start.html

<html> <head> <title>The Start of a New University</title> </head>

<body bgcolor="#ffffff" link="#555555" vlink="#000000" alink="#000000">
<h1>
<a href="index.html"><img src="folklore-icon.gif" alt="Folklore"
align="bottom" width="31" height="33"></a>

The Start of a New University</h1>

<p align=center> Manchester<br> Statistical<br> Society</p>

<p align=center> <b>The Start of a New University</b><br> by<br> Lord
James of Rusholme<br> <hr></p>

<p align=center> <em>Read 9th February, 1966</em></p>

<hr> <p align=center> <b>Price 15/.</b> </p>

<p>It is, I need scarcely say, a very great pleasure for me to address a
society of which I was at one time a member, and to which so many of my
friends belong. I could wish, however, that the offering that brought
you was a more worthy one. As I warned the secretary when he asked me,
I am no statistician. My talk to-night will contain very few figures at
all, and I can simply ask your indulgence for what can but be regarded
from the point of view of this society as the case history of one
enterprise.</p>

<p>It has often been a matter of surprise that the city of York has had
to wait so long for a university. One of the oldest and one of the most
beautiful cities in England, York has a tradition of learning that goes
back to Alcuin. In fact two abortive attempts were made to enlist
government support for a university in the 17th century, but after that
there were no further stirrings of academic aspiration until 1947. York
was too small and too quiet to be involved in the wave of new university
foundations that began during the latter part of the 19th century in the
industrial cities.</p>

<p>It was not until 1947 that an approach was made to the University
Grants Committee, without whose massive support no university
foundation, old or new, could hope to be viable, and without whose
 approval no charter would ever be granted. The inspiration for this
approach came from a very small group of prominent local citizens, who
associated with them in their attempt representatives of the local
governments in the area. At that time there was no general acceptance
of the fact that need would arise for a major expansion of university
education. The only new foundation of that period (Keele) was, indeed,
carried out in the teeth of the opposition of most of the already
existing universities. The proposal for a University of York was
rejected. But those responsible were encouraged to assess in greater
detail the nature and volume of the local support that would be
forthcoming if a university came into existence. To do this, York
Civic Trust established a committee which later became an independent
Academic Trust. York thus differed from some others of the new
universities in the sense that initial impetus was supplied by the
enthusiasm of a small group, rather than by the intervention of a Local
Authority. In the following years this group accomplished a great
deal. York is fortunate in being the headquarters of a large chocolate
industry, associated for many years with an unusually strong tradition
of philanthropy, and some of whose leaders had themselves been pioneers
of scientific social investigation. The charitable trusts associated
with this industry and with some of the individuals connected with it
 made extremely generous promises of financial assistance to the new
university. A very suitable site of 180 acres as purchased with their
help, including a large if decrepit mansion, Heslington Hall, all
within 1&#189; miles of the city of York. The Academic Trust also
mobilised the support of Local Authorities, and of the influential local
opinion generally, and made preliminary surveys of such matters as
availability of lodgings. It did more: it actually founded two academic
institutions, the Borthwick Institute of Historical Research, which
became the repository for valuable archives from the Archdiocese of
York and from other sources, and the Institute of Advanced
Architectural Studies, which began to provide (as it still provides)
unique short courses for practitioners in architecture and related
fields. It must also be said that it appointed as its permanent
secretary a man who afterwards became the Registrar of the University
and who, quite apart from personal qualities about which it would be
inappropriate to speak here, acquired an intimate knowledge of York
from many points of view that was afterwards to be invaluable. When
the Academic Trust returned to the University Grants Committee in 1960,
therefore, it was able to claim that a physical site was available,
that there was the certainty of solid financial backing and a fairly
general body of local enthusiasm, to point to some solid achievements
in the academic field and to feel reasonably certain that, although
York is not an easy town for lodgings, at least 500 would be
forthcoming. Meanwhile, there had been a change in public policy. The
fact that a bulge of prospective students was coming up through the
schools, the tendency for more boys and girls to stay on at school and
seek higher education, and the pressure of national needs in a world
whose complexity makes ever greater demands on the supply of highly
educated people, were all factors which were becoming more clearly
realised, even if in academic quarters. It was these considerations
which led the government to agree not only to the expansion of existing
universities, but to the creation of seven new ones, and it is probable
that the University Grants Committee had little difficulty in deciding
that York must be one of these. Approval for a University of Sussex
had been given two years before; approval for York and East Anglia now
followed.</p>

<p>The decision to found a university once once taken, a series of
definite steps began to follow quite rapidly. A Promotion Committee was
established containing representatives of the principal Local
Authorities involved, together with others who had been active in the
preliminary phases. This committee was the precursor of the governing
council which the university established once it had received its Royal
Charter. It is clearly necessary that there should be some interim
committee to deal with the business of a university in what may be
called its pre-natal phase. It is almost inevitable that it should
include some members without university experience, however, and in its
early days it lacks academic representation. It is vital, therefore,
that such a committee should contain some members of strength and
experience who realise that the ultimate pattern of the university
cannot be laid down until an academic community is established. York
was fortunate in that the promotion committee had the support of a
number of such people.</p>

<p>Parallel with the Promotion Committee an Academic Planning Board was
appointed, representing a broad spectrum of academic experience, though
rightly small (seven) in numbers. The creation of the Boards, the
composition of which was suggested by the University Grants Committee,
for the seven new universities was an innovation. New universities
created before the war had been ``university colleges'', denied full
university status, and giving the degrees of London University. When
Keele was founded a new pattern was tried in which it gave its own
degrees, but some control over academic policy was exercised by three
sponsoring universities. With the seven new universities yet another
method was tried. Full university status is accorded straight away,
including the power to give both first and higher degrees, but in their
early years the integrity of their academic standards, their senior
appointments, and the broad outlines of their studies are under the
general supervision of their Academic Planning Boards. The first duty
of the Academic Planning Board was obviously to nominate a
Vice-Chancellor to the Promotional Committee. This was done in
February, 1961, although I did not nominally take up duty until January,
1962, an interval which I now feel to have been too long.</p>

<p>The problem of laying the academic foundations of a new university is
clearly a difficult one for the Academic Planning Board. If inadequate
plans are made, either the university becomes far too much the
expression of the ideas of one man, the first Vice-Chancellor, or there
is too long a delay while senior academic staff are recruited in
sufficient number to make discussion profitable. On the other hand, if
the Academic Planning Board plans in very great detail the
Vice-Chancellor and staff will feel themselves circumscribed. In the
case of York the Academic Planning Board avoided these dangers by
appointing a Vice-Chancellor who was clearly in sympathy with the plan
which they had prepared, by leaving the final drafting of the plan
until after the Vice-Chancellor was appointed so that modifications were
still possible in the light of discussions with him (although, in fact,
these modifications were of a very minor kind), and above all by putting
forward a scheme both of organisation and of curriculum which although
firm enough to indicate what <em>kind</em> of university York was to by,
yet was sufficiently flexible for modifications as time went on and as
staff were appointed. Since the whole idea of an Academic Planning
Board is new, and since it is not difficult to conceive situations in
which strains might develop between the staff of a new university and
the academic planners, it is worth putting on record one
Vice-Chancellor's conviction that this method of exercising a proper
control over a new institution is by far the most satisfactory so far
devised, provided that the Academic Planning Board is wisely chosen, and
prepared to advise rather than to dictate. No account of the University
of York would be complete that did not pay a tribute to the work of Lord
Robbins (who was chairman of our Board before he took on the work of the
better known committee on Higher Education which bears his name) and his
colleagues. However long the University exists it will always owe them
a great debt.</p>

<p>After the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor a period of very
considerable activity followed, for the Promotion Committee, the
Academic Planning Board and the staff of all kinds as they were
appointed. Although in 1961 the Robbins Committee had only just begun
work, it was clear to many of those who had been studying educational
trends that its report was bound to be expansionist in tone, and hence
there was a feeling of great urgency among those connected with the new
university. The first steps to be taken at once were to appoint of
number of the key staff, i.e. the Registrar, the Bursar, the Librarian
and a very few professors. From the start the University was conscious
of a lack of money and ideally more appointments should have been made
at this stage. The U.G.C. policy of paying no recurrent grant until
students are actually in residence seemed then, and still seems,
unrealistic, particularly for a university without any very
considerable support from Local Authority grants, for it takes no
account of the considerable amount of preliminary work that has to be
done. In the case of York we received (and receive) less from Local
Authorities than any other new university. We are not only the only new
university in which the actual site had to be purchased by donations
and was not given by a local authority, but the recurrent amount we
receive from this source, &#163;36,500, is less than elsewhere. This
arises from the fact that our neighbouring L.E.A.s are either poor,
small, or already committed to several existing universities. This
factor becomes, of course, far less important as the years pass since
contributions from Local Authorities are a very small item in the
income of an established university.</p>

<p>The second major decision that had been taken as soon as possible was
the selection of architects. This is crucial for any university, but
particularly for a new one, since a new university has the chance, that
is both an advantage and a responsibility, which no older university has
ever had, of designing a university as a whole. No record of the
University of York would be adequate that did not record that of all the
decisions taken by the Promotion Committee and their advisers none was
more fortunate than the choice of architects.</p>

<p>To discuss fully the relationships between a university and its
architects would demand an essay in itself, and only a few jejune
comments based on experience are possible here. It is very doubtful
indeed whether many university administrators and teachers even now
realise the way in which the physical form of a university should
reflect its academic ideas. Thus the choice of a predominant method of
teaching (whether by lecture, seminar or tutorial) will have quite
distinctive architectural results. A decision (such as was made at
York) to avoid conventional large faculty structures is translated into
architectural terms by avoiding large Arts buildings, or whatever they
may be. The pattern of social life of the students will be affected by
whether a large central Students Union is included in the plans. The
relationship between staff and students is affected by arrangements for
common rooms and for eating. The position is complicated by the very
nature of the client, for in a university we are dealing not with a
single individual, with fairly clearly defined needs, but with a variety
of clients with quite different tasks, often working through cumbersome
committees. In the case of a new university, where in the nature of
things the committee structure is not very fully developed, decisions can
be taken more quickly than is often the case, and much greater speed of
development is possible.</p>

<p>In the case of the University of York, the dominant factors in the
minds of the architects and those working with them were these. First,
speed of construction was a necessity if the university was to make a
significant contribution to the critical years ahead. The idea that
slowness in planning or execution meant quite simply denial of
opportunity to properly qualified applicants was (and is) always present.
It was this that lead the architects to adopt for many of the buildings
they are planning, a method of system building, and the university
joined a group of Local Education Authorities in adopting the CLASP
system. This was related to plans for the ultimate size of the
university. For our contribution to be significant a target of 3,000
students by 1970 or 1971 was required, with the possibility of expanding
to 5,000 or 6,000 or more in subsequent years, in the light of national
policy. Secondly, plans must be flexible, both as regards numbers and
as regards type of building. With knowledge expanding as it is, it is
impossible to forecast many years ahead what new subjects will have
become important, or what new techniques will have developed and all
buildings, particularly science buildings, must take account of this.
Thirdly, finance would clearly be a dominant factor. Where so much
public money is involved, and where the amount of privately contributed
money is limited, the architect must be one who is prepared to work
within rigid cost limits, while having regard to amenity and aesthetic
value.</p>

<p>Such an architectural programme demands above all things the closest
collaboration between architects, administrators and academics.
Because the buildings have got to express the ways in which teaching,
research and social life should co-exist, long hours of discussion must
take place. In general such discussion took place between the
architects and the particular member of the university most closely
concerned, and it was necessary to appoint some members of the staff
(e.g. scientists) at least two years before they would take up their
appointment so that they could share in the design of the buildings
they would ultimately occupy, even although this meant a very heavy
burden of unpaid work for them, while they continued with their present
appointments. Further elements in the design of a new university are
the necessity for it to be a viable university at every stage of
development, and for the whole plan to be conceived in such a way that
the academic experience of the earlier generations of students should
not be unduly impoverished by forcing them to work among the noise and
disruption of building going on around them. The result of a process of
collaboration between architects and university as close as can be
imagined, a process of architectural dialectic, often exhausting, often
stimulating, but in the end deeply educative, at any rate for an
administrator, was the publication in May, 1962 of a detailed
development plan covering the first ten years of the university's life.
Not every element in the plan has passed without controversy. In
particular the decision to use CLASP construction has met with
opposition, since it is the first time that such as system has been used
for university building in this country. No one would claim that it was
an ideal solution. There is, indeed, in the minds of some of us, the
belief that there is a pressing need for a research group to investigate
university building in the same way that the Ministry of Education
investigated school building after the war. But it is impossible to
believe that without some such plan of system-building the universities
can expand as they must over the next few years, in competition with
other forms of building for a limited labour force. It must be said
here that both as regards the adaptation of old buildings and as regards
the building of new ones, every building has been finished on time, and
within cost limits. This is partly due to the collaboration between
architect, contractor and client of which I spoke, but it is doubtful
whether it could have been accomplished without industrialised building,
involving as it has done a rate of expenditure between January, 1964 and
June, 1965 of nearly &#163;2 million.</p>

<p>It has been said that the material form of the university as
foreshadowed in the Development Plan reflects its educational ideals.
 York aims at being a collegiate university. At the end of its first
phase of development, i.e. by 1971, it plans to have eight colleges.
 Each college will be a unit of 300 students, 150 of whom will be
resident, the remainder being in lodgings or in student flats, but
using the college as their social centre. This organisation is unlike
that of Oxford and Cambridge on one hand or the halls of residence at
civic universities on the other. The college will differ from
``Oxbridge'' in that they will not be autonomous financially, nor will
they be responsible for admission of students or appointment of staff.
They will differ from halls of residence in that teaching will be
carried on in them. Every teacher will have a room in one or other of
 the colleges to which he will be attached, and it is here that he will
give his tutorial teaching. Other teaching areas in non-science
subjects that require no special equipment (i.e. lecture and seminar
rooms) will also be associated with the colleges, although their use
will be centrally time-tabled to avoid that waste of teaching space so
characteristic of many universities. The collegiate idea, thus
interpreted, aims at reconciling elements of the two broad traditions of
English university education. It seeks to provide the valuable
intimacies and loyalties of the life of a smaller community to a degree
that is  scarcely possible if the unit is a whole large university.
On the other hand, by centralising admissions and the organisation of
teaching, it recognises the importance of the ``faculty'' or subject as
the focus of the intellectual life of a modern university. It aims,
moreover, at making closer relationships possible between teacher and
taught. Various implications almost inevitably follow from this method
of organisation. It will be less effective unless a good deal of the
teaching is tutorial in character, based on a weekly or at most
fortnightly contact between a teacher and a small group of students
(i.e. not more than four), although of course, not all a student's
tutorials will be taken in his own college. At York tutorial teaching
is thus accepted as a fundamental element in the academic pattern. At
the same time, the value of the other methods of teaching are
recognised, and both lectures and, still more, seminars of ten or
fourteen students are being used. It is often said that tutorial
teaching is extravagant. This is not so if the programme of formal
lectures is made a good deal lighter than in many universities, and if
it is recognised that graduate students can very often give perfectly
satisfactory tutorials. At the same time it must be frankly recognised
that on the conscientious member of the staff it may impose considerable
obligations of time and effort, although in return they have the
satisfaction and sometimes the stimulus of a closer and more responsible
relationship with the pupils.</p>

<p>The second point about the collegiate structure that provokes
criticism is that since it involves a considerable amount of residence
it is expensive. This is not really so, since the limitation in the
supply of lodgings is in any case forcing all universities to provide
increasingly for some kind of residence. What form it should take is a
matter for further study. It is sometimes said that the modern student
resents the situation, one cannot feel that the most important element
in creating an atmosphere of academic freedom and responsibility is the
quality of day-to-day relationships, expressed in the character of
individual departments. It is the function of the constitution to make
it possible for these to create a sense of responsibility in every
member of the university. It is naturally far to early to say how well
the constitution is working beyond feeling encouraged but the experience
of the first 2&#189; years.</p>

<p>If we turn from these administrative elements in the ideas that lay
behind the planning of the University of York to matters of the
curriculum, we find a situation which is, as it should be, still
reasonably fluid. Only some of the basic ideas can be described here,
and those who wish for more detailed information can obtain it from the
published prospectus of the university. The first of these ideas is
that only a fairly limited range of subjects should be studied. Nothing
is more wasteful of staff, the scarcity of which is one of the most
critical elements in the whole university scene, than for every
university to attempt to offer every subject, and in particular those
subjects for which only very few students will apply, or for which there
are already sufficient places at other universities. As regards some
subjects (e.g. medicine) there are factors which amounts to positive
prohibition. In the case of others, in the absence of any co-ordinated
policy, only the common sense of individual universities prevents a
wasteful duplication of effort. Classics is a case in point. In my own
view although no better education than Greats at Oxford has probably
ever been devised, the output of potential students of classics from the
schools would not justify the teaching of Greek at York, at any rate in
any conventional way, although at some stage classical teaching as an
adjunct to more general literary studies will probably come. In
planning a curriculum, although there should certainly be other more
fundamental considerations than the demand for places, and the probably
national need for graduates of various kinds, considerations such as the
importance of a subject as a medium of education and its place in the
nexus of culture, the more mundane factors must be taken into
account.</p>

<p>Secondly, and curriculum must attempt to reconcile two diametrically
opposed pressures. The first is that the growth of knowledge leads to
ever greater specialisation if some students are to reach the point
where original work is possible. The second is that the complexity of
the modern world makes a greater breadth of knowledge and awareness
ever more desirable. These demands have led to the following practical
results at York. If the conventional three year course for the first
degree is clearly becoming inadequate for the future research worker,
arrangements must be made for postgraduate studies which are not simply
confined to research but include a considerable amount of course work.
Such an arrangement is, of course, a commonplace in the United States
and Canada, but is by no means common in England. Apart from this, we
tend to view subjects in four ways in constructing our curriculum.
There are first principal subjects, e.g. English, History or Chemistry,
which can form the essential core of a university course and demand
from some students the greater part of their energy and their interest.
Secondly, there are subsidiary subjects, which may, of course, be
principal subjects for some students, which will occupy about a third
of a student's time in a mixed course, e.g. main English with a
subsidiary Philosophy, main History with subsidiary Politics, and so
on, while with some subjects equal combinations may be possible.
Thirdly, there are ``service courses'', for example in languages, so
that a historian may be given the chance to learn mediaeval Latin, not
as an examination subject, but as a necessary tool. In this context
we are developing as strongly as possible modern methods of language
teaching and have established with a grant from Nuffield a language
centre. Finally, all students, whatever their special interests, have
the chance of attending ``open courses'', given either by members of
the staff or by visiting lecturers. These are arranged at times kept
free from other kinds of teaching, and their content offers almost
unlimited scope for experiment. In the first year, for example, we had
courses on nineteenth-century thought (lasting throughout the year), on
art and society, and on value judgements in ethics and aesthetics.
These semi-popular lectures are designed to provide a stimulus to
reading, thought and discussion, and one of the problems that needs to
be considered further is their relation to the students' main academic
studies.</p>

<p>The organisation of the social sciences offers problems of its own,
and these are particularly important, since from the start it has been
planned that these studies should be particularly prominent at York, so
that of our first-year intake nearly half were social scientists. For
five terms they follow a broad general course in economics, politics and
sociology, economic history and statistics. For their last four terms
they are given an opportunity to specialise in economics and
statistics, in politics or sociology, while for those intending to be
professional social workers, a course will be provided, which starts
this year, which offers the choice of a normal professional
qualification, or of a two-year course leading to a higher degree, for
those who may ultimately aspire to university posts or to senior posts
in the field. Our emphasis on the social sciences is also shown by the
fact that with a special grant from the Rowntree Memorial Trust we
established almost from the start an Institute of Social and Economic
Research.</p>

<p>Superficially, the York curriculum may seem more ``conventional''
than that of most new universities, particularly in the possibility that
if offers to study a single subject. In fact, it is our belief that
breadth is more likely to be achieved through methods of teaching than
by actually laying down courses which aim at broad synthesis,
interesting and valuable though such attempts may be. One of the
temptations one faces in a new university is to feel that at all costs
it <em>must</em> be different and that novelty is itself a virtue. In
fact various experiments are being carried out at York, of which it is
possible to mention only one or two. The education course (to which
great importance is attached in view of the national shortage of
teachers) is of a new kind. Education is being taught as a subsidiary
subject concurrently with an academic principal subject for the three
years of an undergraduate course, and taught, moreover, by means which
are in some ways unusual. The fourth year will enable the student to
spend two terms of practice in a school (perhaps releasing a member of
staff for the second term to come to York for a refresher course), the
final term providing an opportunity for reflection and discussion.</p>

<p>York has hitherto not planned to have conventional course in foreign
language and literature, although it may well develop the study of
Russian before long. It is, however, aiming to become a centre of
linguistic studies of a more general kind, offering linguistics as a
joint subject, and also arranging special courses for those who have to
teach in English as a foreign language, and more generally to study the
social and cultural effects of contracts between different language
groups. It is already clear that there is a considerable and unfilled
demand for this kind of work.</p>

<p>We may now turn from these general considerations which arose from the
initial planning of the university to say a few words about more
immediate practical aspects of the university's early days, although it
is only 2&#189; years since the university took its first students it is
certainly not possible to draw any conclusions of great weight. It has
already been said that in view of the national situation a feeling of
urgency was dominant in the minds of many of those connected with the
initial stages. Thus it was quickly decided that the university must
open in 1963 rather than delay the start until 1964 as had at one time
been contemplated, and that when it opened it must do so with as
substantial a number of students as possible. The year before the
actual opening in October, 1963 was thus one of considerable activity,
and as had been said, it would probably have been wiser, if less
economical, to have had more academic staff actually in residence,
although the argument from economy is not the only one, since it must
be realised that it is not easy for an academic to isolate himself from
a large group of colleagues and research students. It would certainly
have been wiser to have had more administrative staff, for the burden on
the Registrar and Bursar was very heavy indeed. It is not always
realised that the actual administrative load is determined in a number
of ways by the <em>rate</em> of expansion rather than the actual size of
a university. Since the rate of growth at York has been as high as in
much larger institutions the administrative load has been heavy, and I
should say that we have been somewhat understaffed.</p>

<p>To return to the year before opening, the tasks ranged from the
fundamentally trivial (e.g. designing a coat of arms) to the
fundamental, e.g. the selection of students and the appointment of
staff. In both theses respects it at once became obvious that certain
pessimistic forecasts were quite misguided. The quality of those
wishing to teach and of those wishing to learn in a yet unstarted
university was very high, and it may be said that in the subsequent
years the pressure in both respects has increased. The pressure on
student numbers varies very greatly from subject to subject of course.
Overall figures are approximately as follows :--</p>

<table align=center>
<caption align=bottom>(estimated)</caption>
<tr><td>1963<td>...<td>1,700 for 200 places</td></tr>
<tr><td>1964<td>...<td>3,250 for 250 places</td></tr>
<tr><td>1965<td>...<td>8,000 for 420 places</td></tr>
<tr><td>1966<td>...<td>9,000 for 500 places</td></tr>
</table>

<p>Although, of course, these figures have to be interpreted in the
light of the multiple applications possible under the UCCA scheme, on
the other hand it must be remembered that the university does not offer
some of the more popular subjects (i.e. geography, modern languages or
technology). Students are selected on the basis of school records,
including examination results, headmaster's or headmistress's report,
and personal interview. The latter has been alleged to be of slight
prognostic value. This may be so, although as conducted by some of the
York staff, when an interview becomes virtually a tutorial session, one
cannot but doubt this finding. What is beyond dispute is that from the
point of view of a new university the interview can be justified on
quite other grounds, for it removes some of the impersonality from the
relation between the prospective student and the unknown institution.
In addition, some departments ask candidates to bring examples of their
written work, and this in some cases proves very useful with the
candidate who is daunted by an interview. It is clearly of vital
importance for a new university to establish close relationships with
the schools, and in the case of York a personally signed letter from the
Vice-Chancellor explaining the plans of the university was sent to every
Grammar School in England and Wales as the first step in a programme of
securing the co-operation of the schools, a co-operation now being
followed up in a variety of ways, including visits by groups of
specialist teachers.</p>

<p>It is very difficult to give any very general reasons as to why students
should wish to come to a new university. In our experience few seem to
be under the delusion that it is easier to gain acceptance to an untried
institution. A number are vaguely attracted by the idea of being in at
the beginning and the feeling that a new university will be ``less
hidebound'', although they are far from sure what they mean by this. A
surprisingly large number have studied the prospectus and have formed
the impression that the kind of course will be interesting, or are
attracted by the collegiate-tutorial system, a factor which clearly
weighs heavily with their teachers in advising them. Finally, many wish
to live in or near a beautiful city, as they have spent their lives in
suburbia or industrial towns, and this is a desire which might well be
borne in mind by those who maintain that new academic institutions
should be related to the ``real'' life of an urban environment.</p>

<p>As regards the recruitment of staff there can be no doubt that the
challenge of a new institution with its opportunities to try new ideals
appeals to a large number of very good men, particularly young ones. In
some areas (e.g. the social sciences) there is clearly a dangerous
over-all national shortage of teachers, and in all subjects it is
difficult to recruit suitable women. But however unfair this may seem
to established universities, there is little doubt that as regards one
of the new English universities, and no doubt this applies to all, we
are probably getting more than our share of good students and certainly
more of good staff.</p>

<p>In general, staff have been recruited by simple advertisement. With
some of the earlier and more senior appointments this was not done. The
Academic Planning Board felt that every effort should be made to recruit
initially some men and women of such established distinction that they
would not have responded to an advertisement, and although this policy
(which was not, of course, confined to York) aroused some public
criticism, it is difficult to doubt that it was the right one. In all
appointments every effort is made to ensure that those chosen are in
broad general sympathy with the fundamental ideas behind the university,
particularly in the importance of the tutorial system and the idea of
colleges.</p>

<p>While staff and students were being selected, the conversion of the
Elizabethan-Victorian mansion to form a teaching, social and
administrative centre for the university was proceeding with remarkable
speed and astonishing success. As the academic staff were appointed
and detailed teaching requirements became clearer, it was soon realised
that accommodation would in certain ways be insufficient. Thanks to the
fact that we were already in association with a consortium of users of a
system of industrialised building, it was possible to supplement the
accommodation of Heslington Hall with a new block comprising a large
lecture theatre and a number of tutorial rooms, the whole being
constructed in five months.</p>

<p>Meanwhile a number of other important operations were in progress.
The University Grants Committee by a most enlightened gesture gave
permission for the major site works to be carried out as one large
preliminary operation over the whole area covered by the development
plan so as to minimise disturbance at later stages of the university's
growth, an operation which involved the construction of a major road and
a 14-acre lake, the function of which was to drain the site. Parallel
with these actual works the detailed planning of the first buildings to be
completed by 1965 began, and as members of the academic staff were
appointed they were associated with these plans. A whole series of
meetings with the staff were in fact held, whether they were resident in
York or not, both to clarify the plans for the university and also to
create a basis not simply of professional association but of personal
friendship.</p>

<p>One other most important activity of this year before the actual
opening must be mentioned, the appeal for lodgings and their
inspection, a vital task since the university would be entirely
non-residential until 1965. An experienced lodgings officer was
appointed and by her efforts in securing the co-operation of appropriate
groups in the community (churches, schools and so on), assisted by an
unusually helpful local newspaper, a sufficient supply of lodgings was
obtained, although York is not an easy city in this respect.</p>

<p>At the beginning of October, 1963, then, the university opened with
216 undergraduates and 12 post-graduates, nearly all of the latter being
in the social science field. It is interesting to note that this number
of students, small though it seems was actually the largest with which
any university in England had ever started. The students were almost
equally divided between men and women. No definite steps were taken in
the selection procedure to produce this result, although it has always
been the hope of the university that the proportion of women would be
higher than in most universities. The geographical spread of students
was also surprisingly even over the whole of England. There is clearly
as yet no tendency whatever for York to be a university drawing mainly
from the North.</p>

<p>It was felt by all of us that it was essential that the actual start
should be made as smooth as possible by very detailed preliminary
planning, both academic and administrative. At all costs an air of
improvisation or chaos that might easily arise with a new institution
should be avoided. Both before and at the time of their arrival the
students received papers giving answers to as many preliminary questions
as could be envisaged. For example, as soon as it was certain that he
or she was defiantly coming to York, addresses of suitable lodgings were
sent. Assignment to tutors and supervisors, times of preliminary
interviews to discuss programmes, maps of York and the university
buildings, detailed information about the library, and so on, were
provided, and the students have since said that feeling that these
details gave, though much of it was trivial in itself, of being
welcomed, contributed a good deal to the ease of settling in In
particular, it was fortunate that the catering arrangements (and York
provides meals both at mid-day and in the evening) were in
extra-ordinarily capable hands.</p>

<p>Among the most interesting problems that a new university has to face
is the organisation of the students' social activities, and the range of
decisions on which student participation should be sought. In the
event, on the first of these, the students showed a remarkable capacity
for self-organisation, and very rapidly an extremely wide variety of
societies and teams were created. Games might have been a problem, but
steps had been taken to borrow playing fields and to secure the
part-time services of a member of the games staff of a neighbouring
school.</p>

<p>More difficult was the evolution of a Students' Representative
Council, and the student body spent a good deal of time and effort in
devising a constitution, once they had set up a ``caretaker''
committee. Some matters which to some universities seem a matter for
the staff rather than the students, were left to the students
themselves, e.g. whether to wear gowns. Some students have said that
they would have preferred more of these things to be settled by
``authority'' before they arrived, but my own view is that the course we
took was right. It is certainly clear that from the start a
staff-Student committee should be set up, and student representatives
on relevant committees, e.g. the catering committee, should be
appointed as soon as possible. Because York does not plan to have a
central students' union building it is all the more vital for us to make
it clear that this does not, in fact, mean less willingness on the part
of ``authority'' to collaborate with student opinion. The line between
having a proper regard for student welfare and between an unduly
``paternalistic'' attitude is a very difficult one to draw, and the
climate of the time makes it increasingly so. If York has erred it has
been on the side of libertarianism.</p>

<p>In the second year of its existence (i.e. 1964-65), the university
was physically divided. No new buildings were available. The
university has, however, rented from the York City Corporation an old
building, the King's Manor, in the centre of York. This remarkable
building, parts of which date from the 14th century, the major part
being of the 17th century, had been allowed to degenerate into a
condition of considerable squalor, and was being used as workshops for
the blind. It was reconstructed with such taste and imagination on the
part of the architect responsible that it must now rank as one of the
most beautiful academic buildings in England. A Victorian addition was
destroyed and replaced by a modern block of tutorial rooms. In the old
building other teaching rooms, a library, a dining hall and common rooms
duplicated the accommodation at Heslington. For time-tabling reasons
the division of the university was arranged on a subject basis, but
although this bifurcation produced some harmful results in loss of
cohesion, they were not as great as might have been expected.</p>

<p>In June, 1965, the first permanent buildings were completed, and
were fully occupied in October. The two colleges provide residential
accommodation for 400 undergraduates, graduates and staff, a variety of
teaching accommodation, and common rooms and dining halls used both by
residents and by those who are in lodgings or flats. No central union
is envisaged. It is far to early yet to make any valid assessment at
all of how the system will work, particularly as at present the colleges
are having to cater for a larger number of non-resident students than
will be the case.</p>

<p>As regards future building plans, the main library will be finished
in June of this year. Work has begun on two more colleges and another
science building for October, 1967. The six months pause has delayed
the start of the main university hall, but otherwise we have been
unaffected. Our future plans depend entirely on the supply of
government money, but we are still more or less in step with the
development plan. Our actual student numbers are actually in excess of
those envisaged in the plan, but by adjustment of the intake we shall
probably be approximately at the estimated figure by 1971.</p>

<p>The uncertainty that colours our future development beyond 1967
reflects what in my view is a serious weakness in university finance.
As everyone here will know, running expenditure is fixed by the U.G.C.
for 5-year periods. Capital allocations are, however, known by
individual universities only for one or at most two years ahead. How,
it may be asked, is it possible to make rational estimates of the money
one needs for running costs when one has no firm estimates of the number
of students one can accommodate? How is it possible to plan the ordered
development which we require over five, six or seven years when all one
has is faith and guesswork to go on? Surely we need a much bolder and
more long-term approach, and a greater use of such devices as negotiated
contracts, devices which in my view would actually lead to an actual
saving of money.</p>

<p>Secondly, I believe that the method of calculating grants for current
expenditure must be more closely related to student numbers. A simple
<em>per capita</em> formula will manifestly not do in view of the
variations in cost between students reading different subjects, and the
necessity for making special provision for graduates and above all for
research. But it is surely possible and desirable to devise a more
sophisticated arrangement by which a university will have firm assurance
that expansion will bring with it the means to support it, so that it
can develop without the fear that one will actually be penalised by
increasing poverty if one responds to manifest social needs by expanding
rather faster than at one time seemed possible, or fear to develop and
encourage strong research schools because one knows one may be unable to
support them.</p>

<p>It may seem from the foregoing paragraphs that we are envisaging our
problems to exclusively in material terms. It would be most unfortunate
 if this impression persisted, and still more if the problems of
finance, of buildings and even of numbers became the major
preoccupation of the universities themselves. The continuous
dialectic which should be characteristic of all universities, not least
of new ones, should be devoted to deeper questions.  The first of
these concerns the stimulation of research. Hitherto that word has
barely been mentioned in this paper. Yet one knows that there is no
more pressing question facing the universities today than to find the
appropriate balance between their teaching and research functions. It
may well be that put in this way is to make too crude an antithesis.
It may be that with some subjects what we should really be concerned
with is not so much research as normally understood, but the process of
reflection on material that is already known. Whether this be so or not
is important for diverse reasons that from the start new universities
should be concerned with original ideas and the discovery of new
knowledge. I have said that on the whole teachers are anxious to come
to the new universities, but sometimes it is necessary to reassure them
as to the opportunities they will have for research. Various practical
results follow from this anxiety. In the design, say, of laboratories
ample provision for research must be made, and teachers, whatever their
subject, must be encouraged to bring research students with them. The
flow of research grants to new universities must not be less than to
others. Above all the library is fundamental. Actually some
ill-informed criticisms have been made concerning the potentialities of
new universities on the grounds of their necessarily limited library
facilities. It is easy to over-estimate this. It is essential to
appoint the librarian very early so that he has at least two years to
assemble the basis of a library, and it is essential that he should be a
man of courage and vision. It is still a curious feature of English
academic finance that few people realise the necessity to spend money on
a library on a scale comparable to that which is devoted to equipping a
laboratory. Given this limitation, the University Grants Committee has
actually been generous to new university libraries. At York we have
been fortunate that the University of Leeds, which is less than an hour
away, has most generously given to our staff and research students
exactly equivalent to those given to its own.  Further the National
Science Lending Library is a mere 14 fourteen miles away. Apart from
library facilities, we have been fortunate in securing private money for
research and as I have said an Institute for Social and Economic
Research has already been established, and is now at work. But it is a
fact which cannot ever be forgotten that unless new universities from
the start are enabled to show their capacity for original work, they will
become second-class institutions.</p>

<p>It is no less important that continuous thought and discussion should
be going on concerning the development of the curriculum. It has
already been said in another context that we must be flexible in
thinking of the lines along which the development of knowledge should
proceed. The danger is that in the desire for breadth we may unduly
diffuse our efforts, or duplicate work already being well done
elsewhere. The response to this danger lies in creating an atmosphere
in the academic community in which certain lines become clearly the most
profitable because they involve a synthesis between the special
interests of different departments in which the university, new though
it is, is strong. At York, for example, the particular interests of
economists, statisticians, educationalists, linguists and others
indicate that we should show a special interest in the problems of
tropical Africa and some other undeveloped areas, and teaching and
research are already uniting to make a joint contribution here.</p>

<p>Perhaps the most difficult and important problem, however, facing a
new university is this. Those who were concerned with the foundation
and with the early years of the university had certain fairly definite
views as to what ideals this particular university should embody. They
believed in particular in a tutorial system and a collegiate
organisation. What will occur if, as the years pass, new recruits to
the academic staff disagree with these ideas in fundamental ways? The
reconciliation of the idea of a body of academics responsible for policy
with that of an underlying conception of the idea of a university will
clearly provide problems for the future.</p>

<p>But if it provides problems it also provides opportunities.
Sometimes one feels that the whole idea of ``new universities'' as
being separate from the old is regrettable. Sometimes one could excuse
resentment in more venerable institutions who have borne the lean years
of comparative public indifference, at the publicity received by the
new, and at all costs new institutions must avoid giving the impression
that they have a monopoly of new or good ideas. Yet the fact remains
that their very newness, the very fact that they are growing fast, their
very absence of tradition, imposes a particular obligation on them to
discuss with fresh minds what the function of a university should be in
the 20th century. That is has a duty to train professionals, whether
they be teachers, or chemists or social workers is clear, though it is
by no means so clear as to which particular professionals, are the
concern of universities and which are more appropriately educated
elsewhere, and there is an immensely important area of discussion
concerning relationships with other kinds of higher education. That the
university has a duty to transmit the tradition of culture is equally
obvious. To many of those who teach, the obligation to discover, and to
reinterpret is still more fundamental. But parallel with these are
other pressures. The university must be aware of its obligation to
provide places in various disciplines with some regard to the demand
from the schools, and in view of the circumstances of their foundation
this must be very clearly in the minds of those who work in new
universities. Yet it must not let this demand dictate its policy, since
it must study many things which the schools cannot introduce to their
pupils. On the other hand it must be aware of the kinds of
professionals which society demands. If the social or economic needs of
the community are for more physicists or social workers, the university
cannot ignore them, not only for financial reasons but for those of
social responsibility. Yet a university has a duty to respond to a
higher obligation than what its potential students desire, or what
society needs at any particular time. It must consider that its duty is
not merely one of response, but of creation; that at its highest the
academic community, the clerisy as Coleridge called it, must not merely
give society what it needs, but show it what it ought to need. Because
new universities are expanding so fast, because they are inevitably
preoccupied with problems of finance, of buildings and of
administrations, they may become oblivious to their deeper obligations.
But also because they are new, the very fact that creation forces them
to ask questions, gives them an opportunity and an obligation to see the
deeper aims behind the preoccupations and the frustrations, the
excitement and the visions inseparable from their early years.</p>

<p> <table border=1>
<caption>Table I: Development Plan Numbers</caption>
<tr> <th> &nbsp; </th> <th>1963-4</th> <th>1964-5</th> <th>1965-6</th> <th>1966-7</th> <th>1967-8</th> <th>1968-9</th> <th>1969-70</th> <th>1970-1</th> <th>1971-2</th> </tr>
<tr> <td>Non Science Intake</td> <td>200</td> <td>200</td> <td>150</td> <td>235</td> <td>330</td> <td>460</td> <td>510</td> <td>510</td> <td>510</td> </tr>
<tr> <td>Science Intake</td> <td>&nbsp;</td> <td>&nbsp;</td> <td>150</td> <td>215</td> <td>270</td> <td>340</td> <td>340</td> <td>340</td> <td>340</td> </tr>
<tr> <td>Total Undergraduate Numbers</td> <td>200</td> <td>400</td> <td>700</td> <td>950</td> <td>1,350</td> <td>1,850</td> <td>2,250</td> <td>2,500</td> <td>2,550</td> </tr>
<tr> <td>Graduate Numbers</td> <td>10</td> <td>30</td> <td>30</td> <td>120</td> <td>210</td> <td>310</td> <td>380</td> <td>415</td> <td>420</td> </tr>
</table> </p>

<p>
<table border=1>
<caption>Table II: Actual Numbers</caption>
<tr> <th> &nbsp; </th> <th>1963-64</th> <th>1964-5</th> <th>1965-6</th> <th>1966-7</th> </tr>
<tr> <td>Non Science Intake</td> <td>216</td> <td>286</td> <td>301</td> <td>345 (?)</td> </tr>
<tr> <td>Science Intake</td> <td>&nbsp;</td> <td>&nbsp;</td> <td>122</td> <td>165 (?)</td> </tr>
<tr> <td>Total Undergraduate Numbers</td> <td>216</td> <td>491</td> <td>889</td> <td>1,215</td> </tr>
<tr> <td>Graduate Numbers</td> <td>12</td> <td>24</td> <td>98</td> <td>?</td> </tr>
</table>
</p>

<p><strong>Related pages:</strong></p>

<blockquote>
<img src="/icons/greendot.gif" alt="*">
	<a href="original_dev_plan.html">The University Development Plan</a><br>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<font size=+1>
<img src="/icons/greendot14.gif" alt="*">
<a href="index.html">Folklore Index Page</a>
<img src="/icons/greendot14.gif" alt="*">
<a href="f-disclaim.html">Disclaimer</a>
</font>
<hr>
<img src="/icons/reddot.gif" alt="*">
<a href="http://kipper.york.ac.uk/">S020 Home Page</a>
<img src="/icons/reddot.gif" alt="*">
<a href="mailto:www@kipper.york.ac.uk">Send us Mail</a>
</body>
</html>