1. Calling Flexibility to Account: Pitfalls and Possibilities Ronald Barnett, Institute of Education, London HEA Wales conference: Global Graduates – enabling flexible learning, 2-3 April 2014 Centre for Higher Education Studies Sub-brand to go here

2. 2 Who could not be in favour of flexibility?  Who could not be in favour of flexibility?  Who would want to be felt to be inflexible?  Which institution would want to be felt to be inflexible?  ‘Flexibility’ – everyone is in favour of it, it seems.

3. 3 Implications  But then, if everyone is in favour of it:  There will be rival ideas as to what flexibility might mean (even conflicting accounts)  Those rival ideas may point toward radically different and incommensurable policies and practices.  Flexibility cannot mean everything to everyone at the same time. Some tough choices have to be made.  That is my thesis – and I shall argue as to the direction in which I would make choices.

4. 4 Levels of flexibility F has meaning at different levels – the sector as a whole, institution, course (both curriculum and pedagogy), and student. And interests that register at one level may clash with another level Not merely that say a national interest in CAT clashes with an institution’s interests in its own admissions policy, or that an institutional modular scheme may cut across a course team’s interests in building up a course as such or that a student may wish – in a internet-delivered system – for more support than a course team can give But different stances on flexibility itself may conflict across the levels: a course team may want forms of flexibility that are not poss in an institution’s modular scheme; a student may prefer to study by him/herself on-line while the new on-line programme – begun in the name of flexibility – may require students to engage on-line with each other The EU may want to develop an EU-wide CATS scheme but some UK IHEs may want to preserve their own F

5. 5 Pedagogical paradox 2 Paradoxes: 1A curriculum may exhibit flexibility -It may offer choice of modules; students may be able to vary their mode of study; or intercalate periods ‘out’; or even vary their assessment BUT the pedagogy may be fixed and rigid and even didactic. 2A pedagogical relationship may offer all manner of openness/ flexibility But that openness (‘loose framing’) may be contained in a closed curriculum. (Dimensions of time and space criss-cross these situations.)

6. 6 A pedagogy of openness ‘(beginning the student journey) is [an entry into] a scary, exciting and fascinating world … We need … self-belief to survive and prosper … I remember thinking … this is amazing, exciting, exhilarating and downright terrifying … Working with a complex world is … about … not giving up when you feel overwhelmed …’ ‘… What’s fascinating about Alison’s courses is the amount of panic, you know, that surrounds the essays and I felt it personally … It was a very, very scary thing to do because … there were no right answers.’ - Pedagogical openness/ F; but disc/ curric standards.

7. 7 Two rival ideas of flexibility Alongside/ underneath differences of levels, forms, time, space are two ideas of flexibility that are fundamentally different and rivalrous: -Systems flexibility (all those that we have looked at) -regions/ country/ IHEs/ programmes of study -Personal flexibility NB: the lure of technology; the lure of the market.

8. 8 The idea of personal flexibility The twenty-first century – an age of challenge; a ‘supercomplex age’ Calls for personal flexibility (not a matter of reinventiveness but of making one’s way in a turbulent contested and fluid (‘liquid’) world) Extraordinary thing: a higher education can offer much of what is required Disciplines (incl professional fields) impart discipline! - educational/ epistemic virtues Ds and Qs Capacities to keep going forward in a situation of continuing strangeness ie, personal flexibility

9. 9 The linguist’s tale I’ve always had a huge passion for languages. But coming to [x university], I found the French and the Italian departments very different, and I did start to feel a bit bitter towards French. I wasn’t enjoying that any more. I loved it at school more than Italian. I found the French department very rigid … I did feel like I was back in school, but not in the sixth form … I didn’t feel very free to express myself in the lessons. With the Italian department, we all sit around a big table or chairs without tables in front. There would be a lot more interaction … It was more friendly, just a liberating atmosphere.’ Ped F; curricula stability

10. 10 Always becoming Being – ‘being possible’ Yes, but ‘always becoming’ Struggle amid conflict/ negating negations/ combating distortions/ purpose amid antagonisms ie, an educational idea as to what it is to be a person in the twenty-first century

11. 11 Conditions of personal flexibility – initial questions In order that a higher education promote personal flexibility, its educational situations should themselves contain some degree of flexibility In curricula? - probably In pedagogies? – certainly

12. 12 Reflections on our initial conditions The questions seem inocuous but are themselves profound For their answering implies: –That the questions are worth asking (forms of flexibility are not good in themselves but become good under certain conditions) –That professional judgement is called for – and indeed a lot of hard work lies ahead in determining just how such personal flexibility is going to be developed (or have a good chance of being developed).  NB: it’s happening all the time; it’s not fanciful. (We have just been tolerably good at it as educators for hundreds of years – but we’ve had no theory as to how we have been doing it.)

13. 13 Coming out of oneself ‘I had no … awareness of my own ability, so when you get an inspiring teacher that has faith in you, or helps you understand a topic then you know, it’s amazing. You get excited … you want to go and know more about it, you want to find more … if a teacher inspires you in a subject then are you are going to a lot more attention, feel that drive to get involved in a way.’ ‘I have always lacked self-confidence … You worry what other people think, and are they going to read this and completely disagree? … I was afraid of saying the wrong answer.’ Personal journey; voyaging; ped of/ for risk; cf ped of safety Personal F; becoming anew

14. 14 ‘Global Graduates: Enabling Flexible Learning’ The idea of the global graduate – contains the idea of a person who has an interest in the world and is able to see themselves as a citizen of the world Helping it to go forward, to improve it, to contest it, to work for a better world Ie, flexibility plus a value orientation, but concerned to understand the world All this points both to F in ped and curricula (for students to become themselves) But also to boundaries, discipline(s), standards ie, F can be driven neither entirely by systems considerations or market considerations There are limits to F.

15. 15 Conclusions  Flexibility is an empty concept – it gets filled up by rival ideas and ideas whose implementation cuts across each other  Flexibility is not an end in itself  When pleas for F are heard, the q has to be asked: which F? In whose interests? With what educational consequences?  Educational interests in F may be undermined by systems interests in F  ie, F requires value choices to be made  An education for the C21 desperately needs to look to helping to develop students/ graduates who are ‘flexible’ but not entirely plastic. Institute of Education University of London 20 Bedford Way London WC1H 0AL Tel +44 (0)20 7612 6000 Fax +44 (0)20 7612 6126 Email info@ioe.ac.uk Web www.ioe.ac.uk