NATIONAL CONFERENCE for STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PERSONNEL on EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION A Summary Report A Conference funded by the United States Office of Education under Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; planned and conducted by the Georgia State Department of Education. Atlanta, Georgia May la, II, and 12, 1966 CONTENTS Page Preface 5 welcome 7 Mr. Jack P. Nix Georgia State Superintendent of Schools Keynote Address 9 "Assuming the Mantle of Leadership Responsibility for Educational Television" Dr. E. B. Nyquist Deputy Commissioner New York State Department of Education First General Session 19 "Current Status of Involvement in Educational Television by State Departments of Education"- A survey report Dr. H. Titus Singletary, Jr., Presiding Georgia Associate State Superintendent of Schools "Types of Organizational Patterns, Legislation, Financing and Personnel" Participants: "The South Carolina Educational Television Network" 22 Mr. Henry Cauthen, Executive Director South Carolina Educational Television Network "The New York State Department of Education 30 and Educational Television" Dr. Lee Campion, Director Division of Educational Communications New York State Department of Education CONTENTS-contd. "The Hawaii state Department of Education and Educational Television" Dr. 'Donald Wood, Director of Television Hawaii State Department of Education "The California Educational Television Status" Mr. John Crabbe, Chairman California Educational Television Committee "The Georgia Educational Television Network Organization" Mr. Lee Franks, Executive Director Georgia Educational Television Services Second General Session "A Look at the Future of Educational Television" Presiding Dr. Gilbert Tauffner Executive Director WETV and WABE Atlanta, Georgia Mro Lee Franks Mr. John Crabbe Dr. Donald Wood Dr. Lee Campion Mr. Henry Cauthen Discussion Third General Session "utilization Administrators' Panel" Moderator Mr. Duane Mattheis Commissioner of Education Minnesota State Department of Education Page 35 41 47 56 64 67 70 73 78 80 92 CONTENTS-contd. Dr. Willard Bear, Assistant Superintendent of Public Instruction Oregon State Department of Education Dr. William Flaharty, Deputy Commissioner of Education connecticut State Department of Education "utilization Specialist Respondents" Mr. Robert Fox, Curriculum Director Delaware Educational Television Network Mr. John Dunlop, General Manager Educational Television, University of Maine Mr. O. Max Wilson, Acting Administrator of utilization Georgia Educational Television Services Georgia State Department of Education Discussion Reports "State Legislation on Educational Television" Mr. Robert M. Shultz, Director Department of Educational Television and Network Development Illinois State Department of Education "Interstate and Interagency Cooperation" Dr. Richard H. Bell, Executive Director Instructional Division National Association of Educational Broadcasters Washington, D. C. Page 93 95 98 103 105 108 120 121 CONTENTS-contd. Page "Status of Federal Educational Television Facilities Grant ProgramII 129 Dr. John Bystrom, Assistant to the Under Secretary U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Washington, D. C. liThe Conference and the U. S. Office of Education" 141 Dr. Robert Hopper, Title V Director Elementary and Secondary Education Act U. S. Office of Education Washington, D. C. liThe U. S. Office of Education and Educational Television"143 Mr. Harold Howe, II, Commissioner of Education U. S. Office of Education Washington, D. C. Evening Session 146 Appendix Charts Participants Conference Comments Consultants i xvi xxx xxxix 5 PREFACE Television stations which broadcast educational programming exclusively have been operating in the united states for more than a decade. Intent of the first educational television stations was to enrich the adult masses in terms of the world's cultural arts and graces, to air college telecourses, and to teach the adult educationally underprivileged. within less than three years of the early station's existance, interest was expressed in the utilization of educational television broadcast facilities to aid instruction in elementary and secondary education. In many areas this latter experiment gained roots faster than ideas blossomed for educational television's seed theories. The Educational Television Facilities Act administered by the united states Office of Health, Education, and Welfare has provided up to one million dollars per state for capital outlay for educational television equipment. This program helped to attract the attention of state departments of education to the possibilities of developing statewide educational television services. An extensive amount of activity in educational television is evident throughout the Nation. However, the united states Office of Education noted that relatively few state Departments of Education were providing leadership in this field and where there was involvement there was little exchange of data between departments. Because the Georgia state Board of Education is designated by law as the state's educational television authority, and because its educational television venture has achieved a degree of sophistication, the united states Office of Education suggested that Georgia plan, develop and host a national conference for state departments of education which could be supported under Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Accordingly, Georgia State Superintendent of Schools, Jack P. Nix, submitted an application for such a project and it was accepted. Dr. Charles E. 'Trotter, Jr., United States Office of Education Specialist, Educational Facilities Technology, was assigned as Federal-state project liaison. Superintendent Nix appointed Lee Franks, Executive Director, Georgia Educational Television Service~ to organize and administer the Conference. By invitation 6 of Mr. Franks, Dr. Richard Bell, Dr. Lee Campion, and Mr. Duane Mattheis constituted the Conference Planning Committee. Mr. Franks assigned his Acting Administrator of utilization, Mr. O. Max Wilson, as Conference Coordinator. Throughout the co~erence, he relied on Dr. Trotter to assist in the de~elopment of the meeting. Invitations to attend the Conference were extended to each of the Chief state School Officers and their administrative assistants whose responsibilities include or would likely include educational television. In response, 120 chief state school officers, and/or their associates, state legislators and state personnel associated with educational television attended the Conference. The major objectives of the Conference were: (1) to assess the degree of involvement in educational television of state departments of education in the united States; (2) to point out various organizational patterns indicating enabling legislation, sources and magnitude of financing, and types of personnel required; (3) to show the breadth, complexity and challenge of utilization activities; (4) to consider trends of development for future planning. 7 WELCOME Mr. Jack P. Nix Georgia state Superintendent of Schools (A summary) We are proud the U. S. Office of Education has asked that we sponser this National Conference for State Department of Education Personnel on Educational Television. State department of education representatives coming to Atlanta from allover the Nation to discuss the importance, the possibilities and the potential of educational television should result in an extensive exchange of information on the subject. For several years, Georgia has devoted vast effort to educational television as part of its total educational picture. within the next 18 months, we anticipate five additional educational television stations to start broadcasting with our present four, which are interconnected to compose our state television network. The Georgia State Department of Education entered educational television under the leadership of our Board Chairman, Mr. James Peters, who is seated here at the head table, as is one of our Board members, Mr. David Rice. While Georgia has leaped forward in educational television, we realize there is yet much experimentation and 8 development to be accomplished in the field if we are to discover its many uses to educate children and to develop and stretch the minds of individuals to make them responsible citizens. There are 41 states represented at this Conference and I believe the representatives here should be the "cream of the crop" of all of the Nation in terms of educational television. The future of educational television will rest in terms of how well we fit it into this great responsibility we have of providing educational opportunities for the people of this Nation. What happens, no doubt, will eminate from the nucleus that has been formed here tonight. It is good to have you here with us this evening and I trust you will enjoy the Conference. -~ 9 ASSUMING THE MANTLE OF LEADERSHIP RESPONSIBILITY FOR EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION Dr. E. B. Nyquist Deputy Commissioner New York state Department of Education (A Summary) The purpose of this Conference is to launch an inquiry into the role of state departments of education in providing more forceful and effective leadership for the development of educational television. The inquiry is a good one, and we congratulate Georgia for thinking of it, and the Federal Government for being so generous in funding it. Television is truly a superb opportunity for a state education department to enlist itself on behalf of creative service and constructive change. All you need, to initiate and maintain a useful interest and service ~n educational television, are four things: 1. A statewide plan for guidance and development. 2. A professional staff to provide consultant services to schools and colleges and to engineer consent with potential users. 3. Adequate demonstration in resource materials and equipment. 4. Money 10 A large part of the answer to a more widespread and effective use of educational television lies in the concept of a shared responsibility in a Federal-state-local partnership. Local public schools and colleges and state departments of education are finding that they need to cooperate more, and not only with each other, in order to make education more effective. They must also learn to establish constructive relationships with the Federal Government: with private and parochial educational institutions: with private and public agencies in such fields as health, welfare, housing and community planning: and with other educational resources within their communities or regions which have hitherto stood on the periphery of the formal teaching and learning process, such as libraries, museums, educational television, the performing arts and several others. For our own domestic happiness and our strategic relationship with other nations, it is in the national interest to support education. States and localties are either unable to or unwilling to support education to the extent necessary to match its modern importance. As the federal interest in education has increased and as local systems have confronted problems beyond their capacity to deal with effectively, the need for re-evaluation 11 and readjustment of the role of the state department of education has grown. In his book, Shaping Educational policy, Dr. James B. Conant wrote, "What is needed are strong state boards of education, a first-class chief state school officer, a well-organized state staff and good support from the state legislature." The reason for this need rests on more than the superficial fact that the state is in the middle between the local level of administration and the Federal Government. The state provides a broader base for educational leadership and planning than is possible at the local level, yet one which is far closer to the local school or to the local college than the Federal Government. It makes possible a continuity of leadership responsive to regional variations, conditions and needs. The state is uniquely equipped to formulate policies, conduct research, encourage experimentation, make decisions and take action on a scale not too limited nor too vast. Diversity is always necessary, but diversity should not mean general weakness or rich variety and poor quality. Recognizing the need for state departments of education to be stronger, if they are to play the central role they expect to play and which is expected of them, the 12 Federal Government has provided funds in Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to strengthen the leadership capacity of state departments of education. Unless states are strong in their educational leadership, they can expect to witness a decline in state and local relationships and a proportional growth in direct line communication and administration between local agencies and the Federal Government. The growth of the Federal Government's influence in education, meaning its direction and control, will only occur to the extent that the states neglect to exercise their responsibilities as well as their rights. One is the obverse side of the other. I am urging that the state can only maintain a senior partner position if it leads boldly, imaginatively, and creatively. There can be sound and effective state partnership only where the state agency is prepared to meet the federal agency at a comparable level in professional judgment and performance. The role of the Federal Government is to identify national goals and needs in education, to provide massive infusion of supporting funds, and to evaluate our total effort as a nation. The role of the states is to provide diversity in leadership, to organize and coordinate an effective educational system, to establish minimum standards 13 for achievement in quality control, to lead in long-range planning, to conduct and cooperate in research, to stimulate innovation, to assist localities in evaluating results, to develop good informational systems on the facts and conditions of education and to provide stimulation of local school systems to go beyond a minimal performance. The state is the key to securing the proper balance of strengths among the local state and federal agencies composing what will increasingly become a calculated interdependence in education---a partnership of shared responsibility. What does this background discussion mean specifically for state departments of education in state educational television? I would suggest three things: 1. state departments of education, because they are by definition concerned with the teaching and learning process and its materials and methodology, must involve themselves in an intimate way with the development of educational television and its use in educational systems. Most are already involved in providing leadership in the demonstration and dissemination of other kinds of communications in instructional technology. Television should be regarded as just another, but very important, means to be related to the others in your portfolio responsibility. 14 2. The Federal Government must participate to a greater extent than it has in the financing of educational television. Educational television needs the best possible alliance between the federal, state, and local dollar. Up to now, the states and local agencies have borne most of the burden. There must be here, as in other things in education, a shared responsibility for the development of this important medium. 3. While educational television units of the state departments of education can be individually strengthened by additional funds and staffing, they can become much more effective and efficient if they enter into interagency compacts of cooperation on a regional, interstate and national basis. By cooperation, units or agencies having similar interests can avoid unnecessary duplications of effort, eliminate the time lags in the dissemination of new ideas, and exert a unified force in serving needed action at many levels. The previous involvement of state education departments in educational television is just too thin. Each state is 1n a different degree of evolvement. Some states have done 15 little or nothing; other states have very sophisticated systems and plans for development. We in New York are envious of what those states have accomplished and Georgia is one of them. Prevailing opinion about educational television in some other quarters, though legislative as well as educational, is that television is still a frill and attitudes run the entire gamut from outright repugnance to utter apathy. I am thus reminded of what Max Planck wrote in his scientific autobiography, "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." We may yet have to wait for the great wave of young people who have grown up with television to walk the corridors of power. Let educational television become well seated in positions of authority before it can take its rightful place in the educational scheme of things. At the very least, state departments of education should be thoroughly familiar with the medium and be able to foster its use in the educational system. This is the minimum. At the maximum they can own and operate television stations and in between they can channel funds to locally controlled facilities. My next remark permits me to make liberal but brief use of the policy statement concerning educational media which 16 includes television published by the Council of Chief State School Officers. It deals with the six main responsibilities of state educational leadership and wherever I use the term "educational media," you should put in educational television. 1. The state education department should continuously plan for the encouragement of the effective use of educational television in the school program. 2. The department should make adequate provisions for media staff and facilities within the department. 3. In meeting its responsibilities to broaden and enrich the curriculum, the department should encourage appropriate uses of the new educational media. 4. The department should encourage and assist local school personnel in the evaluation and development of local and regional media services within the state. 5. The department should cooperate with local school systems and teacher education institutions in order to provide teachers with opportunities to learn to use new media effectively. 17 6. The department should establish standards that will assist local school districts in evaluation of the new media needs and in selecting new media equipment and materials. The task of defining a state's responsibilities belon s to each individual state in terms of its own needs ane-; local conditions. Basic to any development for expansion of a state educational television program, however, lS a total commitment to the importance and need of educational television to assist in education. I want to stress one important point In your work. Progress in the field of educational communication will come only as media people recognize and continue to emphasize that their field lS primarily one of serVlce; that it is a means and not an end unto itself; that communications are subserviant to learning. The development of these techniques should go handin-hand with the development of the new curriculum, with teacher training, and with all of the other aspects of educational innovation. Perhaps it would be profitable to conclude with an examination of the nature of leadership. Good administrators have the capacity to expand and develop other peoples ideas and plans. Real leaders create them. Administration 18 is a science; new leadership is an art. Administrators react to change; new leaders dominate it. Leaders, both governing bodies and individuals, recognize the compelling truth of Cardinal Newman I s dictum, "To change is to progress, to change often is to be perfect." Leadership is the art of so indicating a distant goal as to make all else seem trivial. In these terms, state departments of education can assume leadership in educational television. 19 AN INVESTIGATION OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF INVOLVEMENT IN EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION BY STATE DEPARTMENTS OF EDUCATION Dr. H. Titus Singletary, Jr. Georgia Associate state Superintendent of Schools The following percentages represent the results of a questionnaire sent to the fifty U. S. State Departments of Education, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. Thirty- one of the fifty responded to the questionnaire. These were: Arizona California Connecticut Delaware Florida Hawaii Idaho Iowa Kansas Maine Maryland Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Mexico North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Washington West Virginia Wyoming Part One questioned if the state departments of education were involved with educational television; then which public agency was the educational television distri- but ion system operator? A. If there is a state operated or controlled educational television distribution system, it is administered by: State Board of Education 9.6% State University Systems ll.5% State Television Commission or Authority ............ 11.4% 20 B. If the educational television system is locally controlled or operated, it is administered by: Public School Systems 30.8% Colleges 30.8% Non-Profit Organizations 32.7% 57.7% of the State Departments of Education are not currently involved with educational television distribution systems. Part Two questioned the degree of involvement by those state departments of education which acknowledged in Part One, A-B that it was involved in educational television. A. 83.~~ offer advice and consultant services. B. 25.8% develop the total statewide educational television programs. C. 19.4% provide grants or monies to educational television stations. D. l2.~~ provide grants or monies to school systems. E. 3.2% provide grants or monies to educational television authorities. F. 16.1% maintain a video tape and/or kinescope dis- tribution library. G. 16.1% maintain a production center. H. 45.2% develop and distribute publications. I. 38.7% provide workshops in educational television. 21 part Three pertained to those state departments of education which have personnel who are involved in educa- tional television. Of the reporting states: 14 have a television administrator 11 are full-time directors J are part-time directors 8 have at least one utilization specialist 6 are full time 2 are part time 4 have a director of engineering 3 are full time 1 is part time 3 have a production supervisor 2 are full time 1 is part time SESSIONS The following text covers the three general sessions of the National Conference for State Department of Education Personnel on Educational Television. The participant's presentations and the discussion periods have been summarized for this report by Georgia Educational Television Network personnel who were involved in the Conference. An audio-taped, transcribed copy of the complete Conference is in the Network's files. The scheduled Conference speakers were invited to participate by the Conference Planning Committee because their administrative positions represent a variance of United States educational television organizations. 22 First General Session TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONAL PATTERNS, LEGISLATION, FINANCING AND PERSONNEL "The South Carolina Educational Television Network" Mr. Henry Cauthen, Executive Director (A Surrunary) Educational television began in South Carolina in 1958 as an experiment in one school. Now a statewide system, The Educational Television Network, operates under the authority of a twelve member State Educational Television Commission. In 1960 the legislature authorized the formation of this commission with seven members to be appointed by the Governor, one from each congressional district and a chairman from the state at large. The remaining five members are ex-officio and include the State Superintendent of Education and the Chairman of the House and Senate Finance and Education Committees. In 1965, the Corrunission was put under the advisory supervision of the State Board of Education. In this relationship, the State Board reviews all policies and programs related to the public schools, including in-school instruction and teacher education. Additionally, all Federal grant applications are submitted through the State Board. The State Board must also approve our budget recommendations before they can be submitted to the legislature. In this way, everythl' ng we do for the public schools is related and 23 coordinated with the overall education program for the state. Two-way communications with the schools we serve has been effected by the establishment of eleven regional advisory councils. Superintendents in each district have been asked to appoint an Educational Television Coordinator. These district coordinators meet four times a year, or more often if they desire, in their regional councils. Here they discuss the use of television in the schools and receive information from the educational television staff about current developments. The chairmen of the eleven regional councils form the backbone of the Educational Advisory Committee to the educational television staff. Eight members-at-large and four representatives from the State Department of Education complete the composition of this Committee which directs the staff in the development of the in-school and in-service programs which educational television offers to the schools. The State Department is represented by the Directors of the Division of Instruction and Teacher Education and by the high school and elementary school supervisors. This way each school district can be directly represented in the educational television planning and development and each district can be fully informed about such development. Wh8re the regional council chairmen are vigorous and committed, this system works. Where the chairman is not, it doesn't. 24 No system can assure good two-way communication between educational television and the profession it seeks to serve. After school hours, we are now offering twelve series for the in-service training of teachers. These courses are taught by the finest teachers we could find, many have come from other cities. We are happy to report that during the present school year more than 1,500 classroom teachers have voluntarily taken these educational television courses. This is the largest number of teachers ever to take special training at one time in South Carolina. These courses cost the teachers nothing. If these same teachers had been able to afford the money and the time away from home in summer months to receive the equivalent amount of training at colleges, the cost to the teachers would have been over a half million dollars. The State Department of Education recently reported that South Carolina high school graduates taking college entrance examinations in mathematics during the last four years have raised their scores from 36 points to 52 points. We would like to point out that educational television went stat ew~'de four years ago, with major emphasis on high school mathemat~' cs taught at a college preparatory level. 25 There lS so much to report on the continuing education of other adults in the afternoon and evening when schools are out that we have time to mention only the highlights. Hundreds of physicians are in their fifth year of keeping up with new developments in medicine through the educational television system; the dental profession has a regular series of programs; more than 40% of the state's nurses have received regular training by educational television. Many other professional training programs are transmitted regularly. Within the last twelve months, 8,300 business and industrial workers throughout the state have received and are receiving on-the-job training in a cooperative program between technical education centers and educational television. All costs are paid for by business and industry. More than 200 industries have participated in this program. If this training had been done by traditional methods, the cost to the industries would have been prohibitive. The state Development Board reports that new industry prospects want to know more about such industry training. For example, we have already been approached by the new sunbea~ plant being constructed in South Carolina. They wanted to be sure that they could take part in the educational television program. 26 In other areas of training, more than 4,000 high school 3nd college students and adults have paid their own way to take a ninety-lesson course in basic electronics over educational television in the last three years. A ninetylesson course in literacy training is helping to attack one of the state's more pressing problems. The state's colleges and universities, other institutions, and 32 state agencies have produced programs on many subjects. It obviously takes a major production effort to produce this volume of programs. We have two fully equipped studios and control rooms and a master control area equipped with seven video-tape recorders and five film playback systems. The fireproof and humidity controlled video-taDe vault houses over 4,000 video-tapes valued at nearly a half million dollars. We also maintain a well equipped print shop for producing teacher and student lesson guides and study materials to supplement in-school and adult courses. A point of real pride to us is our graphic arts department. This department includes motion picture and still photography, film animation, film editing, illustration, hand lettering and printing. There are 42 office areas and four conference rooms to house the remainder of our staff operations. The building contains about 20,000 square feet. The equipment for our Cen~er lS valued at over a half million dollars. As to our staff, we 27 have 100 full-time and 25 part-time employees. Under the administrative staff we have four major departments: education, production, engineering and graphic arts. The education department has approximately 25 employees and is divided into the following areas: utilization, television teachers, scheduling, program planning and research and development. The production department also has 25 employees. Under the director of production and the production supervisor, there are six producers and directors and two fulltime crews that operate on a two-shift, 15 hour per day schedule, sometimes seven days a week, and produce from 30 to 55 programs a week. The engineering department has approximately 20 employees. Under the director of technical operations it is broken down into transmission, which operates the three open-circuit stations, and studio operations, which handles our network feeds and studio production. The graphic arts department has approximately 20 employees. All programs originate from our production center in Columbia. We have a statewide closed-circuit network that goes into 210 public schools, 12 hospitals, 5 technical education centers, and several police departments, 5 state colleges and universities and numerous other public and private organizations. The closed-circuit network reaches 28 into every county of the state and is divided into three basic legs: the northern, the western, and the southern, each of which is programmed separately to better meet the needs and desires of the local schools and others in various areas of the state. In addition to this, South Carolina is developing a statewide open-circuit network. Two stations are in operation, one in Charleston, the other in Greenville. Before september a third station will be on the air. They will be programmed separately from each other as well as separately from the closed-circuit network. The basic plan calls for using the closed-circuit network to serve the secondary schools and after school hours for special training purposes such as teacher education, medical and law enforcement programs and others. The open-circuit network, which will be completed by September 1967 will be used principally for elementary in~ struction during the school day and for more general public viewing in the afternoon and evening hours. with the completion of the open-circuit coverage of the state, we plan to gradually expand the closed-circuit network into every school activating its full six-channel potential. Our present yearly budget for operation is two million dollars. When the complete system is in operation using 29 all six channels on the closed-circuit network and statewide coverage by open-circuit, our budget for operating 15 hours a day, 7 days a week, 12 months a year will run between five and six million dollars a year. This would average about $7 per pupil per channel. Figured another way, the cost per school would average $4,000 to $5,000 dollars. The real significance of a system such as ours is that it can be expanded to meet virtually any need. We are already using up to five channels in limited areas of the state. We transmit as many as 58 programs during a single school day. This gives us a great opportunity for not only developing a broad curriculum, but also to repeat programs enough times during each school day so that individual schools can schedule and solve their scheduling problems. This is a situation that often hampers utilization with a single channel system. It is my firm conviction that anyone who is planning to seriously use television for instructional purposes must make provisions for developing some type of multi-channel network if his efforts are to be successful. There is an increasingly complex educational job facing each state. We must look at this job and let that dictate what type system we develop. If we do the reverse and develop educational television without regard for the eventual long-range needs, we are likely to end up with a system that is incapable of meeting the demands that will be made of it. (See Charts 1 - 6, Pages i-vi) 30 "The New York State Department of Education and Educational Television" Dr. Lee Campion, Director Division of Educational Communications (A Summary) In 1952, the legislature passed a million dollar bill to develop an educational television system owned and operated by the State. Governor Thomas Dewey vetoed the bill. After a delay of ten years, we have now a fourpronged approach to educational television. If there is one thing I hope to stress in this presentation, it is that we have to rely on many systems, many approaches to educational television, many approaches for financing, many approaches for organization, and many approaches to the technical systems themselves. In the early 60's a budget of $100,000 was allocated to our aid to school program; it has now developed into a budget of $800,000. The purpose of aid to school program is to encourage private systems to independently or cooperatively bring in a television signal. They can do this by cooperating with an open-circuit station. At the present time, we have 72 school districts involved in this program. This five-year program under the Division of Educational Communications (see chart 7)1 calls for the school to develop their own television system, put receivers in every classroom 1. See Page vii 31 and purchase video-tape recorders for playback of tapes at the time that meets their curriculum needs. In areas where there is an open-circuit station, they subscribe to the open-circuit system and contribute to the developlfLc'nt of that system. In the Plainedge schools, for example, the superintendent worked with the FCC in the experimentation of the first 2500mc system. This system resulted in the FCC releasing the 2500mc channels. The Superintendent of this Plainedge school has vastly improved his studios from early industrial type equipment to professional quality equipment. Another service of our aid to schools is that of engineerlng or technical service since schools are notorious for not backing up their programs with technicians. As part of our aid to school program, each schoel acquires video-tape recorders. One saturation project has a four-channel system in the high school using video-tone and film to feed into classrooms. In one of our experlments in Bedford, New York, television is the base of a sel -instructional technique. Television feeds forty electronic carrels, one for every four students in this new school and ungraded school trying out new techniques D&SeO upon self-instruction discovery and allowing students t progress at their 0\'11] rate 32 In au r schools ' we have progressed from the audio- oncept to an instruction materials concept. Televisual C " Vl. S l."on can b e, should be, and must be a very important part of this concept. Television is one of the most important instructional tOO 1 s th at we have under NDEA. Schools are buying receivers for each individual classroom so that television is accessable to the student. Under other federal titles, Title III for example, we have the development of regional or supple- mentary educational centers. The regionalization of educational television is one of the movements that can help implement and help the deve- lopment of educational television. We see the advantages of community owned stations over a state owned system. We also see the advantages of a state owned system over community owned and operated systems. As our second approach, New York State has developed five community educational tele- vision systems or councils. We are proposing now eight or nine production centers for New York State. We think it is better to put more money into fewer production centers and produce quality than to have many production centers pro- ducing mediocrity. Our total plan for open-circuit television 1s a statewide network system. Last year we were able to put two new stations on the air with state and federal support. This year we have funds 33 of $800,000 to put two new stations on the air and to help the old stations refurbish their equipment. This commitment by the legislature to capital outlay is the first time that the state has granted money to educational television. We also have a $700,000 budget this year for air time service. This money goes to stations to provide an educational service to their community. The state has a policy at present to support them with up to one third of their operating budget. If they are community stations, it is up to the community and the schools of that area to support the other two thirds of the station. A third approach is that of higher education. The state University of New York is a cooperative partner with the state Education Department and the Educational Television Councils in the development of a total statewide educational television program. Our inter-institutional project is to stimulate colleges to work together, teachers to share materials, resources of all kinds and exchange programs. We hope, eventually, like Texas, Chicago, and Illinois to have colleges of the air with inter-institutional cooperation. It is possible in New York State to get college credit without ever being in a formal classroom by viewing television or learning the information from any source available. 34 The four 'h c approach is a kind of support to the other three. we have de veloped a duplicating and distribution able us to supply the schools with programs. system to en we dUP 1 , lca t e Drograms ~ from broadcast to slant-track tape. we see th is service as a "green-eyed monster" that's going to get larger and larger and larger. We are proposing regional centers. We will provide master tapes. The centers will in turn provide tapes to colleges and schools in their are;),. We are merely applying the same procedures as are presently in use for audio tape. We are also working in the area of adults continuing education needs and are applying for grants under the various federal acts for the development of television programs. Television has to be emphasized as an implementer of educational goals and objectives. Too often we talk about television for television's sake rather than television as a means or answer to the many problems facing educators, legislators and the country in general. It is a part of continuing education; it is a part of education for everyone. 35 " Hawaii state Department of Education The and Educational Te 1 eV1. S.lon II Dr. Donald Wood, Director of Television (A Summary) Last year the Hawaii budget was a little over $800,000 for the statewide Educational Television Project. This it is $950,000. This represents quite a heavy invest'lear ment .;..n capital outlay for transmitters and production equipment. The annual operating budget will be much less than this. We have several unique problems as far as the geography of the state goes; no other state has hundreds of miles of water between individual counties. These complicate our transmission problems considerably. Our eventual network plan for a one channel open-circuit network will include three VHF transmitters and eleven UHF translators in order to get to a little less than a million people. There are two very unique factors about educational television in Hawaii. First is the close working relationship between the State Department of Education and the University of Hawaii. It is due to the leadership of the University that We have achieved the statewide program. The Hawaii Educational Television Network was funded initially during the 1965-66 legislative session. The Hawaii Educational Television state Network is supervised at the 36 top level by a three-man Educational Television Council established by the Governor. The Council consists of the President of the University of Hawaii, the Superintendent of State Education and one member appointed by the Governor to represent the community-at-large. This three-man Council now has policy-making jurisdiction for the statewide educational television network. The University is primarily concerned with production and transmission facilities and serves as licensee for all stations. We have a hand in setting policy and programming decisions but the ultimate responsibility to the FCC is the University. The State Department's functions lie in the area of utilization, reception, program planning and in-school programming. All of the in-school programming that we put over the air, we plan, produce, package and take into the University studio in cooperation with the directors of the University staff, who work closely with our teachers. When the proposed Hawaiian network is completed, about 97 per cent of the adult population will be covered. Virtually all of the public schools and the private schools will be within the range of one of the VHF stations or UHF translators. These stations have all been funded and scheduled for completion by the end of June, 1967. 37 The Hawaii Educational Television Council adopted the Governor's Advisory Committee's recommendations on the three major areas of programming concern: in-school programming, in-service teacher training, and at-home programming. Porgram responsibility is divided so that the Department of Education is concerned primarily with in-school programming. The university has produced one series for their own closed-circuit use in the lab school, an excellent series that we plan on using. Similarly, the Department of Education's adult education branch is concerned with using the medium for at-home viewing. The in-service programming is very much a joint responsibility, with the department identifying the needs using the university's facilities and talent in drawing upon the college of education to produce materials. A second unique factor about Hawaii is that we have one school system in the state and one board of education, but everything is handled through the one centralized state department of education. We have seven districts with district superintendents and, conversely to what most states are trying to do, we are trying to decentralize. There are many functions that we feel should be carried on at the district level. 38 The Educational Television Office lS one of the five branches directly under the Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum, Instruction and Guidance. The other branches are elementary education, secondary education, special education and guidance, and vocational and adult education. We in educational television operate at the state level very closely with the top curriculum people. The program specialist in each subject area develops and plans the programs from the state point of view as the top state curriculum people would like to see the programs designed. One of the curriculum people in each district assumes the responsibility for coordination and liason with educational television. Similarly, we have one educational television coordinator at the school level. There are nine functions that we see as ours: determining the curriculum needs and selecting the teachers to fill those needs; determining which needs should be filled with local teachers and where we can use recorded programs; series planning and laying out the entire series; whether to use a twice-a-week major resource approach or a once-a-week supplementary series. In-school scheduling is a fourth specific responsibility. The reception facilities are our responsibility. We have again a marvelously unique opportunity 39 bere to plan, d e sl'gn , purchase, allocate and maintain all ception equipment from one central office which of the re .ekes for s t andardization in everything from the antenna d distrij)Ution systems down to the receivers. Systems an '!'he sixth area of responsibility of the state department is the writl.ng and distribution of the classroom guides. '!'he seventh area that we are extremely concerned with is utilization. We are giving this a great amount of emphasis right now. Almost a half of our staff time at this juncture is spent on in-service training for teachers for the utili- zation of television. Two other responsibilities remain. One, the need for research and evaluation. We are work- ing here with the Division of Research and Data Processing at the state level to develop and design our formal re- search program in addition to using several other channels for informational feedback from the schools. Finally, a public information program lS tied to our teacher information-utilization program. There are many opportunities for state departments of education now to coordinate current federal educational funding projects. In association with the various federal projects, I would 1l'-ke to suggest that the states have the same rights t o exercise their prerogative to give aid to education. There is every reason for the state departments to emplement 40 their own public law 89-10's and promote their own financial programs to schools, maybe by matching funds. Projects can be coordinated at the state level just as the federal programs are designed to be implemented by the states. What can you do within your own state to set up a Title V program? These are the years of education, thanks largely to federal initiative, but it is up to each state department of education to realize this at the state level. 41 "The california Educational Television Mr. John Crabbe, Chairman Status" california Educational Television Committee, and General Manager, KVIE-TV, Sacramento (A summary) An l.n formal statewide television committee has been functl.Onl.n g in California since 1952. From this informal grOUP h as emerged the present television advisory committee as a r esult of legislation passed in 1961. The members are appointed by the Governor, serve at his pleasure, and are nominated by the Board of Regents of the university of California, the Board of Trustees of the state colleges, the state Board of Education, and the existing community educational television stations. The Director of State Finance is specifically designated as a member. Note that the administrative level is not the nominating group here; it's the policy making level that nominates the members of this committee. The committee was assigned three mc:jor functions: to advise and consult the United States Office of Health, Education and Welfare in the disbursement of funds then available under the Educational Television Facilities Act; to establish an office of the television cOordinator for the state and to locate an individual to f " 1 l 1 that particular role; to develop a master plan for orderly development of educational television in California. 42 Added recently to the Committee was a representative of the County Superintendents of Schools, through whose office a great deal of instructional television activity has developed, and one from the junior colleges. At the same time, the office of television coordinator for the state was established. A major concern of the Committee now is to effect the expansion of the Educational Television Facilities Act ln order to make more dollars available in California so that television can be brought to its fullest strength. A 1965 legislative Act provided for the first time for an investment by the state in educational television. To quote from the Act: "It is the intention of the legislature in enacting this Act to extend the permissive use of classroom instructional television ln schools throughout the state and to encourage the continued improvement in the quality of non-profit educational television broadcasting.' The Act provides matching funds to the local school districts upon a per student viewer basis in an amount not to exceed fifty cents per pupil nor more than one half of the amount invested in instructional television by a local district. Approximately one half million dollars will flow into instructional programming from this source during 43 t school year. A total appropriation of $1,000,000 the curren ~r the nex t fiscal year is now under consideration by the le9 1slature. The development of a master plan for educational tele- . proving difficult. It became apparent early that vision 1S a master Plan could emerge only ln steps. The first of these stepS was a determination of existing facilities and some projection of facility needs . Before I review the high- 11. 9h ts f 0 that particular study, let me point to a bit of history thQt has influenced the development of educational television in California. until 1958 it was not legally possible for any public school district ln california to expend any of its funds for educational television purposes. California has a permissive code of education and educational television was not mentioned in the code. As a result of this restriction, the first stations that went on the air in California were co~~unity stations. As soon as it was possible for public school districts to participate, they began to do so ln regional organizations. These people located in the county 5"0 . w.erlntendents of schools' offices are largely respon- sIble for the determination of curriculum and the utiliZation of . lnstructional television at the elementary and seCOndary 1evel. Through these agencies, instructional 44 television has become a very important force In a large part of the major metropolitian areas. Therefore, one of the objectives of any master plan must necessarily be the closer coordination of the activities of these regional agencies as they work cooperatively with these existing stations. To give an idea of the diversity of station ownership and operation, see charts 8 and 9 2 . The regional organizations, generally speaking, the county schools officers, who come together to determine curriculum and utilization provide a service that is reaching about 1,000,000 students. A statewide educational television network is mandatory. We do not know when it will be finalized, but, as a result of the study, we have an idea as to how finalization will be accomplished. Through several phases, our study anticipates a complete interconnection of stations in the state as may be noted on chart 10 3 . I want now to refer to the tape library. While the live interconnection seems to be a vital consideration, one that certainly captures the imagination, we must remember that the one basic purpose of live interconnection is simply to get programs from one station to another, to avoid duplication of effort and to assure that the best 2. See Pages viii and ix 3. See Page x 45 , Is are evenly distributed throughout the of t he materla c ,.tate . l i n t ' l l o u r network materializes, some of the program , ' is being accomplished by physically transporting distrlbutlOn film from station to station. We hope the video-tape or t of this tape and film library can serve existestablishmen stations and closed-circuit facilities, 2500mc i09 broadcast facilities as they come on, new stations or any other kind of distribution that might arrive. As can be seen on charts 11 and 124 , $18,000,000 dollars is the estimated requirement for the establishment of trans- lators, the tape library, and the microwave interconnection, which is simply the capital outlay requirement. This will come about as a cooperative effort of the state, perhaps the school district, perhaps county, perhaps community. This just gives you some idea of the total dimension of what is required to install these facilities in California. once the full facility is in, it is 0rojected that it will cost about $7,000,000 per year to operate the stations, the educational television library duplicating center and all the hardware required. When this comes about, program consumption will be frightening and we haven't gotten into that phase of it yet. 4. See Pages xi and xii 46 Legislative interest in educational television has thus far focused on its use as an instructional tool of the public schools, the junior colleges, the state colleges and the universities. The state must eventually provide a means of contributing to the general culture of all people. The Television Advisory Committee by virtue of the legislation under which it was created is faced with certain restrictions that G~rtail its ability to provide leadership for educational television. The Committee has neither operational nor management authority. Such authority should be given to some agency that will be responsible to local needs and that can equally represent all educational levels in administration as well as the general citizens. r~ 47 liThe Georgia Educational Television Network Organization" Mr. Lee Franks, Executive Director Georgia Educational Television Services (A Summary) Georgia's educational television legislation was passed in 1963 and is the cornerstone of our pattern of organization. It is concise but it is potent and inclusive. Here is how Georgia's Legislative Act #340 reads: liThe State Board of Education is authorized and impowered to make available educational programs through the medium of educational television. The State Board of Education is authorized and impowered to own, operate, maintain and manage television stations, transmitting equipment and all other related equipment and facilities both audio and video for the production and transmission of open and closedcircuit telecasting. To furnish schedules, consultative services, teacher aids and to perform all other things necessary in promulgating, furnishing, producing, transmitting and making such programs available and is authorized to enter into agreement with other agencies, persons, forms, or corporations for the production and/or transmission of educational television programs. II 48 This Act was a landmark in the development of the Georgia Educational Television Network. Certain events led to its enactment. The following is a summary of video-tape segment by Mrs. Bernice McCullar, Head, Office of Information, state Department of Education: I think that Georgians are aware of the power that is inherent in this miracle of television for the quality education of their children. We had a trial station in Waycross, the first one in our statewide network. The acceptance of this station brought about the design of a statewide plan on educational television which was formally approved by the state Board of Education in 1961. I think the legislators, the teachers, the superintendents and the public became aware that this was something that was important to Echols County, Atlanta, and Rabun County from the mountains down to the seashore, that all the children would be better educated if we could develop television through a statewide network. A few people mentioned the advisability of a separate educational television commission, but I am glad to reflect that people realized that if this was going to be a part of education that it should be in the department of education. 49 Following the legislative Act, the Governor's Commission to Improve Education was established and one of their topics was the future of educational television in Georgia. The legislature, after strong recommendations by this Commission, then appropriated money for the facilities. The Minimum Foundation Program of Educ~tion was revised in 1964 to provide educational television with permanent support. The following is a summary of video-tape segment by Dr. H. Titus Singletary, Jr., Georgia Associate State Superintendent of Schools: The Georgia State Department of Education was reorganized in July, 1964 into five major offices: The Office of School Administration Services, the Office of Instructional Services, the Department of Staff Services, Staff Assistance, and Office of Vocational Rehabilitation Services. The Office of Instructional Services has seven major components: Educational Television Services, Curriculum Development, Vocational Education, Teacher Education and Certification, Pupil Personnel Services, Exceptional Children and Titles I and III of Public Law 89-10. You will note that Educational Television Services and Curriculum Development are in this unit. The members of the Curriculum Development Division, who are specialists in their areas, work 50 very closely with their counterparts in Educational Television Services. We think this is important so that the content of the programs can be developed adequately. In addition, educational television services are available to all the other units in this office as well as to the other offices in the Department of Education. (End of video-tape comments.) The structure of this educational communication service was then organized into three departments reflecting the three vital elements we believe are necessary for success. One, program excellence, meaning content, structure and production quality. TWo, technical excellence; we are rapidly moving into the technological age in education. These learning resources must corne into the classroom or the group with a 99 per cent dependability and they must be available at the flick of a switch. Three, the vitally important aspect of Utilization. Hopefully utilization will yield acceptance, carefully planned usage and constant evaluation by school administrators and teachers. Under an Administrator for Program Development, this department carries out these functions. 5 Under an Administrator for utilization, this department handles these responsibilities. 6 5. This information was given visually and not repeated orally. See charts in Appendix on page xiii 6. Ibid 51 In the coming year, seven utilization specialists along with the television teachers will work throughout the state. Their efforts, however, will be concentrated on schools having special interests in developing educational communications systems. To extend our reach, we have a demonstration and preview unit that can take television presentations and preview capability to any classroom or conference room in the state. It can also be a kind of mobile television library. These functions fall under the jurisdiction of the Director of Engineering.8 This year we have two fulltime field engineers. They are on the road constantly consulting with schools concerning their technical problems. Another example of our rolling stock is a van that measures signal strength for the schools, helps them with their antenna placement and carries other technical gear. We have seventy people on the television staff. In addition to this, consultants in the Curriculum Division, plus other field poeple in the state department also assist the television unit. Except for the teacher consultant 8. Ibid, Page xiii 52 positions, all of our personnel are under the state merit system, which is a kind of civil service arrangement. These positions are all full-time professional jobs: we do not use any students or part-time volunteer help.9 positions such as broadcast technician and production technician are jobs we call "career trainees. II These were established because we know that we have to train some of our own people. We are trying to build this into our operation. Regarding financing, all funds for the network operation come through the budget of the State Department of Education. The University of Georgia operates its station and has its own budget, but its station and studio are an integral part of the network. When services are rendered to agencies outside the State Department of Education, we receive reimbursement. Capital expenditures include our present stations plus the five presently under construction. It also includes the construction of our new headquarters and production center in Atlanta. These five stations will be on the air this fall. Virtually statewide coverage has been 9. See Chart on Page xiv 53 accomplished for about six million dollars. Our annual operating costs are $1,818.00. Program production costs vary greatly but I thought you might like some idea of what we consider costs. A live lecture-type program with a very brief planning period might be done for $200. A program requiring substantial amount of research and planning and with some involved film or dramatic sequences would naturally run to the higher figure ($2,000). We set our average program unit cost at approximately $1,000 for a half-hour program. These figures include overhead costs, such as, maintenance, repairs and administration. Each of our transmitter stations operates with a fourman staff. The annual cost of each transmitter operation is $45,000. All of our stations are interconnected the moment t h ey h l' t t h e al. r. 10 Our network l.nt erconnec t'lon lines are leased on a year-to-year basis. This figure, $198,000 covers the cost for interconnection for all the nine stations for one year. In-school programming fills the daytime hours up until 3 p.m. when a daily in-service teacher segment takes us to approximately 4:30 p.m. This is followed by a time period for business and industrial training courses. There is 10. See Chart on Page xv 54 an hour each day for out-of-school children1s programs. Then until 10:30, we have regular general interest programs for adults. There are three production centers in Georgia. We have mentioned the State Department of Education, the University of Georgia, but not the Atlanta and Fulton County public schools which has a fine station and production facility in Atlanta. There is an agreement now between the Atlanta and Fulton County people and State which will bring about coordination and cooperation with regard to this facility. We look for a strengthening of both of our positions with this arrangement. The University of Georgia and the State Department of Education share the programming burden of the network. Most instructional programming is done by the State Department of Education and most of the general interest adult programming is done by the University. There is a definite overlapping of interest in a number of areas, but this is laid out in a written agreement we have with the University of Georgia. We produce and program according to our respective educational responsibilities. This network of stations we believe is the most economical way to provide statewide coverage and certainly the way to reach other than in-school audience. Each of these stations has a program origination capability so that programs of over-riding local importance can be aired on any individual station. 55 use of the medium, however, will take us far beyond broadcast television. We are now working with a number of .chool systems who are planning and actively involved in .etting up discrete multi-channel closed-circuit systems and also 2500mc systems. Our utilization specialists are called upon, beyond our capability to serve requests, for consultation along these lines. 56 Second General Session A LOOK AT THE FUTURE "Introduction" Dr. Gilbert Tauffner Executive Director WETV and WABE-FM, Atlanta, Georgia (A sununary) This morning's session was devoted principally to an examination of various kinds of organizations throughout the united states utilizing television as an educational conununications medium. The session this afternoon is concerned with looking ahead to the educational possibility inherent in the television medium. The discussion is scheduled to be broad and will encompass all forms of communications as well as television possibilities. The first part of the following presentation is developed with the "school" oriented television program in mind. This includes the use of educational television for classroom teaching, in-service teacher education and achool administration. Later, the four panelists of this morning will speak of the use of the television aedium for community education. All of us have attended conferences where keynote apeakers dreamed of a future'ln e ducatl.on wh ere e I ectro' nlC aarvels perform the major part of the task of instruction. 57 A few have predicted that the printed word will pass into oblivion---being replaced by very small computers in communi_ cation packages that could be carried by individuals and used to speak directly with other individuals at great dis_ tances and able to survey great amounts of technical infor_ mation stored in remote banks abstracting details desired by the individual. In a sense, this type of communication implement Would solve the problem of reaching and teaching the individual learner providing the learner is motivated. While television and programmed materials (and these terms are not mutually exclusive) have yet to find their place within current instructional patterns, it is conceivable that the future will see basic regrouping of students in a physical sense to achieve learning objectives that are not subject matter oriented or developed sequentially on a grade-bygrade basis. Other keynote speeches have attempted to guess at the direction education should take. One such recent address, delivered by a member of the Ecucat~onal Policies commission, suggested that curriculum should become one of developing the thinking process of each student through experiences in the field of logic and similar abstract learning approaches. In this presentation, even the teaching of science and the behavioristic psychological approaches to learning were considered outmoded. ':)8 "The w o r 1 -'1 u that will be" appears to be one In which em will consume most of his time engaging in activity indivic:,:al will utilize all corms of automated, computerized, that mass m.,. edia extensors. By extensors, we mean to indicate artificial means of adding to the capacity of our those brain storage areas, our visual and auditory perceptions, and our other bodily functions. Batteries of these new nerveS and muscles will serve to assist all specialized fields, including education. Students will need to become conversant with the rationale behind these new forms of "additions to life functions." How far off are some of these dreams? We all know of the highly complex programming that took place in the fields of medicine, computers, and other scientific equip- ment to effect successful space ventures. Now physicians gain a richer evaluation of the physical condition of a patient in much less time and with a good deal more accuracy than a single physicial or nurse's aide galns t::ro''':':i:~ technological advances. The physician's role, much as i} tcaC:H?r I S or student's role, becomes one of analyzing an~ evaluatino -..-: o r ~o ....... r J:~- :-e'c~l'\ "-, r e ~-L experiemental trials. ~':C:Ce,tion l:QS been very 81m] to readjust to the new ?vlc) s t. 59 in education applies itself to the importance of the ind' . lVl_ dual learner moving through a self-initiated process of discovery with a live tutor or at least a low pupil to teacher ratio, and this is very commendable. The most enlightened programs recognize use of "supplementary tools" to assist a teacher. This has resulted in some physical rearrangement of learning spaces. In many of the newer schools, there are large common learning areas, and smaller spaces for carrel type study and individual learning experiences. In a few schools, educational technology in the form of automated distribution systems provide comprehensive sources of data, reference, programmed materials, film, television, slides, and book information bits where the students can, on a highly selective basis, pick ways and means of continuing pursuit of a learning problem. The teacher, in these instances, becomes much more than a giver of specific information. It is imperative that she become, in the best sense, an educational technologist in her own right. Her role becomes one of stimulating thinking, helping the student determine what he should study, and how he can best study it. What type of organization will probably bring about this great change that most certainly will take place. 60 AlthoU9h we all realize the vital importance of maintaining , d' idual student, teacher, and local administrator's the 1n 1V in the learning process that takes place In involvement 'ndividual school, it appears that stronger state depart- an l education with national assistance will probably rnent s of be priJne agen t s for change . An independent commission, apart from the field of education itself, used to promote the use of learning resources in the newer approaches, does not seem to offer as fruitful a prospect as a gradual awareness of technology by agencies concerned historically with education and an assumption of this technology into their regular ongoing programs. In all events, the organization decided upon should keep the individual student in mind and be placed in relationship to other administrative functions so as to be able to evoke change In classroom practice. It should be recognized that the educational technologist is as important to teaching and learning as the curriculum worker. Unfortunately, to this date, the extent to which an educator identifies himself as an educa- tional technologist has resulted in his being labeled as gadgeteer and lesLo 'ened h l' ~~ "classl' c" repu t a t'lon as sch.o I ar Or lec-: it imate cl,'rrl' culum sp_ ec 1',all' st. CurrlC' 1 U urn specl' a I'IS t s 61 who endorse the use of technology integrated with curri 1 Cu UlT\ approaches must be at the heart of any effort to utilize t e 1... evision or any other communications medium in the schools. up to this time the most successful ETV programs have been those where creative local curriculum staff developed programs with well-trained, creative technical staff and communication specialists in close rapport with teachers using the programs. This approach is more apt to result in "quality" instructional programs, than the haphazard or incidental use of programs of perhaps high technical quality produced elsewhere where these are simply brought in and placed before students without adequate thought being given to their utilization. The educational technologist identifies creative talent and provides opportunity for it to thrive. Freedom of action, verbal encouragement, and administration fertilizes in the form of services and expedition and enabies creative staff members to work best together to produce programs of merit. creative ability lies within individual students, teachers, curriculum specialist, TV production staff, in fact, within most of us. The organ ization that is the best "releasing" and "supporting" agent for the identification and synthesizing of the element of 62 \\C viii 1 hear of many ways of uSlng open-circllit, closed- el. rC".. it, Lqrf Zlnc1 2 5 0 0 mc b~nd c , cable and micro-wave links, VTRS Zlnd nwhile units, hoth as s portal:lC le elernents and ."nated joint-use patterns to approach the problems In C0 0101 These problems relate to teacher educa- i n t r o O, l l C 1'n c' -' new content to students, multiD_,lvinc_J '- effect ot- se arce and hard to get teaching staff, enriching lIves of students in culturally deprived neighborhoods, ae111 1 t educat ion l,n t',1e ',1umanl'tl'es , and literacy and vocational training. The many channels offered by the 2 ~)OOmc land, If co::"binec1 with an open-circui t station, can provide the "paper-Lack." prog rams needed for ext ens i ve, s el eel i ve use by teachers and students. L'p to this point, we have releqated our thinkinCf to sc:"oo1 or ien ted prog ramminCf. An educational philosophy of open-circuit, general audience prosramming for enli cn~ent has yet to be written. The pra~natists hold full 5~a! at this point. These are the people who see infinite possl:.ilitics for the medium and are trying them out. ;\ n' ~ t~"' ~ n ~ J '.- c. G-- nc1 c v e r y t h l. n g is being presented over educational tcle~ision stations and the audience is growing. Roughly CCln be placed within 2 per cent of the 25 :"'lllion a "1 au ts indicated in a projection of those following 50:--,(, :) . 1~" n F~or ' lelsure-time education by the National In .lon 63 Research Center in its 1963 study entitled, "Volunteers for Learning." The impact of the vast audience of adults for educational television is staggering. Technology is pushing a complex of means to reach a geometrically increasing population with diverse programs. 64 Mr. Lee Franks Executive Director Georgia Educational Television Services (A summary) While we are a 11 striving to individualize instruction and to u~pgrade its quality, we are having a student explosion. Exploding knowledge is compounded by the abso1escense of teacher knowledge and further compounded by the continual mobility of our population. It is even further compounded by rising expectations on the part of our students. Dr. McLuhan, the communications prophet, indicates that today's students receive a fantastic number of sensory impressions. To me all of this means that the day has passed when a sweet lady with a few charts can purport to explain the solar system~ Today's pupils are conditioned to such things as fine NASA and Walt Disney presentations. We must look at ourselves as educational communicators, not just television communicators; we have to use an array of technological means if we are to move close to individualized quality instruction goals. The question is what configurations are we going to come up with ~o allow this to happen? For years educational television was considered to be a mass thing, the t each ers were expected to herd all their students into an auditorium or a gymnasium to view a row 63 Research Center in its 1963 study entitled, "Volunteers for Learning. II The impact of the vast audience of adults for educational television is staggering. Technology is pushing a complex of means to reach a geometrically increasing population with diverse programs. 64 Mr. Lee Franks Executive Director Georgia Educational Television Services (A summary) Wh~. le we are all striving to individualize instruction a nd to upgrade its quality, we are having a student explosion. Exploding knowledge is compounded by the obso1escense of teacher knowledge and further compounded by the continual mobility of our population. It is even further compounded by rising expectations on the part of our students. Dr. McLuhan, the communications prophet, indicates that today's students receive a fantastic number of sensory impressions. To me all of this means that the day has passed when a sweet lady with a few charts can purport to explain the solar system~ Today's pupils are conditioned to such things as fine NASA and Walt Disney presentations. We must look at ourselves as educational communicators, not just television communicators; we have to use an array of technological means if we are to move close to individualized quality instruction goals. The question is what configurations are we going to come up with ~o allow this to happen? For years educational television was considered to be a mass thing, the teachers were expected to herd all their Students into an auditorium or a gymnasium to view a row 65 of monitors --- that was educational television. That is one way to do it, but technology is here now to make this a small group or even an individual resource. With a Com_ puter assisted instruction tied to television, such a method of study can be done in carrels, as individual review for students, used for specialized unit presentations, or single purpose presentations. The technologists have brought the kind of educational equipment that can do the job. Granted it would be expensive at this point, but the means are here. In Georgia this means we must go far beyond broadcast in order to cross what I call the quantity threshold. We must bring an increased quantity to the teacher and give her flexibility in the use of educational television. This suggests closed-circuit, discrete multi-channel systems wiLh individual school buildings. It means the state has to provide a massive support system. We need to provide consultants in utilization and to help in training such specialists for the schools themselves. We need to increase our engineering consultant services. Schools will also need their own technicians. Our programming support calls for materials to be distributed via the library concept outside of broadcast means. This is not to say that our television stations will all go off the air ---they III always be saturattcl. It might even free them to do an increase of vocatl.ona1 trilir ing, adult education and teacher training. 66 considering the establishment of centers at our WC arc locations. utilization specialists consisting of station 1 technical person will be based at each of ,) team \,. i t 1 a theSe stLlt . l On locations. Also this center might serve as ,) library ~~terial .le< distribution point. The building of , of S\.'stem, eSDecially if it is open-circuit, thlS kine: would rc.::l1y be the development of a natural resource for the statc. Dcvclo~xnent of such c. statewide system of communication carries with it the responsib:lity to see that it is accessible to the ~holc spectrum of education. In Georgia we believe lt is incumbent upon all state institutions to offer its aervices to educational television if the need is there. 67 Mr. John Crabbe Chairman California Educational Television Committee (J1, Summary) This morning I seemed to have implied that the television committee in California should receive all the credit for the advance of educational television up to this point. This is not true; the television committee was not brought into being by the legislature to provide a channel through which all of the various educational television efforts might be funnelled. My friend from Hawaii questions why the state department of education in any state can't provide the strong leadership for all levels of education? the construction of our administrative organization in California is such that it just can't happen now. But let me make it clear that the California State Department of Education, the public school instructional television committee, the state colleges' own television committee, the Universities' own television committee, and a host of other agencies have worked long and hard to bring educational television to its present status. I don't want to imply that the committee itself is the "Great White Father;" it simply happens to be the mechanism that is necessary in order to keep the legislature happy. 68 I have a personal cOfivictionabout where educational j television is going, at least in California. We started j out in our state with enrichment materials, things supportive to the curriculum and the teacher. not direct teaching. We suddenly discovered that we wanted to maintain and in~ crease the level of local district support of instru~tional television, so we got into direct teaching. As an instance, we have a series of seven programs for the high schools on the subject of Communism. This is a difficult subject as it is required by law to be taught in the state. Its policy is a fine line between the John Birch Society and the ACLU. We started with this series as a documentary. The teachers were dependent upon it to do the total job of direct teaching of the subject of Communism, because they did not want to handle it. So, we were in direct teaching. j j j j j j j j j j j j The most significant level of service for educational j television in our state will be in the junior colleges or j the community colleges. The technological explosion makes j available to smaller districts a relatively inexpensive video- j tape recorder, and the ability to achieve distribution via j 2500mc. All of these things are going to enable the local j district to move into its own instructional television ser- j vices and to solve its own scheduling problems. Our station j is a regional service. We are covering 15 counties, but if j we say that we can do this job with the multiplicity of j j 69 individual districts, we're kidding ourselves. Whereas, we could give a particular program to the district on tape, then we would be moving into higher quality, programs of real stature that are genuine enrichment for the school curriculum, not direct teaching. In our particular area, we have the largest junior college district by geographical definition than any junior college district in the world. This district is looking to television as a means of doing its job in the community and reaching students in their homes because they are not going to be able to provide adequate facilities for these additional students for some time. 70 Dr. Donald Wood Director of Television Hawaii State Department of Education (A Surrunary) within the next eighteen months, Hawaii hopes to be able to cover the state with an open-circuit boradcasting system. We anticipate having at least one receiver in every classroom within the next four to five years, ideally, two receivers in each classroom in the state within the next ten years. We plan eventually following a multichannel combination of open and closed-circuit operations, relying more and more on closed-circuit for secondary work. Wherever you have a master antenna and a distribution system within a school, you have the basis for closed-circuit system. At the secondary level, when you have a one or possibly two channel open-circuit operation, sometimes even with a multi-channel closed-circuit operation, you still can't meet scheduling needs. One way around this is building libraries of tape materials, making the tapes available to schools allowing them to prepare their schedule. Once schools are equipeed with playback equipment, devote your (broadcast) in-school day to elementary programs where they can be used more feasibly. In the early morning hours, Over weekends, at night, or possibly during the day, schedule YOUr high school programs; let the schools record them off 71 the air and then play them back to fit their own schedule during the next week or two, then erase and use the same tape to record the next program. This means a tremendous reduction in the amount of tape that you have to keep stocked at each school. You give the schools more flexibility than a library system. One advantage we have is being able to provide current enrichment visuals simultaneously to a thousand schools. The island of Hawaii is using Title I funds to equip every high school with a slant-track recorder next year. We hope to use Title III funds for 2500mc experimentation. This is one way of meeting the stipulations in Title III that (a) all of the students in a given area in public and non-public schools shall be served, but, (b) all the hardware at the end of the project shall remain with the public agency. Therefore, you locate the transmitter and all of the other facilities in some public institution, one of your secondary schools; but, broadcasting can cover a radius that would take in several private schools. They furnish their own receivers; they are able to make use of the facilities, work with you jointly in scheduling what kind of programs can be of mutual benefit for your schools and the private schools and still meet Title III stipulations. 72 What are we doing to try to organize for the administration of this kind of educational technology? I am tempted to suggest that audio-visual and educational television need to be combined organizationally and administratively. 73 Dr. Lee Campion Director Division of Educational Communications New York State Department of Education (A Summary) There is go~ng to be a widening gap between good and bad education. with innovations fast developing and with increased federal and state money available, the do-nothing states, schools, and educators are going to be awfully conspicuous. Boston will soon have color. The New York City station is going to put in a three-channel color system. We'll soon see a continuous breakthrough in video-tape recorders. I point to the Bedford, New York, project in which there is a school that will have a full electronic system with one study carrel for every Four students--an electronically fed study carrel. Television is the heart of this system. In Arlington, New York, we have an experiment with four major film companies to video-tape record film so that we can play the film on the tape when the teacher needs it through a television system. In the future, there will be more television sets and video tape recorders in schools than 16mm projectors! If we can develop the system so that classroom teachers have a choice, half Will prefer to see their films on television rather than by 74 bringing projectors into their classrooms. Television cannot give classrooms large screen color, but we will see a rapid development. The fact that major film companies are cooperating in this project is quite remarkable, because this leads toward another breakthrough in the purchasing of materials that educators will use. Unless we acquire library materials with all rights, we see a problem in the near future concerning teachers' rights and copyrights. Fortunately, we have several organizations representing television and audio-visual interests that are keeping abreast of these problems. We have more television sets in homes than bathtubs, so I suppose in the schopls we can predict that there will eventually be a television set in every room. This is our goal at least in New York. In Scarsdale, a library is being constructed with an audio-visual center beneath it with all the wiring for electronic study carrels. Title III money will be used to purchase its video tapes. Once we said these materials were too expensive for every school. 'The reason behind this statement being its infrequent use, because if a teacher used a film once a year or even if it was used three times a year by other teachers, we felt the film was not used often enough to warrant putting it into a school. 75 The prlmary discovery of a project conducted by EB Films, which is being studied by Ohio state university, is that when the classroom film is made available fllr student selfuse, the film is shown numerous times, thus, it becomes economical to place these materials in every building. We have schools on Long Island who are not only contributing to Channel 13, an open-circuit station, but are developing their own 2500mc systems. Rochester, New York has an el~)orate communications program. It has its own 2500mc system, which because of its compact area can reach 54 schools. High schools will develop audio-visual or communications centers in which there will be several video-tape machines to feed the school programs it desires. In curriculum development, we foresee single programs that will be major resource units, complete teaching units in themselves, such as one on the united Nations. A short unit might be like those which have been successful in the past on the State Constitution, a required subject in many states. Along with television, we will build the teleCOurse's teacher-training aspects. State education departments will play an important rOle in the future by organizing mass media within the state. 76 We will see supplementary centers constructed under av~ilable Title III financing of ESEA. We shall see Title I money used to develop regional television centers. We have some of this activity in New York state. In the future, I see school staff all-media coordinators. In New York, all media is under a division of educational communications, with the exception of libraries and museums; however, all three are under the same Commissioner, so there is coordination and cooperation. We are going to use manpower development and training money in the training of electronic technicians. These are becoming most difficult to employ. We are going to have to train them ourselves. We have already started the routine of organizing an application for this fund to train our own television technicians. The only way I can see of solving the increasing financial problems is by regional cooperation. Our state is currently developing a project with Pennsylvania and Connecticut. Each of these states will put In $10,000 to produce a series which will be far superior to a series produced individually by the states. There will have to be more of this type of cooperation between states, and state departments of education will have to realize they are going to have to finance television libraries or participate with regional libraries, such as the Great Plains Television Library. 77 rt is my belief that more money will go into produc- tions, but fewer production centers will be constructed. The trend is going to be toward larger production centers, and away from many little schools all attempting to produce their won programs. The latter duplicates much of the effort being performed elsewhere. One of these days higher education will discover television. It will make its use widespread in contrast to the few on-going projects of today. A lot can be learned from the Chicago Junior College of the Air, but little has been culled from its experience. The time is coming when we will be forced to use educational television for college courses. There 1S a movement in New York to give examinations over educational television. A student would not have to go to a classroom to gain his degree or at least to secure credit for certain courses. This would be a recognition that all learning does not come from formal teaching situations. The u. S. Office of Education may recognize media by assigning an official to sit in a decision making po~>ition. Also in the future, the NAEB may become more than an association of educational broadcasters. 78 Mr. Henry Cauthen Executive Director South carolina Educational Television Network (A Summary) Let me preface "My Look at the Future" wi;=.11 1 reminder that what we do will be shaped by technology ac'v".nces. It is my opinion that there will be an extensive increase of involvement from kindergarten through college in the State Department of Education. A more uniform curriculum will be developed at the state level. Educational television will become a production and transmission agency for the benefit ot the public schools, with the curriculum and program content coming from the State Board of Education and the State Department of Education as they assume an increasing leadership in this area. All of the state1s teachers will be able to follow teacher education telecourses. This will shorten the tIme to introduce new instruction concepts and curriculum Changes. This wilJ ~llow the teacher to meet the growing demand for an increase in quality teaching. Some of the larger schools of our state will establish limited production facilities, and will install video-tape recorders to record telecourses from the state network in order that the school can play back the lessons when they best fit into their schedule. This will be an asset when 79 we begin to program over six channels with 72 half hour programs during a single school day. It seems logical to me that the existing school buildings should be used after public school hours for junior college instruction. Both colleges and state technical educational centers will move into educational television utilization. Adult education centers will probably be established across the state to train in such subjects as family health information. Many of the businesses and industries in the state are using an educational television channel to train and retrain their supervisors and managers. We already have a dozen hospitals and other medical and mental health facilities interconnected to exchange information. We see an interconnected television channel for police, fire and many state agency departments. Some of our cities are already interconnected on our channel for a police training series, which, incidentally, is reaching three fourths of the policemen in our state now. We feel open-circuit educational television cannot be limited to public school use as there are too many other avenues of education where the service needs to be made available. 80 Th~ following are excerpts of questions from the floor which were posed to the First and Second Session panel members. Q. Is there proof technology in teaching can be effecitve? Tauffner: You will recall the effectiveness of the Edison Response Environment System as developed by Omar Khayyam Moore in which he is teaching pre-kindergarten children to read, write, spell and type. Since education today is headline reading, the press and we make more of our short comings than was made a decade ago. Educators had not succeeded with traditional approaches, so today educators are cognizant they should attempt to utilize technological advancements. Q. To gain the statewide acceptability of telecourses, won1t something have to be done to promote the movement away from the Carnegie grade system towards one of individual acheivement measurement? Wood: Some system will have to be originated whereby we measure the amount of learning the student gains in a semester or year rather than by the number of hours spent in a classroom in a given period of time. Tauffner: Let me give a warning to those here who have not started in educational television. It is vital that you consider processes for evaluation of your telecourses early in the game. otherwise you can be unprepared when the time comes 81 for you to prove that educational television has actually helped with a student1s instruction. Q. P1ease discuss the use of thE medium for individualized instruction for the large class. Campion: In Ithaca, New York, one of our schools has a large, projection-type television screen built into their multi-media system. In our state, the tendency is toward proj ecting b