ABSTRACT A STUDY OF THE FORM.AND FUNCTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES by Charles S. Ruffing The utilization of instructional television in the nation's classrooms has seen much growth during the last decade. With the help of emerging federal and state programs educators have introduced television in their educational programs at a rate sufficient to suggest that in the not too distant future every classroom in the na- tion may have access to programs of instructional tele- vision. In Spite of the expanded availability of instruc- tional television. however. the quality of the television lessons has not appreciably improved beyond a relatively low level of effectiveness. In consequence. there is evi- dent disenchantment among educators with much of the ma- terial being televised and a growing awareness among 1 Charles S. Ruffing educational telvision Specialists of a need for much better educational as well as technical planning of in- structional programs. The investigator in this study has hypothesized that one important reason for the lack of quality of many television lessons may be the inefficient organization and functioning of curriculum committees having at least nominal responsibility for the nature and content of televised courses of study. During the school year of 1965-66. 60 instructional television curriculum committees who had deve10ped courses of study for Open channel televising were investigated with respect to the kind of educational specialties that their committees represented and the responsibilities of those members. The committees reported on represented 19 inde- pendent school districts and 41 councils of school systems. This grouping also provided a base for comparison of the two kinds of organizations. A questionnaire. constructed from recommendations of national leaders in curriculum supervision and develOp— ment. was sent to the educational administrators of the 60 school systems and councils participating in the study. Charles S. Ruffing The findings show marked uniformity in the organi— zation of television curriculum committees in both systems and councils. Every committee has a high prOportion of identical educational Specialties and member reSponsibili- ties. These similarities correlated closely with the recommendations of educational leaders in curriculum supervision and development. Both system and council committees lack specialists who could have significant impact on the quality of television lessons produced. Notably absent for example are research and evaluation specialists and educational psychologists. It is found, further, that there is little consis— tency in the Operational procedures of television curricu- lum committees in either the School systems or the coun- cils studied. This fact together with the similarity found in organization, leads to the conclusion that tele— vision curriculum program services are comparably effec— tive, or ineffective, in both systems and councils. An "instructional systems" approach to the develOpment of courses of study for television is the major recommenda— tion of the study. A STUDY OF THE FORM AND FUNCTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES BY ,¥(" Charles SU’Ruffing A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION College of Education 1967 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To the many persons who assisted in this study I express my deepest appreciation. In particular, Special recognition is due to Charles F. Schuller, committee chairman, for his advice, guidance and c00peration beyond the call of duty. Sincere gratitude is extended also to the other members of the committee, Walter B. Emery, Stanley E. Becker and Russell J. Kleis, each of whom played an important role in bringing me this far. A special acknowledgement goes to Clinton T. Cobb for his gracious consideration and c00peration. Above all, and the reason for it all, to my wife Betty, and children Christine, Jonathan, Daniel, and Peter I express my gratitude and thanks for their sacri- fices, encouragement and patience. Living with the old man while the dissertation was being written wasn't much fun. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. II. III. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Importance and Need of the Study . . . Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . Assumptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Review of Previous Studies . . . . . . ELEMENTS OF THE INVESTIGATION . . . . . . Educational Television: Concept and Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instructional Television . . . . . . . Pertinent Considerations in Curriculum Development . . . . . . . . . . . . METHOD OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . Determining the Approach . . . . . . . Constructing the Questionnaire for the Curriculum Specialists. . . . . . . Constructing the Questionnaire for the Instructional Television Adminis- trators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations of Curriculum Specialists for Committee Form and Function . . iii Page ii 13 l4 l4 l6 17 18 21 21 29 36 SO 50 52 54 55 Table of Contents/continued Chapter IV. REPORT AND ANALYSIS. V. SUMMARY. CONCLUSIONS Summary . . . . . Conclusions . . . Recommendations . APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . I iv Page 63 116 l16 118 125 137 147 Table LIST OF TABLES INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS RECOMMENDED BY 31 SPECIALISTS IN SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT. . . INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES RECOMMENDED BY 31 SPECIALISTS IN SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RANK CORRELATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FREQUENCY OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS RECOMMENDED BY 31 CURRICULUM SPECIALISTS AND THOSE POSITIONS HELD IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS . . . . RANK CORRELATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FREQUENCY OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS ASSIGNED BY 31 CURRICULUM SPECIALISTS AND THOSE POSITIONS HELD IN 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELE- VISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION PRODUCER-DIRECTOR ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . ... . . COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION PRODUCER ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELE- VISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . Page 57 59 76 77 81 81 82 List of Tables/continued Table 8. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION DIRECTOR ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELE- VISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . 9. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF CURRICULUM SUPERVISOR.AND DEVELOPMENT SPE: CIALIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICU- LUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELE- VISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . 11. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF HIGHER.EDUCATIONAL SUBJECT MATTER SPECIALIST IN INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COM- MITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS 12. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF BUILDING PRINCIPAL ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVI- SION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . 13. COMPARISONS OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIPS OF STUDENTS ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICU- LUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION COORDINATION ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. . . . . . . . 15. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF LIBRARIAN ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRIC- ULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF SCRIPT-WRITER ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS and 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Page 82 82 83 83 83 84 84 84 85 List of Tables/continued Table 17. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF SCHOOL DISTRICT SUBJECT MATTER SPECIALIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COM- MITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS 18. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REPRESENTATIVE ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COM- MITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS 19. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELE- VISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . 20. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . 21 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION TEACHERrEDUCATOR ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . 22. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION TEACHERPACTOR.ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . 23. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA SPECIALIST QN INSTRUC- TIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . 24. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF RESEARCH AND EVALUATION SPECIALIST ON INSTRUC- TIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. . . . . . . . 25. COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF STENOGRAPHERS ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION vii Page 85 85 86 86 86 87 87 87 List Of Tables/continued Table 26. 27. 28. 29. CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF COMMUNITY RESOURCE PERSON ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS . . . . . . . . . . . RANK CORRELATION BETWEEN RESPONSIBILITIES RECOMMENDED BY SPECIALISTS AND THOSE PERFORMED BY SYSTEMS' COMMITTEE MEMBERS . . . . . . . . RANK CORRELATION BETWEEN RESPONSIBILITIES RECOMMENDED BY SPECIALISTS AND THOSE PERFORMED BY COUNCILS' COMMITTEE MEMBERS. . . . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF CURRICULUM SUPERVISION AND DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . . . . . 30 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF CLASSROOM 31. 32. 33. 34. TEACHERS ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION TEACHERrEDUCATOR.ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCHOOL DISTRICT SUBJECT MATTER SPECIALIST ON TELE- VISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . . . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF HIGHER EDUCATIONAL SUBJECT MATTER SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION COORDINATOR ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . viii Page 88 88 9O 91 93 94 94 95 95 96 List of Tables/continued Table 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. MAJOR.COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF INSTRUC- TIONAL MEDIA SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COM? MITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF BUILDING PRINCIPAL ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION PRODUCERrDIRECTOR ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESEARCH AND EVALUATION SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COM? MITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMUNITY RESOURCE PERSON ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF LIBRARIAN ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REPRESENTATIVE ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION PRODUCER.ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . ix Page 96 97 97 98 98 99 99 100 100 101 List of Tables/continued Table Page 45. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF STENOGRA— PHER ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . 101 46. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCRIPT? WRITER ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . 102 47. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION DIRECTOR ON TELEVISION COMMITTEESLIN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . 102 48. .MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF STUDENTS ON TELEVISION OOMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966. . . . . . . . . . 103 49. MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 . . 103 50. THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF MEMBERS SERVING ON CUR? RICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS AND THE FREQUENCY OF THOSE AVERAGES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 51. IDENTITY OF ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTING CURRICU- LUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN 31 COUNCILS AND THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH THEY MADE THOSE APPOINT- MENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 52. IDENTITY AND NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATORS APPOINT- ING CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN 15 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND THE FREQUENCY'WITH WHICH THEY MADE THOSE APPOINTMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 53. IN-SERVICE PREPARATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELE- ‘ VISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS ACCORDING TO KIND AND FRE- QUENCY OF PREPARATION . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 54. IN-SERVICE PREPARATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELE- VISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN 41 X List of Tables/continued Table Page COUNCILS ACCORDING TO KIND AND FREQUENCY OF PMPAMTION. O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O 113 55. NUMBER OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEETINGS HELD BY 36 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 15 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR 1965- 1966. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 56. WORKING DIAGRAM OF PROCEDURES OF COURSE DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 xi CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction The utilization of instructional television in our nation's schools has grown phenomenally in the last decade. American education has absorbed this medium into its struc- ture and it has become an accepted journeyman in the educa— tional media family. As instructional television continues to be incor- porated into the classrooms of America and used to develop our students' knowledge. skills and attitudes. the quest of excellence must be pursued. Educators must constantly hold instructional television to the task of providing quality education. The concept of quality in the tele- vision lesson should be expected to emerge in the develop- ing content of the lesson. Quality. above all. is the raison d'etre of instructional television and consequently should be guaranteed so that educational excellence in in- structional television does not "die aborning." 1 Developing the content of a television lesson is a complex process. The involvements of many kinds of people. many kinds of non-personal factors as well as many and diverse relationships among its elements and a state of continual Change are part of the process of develOping a television lesson. Because of the interlacing of these many elements of the tangible and intangible. research findings cannot develop into sources of absolutes. But research can force introspection. introduce systems for accountability and engender responsibility. This study prOposes that certain observations in the development of curriculum for televis- ing have been made and. hOpefully. that another step has been taken toward meeting a major charge of education: the pursuit of excellence. Importance and Need of the Study Delineation of Instrggtional Television Effort During the last decade as instructional television was emerging on the educational scene. it stimulated many research projects. A review of the abstracts of these studies attests that a large portion of this research involved an existing television 1esson—-an accomplished fact--and had investigated the lesson after it had been produced, televised, and utilized. The assumption appears in most cases to have been made that the quality of the lessons presented was rela- tively constant. Little or no attention was paid to the process by which the lessons were develOped or the nature Of educational planning involved. An early corroboration of this research gap can be found in the Kumata inventory in which 71 abstracts and 133 articles on instructional television are listed, not one of which concerns itself with lesson develOpment. The National Association of Educational Broadcasters' Bibliography of Research Fact Sheets list seven major areas of research emphasis, all of which are concerned with the "effect of impact" of the lesson after it has been devel- Oped and "utilized." 1Hideya Kumata, An Inventoryiof Instructional Television Research (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Educational Television and Radio Center, 1956). 2 . . . National Assoc1ation of Educational Broadcasters, NAEB Research Fact Sheets and Index, NAEB JOURNAL, XXIII, NO. 1 (January - February, 1964). p. 79. Openshaw calls attention to this evident imbalance. Rather than trying out how to improve the quality and enlarge our vision of imparting in- formation with this valuable medium. research is usually designed to prove over and over again that television can extend the teacher beyond the limit of one moment and one place. and still teach as effectively as a classroom teacher. Nearly any research summary one chooses to read shows the enormous repetition of this one ques- tion . . . . We should view this condition with great alarm.3 Costello and Gordon mention curriculum only in the context that schools must change their established curricula when incorporating instructional television into their sys— tems. The developing of lesson content has been completely . 4 disregarded. A further affirmation of the lack of information about curriculum planning is found in an evaluation of the MPATI project. Any educational TV broadcast necessarily makes certain assumptions about the nature of the curriculum and the function that the TV broadcast is to serve in relation to that cur- riculum. 3Karl Openshaw. “Educational Television and the Individual." (Paper read before the A.S.C.D. Conference on Creativity. Turkey Run. Indiana. October 1. 1962). 4Lawrence F. Costello and George N. Gordon. Teach with Television (New York: Hastings House. 1961). p. 132. f?~ Onto whom does the responsibility for cur— riculum planning devolve; or to put it bluntly, is the curriculum imposed from above, as the "quality-floor" people often imply: or does it develOp from active participation of teachers everywhere?5 This raising Of the question indicates doubt about the existence of a systematic or accepted procedure of cur- riculum determination for instructional television even after more than a decade of national experience with the medium. AS recently as 1964, Diamond's only reference to curriculum committees was a short paragraph describing the instructional television endeavors of a single school sys— tem's broadcasting services. Edgar Dale, Professor of Education at Ohio State University, noted this unequal emphasis in an address to a conference of audio—visual specialists. We have not been closely associated with the curriculum field. We do not have adequate cur- riculum orientation. We are identified more closely with the means of education than the 5Egon G. Guba, "Evaluation and the Airborne TV Project," Educational Research Bulletin (October 12, 1960). 6Robert M. Diamond, A Guide to Instructional Tele-' vision (New York: McGraw Hill, Inc., 1964), pp. 111-112. ends of education. We have not d ne the integrating job that is so vital. The reason for this high concentration of research investigating instructional television lessons after they were a fait accompli can be found in the nature of the medium and its emergence onto the educational scene. The introduction of educational television coin- cided particularly well with demands of a rapidly growing educational system. The abundance of students, the shortage of teachers, and the explosion of knowledge created a need for an in- structional medium that could extend the good teacher to many more students. Television could do this, and many educators, with perhaps more enthusiasm than good judgment, became its Champions. Although still primitive in its de— velopment, it was hurriedly implemented in many schools, colleges, and universities. Therein lies a basic problem. Few changes in education are hurriedly implemented. In the past educators' commitments to new theories and proposals did not deve10p with much rapidity and imple- mentation had a slow evolvement. 7Edgar Dale, "Many things We See and Some of Them We Are" (Paper read before the DAVI Conference on Evalua- tion, Mt. Hood, Oregon, November 24, 1963). In the case of instructional television, this “adoption lag" was not tolerated and it was thrust, un- tried, into the classroom. The classroom became at once both the research laboratory and the practice field, and consequently a plethora of research projects were develOped to prove that it was the effective educational tool that its sponsors claimed it to be. Since the effectiveness. of an instructional television lesson can best be measured by investigating the terminal behavior of the pe0ple in— volved in the learning situation, most research in the developing field was directed toward the completed lesson and its utilization. The concept and design of the television curriculum and the individual lesson has been a minor concern of the medium's coterie of researchers. How lessons are conceived and develOped has not been as important to them as their degree of effectiveness in the learning situation. This focus of attention may have develOped efficient measuring instruments and needed conclusions, but by not holding the instructional television practitioner to the task of striving for educational perfection, the quality of most instructional television has remained low. There is evi— dence to point this out. A review of pertinent literature discloses that a large portion of instructional television courses. materials used in the classrooms. are not of the high quality that one would expect them to be. Hettinger notes that the National Instructional Television Library staff found few of the 2000 courses being utilized by schools throughout the nation as being acceptable to the library's standards for national distribution. They found that: Teachers appearing on the television screen do not communicate prOperly. the programs show evidence of insufficient preparation or rehearsal. and there is an apparent lack of graphics and studio support. There is a rather serious indictment of both edu— cation and the medium of instructional television when one considers that upward of 2000 courses of inferior quality are allowed to exist as valid instructional material and that these courses are being used by thousands of teachers as part of their daily instructional program. Wigren also recognizes the lack of quality of ex- isting instructional television programming and feels that: Research is needed to determine what con- stitutes a good instructional television program as to methodology and presentation of content. 8Charles Hettinger. "ETV Technology." Audiovisual Instruction (September. 1964). p. 420. 9Harold E. Wigren. "Some Things I've Learned About Television in the Classroom." View (June. 1966). p. 24. He has serious reservations about the present state of the art. Are the traditional techniques of programming via television adequate? DO they bring the most effective results? Is it sufficient merely to put a good teacher in front of a camera and tell him to "teach as you've always taught? . . . In a survey of selected instructional television lessons. an inventory was made of the exact time devoted to each mode of presentation on television and a profile of instructional methodology was made. The study revealed that more than 80 per cent of some courses consisted of verbalization (telling and explaining by the television teacher). The National Center for School and College Tele- vision. in previewing video—tapes of instructional material made available by seventy-five educational television sta— tions for inclusion in the Center's distribution library. reports that generally the lessons were of inferior quality. The materials evaluated were from such areas as art. social work. mathematics. science. health. physical education. and music. The Center's report on the area of music sets the tenor for their overview: Seven authorities in music education and in- structional television found little to be en- thused about after viewing portions Of 70 lessons from almost every telecourse being broadcast in the United States. lOIbid.. p. 24. 10 Greatest concern was for lack of musician- ship displayed by some of the teachers and the generally poor quality of their teaching. While concern was also expressed for the evident lack of imagination, creativity, per- formance, and continuity, Special emphasis was placed on the pivotal importance of the tele- vision teacher, the quality of his teaching, and the adequacy of his musicianship.11 The existence of poor quality material has deeper overtones when one considers the size of the national tele— vision classroom. MCKune found that during 1965—66there were 15,033,178 kindergarten-twelfth grade student enroll- ments in classes utilizing instructional television. This large classroom will increase immeasurably in the future because of the developing participation of the federal government in the support of education. Fur- ther..this large body of existing material will become the foundation for the production of future material that will be developed for the nation's classrooms. The nature of the criticisms of instructional tele- vision seems tO indicate that the mediocrity is a result of inadequate lesson development, design and production. lClarence H. Allen, Ed., National Center for School and College Television News Supplement (Bloomington, Indiana: June, 1966), Vol. I, NO. 1, p. 5. Lawrence E. McKune, Telecourses for Credit (East Lansing, Michigan: Continuing Education Service, Michigan State University), XIII, 1966, p.i. 11 The criticisms reflect a develOpmental orientation which is directed at the pre—planning stages Of the curriculum. Assuming that there are educators or groups of educational Specialists commonly called curriculum com— mittees involved in lesson develOpment, there then is an indication of a possible breakdown in the methods and pro- cedures used by these educators. Curriculum, lessons and courses of study are people-caused, and the value of instruc- tional television, like all other media of education, is de- pendent upon the peOple who plan and develOp the nature and scope of its content. It should be noted that in the literature of instruc- tional television the terms curriculum, lessons and courses of study are Often used synonomously. Since the present study concerns itself with the committees who deve10p tele- vision lesson courses, the term curriculum is defined here tO mean only the content and structure of those television lessons. Sources of Instructional Television Lessons There are two patterns of organization which give source to the instructional television programming used in 12 our nation's elementary and secondary schools--single large school systems and instructional television councils. The history of broadcasting indicates an early in- volvement of school systems in the broadcast medium. Atkinson noted that in 1942 there were twenty-nine school systems engaged in educational radio.13 A review of the literature points out that during 1966 all of those twenty- nine systems participated in programs of instructional tele— vision and the systems of Oakland, Chicago, Atlanta, Portland, Denver, Detroit, Milwaukee, Buffalo, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Nashville, San Francisco, and Rochester, N.Y., have been pi- oneers in both educational radio and television. Thirty—two systems could be identified which were independently produc- ing and televising courses of instruction in their schools. The administrators of these systems select a sub— ject area, direct the development of the curriculum, select the television teacher, produce and televise the lessons and develop programs of utilization, testing, and evaluation. Often hierarchical in nature, their total instructional tele— vision operation is system centered, directed to fulfill Spe- cific system needs. 3Carroll Atkinson, Public School Broadcasting to the Classroom (Boston: Meador Publishing Co., 1942), p. 2. l4McKune, Op. cit.. pp. 1-473. 13 The "instructional television council" is a volun- tary association of school systems who band together to Share the cost and responsibility of instructional tele- vision broadcasting. Because of the council's voluntary nature, it is often weak administratively and is usually controlled by a small central staff which Often consists of a single overworked individual. During the 1966 school year, sixty—three of these councils could be identified through a review of the literature. The small staff of the councils have the same re- sponsibility as the administrators of the independent sys— tems—-developing a valid, functional program of instruc- tional television. The aims, Objectives, and patterns of operation of both the single school systems and councils closely resemble each other-—both are in the same trade, disciplined by the nature of the medium and must follow the same preordained procedures. Curriculum committees charged with the concep— tion and development of the instructional television lesson must then be assumed to be a part of both kinds of organi- cations. Statement of the Problem In the light of findings that the methodology of instructional television lesson development has not been 14 a concern of researchers and because of the prevalence of low-quality instructional television programming indicat— ing a possible breakdown in the system at that point where curriculum committees should be involved in program decis- ions, it appeared a study of curriculum committee relation- ships to current instructional television program develop- ment might help point the way toward significant improvement in both the quality and effectiveness of television in edu— cation. Assumptions It was assumed at the outset of this study that in- structional television is of growing importance in the total educational program of our nation's schools and that a study of the existing methods of develOping the television curric— ulum would have validity and significance to the practition— ers in the field. A second assumption was that since basic decisions in curriculum development are typically made by curriculum committees, such committees should play a signif- icant role in the development of materials for instructional television. Hypotheses In the present study an attempt is made to determine the current relationships existing between curriculum 15 committees and instructional television programming, to analyze these in terms of their possible impact on lesson quality, and to develop consequent recommendations for a systematic and practical application of curriculum devel- Opment principles in instructional television programming. More Specifically the following null hypotheses will be examined: 1. That no common pattern of instructional television curriculum committee membership would be found; That all the instructional television curriculum committees surveyed will lack the kind of educa- tional specialists recommended for membership by national leaders in the curriculum supervision and development field; That many duties of a curriculum committee deve1- Oping a course of study and considered necessary by leaders in the field of curriculum supervision and development, are not performed by instructional television committees; That committee Operational procedures will have no pattern of similarity: and 16 5. That the endeavors of independent school systems will display more organization in instructional television committee membership and function than the councils. Limitations of the Study The study will concern itself only with the broad- cast services of single school systems who autonomously support and control an instructional television endeavor, and with councils of school systems who cooperatively sup— port and control an instructional television endeavor. This limitation to broadcast services is meant to exclude the closed—circuit operations of educational institutions whose Operations are independent and have no council counterpart. The study will involve only those instructional television program services that could be identified to be producing lessons for kindergarten through grade 6 during the 1965—66 school year. The study will confine itself to the form and func- tion of groups and not attempt to determine the quality of excellence of the instructional television materials they produce. 17 Definitions Channel: The assigned frequency for a radio or television transmitter or closed-circuit modulator. Closed-circuit television: The use of television, trans- mitted from cameras to receivers over cable, or by micro- wave, permitting private reception of programs only by those receivers included in the circuit. Coaxial cable: A special cable consisting of a center con- ductor concentrically positioned within an outer shield used to provide low-loss transmission of video and/Or radio frequency signals. Direct television teaching: The presentation of the major portion of a course of study, by the television teacher supplemented by individual study and small group discussions under the direction of a classroom teacher. Educational Television: The generic term for television programs that are produced with a deliberate educational or enrichment objective either in community broadcasting or in-school use. Educational television station: A non-profit station owned and Operated by an educational institution or school dis- trict as part of its ongoing educational program. Instructional Television: The use of television within the formal classroom context on any educational level. Instructional television fixed service. A television facil- ity that broadcasts its signal by micro-wave in the frequency range of 2500—2690. Magnetic tape: An acetate or plastic ribbon coated on one side with tiny oxide particles employed for magnetically recording audio and video signals for future reproduction. Common tape sizes are 1/4", 1/2", 3/ ", l", and 2". Megacycle: A unit equal to 1,000,000 cycles per second used to exPress the frequency of radio, television, and other electromagnetic waves. The term is being replaced by megahertz. Hertz discovered the phenomenon. 18 Microwave Link: A special high—frequency radio transmitter and receiver capable of carrying audio and video signals in a directional line-of—sight "beam." Open-circuit: A broadcast situation in which programs are radiated for reception by any listener or viewer within range of the station. RF monitor (TV receiver): The standard black and white home receiver capable of displaying radio frequency signals from Open-circuit transmitters and closed-circuit modulators on the standard television channels. Sppplementary television: The use of television lessons that are directly related to the course of study and are presented on a scheduled basis to augment the classroom offerings. Total teaching by television: The teaching of an entire course by means of television. Ultrahigh frequency (UHF): A frequency of 300 to 3,000 mega- cycles per second; includes channels 14—83. Very high frequency (VHF): A frequency of 30 to 300 mega— cycles per second; includes channels 2-13. Video tape recording (VTR): The recording of both the pic- tures and sound of a television presentation by electronic impulses on a special magnetic recording tape which can re- produce the information when desired. Review of the Previous Studies of Television Committees and Course Development A study of the research literature in the field of televised instruction and in the broad area of curriculum supervision and develOpment discloses that a study of in— structional television curriculum committee membership and responsibilities and their relation to course development has never been undertaken. 19 In 1962 Stevens undertook a study from which he develOped a profile for educational television curriculum planning for the secondary schools, grades seven through twelve. The study concerned itself with curriculum deve1- Opment within a functioning instructional television series using as reference for good planning Parker's guidelines for curriculum improvement.15 Stevens investigated curric- ulum planning as it related to programs for the secondary grades, through attitudes expressed by the television teacher, administrators and classroom teachers. Ten inde- pendent school systems producing television material were investigated.16 His study did not involve council opera- tions, committee members' Specialties, committee members' duties, or committee Operative procedures. Stevens' util— ization of Parker's guidelines was ideal for his purpose although they were developed originally for the in-service 15T. Cecil Parker, "Guidelines for In-Service Edu— cation," In-Service Education, Fifty-Sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (The Society, Bloomington, Illinois), 1957, pp. 103-128. 6Humphrey Stevens, "A Profile of ETV Curriculum Planning for Secondary Schools (Grades 7—12)," (Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Department of Speech, University of Buffalo). 20 training of teachers and lack an instructional television orientation. Stevens' findings and conclusions do not negate the purpose of this study. Further, this investigator's personal interviews with local, regional, and national televised instruction practitioners and with curriculum specialists disclosed no evidence Of previous research bearing directly on the subject of this study. He did find considerable interest and encouragement for undertaking the proposed study. CHAPTER II ELEMENTS OF THE INVESTIGATION It is the purpose of this chapter to discuss the two major elements involved in the study; television de- sign and curriculum development. Instructional television programming has commanded a major portion of the broadcast time of the educational television station and most of its develOpment has been in tandem with the emerging educational television service. They have become so interlaced that a study of one cannot be undertaken without an explanation Of the structure of the other. Instructional television also concerns curriculum supervision and develOpment. Techniques and procedures common in programs of curriculum development are also ger— mane to instructional television. Attention is directed then. in this chapter. to the following tOpics which the investigator feels have Special significance to this study. 1. Educational television: concept and design. 2. Instructional television: status and potential. 3. Pertinent considerations in curriculum development. Educational Television Concept and Design Educational television was awarded space in the broadcast spectrum by the Federal Communications Commission's 21 22 Sixth Order and Report on April 14. 1952. This document expanded the number of television channels available for develOping broadcast needs and concomitantly reserved 252 channel assignments (80 VHF and 162 UHF) for non-commercial use. These allocations have been revised several times and the most recent in March. 1966. provided for 116 VHF and 516 UHF educational television reservations.17 The reservations of these educational television channels were realized only after a long and concerted struggle by a small group of educators and friends who had the vision to recognize the potential Of television as a forceful medium in strengthening and expanding our educa- tional system and the dedicated courage to carry this con- viction to Washington and the Federal Communications Com- mission. How well they succeeded became evident in this statement from the Sixth Report: We conclude that the record shows the desire and ability of education to make a substantial contribution to the use of television. There is much evidence in the record concerning tha activ- ities of educational organizations in AM and FM broadcasting. It is true and was expected that l7Educational Television. Federal Communications Commission Information Bulletin No. 16-3. June. 1966. washington. D. C. 23 education has not utilized these media to the full extent that commercial broadcasters have in terms of number of stations and number of hours of operation. However. it has also been shown that many of the educational insti- tutions which are engaged in all broadcasting are doing an outstanding job in the presenta- tion of high-quality programming and have been getting excellent public response. And most important in this connection. it is agreed that the potential Of television for education is much greater and more readily ap- parent than that Of oral broadcasting and that the interest of educational community in this field is much greater than it was in oral broadcasting. The public interest will clearly be served if these stations are used to con- tribute significantly to the educational process of the nation the type of programs which have been broadcast by educational organizations and those which the records indicate can and will be televised by educators will provide a valu~ able complement to commercial programming.18 The complete charge to educators that accompanied their prized reSponsibility was best given by Commissioner Frieda Hennock in a separate Opinion in the Sixth Report. Educational television stations. when es— tablished. will do more than furnish a uniquely valuable teaching aid for in-school and home use. They will supply a beneficial complement to commercial broadcasting; providing for a greater diversity intelevision programming. they will be particularly attractive to the many Specialized and minority interests in the 18Federal Communications Commission. Sixth Order and Report. The Proceedings. (washington. D. C.. May 2. 1952) v. 17. No. 87. p. 4089. 24 community. cultural as well as educational which tend to be bypassed by commercial broadcasters thinking in terms of mass audiences. It will permit the entire viewing public an unaccustomed freedom of choice in programming. Educationally. licensed and Operated stations will. in addition. result in a substantial and beneficial diversifi- cation in the ownership and control of broadcast facilities. This would be closely in line with the established commission policy which has sought to achieve such diversification to the exercise of its licensing authority. Finally. educational stations will provide the highest standards of public service introducing non- commercial Objectives and activities. They will be a leavening agent raising the aim and opera— tions of our entire broadcasting system.19 The charge was an explicit Challenge. Within a year the first educational television station KUHT went on the air in Houston. Texas. It was followed in the next decade by the activation of sixty-six more stations.2 It is estimated by the end of the 1967 calendar year there will be 147 educational television stations in Operation. and based on projects under construction and current FCC applications. there will be 170 stations on the air by the end Of 1968.21 lgIbid. 20Television Factbook. 1866 Edition. No. 36. Tele- vision Digest. Inc.. Washington. D. C. 21Letter from Ray Stanley. Chief. Educational Tele- vision Facilities Branch. Department Of Health. Education and welfare. Office of Education. July 15. 1966. 25 This growth of educational television can be at— tributed not only to the dedication and determination of educators, but also to the enlightened interest and finan- cial support of federal and state legislatures. Educa— tional television legislation is on the books of thirty— seven states. Thirty-two states have commissions, boards, or authorities related to educational television. Thirty have appropriated funds for educational television and twenty—five have networks authorized under construction or in Operation. A national network of interconnected television stations creating a Public Television Service is the major recommendation of the Carnegie Commission on Educational Television. The Commission had been sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and was charged to con- duct a study of non-commercial television and to focus its attention on community owned channels and their ser— vices to the public. The Commission estimates that about 337 television stations at full practical power are required to give as nearly complete coverage of the population of the United 2"Survey of State ETV Legislation" (The State Edu- cational Television Authorities, Department of Education, Springfield, Illinois, July, 1966), p. 2. (Mimeographed) 26 States as is economically justified.23 Although the format of these stations includes "all that is of human interest and importance . . . and which is not arranged for formal instruction"24 the Commission still recommended that the first eight hours of programming of each weekday carry in- structional programs. The report was sent to Congress and the resulting Senate bill made provisions for a national study of the status of instructional television. On the federal level, the Congress of the United States has been most liberal in financing the medium, directly and indirectly, by legislating laws predicated to the strengthening of education. The most direct sup— port was through the Educational Television Facilities Act, Public Law 87-447, passed on May 1, 1962. It authorized $32 million over a five year period for federal matching grants to be used in the activation of new educational television stations and for expansion of existing station facilities- The Act, administered by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Specifies the applicant for federal matching funds must demonstrate financial 3Public Television: A Program for Action, The Re- port Of the Carnegie Commission on Educational Television, Bantam Books, N.Y., p. 136. 24 Ibid., p. l. 27 ability to provide the non-federal funds needed for the construction. operation.and maintenance of an ETV station. Thus far 138 grants have been approved for a total of $26.752.225. Pending applications amounting to 8.6 million when combined with money already granted. exceeds the $32 million apprOpriated.25 The National Defense Education Act. Public Law 85- 864. through its Title III. provides for the purchase of equipment by schools to encourage experimentation and re- search to find better wayscfi strengthening instruction in critical areas. Guidelines for this act permit the pur— chase Of television monitors and associated reception equipment so that schools can utilize existing televised instruction. Since 1958. Title VII of the National Defense Edu- cation Act has obligated over $8.000.000 for studying. planning. and reporting about educational television. 5Educational Television Stations Newsletter. (National Association of Educational Broadcasters. Wash- ington. D. C.) March. 1967. 26The Financing of Educational Television Stations. (Report of a Study Conducted of ETV Stations. the National Association of Educational Broadcasters. Frederick Breiten- field. Jr.. Editor) July. 1965. 28 This support develOped a thrust in research and de- velOpment and created a base of knowledge from which many definite and tangible results are likely to be realized. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Public Law 89-10, although considered a general education act, contains guidelines that have ancillary benefits for edu- cational television. Under Title I, Operating expenses for educational television stations are approvable if the program material televised provides educational Opportuni- ties to children in families of low income. Title III guidelines indicate that educational television facilities may be included in supplementary education centers. Any compendium of major educational television sup- port would be incomplete without due credit being given to the many private foundations who, in meeting the responsi- bilities of their charters, provided strong support to edu- cational television development. Notable among these is the Ford Foundation, which since 1952 has made grants of more than $100,000,000 to educational television and its current rate of grant making for this purpose is more than 2 $10,000,000 a year. 7 27"Comments of the Ford Foundation" (In reSponse to the Commission's Notice of Inquiry of March 2, 1966, re FCC Docket #16495. August 1, 1966, The Ford Foundation, N.Y., N.Y.), p. l. 29 On August 1, 1966, the Foundation unveiled an imag— inative plan for a non—commercial satellite system indicat- ing a viable interest in supporting and catalyzing the med— ium. The Foundation envisages a three satellite system that will eventually make available some forty-four channels for educational and instructional television. Instructional Television This review has implied that the design of the edu— cational television system serves a major function in Amer- ican education--that of carrying instructional television to classrooms. But that was not its purpose. DeSpite the basic intent of its Sponsors through proclamation and edict, and in spite of the fact that instructional television pro- gramming commands a goodly portion of the educational tele— vision station's schedule, it was not the intent of the Federal Communications Commission that instructional tele— vision become a responsibility of the educational television broadcast station. Specification of this distinction is found in the Federal Communications Docket 14744 in which the Commission asserts that the primary purpose of the 30 educational television station is to serve the educational and cultural needs of the community and not the Specific 28 needs of the schools. None the less, considerable emphasis on serving classroom needs was evident from the beginning. The first television station licensed to an educational institution, Iowa State University, televised lessons into classrooms 29 of Iowa from the outset. The emerging medium grew and within fifteen years from the Iowa broadcast, McKune reported that there were 36,469,674 kindergarten through twelfth grade students enrolled in programs Of televised instruction. Highest 3 enrollments were: Science 2,601,001 English 1,662,024 Art 1,234,408 Social Studies 1,040,383 Music ‘ 970,146 Mathematics 667,210 Spanish 571,271 Health and Physical Education 368,619 French 152,598 Reading 133,844 28 "FCC Fifth Order and Report," Docket 14220 Foster- ing Expanded Use of UHF Television Channels. (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1952), p. 16. 9William K. Cummings, This is Educational Television (Ann Arbor: Edwards Brothers, Inc., 1954), p. 37. 0Lawrence E. McKune, Telecourses for Credit (East Lan- sing, Michigan: Continuing Education Service, Michigan State University), XI, 1964, p. i. 31 This large television classroom will grow even more so that by 1971 there will not be many students who will not have had some televised instruction in their education.31 There are other factors beyond the perimeters of the educational television station that are adding to this mass television classroom. In 1963 the Federal Communications Commission ap— proved new rules which permit individual school systems to enter the television broadcasting arena through the Instruc- . tional Television Fixed Service. This service set aside thirty—one Channels for point-to-point microwave broadcast- ing in the 2500-2590 megahertz band. Any School system can reserve a block of four channels for their instructional purposes. To promote the maximum and efficient utilization of this service, the Federal Communications Commission fur- ther appointed a national committee to determine methods and standards for its full development. Instructional Television Fixed Service transmitting equipment is relatively lower in cost than Open channel 1Lester Asheim, "A Survey of Informed Opinion on Television's Future Place in Education," Educational Tele- vision: The Next Ten Years, Ed. Wilbur Schram (Stanford, California, Institute for Communications Research, Stanford University, 1962), p. 33. 32 broadcast equipment and although it requires Special re— ceiving antennas and converters for reception, their cost, too, is low. It is possible to provide a transmitter and equip a studio for less than $20,000 per channel, making this system of broadcasting practical for some school sys- tems under certain circumstances. Since Special reception equipment is necessary to receive the television signal, the system can be considered a closed circuit and thus be— comes an ideal medium for the transfer of information of a prOprietary nature. For example, the Brooklyn Archdiocese more effectively extends the services of their educational specialists than could be possible via an open-circuit channel, and Wayne State University's School of Nursing transmits delicate and restrictive material to Ford Com- munity College in Dearborn, Michigan, fifteen miles away. The immediate efficient and inexpensive transfer of these types of information can be realized through the Instruc- Television Fixed Service. Both the educational television station and the emerging Instructional Television Fixed Service Station can draw upon instructional television tape libraries for a portion of their program needs. Included among these are the Great Plains Instructional Television Library at the 33 University of Nebraska; the National Center for School and College Television Library in Bloomington, Indiana; and the MPATI Distribution Library at Purdue University. These ser— vices are repositories for the many lesson series that are being produced in various production centers around the United States. Recent technological develOpments promise to extend the develOpment and utilization of both educational and instructional television programming. Currently available for purchase are video-tape recording units that retail for less than $2,000, including recorder, camera, and monitor. Manufacturers of this and many other comparable units are pointing their efforts toward the education market. As more and better low-cost equipment of this type becomes available increased use by the schools in a variety of educational contexts seems highly probable. As that occurs, the need for a sound curriculum frame of reference for instructional television use would seem essential if the mistakes of the past are not to be perpetuated. Of equal importance to low-cost equipment is the emerging satellite concept of broadcasting. Domestic satel- lites are being develOped that will serve both commercial and educational broadcasting needs. Prior to the Ford 34 Foundation Satellite Proposal, the Communications Satellite Corporation anticipated that by 1969 it would have an Oper- ative system utilizing two satellites providing twelve full— time television channels plus six occasional—use channels. Several satellite proposals have been made and are under con— sideration by the Federal Communications Commission. Telstar established the practicability of satellite relay of television signals with its first Trans-Atlantic program from EurOpe to the United States on July 10, 1962. As was noted by one Observer, Once a satisfactory communication satellite system is in Operation with a sufficient number of ground stations in strategic positions around the world, there is no theoretical obstacle to television transmission from any point on the Earth's surface to any other point with the pos- sible exception of the Polar regions.33 Implications for education lie heavy in this. On May 1, 1965, the first exchange of intercontinental instruc— tional television took place via Early Bird Satellite between a classroom in West Bend, Wisconsin, and its counterpart in 2"Is Satellite Act Ambiguous?" Broadcasting, August 8, 1966, p. 69. 33Martin Pulling, "International Television," Euro- pean Broadcasting Union Review, General and Legal, 79B, May, 1963, p. 15. 35 Paris, France.34 In time such exchanges may become common- place, but educators may still be hard put to find the quality programming that such an exchange should aspire to. In summary, instructional television has grown be- yond the experimental stage and is being nudged and nurtured into a viable entity in education. Its growth and develop— ment has been rapid and voluminous and indications are there will be no lessening of instructional television activity in the foreseeable future. But in retrospect it would appear that the extent of most of instructional television's support is measurable in technical substantives; of towers and tapes, of studios and channels, of machines and other means. Little atten- tion has been given to the raison d'etre of the medium itself, the message. Because television is a powerful medium of communication, the message has been received and accepted with little discontent because it is labeled tele— vision. 34Lee S. Dreyfus and Gary Gumpert, "Students Visit Via Satellite," NAEB Journal, XXV (May-June, 1966), p. 6. 36 In instructional television the message is education. But a message weakened through poor curriculum development is more harmful when presented on television because the med- ium not only extends exPosure of the message but also tends by its nature to extend an aura of respectability to that message. Thus, instructional television can serve to mask inadequate course planning and ineffective course develop- ment. A lack of control or concern for the message may in fact go undetected by some users. If control and concern are to be kept in harmony with the growth of the medium, then educators should assume, as a corollary, a concentration on curriculum, its supervision and development. Pertinent Considerations in Curriculum Development Curriculum development has been described in many ways: as a social process; as the basic re—education and reorientation of teachers; as the inducing and controlling of changes in human relationships; as social or educational engineering; and as a redesign of the school as a social institution. There is no common agreement as to what cur— riculum development really is; it is perceived to be many things and is found to exist in many forms. 37 The variety of programs and activities in curricu- lum development is indicative of the many purposes sought by educators to fulfill the responsibilities of the schools. The goals may range from testing a new program proposal to publishing a study guide to developing an instructional tele- vision series. Since there is such a wide variance in Objec- tives and purposes, no distinct single developmental plan can be considered Operative in all cases. People, techniques, procedures, leadership, and re- sources are all involved and create differences from program to program. Dependent upon the aims and Objectives of the program, the various human and material involvements predi— cate that the processes will be different. However, no matter what identification the processes will have as they are developed, common threads can be found to be constant and consistent throughout all programs. Techniques and Procedures As education is attuned to the many personal and societal demands of our culture, it necessitates a constant re-evaluation of its aims and objectives. These changing aims and objectives predicate various developmental plans which in turn cause to be structured various techniques and procedures that can be used to achieve the desired purposes. 38 Most of the curriculum changes in education are affected through administrators, supervisors, consultants, and teachers. They recognize a responsibility for consid- ering the process and materials of learning as well as the Objectives and content. Accordingly, the media to be used, their potential and their particular requirements Should be an important consideration. In planning a television series of lessons it is clear that the medium and the mes- sage must be objects of primary concern if desired out— comes are to be achieved. The purpose to be attained, the foci of curriculum activity, the personnel to be in- volved, the leadership and resources available and the particular influence of a particular procedure all weigh upon the selection of the appropriate techniques and pro- cedures to be used. Their careful selection is critical if end results are to warrant the effort and eXpenditure. Organizational Patterns for Curriculum Development Three major approaches seem to have guided the patterns of organizations for curriculum development in American public school systems. Two of them can be thought of as the ends of a continuum extending from extreme 39 centralization to extreme decentralization Of the author- ity. and the work that result in curriculum development. The third approach. the centrally-coordinated. falls somewhere between these extremes and combines elements 35 of both. Doll. Passow and Corey developed these con- cepts which are as follows: Centralized approach. This pattern is based on the conviction that curriculum development should be initiated. managed and frequently conducted by persons in the central office of the school system. Decentralized approach. This direction maintains that curriculum development is primarily the re- sponsibility of the individual school. its staff and its patrons. Centrally-coordinated approach. This position holds that both the efforts of the individual schools and the curriculum activities involve staff members drawn from many schools and status positions in the system. Classification of organizational patterns is not a necessity in curriculum development but such groupings do help to clarify the functions and roles of the people involved. Administrative procedures involving initiation of the prOgram. communication and coordination pertinent 35Ronald C. Doll. A. Harry Passow and Stephen M. Corey. Organizinq for Curriculum Improvement (New York: Teachers College. 1953). pp. 3-9. 40 to it must be determined and understood if a unified com- prehensive program is to evolve. The success of any pro- gram is dependent upon the nature of the administrative process and a determination of its structure. and a com- mitment to its function will enhance the probability of success for the program. Committees and Committee Members The organization and administration of strategies through which a sequence of procedures become operative in curriculum develOpment is dependent for the most part upon the curriculum committee. Since curriculum develOpment is extremely complex. it requires many kinds of competencies in different com- binations at different points in time and this combina— tion of effort commands a committee involvement. Group interaction develops democratic participation and produc- tivity. and group dynamics is the accepted process through which leadership. knowledge. communication. and the in- volvement of many positions and beliefs form a consensus. Much has been written about the group process in- volved in the develOpment of curriculum and it becomes evident that the processes are susceptible to procedural 41 and organizational deficiencies. For a committee to be efficient. a strategy must be created that will not only decrease the normal chance of procedural and organizational breakdown but will also promote conditions that enhance creativity and productive work. An empathy with the delicacies of human relations is the framework of that condition. Parker36 has described 11 principles which facili- tate efficient committee Operations: 1. People work as individuals and as members of groups on problems that are significant to them. 2. The same people who work on problems plan how they will work together. 3. Many opportunities are developed for peOple to relate themselves to each other. 4. An atmOSphere is created that is conducive to building mutual respect. support. permissiveness. and creativeness. 5. Multiple and rich resources are made available and are used. 6. The simplest possible means are developed to move decisions to actions. 7. Constant encouragement is present to test and try ideas and plans in real situations. 8. Appraisal is made an integral part of in—service education. 6Parker. op. cit.. pp. 103—128. 42 9. Continuous attention is given to the inter-rela- tionship of different groups. 10. The facts of individual differences among members of each group are accepted and utilized. 11. Activities are related to pertinent aspects of the current educational. cultural. political. and economic scene. The committee member could be the most important aspect of curriculum development. Outlining the SCOpe of a program. assigning develOpmental tasks and displaying guidelines for committee interaction are of little conse- quence in any curriculum develOpment program if the com- mittee participants are not attuned to their responsibil- ities. A random collection and assignment of individuals to a committee may well fail to provide a functioning unit. Because the committee will be decisive in curricu- lum making. concern must be given to its structure and membership as well as to its operations and processes. The process of selection of curriculum committee members can be a difficult task. Where Once these people could be found within a school district. political and social forces outside the districts are now assuming more responsibility and influence. Thus persons must be 43 designated who are at once competent and who represent both local and outside governmental. organizational. and lay influences. The criteria from which the selection of these people are made should be related to the competencies the individual can add to the committee function. KOOpman37 feels that committee members should have at least consid- erable competency in the following: 1. School organization and administration 2. Human develOpment and learning 3. Social conditions as they affect the school 4. Scholarship in subject-matter 5. Group processes 6. Helping teachers to identify and solve their problem 7. Instructional materials 8. Evaluation and educational research The functions. responsibilities and purposes of curriculum committees are susceptible to much variation. If the benefits of the group process effort are to be realized. definite principles for committee form and function should be established. The limits must be set c1ear1y--the nature of the assignment. the time for 37KOOpman. Op. cit.. p. 61. 44 working. and the relationship with the total program must be understood by all concerned. It is important that the necessary rules of the road be understood and nurtured so that the committee potential be realized. Administrators and Supervisors Administrators and supervisors have very special roles to fill. Though they administer the curriculum in- directly. the impetus they provide has an important ef- fect in making the prOgrams successful. Whatever else they may do. these people should provide motivation and leadership in curriculum develOpment. The superintendent is a most decisive factor. In a large system he may delegate his authority to an assis- tant superintendent who then assumes the responsibilities of that authority. In a small System he may lack the sup- port Of an assistant and performs the curriculum function himself. Within his reSponsibilities he provides Oppor- tunities for participation in curriculum planning. sup- ports current curriculum projects and aids communication among personnel. He must establish organization for improvement; interpret the prOgram to the school board; 45 seek adequate financing, personnel, and materials; and facilitate lay participation.3 The building principal's potential of involvement in curriculum development is by far the greatest. As the primary supervisor Of instruction in his school his in- structional responsibilities are extensive. He employs teachers, arranges their schedules, orients new staff members, encourages teachers to evaluate their perform- ances, supports changes, promotes in-service programs, recommends new instructional directions and installs new curricular developments. In short, he is the manager of a crucial educational enterprise a repository of many edu- cational nuances whose value predicates an active and re- sponsible involvement in programs of curriculum develop- ment. The supervisor's duties predicate his working in many situations and with many people in the school district; consequently he gains an overall view Of the educational 8James J. Jones, "The Superintendent Must Lead in Curriculum Deve10pment," Educational Administration and Supervision, V. 45, March, 1959, pp. 91-92. 39 . . . J. G. Umstattd, "The PrInCIpal Interprets His Role in Curriculum Development," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, V. 43. Febru- ary, 1959, pp. 15-20. 46 needs of the community. Be he called a "resource person.” or simply a "helping teacher." his role is very complex. His major responsibility is to stimulate creative teach- ing by helping teachers acquire the abilities and under- standings which will lead them to richer teaching and learning experiences. Because of this exposure to an overview of the total educational prOgram. the supervisor develOps a sen- sitivity to curriculum problems and becomes more capable of coordinating the elements of personnel. purpose. and activities in a program of curriculum develOpment. Consultants The complex nature of curriculum development fre- quently calls for Specialized competencies beyond those possessed by members of the immediate staff. As such needs develop. sources from outside the local unit are frequently called upon for guidance and direction. Pro- fessional educators from colleges. universities. state departments. county Offices. regional and national asso- ciations. and Citizens from within the community. who possess valuable talents. can frequently be called upon to enrich curriculum deliberations. 47 The tasks and role of the educational consultant may vary according to the needs of the committee he is working with. but he can provide scholarly insights into a specific problem area. and introduce new concepts. ideas. resources and materials that are relevant to his field and pertinent to the committee responsibility. Classroom Teachers Teachers have a most direct effect upon curriculum develOpment. The outcomes of curriculum develOpment even- tually find their way into the classroom in some measure. At this point the teacher becomes the key factor in the success or failure of the program. Teachers perform three tasks that deve10p within them a knowledge and understanding that should be carried into all curriculum deliberations. They work with students. they increase their compentencies through in-service ex- periences and they share curriculum insights with other teachers. Thus. they develop ideas. practices. and eval- uations that are unique to themselves but could add a new dimension to the work of the committee. 48 The Problem of Time DeSpite the capabilities and potential of the curriculum committee. it can only function effectively if it Operates outside the restrictions imposed by the clock. The number and length of meetings require serious consideration. Most curriculum work is demanding and can be carried on only through the sustained efforts of its workers. It demands a mood. pace. or empathy. and an ar- ticulation that cannot be accommOdated in Sporadic se- quences or decimated committee attendance. The problems Of the number and length of meetings will vary with local conditions. The nature of the prob- lem. the personnel and finances available. the in—service techniques and principles employed all influence the poli- cies that effect the time allocation. Without a viable policy. the creative efforts that are possible and neces- sary for the promotion of good curriculum develOpment may not be realized. In summary. there are certain general considera- tions which are important in prOgrams of curriculum de- velopment. Such programs are numerous and apt to be dis- tinctive in terms of scope. purpose. and probably in 49 process. The techniques. procedures. and the people in- volved all have a unique impact on a specific program. but each program of curriculum develOpment. although dis— tinctive. contains threads in common with other curricu- lum programs. CHAPTER III METHOD OF THE STUDY The method of the study includes three phases. First. a set of patterns. principles and objectives for instructional television curriculum committees was de- signed from information collected from national leaders in the field of curriculum supervision and development. Second. a questionnaire based on that information was sent to instructional television administrators. Third. a report and analysis of the returns were made. Phases I and II and an analysis of the information collected from the curriculum specialists are treated in this chapter. Determining the Approach It became readily apparent at the outset of the study that data were to be sought that did not currently exist. The study was conducted in an area not previously researched and pertinent information was accordingly not available. 50 51 The development of a valid and appropriate ques- tionnaire proved to be a somewhat difficult problem be- cause of the need to collect information concerning the form and function of a committee whose parameters had yet to be defined. The problem was finally resolved through confer- ences with the chairman and other members of the writers guidance committee; additional conferences were held with other members of the University faculty. In addition specialists in curriculum supervision and develOpment were asked for their judgments as to the form and func- tion of the committee. It was assumed that the consid- ered reactions of the above three groups could provide necessary information for develOping the required ques- tionnaire. A letter was drafted (Appendix A) and sent to the executive offices Of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Deve10pment and the Division of Audio Visual Instruction. both divisions of the National Education Association. and to the Michigan Association for Super- vision and Curriculum Deve10pment. The letter explained the problem and requested a roster Of 25 educators con- sidered to be capable of Offering judgments concerning 52 the form and function of instructional television curricu- lum committees. Several members of the faculty of the University were also asked for apprOpriate lists. Because the educators receiving the inquiry had a high interest in the proposal. five extensive listings were Obtained. The rosters were then alphabetized and compared and the names of 56 pe0ple were found to appear consistently on two or more of the listings. These individuals were then requested to submit Opinions concerning the proper form and function of in— structional television curriculum committees. Their re- sponses provided the information necessary to deve10p the questionnaire of the study. Constructing the Questionnaire for the Curriculum Sngialist One of the requirements of the study was to obtain information from a large number of curriculum Specialists located in all sections of the country. Accordingly the questionnaire technique was employed. The apprOpriateness of this method is pointed out by Good. Barr & Scates as follows: 53 The questionnaire is particularly useful when one cannot readily see personally all of the people from whom he desires reSponses or where there is no particular reason to see the reSpondents personally. This technique may be used to gather data from any range or territory. sometimes international or national. Regarding this method. they also point out that: Normative survey method may reveal prac- tices or conditions which are well above average. representing advanced thinking and administration; the method is also helpful because it tends to focus attention on needs that might remain unob- served . . . normative method may call attention to current trends and permit people to evaluate and direct these new tendencies which are taking shape.41 Realizing that the phrasing of questions would prove to be of vital importance if the responses were to have validity. the identification and form of the ques- tions were constructed upon principles found in Good. Barr and Scates.42 and in Payne.43 The first draft of the questionnaire was composed and submitted to members of the guidance committee. Again. other members of the University faculty were asked to 4OCarter V. Good. A. S. Barr and Douglas E. Scates. The Methodology of Educational Research (New York: Apple- ton-Century-Crofts. Inc.. 1941). p. 605. 41Ibid. p. 292. 2 4 Ibid.. pp. 337-344. 43Stanley L. Payne. The Art of Asking Questions (New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 1951). pp. 5-125. 54 offer constructive criticism. Several modifications and recommendations concerning question content and form were incorporated into a revised draft. The instrument and a cover letter (Appendix A) were printed and mailed to the 56 curriculum and supervision specialists along with re- turn envelOpes. There were 31 usable questionnaires re- turned and a report of the findings is provided later in this chapter. Constructing the Questionnaire for the Instructional Television Administrators A questionnaire for the instructional television administrators was then develOped from the responses in the 31 instruments returned from the curriculum special- ists. That information was analyzed. duplications were eliminated. and ambiguities clarified. The refined in- formation was then constructed into a functional format and distributed for constructive criticism. Once again. members Of the guidance committee and faculty members were asked to offer recommendations. The questionnaire was also .examined by several members of the Michigan Department of Education. A draft was further sub— mitted to the coordinators of three randomly selected 55 instructional television production centers for trial com- pletions and comments on design and method. The resulting instrument (Appendix B) was then printed and submitted by mail to the administrators of 32 single public school instructional television production centers and 63 instructional television councils. The list of these administrators was developed from the col- lective recommendations of the executive Offices of the Division of Audio-Visual Instruction of the National Edu- cation Association and the National Association of Educa- tional Broadcasters. Additional names were secured from a check of the literature of the field. There were 19 usable returns from the single systems and 41 usable re- turns from instructional television councils. Recommendations of Curriculum Specialists fpng0mmittee Form and Function The preceding has been an overview of the methods and procedures used for collecting data for the study. One of the procedures required the collection of informa- tion from a large number of curriculum Specialists which would then be incorporated in the final questionnaire to be sent to the school systems and councils. 56 A review of the literature on curriculum develOp— t ment indicates that it is difficult to find universal agreement on either a definition of curriculum or the curriculum development process. This diversity is like- wise reflected in the curriculum specialist responses to the questionnaire. Whether the reason for this diversity lay in the questionnaire itself, in differing philosophies of the respondents or in other factors, it was difficult to generalize sufficiently from the responses to evaluate Specific aspects of the proposed questionnaire to be sent to school systems and instructional television councils. None the less, there was general consensus on the value of the proposed study and sufficient clues here and there to help in refining the instrument develOped. The questions to and responses from the 31 curric- ulum Specialists are discussed below. Question #l——What educational specialties would you rquire for representation by the people that you appoint to such a curriculum committee? The responses to this question were tabulated and analyzed. It can be noted from Table 1 that there was a wide variation of members recommended and a definite lack of unanimity in their appointments. 57 TABLE 1 INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS RECOMMENDED BY 31 SPECIALISTS IN SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT Number Title Recommending ‘% School District Subject Matter Specialist 25 78 Curriculum Supervision and Development Specialist 18 56 Classroom Teacher 17 53 Instructional Media Specialist 10 31 Educational Psychologist 9 28 Television Producer-Director 8 25 Building Principal 6 l9 Superintendent 6 19 Television Producer 4 12 Television Teacher 4 12 Script Writer 3 9 Television Director 3 9 Librarian 2 6 Community Resource Person 1 3 Higher Education Subject Matter Specialist 1 3 State Department of Education Representative 1 3 Students 1 3 Instructional Television Coordinator 1 3 Research & Evaluation Specialist 1 3 Stenographer 1 3 School Board Member 1 3 58 It became necessary. then. that every member who was recommended by the specialists be listed on the final questionnaire in order that all recommended functions be considered. It was recommended by several members of the inves- tigator's committee that different member competencies might be required at different times or may not be required at all. To cover these possibilities the categories ”per— manent member." "occasional member." and “not required" were incorporated in the questionnaire. Question #2--What do you believe the committee assignments for theseppeople should be? The responses to this question were analyzed and tabulated (Table 2). The task was rather complex as it became impossible to find sufficient consensus to ascribe specific responsibilities to specific members. A wide range in direction was indicated by the specialists and most members received many assignments. This could indi- cate. however. that an interdisciplinary approach to mem- ber responsibilities may have been an underlying intention of the specialists. 59 TABLE 2 INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES RECOMMENDED BY 31 SPECIALISTS IN SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT Responsibility N—24 Score % Ascertain needs of teachers and students 27 87 Determination Of course objectives 27 87 Development of course content and scope 26 84 Collect props and resource materials 24 77 Recommend reference books 21 68 Determine number and length of lessons 21 68 Selection and utilization of other media 19 61 Participate in post-course evaluation 19 61 Development of individual lesson content 18 58 Develop and implement program of evaluation 17 55 Selection of television teacher 17 55 Suggest ideas for graphics 16 52 Develop student worksheets 14 45 Final approval of proposed lessons 12 39 Maintain quality control 11 35 Recommend classroom utilization methods 7 23 View completed lessons 7 23 Develop study guides 5 16 Study lessons from other program services 4 13 Develop post-lesson reinforcement activities 4 13 Pre-test lessons in classroom situation 3 10 DeVelop student test ing 3 10 Assist in studio rehearsal and production 2 6 Write Scripts 2 6 60 To further complicate the assignments. in many cases reSponsibilities were simply listed and not Specif- ically assigned to committee members. To utilize the information obtained from this question it was decided to extract from the responses only the Specific responsibilities listed and to request the systems and council's reSpondents to match responsi— bilities with their committee members. No attempt to de- velop a theory of "who should do what" would be undertaken. Qpestion fi3--What Operative procedure for committee func— tions should be considered? The responses to operative procedures were less varied that the responses to the other questions. There appears to be no difference fromifle procedures of curric- ulum committees functioning in education generally. The specialists concurred that the develOpment of a curricu-- lum for television has no unique requirements that would call for committee Operational procedures not already es- tablished and proven functional in other educational settings. From the reSponses the following four concerns could be defined: “;‘fl.nl- 61 1. Number of committees involved? 2. How are members selected? 3. How many members do committees have? 4. How many times a year do they meet? Question #4--What in-service preparation do you feel these people should undertake in readying themselves for this assignment? There were 31 reSponses on the question of in- service preparation and all answered in agreement that i some kind of preparation for the assignment was necessary. Once again a wide variation of opinion was noted. To say the least. the kind of training needed is seen in many possible forms. The range of possibilities is suggested by the following recommendations contained in the reSponseS. 1. Visit participating schools 2. Talk to administrators 3. Talk to teachers 4. Talk to children 5. Talk to parents 6. Familiarize self with texts 7. Familiarize self with resource materials 8. Observe non-TV classroom techniques 9. Instruction in AV materials 62 10. Study ITV research and literature 11. Visit schools using ITV 12. None at all 13. Review established curriculum l4. Ascertain needs 15. Audit existing material 16. Check new developments in field 17. Study production techniques 18. Visit TV station 19. Study other teacher guides 20. Study curriculum development 21. Obtain learning theory knowledge 22. TV workshOps It would seem safe to conclude from the above in— formation that in-service preparation is considered im- portant. but that the form and substance of it Should be determined essentially by the organization undertaking the program. In that senSe. the question in its entirety was incorporated in the study questionnaire. CHAPTER IV REPORT AND ANALYSIS In this chapter an analysis is undertaken of the form and function of the curriculum committees for both systems and councils. The information from both organizations presents the kind and frequency of educational specialists on the curriculum committees. the rank correlation between the curriculum Specialist recommendations as to membership and the kinds of memberships found on systems' and coun- cils' committees. and a statistical analysis of the dif- ference between system and council memberships. The in- formation also includes the kinds of committee responsi- bility each committee member had and the rank correlation between the responsibilities recommended by curriculum specialist and those responsibilities fulfilled by com- mittee members in both systems and councils. The findings further deal with certain committee operational procedures. how committee members were selected. and the kind of in— service preparation the committee member received for his assignment. 63 64 Curriculum Committee Membership The data. the projected hypotheses. and the in- strument used to make the investigation suggested a sum- mary of data in several forms. The information Obtained from the first question was treated in three ways: 1. Bar graph displays. 2. Rank correlation. 3. Statistical analysis. Graphs l and 2 were develOped to display the kind of mem- bership and their percentage of frequency in both systems and council organizations so that a visual analysis could be made. The graphs Show that there were two kinds of mem— bership reported. permanent and occasional. Eighteen members served in both categories on both systems' and councils' committees. This division of membership into the permanent and occasional categories could indicate that different specialties are called upon at different times during curriculum deliberations. A review of the literature of curriculum development indicates that this is most often the standard procedure for the development of courses of study in education and appears to hold true in the case of the instructional television program services studied. 65 poucomounmh 902 _ _ .5989: HmGmemouo D honsva azccmfihwm D ammlq unwoham O O H m F O m m N o 0 n .3900.» End...» a. o u .0 honfima p.809 acquum om 2 O Amhguqoov mwampnnm .um mm o :Omhoa 90.389» assesses man ma m pmwwoaonommm Hmcnwummsum ,0: w: m :5 nosmsago pea Cohmmomm mm. m ._.. maoonum .wo vampempfihomsm i. . 4. M...” Z vuquowouoof. MEN .9- and mom 3.... 0H ma . . . . .mmh .0360 no .306 mpuvm n .m- is- u 5 .‘5 .9 Tim . mm to.” mm. T/////7//////V/// . .33. a a? m NM. 5. W V .0 .... on... . U . v. , mm mm Hm . l a umsmwhwonmu. .0 .0 00 0.0.0.. \ 4 - R. mm H g2“.u.u.u.vu.vu.u a 2. Emmawwmfm u .. 4. . 2 ac m. mm Egg/annummmhhfimmu mm SH am. an“. 4 he“ 6 . . . . , . r 4 n; . S 8 : Ill/474 S S - L . a m s .7.xx.“«.eufifisaé -86.... 3 ON HN mm v oddiofloqo. «o.0.0..o«.0«0.%o.o..o¢o¢.. nonmefiphoou Pam \ 5.0.0.05.0.05.0.0.03.0.0.055»....0.0 4 . . 0.0.0.0 000.000.000.200. .0.0, 7 .0 00 Ihmn: 0&0. 1 Wm WI.” mm Vl/lh"mauvcpos.oomooouououou.uouou.u.uou.osuvuuuu. .. Whomwo BOMpmm ”w. L .0o000.000.08.0000000000000.0., . u m Pm n ww all/l/l/Aflfvvv&cu¢ucn¢u¢«an"Mon“.nauhoucncucnbcuauhou. .mm .3.» 98546033.... . uman .com . 70w”?..9.0.u.u.n.u.n.uv0>u.upu.u.u.0.o...o.0.u.u.0.n.0 n my: 0 91.60. . «0.0...0.0..0........ . .. .. ...0..- r I1 t S m mm 3 . .43." . .3." xx.”SEEMS.” . . . “xx. .9. . fa”. ma “1...... o . .....u.u.$vu.u.. as...MERE.”Sans...u...~.u.u.v§.u.u H i. a H 3. .20 aw IF IV . 0x .mflOOO oahmm poz wopnmbdmfim mo Hgaommm 95 a monanom DH canm80< .wmumme 2H mafia...” 35:5 Emu... ho mamwm Hoaum 9” 2H BEHEB wag 28mg onmH>E 589.09%va ho nun—”mag H magma 66 lml. om pom IIP .ucooo “\(UOINOOOO 80258.50.“ #02 D panama HanoHumooo flHHU nonfiua peonwakom flHHU g psmuuom OOH mh Om mm .I g/l/Jduununuuumwm. gig .u.u.u.u.n.u.u.u.u. uaaananaaaaaaflanamhfifiahhbfln 4.0.0....00. g/ .0049w0w040400000wooo. I Aanflzwaaaéaaéaaafiaax .ccO..O..q ...... 4.11¢.uu 74/7777:wwas".«SHEER»«mum. g u.u.u.u.u.u.”.u.u.u$3.....u.m.u....u.u.u.u.u........ O ‘ ‘ C G . VAaa...a...~.u.»....vv£.vu.u3.3”.”Sagas... . . . . . . . . . . ................. .flnzuvaQawQwnh&xvvvw9mmbbbfifibbafififihm AV......OOO.... 0.. O . 0.. O O C . ..I.OO. . O . O . O O . $0 0919a010(0u9u0H0H0H0H0H010H0H0H0H0H010o0«0.0.0H0H0H0H0H0H0H0” a .u.w0w0w0uowono”onowowouowcuovuowowowowowowovn.uowouonfiowow. HEN—HUME ho flugafiwm 92¢ a mmoHBHmom 8. ufiamBoa 69$? 5 mafia HES 2 ho 30,58 .3 EH EHEB 053 28g onmH>E donBUDmHWZH ho bag N 9338 nonomuumnuwuu >9 nonsua whoop Hoowom Amuvadmuouv upcoczum nomhom othOmOh haqueaoo hogmcnmoswum pufiwoaonohmm HugowpmnSdm Emwhchgwq .3985“... 3.. .mm cofiwmnam>o can nonmemvm hmupoLm >9 hopfiuzuamwhom mHoonum ho unoccupefiuwmsm .mou .usco mo .pmoo Juana .Qm umaquIPOOmQSm .nsvm Anxmwm .am c«paa HagoflpusnumsH 33 05.3 33:5 Meanwhauuhmodu0hm >H mhwnuwwu 8009mmaau .mm houumanuoonnsm .umwn .Eom hoanuspolumnuaov >9 .mm .Hm>mp a .hvmzm adazuwhhsu hoaunachoou >Hw 67 All of the systems and councils reporting have every Specialty lacking representation, with the excep— tions of the "curriculum supervision and development Spe- cialist" and "classroom teacher" in the systems' committees. This could mean that these two specialties are the only two considered absolute requirements for all committees. In a negative sense it could be an indication that cer- tain decisions basic to good curriculum development are not being made, or are being made by other Specialists on the committee not fully qualified to make such judg- ments. Either of the aforementioned concepts could be of questionable value and should receive further study. By arbitrarily selecting members who received better than a chance assignment (50 per cent or better) as both a permanent and occasional member, it is noted that the following nine members are found to be represented on both systems' and councils' committees. Listed in a descending frequency they are: Curriculum supervision and development Specialist Classroom teacher Television teacher School district subject—matter specialist Higher education subject-matter specialist Television coordinator Instructional media specialist Building principal Television producer-director \Omflmmbwl’vlfl I 68 Basic in most programs of curriculum develOpment are five subsystems: planning, production, presentation, utilization and evaluation. A review of the above nine members on the television curriculum committees indicates that among them a pattern of involvement exists for four of those subsystems; planning, production, presentation and utilization. Notwithstanding the possibility of an interdisciplinary approach being at work within these subsystems, the planning component includes the "curricu- lum supervision and curriculum Specialist," the "higher education subject-matter specialist" and the "school dis- trict subject-matter specialist." The production compon- ent involves the "television teacher," the "producer— director," the "instructional media Specialist" and the "instructional television coordinator." The presentation component involves the "television teacher" and "televi— sion producer." And the utilization component involves the "classroom teacher," the "building principal" and the "instructional media specialist." This basic grouping of professionals could develop a course of study for televising but the effort could probably be more refined and effective if other Special- ties were also involved. Responsibilities of the various 69 committee members will be further treated later in this chapter. NO attempt is made in this study to analyze each member's representation individually. This would be un- warranted since the normative survey does not develop the bank of data needed for individual analysis. Some Obser- vations can be made however from singular items. The involvement of the "educational psychologist" in only 21 per cent of the systems and 24 per cent of the councils appears to indicate for example that considera- tion of learning theory is not a part of the foundation of most instructional television lessons. Sound sugges- tions for curriculum development can be derived only from a sound psychOlogy of learning. and the lack of committee interest in drawing upon the available knowledge of edu- cational psychology and its relationship to the media of instructional television should be questioned. Holmes44 conducted an analytical Correlation of the results of in— structional television research and experimentation. He 44Presley D. Holmes. Jr.. “Television Research in the Teaching—Learning Process” (Published Ph.D. disserta— tion. Division of Broadcasting. Wayne State University). pp. 74-80. 70 listed 53 concepts that bear directly on instructional television, its production, presentation and utilization. It would seem logical to expect an investigation of those, and other, research findings to be included in the delib- erations of the curriculum committees. The low participation (16 per cent) of "superin- tendents" in the reporting systems could indicate that in large, autonomous Operations, the superintendent's respon- sibility to a curriculum committee is being delegated to a staff member, since a method of accountability is built into the systems' administration. Conversely, in a coun- cil organization of many school districts, the superinten- dent is called upon to make initial administrative decisions pertinent to participation in the program. Since many sys- tems are involved in a council organization it would seem that the "superintendent's" high participation (54 per cent) is due to many of them finding it necessary to retain curric— ulum decision-making responsibilities for their systems. A "state department of education's representative" appears on 20 per cent of the systems' committees and on 58 per cent of the councils' committees. Perhaps because of the COOperative nature of the councils and a greater need for a support base, both pedagogically and financially, 71 the state department appears more likely to be represented on council committees, whereas the autonomous and inde- pendent nature of the system, or its inherent capability of fulfilling this kind of Specialty could create a ten- dency to abstain from this kind of involvement. Notable absenses of "students" and "school board members" on both systems' and councils' committees could have a direct bearing on the substance of the curriculum. The use of "students" occasionally (as members in two school systems and on four council committees) would in- dicate that the concepts of pre—testing the lessons and student involvement in determination of needs are infre— quently utilized, and that possible methods for increasing the efficacy of the lessons themselves are being overlooked. Doll,45 McNally and Passow46 and others believe that stu- dents, as consumers, if utilized properly, can add a sig— nificant dimension to curriculum deliberations. The occasional use of "school board members" in two councils and their total rejection in the systems is 45Ronald C. Doll, Curriculum Improvement: Decision- Making and Process (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1964), pp. 218—219. 46Harold J. McNally, A. Harry Passow, and Associ- ates, Improving the Quality of Public School Programs (Co- lumbia University. Bureau of Publications, 1960), pp. 103—104. 72 a finding that deserves further study. Since it is essen- tial for school board members to be sensitively conscious of the educational programs in their schools. it would seem logical to assume that they could play a vital part in television curriculum planning. Krug. Babcock. Fowlkes and James.47 and KOOpman.48 and others feel that school board members play a special role in education and that curriculum involvement is one of their major prerogatives. The total rejection of the "television teacher- actor" category by both systems and council respondents indicates that a teacher. given a working knowledge Of television presentation techniques. is preferred as the television teacher. In a review of the literature there could be found no empirical data to justify that prefer- ence. However. Skinner49 found that an actor trained to perform as a "good" speaker was able to produce signifi- cantly higher scores on immediate tests and delayed reten- tion tests than he did when he acted as a ”poor" Speaker. r—v 47Edward A. Krug. Chester D. Babcock and JOhn Guy Fowlkes. Administration Curriculum Planning (New York: Harper and Brothers. 1956). pp.lll-112. 48G. Robert KOOpman. Curriculum Development (New York: Center for Applied Research in Education. Inc.. 1966). pp. 111-112. 49E. D. Skinner. "An Experimental Study of the Ef- fects Of Prestige and Delivery Skill in Educational Tele- vision.“ (unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Department of Speech. University Of Michigan). 1963. 73 The concept of what kind of person. educator or actor. makes the better television teacher should receive fur- ther study in terms of student learning potentials. The "instructional television coordinator" re- ceived the highest rating (82 per cent) by the councils' respondents. Due to the organizational structure of the council. many school systems with no single system admin— istratively dominant. the coordinator is the chief. and Often the sole. administrator. Consequently he becomes involved with all of its functions. curriculum develOp— ment included. This could result in his high rating. Another possibility exists that because he is the sole administrator. he was the respondent to the questionnaire and indicated his perception of his responsibility. The low participation of the "research and evalu- ation specialist" in both systems (52 per cent) and coun- cils (32 per cent) would seem to indicate that in most instructional television program services there is no professional or formal control of the evaluation process. An informal process may exist such as student-teacher questionnaires. testing. communication with the televi— sion teacher. but no Specialist is indicated for the eval- uation of program if. in fact. one exists. 74 The ultimate criterion of all instructional pro— grams is the improvement of the quality of education. This criterion can only be Obtained through a continuing process of evaluation which should be built in as a part of the_prOgram. The structure of those curriculum com- mittees who have an informal kind of evaluation should receive further study. Rank Correlation of Committee Membership Rank Correlation analysis is uSed as a practic- able formula for establishing the relationship existing between two variables of the types employed in this study.50 It is recommended for about 20 to 40 cases.5 The information Obtained from the curriculum and supervision specialists as to What personnel should be included on the curriculum committee was ranked accord- ing to frequency of recommendation (Table l). A rank correlation was then made of the memberships recommended by the curriculum specialists and actual memberships 50Harold O. Rugg. Statistical Methogp (Boston: Houghton Miflin. 1917). p. 284. 51Karl J. Holzinger. Statistical Methods for Students in Education (New York: Ginn and Co.. 1928). p. 280. 75 reported by the systems and councils to determine what relationship exists between the two. In order to determine the correlation coefficient between ranks of the curriculum specialists' recommendations and those indicated by the respondents. Spearman's formula for rank correlation was used. The procedure involved ranking the specialists in the systems and the councils according to their frequency score and determining the value of the difference between those ranks and the frequency ranks of the curriculum specialists (Tables 3 and 4). Spearman's formula was then applied: 62D2 P = l - N(N2-1) The coefficient of correlation between the specialists' committee membership recommendations and those member- ships existing in 19 schools systems was found to be .44. The coefficient of correlation between the specialists' committee membership recommendations and those member- ships in 41 councils was found to be .43. 52 . Rugg. Op. c1t.. p. 285. 76 TABLE 3 RANK CORREIATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FREQUENCY OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM CDWI‘I‘TEE MEMBERS A3 RECOMMENDED BY 31 CURRICULUMSPECIALISTS AND THOSE POSITIONS HELD IN 19 SCEDOL SYSTI‘MS . _”._---_--------_--lr_-llr-l_l--r-_._l--.-r_-r pig, Specialists' Systems' Difference Title N-2l Rank . Rank - In Rank School District Subject Matter Specialist 1 5.5 - 4.5 CUrriculum Supervision Specialist 2 1.5 + .5 Classroom Teacher 3 1.5 + 1.5 Instructional Media Specialist I. 10 - 6 Educational Psychologist 5 18 - 13 Television Producer-Director 6 7.5 - 1.5 Building Principal 7.5 1+ + 3.5 Superintendent 7.5 19 - 11.5 Television Producer 9.5 14 - 4.5 Television Teacher-Educator 9.5 3 + 6.5 Script‘writer 11.5 16.5 - 5 Talevision Director 11.5 15 - 3.5 Librarian 13 12.5 + .5 Community Resourse Person 18 7.5 +‘ 10.5 Higher Education Subject Matter » Specialist 18 9 + 9 State Department of Education Specialist 18 16.5 + 1.5 Students 18 20 - 2 Instruction Television Coordinator 18 5.5 i' 12.5 Research.& Evaluation Specialist 18 11 +- 7 Stenographer 18 12.5 +- 5.5 School Board Mamber 18 21.5 " 3.5 TV Teacher-Actor 18 21.5 - 3.5 77 TABLE 4 RANK CORRELATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FREQUENCY OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS AS ASSIGNED BY 31 CURRICULUM.SRECIALISTS AND THOSE . POSITIONS HELD INhi COUNCILS -_ Specialists' Councils' Difference Title Bank Bank - In Rank School District Subject Matter Specialist 1 3.5 - 2.5 Curriculum Supervision Specialist 2 1.5 + .5 Classroom.Teacher 3 1.5 + 1.5 Instructional Media Specialist 4 7.5 - 3.5 Educational Psychologist 5 15 ? 10.0 Television Producer-Director 6 6 0 Building Principal 7.5 10.5 ? 3.0 Superintendent 7.5 10.5 - 3.0 Television Producer 9.5 16.5 — 7.0 Talevision Teacher-Educator 9.5 3.5 + 6.0 Script writer 11.5 16.5 - 5.0 Television Director 11.5 19.5 - 8.0 Librarian l3 l3 0 Community Resource Person 18 14 + 4.0 Higher Education Subject Matter Specialist 18 7.5 + 10.5 State Department of Education Specialist 18 9 + 9.0 Students 18 19 .5 - 1.5 Instructional Television Coordinator 18 5 + 13.0 Research.& Evaluation Specialist 18 12 + 6.0 Stenographer 18 18 0 School Board Member 18 21 - 3.0 TV Teacher-Actor 18 22 - 4.0 78 According to Baggerly53 in order to be statistic- ally significant a coefficient of correlation computed between 22 pairs of measures has to be .428 to be signif— icant at the .05 level and .562 at the .01 level. In these cases both are found to be statistically signifi- cant at the .05 level. It is therefore safe to conclude that there is a strong relationship between the committee members recom- mended by the specialists and those members found to ex- ist on both systems and councils curriculum committees. Statistical Analysis of the Frequencyiof Membership Because 13 School systems and 22 councils declined to participate in the research and since the growth of in- structional television predicts the formation of additional curriculum committees in emerging instructional television program services. it was decided that the information con- cerning committee membership be treated further through statistical analysis. Tabulations were made of the above percentages for both systems and councils. The statistical analysis con- sisted of the determination of a critical ratio between 53Ibid.. p. 191. “I It!” 79 the difference of the proportions between the systems' membership ratings and the councils' membership ratings. 54 . . . . . . McNemar describes this analySis indicating the follow- ing formula, which was the one used. The council members' percentage is represented by E and the systems membership percentage is represented by ‘5. The latter is used as the theoretical value. In com- puting these data the standard error of the percentage (6p) was obtained by using Nomograph No. 25 in Dunlap and Kurtz.55 The level of significance of the difference of proportions was secured by the use of Table E in McNemar.5 The treatment of these data through this analysis produced statistical signifiance that would warrant con- clusions that are reasonably illustrative of the total population. Applying the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the groups being observed and compared. 54Quinn McNemar. PsyCholoqical Statistics (New YOrk: John Wiley and Sons. Inc.. 1949). 55J. W; Dunlap and A. K. Kurtz. Handbookgof Statis- tical Nomographs. Tables and Formulas (New York: Wbrld Book Co.. 1932). 56McNemar. Op. cit.. p. 352. 80 the data show a statistical significant difference exist- ing at both the one per cent or five per cent levels. This warrants the rejection of the null hypothesis on the basis that in 95 or 99 times out of a hundred would you obtain a difference equal to or greater than that reported. Assuming that no other factors are introduced, the patterns displayed in Tables 5 to 26 are those most likely to exist in the re— mainder of the pOpulation and most likely to be adopted by emerging curriculum committees. The concept of "critical ratio" (CR) expresses the relationship of a statistic to its standard deviation. The use of the critical ratio allows for the determination of statistically significant differences between comparable statistics. In this study, this statistical procedure is used to compare percentages on the basis of differences in the percentage of an observed group, the councils, against a theoretical group, the systems. The value of the "critical ratio" has been compared with the normal probability table to. ascertain a level of significance at which this difference of percentages can be accepted or rejected for a comparison of individual items.5 57Helen Mr Walker, Elementary Statistical Methods (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1943), p. 357: see also Deobold B. VanDalen, Understanding Educational Research (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962), p. 304; and J. P. Guilford, Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Ed— ucation (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1942), p. 298. . 81 TABLE‘j COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF SCHOOL HDARD MEMBERS ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMITI'EE IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 1&1 (DUNCILS System p_ Council Score % Score % CR* S# Permanent Member 0 0 o Occasional Member 0 2 .05 1.61 NS Not Required 17 .90 32 .78 1.85 NS Not Available 2 .10 7 .17 1.21 NS *CR 3 Critical Ratio #8 ='_ Statistical Difference 0N5 = Not Significant TABLE 6 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION PRODUCER-DIRECTOR ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COM’IITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 1&1 COUNCILS System Council Score i Score %—' CR* S# Permanent Member 11 . 60 22 . 51l- 0 .77 NS Occasional Member 2 .10 8 .20 1.61 NS Not Required 0 2 .05 1 .61 NS Not Available 0 0 82 TABLE 7 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION PRODUCER ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM (DMMIT'IEES m 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 1&1 COUNCILS m ‘ m System Council Score f Score if (33* S# Permanent Member ' 7 .37 5 .12 #90 1% Occasional Member 1 .05 3 .07 0.50 NS Not Required 0 1 .02 0.95 NS Not Available 0 TABLE 8 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHII> 0F TELEVISION DIRECTOR ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES DI 19 SCHOOL SYS'IEVIS AND 1+1 COUNCILS ;= .:===== 11 System Council Score if Score f (13* 3,? Permanent Member 5 .26 3 .07 h.76 1% Occasional Member 3 .16 2 .05 2.hl 2% Not Required 0 1+ .09 2-05 5% Not Available 0 0 TABLE 9 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF CURRICULUM SUPERVISOR AND DEVELOPWT SPECIALIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COIMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYS‘I'EMS AND 1&1 COUNCES ‘_ (System v=Counci1 Score % Score % CR* 8# Permanent Member 18 .95 30 .73 3.19 1% Occasional Member 1 .05 6 .15 1 .79 NS Not Required 0 h .10 2.13 5% Not Available 0 1 .02 0.95 NS 83 TAELElO COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP 0F CLASSROOM TEACHERS ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM OOImITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 1+1 COUNCILS _ System Counc i1 Score f Score T CR* Sfi‘ Permanent Member 11 . 58 28 . 68 1 . 39 NS 0 ccas ional Member 8 . 1+2 8 . 19 3 .78 1% Not Required 0 1+ .10 2 .13 5% Not Available 0 l .03 2 .15 5% TABLE 11 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF HIGHER EDUCATIONAL SUBJECT MATTER SPECIALIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISIONCURRICULUM . CONNITTEES IN 19 SCHOOLSYSTEMS AND hi COUNCILS bl. ’ 1:. ‘ m System Council Score T Score T CR* 51% Permanent Member 3 .16 11 .27 1.59 NS Occasional Member 9 .1+7 16 .39 1.58 NS Not Required 7 .37 12 .29 1.13 NS Not Available 0 2 .05 1.61 NS TAKE 12 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF BUILDING PRINCIPAL 0N MSIRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM CONMITI'EES m 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 1+1 COUNCILS. _ , Janina... Score % Score 1. CR* S# Permanent Member ' 5 .26 "15 .37 1.117 NS Occasional Member 10 .53 7 .17 6.21 1% Not Required 1+ .21 18 .1111 2.99 1% Not Available 0 l .02 0.95 NS 84 TABLE 13 COMPARISON OF THE EREnUENCY 0F MEMBERSHIPS OF STUDENTS ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN .19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 1+1 COUNCILS . System Council Score 1. Score % CR* 37% Permanent Member 0 O Occasional Member 2 .10 h .09 0.23 NS Not Required 17 .90 35 .86 0.89 NS Not Available 0 2 .05 1.61 NS TABLE 11$ COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION COORDINATOR ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND #1 COUNCILS System Council Score E Score 1; CR* S# Permanent Member 10 .53 31 .76 3A8 1% Occasional Member A .21 2 .05 5.16 1% Not Required 1+ .21 5 .12 1.76 NS Not Available 1 .05 3 .07 5.00 1% TABLE 15 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF LIBRARIAN ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM 03mm IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 141 CDUNCILS System Council Score f Score $ CR* 3;? Permanent Member 3 .16 1 .02 6.90 1% Occasional Member 6 .31 15 .37 2.66 1% Not Required 10 .53 20 .A9 0.51 NS Not Available 0 5 .12 2.35 2% 85 TABLE 16 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF SCRIPT-WRITER ON 7 INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND #1 COUNCILS 7 System Council Score %' Score % CR* S# Permanent Member 3 .16 7 .17 0.17 NS Occasional Member 2 .10 l .02 3.81 1% Not Required 11 .58 23 .56 0.26 NS Not Available 3 .16 10 .2A 3.6A 1% TABLE 17 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OEMEMBERSHLP OF SCHOOL DISTRICT SUBJEcT MATTER SPECIALIST 0N INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM OOMTTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMSAND 1+1 COUNCILS System Council Score % Score %— CR* S# Permanent Member 13 .68 ' 30 .73 0.72 NS Occasional Member 1 .05 5 .12 1.37 NS Not Required 5 .26 5 .12 2.75 196 Not.Available 1 .02 0.95 NS 'DABLE18 COMPARISON OF THE EREQUENCY 0F MEMBERSHIP OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REPRESENTATIVE 0N INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND Al, COUNCILS System Council Score 8%I Score % CR* S# Permanent Member 3 . 16 10 21+ 1 .21 NS Occasional Member 2 .10 1% .3h 3.2% 1% Not Required 13 .68 1% .3h h.59 1% Not Available 1 .05 3 .07 0.50 NS 86 TABLE 19 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT 0N INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND Al COUNCILS . System Council Score % Score % CR* S# Permanent Member 2 .10 8 .20 1.61 NS Occasional Member 1 .05 1h .3h 3.92 1% Not Required 7 13 .68 17 .A2 3.h2 1% Not Available 3 .16 2 .Oh 3.87 1% TABLE 20 CDMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF DILEMBERSHIP OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM OOMTTEE IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND Al COUNCILS System Council Score % Score % CR* 37’} Permanent Member 1 .05 1 .02 l.A3 NS Occasional Member 3 .16 9 .22 0.9% NS Not Required 11+ .7A 20 .A9 3.21 1% Not Available 1 .05 11 .27 3.19 1% TABLE 21 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION TEACHER-EDUCATOR ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM OOMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND j4-1 COUNCILS . . System Council Score % Score % CR* 5# Permanent Member 16 .81+ 30 .73 1.59 NS Occasional Member 0 .00 6 .15 2.68 1% Not Required 3 .16 2 .05 3.55 1% N0 13 Ava ilable O 3 . 07 l .75 NS 87 TABLE 22 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF TELEVISION TEACHER-ACTOR p ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM CDWIT‘IEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND l+1 COUNCILS —_‘ .— System Council Score T Score I CR* S)? Permanent Member A 0 0 Occasional Member 0 0 Not Required 0 1 .02 0.95 NS Not Available 0 5 .12 2.35 2% TABLE 23 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP 0F INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA SPECIALIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM.COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND A1 COUNCILS - System Council Score % ‘Sbore %* CR* S# Permanent Member 6 .32 12 .29 h.28 1% Occasional Member 5 .26 16 .39 1.71 NS Not Required 7 .37 9 .22 2.3A 2% Not Available 1 .05 ll- .10 1.06 NS TABLE 2A COMPARISON OF 'IEE FREQUENCY OF MEI’IBERSHIP OF RESEARCH AND EVALUATION SPECIALIST ON INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM (DWITI‘EES, m 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS ANDA-l COUNCILS System, Council Score %' Score %_ CR* 3# .05 A .10 1.06 NS .A7 13 .32 2.08 5% .37 13 .32 0.69 NS .11 11 .26 2,27 5% Permanent Member Occasional Member Not Required Not Available manor-i 88 TABLE 25 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP 0F STENOGRAPHER 0N INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 1+1 COUNCILS System Council Score %_' Score %“' CR* S# Permanent Member LIA .21 l .02 9.05 II% Occasional Member 5 .26 5 .12 2.75 1% Not Required 7 .37 27 .66 3 .92 1% Not Available 3 .16 8 .20 6.62 1% Tkmm:26 COMPARISON OF THE FREQUENCY OF MEMBERSHIP OF COMMUNITY RESOURSE PERSON 0N INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM. COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND Al COUNCILS System Council Score _%_, Score %“ CR* S# Permanent Member 0 0 Occasional Member 13 .68 12 .29 5.A9 1% Not Required 5 .26 22 .5A 3.59 1% Not Available 1 .05 7 .17 2.07 5% Dimensions of Committee Members' ReSponsibilities The second section of the questionnaire (Appendix B) consisted of a matrix on which the respondents were requested to indicate the Specific responsibilities fulfilled by each type of committee member. The responsibilities indicated were those recommended by the curriculum supervision and development Specialists. Because function is the purpose of the curriculum com- mittee. the fulfilling of a Specific responsibility is more important than the Specialty of the person performing it. Com— mittees function through interaction and exchange of ideas. so different peOple with different specialties could therefore fulfill the same responsibility. 89 Regardless of the theory as to the duties which the committee members Should have in connection with cur- riculum development, an attempt has been made in this study to discover what actual responsibilities, if any, these various individuals have had or are having in con- nection with curriculum development in the systems and councils studied, as compared with those responsibilities recommended by the curriculum Specialists. Rank Correlation of Curriculum Committee Responsibilities The information obtained from the curriculum and supervision specialists as to what responsibilities should be assigned to the curriculum committee members was ranked according to frequency of recommendation. A rank corre- lation was then made of the responsibilities fulfilled by the committee members reported by the systems and councils to determine what relationship exists between the two. In order to determine this coefficient of correla- tion, Spearman's formula 62D2 -1_ p N(N2-l) was once again used. Tables 27 and 28 provided the data that was inserted into the formula. 90 TABLE 27 RANK mRRELATION BETWEEN RFSPONSIBEITIES RECONHVIEI‘IDED BY SPECIALISTS AND TIDSE PEREORIVED BY SYS'JEMS' COMMITTEE MEMBERS “=33: ‘ Specialists ' Systems ' Difference Ascertain needs of teachers and students 1.5 l + .5 Determination of course objectives 1.5 3 - 1.5 Final approval of proposed lessons 11+ 9 + 5.0 Development of course content and scope 3 1+ - 1.0 Recommend classroom utilization methods 16.5 10 + 6.5 Selection and utilization of other media 7.5 6 + 1.5 Recommend reference books 5. 5 7 -+ 1.5 Development of individual lesson content 9 l6 - 7.0 Develop student worksheets 13 17 - 1+.0 Maintain quality control 15 11 + 1+.O Develop and implement program of evaluation 10.5 13 - 2.5 Collect props and resource materials 1+ 19 - 15.0 Participate in post-course evaluation 7 . 5 5 + 2 . 5 Develop post-lesson reinforcement activities 19.5 15 + 1+.5 Determine number and length of . lessons 5.5 8 - 2.5 Study lessons from other progam services 19.5 11; + 5.5 Pre-test lessons in classroom situation 21.5 23 - 1.5 Suggest ideas for graphics 12 21 - 9.0 Assist in studio rehearsal and production 23 . 5 20 + 3 . 5 Selection of TV teacher 10.5 12 - 1.5 Develop student testing 21.5 22 - .5 Develop study guides 18 18 .0 write scripts 23.5 21+ - .5 View completed lessons 16.5 2 + 11+.5 -_——- 91 TABLE 28 RANK CORRELAEION BETWEEN RESPONSIBILITIES.REOOMMENDED BY SPECIKLISTS AND THOSE PERFORMED BY COUNCILS' COMMITTEE MEMBERS Specialists' Council' Difference Responsibility N-2h Rank Rank - In Rank Ascertain needs of teachers and students 1.5 l + .5 Determination of course objectives 1.5 2 - .5 Final approval of proposed lessons 1% 18 - h.0 Development of course content and scope 3 3 0 Recommend Classroom utilization methods 16.5 5 + 11.5 Selection and utilization of other media 7.5 9 - 1.5 Recommend reference books 5.5 6 - .5 Development of individual lesson content 9 16 - 7.0 Develop student worksheets l3 l9 - 6.0 Maintain quality control 15 11 + h.0 Develop and implement program of evaluation 10.5 10 + .5 Collect props and.resource materials h 21 - 17.0 Participate in post-course evaluation 7.5 h + 3.5 Develop post-lesson reinforcement activities 19.5 1% + 5.5 Determine number and length of 2 lessons 5.5 12 - 6.5 Study lessons from.other program services 19.5 8 +-11.5 Pre-test lessons in Classrom situation 21.5 20 +' 1.5 Suggest ideas for graphics l2 l5 ‘ 3.0 Assist in studio rehearsal and production 23.5 22 +' 1.5 Selection of TV teacher 10.5 13 -' 2.5 Develop student testing 21.5 23 " 1.5 Develop study guides 18 17 +- 1.0 write scripts 23:5 2h - .5 View completed lessons 16.5 7 4' 9.5 92 It was found that the coefficient correlation be- tween the responsibilities recommended by the curriculum specialists and those responsibilities being fulfilled by the committees in the 19 school systems was .583. The co- efficient correlation between the responsibilities recom- mended by the curriculum specialists and those responsi- bilities being assumed by the committees in the 41 coun- cils was .561. Baggerly58 notes that in order to be statistic- ally significant a coefficient of correlation computed between 24 pairs of measures has to be at least .537 to be Significant at the .01 level. Twenty-four (24)meas- ures were computed in this case and since the systems coefficient is .583 and the councils coefficient is .561. both significant at the .01 level. it is therefore safe to conclude that there is a strong relationship between the responsibilities recommended by the specialists and those being fulfilled in both the systems and councils operations. Further study of the data reveals that a wide range of assignments was reported by the respondents. 58Baggerly. loc. cit. 93 Tables 29 to 49 illustrate the variety of responsibili— ties reported as being performed by various types of committee members. A major purpose of the study was to become cogni— zant of each committee member's responsibilities. Since a marked degradation of scores was noted beyond the first five responsibilities listed. however. a determination was made to consider only the five duties corresponding to the five highest scores of each member. TABLE 29 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF CURRICULUM SUPERVISION AND DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - 19 l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 17 2. Determination of course objectives l7 3. Final approval of proposed lessons 16 4. Selection of television teacher 16 5. Determine length and number of lessons 14 Councils - 41 l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 32 2. Determination of course objectives 28 3. Development of course content and scope 27 4. Participate in post-course evaluation 25 5. Recommend classroom utilization methods 23 94 TABLE 30 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Svstems - 19 E 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 15 Eu; 2. Determination of course objectives 14 y 3. Development of course content and scOpe 14 . 4. Recommend reference books 12 5. Participate in post-course evaluation 12 ;{ b Councils - 41 y; l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 34 2. Determination of course objectives 31 3. Recommend classroom utilization methods] 27 4. Development of course content and scope . 26 5. Participate in post-course evaluation 24 TABLE 31 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION TEACHERrEDUCATOR ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - 19 1. Development of individual lesson content ' l6 2. Collect prOps and resource material 16 3. Suggest ideas for graphics l6 4. Develop study guides 16 5. write scripts 15 Councils - 41 1. Develop study guides 33 2. Deve10pment of individual lesson content 32 3. Collect preps and resource material 32 4. Deve10pment of course content and SCOpe 31 5. Suggest ideas for graphics 30 95 TABLE 32 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCHOOL DISTRICT SUBJECT MATTER.SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 —— - Duty Score Systems - l9 1. View completed lessons 15 2. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 13 3. Determination of course objectives l3 4. Development of course content and scope 12 5. Determine number and length of lessons 12 Councils - 41 l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 27 2. Determination of course objectives 27 3. Development of course content and scope 23 4. Recommend reference books 22 5. Recommend classroom utilization methods 20 TABLE 33 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF HIGHER.EDUCATIONAL SUBJECT MATTER SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - 19 l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 9 2. Determination of course objectives 7 3. Deve10pment of course content and SCOpe 7 4. Recommend reference books 6 Councils - 41 l. Deve10pment of course content and Scope 15 2. Determination of course objectives 13 3. Recommend reference books 12 4. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 11 5. Participate in post-course evaluation 11 96 TABLE 34 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION COORDINATOR ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems — l9 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 13 2. Selection and utilization of other media 13 3. Determine length and number of lessons 13 4. View completed lessons 12 Councils - 41 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 28 2. Selection of television teacher 27 3. View completed lessons 26 4. DevelOp and implement prOgram of evaluation 25 5. Recommend classroom utilization methods 24 TABLE 35 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - l9 l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 9 2. Recommend classroom utilization methods 8 3. Selection of television teacher 7 4. Determination of course objectives 7 5. View completed lessons 7 Councils — 41 1. Selection and utilization of other media 20 2. Recommend classroom utilization methods 19 3. DevelOp and implement program of evaluation 17 4. Participate in post-course evaluation 14 5. Study lessons from other program services 14 97 TABLE 36 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF BUILDING PRINCIPAL ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Svstems - l9 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 13 2. Determination of course objectives 9 3. View completed lessons 9 4. Participate in post-course evaluation 9 5. Recommend classroom utilization methods 8 Councils - 41 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 21 2. Determination of course objectives 18 3. Recommend classroom utilization methods 15 4. View completed lessons 12 5. DevelOp and implement program of evaluation 10 TABLE 37 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION PRODUCERrDIRECTOR ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965- 1966 Duty Score Systems - l9 1. Suggest ideas for graphics - 12 2. Assist in studio rehearsal and production 11 3. Collect props and resource materials 10 4. Study lessons from other program sources 9 5. Selection of television teacher 8 Councils - 41 1. Collect prOps and resource materials 25 2. Suggest ideas for graphics 24 3. Assist in studio rehearsal and production 23 4. Maintain quality control 21 5. View completedlessons 21 98 TABLE 38 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - l9 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 7 2. Determination of course objectives 6 3. Selection of television teacher 6 4. Final approval of proposed lessons 5 5. View completed lessons 4 Councils - 41 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 19 2. Selection of television teacher 16 3. Determination of course objectives 15 4. Final approval of lessons 11 5. Development of course content and scope 11 TABLE 39 MAJOR.COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESEARCH AND EVALUATION SPECIALIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Svstems - l9 1. Develop and implement program of evaluation 7 2. Determination of course objectives 6 3. Develop student testing 6 4. Development of course content and scOpe 5 5. View completed lessons 5 Councils - 41 1. Develop and implement program of evaluation 17 2. Participate in post-course evaluation 14 3. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 12 4. View completed lessons 10 5. Develop student testing 9 99 TABLE 40 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMUNITY RESOURCE PERSON ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score SystemS - 19 1. Recommend reference books 2. Collect props and resource materials 3. View completed lessons 4. Suggest ideas for graphics 5. Participate in post-course evaluation WWthU'lfl Councils - 41 1. Development of course content and scope 2. Collect prOps and resource materials 3. Suggest ideas for graphics 4. Recommend reference books 5. Deve10pment of individual lesson content wwmmq TABLE 41 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF LIBRARIAN ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Svstems - 19 1. Recommend reference books 10 2. Selection and utilization of other media 4 3. Collect prOpS and resource materials 4 4. Suggest ideas for graphics 3 Councils - 41 1. Recommend reference books 12 2. Selection and utilization of other media 11 3. Collect props and resource materials 8 4. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 7 5. Maintain quality control 6 100 TABLE 42 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REPRESENTATIVE ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Svstems - l9 l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 6 2. Determination of course objectives 6 3. Development of course content and scope 6 4. Final approval of proposed lessons 4 5. View completed lessons 3 Councils — 41 1. Determination of course objectives 20 2. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 19 3. Recommend reference books 14 4. Development of course content and scope l3 5. Final approval of lessons 12 TABLE 43 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION PRODUCER ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems — l9 1. Suggest ideas for graphics 8 2. Assist in studio rehearsal and production 8 3. Maintain quality control 7 7 4. Collect props and resource materials 7 5. View completed lessons 7 Councils - 41 1. Suggest ideas for graphics 8 2. Assist in studio rehearsal and production 8 3. Maintain quality control 8 4. Collect prOps and resource materials 8 5. Study lessons from other program services 7 101 TABLE 44 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - l9 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 4 2. Deve10p and implement program of evaluation 3 3. Development of course content and scope 2 Councils - 41 l. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 8 2. Develop and implement program of evaluation 7 3. View completed lessons 6 4. Determination of course objectives 6 5. Development of course content and SCOpe 6 TABLE 45 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF STENOGRAPHERY ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty ’ Score Systems - l9 1. Develop student worksheets 2. Develop study guides l 3. Write scripts H [—1 Councils - 41 l. Deve10p study guides 2. Assist in studio rehearsal and production 3. Collect props and resource materials 2 NM 102 TABLE 46 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCRIPT WRITER ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Svstems — l9 1. View completed lessons 4 2. Write scripts 3 3. Development of course content and SCOpe 3 4. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 3 Councils - 41 1. Write scripts 8 2. Suggest ideas for graphics 5 3. Study lessons from other program serVices 5 4. Development of individual lesson content 5 TABLE 47 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF TELEVISION DIRECTOR ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Sytstems - l9 1. Assist in studio rehearsal and production 8 2. Suggest ideas for graphics 6 3. Maintain quality control 6 4. Collect props and resource materials 4 5. View completed lessons 4 Councils - 41 1. Assist in studio rehearsal and production 8' 2. Maintain quality control 8 3. Suggest ideas for graphics 7 4. Collect prOps and resource materials 6 5. View completed lessons 5 103 TABLE 48 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF STUDENTS ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - 19 1. View completed lessons 4 2. Ascertain needs of students and teachers 4 3. Participate in post-course evaluation 3 Councils - 41 1. View completed lessons 6 2. Ascertain needs of students and teachers 3 3. Participate in post-course evaluation 3 4. Suggest ideas for graphics 3 TABLE 49 MAJOR COMMITTEE RESPONSIBILITIES OF SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS ON TELEVISION COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS. 1965-1966 Duty Score Systems - l9 1. Ascertain needs of teachers and students 2. Determination of course objectives 3. Maintain quality control 2 4. View completed lessons NM Councils - 41 . . Ascertain needs of teachers and students . View completed lessons . Determination of course objectives . Develop;and implement program of evaluation 4:.me wbmuw 104 An analysis of the committee membership (Graphs l and 2) and the committee responsibilities (Tables 29 to 49) discloses an interesting Similarity between membership and responsibility. On the questionnaire (Appendix B) the respondents were asked to match committee responsibilities with the committee members fulfilling them. It was therefore pos- sible for each member to be assigned to the total number (24) of listed responsibilities. One could assume from that posmbility that the more important and necessary com- mittee members. as perceived by the respondents. would receive the highest number of responsibility assignments. Using that assumption as a frame of reference. every member who did not receive at least a 50 per cent (chance) assignment to all 24 responsibilities was deleted from the committee roster. In so doing it was found that seven identical members remained on both systems' and councils' committees: Curriculum supervision and development specialist Classroom teachers Television teacher School District subject-matter specialist Television coordinator . Building principal Television producer-director \lO‘UluwaH 105 When the above committee roster is compared with the committee roster of nine who servived the 50 per cent membership cut (see page 67). itiS found that the first seven members on that roster are identical to the members above. Further analysis discloses that all 60 respondents designated ten identical responsibilities within the first five major assignments to their top seven committee members: Deve10pment OKDCDQCDU‘lrb-le-J [—1 Ascertain needs of teachers and students Determination of course content of course content and scope Development of individual lesson content Final approval of proposed lessons Selection of television teacher Suggest ideas for graphics Collect preps and resource materials Develop study guides _ View completed lessons The similarity between committee members and their responsibilities in cation that a basic as being capable of vision. An analysis ties discloses that both systems and councils is an indi- core of specialists can be identified developing a course of study for tele- of the nature of the ten responsibili- they are such that could easily be fulfilled by the competencies of the designated members. However it is safe to conclude that additional refinement and sophistication could be added u: the work of the 106 committee if their rosters were supplemented by the spe- cialists noted to have little involvement as displayed in Graphs l and 2. Although there was. as noted above. a positive re- lationship between the committee members and their number of assigned responsibilities. two responsibilities were notable by their absence. None of the seven committee members. for either the systems or councils. received a single assignment in "pre-testing lessons in classroom situation" or ”developing student-testing." There was an indication in the analysis of the in— formation found in Graphs l and 2 that the low rating for “students" and "research and evaluation specialists" in- volved concepts not receiving due consideration in com- mittee deliberations. Both of the assignments "pre- testing lessons in classroom situation" and "developing student-testing“ are intrinsically germane to "students" and ”research evaluation." Their lack of consideration could be viewed with concern and deserves a study in depth. 310' 107 Number of Committees and Members WOrkingion the Committees In planning a prOgram of curriculum develOpment. the question arises of what committees are necessary and the number and types of individuals required for their effective operation. A study of the reported practices would indicate there is little uniformity. The Size of the program seems to determine largely what is done. The number of commit- tees used varied from 1 to 15 for the systems and from 1 to 16 for the councils. Committee population ranged from 7 to 17 for the systems and from 4 to 20 for the councils. The number of committees for both systems and councils raises an interesting question; a small number of committees could conceivably indicate a strong autono- mous curriculum control by a few people. or an interdisci- plinary approach to curriculum development wherein a small number of specialists from different subject areas con- tribute their competencies and knowledge to a subject area other than their own. The paradox is formed when~ one considers that a large number of committees could in- dicate a democratic design involving many people or an 108 indifference to the interdisciplinary approach. This concept bears further investigation. The number of members on a committee in itself is unimportant. Merely collecting individuals and assigning them to a committee does not guarantee a mature working unit. At their best. committees give their members clear. meaningful objectives. along with a sense of significance which encourages exploration of new ideas and new solu- tions to old problems. Meaningful group dynamics are probably far more influential than numbers in effective curriculum development. TABLE 50 THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF MEMBERS SERVING ON CURRICULUM COMMITTEES IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 41 COUNCILS AND THE FREQUENCY OF THOSE AVERAGES System Members , Councils Members 2 7 1 4 2 .8 4 5 2 9 2 6 4 10 l 7 1 11 4 8 2 12 2 9 1 l3 2 10 1 14 ll 11 l 15 2 12 2 16 4 13 1 l7 3 14 _ 2 15 N-l9 2 15 2 17 _1_ 20 f n H 109 Selection of Personnel for Duty on the Curriculum Committees The selection of committee members well qualified to work in the various phases of curriculum development is a major consideration. The nature and competency of the member in relation to his fellow committeemen requires considered judgments. Such appointments should be based upon the opinions of administrative decision makers who are concerned with the valid development of the educational program. Tables 51 and 52 reflect the kinds of people who were responsible for appointing members to the curriculum committees reported upon. A study of all the administrative titles reported by both systems and councils. shows that 15 different peo- ple were involved in the overall selection of committee members. This could indicate that there exists no defin- ite procedure within our educational institutions for the selection of curriculum committee members. The appoint- ment of members in the systems was made more often through committee action than in the councils. This kind of de- termination could mean an exchange of ideas concerning theappointee wherein objective factors concerning the per- son's ability to do the job could have been more of a 110 TABLE 51 IDENTITY OF ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTING CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN ‘31 COUNCILS AND THE FREQUENCY NITH NHICH . THEYme THOSE APPODITME‘JTS fl _———_7 Title Frequency 1. Superintendent lO 2. Vblunteers 5 3. Executive committee A h. Curriculum supervisor h 5. Classroom teachers 2 6. Assistant superintendent 1 7. Elementary supervisor l 8. Executive committee-Principals-Professors l 9. Superintendents-television coordinator 1 10. Superintendents—executive committee 1 11. State Department of Education Representative- SuperintendentséProfessors In W p... TABLE 52 IDENTITY AND NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATORS APPOINTING CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN 15 SCHOOL SYSTEIIS AND THE FREQUENCY , NITH WHICH THEY MADE THOSE APPOINTMENTS L Title Frequency 1. Assistant Superintendent 3 2. VOlunteers 2: 3. Curriculum Supervisors 2 A. Subject-matter Specialist 1 5. Audio visual coordinator—subject matter Specialist 1 6. Superintendent-subject matter Specialist 1 7. Television coordinator-director elementary education 1 8. Assistant superintendent-curriculum supervisor- television coordinator 1 9. Subject-matter specialist-television producer- " television teacher 1 10. Principals-television teachers-television coordinator 1 11. Subject matter Specialist-classroom teachers- television teacher-TV producer 1 lll consideration in systems selection. In both organizations people were selecting members who would share peer status on the committee. This type of peer selection may not carry educational validity into the final determinations of the committee because appointments might be made more on a friendship or strategic rather than on a competency basis. Both systems and councils have volunteers serving on their committees. Volunteer membership is of question- able value and suggests further investigation to determine the competency of the volunteer and the factors existing in an organization which lead to the use of volunteers for cur- riculum committee membership. One of the systems reporting indicated that the tele- vision teacher and the television producer participated in member selection. Once again the value of this selection procedUre is hard to determine. Unless the television people are concerned. well-trained. and knowledgeable in educational pedagogy it seems somewhat questionable that their selection would be in the best interests of the committe's effective- ness. On the other hand. with an otherwise sound basis of member selection. it is conceivable that the teacher and tele— vision producer could best identify those individuals with 112 an interest in new developments and creative ability in their execution. A study of the information (Graphs l and 2) reflect- ing the kinds of people selected would indicate that the per- son. or groups of persons. making the selection is of little importance. Whether the selection is made individually. or collectively. the same kind of people are assigned in both systems and councils and from that it can be concluded that most administrators believe a basic core of educational spe- cialists is required in curriculum develOpment. In-Service Preparation of Committee Members “The task of curriculum development considered from any angle is a complicated one. It involves not only know- ledge but also certain highly develOped skills gained only through study and experience. It involves methodolOgy. a way of doing things. The task of curriculum development for television compounds these concerns by requiring additional competencies of the committee members so that they can more effectively relate subject matter to the unique potentiali- ties of the television medium. Consequently. one would ex- pect that if the committee members didn't already possess 113 this knowledge pertinent to television that they would have an opportunity to receive the necessary preparation. However the data in Tables 53 and 54 indicate that, in 58 per cent of the systems and 68 per cent of the councils, committee members receive no special training for their assignment. One could conclude from the responses that there might be an inadequate orientation of committee mem- bers in the instructional television services reporting. TABLE 53 IN-SERVICE PREPARATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN 19 SCHOOL SYSTEMS ACCORDING TO KIND AND FREQUENCY OF PREPARATION Element Frequency A % No in-service training 11 58 Conducted workshops 4 21 Possess necessary knowledge 3 15 l 5 Group discussion TABLE 54 IN-SERVICE PREPARATION OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN 41 COUNCILS ACCORDING TO KIND AND FREQUENCY OF PREPARATION Element Frequency % No in-service training 28 68 Conducted workshops 10 24 Visit to production center , l 2 Speech at first meeting 1 2 Observation and group discussion 1 2 114 Frequency of Curriculum Committee Meetings The frequency of curriculum committee meetings is probably relatively unimportant. However in planning a program of curriculum development. consideration must be given to this particular point in a careful planning of the work. It is integrally tied up with other phases of the total educational program. If committee members have major assignments from which they will need to be released. then the frequency of meetings is limited. Most often the committee member will need to make room in an already crowded schedule for the television meetings and since there is no "professional committee member." the question needing to be answered is this: How frequently should a committee meet in order to retain interest in the work. build up enthusiasm for its respon- sibility and carry it to a successful conclusion? It should be anticipated that the frequency of committee meetings is contingent upon the scope of the task to be undertaken in relation to the other phases of the members' work load. Table 55 indicates a wide range of meetings were held by the television curriculum committee and it would seem that instructional television has not developed a pattern for the frequency of committee meetings. 115 TABLE 55 NUMBER OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEETINGS HELD BY 36 SCHOOL SYSTEMS AND 15 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR 1965-1966 Systems Meetings Councils Meetings 6 2 2 l 4 3 2 2 9 4 2 3 4 6 l 4 1 7 1 5 2 8 1 6 3 9 1 9 4 12 l 10 1 l4 1 12 _2__ l8 1 18 36 1 weekly _JL_ as needed 15 CHAPTER V SUMMARY. CONCLUSIONS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary This study investigated the form and function of the instructional television curriculum committees who were involved in the develOpment of courses of study for television during the school year 1965-66. The curriculum committees investigated were those that could be identified as being administered by inde- pendent school systems and those that could be identified as being administered by cooperatives of school systems usually called instructional television councils. A total of 32 such school Systems were identified. of which 19 elected to participate in the investigation. A total of 63 television councils were identified. of which 41 elected to participate. The study was basically concerned with the educa- tional specialties of the various committee members. their responsibility as members of the committee and identification of various procedures used in committee Operations. 116 117 Specifically the following null hypotheses were examined: 1. That no common pattern of instructional televi- sion curriculum committee membership would be determined; That all the instructional television curriculum committees surveyed will lack the kind of educa— tional specialists recommended for membership by national leaders in the curriculum supervision and development field; That many duties of a curriculum committee develop- ing a course of study and considered necessary by leaders in the field of curriculum supervision and development are not performed by instructional tele- vision committees; That committee operational procedures will have no pattern of similarity; and That the endeavors of the independent systems will di5p1ay more organization in instructional tele- vision committee form and function than the councils. Procedure An open—end questionnaire was sent to selected national leaders in the field of curriculum supervision and development requesting their recommendations as to what kind of educational specialties Should be represented on an instructional television curriculum committee. They were also asked to Specify what responsibilities they felt 118 that members should assume to fulfill their duties on the committee and to specify elements appropriate to committee function. Thirty-one (31) curriculum Specialists responded and the information in their returns was analyzed and de- velOped into the main instrument of the study. The re- sultant questionnaire was then mailed to the administrators of all the identifiable systems and councils in the United States. Conclusions The following conclusions are drawn from the find- ings of the study: Concerning the kinds of Specialists comprising the membership of the instructional television curriculum committees: 1. There is a common pattern of organization of the instructional television curriculum commit- tees in both systems' and councils' program ser- vices. 2. A significant relationship exists between the cur- riculum committee members as recommended by the national leaders in the field of curriculum super- vision and development and those found to be mem- bers of both systems' and councils' committees. 119 These conclusions are drawn from the following findings: (1) (2) (3) (4) in selecting members who held positions at a fre- quency of 50 per cent or better on the systems' and councils committees. the following nine mem- bers were found to be represented in all: Curriculum supervision and development specialist Classroom teacher Television teacher School district subject-matter Specialist Higher education subject-matter specialist Television coordinator Instructional media specialist Building principal Television producer-director; \OCDQOAUIFPUJNl-J an analysis of the specialties of these nine people indicates that they form an organizational body that could adequately plan. produce. present. and utilize an instructional television series; that both systems' and councils' committees have low representation from “students." “educational psychologists" and "research and evaluation spe- cialists" and low representation of general re- source people--"laymen" and "school board members"; in determining the rank correlation of the member- ship between the frequency of instructional 120 television curriculum committee members recommended by the national leaders in curriculum supervision and development and the committee members reported to be on the systems' and councils' committees, it was found that both systems and councils committees had coefficients of correlation statistically sig- nificant at the five (5%) Per cent level. Concerning the committee responsibilities of the curriculum committee members: 1. There is an efficient functional pattern of re— sponsibilities being fulfilled by the committee members on all the systems' and councils' curricu- lum committees. ' A significant relationship exists between the re- Sponsibilities considered necessary by the national leaders in the field of curriculum supervision and development and those responsibilities being ful- filled by the members of the committees in all systems and councils. That a consideration of the concept of program evaluation has not been well accommodated by the decision-makers in either the systems or councils. That consideration is not being made by the decision- makers in either the systems or councils of the re- search that concerns itself with learning theories or their relation to the processes of lesson develop- ment and student learning. These conclusions are drawn from the following findings: (l) (2) (3) H 121 In considering only the five major responsibili— ties assigned to each curriculum committee member it was found that all 60 respondents designated ten identical responsibilities within the first five major assignments to their top seven commit- tee members: Ascertain needs of teachers and students Determination of course content Deve10pment of course content and scope Deve10pment of individual lesson content Final approval of proposed lessons Selection of television teacher Suggest ideas for graphics Collect props and resource materials Deve10p study guides View completed lessons; CDKQCD\1CDU'1u(>-L..)I\Ji--l An analysis of the above ten responsibilities in- dicates that they are basic requirements for the development of curriculum and since they are being fulfilled by the select group of seven Specialists the process can be considered functional; In determining the rank correlation of the commit— tee member re3ponsibilities between those recom- mended by the national leaders in curriculum su- pervision and development and those reported as being fulfilled by the committee members in systems 122 and councils, it was found that both systems' and councils' member responsibilities had coef— ficients of correlation statistically Significant at the .01 level; (4) None of the above seven committee members received an assignment to the reSponsibilities of pre- testing lessons in classroom situation or deve10p- ing student testing and this, coupled with the low ratings of "research and evaluation specialist" and "students," (Graphs l and 2) is an indication that efficient evaluation procedures are notable chiefly by their absence; (5) A low rating (systems 21 per cent, councils 24 per cent) for the "educational psychologist" shows little concern for educational or psychological research which indicates a possible lack of know- ledge, concerning learning theory and its poten- tial contributions to curriculum development. In the study of curriculum committee operational procedures: 1. There is little consistency in instructional television curriculum committee operations and 123 no common organizational pattern in the systems and councils reporting. Operational procedures are based primarily on individual situations and seem likely to remain so in existing and emerging committees. These above conclusions are drawn from the follow- ing findings: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) The number of committees within the organizations ranged from 1 to 15 for the systems and from 1 to 16 for the councils; The number of committee members ranged from 7 to 17 for the systems and 4 to 20 for the councils; The number of meetings held per annum by the com- mittees ranged from 2 to 18 for the systems and from "weekly," "as needed," to 18 for the coun- cils; The selection of the members for the committee duty in all the organizations reporting was made by fifteen different individuals of committees; The in-service preparation of committee members to aid them in fulfilling their responsibilities 124 is not considered necessary in 58 per cent of the systems and 68 per cent of the councils. With respect to curriculum committee form and function: 1. ings: (l) (2) (3) Independent systems diSplay no superiority over councils as there could be found no discernible difference in their committee structure, member reSponsibilities or Operational procedures. Both organizations have tendency to be more alike than different in the above respects. This conclusion is drawn from the following find- Both systems and council committee membership had a rank correlation statistically Significant at the .05 level with the recommendations of the national leaders in curriculum development; The responsibilities of both systems' and coun- cils' committee members had a rank correlation statistically significant at the .01 level with recommendations of the national leaders in cur- riculum develOpment; Both systems' and councils' top nine committee mem- bers were identical, and their tOp seven committee 125 members had ten identical responsibilities assigned to them; (4) Both systems' and councils' committees were simi- lar in a negative sense as both had low represen— tation of "research and evaluation Specialists," "educational psychologists," "community resource people," "students," "school board members," and‘ both had a total negation of the television- teacher-actor; (5) None of the tOp seven members for either councils' or systems' were assigned an involvement in pre- testing lessons or developing student—testing; (6) No different pattern of organizational procedures could be discerned in the systems that was not evident as operational in the councils. Recommendations Several recommendations can be made as a result of this study. It was found that there was much simi- larity in the form and function of all the curriculum committees investigated. This may be due partly to 126 two things: (1) that the design Of the questionnaire instrument prompted decisions and altered the perceptions Of the respondents, or (2) that the develOpment Of cur- riculum requires a framework common to all media. It is therefore recommended that a study in depth, utilizing per- sonal interviews and observation, be made of several systems and council instructional television program services to obtain more definitive information concerning the form and function Of their Operations. Learning theory literature pertaining to instructional television indicates that an appraisal of the utilization Of television in the teaching—learning process is mandatory if the full potential Of the television medium as an educational tool is to be realized. This charge necessitates that a knowledge Of educational and psychological research be a con- sideration in the deliberations of the curriculum committee. Therefore, "educational psychologists" and "evaluation Spec- ialists" should receive high priority in the selection Of the curriculum development team. A review Of the literature of curriculum develop- ment indicates that in most projects a very careful process Of development and evaluation is used. The concept Of field-testing the material with student groups is highly 127 regarded as being productive in the final development Of an Optimum product. Alexander59 reports that the Biologi- cal Science Curriculum Study materials were eventually pretested with 165,000 children in 47 states, involving the participation Of over 1,000 teachers. It seems il- logical that the process Of field—testing is practically non—existent in the development Of instructional tele- vision programs in the systems and councils reporting in this study. It is recommended that instructional tele- vision program services should study the feasibility and effectiveness Of pre-testing their program material be- fore final presentation. The investigator is concerned that most of the respondents indicated that their committee members re— ceived no formal preparation to introduce them to the potentialities, limitations, and requirements of the television medium. All media require different knowledge and competencies as they relate to curriculum development and pre—service training then becomes a mandate. It is recommended that all educators who are to become involved 59William M. Alexander, Changinngurriculum Con— tent (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop- ment, N.E.A., Washington, D. C.. 1964), p. 9. 128 in instructional television planning be provided an Oppor- tunity tO attend a media workshop or institute to better prepare them for their assignment. It was impossible to extract from the information contained in the questionnaire whether or not an "instruc- tional systems" approach to curriculum development was being utilized in the program services reporting. It can be inferred, however, due to the large number Of spec- ialists assigned to the "occasional member" category, that some kind of systematic approach was being taken. A study is in order to determine what kind Of systems approaches are being used in the development Of courses of study for television, and subsequent study and experimentation with those that look promising. The investigator feels that a pre-determined and well—defined organizational approach to instructional tele— vision programming is the most likely to pay dividends in terms Of improvement Of instruction, and the profession— alization Of those who develop it. TO that point he proposes as a recommendation a paradigm for the procedures in instructional television course development. The analysis will be undertaken in three parts: 129 (1) a listing Of Specialists and their reSponsibili- ties whom the investigator feels are necessary tO function as team members within the paradigm; (2) a diSplay of the working diagram (Table 56); (3) the construction Of the individual specialized teams in relation to their insertion into the procedure. Committee members and reSponsibilities: Curriculum supervision and develOpment Specialist: Develops Objectives, purpose, content and degree Of programs. Helps tO establish the guidelines and parameters Of supportive services. Assesses curriculum needs and policies and maintains balance Of articulation with other educational aspects Of the school program. Stimulates and leads people to consider ways and means Of appraising the dif- fusing information concerning desirable curriculum practices. Classroom teacher: Determines the appropriateness Of lessons as to grade, maturity, interest and vo- cabulary level Of the learners. Determines scope, frequency and length Of lessons. Reacts to kinds Of demonstrations, illustrations and experiences that cannot be done in the classroom. Suggests classroom utilization patterns and defines class- room limitations. Television teacher: Receives advice and direction from other members Of the committee. Undertakes the final development Of the program. Refines the script and plans for visuals. Develops study-guides and classroom utilization and evaluation techniques. 130 School district subject-matter Specialist: Develops Objectives, purpose, duration and degree Of programs. Outline subject matter content areas to ascertain compatibility with other asPects Of the school pro- gram. Gives a sense Of direction to the group, link- ing the television curriculum with the overall aims and Objectives Of the school. Assures relevancy and accuracy Of content, method and materials Of the sub- ject matter as they relate to the total SCOpe and sequence Of the school curriculum. Higher education subject-matter specialist: Discovers and classifies new knowledge which is basic to the cre— ation Of new curriculum content. Modifies and refines subject matter. Television coordinator: Administers the total direc- tion of all programs and people involved. Coordinates and chairs all curriculum team meetings. Instructional media Specialist: Applies learning and communication theories to instruction. Specializes in resources management. Advises and provides mater— ials which enhance teaching and learning. Building_princ;pal: Evaluates all curriculum proposals made in terms of the needs Of pupils in his building in regard to the maintenance Of a balanced program and in terms Of practicability of their implementation in his building. Evaluation specialist: Devises, conducts and inter- prets evaluation and research procedures which will assist in the appraisal, improvement and planning Of instructional activities and related methods and ma- terials. Community resource person: Advises as to what commun- ity resources are available for integration and utili- zation. Offers a different point of view and frame of reference as tO community needs. State department Of education representative: Gives leadership to the area of curriculum develOpment in— cluding planning and evaluation Of new programs. 131 Supplies the motivation for the leadership of com- mittees appointed to produce new curriculum programs. Television producer: Coordinates entire series of lessons. Sees that all the work Of the committee is developed into television presentations. Advises as to the limitations and potentialities Of the medium and suggests effective uses Of its singular facets which can be exploited tO enhance the lesson. Serves as business manager and legal consultant. Evaluates during walk-throughs and rehearsals. Television director: Assures that what is planned is practical and feasible for televising. Determines the best way to visualize ideas for television. Orchestrates all materials into the final on-air presentation. Educational.psycholoqist: Helps in the formulation. interpretation and application Of a statement Of principles Of learning on which can be based proce- dures that should result in the accomplishment Of the desired educational Objectives. Stenographer: Records pertinent information which is developed at meetings. Script-writer: Assists the television teacher in de- veloping a functional script which can be accommodated by the teleVision medium. Students: Consumers of the product. Reactors to ideas. For a display Of the working diagram Of procedures Of course development see Table 56. The construction Of the individual specialized teams: The formation Of the following teams would permit specialized groups Of people tO work in the Specialized 132 TABLE 56 PARADIGM OF PROCEDURES OF INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION COURSE DEVELOPMENT STUDENT ‘ SOCIETAL NEEDS ’ NEEDS SCHOOL . ‘ STRUCTURE OF NEEDS KNOWLEDGE V COURSE OBJECTIVES 4 m! A... MEDIA SELECTION OTHER Y MEDIA INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION APPROPRIATE—l Y DEVELOPMENT ' TELEVISION LESSON OBJECTIVES ___ RESEARCR| ’, _ LESSON ‘1 CONTENT DESIGN (._____. "' PREPARE ’ FIELD TEST P———~HPRESBNTATIOI§ -—————||>——{UTILL:;;ION] ~—-—-~ EVALUATION}— 133 areas. Instead of one large committee assuming control of the total program, ten small task forces would move into the paradigm at apprOpriate stages. The following are the area titles and the teams with their components: Needs--Objectives l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O l . *Superintendent Curriculum supervision and develOpment Specialist Classroom teacher Principal Higher education representative State department of education representative *Community representative *School board member Evaluation specialist Stenographer *First meeting only Approach (Selection of media) OKOCDQONU'IAPUJNH H Curriculum supervision and development Specialist School district subject matter specialist Classroom teacher Principal Higher education subject matter Specialist State department of education representative Evaluation Specialist Educational psychologist Instructional media specialist Stenographer Objectives: Television Series mmhwwr—a Instructional television coordinator Curriculum supervision and development Specialist School district subject matter specialist Classroom teacher Higher education subject matter specialist Television teacher 134 Television producer Instructional media specialist Educational psychologist Evaluation specialist . Stenographer H l—‘OKOCDQ H Research Instructional television coordinator Television producer Educationalmpsychologist Evaluation specialist Instructional media specialist Stenographer O\U'|J>UONl-‘ Lesson Content 1. Instructional television coordinator 2. Curriculum supervision and develOpment speCialist 3. School district subject matter specialist 4. Classroom teacher 5. Television producer 6. Instructional media specialist 7. Higher education subject matter specialist 8. Community resource 9. Educational psycholoqist 10. Evaluation specialist ll. Stenographer Q§§iqn--Prepare 1. Instructional television coordinator 2. School district subject matter specialist 3. Television teacher 4. Television producer 5. Television director 6. Instructional media specialist 7. Script-writer 8. Stenographer Field--Test 1. Instructional television coordinator 2. School district subject matter specialist H OKOCDQO‘U'IAPLA) 135 Television teacher Television producer Television director Classroom teacher Educational psychologist Evaluation specialist Students Stenographer Presentation l 2 3 Television teacher Television producer Television director Utilization GNU'IQUJNH Instructional television coordinator Classroom teachers Students Principal Instructional media specialist Educational psychologist Evaluation Hid i-‘OKOCDQOWUT-P-LONH Instructional television coordinator Educational psychologist Students Classroom teacher Curriculum supervisor Subject matter Specialist Instructional media specialist Television teacher Television producer Stenographer Evaluation specialist 136 A Look Ahead It is evident that there has been much activity in the develOpment of instructional television up to this time and all indications point to greatly expanded use in the future. The educational significance of that expansion will be largely dependent upon the quality of educational planning for its effective use. It is hOped that this study's focus on curriculum development procedures appro- priate to instructional television will contribute in some measure to improving the quality of courses and lessons appearing on television. APPENDICES AS DALE E GIBSON Director InsIvucIIonaI Services Muskegon County CHAIRMAN RUSSELL L. SCHNEIDER . Adrmmslrahve ASSIsIanI. Lanxm VICE CHAIRMA DR. COLBY LEWIS General Manager. W58 SECRETARV BEN F AHISCHWEDE Assumnt Supennlendenl. Battle Creek WILLIAM J. BAIL/ARI) General Manager. WUCM DAVID E. BANI SupennIendenL Lmden KINNETH T BEAGLE Supennleudbnt‘ Grand Ledge MURI B CONNOR Supevmiendeul‘ Beldmg WILLIAM C DEMPSEV Ix» VICE Prestdenl GeneraI Managev. WZZM REV DONALD EDER Amslani Supenmendent Lansmg Calhohc DIDCE$E LTJL'E A. GRAY Suvenniendent. Marshall BASIL E. JOHNSON Superintendent, Denon KelIogg WILLARD KIDDER Supeunlendem, Nonhwest DR NORM/IN IAVLDR SCIence Coommalor Jackson UmDn APPENDIX A TELEVISION (MIL—“J e“? “we! fig— 1 am the coordinator for an instructional television endeavor that involves over 300,000 pupil enrollments in over 100 school systems in Michigan. As I become more knowledgeable of the work done in instructional television, I become concerned with the methods by which tele- vision lessons are developed. It appears to me that too often the television teacher and the television producer-director are given a carte blanche in determining the content of the lessons by 'Curriculum Committees' whose members have use- tionable educational qualifications in relation to the subject matter under consideration. From this concern has emerged a dissertation project from which I hope to be able to make recommendations that wil help in directing the formation and in defining the functions of instructional television curriculum committees. The most important part of my research involves gathering a consensus of twenty-five national leaders in curriculum super- vision and development. Your name has been recommended to me by several sources as one of these people. To that point I am sending to you a questionnaire which I hope you will put near the top of your work—to-do-file. Since my sample is very small, I would appreciate your consideration of its completion and return. Your name and opinions will be pub- lished only with your permission. 1 hope that you will consider this request not as an imposition. but rather as a pat-on-the—back from friends who value your judgement. Your help will be appreciated. S ince re ly , Charles S. Ruffing, Coordinator 138 139 APPENDIX A (cont.) ITV CURRICULUM QUESTgpNNAIRE Assume you have been given the responsibility of appoint- ing a committee to develop a series of elementary (i.e. science/art/music) instructional TV lessons. The series will be supplementary to the existing classroom curriculum. and the number and length of the lessons will be determined by that purpose. In view of this assignment. please answer the following questions: I. What educational specialties would you require for representation by the people that you appoint to such a curriculum committee? II. What do you believe the committee assignments for these people should be? III. What operative procedures for committee functions should be considered? IV. What in-service preparation do you feel these people should undertake in readying themselves for this assignment? APPENDIX B STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION "A" m0 OF EDUCATION ‘M’I. 1?, A I. .SV Lansing, Michigan 48902 EDWIN 1" Nov‘x' an r wen-“X mum .- #1 MARILYN JEAN KELLY 3‘? ice PM» W PETER OPPEWALL IRA POLLEY Secretary Superintendent of Public Instruction CARMEN L. DELLIQUADRI Tnmm LL:R()\ G. ALIGENS’TEIN THOMAS J. BRENNAN CHARLES E. MORTON JAMES F. O'NEIL GOV. GEORGE ROMNEY Bx-Ofiido I am working on one of the final stages of my doctoral thesis, that of collecting data as to the development of curricula as it relates to instructional television. I need to determine the Specialities of the personnel involved in making decisions pertinent to instructional television development and their responsi- bilities to the committee. With no intent to be obsequious, my work in the field makes me aware that you are one of the few people who can make considered judgments concerning this aspect of ITV. Consequently, I need to call upon you for this information. Since my sample will be small, I hOpe that you can take five minutes of your time to respond to the enclosed questionnaire. All returns will remain confidential, unless otherwise requested, and a copy of the final study will be sent to you. Sincerely, Charles Ruffing, Chief Instructional Materials Center Television Consultant Encl. 140 141 APPENDIX B (Cont.) The purpose of this investigation is to study instructional tele- vision curriculum committees' structures and their involvement in decision— making as to content and production of courses of televised instruction at the K-6 level. Please respond to the questions as you perceive them in your role as administrator of your instructional television endeavor. Most Important IN REFERRING TO YOUR CURRICULUM COMMITTEES, PLEASE USE AS A FRAME OF REFERENCE THE FIRST YEAR THE LESSON SERIES WERE PRODUCED AND UTILIZED, AND ONLY THOSE SERIES YOU WILL TELEVISE DURING 1966-67. 10. 11. 12. 1J42 APPENDIX B (cont .) Form A Check below, the educational specialities of the peOple who are/were members of the curriculum committees who develop(ed) the elementary instructional television lessons used in your programming. School—board member Permanent member Occasional member Not required Not available TV Producer-Director (As a dual assignment. Note questions #3 and #4.) Permanent member Occasional member Not required Not available TV Producer Permanent member Occasional member Not required TV Director Permanent member Occasional member Not required Curriculum supervision and development specialist Permanent member Occasional member Not required Classroom teachers Permanent member Occasional member Not Higher education subject-matter specialist Permanent member Occasional member Not Building principal Permanent member Occasional member Not Students (consumers) Permanent member Occasional member Not ETV Coordinator Permanent member Occasional member Not Librarian Permanent member Occasional member Not Script-writer Permanent member Occasional member Not required required required required required required required Not Not Not * ___Not ___Not ___Not ___Not Not Not Not available available available available available available available available available available 13. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 143 APPENDIX B (cont .) Form A School district subject-matter specialist Permanent member Occasional member Not required State Department of Education representative Permanent member Occasional member Not required Superintendent of Schools Permanent member Occasional member Not required Educational psychologist Permanent member Occasional member Not required TV Teacher-Educator (Note question #18 before answering.) Permanent member Occasional member Not required TV Teacher-Professional Actor Permanent member Occasional member Not required Instructional-media specialist Permanent member Occasional member Not required Research and evaluation specialist Permanent member Occasional member Not required Stenographer Permanent member Occasional member Not required Community resource person Permanent member Occasional member Not required Other Not Not Not Not Not Not Not Not Not Not available available available available available available available available available available 1J44 APPENDIX B (cont.) On the left of the page are listed possible curriculum committee members. Above are listed possible duties of the total committee. In the squares opposite the members' designation (serving on your committees) check thesquares that correspond to that member's responsibilities. 1115 .mcomme vmumaaaou 30H» .muaauom sown: .mmvfiaw uvaum aoHo>oo .wCAumuu ucmvsum aoao>ma .uunumuu >9 uo coauuwamm .aowuosvoua was Hmmummnmu owvaum aw umamm¢ .mowsamuw you mmmvfi umwmmsm .coaumzuwm sooummmau :H mcommoa ummulmum .mmow>umm amuwoun nonuo scum mcommoa hvsum .maomeH mo nuwaoa van humans mcwaumumn .mmfluw>wuum ucoamou0mcwwu commoalumon don>mo .couumvam>m omuaoolumoa cw oumafiowuumm .mamfiuwuma mousommu was among uomdaou .cowumsam>m mo Bmuwoua unmamaaaa can aoam>mo .Houucoo huwamaa samuswmx .mummamxuoa ucmvsum moam>oa .ucmucou commma Hmsz>wvafi mo ucmaaoao>oo .mxoon mocmummmu vcmaaoowm .mwvma nonuo mo cowumnwawu: cam coauomawm .wvonuma cofiumuaafius Sooummmao mamsaoumm .meoom use uamuaoo omunou mo unwaaoam>oo .mcommmH vmmoaoua mo Hm>ouaam Hmcfim .mm>«uomfino amazon mo :owumswaumumo .musmvaum cam muwnommu mo mvmmc samuumumm to the format of this publi- cation. Form B This form has been compressed one half its size to conform APPENDIX B (Cont.) Community resource person Stenographer Research and evaluation sp. Instructional media sp. TV teacher Educational psychologist Superintendent of Schools State Dept. of Educ. Rep. Sch. dist. subject-matter sp. Script-writer Librarian ETV Coordinator Students (consumers) Building Principal Higher educ. subject-matter sp. Classroom teachers Curriculum super. & devel. sp. TV producer-director TV director TV producer School board member Other 146 APPENDIX B (cont.) Form C 1. What is the official name of your organization? 2. How many curriculum committees were involved in your total program? ___ 3. How many school districts are represented on these curriculum committees? 4. How were the members selected for duty on the curriculum committees? 5. Considering all your committees, what was the average number of members on each committee? 6. What formal in-service training did the members receive to better prepare them to fulfill their committee responsibilities? 7. Considering all your curriculum committees, how many times a year, on the average, did they meet? B IBLIOGRAPHY Alexander. William M. Changing Curriculum Content. Association for Supervision and Curriculum De- ve10pment. National Education Association. Washington. D. C.. 1964. Allen. Clarence H. News Supplement. National Center for School and College Television. Bloomington. Indiana. 1966. Asheim. Lester. "A Survey of Informed Opinion on Tele- vision's Future Place in Education." Educational Television: The Next Ten Years. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press. 1962. Atkinson. Carroll. Public School Broadcastinq to the Classroom. Boston: Meador Publishing Company. 1942. Baggerly. Andrew R. Intermediate Correlation Methods. New York: Wiley and Sons. 1964. Breitenfield. Frederick. The Financing of Educational Television Stateions. A Report of A Study Con- ducted of ETV Stations. washington. D. C.: National Association of Educational Broadcasters. 1965. "Comments of the Ford Foundation." A Report to the Federal Communications Committee. August. 1966. Costello. Lawrence F.. Gordon. George N. Teach with Television. New York: Hastings House. 1961. Cumming. William Kenneth. This is Educational Television. Ann Arbor: Edward Brothers. Inc.. 1954. 147 148 Dale. Edgar. Many Things We See and Some of Them We Are. Paper presented at the Division Audio-Visual In- struction Conference on Evaluation. Mt. Hood. Oregon. 1963. Diamond. Robert M. A Guide to Instruction Television. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company. 1964. D011. Ronald C. Curriculum Improvement: Decision-Making and Process. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Inc.. 1964. Dreyfus. Lee S.. Gumpert. Gary. "Students Visit via Satellite.” NAEB Journal. May-June. 1966. Dunlap. T. W.. Kurtz. A. K. Handbook of Statistical Nomoqraphs. Tables and Formulas. New York: World Book Company. 1932. Federal Communications Commission. "FCC Fifth Order and Report." Docket 14220. Fostering Expanded Use of UHF Television Channels. Washington. D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office. 1952. p. 16. . Educational Television. Federal Communications Commission Information Bulletin No. l6—B. June. 1966. Washington. D. C. . Sixth Order and Report. The Proceedings. Washington. D. C.: May 2: 1952' V. 17: NO. 870 p. 4089. Guba. Egon G. "Evaluation and the Airborne TV Project." Educational Research Bulletin. October. 1960. Guilford. J. P. Fundamental Statistics in Pscychology and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.. 1942. Hettinger. Charles. "ETV Technology." Audiovisual In- struction. September. 1964. Holmes. Presley D. Jr. Television Research in the Teach- ing-Learning Process. Detroit: Wayne State University. 1959. 149 Holzinger. Karl J. Statistical Methods for Students in Education. New York: Ginn and Company. 1928. ”Is Satellite Act Ambiguous?" Broadcasting. August 8. 1966. Jones. James J. "The Superintendent Must Lead in Cur- riculum Development." Educational Administration and Supervision. March. 1959. KOOpman. Robert G. Curriculum Improvement. New York: Center for Applied Research in Education. Inc.. 1966. ’ Krug. Edward A.. Babcock. Chester D.. and Fowlkes. John Guy. Administration Curriculum Planning. New York: Harper and Brothers. 1956. Kumata. Hideya. An Inventory of Instructional Television Research. Ann Arbor: Educational Television and Research Center. December. 1956. McKune. Lawrence E. Telecourses for Credit. East Lansing: Continuing Education Service. 1964. McKune. Lawrence E. Telecourses for Credit. East Lansing: Continuing Education Service. 1966. McNally. Harold J.. Passow. Harry A.. and Associates. Improving the Quality of Public Schools Programs. New York: Columbia University. 1960. McNemar. Quinn. Psychological Statistics. New York: Wiley and Sons. Inc.. 1949. National Associationcf Educational Broadcasters. Educa- tional Television Stations Newsletter. Washing- ton. D. C.: National Association of Educational Broadcasters. March. 1967. "NAEB Research Fact Sheets and Index." NAEB Journal. The National Association of Educational Broadcasters. XXIII. No. 1. February. 1964. 150 Openshaw. Karl. Educational Television and the Individual. Paper presented at the Association Supervision and Curriculum Development Conference on Creativity. Turkey Run. Indiana. 1962. Parker. Cecil T. ”Guidelines for In-service Education." The In-Service Education. Fifty-six Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Part I. Bloomington. Illinois: The Society. 1957. Payne. Stanley L. The Art of Asking Questions. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 19651. Public Television: A Prqgram for Action. The Report of the Carnegie Commission on Educational Television. New York: Bamtam Books. 1967. Pulling. Martin. "International Television." EurOpean Broadcasting Union ReView. May. 1963. Rugg. Harold 0. Statistical Methods. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1917. Stanley. Ray. A letter from the Office of the Educational Television Facilities Branch. Department of Health. Education and Welfare. Office of Education. 1966. Skinner. T. D. "An Experimental Story of the Effects of Prestige and Delivery Skill in Educational Tele- vision.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Univer- sity of Michigan. 1963. Stevens. Humphrey. "A Profile of ETV Curriculum Planning for Secondary Schools (Grades 7-12).“ Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation. University of Buffalo. 1963. "Survey of State ETV Legislation." A report of the state educational TV authorities. Prepared by the De- partment of Education. Springfield. Illinois. 1966. Umstattd, T. G. "The Principal Interprets His Role in Curriculum Development.” Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals. Feb- ruary. 1959. 151 VanDalen. Deobold. B. Understanding Educational Research. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Inc.. 1962. walker. Helen M. Elementary Statistical Methods. New York: Henry Holt and Company. 1943. Wigren. Harold E. "Some Things I've Learned About Tele- .vision in the Classroom.“ View. June. 1966. "Imummies