Unfinished but the best overview I can manage.  

Conducted by: Hannah and Laura M on 11/11/09

Location: campus- from the Arts Centre to the Reinvention Centre with a tour of the Learning Grid from Fran Kauzlaric (Student Advisor) en route.

Notes on methodology: The interview for the most part was structured via our moving around the campus and particular buildings/ rooms.  An example of collaborative research- exchange of details/ information between Gaston and the Learning grid  

Transcribed notes from walking part of interview: ‘Opinions and memories of gossip rather than necessarily authentic history’

Gaston was appointed to Warwick in 1964 (in between then and teaching at Warwick he spent a year in Melbourne). First taught at Warwick in January 1966 but was involved with organising of new course prior to teaching. Retired in 1989 (last taught in 1990). Made an Emeritus Reader when position was created.

....

 Loss of staff rights, restrictions needed when 20,000 students. ID cards- when introduced and for who? For staff initially c.1968? Security- computers stolen from Arts building one afternoon when they were new

First university intake was of a graduate student in maths 1964. He came with Professor Zeeman and [in audible]…‘stein from Cambridge. First undergraduates came to Warwick in October 1965

1963 1^st librarian appointed (full-time), some professors (part time)  

At a time, c.1965-66, all the university was on the other site (east site?) and then once some departments had moved staff still went back to the other site for lunch. There was a lunch hour. All staff and student ate in their own groups separately. Hierarchical- faculty club or general club- university divide. 

Noted the numerous cafes on campus today- required with the student population in the thousands.

1967-68 Humanities moved into the top 2 floors of the library from the East site. It was still a building site.

…

Falling tiles of the library and other buildings

Jack Butterworth 1^st VC wanted Warwick to imitate Oxford Colleges and Berkeley’s big modern university, big research base, international reputation. Gaston has experience of both - student at Oxford and taught at Berkeley.

Students thought that having colleges was the university trying of dividing and rule- separate the students into colleges so that they wouldn’t have a strong student voice. C.1968 Student vetoed the colleges.Check student newspaper records for documentation.

Gaston thinks great pity due to the number of students today- would feel cosier.

Mentioned Spring 1968 Prague Kafuffle and the colleges of Durham, Kent at Canterbury, Yale and Harvard

...

University parking- students against the multi storey by the sports centre. University had ‘wrong priorities’ ‘waste of money’ ‘shouldn’t be catering for cars’

After 1968 students continued to be stroppy for a few years… turned to say that the university wasn’t providing enough parking. 1^st major complaint of students was the car park.

Learning Grid:

Why it doesn’t get destroyed is due to its ownership. Students own it and so why would they destroy something they own?  

Fran Kauzlaric had some interesting things to say about finding space to work and resources and their delivery at Warwick. Student story?  

Gaston impressed with the metro-nap pod- the need to nap.

…

1960’s Warwick pioneered student accommodation in terms of letting it out for the vacation. Has been done since the first year which coincided with the Royal Show

Built to attract people in the vacation and gave students better accommodation.

Highlighted the importance of conferences for universities 

Inside the Reinvention Centre: (described how the room can be used, by who and the different facilities)

[Gaston took the black reclining chair and Laura and I a bean-bag sat towards the corner of the room]

 “It is just such a different… more like Berkeley than it is like Warwick when I retired”  Starting to get overseas students but not the large numbers of overseas students like today- it is a big international business …. 

The biggest change happened in the last few years of teaching- writing a paper/ lecture and the organising of it. Rearranging of material via scissors and tape- photocopies

 Lectures usually small because 30-45 students per year, 1^st years in groups of 6, seminar groups c.12- got to know students quickly, tutorials 2-4 and when money began running out sizes increased

Nearest could come to an Oxbridge style tutorial group- English core lectures- much bigger.  

Would sometimes have to give the same lecture twice to large numbers at Glasgow when taught there

Everything has become more impersonal. Philistine government- putting Oxbridge under pressure now not increase class sizes  

Oxford and Warwick (as it was)- students taught by fully accredited permanent staff. Big American Uni students did not get the same experience as rarely see their professors- situation today? Today PhD students teach- pros cons of being taught by professors and PhD students.

No good going into a first year class and asking how would you like to be taught. Need to go in with an idea. Some groups gel well together etc. Some end up with cliques.

…

Space- what is conducive to teaching and learning and anything which prohibits?  A good group can make the best of space available. Crowded or too big a room doesn’t work

...

Warwick generally lacks, not entirely now but before, kind of historical architectural centre

Campus- Have put in works of art and is attractive in lots of way but not one of great architectural distinction.

One of the advantages Oxford architectural heritage and for Gaston it really mattered when spending days and nights in fine architectural heritage

Berkeley- campanile (Sather Tower) 

Birmingham – Victorian, red brick, campanile (clock), great hall, feel entered privileged place where learning is valued and apart of something different and big. Feels established

Social studies (red brick!) much cosier

Warwick needs to work hard to create established feel

At the time when Warwick was built there was an Egalitarian view towards architecture. In Eastern Europe or Cuba bourgeois buildings were being allowed to fall down and post war Britain building flats etc. to house people cheaply. As a part historical heritage of not wanting to spend money on big facades or ornaments.  

But something about having an architectural centre whose utility really is to uplift your spirits and to give you a focus and to be an Emblem of your identity and I have always thought that Warwick could do with a bit more of that […] makes people walk with more of a swagger […] in your hands, you students must go and out and do that. Find, the state will never do it, some wealthy patriot among the alumni who have made fortunes and get them to endow some wonderful […] Warwick deserves it… well on the other hand you can’t be sorry that Warwick hasn’t spent the money on that kind of thing when we have the Learning Grid etc.

Ken Flint Interview·         Began working at Warwick in October 1976.·         First position was in environmental sciences and was based in the chemistry building. From 1985 onwards he was based in biological sciences on Gibbet Hill.Photo Identification

·         Picture 1: Identifies the yet completed library and science blocks, places the date of the picture at pre 1968, as these were completed by the time he arrived on campus and the chemistry degree began in 1968. Comments that the library tiles were already beginning to drop off.

·         Picture 2: Recognises typical ‘cladding’ of the building in the photo as being the Gibbet Hill Campus. Later Ken shows me the site of the photo in its modern carnation.

  ·         Between 1974 and 1980 the university began to grow and change rapidly. In this time social studies was built, it then calmed until around the mid 1980’s when development began again.  This cycle of building included the business school and extensions to existing buildings, including the Gibbet Hill wing which was built in 1984. Ken believes the university has building and development ‘spurts’. ·         Estimates that since 1976 there has only been one year when Warwick has not had some sort of major building works going on. ·         ‘Warwick has prided itself on being at the forefront of everything’ thus it has to move forward and modernise constantly. Even in the 1970’s Warwick had a reputation for being cutting edge and innovative.

·         The biggest change he has seen in teaching rooms is the change from ‘chalk boards, to white boards, to overheads and now to the use of powerpoint.’

·         In terms of how technology affects teaching, he feels staff have to change the way they teach to suit the equipment. However some subjects still need older equipment, he uses the example of teaching statistics on a chalk board, as you can easily erase and change things. Admits that ‘you could do that on PowerPoint, but I don’t want to learn.’ Although he does say that PowerPoint is great for other things and says it is expected that biology lecturers use PowerPoint.

·         A new development is students recording lectures and making podcasts.

·         Some staff do resent changes in technology as it means constantly having to adjust lectures and methods, which means less time on research comments

 

‘Every member of staff is hesitant to change the way they teach, partly because at Warwick, as you probably know, Warwick promotion ect are determined by research’

 

·         However believes staffs have to adjust to technology or it can be fatal for their careers.

·         Teaches different years differently. For first years it is important to lay ground work and get them ‘interested’ in the subject. For final years it is more important to have cutting edge material, thus the materials changes yearly for final years and rarely for the first years.

·         Laboratory rooms have changed dramatically and ‘look a lot different to when I first started’. Main difference is the presence of computers in the lab and the way all the equipment can be hooked up to laptops.

·         Smaller teaching includes workshops, tutorials and seminars.

·         Teaching of whole year groups has become more formal, as there larger intakes of students each year.  Since he started the number of students in a year group has grown from 50 – 240 students. Small group teaching has not changed, as it has always been groups of five and will remain that way. Belives groups of 5 are the best way to teach and would not increase size of tutorials past 5 students.

·         Prefers ‘students to lead the tutorial’ and for each student to take turns in leading the discussion. Sees his role as ‘facilitating the discussion’ rather than teaching it. Also uses this time for students to bring up any issues or problems they may be having with the course. 

·         Dedicates one seminar a term for students to choose what topic or research will be discussed.

·         Feels there is a big spilt between ‘town and gown’.  Thinks that the University has ‘done more damage to Leamington than good, because of the damage students’ cause’.  However sees students in Coventry as less of an issue, as Coventry has a history of students due to the polytechnic, whereas in Leamington it was a major change.

·         Although does mention some strength of the University, such as the arts and sports centre as good ways of attracting the community onto campus. Mentions local sport team coming to compete on campus and this makes good links.

·         Mentions the socialising after sports matches in the university bars mentions the ‘airport lounge’.  This resulted in many people not seeing the university as an elitist organisation, as perhaps they had previously assumed.

·         It has also created a lot of jobs for the local people, Ken knows several people who jobs in the university within the admin and estate departments.

·         Ken has personal links with many of the local colleges in the area and tries to spread the message of what Warwick University is all about.  Also occasionally has school students come in and take part in labs sessions.

·         Sees the development of learning grids ect as a result of students moving away from learning from books, to internet resources. Believes the library should be renamed the information centre, as there is no longer a need for a place that just has books.

·         When asked about the access and card only entrance to library he felt that ‘knowledge is universal, so the library should be universal and free of charge’.

·          Overall believes that the University ‘could do a hell of a lot more’ to forge good links with the community.

  

Warwick and Community - main thrust of interview

• Little communication with immediate community regarding the development of the university.
• Ruth a child in Canley when Warwick was being built, remebers the uni being a representation of their 'playground destruction', built over orchards and fields which were play sites for the local children.
• Warwick seen as a self contained  and separate entity to the outside world, no bus links initially, locals tended to take bus into Coventry and use social facilities at Lanchester Polytechnic (now Coventry University). Ruth commented on the kudos of having a 'student boyfriend', but it was the Lanchester, not the Warwick students that were sought after.
• Some community links with teacher training college (now Westwood teaching centre) that existed prior to the university's construction, use of their swimming pool and teachers taught at nearby schools. Ironic that this is one of the only community links that Warwick maintains today, yet this tradition did not originate within the uni itself!
• Uni physically closed off from community in recent years, i.e the blocking of paths from Canley estate to central campus, seemed symbolic for Ruth, reason why many children in the area see uni as something beyond them or not for them, despite living so close to one.
• Despite this, Ruth saw Warwick as ASPIRATIONAL; iconic white buildings and striking architecture shown to her by her brother in teen years became a symbol for what she could achieve through higher education, even though she did not attend Warwick as a student. Should the uni be trying to encourage this now?
• Mentions Butterworth's visits to working men's clubs when uni was first opened to establish community links and support (this was from Ruth's own research - recommended we get in touch with Coventry telegraph to look into community relations with Warwick).

Warwick and Teaching Space

• Ruth a lecturer here in the past, showed photos of first lecture, Gibbet Hill classrooms and science lecture theatre.
• Criticised small, airless, windowless, power centred (teacher as oracle at the front of the room) classrooms characteristic of most of Warwick's teaching spaces.
• Commented on her own attempts to 'break the mould' in teaching, set up local projects with nearby Westwood school (although with no formal backing of the uni), and insisted on changing around seminar rooms to create a more open, social space for learning focused on the needs of the students, not the dictates of the lecturer.
• Excellent quote to sum this up; 'open them (classrooms) up and set the students free.' Praised the new spaces at Warwick such as the Reinvention Centre and the learning grid.

Notes by Laura Evans

  1.      Story at Warwick – Curator of the University

Mead GalleryIn charge of art collection, 800 works across campus, also part of TEACHING LEARNING AND RESEARCH.1993 start date – stalled career, period of longevity, know the history of the university, what it STANDS for and what the university NEEDS in terms of reflecting its values as an institution and what is demanded by and of students. 

2.      History of art at Warwick – change, phases of development etc No idea that it wanted or needed art as part of its university 

PHASE 1 - Eugene Rosenberg – key architect in early design of the university, style = designing large institutional buildings – always had an art collection in each building design, furniture chosen = modernist chairs, mass produced Scandinavian design, large abstract art paintings, pop work e.g ‘Special K’, commercial imagery – new consumption of university students etc – university as MODERN, CUTTING EDGE, new ideas and ideals.Discourse of abstract paintings – existentialism ‘BUYING INTELLECTUAL PAINTINGS FOR AN INTELLECTUAL PLACE’ (4:58)Seven unis founded at the same time – opening of H.E to working class = new wave of student grants, new ‘people’ becoming intellectuals, anxiety towards this new conception of university education, art used to respond to the MODERN needs of the new students. 

PHASE 2 – Syrill Barret? Member of philosophy department late 60s-70s. £200 a year for art – prints, wanted to continue the ‘modern’ art feel, bought on secondary market rather than from artists themselves as Rosenberg did. Continuing the vibrant, intellectual, forward thinking, and dynamic ‘Warwick environment’. 

PHASE 3 – First uni curator, catalogued uni art, ‘past is past, stories of art history are an ARTIFICIAL CONSTRUCT ANYWAY’ – so is this the role of art at Warwick, to artificially construct an intellectual environment with modern ideals and approaches using its architecture/art?Small budget for art – could only afford young and new art pieces – again does this reflect what Warwick stands for?? ‘Young’ and revolutionary thinking regarding education and teaching, research, the clientele of students, learning environment etc?? 

PHASE 4 – Sarah Shalgosky and Brian Follett, new vice chancellor, ‘HOW ART COULD ANIMATE THE SPACES’, budget increased to £10, 000, were able to buy significant art pieces by significant artists, then won lottery, £150,000 on art then, installed 4 major works of art 1. Cosmic Wallpaper – Ramphal 2. Maths institute 3. Business School4. David Bachelor for uni house. NEW BUILDINGS GIVEN NEW ART – is this significant? Forward thinking university? Imposing ideals of student and uni from the beginning of a space’s life?Spaces important for work, e,g uni house 3 storey art… ART part of PUBLIC ART, Warwick is NOT a museum, what is public art? ‘IT ADDRESSES THE PLACE IT’S IN’.Input of students informs the art e.g sociology and cosmic art, Deep Purple history – studying systems, map of life, this is how sociologists make sense of the world etc. ART REFLECTS SUBJECT DISCIPLINE, central to reflecting the intellectual world that the art is placed in. 

PHASE 5 – Nigel thrift - Changing perception of art as interior decoration, wanted art to make an ‘INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTION’ to the university itself, art representative of academic pursuit, form of RESEARCH, art reflective of Warwick’s commitment to research based learning perhaps??Artists put into research collectives here at Warwick now, working with departments etc e.g Olivia Plender? Art not secondary to academic research but more complimentary. 

3.      Curriculum and Art 1960s – Art separate from the ‘business’ of the teaching of the university, more indicative of the ideals of the institution, freedom, access, modern approach to learning, opportunity etcNOW – Central to the academic work itself, art as a process of idea generation and research = ideal of teaching and learning at Warwick, what the university student should STRIVE TO BE – a researcher!  Importance of FUNDING – artists have similar ownership of ideas as intellectuals, but disseminate these ideals in a different way to academics = architecture wider illustration of this, different way of disseminating ideals? Funding bodies encouraging this use of art. ‘FUNDING FOLLOWS FORM OR FORM FOLLOWS FUNDING’ – true of architecture, pedagogy, and spaces throughout history??  Labour government policies at beginning of millennium regarding art in educational institutions = ‘ART WAS A UTILITARIAN DEVICE TO DELIVER SOCIAL COHESION,’ Warwick attempting to distance itself from this idea, wants art to actually contribute to academia – Warwick always been quite REBELLIOUS?? Link back to student riots etc. Art is people working through ideas and putting their findings into the public arena – exactly the same as academics!  

4.      In one statement what does art mean to Warwick University 

‘DEVELOPMENT OF IDEAS’ – new ideals of teaching, learning, the student, challenging government policy, and this has been the case from the 1960s to today!

Notes by Laura Evans