill.”
There is already widespread recognition of
the need for learning which goes beyond formal
education.
In his recent book about future prospects
for humanity, we had this fantastic endorsement
from Martin Rees, an astrophysicist, who considers
formal education rigid and unresponsive and
calls for realising the potentials that institutions
like The Open University have.
So what does it mean for us?
Universities will need to review their approach
to learning provision and acquisition.
Learning places and times may have to move
to where and when is suitable for the learners.
We will need to move from a notion of a dedicated
few years of time devoted to education, to
a lifetime commitment to education, with the
flexibility to choose different types of learning
at different stages of life.
This means a fragmented view of learning will
need to make way for a holistic prospect of
education and learning.
Great efforts are needed from the state and
learning providers to address the issue of
inequality and inclusion in learning.
This requires concerted efforts in which the
society, the state and economic systems will
need to partner and respond to the context,
both political and cultural, to support lifelong
learning.
I want to make one more point in this regard.
There are many theories of learning.
A brief review of literature led me to consider
this theory proposed by Knud Illeris who is
Professor of Lifelong Learning at the Danish
School of Economics.
Developing his theory based on earlier insights
from Carl Rogers and Jean Piaget and his own
research, Illeris argues that learning involves
two kinds of processes, identified by double
arrows in this triangle of learning.
The horizontal arrow represents the internal
acquisition process which includes content
and incentive.
The content here is very broadly defined as
human capacity such as skills, knowledge,
attitude, understanding, beliefs, behaviour
and competences etc.
The incentive is mobilisation of mental energy
to drive the process.
That is, the motivations, emotions and volitions
involved.
The vertical arrow represents interaction
between the learner and the environment which
initiates and supplies learning input.
The way this model of learning is structured
it underscores the importance of prior knowledge,
learning and cultural context of the learner.
There is a body of academic literature in
psychology which points to the culture dependence
of knowledge creation.
It is recognised now that people in different
cultures may perceive and process information
differently.
A study of this link between culture and cognition,
for example, showed a difference in the reasoning
style of Chinese bilingual students and European
and American students.
For example, some objects may be categorised
on the basis of shared attributes in one culture,
and maybe categorised on our relational properties
of objects in another culture.
Consider these three objects.
In a recent study researchers asked American
and European students and Chinese students
to categorise three words – monkey, panda
and banana.
Let’s play this here.
Please raise your hand if you would categorise
these objects as this.
Looks like 30%.
How many of you would like to categorise like
this?
Interesting, still not full house.
How many of you might categorise like this.
Not many.
OK.
So what’s going on here.
Respondents from America and Europe are more
likely to categorise monkey and panda as they
are animals.
While Eastern cultures are more likely to
put monkey and banana in the same group.
The point I want to make is, that we in universities
will need to understand assumptions about
the learning models we use.
There is a need to consider the cross-cultural
context of what is offered to learners as
the prior learning cultural context are important
determinants of realised learning outcomes.
In the discipline closer to mine in business
and management, we have known this for a while,
that the cross-culture context of practice
matters in management.
Hence any theorising we do about management
needs to factor that in.
Although in a practical teaching context I
am disappointed to see American case studies
and concepts tested and refined in Anglo Saxon
societies routinely used in business school
classrooms in Asia without much critical discussion
and assumptions about the context of their
origin.
In the case of lifelong learning, decisions
will also need to factor in the stage of life
of the learner.
Even if all the learners are in the same cultural
context, the learner acquires knowledge and
experience as she grows older that intellectual
and emotional baggage will play an important
role in the interaction between the learner
and the content, and may also affect the incentive
of the learner.
Finally, as I move to finish the lecture,
I want to recall 23rd April 1969, when Her
Majesty the Queen approved the creation of
the Royal Charter of The Open University.
On 23rd July 1969 the first meeting of the
congregation of the University was held at
the Royal Society.
The Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, and Jennie
Lee were present at that event where the Charter
was officially presented by Privy Council,
and Geoffrey Crowther was installed as the
first Chancellor.
This is a picture of that occasion.
When our first Chancellor gave us this wonderful
mission to be open to people, places, methods
and ideas.
It was relevant then, it is relevant now after
50 years.
I am reading a book titled Turing’s Cathedral
which is a history of computing by George
Dyson with a historian of technology also
the now famous scientist Freeman Dyson who
chose Turing’s Cathedral title for his book.
He explains that it was the seminal contribution
of Alan Turing who we know worked in Milton
Keynes in Bletchley during the war years,
about the possibility of thinking machines
that led to the development of computers and
hence he calls that movement to build powerful
computers as Turing’s Cathedral.
I am tempted to borrow the metaphor of cathedral.
Fifty years ago we started the building of
an institution what I call the Harold Young
Cathedral of Open Education which unleashed
a revolution that has touched and transformed
millions of lives in the UK and far flung
parts of the globe.
Over these five decades several thousand employees
comprising full-time academics, tutors, professional
staff, Chancellors, Pro-Chancellors, Vice-Chancellors,
the Council members, philanthropists, and
our advisers and above all OU students have
contributed their labour and skill to build
this cathedral brick by brick and continue
to do so.
For us now at The Open University, those of
you who are connected with their education
in any form, those who can enable and support
learning for all the imperatives that I have
presented in this lecture, this is the time
we recommit to the mission for another 50
years.
Let us break the barriers of time and space
and take this revolution forward.
Make lifelong learning a global force for
positive change.
Let us make the difference that will make
the difference.
Thank you.
Thank you Dev.
I am sure you will agree with me, that was
extremely thought-provoking and fascinating.
I am going to give you a chance to not let
Dev off the hook just yet because there’s
a Q&A session for 10 minutes after which we
will close and head to a celebration.
So, whilst we make our way to the chairs and
get settled, I would request that you have
a think about what you would like to ask including
our guests online and when you do ask your
question please wait for the roving mike to
get to you.
When it does just let us know who you are
and which institution you are from, so that
we have a good idea of who you are talking
to.
Thank you very much.
I’m very happy to take the first question
from the room.
Who would like to go first?
Thank you for a very insightful lecture.
I came to The Open University in 1978 and
left it seems only a few moments ago in 2011.
My question is, at the beginning you said
that The Open University was a university
ahead of its time.
Do you think the OU is still ahead of its
time and, if so, which single criterion signifies
its being ahead.
That’s a very good question Dominic.
I think what still puts the University ahead
of its time is its mission.
I think we are still one of the few, if there
are many other universities who consider education
not to be a privilege but as something that
individuals in society and communities need,
irrespective of whichever stage they are in
their life.
So the fact that colleagues in the University
and students have demonstrated that we can
reach out to them.
If you just look at the history of the Open
University Student Association’s achievements.
I was there on Friday evening.
We had lunch with the OU Students Association,
and they showed their history.
How many social barriers they have broken
down to take education to students, whether
its disabilities, social and other barriers.
The OU as an institution has broken barriers
internationally.
I was in Pakistan in November.
The OU help set up the University of Pakistan,
Allama Iqbal Open University there.
They had 1.2M students, 80,000 tutors.
Now 1.2M is actually nearly half of their
total tertiary education enrolment ratio in
Pakistan and they have 190 universities.
So the kind of things that the OU mission
drives us to do I think still makes us ahead
of time.
The call that we just heard from this ILO
report that I just quoted.
If you read that report its just saying the
reason we need places like the OU and more
of those.
So I think it is our mission that takes us
ahead of everybody else.
I’m from the Faculty of Business and Law.
Thank you 
so much for that fascinating lecture.
I was fascinated in particular to hear in
the introduction that you almost became a
monk.
I was wondering to what extent do you think
that the University in the 20th century still
provides what we might call a space for contemplation,
not just the engagement with the world that
we take for granted, the engagement with the
economy for example that you mentioned.
But also for academics themselves to live
a life of contemplation and perhaps critique,
apart from that world.
I think there are very few places to be left
in society at the moment.
I still feel universities are one place where
scope for reflecting on the long-term and
contemplation in general is much more.
I think we need to have space.
There are some worrying signs for me like
the disconnect between the perceived importance
of humanities and what economistic considerations
drive us to in terms of choosing carriers
and the subjects that get studied.
But I still feel it is a 21st century I think
you meant not 20th century, a 21st century
university still should have this space.
If we are to tackle some of these big challenges,
this constant pressure on academics to be
focussed on here and now.
I was looking at a study of how research in
history has evolved, History as the subject.
There was a very interesting finding from
an analysis of the duration of the time span
over which history theses are being written.
So actually there are every few history theses
which go over the timespan of fifty years
or a hundred years which is strange because
in history you would expect them to take a
much longer look at phenomena.
Even there if you look at the title of history
theses, they are talking of five years phenomena
and then they study that thing in five years.
We know some of the social and cultural forces
work on a much, much larger timescale.
So you can’t really analyse a five year
slice of history of some place or topic.
So the answer for me is still it is in the
universities where we can find and must protect
some of those spaces for contemplation.
I will go beyond that through this lifelong
learning kind of opportunities because the
short talks don’t allow you to elaborate
on some of the things like stages of life
that we will be going through.
Living 90 years, you are going through three
or four different stages of life, and all
of them have different challenges but at the
same time opportunities.
So because universities are not coming in
space you have these civil society responses.
For example, there’s the University of the
Third Age in the UK which is a global phenomenon
but in the UK there are 462,000 participants
in the University of the Third Age programmers.
What do these participants do between age
group 55 and 75 because people beyond 80 have
now set up a University of the Fourth age.
There is one University of the Fourth age.
So they are trying to backfill some of those
gaps that you are arguing about contemplation.
I think universities are a much better place
to do those activities.
I will go back to Michael Young’s argument,
why is our library or MK Council not doing
something with the OU for that group of people
that is meaningful, and pays back to society
in different ways through the educational
resources.
Professor of Enterprise and Organisation in
the Faculty of Business and Law.
He thanks you for your interesting talk and
he asks – what are the implications for
the governance of universities if they are
to address the complex challenges that you
have outlined and to deliver these long-term
public goods.
For example, do we need to actively defend
them against commercialisation and privatisation?
Richard thank you for your question.
You have conflicted two issues here in my
view.
One is what do universities governance do?
We’ve got Council members here today, and
VCE members.
I think commitment to lifelong learning has
to be thought through first of all holistically.
How does the OU play a role in that?
The commercialisation in itself I see this
as a different challenge because by its very
nature commercial and private and entrepreneurs,
be they companies or individuals, will come
into a space where there are lower hanging
fruits and training and education which is
of a vocational type, so they are unlikely
to go in there.
The question is how do universities, if we
are to ask that question to us in the University
here, address this need to serve the mainstream
curriculum to what is a mainstream audience
today.
There are students who want qualifications
and so on, and the rest of lifelong learning
needs.
I think whatever we do is going to cost us
money.
All the universities face the same problem.
So the question is who pays for this.
So we have three options, either the user
pays for it, or the state pays for it, or
there is some combination of the two that
makes it happen.
The question is therefore what the universities
think and the OU thinks.
We used to have one fourth of OU students,
I wouldn’t call them leisure learning that
was loosely used for them before 2012, I think
they were actually lifelong learners.
We used to have one in four of that kind of
audience.
We lost that when we took that strategic direction
to qualification route in 2012.
So they are genuinely relevant learners that
we need to serve.
Perhaps governance can explore how to create
public space discussion so that we don’t
have to be seen as lobbying because this is
our clientele, that’s what I don’t think
the OU should be doing.
We should be creating a genuine conversation
and encouraging that though the Students Association,
through whatever networks we have.
This is a real issue and we need to create
space for this learning which is taken care
of whatever way actually.
Again if I go back to one of the proposals
which are there in literature which was to
give people lifelong learning entitlements
for the future.
So you don’t have to go through 20 years
of education in the first part of your life.
You decide when you want to take what you
want.
That’s quite an interesting model and then
how do you support that lifelong learning
entitlement model is something that at policy
level and public level one has to explore
and debate and raise awareness about those
alternatives.
I think this binarily alternatives of private
versus state are not going to help.
We need to broaden and deepen the conversation
around that option.
One last question or a thought or a comment,
in which case I shall walk across to thank
Dev for his excellent lecture and to thank
all of you as well.
I have just a couple of things to bring to
life for you about the 12 academics who will
be presenting in the Inaugural Lecture series.
The first one will be on 19th February when
Professor of Educational Technology, Martin
Weller will talk on Aspects of Open - The
evolution of the meaning of open education.
Of course, fittingly it aligns with our 50th
anniversary.
Details can be found on The Open University
research website or on 50.open.ac.uk if you
would like to sign up for it.
There will of course be an opportunity to
give us some feedback.
We thrive on feedback.
The only way we can make ourselves better
is if you tell us how.
So when those forms come around please do.
If you are online please let us know via your
comments what we could do better for next
time.
So really that brings me to the close of today’s
launch.
To thank Dev formally, to thank his family
and everyone here.
We will now move on to our drinks.
Thank you very much.
