Conversations about Conversation into Action...as it unfolds
Here we are recording the development if the initiative, and ideas around it.
We will add pages about ideas being discussed in the group:
Housing and Homes
We will add pages about ideas being discussed in the group:
Housing and Homes
Some thoughts about Conversation into Action - November 2015
It’s been an interesting journey so far which feels quite organic but I think we are reaching a point where we need to decide where to take both our conversation and our action.
What have we got at the moment? Well there are the three of us, there’s Mel (KOVE), there’s the link with Ransackers and the AEA and there are connection with BSG and with the OU. There is also a nucleus of people who attended either the May Kilburn debate session and/or the October Conversation into Action workshop.
In addition to these people I also think we have ideas and methods. I stumbled on the device of getting participants to think of themselves as either older learners or the educators of older learners. I also used the notion of engaging (critically?) with particular texts which was taken forward in October when we encouraged people to make connections between texts and current circumstances and the possibilities of engaging in either research (for example with sheltered housing) or campaigning (in relation to age disqualification for jury service).
Oh yes, we’ve also got a theme (or themes) citizenship, participation and democracy.
I think that’s pretty impressive but the question remains of where now. I’m deliberately writing these without reference to any notes. (I perhaps should have added that we have been quite good at keeping notes as we have gone along and these have been supplemented by reflection from other people like Jackie Richards and Jane Watts.) I’m doing that to see what seems to be most significant.
The other thing that’s worth noting is the conversations this has led to with other people. I have been in contact with Professor Engin Isin who is Professor of Citizenship at the OU. He is also co-editor of Citizenship Studies. He tells me that citizenship and ageing is an active research area and suggested that I come along to an Open Forum later this month. I have also been discussing with colleagues in the Faculty of Education and Language. There are a number of them who feel quite isolated there as a result of curriculum changes and they were very interested in what the three of us have been doing and would like to be involved. I have also been discussing this with CICP colleagues and there is some interest in this quarter too.
Perhaps one issue we need to resolve is whether we want to be talking to other people as well (Men’s Sheds? Third Age Trust?)
We also have a commitment to ‘deliver’ two more seminars which would aim to increase the level of participation and perhaps head us to towards a sort of co-production of …
What would we want a method, a framework of how older learners could come together to initiate research or a campaign (or a well-researched campaign) or something more content focused that would support enquiry in a particular area? Perhaps the use of IT, the internet or social media could be a possibility too (for both research and campaigning)? Perhaps a combination – for example we might want to have inputs on citizenship – perhaps explaining the relevance of earlier figures like T. H. Marshall?
I think that the two seminars and any future ones might be the basis of a ‘course’ that could be offered to interested parties like the Ransackers. I think there are (at least) two aspects of this that we need to think about. First I think it needs to have fairly loose framework/open box feel to it. This would make it easier to develop variants within its overall structure. For example if it had a particular citizenship focus we might ask Engin Isin to do a sort video which people could then use as a resource. I also think it needs to think of itself as developing as an open educational resource.
Jonathan Hughes
What have we got at the moment? Well there are the three of us, there’s Mel (KOVE), there’s the link with Ransackers and the AEA and there are connection with BSG and with the OU. There is also a nucleus of people who attended either the May Kilburn debate session and/or the October Conversation into Action workshop.
In addition to these people I also think we have ideas and methods. I stumbled on the device of getting participants to think of themselves as either older learners or the educators of older learners. I also used the notion of engaging (critically?) with particular texts which was taken forward in October when we encouraged people to make connections between texts and current circumstances and the possibilities of engaging in either research (for example with sheltered housing) or campaigning (in relation to age disqualification for jury service).
Oh yes, we’ve also got a theme (or themes) citizenship, participation and democracy.
I think that’s pretty impressive but the question remains of where now. I’m deliberately writing these without reference to any notes. (I perhaps should have added that we have been quite good at keeping notes as we have gone along and these have been supplemented by reflection from other people like Jackie Richards and Jane Watts.) I’m doing that to see what seems to be most significant.
The other thing that’s worth noting is the conversations this has led to with other people. I have been in contact with Professor Engin Isin who is Professor of Citizenship at the OU. He is also co-editor of Citizenship Studies. He tells me that citizenship and ageing is an active research area and suggested that I come along to an Open Forum later this month. I have also been discussing with colleagues in the Faculty of Education and Language. There are a number of them who feel quite isolated there as a result of curriculum changes and they were very interested in what the three of us have been doing and would like to be involved. I have also been discussing this with CICP colleagues and there is some interest in this quarter too.
Perhaps one issue we need to resolve is whether we want to be talking to other people as well (Men’s Sheds? Third Age Trust?)
We also have a commitment to ‘deliver’ two more seminars which would aim to increase the level of participation and perhaps head us to towards a sort of co-production of …
What would we want a method, a framework of how older learners could come together to initiate research or a campaign (or a well-researched campaign) or something more content focused that would support enquiry in a particular area? Perhaps the use of IT, the internet or social media could be a possibility too (for both research and campaigning)? Perhaps a combination – for example we might want to have inputs on citizenship – perhaps explaining the relevance of earlier figures like T. H. Marshall?
I think that the two seminars and any future ones might be the basis of a ‘course’ that could be offered to interested parties like the Ransackers. I think there are (at least) two aspects of this that we need to think about. First I think it needs to have fairly loose framework/open box feel to it. This would make it easier to develop variants within its overall structure. For example if it had a particular citizenship focus we might ask Engin Isin to do a sort video which people could then use as a resource. I also think it needs to think of itself as developing as an open educational resource.
Jonathan Hughes
Notes from Conversation into Action discussion 6th November 2015
Caroline, John and Jonathan
We started by discussing other possible partners. Agreed that Mel (KOVE) would probably be too busy to be pro-active in this context. Some discussion of whether Marianne Markovsky ,who ran the desk at the 2nd Kilburn debate and who has links with Shailey Minocha and has interests in designing of-line accessibility, might be interested on being involved.
I think we agreed that John would approach her?
So it was felt that currently we are a partnership that involves the OU, the Ransackers , KOVE and AEA. We had some discussion about the level of formality of this partnership but I think we agreed with Caroline’s point that it is all very ‘emergent’ at the moment and that the group may well lead to spin off activity that would not necessary be 100% on our agenda. So we are talking using words like collaboration and cooperation and understanding rather than working to a very tied down core mission (this was felt to be no bad thing).
I do think we need to keep think about who we are talking to – for example might we want to have Jane watts and Janet Whitehouse more ‘on board’?
Touched on issue of the alternative course to the historical Ransacker’s residential approach which not directly be an OU course either. Working towards an output of some sort of course would need much more defined funding which would, in turn, mean that we had to be much clearer about what we are about.
We agreed that it would probably be preferable to aim to get a small amount of money to tide us over the next few months. (Possibly from HSC RESDEV)
This would be primarily to support the next two seminars we are committed to and which could then lead on to Camden Intergenerational Week in autumn of 2016. Over this period the focus much more likely to be enquiry rather than delivery, although this then might lead onto content development.
As hinted at above we also anticipate that other people might use this context as a launch pad if this does happen then we could well be in a position of offering support and advice. The lack of control is likely to lead to more opportunities. We accept that Ransackers need to provide things and that KOVE provides (For JM) an ‘anchor’ for small associations shaken out by AgeUK and which are strong in Camden.
Having discussed these more (potentially) strategic aspects we then moved on to what we plan to do next. This started with JM mentioning the exercise built round the planning application. This led to a brief but interesting discussion. This included participants (?) being put on the spot, the need to do some research and different goals . Also the issue of attempting to play the role of academic experts when we are not. Also question raised of what we do if it “turns serious”.
Also mention of Robin G and old K D form which are lost to me now.
Could one of you confirm who and what this refers to?
This gave way to a discussion of housing as a focus issue. Mention of Fitting together with age (Was this as a possible focus document?), would we need to involve someone as an expert and/or to provide an overall appraisal.
Drawn to this topic too because housing raises significant cross-generational issues and raises key political issues.
Notion of “how we live” was raised. WE are living together less. The housing market is largely geared to people buying. What implications does this have for communities, how we live, with whom, who has control? Such issues require a lot of thinking much of which is counter-intuitive.
It was felt that housing raises big issues of principle which can be explored at a smaller scale.
We also touched on the narrative of ‘horrid estates’, limited ideas of community, generational solidarity, social mix. On social mix felt that often people are not comfortable with defining social mix- and the tendency for people to want the mix they are comfortable with.
Mention of New York study which shows that younger people liked having older people living in their neighbourhood. (Thought we could perhaps discuss this paper). Also mentioned was Ness Burgholt’s work about growing up in Worthing.
Could we get more detailed references?
Agreed that there were various elements to think about in relation to the housing theme over 2 seminars which could to a substantive intergenerational event in a year’s time (as part of Camden IGW).
A key issue would be the deconstruction of the rhetoric around housing and exploring what links there should be with human rights and citizenship (which we think are generally not interrogated).
Warming to housing as a theme, we thought that the workshop should bring in historical evidence and in particular the deep-rooted home ownership narrative, This would be contrasted with the ‘heyday’ on council housing.. Also to highlight how this is profoundly questioned by data (for example in Stuart Lowe’s book) about how profoundly we are trapped in a very polarised model of housing.
This is in contrast with the German model where housing is provided by trades unions and friendly societies.
So do we need to have comparisons?
Need to lead to pragmatic discussion about what can be done. It was thought that it might be useful to make a link with Middlesex University Students Union (media students?) as well as Haverstock School and Camden IGW).
I’m not sure I’ve got this right – could you correct please John?
CH agreed to create a website for us. This underlines our commitment to transparency and be some were where we could place the extract from Selina Todd and Stuart Lowe.
I will need to get electronic copies sorted.
This would include pages for the two seminars and the Camden IG week.
Again mention of contacting Robin.
Mention also of Mike Savage on social class (2006?).
Again could one of you correct/add details?
Key activities in the workshops would be exploring texts and listening to speakers.
Mention made of the £40K available via Sandpit (I didn’t note who the funder was).
Could you add who funds this , Caroline?
CH to Check availability at OU Camden for March and June 2016.
JH to check ESREA dates as we might put in a paper for this.
We concluded with a more general discussion. We enjoy this way of working and want to maintain what we doing which we see as a terrific mix. Also notion that Conversation into Action might be a way of holding the centre leading to actions we might or might or not get involved with.
Also brief mention of activist training next January (was this at City Lit?) and using Claude to help us explore the realities of social housing.
We agreed that we want to keep the lifelong learning perspective in play.
Some actions:
CH- re: funding (RESDV and Sandpit) and website.
JH – ESRA and FELs contacts
Update
Caroline and I met Paul Lewsey, a Southampton Councillor who is doing a master’s in gerontology and was at the BSG event last week –we both thought that he might be a good link to add a workshop case study.
I’ll get back to him.
