National Association of Educational Broadcasters Convention Educational Broadcasting and NDEA

What a room there. And. On that assumption. Let your stay where you are provided one thing. And that is that when we get to the part of the session this afternoon where. We're going to ask and expect extensive. Audience reaction. Thank you in the back of the room will react just as vigorously as those of you directly down in front of. You. That's all right with you. That'll be fine with us. I'm Larry Meyers as this card says and I'll take it back down. Because we don't quite have enough cards to go around. You can see me on the program. This is one of three sessions devoted to educational broadcasting and government organizations are concerned. For the next hour and a quarter is the program operated under the National Defense Education Act. There's another session examining educational broadcasting and the FCC. I

gather that that's for those who need or want stations. There's a second one for those examining educational broadcasting on the ATV facilities act I gather that's where the one who already has a station but needs the dollars to support it or to augment it. And our session in theory is for those more interested in assessing the merits of these and other media activities. You're all aware of course of the approval by the Congress of the National Defense Education Act and 1958 Public Law 85 864. It is very far reaching program. Providing such things as student loans fellowship grants honor and extensive fellowship program. Guidance programs. Programs for the purchase of equipment. And. Last but not least. A twofold aspect to support research and

experimentation. In the uses of television radio motion pictures and. Related media for educational purposes. And then secondly and lastly to disseminate this information by all appropriate means. Well now the program for support of research. Has operated as you know under terms of title so. Part A of the act. And the program for dissemination activities under Title 7 part big. There. Are planned this afternoon. And no matter how important these other areas may be. Is to confine ourselves to title setup. And the role and function of the National Association of educational broadcasters individually and collectively for this particular operation. Or procedure will be as follows. First of all time Clemens. Is going to review briefly for us the activities carried out under Title 7 and set the

stage for you to pose questions in consideration of future programs. The second. Part of the program this afternoon Jerry Sandler representing the radio division of an area that is received well it's a somewhat less than others in the past years for a variety of reasons. Well present some ideas relating to radio and. Third press homes representing the end of the research committee. Is going to evaluate the activities from his point of view and suggest directions. For fellows from the anti-B headquarters is then going to lead off our. General audience discussion by reacting to what the various members of the panel have said. And his comments will then we hope lead him to Yarrow because from these presentations we hope you will be sufficiently stimulated. To question. Or challenge and a member of the

panel with thoughts of your own. Let me say the session is going to and precisely at 3:15. So that you'll have time to chew the fat with anyone that you want to do and then get down to the general session at 3:30. Let me also introduce to you just before we get started our secretary for this. Program Carl Ludwig who is assistant director of research and development of the NEA. Be quite Would you stand up here. And now on to the program. Robert. Thomas Clouse. Is chief of research and services in the educational media branch of the U.S. Office of Education. He's been involved with Title 7 since I think since its inception. One way or the other and certainly is most qualified to discuss its significance. You will remember this morning up Professor. Lester Beck in his keynote said. That people like hamsters get so interested in being acrobats that they forget their

original mission. Well I think Tom Clemons is here to ask us to clarify our mission as well as he is and that is indeed a difficult aside. Time class. Thank you Larry. Thank you. For some 5 years now representatives of the Office of Education come to talk with you. At the national convention. About the National Defense Education Act in general and Title 7 in particular in general these presentations have taken one of two farms. First the one which is most common and perhaps most comfortable comfortable to bureaucrats is to re site to you. But the provisions of the law are and what the procedures and the accomplishments have been. The second is to harangue you

about what should be done that isn't being done. As we were thinking about this session Harold Hill and some of the rest of us back some months ago we decided that perhaps the. Measure above all others of a profession is that it kills its own snakes. For that reason since Title 7 does provide a resource whereby you may kill your own snakes. We decided that perhaps the best thing to do would be to rather briefly go through farm one of the presentation. What are we about. In Title 7. What of our accomplishments been to do this quickly so that you the professionals. Together with with the exception of the present speaker are about as competent a group of researchers and scholars in the area of educational broadcasting as one could collect. I. Have an opportunity to talk

about how should you use this resource in the future. Now Mr. Chairman if I may digress from my unprepared remarks for just a moment I would like to tell you about some of the legislative developments which may be of relevance I'm going to generalize it on Title 7. This has been this past session of Congress perhaps the greatest educational Congress in the history of the United States. Certainly what happened in the Vocational Education Act. Was highly significant. Ten percent of all monies appropriated for vocational education activities under that act. Must be expended for research. This would appear to be. A source of interest to educational broadcasters and other educational media specialists. The economic opportunities Act of 1964 certainly has tremendous implications for education. And I would submit.

That this act is bound to fail unless. A wide range of instructional resources are brought to bear including the resources of broadcasting. Just before Congress adjourned they passed an extension of the National Defense Education Act authorizing the expenditure of funds through June 30th of 1968. This continued. The the National Defense Education Act programs as they have been but made some significant expansions in it in the first place Title 3 of the National Defense Education Act which is of course concerned or was formally concerned with providing matching funds and loans to nonprofit or to nonpublic institutions of education for math science and modern foreign languages has been expanded to cover English the social sciences and a number of other areas with appropriately increased funds. Title 4 of the National Defense Education Act which is concerned with expanded

or improved graduate new or expanded graduate fellowship programs has been expanded again. So that here again there is a possibility for us to begin training more competent educational media specialists of all types at the doctoral level. Through Title 4. Title 7 of course continues for another three years. Five million dollars a year for research and dissemination of information. Finally a new title has been added to this act. Title 11 which authorizes institutes Institutes for the training of teachers to to apply the newer media in a variety of subject areas and author also authorizes Institutes for the training or retreading if you will of school librarians and specifically cited in the law. Educational media specialists. It's hoped that the regulations or at least the guidelines for this program will be published shortly.

Now what about Title 7. We've been in business for some 5 years now. 5 million dollars a year but the current the current state of appropriation for research on the educational uses of new communication media which may be promised to be of benefit the public elementary or secondary schools or institutions of higher education. Secondly contracts for dissemination of information about such media which will promise to be of benefit to the schools. What does this add up to so far as the educational broadcaster is concerned. Well it adds up to this in terms of dollars and cents. That over eight million dollars roughly one third of all the funds authorized for Title 7 to date have been expended on projects relating to educational Broadcasting be it radio or television. By the way I also encompass the study of videotape and

of a closed circuit television in broadcasting for today. Eight million dollars for. Something in the order of 80 research projects and approximately 40 dissemination activities. What does it add up to though. What can we say the accomplishments are. Well in part. The title 7 is done has been. Merely to reinforce some of the activities which have gone on for a number of years at least since the days of inventory of educational research back in 1956. We've known that television like radio like almost any other form of human communication can teach. We were sufficiently sure of this that in 1960 Ray carpenter stated unequivocally television can teach and I think that our presence here today reflects that all of us believe this. Sole title 7 particularly in

30 earlier days under the research program. Did reinforce the general finding that. Television. And radio can teach a wide range of subjects at any grade level you care to name some of the comments which Lester Beck made this morning indicate that perhaps broadcasting media provide a way of leveling out some of the imbalances and preschool experiences which youngsters have and can generate more creative production in the schools as time goes on. Secondly again here I believe Title 7 has reinforced what was known before. The broadcast media Kim certainly expand educational opportunities not only by sending out a message to an undifferentiated audience scattered over a wide area or two large audiences closely packed. But. Radio and Television provide a means whereby it is possible for us.

To tailor instructional messages to specific audiences provides a means for us to get at the culturally deprived audience. We can use television and radio to seek out the learner rather than waiting for the learner to seek out educational opportunities. In like manner we can use these media to provide special and rather exciting educational experiences for gifted youngsters of. B they creatively are academically gifted. It might be of interest you to know that a study conducted by Keith and Gar at University of Utah indicated that when you provided special. A special television curriculum in Russian. For. Gifted sixth graders they not only learned Russian. But there was a significant increase in their performance in all subject areas throughout the curriculum. Apparently the gifted youngster is almost infinitely expandable and the broadcast media

provide a way to expand them. Third. I suppose that perhaps here is a place where Title 7 did reinforce a little bit but perhaps we've stated a little bit more forcefully than others. Our research has demonstrated pretty clearly that television is not a panacea. That simply putting the great teacher before a camera is not adequate that the real hope for these media. Is through the careful articulation of them with other instructional resources including the competent classroom teacher. To attain objectives not only to attain more efficiently the objectives which we've always wanted to attain in the schools but perhaps to reach out to attain new educational objectives. And finally for me. Title 7 research has demonstrated and I think that here we can lay claim to this has demonstrated rather clearly. That. Active student response and superior teaching are essential to

effective use of the television medium. A wide range of studies have indicated that we can do a great deal better in television programming if we as the self instructional programmer does operationally define our objectives in terms of student behavior and then empirically revise. The. Preliminary versions of the programs. Through having youngsters respond. Revise the programs and then broadcasting we get better results. Secondly growing out of some of the old film research as well as much new television research we know very clearly that television can be made an active medium whereby the student is required overtly or covertly to respond during the television programme and the such can such uses of student response and educational broadcasting lead not only to a higher level of learning. But actually increases the efficiency of learning and it's quite

evident. That both the production team which is in effect a television teacher and the classroom teacher herself. Are crucial to the to the process of getting affective television learning. We know that the teacher who is not committed who does not know how to use the medium can destroy the effectiveness of the program no matter what was built into it. And we know that the skillful. The insightful classroom teacher provides a means of individual izing what may appear to be a mass signal. In a way that was either too just unbelievable to us. What about the dissemination programme. What if anything have we done in titles and the dissemination program authorized by Title 7 Part B. Essentially we've had about four major objectives relating to the broadcast media. Let me tell you about the major objectives.

You know to a degree they're sort of opposite theory Ari but that's all right. They they have been the major emphases and how we've gone about implementing them. First of all we have since 1959 been concerned with facilitating the flow of information about outstanding practices procedures and about research relating to the broadcast media. Secondly we have worked with your assistance in fact you have worked with our financial assistance is really a more accurate way to put it to improve the availability of high quality program materials in educational broadcasting. Third there has been some concern for the problems of manpower in the media field in general and broadcasting in particular. And finally we've there's been concern for improving administrative financial and technical resources for educational

broadcasting. Now how is this done. We award contracts usually in a series of phases. Most frequently we attempt to start out with a study or a survey to identify the need for increased or improve uses of an instructional resource or to assess the status of a field whatever the field may be. On the basis of this study or this survey whatever the tech whatever technique we may use. We then usually follow that up with. At least one and perhaps two different kinds of activities. First of all. Reporting activities in which we attempt through contract to report in. Almost any form conceivable to the mind of man abstracts bibliographies monographs reports film reports and so forth on the current status of activities and on outstanding practices which are being carried on. Concurrently with this or perhaps even prior to the reporting we frequently

contract for developmental or demonstration activities which will demonstrate in naturalistic settings the feasibility of what we know from research or from the best thinking professional thinking on the subject. Let me give you one or two examples. Back in 1959. We conducted we supported. A conference conducted by the National Association of educational broadcasters on regional and state networking of broadcast facilities. This led after a period of time to a feasibility study of the possibility of interchange ing broadcast materials in recorded farm which in turn led to the establishment of one national and two regional libraries of instructional television materials. Jerry Sandler and Jim Fallows will have some things to tell you about other girls of this

networking conference which is which is underway today. Another example. We have just we have completed again under the. With through the U.S. supervision and the study of manpower. The status of manpower and manpower needs in the broadcasting. And so on. We then attempt under the dissemination programme. To provide some sort of sequence of structured activities which will lead to improvement of practice in the field. I think I can assure you that the view of our advisory committee has of the staff of the office of education is that the dissemination program should not be conceived narrowly as one one of simply passing out information. We construe dissemination to be the process of facilitating appropriate educational change not only through reporting but also through demonstration and pilot activities.

This then is what we have done under Title 7. But rather than my going on. Perhaps the question now should be what are the needs. And I'm going to throw that question back to you. We in the office of education can formulate a series of priorities and needs and say that this is the way in which the title 7 program should go. I'd suspect that this would put the the profession in the position. Of getting into a horse race in those areas which we think are important. It seems to us much more consistent with the tradition of American education. Of pluralistic. Educational support determination of needs at as local a level as possible. To throw this question back to you and to my colleagues at the table here. What are the needs. Where should we be going with a research

demonstration and developmental potential such as we have in Title 7. To make sure that there is the fullest and the most effective use possible made of the broadcast media and education. Thank you. So. Much. Thank you very much time in the background for us and left us with the big question what are the needs. And so I'll turn first to a man who thinks he has some suggestion on them and some ideas about them. Gerald Sandler. Is executive director of the national educational radio division the N A B. And as. You know. As the man. Vitally concerned with radio which I want to mention one of the goals have been a kind of a stepchild I suspect he has a lot of things to say why I think radio has been the kind of shot of the side. As far as work is concerned I'm not quite sure. There have been a lot of theories posed

on that just a matter of lack of personnel wise of that all the good people went into television. You've probably heard that jury and then along with it was a lack of ideas of professors on our staff. A bitch gets up on his first line to shock his students is when he meets with the students who are working on the radio station is the flat assertion that radio is dead. Maybe that's it. There might be a question of lack of time to get involved in research activities because you're too busy programming too many hours a day. As an already own man myself I would prefer the reason that as straight talkers and as efficient communicators we have no desire particular to mix with governmental gobbledygook and. That whatever the reason. Certainly there needs to be some kind of research and song. As far as radio goes Tom Clement mentioned just a minute ago that measure of the profession. Has the question of the fact that it kills its own snakes. Here is Gerry Souter who has a whole

sackful up. On him. Thank you very dancer a few of your questions. Yes we do have a whole sackful of them. We're only going to present a few of them and hope that they will in turn create a bit of a contagion which we hope on the part of you will become an epidemic because we would like some feedback from you in terms of a sack full of snakes both today and in the months to come unequivocally as far as we're concerned in the national educational radio division of the NAACP and I am sure this is true for the NASB as a whole. Radio is anything but dead and I think you will see from the point of view of the kinds of ideas we're talking about that we are not talking about a return to the past. We're talking about the future of educational radio and what directions it might take. Before I try to chart a few of the snakes of the future however I'd like to speak to one current point

and reiterate what Bill Harley mentioned in his president's report this morning and that is the ongoing DC s project which is being funded under NDA Title 7. The first two phases of a projected five phase study. The C S is short for educational communication system and as many of you know it has been undertaken by an abs since 1 April of this year to study the need and feasibility of a system of electronic interconnection among the institutions of higher education of the United States to provide two kinds of essential services. One a lot of interconnected educational radio network two in conjunction with that. Specialized communication services directly linked to the needs of education. Now obviously there are implications in Easy S not only for radio people but for everyone concerned with communications and education. I spent

from March until the end of August of this year as Project Director for that project and the only reason I was able to give up that ghost was to take on the big challenge is radio dead. I was asked to take on this post as head of the new radio division of an AP. However we were very fortunate in being able to set up a kind of continuum here because Jim fellow was recently named as Bill Harley's assistant is now a project director and my colleague my esteemed colleague John Witherspoon formerly of San Diego State College is now wearing both hats as Associate Director of any R and associate director for the CFS. So we are all working together on this. And Phase 2 which is currently being undertaken by Jim and John involves a survey phase in which they are talking with people on the fairly high level presidents provost vice president for academic affairs as well as the media people and a

selected number of institutions of higher education across the country in terms of the need for this kind of system to develop. When this phase is completed and reported on which will be at the end of this year. Then we'll see about the other projected phases that Tom Clemons suggested might possibly happen. We certainly hope and trust that the U.S.'s concept of such will indeed show itself to be one that deserves further support and further develop. Now to the future. What I'd like to throw out for you in the next few minutes is not necessarily the entire first five year plan but at least one approach to a first five year plan. When John Witherspoon stepped off the plane from San Diego at ten fifty six p.m. on the evening of August 28 I met him and his lovely wife and two children at Friendship airport at 10:58 after we shook hands. We began our first

continuous session which lasted some three weeks. I'm quite serious about that. I think that John's wife and my wife probably saw more of each other than they saw their husbands during that period. The relevance to the subject today really is this very simple point. We had to come to grips within 24 to 48 hours of his arrival. What priorities really. We were going to be able to pay in any attention to. We knew that we had thousands of problems that that we had to work with. And I can tell you without a question of a doubt either one of our minds if we had not had time to really talk in any great detail other than through the mails. That one of the first five items that we both immediately insisted upon that needed immediate attention was the area of research as it relates to educational radio. And thus the informal memo that I'd like to share with you parts of this. It is our our first

attempt to try to articulate some of these needs. And again let me stress that we don't think that this is the plan but only a beginning towards the formulation of this kind of long range view. Since NDAA will be alive and thriving for a number of years to come we hope that some of these may very well turn out to be appropriate. We might call this then a research plan for the development of noncommercial educational radio as an instrument of social change cultural development and organized instruction in the United States. All right. As we're all aware acutely aware I'm afraid radio has been for many years the intergalactic medium of American educational media research. The reasons for this in the age of television are many and to some degree understandable. Nevertheless such meagre research as we have indicates that in a great many cases radio is as effective as television and in other cases it is more

effective than television and in any event it is less expensive than television. Furthermore and perhaps most important radio is not television without pictures but a wholly distinct media with its own set of unique attributes and problems. Educational radio in the United States has been handicapped further by an identity problem which is rooted in its strange boom and bust infancy in the mid twenties. A large percentage of station licensees were colleges and schools. The depression retrenching of the 30s compounded by the passing of radio's novelty factor severely damaged educational radio's development. Now the growing strength of FM in the general interest in educational media have stimulated interest once more. This 40 year background has been complicated by the fact that unlike government related educational radio many European countries noncommercial educational radio in this country is used by higher education public schools churches libraries nonprofit

corporations and so on all for their very own purposes. Now none of this historical fact however has anything to do with the capabilities of radio as an instrument of social change cultural development or organized instruction. Furthermore the emerging strength of educational broadcasting makes it inappropriate to accept the patterns of the past too readily. One might better study such questions as What should be the role of noncommercial educational radio in our society. The National Association of educational broadcasters through its nuclear nice radio station division called a national educational radio is interested in proposing formulating a series of studies systematically addressed to at least these three major questions first. What is the nature of radio as a medium of educational social cultural communication in the middle you of America today. This broad question includes many topics including some of the following the ways in

which radio engages a listener's attention. The effect of incomplete or carefully selected sensory cues the carrying capacity of radio the point of diminishing return for oral broadcast transmission of information and abstract concepts. The application of this information in designing a rhetoric of the media and the use of this knowledge in designing programmes for specific social educational purposes. The techniques of radio utilization in a variety of situations for formal and informal instruction. The use of radio in conjunction with other media from simple use of illustrated radio study guides to elaborate cross-media educational planning. Question number two. Given educational radio's presence status as a starting point. What roles should noncommercial educational radio have in the American society. Well clearly this question is not unrelated to the first and intelligent assignment of roles presupposes some knowledge

of the medium's characteristics and potential. Given that fact we envision attacking this question in three stages. A. Determine the present status of educational radio in terms of facilities personnel fanatics objectives and intended growth. Be bring to bear the thinking of an outstanding group of broadcasters educators social philosophers and economist. In a study that would result in a recommended course of development for noncommercial educational radio in the United States. See study of the economic and technical factors of the recommended course and develop a program of practical action toward its implementation. Major question 3. What is the potential of the radio broadcast spectrum for noncommercial educational development. This question is not nearly as simple as it sounds but it is so fundamental that it influences all of the others. And maybe as a matter of fact right now has an informal memorandum before the US so we are outlining a computer study of educational FM channel

allocations and a formal proposal if appropriate would follow. Well toward the implementation of this long range program. Three initial ideas seem to be indicated to us as first steps. One as we've already mentioned the educational FM channel allocation study which would help provide many of the answers to some of the questions we posed above and could set a pattern for solution of further spectrum problems as they arise. Second an informal memorandum right now that we're working on. Which would lead to a study including the examination of the present state of instruction by radio. The identification of specific research questions and on the nature of radio as an instrument of instruction and formulation of a plan for orderly integrated study of these questions. And third the third element of present research activity might be a study to determine in considerable detail the present status of educational radio. This

project dealing with facilities personnel and finance objectives and plans we feel is so fundamental to this entire approach that we hope to have this in some kind of workable form by the end of this year. Well it can quickly be seen I'm sure that each of these three studies just as cases in point begins the attack not least one of the major questions that we've stated in this outline and what we hope we've done by sharing some of these thoughts with you is to get you to do some thinking about this. The untapped potential of radio. Is there we are sure of it. And we think that one of the things that is happening almost as a direct result of the reorganization of an AP with the parent organization and the four divisions under it. It is for the first time for instance in the history of the Navy take the radio station division itself and here are we now have a full time staff devoted 100 percent of its time and energy in the nine day

weeks to the problems of radio. Period. And this means of course that while we are chorused concerned with problems involving the TV instructional broadcasting per se we are primarily concerned with all of those problems as they relate to move to radio as a medium of communication and education. And I might say the conclusion of these remarks that one of the areas that seems to us because of the appropriate to this immediate attack. Towards the long range objectives that we've outlined is in the area of in-school broadcasting as it relates to radio. It's an interesting point to note that approximately 25 percent of the N.E. are network stations that exist in the United States today are in school broadcasters. These are a formidable group of people. There's an important service to be performed and we feel that this is an area that needs to be dealt

with very soon and in a very specific way. And one of the thoughts that we have along these lines is to bring together. All those people concerned with in school broadcasting on a nationwide conference level if you will some of our level the in-school broadcasting personnel in conjunction with the superintendents of instruction or whatever seems to be the most appropriate framework the curriculum policy people and the management broadcasting. Live in school broadcasting people. And we hope to develop something along these lines so that this becomes something very specific in a very important area of radio broadcasting one of the truly pioneering aspects of educational radio from its very earliest days. And it too is not dead but it too we hope will be revitalized with the help of appropriate research instruments under us so we Title 7.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Jerry. After this the motto will be radio is alive. You hope you. Suggested some questions on the part of the audience I know I got one from you that if I have time I'm going to ask you introduced a new term into the lexicon for me and that's informal memorandum and then I'm going to have some plugs of the. Dr. Presley Holmes is director of television at Ohio University and is chairman of the Research Committee of the National Association of educational broadcasters. When I mention that committee it brings back a little nostalgia to me because I remember some dozen or more years ago when I was a member of the committee and one of our key problems of the day was estimating the audience to educational broadcasting stations by means of a telephone survey.

Press Holmes is here today I think to demonstrate that we've come a long way since then. The. Letter does remind me though of two college students who were walking along a campus and they passed an old distinguished professor sitting on a bench in the on the campus there. A gray goatee and so on. But great for retirement. And the one asked the other who was of all that soul Professor Snavely. Yes you know when I graduate I'm going to be like him. I'm going to apply for a grant for a research project that nobody else understands. And I can putter around for years without anybody being the wiser. Press Holmes is here to suggest ways in which we can improve the stroke of our growth. But.

I'm not sure I know. That's a tough act to follow. Indeed my first reaction is to your statement about telephone surveys. We have come a long way but they're still going on I guess they are as well. Telephone surveys never die they just get disconnected I guess. Check you'll leave here an area that served by one particular telephone company that will remain nameless for local reasons and I didn't want to react a little bit and since time is growing short hold on my remarks a little bit. But Tom Plowman's mentioned. Four specific things that he thought research with television had done. They came up with the the impression that television can't teach. We are concerned with. We are broadcasters and we are supposed to be concerned with education. And I think that's where I want to put my emphasis now. The early studies as Tom suggested. Were mostly on the

basis of gross comparisons between what was referred to as conventional teaching and this was conventional was anything that took place in a classroom where there was nothing electronic and compared with. Teaching by television. And the results of many years of research comparing of those two gross conditions unable to say. Television can teach. I have always been bothered since and this is for. Since the prehistoric ages of television education. I've always been bothered by the fact that they chose to compare. And struction by means of television to conventional conditions. All of a sudden jumping at the conclusion that conventional conditions were the thing that they should be compared against in the first place. Nobody's ever spent a great deal of time you got you waiting whether conventional conditions are the best means to communicate information

or to teach. They were always there and so we just assumed that's what we should compare television with or against or to work for. This was done with. Success depending upon which side of the fence you stand on. At least it was determined that in most of the cases there were no significant differences. So what does this mean. Another way of saying television can teach is that students can learn. We know for a fact that students can learn in spite of. As well as because of. And I think one of the things the big thing. The main thing we have to get at whether we get any of Jerry's stuff and utilizing radio or utilizing television or any of the new media is how do you measure it. How do you measure whether the kids learn something or not. And I think I could make a very good case to argue against Jerry that most of the research that

has been done a good part of it that's been done that's been called television research has really been measuring conventional conditions versus audio. That the vision part of television if you look at the examinations that are given to students after they have taken a course that the same examinations that were offered in the conventional course their print examinations the student has heard the material anything he has seen. If he learned it. They haven't found out about it. From the exam they gave him. There has been some work and we have come a long way from telephone surveys and these beginning gross comparisons. Where we're now starting to compare. A certain television condition versus another television condition. Larry Myers has done an interesting thing with teachers whether they're experienced or inexperienced and

remember those are quite the right terms. Graduate assistant versus somebody with tenure might be a better way of putting. It. We end the term three times or so. His remark was they change their terms three times themselves. So we're not sure on that. I think this is where we have to go with television let's forget about conventional conditions we have spent enough time on them. Let's find out what While some kind. One use of television versus another use of television can do or radio in many cases I'll agree with Jerry that radio can do a teaching job equally well as or better than television. If all you're doing is testing people on the audio or the entire information content is carried in the audio and what part do the visuals play in it. Now tomorrow there is a succession of television art directors at 9:00 in the morning. The titles of their speeches are visual aids and graphics from the teachers view point

from a producer's viewpoint and from the artist's point. How about the learners viewpoint. What does the visual do for him. Does it confuse you. Does it get in the way. I will always remember one television program that I was fortunate enough to see that when I was in an area that could receive the CBC and two gentleman came on camera and were arguing back and forth you can't do it. Yes I can. You cannot prove it to you. All right. Go ahead. So the screen went dark and then the silhouette of a very shapely female in leotards appeared on the screen and danced and so on. And 30 seconds later these two gentlemen appeared back on the screen and one guy said See I told you good. I said I guess you can you're right. You didn't get them to stay in front of the screen and listen to Bach. But.

I wasn't listening to Bach. What does that what. This is the other case. If they had given me a paper and pencil test then and said Who was the composer of that music. I would have said what music. Probably. We have got to realize that we are working with two senses this one get in the way of the other. Does one overshadow the other. Can they reinforce each other I think this is along with learning how to test with this information. These are the areas where we have to go if we want to make any more progress and we have made a lot. As Mr. Robinson suggested. Through television. One last thing I want to plug my own session Wednesday at 11:15 in the morning. Some of this will be based on a recent study by the research committee of current activities and research. And of these some 100 almost 100 projects that are in progress right now only four of them. Are measuring measuring instruments. Only

four of them are for people who are trying to find out how we measure things. We made an assumption that a conventional classroom was a thing worth. Comparing against and we've made the assumption of the test.