Three reflections on ALDinHE's Virtual Writing Retreat June 2012

How can we write more: more often, more fruitfully and more happily?

This is a question that torments academics and students alike and as Learning Developers we try many tactics to get ourselves writing - and to support the productive writing of others.

As part of LearnHigher I have been on successful Writing Retreats - and have run Writing Groups for our academics with colleagues from the Writing Centre. I have tried to set up Writing Groups for students - building a space for them to come and write that had the same quality as a retreat proper... One idea that seems valuable came from ALDinHE's and Plymouth's John Hilsdon: if physical retreats are too time consuming or even disorientating - can we create virtual writing retreats that function in the same supportive and focussed way as the physical retreat - but saves on travel time - and you can still write in your pyjamas? (That may not have been quite how John put it.) Sadly I could not go on John's first VWR, but I was very inspired by it - and am sharing here John's post on the Retreat itself. It contains information on how you too could be involved in VWR in the future as well as a great free writing exercise - and some links to online writing tools that I've added at the end.

Here's John's post previously posted in his own blog and on the ALDinHE Professional Development Blog - from which this version is taken:

Three reflections on the first LDHEN ‘VWR’ – Virtual Writing Retreat, that is!

Posted on http://aldinheprofdev.wordpress.com/2012/07/03/three-reflections-on-the-first-ldhen-vwr-virtual-writing-retreat-that-is/?year=2012&monthnum=07&day=03&like=1&_wpnonce=1cc5272020 by John Hilsdon, Retreat Organiser

One: John

On Monday June 11th we ‘met’ via our computers for a trial run using ‘Flashmeeting’, the online meeting tool we would be using for an ‘experimental online writing retreat’. Martin Sedgley from Bradford University, Tracey White from Middlesex, Joe Allison from Plymouth and me. After introductions we agreed some very basic ground rules (whilst experimenting with the smiley, sad, surprised/shocked etc ‘voting’ options you can use whilst others are speaking!). We then shared our writing goals and did a kind informal contract with each other about what we hoped to achieve and which segments of the three-day retreat period we would be able to work. That done, we agreed the times for four ‘check-in’ slots on each of the days and I shared my favourite version of a ‘free writing’ exercise (see below).

Day one was Thursday 14th June. We’d agreed to work between 9am – 8pm and it was a full-on day! I only managed to write about 300 ‘good’ words that day – interspersed with lots of pacing about, talking to myself, head-scratching and textbook browsing … but then I was at the start of my journey with a particular assignment – a paper outlining the research question and methodological underpinning for my EdD thesis. Martin, working on a professional development writing task made much more progress than I in terms of number of words but, of course, Tracey (working on a literature review) reminded us, it is not a race or a competition! By the end of the day there had been admissions of lapses (a snooze after lunch in (ahem) one case, a lawn-mowing interval in another, and an early glass of wine in yet another) but, soothed by our mutual confessions we all had a redemptive little glow and agreed we’d not done badly!

Day Two, Friday 15th June: Joe was able to join us for the first time. Like me, he’s working on his EdD thesis proposal. Tracey had some down-time attending to other business but we all achieved well. The brief regular check-ins were motivational and effective in helping us articulate where we were up to and what we needed to do next. Martin reported that he was now almost two-thirds of the way through his Senior HEA Fellowship application. My own progress was slow but steady – but my ideas seemed to be coming into sharper focus after two days of concentration on the same set of issues. Suitably buoyed, I went to the pub and enjoyed a beer …

Saturday was my most productive day, word–wise and I ended up with over 2000 ‘good’ or usable words. I was sorry to say cheerio to the others at the finish. We gave each other well-deserved virtual pats on the back and we all said we’d like to do more of the same in future!

Two: Tracey

I approached the writing retreat with a self-discipline I have not found throughout my doctoral study. From the word go I felt very much a part of a community of practice of like-minded people. All of the struggles I had faced were not unusual and although I had told myself this time over……now I was hearing first hand from others. Each of us had specific tasks which we wanted to achieve and therefore I had a responsibility to both myself and to them to just get on with it. This I did and in immersing myself into the task I found not only did I manage to get back into a study regime I had not experienced since my UG degree, I was enjoying it. The regular ‘touchpoints’ provided a light relief and spurred me on to the next point. Had to say I was disappointed when it ended and I have not been as productive with my writing since!

I have been on live retreats but this for me is the way forwards…comfort of your own home, all your books at hand, no pressure and the ability to develop a community of practice from your armchair and which you can continue through technology on a group or one to one basis. As a companion to doctoral study…just what the doctor ordered!

Three: Joe

I have never warmed to the idea of writing retreats, mainly because I have just not felt that I’d be productive under those sorts of conditions – strange environment and perhaps people, a given amount of time, and expecting to be in the right ‘place’ to write!

However, when I first heard of the virtual writing retreat, I was more interested, I thought it might be different despite some of my concerns still being applicable, I felt that being in my space, where I write best, might outweigh these. So I committed to it. I can’t deny that there were times leading up to it where I was looking for a reason not to be able to do it, but I resisted, and despite some availability limitations, through work and family, participated as much as I could.

The speed at which our community seemed to form, despite not knowing some people previously, was alarming and very pleasing. Starting the days off with setting ourselves targets, helped to rationalise and commit to our own agendas, and the fairly regular catch-ups made sure we didn’t stray too far from them.

If progress was made it was good to air and share this, if it wasn’t then talking through what had gotten in the way was also very helpful, in part to make sure this didn’t continue or repeat itself. The level of support provided through this was incredibly beneficial, and did a great deal to keep momentum up, a sense of togetherness was very apparent, despite the different tasks we were attempting. Whilst productivity ebbed and flowed, just as usual, time seemed to pass very quickly, and I only wish I had been able to take part in all three days instead of just the two.

I might have been able to write more had I not been participating but I don’t think it would have been nearly so enjoyable or rewarding. One of the things about writing is that it can be lonely, this can go both ways, but just being able to chat briefly with people in a similar position throughout the day makes sure you have the best of both worlds.

Overall I was really surprised at how much I got from this and will be very keen to take part again. I will just try to make sure that the time is as clear as possible, for, just adding a couple of things in, such as picking up the kids and popping to the shop, did make one day a bit too fragmented with the catch-ups as well.

If you are interested in participating in future LDHEN writing retreats, please email: john.hilsdon@plymouth.ac.uk . I’ll add your names to a list and we’ll try to arrange another event soon.

The Freewriting:

A five minute writing exercise (thanks to Peter Elbow for the basic idea).

Preparation

1. Spend a few minutes locating and reminding yourself of any writing in-progress or other notes or texts relevant to your current task.

2. Take 2 minutes to identify a key question, theme, issue or problem. You will use this as a ‘trigger’ or stimulus for your writing

3. Take a fresh piece of paper or open a new document on your computer and clear away any distracting books, papers and litter from your work area

4. Equip yourself with a timer or use your mobile phone alarm to signal when 5 minutes have elapsed

5. Convince yourself that you will follow the rules below and not be distracted!!

‘Rules’

• Write your ‘trigger’ phrase as a title
• At the signal to begin, write the first thing that comes into your head in response to your trigger
• If nothing comes to mind, just write the trigger phrase itself – again and again – until something new comes to you
• DO NOT STOP WRITING AT ANY TIME until the time is up!
• Try to write complete sentences rather than notes
• Grammar, spelling, punctuation and sense are not important. Repetition is fine. No particular structure is necessary.
• You decide what to do next. No-one else need see this writing unless you want to show it to others.

ADDED:

And for those of you who might be inspired by some online writing support try:

Get a kitten for every 100 words you write:

http://writtenkitten.net/

Three pages a day: get the writing habit:

http://750words.com/

Our Free write tool:

http://learning.londonmet.ac.uk/TLTC/freewrite/FWT.html

Re-posting thesis Whisperer: Ethics part one!

Loved this post on ETHICS so much that I had to share it - at least with myself... So here is another post from The Thesis Whisperer
" (Human) ethics applications with a minimum of pain (part one)
by Judy Redman

This post is by Judy Redman who is a Uniting Church minister and, as part of her role as a university chaplain, has been minister of religion on the human research ethics committees of three different Australian universities. She has qualifications in Agricultural Science and Human Nutrition as well as Theology and is currently working on a PhD. Her university-related work experience has also involved being a research assistant and academic editing. In this post Judy lends you her vast experience to help you with your ethics application - thanks Judy!

The post:
If you wander into a university tea-room and say you are writing an ethics application, you are sure to attract sympathetic looks and a range of horror stories. Everyone seems to know of someone who took 27 tries and two years to get their application through, and a number of researchers are firmly convinced that the sole reason for the ethics application process is to impede their research.

I've been a member of human research ethics committees for three different universities for some 15 years and this has not been my experience. I must have been involved in reviewing close to 2,000 applications and I don’t remember a committee ever having refused an application outright, although two or three researchers have decided to withdraw their applications.

I’ve been told by a significant number of experienced researchers that completing the ethics application form helps them to clarify exactly what it is that they hope to find out. I want to help you have a good experience too. There is quite a lot to ethics applications, so this post will look at the general process and the next one will look specifically at the information you provide for participants, since this is what causes most people (including ethics committee members) the most angst.

There is some Australian-specific information here, but the basic principles will apply fairly universally.

Why do I need to do an ethics application?
We have responsibilities towards our research participants. People are giving up their time (and sometimes also putting themselves at risk) to enable you to do your research. We need to ensure they can give free and informed consent to their participation and ensure their safety, particularly vunerable groups.

We must provide fair access to the benefits of research to all participants. In the past researchers have denied participants access to a life-saving procedure or product on the grounds that s/he needs to have a control group (see for example the Tuskagee Syphilis Study and the New Zealand National Women’s Hospital experiment).

Finally, there are regulatory issues. if you are associated with an Australian univerity, funding groups like the ARC and NH&MRC can pull all their research grant funding from a university if one just person is found to be in breach of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research.

Contrary to popular belief, looking at your research design & methodology is part of the committee’s role. It's unethical to conduct research which cannot achieve what it says it aims to do. To put this another way: if you tell your participants that their participation in the research will help you to determine X, but the design of your research will not, in fact, allow you to determine X, you are recruiting participants under false pretences (aka lying to them).

Stress free applications!
I recommend all research students read sections 1 & 2 of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and any other parts that are relevant to your particular research. The statement explains what can and can’t be done - and why; it will help you to understand the reasoning behind the questions on the application forms.

It's important to follow the processes which are in place in your university so you don't slow the process down. Download the current version of the application form and the guidelines that go with them from your university website and read them carefully.

DO NOT (yes, I know I am shouting) accept the copy that your supervisor or friend kindly emails to you. It could be out of date and you may fail to provide critical information as a result.

When you start to fill out the form, read the questions carefully and answer them fully and write the answers in language that people who are not specialists in your field can understand. DO NOT just attach your research proposal and expect the ethics committee members to refer to it for answers. They may have 15 or 20 applications to read and at best they will become very, very grumpy about your application and at worst will send it back for you to do again.

If you are confused, ask the secretary of your ethics committee or a committee member for help. They would much rather that you ask and get it right! This can help you avoid...

Common Problems
Not enough detail about recruitment: “students” is not an acceptable answer to the request to “describe how you plan to recruit participants.” We need to know which students, how you plan to identify them, how you plan to approach them, and whether there is a conflict of interest - particularly if they are in a dependent relationship with you (ie are they students that you teach, whose work you mark or over whom you have some other kind of power).

Erroneous assumptions: Just because you have access to particular databases in your work, does not mean that you can simply use them to access potential participants for your research. Doing this without permission puts you in breach of most privacy legislation.

Incomplete questions: If the form asks you to respond Yes or No, it is quite possible that there may be a section which requires you to provide justification of your answer. Check this, or it's likely you will get your application back again.

Not enough detail: If you are doing research overseas, just telling us how much money (whether in the local currency or in AUD) you are planning to pay participants is not enough. Are you paying them enough to buy a cup of coffee - or a new home? We need to know whether you are offering too much inducement to engage in risky behaviour.

Justification not provided for potentially sensitive data collection methods: If you need to deceive participants (eg by not tell them that you are observing them or not telling them exactly what you’re looking for) you will need a good reason.

Not enough reason given for keeping identifiable data: You will need to explain why you need that information, especially if it is potentially sensitive information such as sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious affiliation, age etc. “Because the study I am trying to replicate collected it” is not good enough.

Not understanding the significance of anonymity vs confidentiality: Anonymous data (ie data that is collected without any identifying information attached to it) is reasonably problem free. You can ask all sorts of controversial or sensitive things as long as you cannot link responses to the person who made them. If you collect sensitive data and you know who gave it to you, you need to think about how to maintain confidentiality.

If you are de-identifying your data you need to be clear about who will be able to put the identifiers back. Note also that removing names doesn’t necessarily de-identify data for high profile people. Most organisations only have one CEO and Australia has only ever had one female prime minister. In this kind of situation, you ask for permission to publish the names of the interviewees and provide them with a copy of the transcript of their interview for approval.


I hope this post helps you start to sort through your ethical issues - does anyone have any questions or problems? Ask us in the comments.

Related post: The researcher's hunch "
ENDS

Uplifting your PhD - Uplifting academia

This is a positive story from the THESIS WHISPERER BLOG of using real and virtual support to survive your PhD - but it illustrates how students at all levels - and all academics - can benefit from support networks:

From ingermewburn @thesiswhisperer
Who shares Dr Janet Fulton's blog post

As the Thesis Whisperer matures, students who look to it for support are starting to graduate. I always love to hear about their experiences and created the "Dear Thesis Whisperer" section to publish any nuggets of advice they want to share.

This post is from the new Dr Janet Fulton, who completed her PhD last year. Her thesis is titled 'Making the News: Print journalism and the creative process'.

I became an official post-PhDer at the end of October 2011. The one thing that helped me throughout the process was actively pursuing any kind of support, from physical through to virtual.

I was very lucky in that our school provides a fair amount of support for research higher degree (RHD) students - those doing a PhD or Masters degree. We have a dedicated room with a desk, computer and storage space provided; there are annual seminars where it’s compulsory for RHD students to present their work; we receive a sum of money each year (to use for conferences, data gathering expenses, etc.); and, our school’s academic and support staff is (by and large) incredibly supportive.

But there are certainly horror stories out there.

A friend of mine did her PhD with such little support from her school that she rang me weeping one day and asked me to have a regular coffee hour each week, just to discuss her research. This happened right at the beginning of my PhD and I’ve never forgotten how lost and sad and lonely she was.

PhDing can be lonely and isolating. It doesn’t matter how loving and supportive your family is, if they haven’t gone through it themselves it’s impossible for them to understand what’s happening to you. So, it’s really important to create a community, either physical or virtual, to help you through.

Here is some of the support I made use of. Some were more important than others at times but they all assisted in making my PhDing a little easier.

Find your fellow PhDers
I was blessed to have a group of fellow Media and Communication PhDers at my uni all going through at different levels. The experience within the group was a massive resource I drew on and I’d like to think that others who came after me have found my knowledge valuable as well.

Over the years we had various attempts at trying to meet formally either via regular coffee catch-ups or scheduled meetings, but busyness usually meant these formal forums eventually wound down. Most of the PhDers in our school are full-time academics doing research part-time (I don’t know how they do it) or full-time students teaching on a casual basis (don’t know how they do that either) so time is at a premium. I found it more valuable to just email someone to have a moan or ask a question or meet up for coffee.

Our RHD room setup was a valuable resource. When I started in 2006, there was only me in the room but over the years we’ve had more than a dozen coming and going, each bringing their own special experience into the mix.

Try to hang around with other academics
I worked in the RHD room from the beginning of my candidature and found it an excellent way to informally meet up with academics in the school. We have a strange mix of disciplines with academics from design, communication studies and information technology, but most have been very happy to chat in the lunchroom or in the corridors. The different disciplines bring their own take on problems. A great resource.

Twitter
I came to Twitter late in my PhD (early 2009) but talk about an instant support group!

There is the regular meeting of #phdchat on Wednesday nights (UK time), created and run by Nasima Riazat (@NSRiazat) but the hashtag can be used at any time to ask questions, update your own PhD status, make comments and observations and share experiences. Australia has its own version run by Dr Inger Mewburn (@thesiswhisperer) on the first Wedensday of every month.

Our little local group of PhDers tweet pretty regularly as well. I used the ‘List’ function to gather us all together so we could keep track of each other. At one stage, we had a hashtag called #phdequivalent where we decided that each day’s word output should be equaled by mls of wine or milligrams of chocolate. Yes, yes, sounds silly but silliness is sometimes REALLY IMPORTANT during the PhD process.

The only problem with Twitter is that it is possible to use it for evil instead of good. Twitcrastination: a way to use Twitter to not do PhD work. I remember tweeting once that you could always tell when I was trying to work my way through a particularly difficult bit because my tweets went up in volume and inanity. I got a few virtual nods for that comment.

Bloggers
Blogs didn’t feature highly in my PhD experience but I was so grateful when @chloekillen put me on to the Thesis Whisperer blog. There were many times when one of Dr Inger’s posts would land in my InBox and I would read it nodding my head in agreement. If you aren’t on the Thesis Whisperer mailing list, it’s well worth getting that started but there’s also a rich source of previous posts on topics ranging from how to design posters to publishing during your candidature, tips on how to manage money, supervisors and alcohol (hmmm, wonder what Inger thought of our #phdequivalent hashtag) through to advice on using technology efficiently, etc., etc., etc.

The GradHacker blog is another great resource, although it’s not Australian. I come to this one late in my candidature.

There are lots of other blogs there and it’s just a matter of finding the right fit for you. The beauty of following these blogs is that you realise others are going through the same kind of things and the good, practical advice on these sites is invaluable.

Of course having a supportive family is important but using whatever tool you can to get your way through what is a difficult journey (sorry about that Australian Idol term but there’s no other way to describe it). I do understand that RHDers juggle families, jobs, etc. and there are distance students who can’t go to regular meetings or catch up with others in person, but that’s the beauty of the Internet – there are virtual communities that can provide an incredible amount of support. Do some googling and find one that suits you.

And speaking of supportive families, my lovely husband was (is) awesome but a friend and I joked one day that there really needs to be a PhD Partner Support Group. Although how they would fit it in when they have to cope with someone whose brain is soggy and non-functioning from PhDing is a topic for another post.

Thanks Janet - and congratulations Dr! How about you - are you close to graduating now? Do you have any advice to offer? You can write to us, or leave some drops of wisdom in the comments."

Helen Beetham on ePedagogy

This post is a re-publication of an email that Helen Beetham sent to the LDHEN jiscmail, May 2012 On ePedagogy

From: Helen Beetham helen.beetham@googlemail.com
To: www.jiscmail.ac.uk/ldhen

"If by pedagogy you mean theory of learning, I can recommend a review of e-learning theories and models, carried out in 2004 by Terry mayes and Sara de Freitas, which though it sounds rather old now is in fact relatively timeless. Their conclusion: that the basic tenets of associative/instructive, constructive and situative learning are stable theoretical positions, but that they are expressed in different educational activities and interventions when different tools are available:
http://www.elearning.ac.uk/resources/modelsdeskreview/view

My own take on this is on page 11 of this publication: http://www..jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/effectivepracticedigitalage.pdf

I think there are probably two candidates for 'new theories of learning' in response specifically to the availability of digital tools and networks in education. They are networked learning, strongly associated in the UK with Lancaster university e.g. http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/ and Connectivism, strongly associated with George Siemens in the UK: http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

They are essentially both versions of the same idea, that being ubiquitously connected with other people and with information represents a step change in learning potential. Some versions of this theory go so far as to argue that learning takes place 'in the network'.

If by 'pedagogy' you mean 'approach to teaching', well there are hundreds of those which have been influenced by the technologies and literature of e-learning. One recent meta-review from the University of Minnesota - looking solely across the kind of positivist, experimentally-inclined work that takes place in the US - drew some interesting conclusions: instructor led approaches lead to significantly better learning outcomes if they have an online component (blended learning in a 'transmission' type scenario). Collaborative approaches are scarcely any better with an online component, and self directed approaches are not better at all. In other words, the kinds of learning that have traditionally been espoused by e-learning officianados (I have been counted as one) is not actually making the best use of the technology advantage, such as it is. http://www.oit.umn.edu/prod/groups/oit/@pub/@oit/@web/@evaluationresearch/documents/article/oit_article _336064.pdf

My own view, as I have argued since at least 2004, is that we don't need a new theory of learning or a special approach to teaching. We need to understand what it means to learn in an environment where information and communication is ubiquitously available. There is no part of learning that is not touched by the digital: even if a teacher and student choose to isolate themselves from digital opportunity, the meaning of that isolation is changed by virtue of the fact that they have had to make those special arrangements.

Helen Beetham
Consultant in e-Learning
helen.beetham@googlemail.com
twitter helenbeetham
skype helenb33 "
 
ENDS

Digital Literacy needs Visual Literacy and powerful learning spaces

I’ve just  been to the ALDinHE Conference: "Learning Development in a digital age: emerging literacies and learning spaces". (See on Twitter at #aldcon and #loveld.)

My Poster Presentation (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150648708378240&set=a.10150648708338240.387367.506793239&type=1&theater) tackled different visual aspects of Digital Literacy – reflecting my concern that these are being sidelined, especially as directed by government policy,  for the more technological aspects (viz. ‘Harnessing Technology’). 

Coming from a Literature, Film and Television Studies background, my focus is on the constructed nature of all representational systems, including the digital – and that all media are constructed in and through power discourses. If our students cannot ‘read’ and de-code the power inherent in digital messages, then they will never be digitally literate – no matter how many blogs they write or twitter posts they make.

In a practical pedagogical sense, I am interested in harnessing multimodality in teaching and learning – and particularly in supplementing the traditional essay with IBL and PBL assignments designed to promote engagement and creativity through real research projects that don’t ‘waste students’ work’.

One part of this research interest involves exploring how students can express their ideas on studying, learning and knowledge via designing their own animations and producing their own teaching and learning resources.

We have developed a prototype resource, ‘The AniMet Challenge’, that anyone can use to challenge their students to explore aspects of studying - and then to produce animations or resources around what they discover.

If you are interested in joining in our project – please go to our AniMet Challenge: http://learning.londonmet.ac.uk/epacks/animation/index.html

I am also involved in exploring how students inhabit Second Life and other 3D spaces. I want to discover how they represent themselves in these learning spaces – and how powerful they feel in these spaces. My hypothesis is that these places are less inhibiting for learners – especially non-traditional learners – than the typical University – and that therefore, there is the potential for students to be more creative there than in the University per se – and that these spaces are definitely more empowering than the traditional MLE or VLE.

See http://slonthebeach.blogspot.co.uk/ for resources we’ve developed to help other educationalists join in these explorations in teaching in 3D worlds – and for more information on ALDinHE – and to access the latest edition of our Journal – please go to: http://www.aldinhe.ac.uk/

I predict an education riot

I have told my students about this seminar on the Summer 2011 riots:

I Predict A Riot

Professor Ken Worpole, Cities Institute, LMBS, will be presenting at a seminar on what the riots mean for our city. He will talk on 'Public Space, Public Health and Urban Connectivity' and how the quality of the spaces where people live reflect the lives of the communities they serve.

The seminar followed by a panel discussion will be held on Thursday 8 December from 5pm to 6.30pm at: Unit 4 Union Wharf, 23 Wenlock Road, London N1 7SB.  RSVP joy.burgess@fha.co.uk

My view is that the riots were also about the learning spaces that we inhabit and that - especially in London - these were the great EDUCATION riots of 2011. 

Research from the child poverty action group in the 1980s indicated that if you wanted more families from non-privileged backgrounds to stay on at school, maintenance grants were necessary and lo in the twinkling of a couple of decades EMA were born. By 2011 you could pass an inner city secondary school and over hear the students talking about university: and not just as an abstract concept - but in terms of which university and what course they were considering. It seems that the very millisecond that this sort of thinking occurred, EMA was scrapped, fees shot up to £9K per year... and riots broke out.

Freire, 'favela', slum clearance and the demonising of the white w/class

This week one of my Educational responses to refugees students delivered a wonderful interactive workshop on second language acquisition drawing on the work of Paolo Freire (http://prezi.com/p5zxcpterqx-/second-language-acquisition-according-to-paulo-freire/?auth_key=dbbdcbb5ab595178c27481b128336260549bbc0b)  

She illustrated his method by exploring the word FAVELA (slum) - and since then I have watched Unsung Town Re-visited - Gareth Malone going back to South Okhey... There was such a powerful connection in my mind with the work of Freire and Malone - and attitudes towards refugees and the (white) working class.

So - make time to watch this ‘educational response to refugees’ (before Monday 5^th December 2011 or find it on the web) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b017yxhd/The_Choir_Unsung_Town_Revisited/ 

South Okhey is what you make when you have slum clearance without consultation with and not ‘for’ the people you clear. After the war people from the East End of London were moved to this hidden estate – and rendered silent and invisible in the process. Subsequent re-demonising of the white working class have made people like this the only ‘legitimate’ targets of middle class contempt and derision – which is why I have called these people refugees and this an educational response. 

If the original Choir - Unsung Town is out there - watch that too!