Colin was very kind to entertain my questions in June 2024. Prior to answering my questions, he'd already seen Steve Bacon's previous responses, hence why he mentions them below. Thank you Colin for giving such detailed answers. In Steve's intro, I used the term instrumental, and without apology, I'm going to use the same word again. Colin also was instrumental in the success of the ICL-CES project.
Colin joined ICL-CES in 1974 as a member of the development team. When Steve became project director, Colin took over charge of the support and development team until Steve left in August 1981 when he became project director until March 1983, joining Berkshire LEA.
Q1: Prior to joining ICL-CES, were you involved in the project as a teacher making use of the project? Is that how you came to hear of it?
I’d had a couple of vac jobs that involved some use of computers: a bit of Pegasus Autocode programming for the International Research & Development Company in Newcastle, and some Fortran programming at C A Parsons, plus a few evenings as computer operator for their IBM 1310. I’d also spent a summer vac working at ICT Stevenage (a constituent company of what became ICL) as a trainee programmer, where I’d been introduced to programming at machine-code level.
So subsequently, as a maths teacher in Wallingford, I was keen to take up an offer by the computer manager in the treasurer’s department at Berkshire County Council, for his department to punch & run Fortran programs written by students. I ran an after-school programming class and this, in turn, led me to attend the Imperial College Computing for Teachers conferences. There I discovered ICL-CES materials and subscribed to their mailing list. In the Spring of 1974 the CES Newsletter advertised vacancies for two staff to develop new materials, and I applied.
Q2: What led to you joining the project? Was it because being at the forefront of developing a new subject was too good to resist? A change from teaching?
Having put some effort, as a maths teacher, into developing interesting worksheets and teaching materials, I was attracted by the opportunity to develop curriculum materials that would be used by more people. Also, of course, there was the excitement of working in a subject that was new, and developing. Although I had no experience of teaching Computer Studies per se, I guess my previous hands-on experience with computers persuaded Colin Hampson-Evans to appoint me.
Q3: Once you started at ICL-CES, what your main responsibilities?
As Steve has said, Rosemary Phillips left the Project in the summer of 1974 to have a baby[1]. In September 1974 Steve replaced her as Development Team Leader; a couple of weeks earlier I had joined as a member of Steve’s team. As far as I can recall, the only other team member at that time was John Hammond; he had been involved in developing the early CES materials but, by the time I arrived, he was mainly occupied in software development – in particular, a BASIC language compiler for the ICL1900 series (the existing ICL offering was a BASIC interpreter, which was slow and unsatisfactory).
In 1974 there were three salesmen: Tony Ward, Ray King & John Winship; John had previously been a mainstream ICL salesman and had recognised the future significance of information processing (as opposed to number crunching) in computer applications. He had experience of the ICL FIND software and had persuaded the team that material, based on FIND, should be developed to support the teaching of information retrieval. In addition to producing the Newsletter (one per term, more or less), my initial brief when I joined CES was to produce a spec for the information retrieval materials, and then draft, develop and test the materials[2]. Initially this involved writing the pupils’ textbook and creating supporting data files to run under FIND and then, in keeping with the CES principle of providing substantial teacher support, writing a guide for teachers. The IRIS textbook was published in April 1976, and the Teachers’ Guide in September 1976.
As Steve has explained, his first major task was to lead the development of Computer Studies Book 3, which was to mark a radical move towards information processing, systems analysis and simulation. Steve planned the structure & content of the book, and he drafted many of the chapters. John Hammond & Rosemary Phillips also contributed, and some material was provided by John Gilligan who (I believe) had been part of the team before becoming computer manager at Blackburn College. After I’d finished writing the IRIS materials I wrote the chapters on simulation.
When Colin Hampson-Evans left CES, Steve Bacon took over as Project Director and I took charge of the Support & Development Team. The changes coincided with the CES office moving from 322 Euston Road to ICL’s Software & Literature Distribution Centre in Reading – a change that was convenient for ICL managements (as ICL’s London office accommodation was limited & expensive) and for Steve & me (as we both lived in Berkshire, and SLDC distributed all our books).
[1] subsequently she worked part-time for ICL’s Contract Programming Service (CPS), which was a team of programmers mainly working from home; I believe it was led by Steve Shirley, although I can’t find any reference to it in her Wikipedia biog
[2] a list of typical support activities is mentioned in Newsletter29 – this provides a good overview of the various tasks that I’d been undertaking
Q4: The Jan 1977 newsletter states that you had become lead of the support and development team. Could you tell me about that role?
By 1976 many of the original CES staff had moved on – simply a reflection that most had been appointed early in the life of the project, and they were looking for change and perhaps promotion. John Hammond largely worked from home and, as I have indicated, Steve & I lived over 50 miles from London, so the move to Reading was only disruptive for Paul Clarke. In effect therefore, when I took over the support & development team, I had no team members although, as I was working flat out on the Teachers’ Guide to Book 3, I wouldn’t have had time to manage anyone anyway!
Ian Sewell and Frances Vickers joined in the summer of 1977, and I was then able to focus on the development of new materials. With the passage of time and, especially, the publication of Book 3, it was clear that the original Books 1 & 2 no longer reflected the range of applications for which computers were used, so the new team’s first job was a complete revamp of those books. From the outset we introduced the notion of systems and this was developed throughout the revised course. With the more varied use of computers we were also able to include more extensive Computer at Work chapters reflecting the growth of interactive applications, and we updated the hardware chapters to try to reflect cutting edge developments. Wherever possible, we used examples and questions that emphasised the role of computers as processors of data, rather than just numbers.
The Project had always recognised that most teachers had no formal training for teaching Computer Studies, and we explored various ways of providing support. This included running regional panels, giving lectures and running summer courses for teachers, but we also talked to teachers about useful support materials. In addition to the substantial Teachers’ Guides, we produced sets of further questions to support Book 3 and the new Books 1 & 2, and structured copyable worksheets, to guide students through specific sections of the books. The list of materials in Newsletter 40 gives an idea of the range of products available by the start of the 1980s.
Steve and I recognised that some teachers believed CES was a Trojan horse to, somehow, enable ICL to sell computers to schools (although it was hard to envisage how ICL’s machines could ever be used by schools); for this reason we both devoted significant amounts of time to activities that didn’t directly benefit CES. For example, for four or five years I was book review editor for Computer Education[3], and I was a member of the BCS working group that developed the BCS Glossary of Computing Terms. From around 1978 I was also Chief Examiner for the UCLES O-level Computer Studies exam, and Reviser (ie moderator) for JMB O- and A-level Computer Studies/Science.
[3] the journal of the Computer Education Group
Q5: Part of your role towards the late 70s was as the editor for the newsletter. Do you recall how many copies of each newsletter were sent out, on average? And was this number increasing year on year through the late 70s/80s?
I was the newsletter editor until I became Project Director. As I mentioned earlier, I was on the newsletter mailing list when I was in Wallingford, even though I didn’t use CES materials, so we sent out many more newsletters than schools using our materials. The newsletter had the dual purposes of communicating with users, and also promoting Computer Studies to those who weren’t involved. I can’t remember how many newsletters we printed each time but, as there were about 5000 secondary schools at the time, I would guess we originally distributed around 1500 copies, rising to perhaps 3000 by the 1980s.
Q6: You became project director but I don't know when. (I know that because I found a letter from yourself in the TES, replying to someone who was displeased with some ICL software and was incorrectly attributing it to ICL-CES!!!) . When did you become project director?
I became Project Director in August 1981, when Steve became an Adviser with Derbyshire LEA. The availability of small machines such as the Commodore PET and the ZX80/81/Spectrum was encouraging LEAS to support and/or promote their use in schools, and Steve’s appointment reflected this.
At the same time, an entrepreneurial salesman in ICL’s Education Region took advantage of the success of ZX80s etc for home use, and commissioned a series of drill & practice programs that were sold through W H Smith. Although of questionable merit, the programs sold exceptionally well, making a substantial profit for ICL in 1981. In consequence, the salesman was given charge of what might be termed a “mini region” comprising his small software unit and CES.
Until the end of the 70s CES had more-or-less broken even each year[1], and Steve had successfully persuaded ICL managers of the publicity benefits of students becoming aware of the existence of ICL. In any case any profit made by CES would have been insignificant compared to the amounts made or lost in selling mainframe computers.
By August 1981, however, the increasing popularity of Computer Studies[2] was reflected in our sales, and we made a substantial profit – I can’t remember the amount, but it made a significant contribution to the overall profit of the “mini-region”. As a result, CES was seen increasingly as a profit centre, with the traditional pressure to produce an annual increase in profit. As we operated in a market where we virtually had a monopoly of teaching materials, there was little we could do to increase sales, apart from developing additional support materials. Eventually my new manager recognised that we weren’t operating in the traditional sales environment he was accustomed to, but there were a few unhappy experiences on the way: I remember being required to sell 800 copies of Books 1 & 2 to W H Smith at a 50% discount[3]; this gave an impressive boost to our revenue until, 3 months later, Smiths returned 650 unsold, shopsoiled books, having had them supplied on sale or return.
Nevertheless our success, linked to a recognition by ICL that microcomputers were going to revolutionise computing in schools[4], enabled me to employ a further four development team members in the summer of 1982.
[1] neither Steve nor I would have been happy had we felt that ICL wanted to make money from the schools market
[2] the year-on-year increase in the number of pupils taking CSE or O-level Computer Studies was 18% in 1980, 41% in 1981 and 52% in 1982
[3] our business model was based on selling direct to schools and we gave no discounts, even to bookshops (sometimes the cause of understandable annoyance to bookshops with LEA supply contracts!)
[4] by then the DTI had begun the first of its Micros in Schools funding schemes
Q7) What were the main aims/focus of the CES project in the 80s? I'm wondering if aims and focus changed because of the microcomputers that were gradually becoming more commonplace in schools?
By the end of the 70s the focus (reflected in the revised Books 1 & 2) had shifted towards emphasising the applications of computers, and this was reflected in the various support materials – worksheets, photographs, case studies – that we published.
At the start of the 80s it was clear that (1) access to microcomputers would give students opportunities to work directly with computers (instead of relying on batch processing or teletypewriter access to mainframes), and (2) microchip technology would give rise to new applications that would directly impact on people’s lives. We believed that all students, not just those studying for Computer Studies exams, should understand the impact of the new technology, and this approach was explained by Steve in Newsletter 36. The short “computer awareness” course that we produced was intended for all students in early secondary education, and it took advantage of the increasing availability of microcomputers by providing simple applications programs linked to the ideas in the text. The first of the two course books, Computers, Information & You was being trialled when I left CES and was published in August 1983; the second, The Information Age was published by Acorn-CES in September 1984. In case you haven’t seen it, I’ve attached an Acorn catalogue that provides an overview.
Q8) Revised versions of pupil books 1 & 2 were reprinted many times. Was a revised pupil book of 3 ever planned?
Book 3 was really the start of the second generation of CES books, and the new Books 1 & 2 completed that second generation; I think I was more uneasy about the differences in graphic design between Books 3 and 1/2, rather than the content. Had CES continued unchanged, by the mid 80s I suspect the three books would have been dramatically reorganised and rewritten to reflect real-world changes, and also to take advantage of students’ widespread access computers.
Q9) When did you leave the CES project, and what was the reason? Did you go direct to Berkshire LEA? (I found your name referenced in an Acorn User regarding Acorn CES).
Although I enjoyed the whole of my time with CES, the longer one is removed from teaching, the harder it is to maintain credibility with teachers and educationalists. After nine years with CES I realised that I needed to return to the mainstream of education, if this was to continue to be my chosen career.
As I mentioned, the DTI Micros in Schools schemes resulted in LEAs recruiting specialist advisory staff. Being based in Reading, we had made contact with the local LEA and, in the absence of an adviser for computer studies, I’d provided some support to secondary schools. When the Berkshire post was advertised it was natural for me to apply, and I was successful following a two-day assessment centre. Interestingly my job title was Adviser for Computer-related Education. When I subsequently worked with colleague advisers in NAACE, it turned out to be a unique title, but one that perfectly captured the essential element of working with teachers in a variety of subjects to help them use computers as a tool for teaching.
Q10) What was best thing about working on the ICL-CES project?
Working with a team of like-minded people, in an environment where I was (pretty much) allowed as much time as I needed to do the job well, and …
… knowing that it was worth doing the job well because the end result was going to used by thousands of students.
Plus, of course, being close to the cutting edge of both curriculum development and technology.
Q11) What were you most proud of?
It’s difficult to say what I’m most proud of, but here are some of the things I’m pleased about
· when we wrote the new Book 2 – at the end of 1978 – I needed to write a chapter on the future uses of microcomputers; although there were newspaper and research articles about new developments, I also had to rely on intuition/logic to write about applications that hadn’t yet been invented. Reading Chapter 9 now, over 45 years later, I think I guessed quite well!
· Steve wrote the History of Computers chapter in Book 3; at the time I had absolutely no interest in computer history, but it fell to me to write the Teachers’ Guide material for that chapter. We recognised that this was an area where teachers would need even more support than for teaching the “mainstream” elements of computer studies, so I was given as much time as I needed to do my research. In fact I found the subject captivating, especially as information about Bletchley Park was just beginning to emerge, and it was fascinating, for example, to have to understand and explain how Babbage’s carry-forward mechanism operated, or how delay-line storage worked. Since I retired I’ve done a few History of Computers talks for my local U3A, and I’ve been delighted to discover that my teachers’ guide chapter gives me far more information than I need to give a good talk!
· overall, the long-term impact of the project and its staff. Without CES, Computer Studies would not have progressed as a subject and, arguably, there would not have been the knowledge base that enabled computing in schools to take off in the 80s. CES staff have also been influential after leaving: Steve Bacon was a leading player in NAACE for over 20 years; as a full member, John Hammond provided the information technology input on Lady Parkes’ Design & Technology Working Group for the National Curriculum; and, as senior professional officer for Technology at the National Curriculum Council, I had responsibility for the subject for the whole of the NCC’s short life.
Q12) And, if you don't mind, what was the least favourable thing?
In the early days it was frustrating to face the criticism that I’d sold out to the commercial sector – frustrating because I wasn’t particularly well paid, but also because people working for CES genuinely saw themselves as contributing to education, rather than escaping from it. Over time, by contributing to a variety of mainstream initiatives (exam boards, NDPCAL, Computer Education Group and so on) we overcame most of the criticism, but it sometimes felt like an uphill battle.
Q13: What do you remember about the project being sold to Acorn in 1983? Is this something that the team foresaw? Or was this a surprise?
I was appointed to my Berkshire LEA post on December 1982 and left CES in March 1983. During this period there were suggestions that Acorn might be interested in taking over CES in its entirety. This seemed to make sense, as Acorn, through the BBC microcomputer, had an increasing presence in UK schools, and taking on board a successful curriculum project might strengthen their position against their main rivals, Research Machines.
As I mentioned, by then we had developed some software to support the new Living with Computers course, and so there would be a convergence of interests. As far as I am aware, nothing had been firmed up by the time I left CES, although I think most people in the team viewed a move to Acorn as an exciting opportunity.
The move took place in (I think) October 1983, when the team moved to Acorn’s Observatory House in Slough. Subsequently Acorn-CES was relocated to Cambridge, and I believe it was at that time that Gill Blackwell left, taking up a post at a secondary school in Surrey.
Q14: If the CES project hadn't have been sold to Acorn, what were the plans for the project? What was the roadmap? More reprints? More revisions of books? Anything else?
In March 1983 we were working flat out on the Living with Computers materials and software, which we knew would take us well into 1984. In a quickly-changing world there were no specific further plans. In the event, I think our priority would have turned to working with the various groups set up by the MEP and, subsequently, MESU to provide an efficient and high-quality publication and distribution service – rather like the service later provided to primary schools by Anita Straker’s project based in Winchester.
Also, as I mentioned earlier, I’m sure we would have restructured and rewritten the Computer Studies course to reflect current practice.
Out of interest, I’ve compiled a list of all the “professional” members of CES that I’m aware of:
CES non-administrative staff
Byron Williams ? — 1972
Sue Shaw ? — ?
Rosemary Phillips ? — June 1974
John Gilligan ? — ? September 1974
John Hammond ? — August 1976
John Winship ? — ? March 1975
Tony Ward October 1969 — August 1975
Colin Hampson-Evans May 1972 — December 1976 (Editor: see main people page for details on pre and post CES.)
Ray King March 1973 — August 1975
Colin Monson August 1974 — March 1983
Steve Bacon September 1974 — August 1981
Paul Clarke April 1976 — September 1979
Ian Sewell May 1977 — Acorn computers (Editor: Worked for Acorn until 1992 at the very least)
Frances Vickers September 1977 — Acorn computers
David Roberts September 1979 — January 1983
Ian Irving September 1979 — August 1981
Garry Neale June 1982 — Acorn computers (Editor: Worked for Acorn until 1994 at the very least)
Gill Blackwell August 1982 — ? summer 1984
Wynford James September 1982 — Acorn computers (Editor: Went on to write computing books.)
Jenny Nash September 1982 — Acorn computers