The Open University has, in a real sense, two ancestries. One is technological. The other is ideological – the notion of a people's university for continuing education throughout life, the notion of deschooling and universities without walls.
(Hooper, 1974, p 183)During its formative years the development of prisoner education at The Open University (henceforth OU) was shaped by prisoners, prison and OU staff, and framed by a government desire to maintain and develop society through broadening prospects for social improvement. OU staff tended to see the university as part of a social democratic commitment to rehabilitation. Their pedagogy encouraged learners to be active in constructing knowledge by reflection on experience. For many prisoners, education was a means of escape, or at least engaging with ideas from beyond the walls.
The first part of this chapter outlines the OU's creation as an element of the support for pluralism, wider opportunities and the belief that humans can and should shape the world which defined the post-war settlement. Directed by overt government audit and intervention, the OU employed industrial-scale teaching and a range of media to showcase scientific efficiency and to promote Britishfocused culture and western values. Within the context of a Cold War rivalry which stimulated further expansion of welfare provision, the OU normalized the marketisation of social democracy. This understanding of the OU's role informs the focus in Chapters 6 to 14 on the perspectives and understandings of some of those involved in the OU's prison work.
The OU had its roots in part-time education for adults, developed from the 18th century, in the correspondence courses and university extension initiatives of the 19th century, and in the 20th-century sandwich courses, summer schools and educational radio and television broadcasts. These seeds were nurtured in the 1960s when the post-war population bulge led to an increased demand for higher education, greater interest in post-compulsory education and widespread acceptance that expenditure on education was reasonable and likely to aid sound governance.