1.5. . . a .u . ,. . .d: t 308?. “flu. .- hi .. qt . , . 1a“! g. 5.150.! dflia d III). ‘IctVo3v1‘IninH‘l- . . . lo I . .z c"! . Mr. -I ‘10 .i . I (‘1‘ \IL oil in: ..... . H‘E‘II. .. 1.3.1: I r .15.... .. . 4 .- «filmy «11...... .. JmuIIanuum... .uumunwmrh... .ivn..¥II...... an..- ...- . .3 u . . f .r: - I1 .h! «2.4%... .iufin..—I..1....H3Ivfl9.duu!u.n. .22-... I a! I 4 . . . vlt « - rt :4 I. I. . . 1.9.. .xuurméfiwwn 1...... .. c ..h?. ‘l I III. .. In [O‘V .I... - 911.4»! . i .I-. I . . O 4‘ I “ I ”011'. v1.5“. it . .. 3&9 7%.? m...“ it». I!“ . l a .u I.- V... .II‘ ............ Jfll . 1.“ gumilvn I II ..II...II\.. III. 1 VIII... "HUI." I. l‘l'l"- .l I I'l' I‘I I‘I- . I u u I I I I 1 IT a I. III (III H. .II I II . . .‘ufil .. I III-I‘ll. A o \II‘I .flt‘l‘lxd.‘ II’.I l fil'fiil 3....I ,I . In if}... I. 1.1.»..11... 1.1.1..1111.11.13.16.(11115319311113... I - . .u. E \II - .- vul‘I-Ill‘lfo! t \ III . .‘ 1.31%..1511. .I I Huh»)... LA. I It? I. 'J’w -I'I.1"|I|\ul|‘l‘v' ‘II‘I...’ 1 ii. 51111". 1‘ 1"" . I H I .111. 11 I |1l 1. 1m Ir. . . . III 1 . ’- . - l . 1.0 (I. .II - I -.I'.I I I .3 . .7 I all in "I” ..I‘ II“). Lani-101 I. . buck... .v‘n iqul, r -lI'lYJIII \IlItlll‘I‘Ila‘IIItl IlllrlI PIII’I‘IIIII I. I)I| .HIIIAVIIIIIIII“... ‘Iihrfli .IIII')‘ L‘II'IIIIIIIIlltlllIol [will III: IIIIIIIIIII.|IIIIIOI 1‘" 011' S. III. b. (I {I‘ll} \IIIIOHI‘LFIIHHHII IIIIIV (I IIIIIIII} IIIIIIII yflnfiiuiut iItI’vlfl: III! . III]- .I. ill. III, I I“ .I1 I. IIIrlllI l...‘ ' likl‘q Iii: $51 . I.‘ I' I I." ‘-II I ’“314‘. \ \rII»I|I\“‘-Y|llvl.|ll It'l‘rigq“ H‘h‘ii I. ‘0‘ an” \f‘lll. I . I .l . .9. III III'IIIII 3'14 it?! lulllflfl". I . III. I.|\..:|lII.I.I-I .. ,IVJII... 'IK .lcli. “MIME—”HI. . III]-..IUnm. .IE‘IRIIAIMI-I‘II. tllil' .IIII «In IIIIIIIII-‘IH -gf‘l. |u.Il .I I. 1| 4. 5.\“HlflMHNy.IIIV‘II .I. alI. .111. '. ”I...‘ 1‘: .IV‘IlrlI HUI-In. I IIIIlll'I‘Mr. .‘ll‘llalll Jr tilllul tr)? Il‘l . N I»... .0224-.. v. ..III.IIIII.I_v..rI.’. InuLIJIIIII. . “HIM“: Iarrqhfl, . 1...U.II.I..I.. {0.8.1.}! fll}4ir\l.u.allj.ti11%nll)lflll II. .IIIIIIITII {IIIIIIIIIDIHWIIH I. . .. -I I II I I. . . n . I. .‘.1..M.I.IJ. L ..fl .14.. oi-.;l_...... IIIIIWVIIH 1.1.”... 9". .IIJIl‘IIIII.I.NI\.|..I.\II|l.J.\QI‘.II.1 )I. .I'u‘lvll it. |II1 I. .. .. I I . I . .I..... ..I.|'|\I.... (.11.)? , .1 . III- III: 'I.’ u .I‘I.IA«l|1u|'I\I.III ‘\IIII.IQD III,“ 7..- . . I L..., ...... um. [.IIHWsznl (.11.. 2... 1..u.I yM.|h.N.I.\Iflu.|\.flINtf . 1- I I . . I l . I‘ll? . I I’D. .. ~ ‘ "mu. . ' ‘111111.111.11111111111411111 "7&231333 gtate University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled A Comparative Study of Humanism and Pragmatism As They Relate to Decision Making In Instructional Development Processes presented by Thomas Luiz has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D. Education degree in Major professor November 9, 1982 Date MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 MSU ‘ RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LJBRARJES remove this checkout from g}!!— YOUP Y‘ECOY‘d. FINES Wlll . be charged if book is ? returned after the date g stamped below. i A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF HUMANISM AND PRAGMATISM AS THEY RELATE TO DECISION MAKING IN INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES BY Thomas Luiz A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology and Special Education 1982 ABSTRACT A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF HUMANISM AND PRAGMATISM AS THEY RELATE TO DECISION MAKING IN INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES BY Thomas Luiz This is an exploratory study aimed at discovering some of the philosophical assumptions that may undergird the conceptual framework of instructional development as a subset of educational technology. It sought to answer the question whether a philosophical investigation of instructional practices would provide a framework for enabling instructional developers to make better and more consistent decisions. Given that instructional developers possess a personal philosophy and a composite statement based on personal beliefs and attitudes, this study is directed at finding the implications of an instructional developer using a philosophical position as a: device to filter instructional development decisions. It was assumed that consistency in decision making with a philosophical position could not only affect Thomas Luiz instructional development systems, but also provide a conceptual framework for theory building in educational technology. To achieve this purpose, a philosophical investigation was initiated :hn which the twenty-four decision points of the Instructional Development Institute (IDI) Model were examined individually from the philosophies of Pragmatism as advocated by Charles Peirce and William James, and of Humanism, as advanced by Abraham Maslow and Jacques Maritain. Since the twenty-four decision 'points' are more aptly described as (decision processes,. example decision_ points were generated for each process as specific questions that an instructional developer would typically respond to. These were examined from the pragmatist and humanist view- points; illustrative examples were added and congruences (agree or disagree) variabilities (agree with reservation), and empty sets (questions not responded to by the two philosophies) of the philosophical views with each of these decision points were recorded. It was found that a pragmatist would make instruction- al development decisions mostly similar to the ones contain- ed in the twenty-four decision processes of the IDI Model. The humanists would make decisions, sometimes similar to those in the IDI Model, but in a large number of cases Thomas Luiz would either agree in a guarded fashion, or even reject them. The analysis did not, however, state whether these differently conformed systems performed with any signifi- cant difference in terms of their respective effects on learners. This study could be viewed as a first in a series of more refined and incisive studies yet to be undertaken. To John and Mary Luiz To C.S. and I.M., Who need not read this study To realize how indebted I am For their gift of life and love. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are many wonderful people who stood behind me with their supportive care, solicitude, and active as- sistance in the completion of this study. To my confreres in the Society of the Divine Word, and especially to Henry Heekeren, my religious superior, I would like to express my sincere gratitude, appreciation, and affection. To the members of my Thesis Guidance Committee, Dr. Bruce Miles, Dr. Castelle Gentry, Dr. Larry Sarbaugh, and to Dr. Harry McKinney, who have been unstinted their support, interest, and encouragement; To Bruce Miles, Chairman of my Guidance Committee, who gently prodded me into completing the work and who never said 'No" to my many queries and requests for help; above all, for being such a wonderful friend; To Cas Gentry, Director of my Guidance Committee, who spurred me on, in the first place, in understaking this iii philosophical investigation and who continued to goad, coax, cajole, and inspire me ceaselessly, despite his many obligations, to work out this study, and for whom this study became, in many ways, a "labor of love"; To my colleagues and priest—friends at St. John Student Center, Tom McDevitt, Jake Foglio, John Schwind, and Mike Steltenkamp, and the pastoral team for their continued care and support; To Dr. Madhukar Mike Bansod and Marjorie Bansod, my genial hosts, during the last months of dissertation work, for their unfailing love and concern; To my numerous friends who shared my joys and some moments of frustration, always willing to help in any way they could; To Teresa Ni, for a wonderful job she did in typing the final copy in record time, and to Lionel Ni for the able assistance he provided; and To some special friends whose names would deliberately go unrecorded, but whose love would always be cherished. Thanks! iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Chapter I. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Defining Educational Technology . . . 2 Quest for Professional Identity . . . 3 Need for Systematic Theory and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 AECT Defines Educational Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Rationale of the Study . . . . . . . . . 8 Search for Philosophy . . . . . . . . . 9 Role of Philosophy . . . . . . . . . . . 10 A Real 'Personal' Philosophy . . . . . . 11 Why Pragmatism and Humanism ? . . . . . 12 Pragmatism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Humanism . . . . . . . . . . 15 A Journey Through the Past . . . . . . . 18 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . 22 History of Educational Technology . . . 22 Early Beginnings . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Personalities . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Behaviorism and Its Influence . . . . 26 Watson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Skinner . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Teaching Machines and Programmed Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Movements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 The Film and Television Decades . . . 30 Research and Evaluative Studies . . . 30 Behaviorists and Cognitive Psychologists . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Chapter Three Paradigmatic Changes . . . Communications . . . . . . . . Systems Theory . . . . . . . . Technology . . . . . . . . . Changes in Names and Perspectives Recapitulation of Historical Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pragmatism . . . . . . . . . . . Pragmatism - Philosophical Antecedents . . . . . . . . . Greek Origins . . . . . . . . . Descartes and Kant . . . . . . . Kantian and Empiricist Heritages Pragmatism - Meaning of the Word Early Beginnings: 1870-1898 . . Charles Sanders Peirce (1839- 1914) . . . . . William James (1842- 1910) . Inconsistencies in Writings Humanism . . . . . . . . . . . The Sophist Beginnings . . . Pedagogy: A Humanistic Contribution . . . . . . . . Latin Culture and Greek Antiquity . . . . . . The Renaissance Period . The Age of Reformation . Some Basic Assumptions . Can Humanism be Defined? . Varieties of Humanistic Out Ethical Humanism . . . . Naturalistic Humanism . Scientific Humanism . . New Humanism . . . . . . Marxist Humanism . . . Humanistic Psychology of Abraham Maslow (1908- 1970) . . . Major Works of Maslow . . . . . Relevance of Humanistic Psychology . . . . . . . . . . Integral Humanism . . . Jacques Maritain (1882- 1973) . Relevance of Maritain' s Integral Humanism . . . . . . . . . . Instructional Development Institute Systems Approach in ID . . . . . NSMI and UCIDT Programs . . . . Early Beginnings of the IDI Program . . . . . . . . . . . [0000008400000 l'-‘ 000.008 € W oooooUlooooo '3 9) vi Page 34 34 35 37 38 44 44 44 45 46 47 48 51 54 58 58 S9 60 61 63 66 67 69 69 71 72 73 78 8O 80 82 85 87 89 89 90 91 Chapter Page The IDI Program Objectives . . . . . . 93 The IDI Prototype Testing Program . . 94 Detroit (1970) . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Phoenix (1971) . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Atlanta (1971) . . . . . . . . . 96 Current Activities of UCIDT . . . . . 97 The Instructional Development Model . . . . . . . . . 99 The Hamreus Model (1968) . . . . . . . 101 Instructional Development Institute (IDI) Model . . . . . . . 103 Literature Support . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Precedents for the Study . . . . . . . . 108 Implications of the Study . . . . . . . 109 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . 110 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Relevance of a Philosophical Study. . . 122 Inadequacy of Experimental Studies . . 122 Concerns for Basic Research . . . . . 123 Toward a Philosophy of Education . . . 125 The IDI Model Literature . . . . . . . . 126 Pragmatist and Humanist literature . . . 128 Pragmatism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 Theory of Meaning . . . . . . . . . . 130 Theory of Truth . . . . . . . . . 138 Truth - Property of Beliefs . . . . 138 Potential Truths . . . . . . . . . . 140 Truth and Verification . . . . . . . 141 Different Views on Truth by James and Peirce . . . . . . . . 142 Theory of Inquiry . . . . . . . . . 143 Inquiry: Physico-Psychological Origins . . . . . . . . . 144 Belief - Rules for Action . . . . . 145 Rejection of Cartesian Doubt . . . . 147 Humanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Maritain's Integral Humanism . . . . . 149 Christendom vs. Christianity . . . . 150 Integral Humanism . . . . . . . . . 151 Individual vs. Person . . . . . . . 152 Integration of Individual in Person . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Interrelation of 'Distinctive Powers' . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 vii Chapter Page Maritain's Phiosophy of Education . . 156 Unconscious Irrational vs. Preconscious Spirit . . . . . . . 157 Education: A Process of Liberation . 158 Maslow's Theory of Personality . . . . 161 Basic Needs of Human Nature . . . . 162 Hierarchy of Needs . . . . . . . . . 163 Need Gratification . . . . . . . . . 164 Freudian and Maslowian Approaches . 165 Growth Motivation and Cognition . . 166 Maslow's Theory of Values . . . . . 167 Inner Nature, Basis of Ethics . . 167 The Starting Point: Self- Actualizing People . . . . . . . 169 Environment: Context of Education . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Maslow's Meta-Ethics: A Critique . 171 Maslow's Contributions to Education . . . . . . . . . . . 172 Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Design of the Study . . . . . . . . . . 174 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 IV. COMPARATIVE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 Defining Instructional Development . . . 184 Introduction to Comparative Study . . . 187 Stage I: Define . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 Decision Process ”a" . . . . . . . . 190 Decision Process "b'I . . . . . . . . 200 Decision Process "c" . . . . . . . . 205 Decision Process "d” . . . . . . . . 208 Decision Process "e" . . . . . . . . 211 Decision Process "f" . . . . . . . . 215 Decision Process "9" . . . . . . . . 217 Stage II: Develop . . . . . . . . . . 220 Decision Process "h" . . . . . . . . 220 Decision Process "i” . . . . . . . . 224 Decision Process "'" . . . . . . . . 228 Decision Process "k" . . . . . . . . 230 Decision Process "1" . . . . . . . . 234 Decision Process "m" . . . . . . . . 237 Decision Process "n" . . . . . . . . 241 Decision Process “0" . . . . . . . . 247 Decision Process "p" . . . . . . . . 250 Decision Process "q" . . . . . . . . 253 Decision Process "r” . . . . . . . . 256 viii Chapter Page Stage III: Evaluate . . . . . . . . . . 259 Decision Process ”s" . . . . . . . . . 259 Decision Process "t” . . . . . . . . . 262 Decision Process "u" . . . . . . . . . 265 Decision Process "v" . . . . . . . . . 270 Decision Process "w" . . . . . . . . . 273 Decision Process "x" . . . . . . . . . 276 Sumary O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 279 V . CONCLUS IONS , LIMITATIONS , AND IMPLICATIONS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 28 9 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294 Limitations 0 O O O O O O I O O O O O O 301 Implications for Furth r Research . . . 303 BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O 30 7 ix LI ST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Instructional Development Institute: The Five -Day SChedu 1e 0 o o o o o o o o o 98 2. The Hamreus Model (1968) . . . . . . . . . 102 3. IDI Model (Instructional Development Institutes, UCIDT, 1971) . . . . . . . . 104 4. Twenty-four Decision Processes of IDI Model 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 lo 6 5. Illustrative Comparison of Decision Steps With PhiloSOphies . . . . . . . . . 177 6. Twenty-four Decision Processes of IDI Model 0 I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 188 7. Comparative Analysis of Instructional Development in Terms of Humanism and Pragmatism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 CHAPTER I PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The present research is an exploratory study aimed at discovering some of the pmilosophical assumptions that may undergird the conceptual framework of instructional develop- ment which forms part of educational technology. This study seeks to investigate the feasibility of a fresh methodological approach through which a specific instructional development process will be examined from two philosophical perspectives, i.e., Humanism and Pragmatism. Such a comparative study, it is hoped, would reveal either the presence or the absence, in varying degrees, of a discernible strain of philosophical thought inherent in such instructional processes, programs and policies. A conscious disclosure of uninvestigated and unsuspected ideological leanings may contribute to areas of meaningful theory-building and research by educational technologists. This chapter is designed to provide the background for initiating such a study. 2 DEFINING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY In 1972, the Association for Educational Communi- cations and technology (AECT) issued a statement defining the field of Educational Technology: Educational technology is a field involved in the facilitation of human learning through the systematic identification, development, organi- zation, and utilization of a full range of learn- ing resources, and through the management of these processes. It includes, but is not limited to, the development of instructional systems, the identification of existing resources, the de- livery of resources to learners, and the manage- ment of these processes and the people who per- form them. Donald P. Ely, chairman of the Definition and Termi- nology Committee, AECT, ascribed this final formulation of the field of educational technology to a group of experts like Kenneth Silber, Kenneth Norberg, Geoffrey Squires, Gerald M. Torkelson, Robert Heinich, Charles F. Hoban, Jr., Wesley Meierhenry, and more than 100 members of the AECT who participated in its open hearings.2 This list constituted the creanl of top-level professionals in the field of educational technology who had been pioneers and guiding spirits in the gradual emergence of a profession that sought to answer the question, "what field are we in?"3 For a relatively young profession that began as “audiovisual instruction,” was then renamed instructional technology, and, finally, came to be known as educational technology, this search for identity has remained an agonizing process. 3 QUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY The quest for professional identity has been one of the main preoccupations of the proponents of educational technology. In the very first issue of AV Communication Review (1953), the new research journal of the Department of Audio-Visual Instruction (DAVI), James D. Finn examined the characteristics of a profession. A profession has, at least, these character- istics: (a) an intellectual technique, (b) an application of that technique to the practical affairs of man, (c) a period of long training necessary before entering the profession, (d) an association of the members of the profession into a closely-knit group with high quality of communi- cation between members, (e) a series of standards and a statement of ethics which is enforced, and (f) an organized body of int llectual theory constantly expanding by research. Recognized nationally and internationally as an authority on instructional technology, Finn had, throughout his professional life, demonstrated his commitment to education and to this growing field of specialty' which sought to extend education into an age of technology. He explored the impact, implications, and consequences of technology that was revolutionizing education and. paral- lelled. these efforts by challenging, goading, attacking, and, occasionally, indicting the academic establishment in a scholarly concern for professionalizing the field. For Finn, philosophizing was an essential component if one were to go beyond the expedient.5 Examining the status of audiovisual education through 4 the application of the six tests of a profession, Finn found that audiovisual personnel did have (a) an intel- lectual technique, and that they competently met the test of (b) application of technique to practice. The require- ment of (c) a long period of training as a necessity for professionalization was not met at all, while (d) an associ- ation of members with high quality of communication, and (e) a code of standards and ethics did exist, but func- tioned inadequately. On the test of (f) an organized body of intellectual theory constantly expanding by research, audiovisual education rated such low scores that failure was the only possible grade.6 The prognosis? Everything added up, "in the opinion of the writer, to the simply stated fact that the audiovisual field is not yet a profession."7 NEED FOR SYSTEMATIC THEORY AND RESEARCH For Finn, the ”most fundamental and most important characteristic of a profession"8 was the sixth and the 1ast--—that the technique of a profession is founded upon a body of systematic theory and research constantly being expanded by research and thinking within the profession. This was a serious lacuna in the profession and may have been the result when audiovisual personnel seeking to apply the fruits of technology to the educational process began to place a premium on ”practicality” while eschewing the "theoretical." 5 In 1977, Gerald Torkelson examined major articles, research abstracts, book reviews, etc., that were published in the AV Communication Review, with regard to the evolution of theory and research in the profession and passed his own verdict: "We have a body of theory, but, I would argue, not organized and integrated to provide bases for judging the relative merits of theories nor for organizing future inquiry on any agreed—upon path."9 Alfred North Whitehead once said: . . . The practice of a profession cannot be disjoined from its theoretical understanding and vice versa The antithesis to a profession is the avocation based upon customary activities and modifffid by the trial and error of individual practice. Excepting three studies, Finn found that theoretical formulations in audiovisual education lacked both depth and direction. Much of the professional inadequacies like the scarcity of intellectually stimulating content both at meetings and in journals was traceable to a lack of theoretical direction. Without a theory which produces hypotheses for research, there can be no expanding of knowledge and technique. And without a constant attempt to assess practice so that the theoreti— cal implications may be teased out, there can be no assurance that we will ever hiye a theory or that our practice will make sense. AECT DEFINES EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY Twenty-five years after James Finn had made the assessment and found the instructional technology field 6 wanting as :1 profession, the AECT Task Force of Definition and Terminology in 1977, after a l4-year study, published Educational Technology: Definition and Glossary of MAJ a monumental work, which was appropriately dedicated to "James D. Finn and Sidney C. Eboch..." The Association for Educational Communications and Technology officially endorsed the definition (Part A) of Educational Technology and the process through which the Glossary (Part B) was developed. It was resolved that educational technolo- gy, as a theoretical construct, as a field, and as a pro- fession met all the criteria, first postulated by Finn and later amplified to be more inclusive, and that the people engaged in this profession. might be called ”educational technologists."13 Although the AECT publication was based on a new conceptual framework which was the "best available at the time,"14 it also recognized the validity of other theo- retical frameworks and pledged continuous re-evaluations to reflect changing concepts, terminology, and definitions. THE PROBLEM Even after sixty years of growth and progress, edu- cational technology as a profession, despite some strong theoretical advances which were grounded in research, looks still for a definitive maturation in an integrative and unifying philosophy. 7 After having examined Dewey's educational progres- sivi sm wi th its cognitive -developmental psychology , Kohlberg and Mayer concluded that the developmental defi- nition of educational aims and processes require both the method of philosophy or ethics and the method of psychology or science. "The justification of education as development requires a philosophic statement explaining why a higher stage is a better or more adequate stage."l5 Bass, Lumsden, and Dills disagreed saying that there was no valid reason to believe this claim that the lack of impact through instructional development is rooted in a basic deficiency in the conceptual underpinnings of our techno- logy.l6 Rare is the single study that has direct appli- cation to instructional practices, William Winn stated, as he studied the distinction between basic research, that has the primary aim of building theory, and applied research, that aims at solving immediate practical problems. His con- clusion: it is unwise and unnecessary to sever theory from practice.17 The 1979 Lake Okoboji Leadership Conference examined how educational technology could be promoted and found that one of the major problems confronting education- al technologists is the fact that the research upon which ”the organized body of knowledge" is based is fragmentary and sometimes contradictory.18 Since theory, in a general sense, is a synthesis of observations of relationships, it said that "a researcher's philosophy regarding how people 8 register sensory impressions may guide his quest for expla- nations."19 As James Finn wistfully remarked, "somehow, somebody, someday is going to figure out how to put these things together into a fairly useful order of instruction to solve 20 specific problems." Will such a philosophy, if ever, come into being? RATIONALE OF THE STUDY The AECT as a professional organization of educational technologists acknowledges the viability' as well as the desirability of other conceptual frameworks which would seek to establish its professional identity, especially in its fundamental task of building up a body of systematic theory and research which, in turn, would advance the facilitation of learning. "To improve learning,“ said David Hawkridge, "educational technologists require a stronger repertoire than they have now. There has been considerable confusion because educational technologists have been eclectic without taking the trouble to understand the 21 Educational technology sources they have exploited." has drawn and continues to draw from various sources and disciplines and, despite occasional predilections and avowed preferences to certain learning theories, practice and research tendencies, remains essentially an open system, permeable to unifying inputs from the world of education, communication and technology. 9 The question may now be asked: will a philosophical investigation of educational and instructional practices and techniques prove to be a fruitful undertaking which will provide a framework that enables instructional developers to make better and more consistent decisions? Before one affirms its justifiable viability, we need to understand what a philosophical inquiry involves. SEARCH FOR PHILOSOPHY The roots of any science can be traced back into phi— losophy. The seminal ideas contained in the writings of Greek philosophers became through the efforts of later generations of thinkers the central ideas of western philosophy and science. While such searching for philosophical roots can take on the nature of a rather pointless academic game, and while it is often the case that such procedures are used to legitimize rather poorly thought-out ideas, it is, neverthe- less, true that it is very often difficult to understand why a particular scientific theory was formulated whout understanding its philosophi- cal origins. Aristotle once remarked that everyone adheres to a philosophy whether he or she is aware of it or not. The guiding pattern in the life of every person is his or her philosophy, or his or her "inarticulate major premises” as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once put it.23 Donald Ely, who observed that the use of the word 'philosophy' in this sense of personal attitudes and 10 convictions would dilute its original intent, found it, nevertheless, a useful point of departure. He acknowledged that it is only right that there should be a philosophy of instructional technology and that it should vary from individual to individual. According to Ely, such a philoso- phy, although autobiographical in nature, is a "composite statement based on beliefs, concepts and attitudes from 24 which personalgpurpose and direction are derived." As a developed study and discipline, philosophy has for its purpose the analysis and clarification of human aims and actions, problems and ideals. As a synthesis, philosophy attempts to work out a correct and integrated view of the universe, human nature, and society. "Philosophy is the establishment of coherent meaning in the whole domain of thought,” wrote Susanne Langer.25 The domain of thought might vary according to the scope of people's factual knowledge and the range of their imagination. When it is predominantly factual, verifiable propositions logically strung together may generate science; theological beliefs could result from speculations on a core of personal and social values. ROLE OF PHILOSOPHY Whatever be the outcome, the establishment of coherent meanings is not a simple process which would be achieved through logical analysis from a set of premises that are 11 situated or invented in vacuo. The function of the philos- opher is to draw from major branches of various disci- plines the data and premises that are particularly relevant to problems, broad generalizations and audacious syntheses. The philosopher should weave back and forth between fact and theory to be objective in conclusion and faithful to the rigors of logic. A 'REAL' PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY A lived-in experience, a substratum of commonsense notions which are analyzed, and basic concepts that are endowed with adequate meanings should trigger off the initial thought processes. Through progressive elaboration and articulation, a philosophical thinker would be able to establish coherent meanings, but his point of departure remains a field that is real. It is in an experiential world of lived realities that many a 'personal philosophy' finds its locus which, in turn, provides a personalized perspective of viewing and understanding the environment. Gilbert K. Chesterton once stated that the most practical and important thing about a man was still his view of the universe. It is important for a general, who is about to fight an enemy, to know the enemy's numbers, but still more important for him to know the enemy's philosophy. Quoting Chesterton in his lecture delivered at the Lowell Institute in Boston on November 14, 12 1906, William James stated: I think with Mr. Chesterton in this matter. I know that you, Ladies and Gentlemen, have a philosophy, each and all of you, and the most interesting and important thing about it is the way in which it deztBermines the perspectives in your several worlds. Since the goal of every branch of education is to facilitate and improve the quality of human learning, "the uniqueness of educational technology, and, therefore, its reason for being, lies in the philosophical and practical approach it takes toward fulfilling this purpose."27 WHY PRAGMATISM AND HUMANISM? Pragmatism The origins of pragmatism are clear in broad outline, but obscure in fine detail. According to Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, two strong advocates for pragma- tism, certain elements of this philosophy are traceable to the thinking and writing of Socrates, Aristotle, Berkeley, Hume, Kant and others. The major intellectual contributions to American pragmatism were provided by Peirce, when he presented his theory of meaning in the 1870s; it was revived primarily as a theory of truth by James in 1898; it was further developed, expanded and explained variously by John Dewey and F.C.S. Schiller. Pragmatism became, at the turn of the century, the most influential philosophy in America, and as a movement 13 characterized a stout stand against the intellectual currents and other idealisms that were then shaping America. It is as a movement-~both critical of much of traditional philosophy' and. concerned. to establish certain positive aims--that pragmatism is best understood. It is in this respect, rather than by any exclusive doctrine, that pragmatism became the .major coibtribution of America to the world of ph1losophy. An incipient pragmatism can be easily discovered in the last century threading the fabric of American social experience: the founding of schools in the Colonies, the opening of the West, and the origins of public education. The rapid expansion of industry and trade coupled with a popular optimism( that had its roots in.quritan. theology provided a social ethos which intensely believed that virtue and hard work are bound to be rewarded. As a body of ideas, pragmatism contributed a heritage to the American way of life: interpretation of thought and meaning as forms of purposive behavior, of knowledge as evaluative procedure in which normative and descriptive materials are integrally related, and of the logic of scientific inquiry as a norm of conduct. In its attempt to understand humankind and the human society, pragmatism ”orders“ the experienced world. As a result, a large segment of American society has accepted the principles of relativism, cooperation, problem solving, and pluralism, as well as exhibits a concern for all actions and their consequences . 14 There are good reasons for believing that Pragmatism represent an indigenous American out- look on life and the world. Or, perhaps, to avoid any hint of jingoism, it would be more satisfac- tory to say that Pragmatism sums up beliefs and attitudes which have shaped the development of America as the many-sided phenomenon which it is--a people of peoples, a vast enterprise of industrial technology and the locus of multi- levellgd experiment in representative govern- ment. If pragmatism is a definitive American phenomenon, it was in the sphere of education that it began to exert its considerable influence and contributed to progressive developments which resulted in the 0.8. education breaking away from the overtly intellectual moorings of its European heritage. Education is a primary concern of the pragmatist, and the concepts of utility, prog- ress, democracy, and technology are crucial to the pragmatic view of education. The pragmatist asserts that the process of education is learning to reconstruct one's experience intelligently. The child, rather than subject matter, is con- sidered chtral to education, and the child's interests. It may be said that, as a single movement, pragmatism is no longer extant; but as a body of ideas, it makes a considerable impact on American life and education. Its pervasive symbiotic relationship with educational tech- nology has not been plumbed, but the veins of educational thought and practice, unacknowledged and unspoken, may still throb with pragmatic blood. While one might be at perfect liberty to apply any philosophy to instructional development practices to 15 examine the philosophical theories that considerably charac- terize an educational program, it was deemed advisable to employ pragmatism for these reasons already mentioned above: (1) it is a modern philosophy, (2) rooted in American educational system, and (3) interlinked with con- temporary concerns. Humanism With the increasing introduction of technology in the educational arena, a phenomenon that still continues unabated, discord, disenchantment and dissenting voices are heard in the hallowed halls of educational establishment. One is thrilled with the exciting possibilities that technology offers, but there seems to emerge a gnawing suspicion that a technological revolution in classrooms may not lead future generations in desired directions, whatever be indicated as the ideal direction. If, in instructional technology, learning is ”purposive and controlled," the factors that lead to controlled learning, it is feared in some circles, may tend to "dehumanize" education. James Finn zeroed into this problem when he wrote: ... Instructional technology is, run doubt, here to stay. Our problem, becomes one, run: so much of how to live with it on some kind of feather-bedding basis, but how to control it so that the proper objectives of education may be served a? the human being remain central in that process. The centrality of human being in a world he or she creates is the concern of humanism. Albert Levi defined l6 humanism, in the broadest sense, as simply the "quest for value". He elaborated this quest for value as all that opposes the specifically human to a 'transcendence' which is too recondite and a 'nature' which is too neutral and unfeeling; the vital, the organic, and the human, that is, against the merely mechanical; human freedom, fortune, and fate against the operations of an impersonal causality; will against force;32value against fact; the human against the brutal. Like pragmatism, humanism defies a systematic and mono- lithic statement of definition. The term 'humanism' as a number of more or less distinct meanings, all referring to a world view in some way centered on man rather than on the suprahuman or the abstract. The definition of "humanism" as provided by Webster's Third International Dictionary reads as follows: A doctrine, set of attitudes, or way of life centered upon human interests or values: as a: a philosophy that rejects supernaturalism, re- gards man as a natural object, and asserts the essential dignity and worth of man and his capacity (1) achieve self-realization through the use of reason and the scientific method... 9 (often cap): a religion subscribing to these beliefs. The ambiguity of the term "humanism" is created when an entire metaphysic is brought into play in the use of the term which results in different implications according to whether ”we hold or do not hold that there is in the nature of man something which breathes an air outside of time and a personality whose profoundest needs surpass the order of 33 the universe.” There has been a consistent criticism against the l7 all-pervading technology that impacts on education. The interplay of men and machines in education and the value system that needs to be imposed have remained a favorite theme of educational theorists and technologists. For Finn, the automatic classroom was a combination of both men and machines, ”but one in which the human element still plays the central part with the machines being the slave of man, not the other way around.34 It. was Finn's belief that educational technologists insist that the products and efforts of industry concen- trate on the human being. He went on to add that in the next few years, "we need more to follow the lead of Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow than we do B.F. Skinner and other behaviorists. With media and a different instructional design, we can move into the affective domain and be concerned with human beings."35 Thus, on the one hand, there is a firm belief that technology is here to stay and progress; on the other hand, there is alarm and suspicion about the 'dehumanizing effects' of technology. The quest for values increasingly questions the relevance of technology and the 'uncertain' future to which educational technology would lead human- kind. Consequently, it is opportune to examine the grounds on which humanists base their arguments against educational technology by choosing humanism as one philosophical genre to examine the instructional development processes in educational technology. 18 For these reasons, this study undertook a study of pragmatism, as proposed by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, and Humanism, as put forward by the humanist psychologist Abraham Maslow and the Catholic metaphysician Jacques Maritain. A JOURNEY THROUGH THE PAST The AECT Committee for Definition and Terminology which drafted the statement of definition singled out three successive patterns of interest that for nearly 50 years shaped the development of the field of educational tech- nology. There were: (1) the use of a broad range of re- sources, (2) the emphasis on individualized and personal- ized learning, and (3) the use of systems approaches.36 In a similar vein, it is expedient to review some of the salient contributions made by notable persons, events, and movements in the field of instructional/educational technology as it strove to discover its professional identi- ty. This brief journey through history, which will be treated in the next chapter, is intended to underscore the importance of these contributions, to record the feverish excitement they caused, the hopes they raised and the dis- illusionments they produced as well as to emphasize the significance of the present study in its attempt to dis- cover a new conceptual framework resulting from a philoso- phical investigation of instructional development prac- tices. 19 FOOTNOTES 1Association for Educational Communications and Technology, ”The Field of Educational Technology: A State- ment of Definition,” Audiovisual Instruction 17 (October 1972): 36. 2 ibid. 3Kenneth J. Silber, ”What Field Are We In, Anyhow?" Audiovisual Instruction 15 (May 1970): 21-24. 4James D. Finn, "Professionalizing the Audio-Visual Field,“ AV Communication Review 1 (Winter 1953): 7. 5James D. Finn, Extending Education Through Tech- nology: Selected Writings by James D. Finn on Instructional Technology, ed. RonaLd J. McBeath (Washington, D.C.: AECT, 1972), p. ix. 6Finn, AVCR 1 (Winter 1953): 16. 7ibid. 8Finn, Selected Writings, p. 173. 9Gerald Torkelson, "AVCR - One Quarter Century: Evolution of Theory and Research” AV Communication Review 25 (Winter 1977): 356. 108. Otanael Smith, Kenneth D. Benne, William 0. Stanley, and ArchibaLd W. Anderson, Readings in the Social Aspects of Education (Danville, 111.: Interstate Printers and Publishers, 1951), p. 557. 11 Finn, AVCR 1 (Winter 1953): 14. 12AECT Task Force on Definition and Terminology, Educational Technology: Definition and Glossary of Terms, Vol. 1 (Washington, D.C.: AECT, 1977). 13AECT, Definition and Glossary, pp. 1—7. 14ibid. 15Lawrence Kohlberg and Rochelle: Mayer, ”Development as the Aim of Education,” Harvard Educational Review 42 (November 1972): 449-96. 20 16Ronald K. Bass, D. Barry Lumsden, and Charles Dills, “Instructional Development: The State of the Art” in Instructional Development: The State of the Art, ed. by Ronald K. Bass et a1. (Columbus, Ohio: Collegiate Publish- ing, 1978), pp. 240. 17William Winn, "Relationship Between Research and Instruction," International Journal of Instructional Media 8 (1980-81): 306. 18Promoting Educational Technology: Summary Report of the Annual Lake Okoboji Educational Media. Leadership Conference (25th, Milford, Iowa, August 20-24, 1979) (Washington, D.C.: AECT, 1979), p. 77. 19 ibid., p. 51. 20 p. 52. 21David G. Hawkridge, ”Next Year, Jerusalem! The Rise of Educational Technology," British Journal of Edu- cational Technology, 7 (January 1976): 27. 22Glen E. Snelbecker, Learning Theory, Instruction- a1 Theory and Psychoeducational Design (New York: McGraw, 1974), p. 46. 23Corliss Lamont, The Philosophy of Humanism 5th rev. and enlarged ed. (London: Pemberton Publishing Co., 1965), p. 3-4. 24Donald P. Ely, "Toward a Philosophy of Instruction— al Technology,” Journal of Educational Technology 1 (1970): 81. 25Susanne Langer, "On the Relations Between Philos- ophy and Education,” Harvard Educational Review 26 (Spring 1956): 139. 26William James, Pragmatism: and Four Essays from the Meaning of Truth (New York: New American Library, 1909; A Meridian Book, 1974), p. 17. 27AECT, "The Field of Educational Technology: A Statement of Definition" Audiovisual Instruction 17 (October 1972): 37. 28Horace S. Thayer, Meaning and Action: A Study of American Pragmatism (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1973), p. 3. Finn, quoted in AECT, Definition and Glossary, 21 29John E. Smith, Purpose and Thought: Meaning of Pragmatism (New Haven: Yale University' Press, 1978), p. 50. 3oCarlton H. Bowyer, Philosophical Perspectives for Education (Glenview, Ill.: Foresman and Co., 1970), pp. 17-18. 31Finn, Extending Education, p. 153. 32Albert W. Levi, Humanism and Politics: Studies in the Relationship of Power and Value in the Western Tra- dition (Bloomington: Indiana University' Press, 1969), p. 15. 33Jacques Maritain, True Humanisun 5th ed., tr. by M.R. Adamson (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1950), p. xii. 34Finn, Extending Education, p. 153. 3SFinn, Extending Education, p. 305-6. 36AECT, A Statement of Definition, p. 37. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE This chapter will provide a brief historical survey of the Educational and Instructional Technology nmwement--the persons, events, and movements that influenced the growth of this profession especially from the 19203--as well as a review of the literature on Pragmatism, Humanism, and the Instructional Development Institute (IDI) Model with its 24 decision-making steps, or processes.1 HISTORY OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY Early Beginnings Although a1 comprehensive historical analysis of educational technology could be referred back to the educational writings and practices of Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827), Friedrich Wilhelm. Froebel (1782— 1852), and Johann Friedrich Herbart (1776—1841), as Paul Saettler mentions in his classic, A History of Instruction— al Technologyz, the early stirrings of such a movement could be traced back to the Elder Sophists in Athens and to the Socratic Method of Instruction in the fifth century 22 23 B.C. Later, Pierre Abelard (1079-1142) initiated the scholastic method (n5 instruction where theological propo- sitions would be presented with pros and cons; this was later improved by St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). In his Great Didactic, John Amos Comenius (1592-1670), set forth a theoretical basis which included his ideas of Panaso- phia, a system of universal knowledge that dealt. with every phase of instruction. The educational theories of Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), a non-teaching philos- opher, would also influence later practitioners of instructional method since scholastic method was no longer practised in public universities; it was a new phase for instructional technology. For all practical reasons, the early twentieth century, may be considered the time ‘when instructional technology began to manifest itself as a distinctive field of educational enterprise. "It is clear," wrote Saettler, “that at the beginning of the twentieth century there occurred a series of related events, which, together, might be interpreted as the beginning of a science of instruc- tion."3 While acknowledging the philosophical underpin- nings of educational technology as evidenced in the writings of early Greek thinkers as a historically valid link, Wallington did not find it operationally relevant for educational technology, an ”essentially young field of 4 study.” Ely stated that one ought to begin with the 24 twentieth century, since this is a twentieth century movement.5 James Finn wrote: Ours is a knowledge generating culture with its birth in the second Industrial Revolution, the age of automation, the age of atomic power. Instructional technology is related to this development and gould be thought to have begun in the early 19203. The stirrings of educational technology in the 19203 is connected with the first formal movement in visual instruction which was based on the concept of visual aids at the service of conventional teaching; the notions of classification of visual aids and their integration with the curriculum eventually followed, when still photography and motion pictures began to be increasingly used. The advent of sound films broke the earlier resistance to this movement and took it one step further to audio- visual instruction. PERSONALITIES Three American educators whose writings, at the turn of the century, influenced the modern science of technology of instruction were William James, John Dewey, and Edward Thorndike. In Talks to Teachers on Psychology, published in 1901, James distinguished between the art and science of teaching and called for a scientific approach to instruc- tion. 25 John Dewey was the pragmatist whose hypotheses were never submitted t1) scientific experimentation, despite his warnings to inquire, test, and to criticize. But his comprehensive theoretical system, which ranged from the nature of man and learning to ethical and logical theory, revolutionized the educational scene in the United States through the powerful Progressive Education Movement. Dewey's educational theories converted the conventional classroom into an experimental laboratory, an environment to be explored by the pupils. For him, stimulus and response were not to be sharply distinguished but to be seen always as organically related.7 If Dewey's educational theories were not subjected to scientific experimentation, Thorndike both theorized and investigated along scientific lines. Thorndike anticipated programmed instruction when he wrote: If, by a nfiracle of mechanical ingenuity, a book could be so arranged that only to him who had done what was directed on page one would page two become visible, and so on, much that now requirgd personal instruction could be managed by pr1nt. Proponents for programmed learning, who happily quoted Thorndike half-a-century later, did not pause to think that such techniques would be trivial when compared to his monumental writings on connectionism and the laws of learning. A student of William James at Harvard, Thorndike had formulated laws of learning that provided basic 26 principles leading to a technology of instruction. His law of effect stated: When a modifiable connection between a situation and a response is made and is accompan- ied or followed by a satisfactory state of affairs, that connection's strength is increased; when made and accompanied, or followed by an anngying state of affairs its strength is decreas- ed. This signified the existence of a pleasure-pain princi- ple according to which a connection between a situation (stimulus) and a behavior (response) is strengthened only if some success followed that response. This principle of reinforcement foreshadowed later works by Pressey, Skinner, and Glaser. Behaviorism and Its Influence WATSON Watson, who shared many ideas with Thorndike, based his studies on the experimental analysis of human behavior, using techniques that were developed from similar studies of animal behavior. This first behaviorist abhorred con- sciousness as an unusable concept and advocated scientific means of predicting and controlling human behavior through teaching which consisted in the presentation of the correct stimuli to elicit the desired responses from the students. 27 SKINNER B.F. Skinner who was influenced by the research of Pavlov and Watson sought a science of instruction based on operant conditioning in which sets of learned acts were reinforced so as to increase the probability of their recurrence. Key to successful instruction was the analysis of the effect of reinforcement and the design of techniques that are set up in specific and reinforcing sequences; the reinforcements themselves were made contingent on desired behaviors. These Skinnerian concepts provided the vital force for programmed instruction. It seemed that a technology of instruciton based on operant conditioning' would provide the necessary impetus and rationale to establish the profession on a firm footing. The human organism was seen. more sensitive to precise contingencies than any other organism ever studied. ”We have every reason to expect," wrote Skinner, "that the most effective control of human learning will require instructional aid."10 If objections were raised against the 'dehumanizing' use (MS devices in classroom, or assessment of intellectual achievement in purely mechanis- tic terms was deplored, it was argued that the externalized manifestations, through measurable behaviors, vindicated such mental processes and states; human thinking must eventually be defined in terms of visible and verifiable behavior. There was a sense of implicit faith in the invincibility of behaviorism. In a paper presented at a 28 conference of Current Trends in Psychology and the Behavior- al Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, Skinner himself evinced this renewed enthusiasm. We are (M) the threshold of an exiciting and revolutionizing period, in which the scientific study of man will be put to work in man's best interests. Education must play its part. It must accept the fact that a sweeping revision of educational practices is possible and inevita- ble. TEACHING MACHINES AND PROGRAMMED INSTRUCTION If this 1954 address marked Skinner as the progenitor of programmed learning, S.L. Pressey in 1926-27, had antici— pated the movement with his testing machine. Pressey, who had little time for improving his testing machine, made his strongest contribution to educational technology through his strong belief which foresaw the dawn of industrial revolution in education and the more efficient and effec- tive learning it would entail.12 The programmed learning movement gathered momentum as refinements were introduced in the clarity of objectives, alternative routes and individualized pace toward progress, and higher degrees of feedback; these were evidenced in the Dalton Plan and Winnetka Technique. Individualized educa- tional projects such as the Individually Prescribed Instruction (IPI) and Program for Learning in Accordance with Needs (PLAN) are indebted. to these earlier enter- prises. The 'teaching machine' revolution initiated by Skinner ran into opposition for purportedly venturing out to 29 replace teachers, misconstruing the notion that the learning process was necessarily mechanical, and even for being generally 'antiprofessional' and superficial. But by the early 19605, the term 'program' came to be generally recognized as more acceptable than 'teaching machines' since the former meant “educational materials after they had been arranged in the best possible sequence for students."13 Programmed instruction, whatever be its limitations and contributions, would lead in later years to modified versions and uses of electronic computers and other print and nonprint instructional materials. An expansion of the concept of programmed instruciton to include whole schools led to the individualization of learning under such titles as 'continuous progress p1an,‘ 'individually prescribed instruction,‘ 'the tutorial communi- ty,‘ and many others. These plans made use of various types of instructional modules having such labels as 'contracts', 'learning activity packages,‘ 'teacher-learning Thits,‘ 'performance criteria units, and 'UNIPACS.‘ If conventional teaching upheld the primacy of teacher, chalkboard and books, the "advent of programmed instruction in the late 19505 helped to place a new empha- sis on the learning process and individual learner."15 Learning was seen as the goal of the instructional process, and in the McLuhanesque landscape of 'mediated generation' where information level outside of school was found to be greater than that inside, the 'deschooling movement' initi- ated by Ivan Illich and the 'School Without Walls' movement 30 found greater acceptance. MOVEMENTS The Film and Television Decades The ten-year-period immediately following World War II saw extensive studies in such areas as film effectiveness, motor skill training, and perceptual learning. But the wealth of instructional media research during this period was characterized by a preoccupation with 'evaluative' com- parisons: from the baseline of prevalent teaching practices the greater effectiveness of these innovative techniques had to be vindicated. These studies showed decided advant- ages for films and other audiovisual materials over class- room instruction. Following the legislative enactments that allocated television channels to education, the emphasis in instruc- tional media research switched dramatically from film to television: thus was born 'the decade of educational television'--approximately from the mid-19503 to the mid- 19608. This change ushered in a.repetition of 'evaluative' research. Research and Evaluative Studies The overriding concern of research studies in educa- tional/Instructional technology was comparative effective- ness of different media. In 1959, William Allen completed a 31 paper for NDEA, Title VII, which examined an estimated 2,500 to 3,000 research studies in educational media that had been conducted since 1919. Allen concluded: Enough comparative effectness research has been conducted to show that all of the newer educational media can teach factual information It might be a waste of research effort to continue the gross comparative studies (single medium vs. conventional instruction) with any of these media, particularly with motion pictures and tieslevision, except under special condi- tions. Twelve years later, Allen undertook another important summary of media research that covered the 1950-1970 period and stated: With some notable exceptions, instructional media research prior to 1950 was characterized by a preoccupation with evaluative comparison. In other words, learning from some unspecified film or other medium was compared with learning from some unspffified presentation by an instruc- tor or medium. Behaviorists and Cognitive Psychologists It was becoming increasingly clear that behavior modification, as an approach to designing instruction and to evolving instructional principles, failed to provide a complete theory, though substantial efforts were made in planning and conducting empirical tests for their vali- dation; instead of a new theory with interrelated princi- ples, what emerged was mainly an orientation and a set of working procedures. At the 1967 Lake Okoboji Leadership Conference, James Finn, who called himself ”a past sup- porter of behaviorism and shaping," said: "We must alter 32 our theoretical framework which is now moving in the direc- tion of behavioral shaping at too rapid a rate.“ Although he did not believe that we should throw out the baby with the bath, “somehow we have got to get over on the human free side as well. We are sort of standing with one foot in both camps . '18 The other camp Finn mentioned was that of cognitive psychologists and educationists. ”The black box of stimulus-response psychology has been invaded and the result is the development of theories about cognitive operations."19 In opposition to the behavioristic modifier's obses- sive concern with overt observable behavior, cognitive psychologists emphasized the more complex cognitive pro- cesses such as thinking, problem solving, language learn- ing, concept formation, and information processing. The learner, with a degree of autonomy and initiative was reinstated as the processor of information who actively selects and interprets certain stimuli from all those that impinge upon him in a learning situation. The major task of the instructor was to provide whatever guidance deemed necessary, as the 'student,‘ through inquiry search patterns, 'discovered' things for himself or herself. Unlike the behavioral camp of Skinner and his eager devotees, the 'cognitive camp' was peopled by a loose group of influential psychologists and educationists like Jerome Bruner, David Ausubel, Ralph H. Ojemann, Jean Piaget, Paul 33 Torrance, A.D. Woodruff, and others. The 'discovery learning' principles, 'advance organizers,‘ principles of subsumption, and developmental theories from this camp have provided newer insights into instructional theories, but one might add that, alike the behavior modification approach, cognitive construct tradition retained an identi- fiable position, but no complete instructional theory formulation. Whereas empirical support for behavior modifi- cation is rather cogent due to operationally defined learn- ing changes it employs, the cognitive theorists' conception of instruction and educational objectives are highly criti- cized for their lack of clarity and precision. They are, again, legitimately criticized more for what they are against, than what they are £p£.20 The logical and psychological premises heavily favored by their respective proponents, thus, seem in) tilt. the instructional development research in various ways. The 'logical' premises emphasize the learner, an orderly analysis of learner goals and desired outcomes toward a formulation cu? internally consistent objectives, task hierarchies, and instructional sequences; the 'psychologi- cal' approach, in contrast, emphasizes 'instructional' methods based on learning theory and the methods employed may be as divergent as the stimulus-response stance of behaviorists, or the 'advance organizers' of Ausubel's cognitive theory, or the 'modeling' principles based. on 34 social learning theory. The question is whether, if at all, an optimal synthesis of both these logical and psychologi- cal approaches could be effected. THREE PARADIGMATIC CHANGES The radical change from being called ”audiovisual instruction” to "educational technology" represented for this relatively young profession not only an enrichment phase, but almost a quantum leap. This was a revolutionary paradigmatic change which broadened its scope and deepened its impact. Parallel to developments in learning theories and sophistication in instructional materials were the introduction, increasing assimilation and identification with three orientations: communications, systems theory, and technology. Communications ”A fruitful approach to better understanding and greater efficiency in the audiovisual field,” wrote Charles Hoban in 1956, ”seems to lie in the concept of communi- cations.'21 According to Lasswell, "no change in the academic world has been more characteristic of the age than the discovery of communication as a field of research, teaching 22 . . . The commun1cat1on or1en- and professional employment." tation to what was then known as audiovisual instruction altered the theoretical framework of the field and the 35 entire process of communication and the dynamic models it engendered were being greatly studied. The concept of communications helped the audiovisual field of the 19503 to move into new directions. It was easier to transfer the concern for the role of media in education to an emphasis on the cmmunication of ideas.23 Systems Theory The second important watershed in the history of educational technology was the introduction of the systems concept. Instructional product was no longer considered as the basic unit, but rather a component of a complete instructional system which was integrated according to instructional objectives and problems. The systems concept was essentially an idea of organization that included the gestalt or whole function of a unit of organization. . . . Instructional technology is more than the sum of its parts. It is a systematic way of designing, carrying out, and evaluating the total process of learning and teaching in terms of specific objectives based on human learning and communication, and employing a combination of human and nonhuman reigurces to bring about more effective instruction. Finn remarked: “For an audiovisual program ..., and this is the heart or our argument, ... is a clear-cut 25 He decried the atomistic fashion in which the system. audiovisual director managed his system, "which extends from producer to teacher and class back to producer again." 36 He concluded: "The audiovisual movement is relatively young. It is also geared into the technological world of the future--a world of interlocking, complicated system of I 26 men and mach1nes.” Technology The technological world of the future--the third important orientation of educational technology--which Finn talked about had already’ made its markq for‘ interlinked with the concept of systems was the concept of technology which was more than "men and machines.“ John Kenneth Galbraith defined technology as ”the systematic appli- cation of scientific and other organized knowledge to practical tasks."27 Technology helps to break down tasks into detailed subdivisions of functions or activities so that, through systematic observation, analysis and ordering, organized knowledge could be put to work. What Galbraith ascribed to economic planning could "apply across the board to our tech- nological culture and to any large-scale application of instructional technology."28 A year later, Finn, who viewed the build-up of audio- visual equipment and materials in education as one of the principal conditions for a 'technological revolution, stated: Basically, I hope that... we can no longer afford the luxury of the traditional system; that the system needs a vast overhaul and, in order to 37 solve some of the problems presented by the three revolutions, we must develop a technology of educafiéon that will carry a greater share of the load. The impact and influence of these three orientations-- communications, systems theory, and technology--on edu- cational technology have been considerable, and they con- tinue (x: chart future directions for this profession. The AECT, after having acknowledged the contributions from various events, movements, and personalities, finally drew up the official definition of educational technology in 1976. Educational Technology is a complex, integrated process involving people, procedures, ideas, devices, and organization, for analyzing problems and devising, implementing, evaluating, and managing solutions to those progbems, involv- ed in all aspects of human learning. Changes in Names and Perspectives It had been an arduous journey for Educational Tech- nology, a journey replete with promises and opportunities, as well as fraught with disappointments and disillusion- ments. From the 'visual instruction' of the 19203, it had grown into 'audiovisual instruction' and finally into 'educational technology,‘ each phase of growth and progress being punctuated. with major theoretical orientations and lively debates regarding the label of the field. The Depart- ment of Audio-Visual Instruction (DAVI) of the National Educational Association (NBA) acquired the new title of the ”Association for Educational Communications and Technology” 38 in 1970, which came in the wake of a major report to U.S. Congress. AECT's own professional journal, Audiovisual Com- munication Review (AVCR), underwent an appropriate trans- formation and was later renamed Educational Communications and Technology Journal (ECTJ). The change in the name of this emerging profession was not a fortuitous occurrence, but a calculated move into newer directions and unexplored avenues. Across the Atlantic, the enthusiasm for the new name reflected not only a break with an unproductive past, but also an alliance with a hopeful future. At a 1966 conference of the Association for Programmed Learning, the role of this tech- nique itself was reconsidered and programmed learning was thought to be possibly just one item in the coming revo- lution in educational technology. A year later, the journal of the Association for Programmed Learning, called Program- med Learning, was renamed Educational Technology. Eleven months later, in January 1968, a change in name was also effected in the parent association of Programmed Learning and Educational Technology. In 1970, another journal was also launched in Britain, the Journal of Educational Tech- nology which would later be renamed the British Journal of Educational Technology. RECAPITULATION OF HISTORICAL SURVEY The brief historical survey of educational technology from its early beginnings, the exciting 19203, the film and 39 television. decades of the 19403 and 19503, down to the present times of an 'exploding technological revolution' has attempted to array some of the noteworthy persons, events, and movements that shaped and guided the destiny of educational technology. The following names might serve to anchor the significant contributions to educational tech- nology. 1. PERSONS: Educational thinkers like Thorndike, James and Dewey; stalwarts in instructional/educational tech- nology like Finn, Dale, Hoban, Ely, Saettler, Allen, Heinich, Eboch, and Silber; psychologists like Skinner, Bruner, Gagné, Ausubel, and others. 2. EVENTS: Research studies of the postwar years; the film and TV impact studies, the years of teaching machines, programmed learning, programmed instruction, computer- assisted instruction, the establishment of DAVI and AECT, the Report of the Presidential Commission on Instructionl Technology, federal and private funding, technological progress in audiovisual hardware and software. 3. MOVEMENTS: Introduction of perception theories, learn- ing theories, psychoeducational theories, especially behavioristic and cognitive orientations; paradigmatic changes occasioned by communications, general systems theory, and technology. 40 This historical survey also helped to highlight some of the trends and events that argue for a conceptual frame- work that could build intc» a philosophy' of educational technology. 1. By tracing the origions of educational technology, especially from the 19203 up to the present time, one sees the concerted confluences of communication, behavioral sciences, general systems theory, and technology on educational technology in a: clearer manner. These consti- tute definitive watersheds in the development and progress of educational technology and partially explain the flutter and ferment of activities which robbed it of any definitive philosophy or theoretical formulation. 2. The premium placed on practicality and an ambivalent approach 11) hardware-inspired software programs pre-empted any constructive and systematic development of unifying theories. In successive waves, film and television, program- med instruction and teaching nachines, ATIs and TTIs, CAIs and CBEs have,31 at various times, held the world of educational technology captive, and continue to exert their influence in varying degrees. Their technological perco— 1ations have, indeed, filtered into the collective consciousness of educational technologists, but any claim of their uniqueness and singularity in totally revolution- izing the field continues to draw only an indifferent chuckle from professionals, except for a hardened core of aficionados. 41 3. Research and experimental studies so far have mostly investigated themes and topics that are marginal, ungeneral— izable and fragmented. Surveys of earlier research by professionals reveal that thousands of research studies now litter the educational technology scene as pieces of a jig-saw puzzle, waiting to be put together in a coherent pattern. 4. Educational technology has seen the fade-in and fade- out of various innovations, once trumpeted in as a 'signifi- cant technological breakthrough,‘ but now wistfully looked back on as a passing fad. Perhaps, new philosophical frame- works may serve as a factor in breaking the cyclic repe- titions of the theme. 5. The worship at the temple of educational technology has been largely confined to North American and European votaries. The unabashedly parochial mentality exhibited in research concerns where the relevance of educational tech- nology on American and British schools has been agoniz- ingly searched gives the lie to an official statement of definition that proposes educational technology as the facilitation of human learning. Those who strive to facili- tate human learning will now have to embrace a global out- look in drawing up a philosophy of educational technology. Educational technologists have been described as people with a 'foot in two camps': ”They seek to under- 32 stand the theory and apply it." But seeking to apply 42 scientific and other organized knowledge to the practical tasks of education, professionals in this field have been more concerned with practice than with theory; consequent- ly, theoretical investigations have been feeble and sparse. Educational technology proponents have repeatedly affirmed the necessity of such theoretical forays into the domain of educational technology. If it must be, according to Hawkridge, the "New Jerusalem” of the education of tomorrow, the future will have to witness the rise of more theoretical-deductive work, more effective techniques grounded in strong theory, more thinkers than doers. Hawridge quotes a 1975 personal communication from Brian Lewis, which is pertinent here. If the required techniques are produced at all, they will be produced by thinkers rather than doers. I firmly believe that the future of educational technology is now in the hands of the thinkers. What is needed is a handful of experi- enced people, who have thought wisely and deeply, and who are literally obsessed by the problems posed. These people must also have the ability to analyze and synthesize, and, in effect, to invent whole new conceptual frameworks. If they do not have this latter ability, they will be soon reduced merely to improving what already exists. I think that this radicaLBthinking is both a lonely and high risk activity. Various psychological theories of learning and teach- ing have inspired periods of intense activity in the domain of education, but none has been successful in providing adequate answers to all concerns of human learning. These theories, as sets of propositions which are syntactically 43 integrated and aimed at predicting and explaining observa- ble phenomena, have had significant and valuable impact on educational technology. An extended theory-building with the theories in the arsenal of educational technology may be useful, but can also lead to implausible eclecticism where one theory would militate against another. If, how- ever, these various theories could be organized into a meta-theory (or super-theory), which would seek to integrate harmoniously the implications of theories so far interlocked and "thus harmonize, integrate, rationalize, and explain all different conceptions" we would have a philosophy of educational technology.34 Right now, an aspiring student of the philosophy of education, especially from the field of educational tech- nology, is struck by its varieties and the intensity of the allegiance that is demanded. These students would like to understand and acknowledge the philosophical underpinnings of educational theories, but due to its multiplicity and pervasiveness in educational technology, they become as confused as a directional magnet in a junk pile. We have so far seen educational technology in its quest for a professional identity and the need for advanc- ing a methodological inquiry to investigate the philosophi- cal underpinnings that might underlie educational tech- nology. We will now look at Pragmatism and Humanism to provide a perspective to undertake this study. 44 PRAGMATISM In the following pages, we will look at the origins, of pragmatism, its two main protagonists in America, Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, and their contri- butions to this philosophical movement. Pragmatism - Philosgphical Antecedents Pragmatism, although acknowledged as a characteris- tically American philosophy, has complex antecedents, and, in the words of William James, is a ”New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking," as he subtitled his book, Pragmatism. These ancient ways of thought could refer back to Plato and the Greek Sceptics. Greek Origins The Aristotelian distinction between the realm of true knowledge (epistémé) and (fl? opinion (dpxa) made it possible for cognitions of the latter kind, which are concerned with the sensed objects of our everyday world, to be considered sufficient for practical affairs of life;35 but the search for theoretically adequate knowledge by serious philosophers could not be stilled with this arrange- ment. The Greek Sceptics, however, took the entire quest for philOSOphically genuine knowledge as a quixotic venture and urged that a knowledge which met the practical needs of life be considered adequate because any true knowledge of 45 the world was totally unattainable. "If a thesis is presumtively trueL then it will serve the rational man with an adeguate basis for practice."36 The teachings of Academic Scepticism were revitalized by the "Mitigated Sceptics' of the seventeenth century. David Hume would take up this position and make it the central theme for latter thinkers. Descartes and Kant Modern philosophy, in the meanwhile, found its champi— on in René Descartes and in his uncompromising formulation that to think philosophically is to accept as true only that which recommends itself to reason. To make this claim watertight, W.K. Clifford, in the Ethics of Belief, pro- vided a succinct formula: ”It is wrong everywhere and for any one to believe anything upon insufficient evi- dence.‘37 But this Cartesian 'intellectualism' met with stiff opposition from many philosophies, especially from Germany where 'voluntarism" was the prevalent philosophy. "I must abolish knowledge,” Kant had written in his Critique of Pure Reason, "to make room for belief." Kant wanted to stress the limits of theoretical reason and offer to practical reason a primacy which, despite its scope and significance, was restricted to a sphere of human action and interaction; the domain of pure and theoretical reason was definitely excluded from here. "It is only from a 46 practical point of view that the theoretically insuf- ficient holding of a thing to be true can be termed 38 The obligations of morality, however, believing.“ compelled us to think of ourselves as having a 'noumenal' self which lies outside the realm of causally conditioned 'phenomena' constituting experience. A crucial step to the development of pragmatism was, thus, taken through the aggrandizement of practical reason over theoretical reason, when Schopenhauer converted Kant's 'phenomena' into 'ideas.' It was found that the search for the philosophical- 1y genuine knowledge of Plato, which underlies ideas, cannot be carried out in the world around us (where we meet nothing but our own ideas), but rather in our consciousness of ourselves as possessing of will. Our actions are them- selves ideas, so spoke Schopenhauer: as phenomena, they are ideas; but as meaningful, they' are manifestations of a will. For him, thought was only an instrument of the will. This 'instrumentalist' analysis of human thinking would later influence the psychology of William James. Kantian and Empiricist Heritages Kant was read through the eyes of Schopenhauer, when Kant's 'phenomena' were converted into 'ideas.' A similar travesty was effected by some neo-Kantians like F.A. Lange, when through a reformation of 'phenomena' into 'sensations', Kant was read through the eyes of British 47 Empiricism. It is our human nature, Lange argued, that determines the kind of world we experience; Langean psycho- logy replaced Kantian logic. The Kantian analysis of the purposive character of belief and the roles of will and desire in forming belief, the Hegelian conception of change and development of subject matters, joined forces with British Empiricism, which stressed the role of experience in the genesis of knowledge, in shaping the emergence of American pragmatism. The Empiricists had analysed. belief’ as being intimately tied with action, especially with the motive to act. When John Stuart Mill defined the external world in terms of possible sensations, Alexander Bain looked at it in terms of possible active responses to sensations. Bain, according- ly, defined belief as 'that upon which man is prepared to act,I and pragmatism, according to Peirce, was ”scarce more than a corollary" to this understanding.39 Thus, British Empiricism and German Voluntarism eventually constituted 'preparedness to act' as the foundation of belief, and paved the way for Pragmatism. Pragmatism - Meaning of the Word To be 'pragmatic' is broadly understood to mean "get- ting things done" such as in business or public affairs, or achieving results. In this popular sense, 'pragmatism' refers to the workability and practicality of ideas and proposals as criteria of their merit in the successful 48 pursuit of specific objectives. Academically, pragmatism is an opposition to invoking the authority of precedents or of abstract principles. William James once remarked that pragmatism is derived from the Greek word,I7/Doclluoc, meaning action, "from which our word 'practice' and 'practical' come."40 Peirce, whose 'pragmatism' connoted closer connection between purpose and cognition--as opposed to James who emphasized action, practice and the practical--could not bring himself to call his theories 'practicalism', because Kant's p535: tisch referred pointedly to the moral sphere. Instead, Peirce opted for Kant's usage of the term pragmatisch which with its reference to human purpose was more similar to his position. Pragmatisch. refers to (experimental and 41 purposive thought based on and applying to experience. James adds that the term was ”first introduced into philos- ophy by Mr. Charles Peirce in 1878."42 The article alluded to by James was published in the Popular Science 43 Monthly. Early Beginningy: 1870-1898 The earlier presentation of the so-called Metaphysical Club at Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the 18703 and the first stirrings of the ideas of pragmatism have been chronicled in a number of studies.44 At any rate, Charles Sanders Peirce is generally acknowledged as the originator 49 of the pragmatist movement in America. While much of Peirce's work remained unpublished and in relative obscuri- ty except for lectures and authored essays in dictionaries, it fell to William James, well-known psychologist and philosopher at Harvard, to champion the cause of Pragmatism through journal articles and popular lectures. James freely admitted his indebtedness to Peirce whose lectures on pragmatism he dubbed as "flashes of a briliant light reliev- ed against Cimmerian darkness!"45 Nevertheless, his own definitive contributions and insights would. mark. William James as a protagonist for pragmatism. The purposive theory of mind which is one of the pivotal issues in the pragma- tism of James is foreshadowed in The Principles of Psycho- logy, one of his monumental works published in 1890, and his analysis of the purposeful direction of thought dis- tinguishes The Will To Believe, published in 1896. But James through his "Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results,” a lecture delivered on August 26, 1896, before the Philosophical Union of the University of California at Berkeley, developed substantially his own formulation of the pragmatic method for dealing with philosophical problems. Peirce, in his article "How to Make Our Ideas Clear” published in 1878, had stated that the sole motive of thought was to produce belief, and belief, in turn, was a 46 rule for action. The whole function of thought is to 50 produce habits of action.47 Then, in a celebrated maxim, which he later called 'definition of a definition', Charles Sanders Peirce stated: Consider what effects, that might conceivab- ly have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to have. Then, our conception of these effefis is the whole of our conception of the object. Peirce argued that we could make our ideas clear by determining what conduct the ideas prepare us for. James endorsed this principle, but with a further clarification. He suggested that a concept dictates specific conduct because it first foretells some particular turn in our experience which shall call for that conduct from us. He stated: The effective meaning of any philosophical proposition can always be brought down to some particular experience, whether active or passive; the point lying rather in the fact that the experience must be par4tgicular, than in the fact that it must be active. Both the original declaration of Peirce in 1878, and the Berkeley lecture of James in 1898, generated little interest. But, when the Lowell lectures at Boston in 1906- 50 7, and the reworked articles and earlier lectures were integrated in the publication of Pragmatism in 1907, it sparked a lively controversy. Negative criticisms came from Bertrand Russell, G.E. Moore, F.H. Bradley, and others. Although they did not share a single theory of pragmatism, Peirce, Dewey, and F.C.S. Schiller came to the defence of James in this pragmatist vs. antipragmatist controversy to 51 present a single "orthodox” position. In the first year of its publication, Pragmatism went into five printings; and pragmatism as a definitive philosophical movement in the United States was clearly established. Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) Charles S. Peirce was born in Cambridge, Mass., in September 1839. His formal education culminated with a degree in chemistry from Harvard University in 1863. From 1861 to 1891, he was on the staff of the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, though from 1869, he was also associated with the Harvard Observatory for some years. While he was, for a time, in charge of the Office of Weights and Mea- sures, he recommended the expansion of this office which eventually led to the establishment of the National Bureau of Standards in 1901. Peirce also lectured at Harvard on history of modern science and logic during various academic years, from 1879 to 1884. He served also as lecturer on logic at John Hopkins University. His divorce and subsequent re-marriage in 1883, and especially his nonconformist views with the establishment prevented his academic appointment from being renewed, and his frequent clashes with the administration at the Geodetic Survey finally led to his resignation from this office in 1891. From then, he never held any academic post nor had he any regular income; so he tried to make 52 ends meet by writing reviews and articles for dictionaries. Peirce's last years were spent in abject poverty and sick— ness except for generous help from such friends as William James--in whose honor Peirce added Santiago (St. James) as his middle name. He died of cancer on April 19, 1914. A scientist by career, Peirce was passionately wedded to logic. Although he wrote technical papers in such diverse subjects as chemistry, philology, history of philos- ophy, and religion, he gave a series of Lowell lectures and Harvard University lectures in logic. Peirce was a thinker of the first magnitude. As a brilliant logician, Peirce was given to careful analysis and his pragmatism is primarily a matter of logic, although it is set forth as a theory of meaning and a method of making our concepts clear. At the same time, his speculative mind sought for a general inter- pretation of reality-—a difficult task which resulted in some unsolved ambiguities. With the publication of the first six volumes of his Collected. Papers between 1931 and 1935, a steadily mounting interest is evinced in his philosophical ideas; the freshness, originality, and penetration of his writings continue to impress his readers. Peirce, James and Dewey, the impressible trio of pragmatist stalwarts, are usually acclaimed to have further- ed the cause of pragmatism, but among these, none deserves the 'title of popularizer of pragmatism. more aptly than 53 William James. A physician turned psychologist and, gradual- ly, a philosopher, James is the live-wire who turned the spark of interest in pragmatism like a wildfire on the American landscape. William James (1842-1910) William James was born in New York City on January 11, 1842. Educated in private schools in Europe and the U.S.A., James entered Harvard University’ to study chemistry and anatomy, and later enrolled in Harvard Medical School. Before he obtained his M.D. from Harvard in 1869, he had taken time for a zoological expedition to Brazil and to study physiological psychology in Germany; he thus became remarkably informed in science as well as German, French and English literature. Beginning as an instructor in anatomy and physiology at Harvard in 1873, James quickly turned his attention to teaching psychology, and held professorships in philosophy, psychology, and again in philosophy from 1885 till his retirement in 1907. James, who contracted to write a general treatise on psychology in 1878, took 12 years to accomplish his task because he could not find a satisfac- tory theory of cognition; but when The Principes of Psycho- logy was published in two volumes in 1890, he became a celebrity and the book was translated into many European languages. 54 A son of a clergyman, James did not belong to any official church, but rather cultivated a personal religion; his philosophical writings can be regarded as an intellectu- al search for religious faith. Both in The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902) and The Will to Believe (1897), James looks at the life of religion which for him consisted of the belief that there is an unseen order and that our supreme good lies in harmoniously adjusting ourselves to it. In 1907, James published Pragmatism where he proceed- ed to elaborate a theory of truth--a1though he called it a “method" for determining and testing hypotheses. Absolute truth can exist only in a created and fixed universe, James argued, but the ”pluralistic" universe that we experience is different from it and human efforts should subsequently be focused in shaping a future world. Recognized in his last years as the foremost American philosopher of his time who wrote in a lively literary style; James died on August 26, 1910. Inconsistencies in Writings Despite the significant contributions of both Peirce and James towards the advancement of pragmatism, it would be erroneous to assume that pragmatism is proffered as a conceptually clarified monolithic system with uniform metaphysical interpretations about reality, truth and meaning. 55 There are inconsistencies as well as apparent and real contradictions in their writings, as they strove, over the years, to reword and reformulate their metaphysical writings. The impact of various philosophical theories like the British Empiricism, Darwinian Evolutionism, Hegelian Monism, Kantian Idealism, Scotistic Realism, and the Positivism of Comte on the emergence of pragmatism is considerable; both Peirce and James absorbed and reacted to these philosophies in varying degrees. When Professor Lovejoy undertook in 1908, a study' of pragmatism. in an effort to clarify what it purported to be and distinguished thirteen points of the doctrine,51 F.C.S. Schiller replied that there were theoretically as many pragmatisms 52 as there were pragmatists. The notion that according to pragmatism the criteria of usefulness determine the meaning and the truth of thought gained ground in uncritical circles which development was, in no small part, due to the colloquial and unclear language employed by the pragmatists themselves. Some observations may be helpful in understanding the philosophical positions of Charles Peirce and William James. 1. The pragmatists were partly to blame for the confusion engendered by their positions. James had a popular style and arresting language and often used expressions which were either misleading or designed to confirm the pre- judices of his critics. While his younger brother, novelist 56 Henry James, wrote with careful qualifications and minute attention to details that one might expect of a philos- opher, William James carried "the reader away with his humor and zest and the vividness of his imagery."53 His characterization of truth as 'the eXpedient in the way of knowing” cannot help being misunderstood as 'calculating.‘ “You must bring out of each word,” he wrote, “its practical cash value, set it at work within the stream of your experience."54 Peirce's style alternates clarity with obscurity. He could be admirably lucid in discussing complex issues, but could also be disconcertingly capricious in dark sayings. Josiah Royce summed up the matter very wel when he observed: "It is not always easy to understand Peirce Too often the reader meets with a thought of surpassing brilliancy, and follows it eagerly, only to have it dis- appear like the cuttlefish in the inky blackness of its own secretions."55 2. The writings of Peirce, though consistent and strictly logical, were not subsumed into a system during his life time. The six volumes of his Collected Papers were posthumously published and, except for occasional contri- butions to journals and dictionaries, the original manu- scripts of Peirce went largely unnoticed and some of them evidence temporal development. Similarly, part of the looseness and vagueness of James's thought can be attribut- ed to a fact characteristic of his published works: all of 57 his works except for The Principles of Psychology and its abridgement, Psychology, were either published lectures 56 ... or collected articles. One is reminded of the vivid characterization by James of consciousness like the flight of a bird which is made of an alternation of flights and perchings.57 The intellectual flights of James are made up of articles, speeches, ,and 1etters--and the books provide the perchings. James often expressed the hope of doing a systematic work, but the man who wanted to be a 'philosopher's philosopher' was a victim to a lecture- circuit which relentlessly demanded his time and energy; he 58 lapsed into a ”squashy popular lecture style" and in 1904 alone, he records, he declined one hundred invitations to speak.59 3. Perhaps it would be more accurate to state that the looseness in James's thought is attributable to his aversion for strict, rigorous thinking. James himself acknowledges this in a letter: ”I permitted myself to remain so deliberately on account of the strong aversion with which I am filled for the humbugging pretence of exactitude in the definition of terms and description of states that has prevailed in psychological literature."60 All the same, James remained faithful to the concern of presenting a unified picture "as it presents itself to my own eyes, dealing in broad strokes, and avoiding minute controversy."61 58 The specific doctrines of pragmatism, namely their theory of meaning, the theory of truth, and the scientific inquiry method is dealt with in greater detail in Chapter III where the pragmatist perspective for the analysis is discussed. HUMANISM The Sophist Beginnings In its broadest sense, humanism is a concept as ancient as cdassical Greece and as modern as the twentieth century. It could be termed basically as a philosophical outlook centered on the autonomy of man as a dignified, rational being, possessing' within himself the source of truth and right. The Greek Sophist Protagoras in the fifth century B.C. declared: "Man is the measure of all things." Human consciousness was enthroned as the alpha and omega of all thinking, and the individual as the center of values. This humanistic scholarship has been a rich legacy for the West that viewed human personality as a virtue, while the sages of the Orient dismissed it as an illusion and an evil. From the golden age of Greece that culminated in the age of Pericles down through the centuries came the Homeric poems, Aesychlian dramas, Pindar's‘ odes that celebrated patriotism, sacrifice, chivalry, and virtue, paving at the same time the way for the dehumanization of mythology in which they were couched. 59 In Athens, the humanistic Sophists transmuted mythos to lgggg and tradition to intellect. These founding fathers of pedagogy changed the age of theogony into the age of rationalism. As early as the second century A.D., Aulus Gellius, a Latin rhetorician, "stressed the need for literary studies as alone able to endow man with the fullness of humanity in accordanc with the ideal of the Greek paideia (education) and the Roman humanitas.62 Curious about various aspects of humanity, the Sophists undertook a systematic study of human reality that sought to liberate it from any' mythical. or religious preoccu- pations; pedagogy became the precondition. for reform in human understanding. The gods came down to earth: according to the ancients, Socrates deserved the credit for having brought philosophy from the heavenly abode of gods to the earthly abode of man. Pedagogy: A Humanistic Contribution If the art of pedagogy had as its goal the formation of the political man, oratory was the technique employed, an intellectual mastery of manipulating one's fellow citizens. The Sophists systematically organized a course of seven arts (later called the 'liberal arts') which provided a harmonious and thorough-going education in the scientific guadrivium or the four disciplines (arithmetic, harmony, geometry, and astronomy) and the literaray trivium or 60 three disciplines (grammar, rhetoric, and dialectics). These would provide for the later universities the pattern of paideia and would endure for over 2,000 years. Plato was suspicious of some of the seven arts because thought was endangered with a possible enslavement to the perceptible. In contrast, Aristotle was a systematic thinker and an analytical genius. So benumbing was his intellectual prowess and overpowering the weight of his authority that, centuries later, generations of scholars would rest content with repeating his teachings and close interminable debates with a magic call upon his authority, 'ut dixit magister'--thus spoke the master. An Aristotelian disciple, Alexander the Great, carried his teachings and wisdom into the countries be conquered. The Mouseion or the House of Muses, from which the word 'museum' is derived, established at Alexandria in Egypt was the prototype of Oxford and Cambridge, and the "Treasure Island” of scientific research as Francis Bacon would call 63 it in his New Atlantis. Alexandria remained the cultural center for at least seven centuries for Moslems, Jews and Christians. Latin Culture and Greek Antiquity Just as the Jews were molded by the sacred writings of the Torah and Talmud, the Moslems by their sacred Koran, and the Christians by the Bible, the primary concern of these peoples was their spiritual identities and the secret 61 of their humanist calling would not register any upsurge till religious intolerance was lifted. The medieval period with Christianity as the state religion saw the acknowledg- ed preeminence of christian values over pagan teachings; the Roman west eclipsed the Byzantine east; Latin culture preceded the Greek culture and Greek thought was relegated to a literary limbo. The reactions of the authoritarian Church-directed culture varied from strict suppression of classical learning (1) a secretive appropriation of certain elements like inoffensive extracts from classical liter- ature, subsumption of grammar and rhetoric, and enthrone- ment of Aristotelian logic by scholasticism for the expound- ing of christian doctrine. Under the guidance of the Church Fathers, a cultural updating was effected and humanistic scholarship with its pagan overtones was made a handmaid of christian revelation. The Church Fathers also played a key role in the peaceful coexistence of a double heritage--the pagan and the christian--which molded the consciousness of the west. The Renaissance Period A transformation of the European consciousness seemed imperative as new and direct relationships were being established with the heritage of'Hellenic antiquity. The positive religious ideals that were inherent in the protest against the abuses in the Catholic Church were only a part 62 of the heritage of the reforming tradition that swept through Europe. The winds of change that gathered momentum in the sixteenth century were fanned, to a considerable degree, by the growing intellectual changes that gripped the continent earlier. Two significant trends could be cited: the discovery and acquisition of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts in private libraries and the development of printing. The enthusiasm for Greek in the world of Italian scholarship had begun long before the fall of Constantino- ple in 1453. The Medicean manuscripts of Tacitus and Livy in classical Latin would eventually result in the 1515 printing of Editio Princeps and establish their influence in the age of humanism. Great libraries that came into being in the fifteenth century under the scholarly leader- ship of personages like Pope Nicholas V, Cardinal Besarion of Venice, Cosimo and Lorenzo de' Medici of Florence saw an increase in the number of Greek texts; these libraries of the great age of humanist scholarship were almost princely or private libraries, in contrast to the libraries of the European universities that grew around abbeys and monaste- ries. The development of printing with movable types brought this intellectual ferment still closer to the masses. 'It opened new horizons in education and communication of ideas. Its effects were felt sooner or later in every department of human activity."64 63 The growth of a secular reading public slowly chipped away at the prerogatives of the clergy. The social and economic evolution that came in its wake altered the face of scholarship as the writings of Plato, Moses Maimonides, and other Hebrew and Arabic scholars were increasingly read by an enlightened populace. "The development of a sense of perspective on the past, the ability to place oneself in time with respect to an age as a whole, the awareness of historic distance, all this was a contribution essentially of a humanist thought."65 The Age of Reformation The Age of Reformation was ushered in two distinctive waves: (1) the pietistic and mystic approach to ecclesi- astical reform with its reliance on immediate divine guidance and spearheaded by individuals like Thomas a Kempis and Jerome Savanarola, and (2) the new scholarship and the christian humanistic philosophy which was built upon the conviction of the paramount status of rationalism and intellectual aristocracy, championed by scholars like Erasmus and Machiavelli. Nature was stressed over grace, action was preferred to contemplation, and ethics dethroned theology. Neo-platonism was to the humanists what Aristotel- ianism had been to St. Thomas Aquinas and his followers. A veneration for the prestigious genius of the Greek and Latin antiquity did not imply a myopic view to its shortcomings in understanding the real wrold. According to 64 Francis Bacon, the discovery of the geographical New World elicited a necessary elaboration of a new mental world. Horizons were being broadened and the concern to treasure the classic ancient wisdom was paralleled by an effort to compose new masterpieces, no more in Greek and Latin, but in modern languages. Bacon's Novum Organum (1620) was to replace Aristotle's Organon; Galileo's book on nature was composed in mathematical signs. Humanistic scholarship passed from the sacralized past to scientific investigations. The rebellion of the Renaissance humanists is best. exemplified by Petrarch of the fourteenth century and the New Learning of the Italian humanists who still treasured the revival of the classical spirit. But it still produced a voluminous literature of its own, first in Latin, later in Italian. Toffanin wrote in his book, Che Cosa fu 1'Umanismo, about Humanism: That particular state of mind and culture to which in Italy, from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, we give the name of Humanism, was a rebellion, and acted for at least two centuries as a barrier against certain heterodox and romantic forms of unrest, which were germinal- 1y present in the city-stagg, and. which later triumphed in the Reformation. A movement that began with Petrarch and, later, with Boccaccio continued to live in the writings of Enrico Dante, Marsilio Ficino, Nicolo Machiavelli, Aeneas Piccolomini, and others. Philosophically, Italian humanists agreed in their belief in the reasoning power of human 65 beings, their freedom. of choice and an innate sense of moral goodness, but there were also limitations and un- certainties in human life. Human frailty forms the pessimistic background for Machiavelli's Prince. "For him, men were evil and corrupt and had to be coerced to do good. Because of the evilness of man the institutions he creates are always bound to decay, no matter how firmly established they seem to be."67 In England, a young contemporary was, however, painting an optimistic picture with the traditional material of political thoughts. Contrasting with the. realistic analysis of Machiavelli, who constructed a con- temporary scene based on the world of European monarchies, Sir Thomas More built up a frankly unreal Utopia, existing neither in time nor in space. Both drew on the inspiration of humanist interests. Thus, "the literary humanism of the Renaissance, proceeding from the Italian Petrarch to the Dutch Erasmus and his disciple Thomas More, broke through the guison walls of medievalism and opened a wider horizon on history than the enclosed outlook of the Catholic Church."68 Renaissance Humanism flourished in the writings of Erasmus, Montaigne, Rabelais, Diderot, the French Encyclo- paedists, and others. Its insistence, according to Lamont, on getting away from religious control of knowledge, stress on the ideal of human personality, and the actualization of 66 human potentialities still endure in present-day human- ism.69 This long tradition of humanism. points one salient feature: humanism is historical rather than metaphysical. It extolled man as his own rule and end; human life was in human hands. Abstractly, it is a concept of man focused upon a program of humanity. Some Basic Assumptions It may be worthwhile to gather in capsule form some of the distinctive accomplishments and character- istics of humanism. l. Humanism signalled a revolt against the Church and the limitations imposed on knowledge by ecclesias- tical authorities. 2. Humanist intellectual awakening consisted largely in a rediscovery of and. a return to Greek and Latin classics. 3. Humanism stated that an individual, through a harmonious combination of personal satisfactions and self-development through work and service to the community, can attain 'good life.' 4. There is ultimate faith in man and in his power to resolve his problems, primarily through reliance on reason and scientific methods. 5. Scientific methods postulate an opposition to universal determinism and an insistent questioning 67 of basic assumptions and convictions, including its own. 6. Humanism acknowledged religion as an organizing principle of existence that provides human beings with the opportunity of losing themselves in a great ideal, far above their petty selves, but without any binding adherence to dogmas. 7. Humanism accepted that lives are shaped in decisive freedom and that it is this freedom of choice and self-determination which provides them human meaning. Today, humanism provides a critique of alienating and depersonalizing tendencies, whether the source is tech- nology, religion, ideology, or bureaucracy. Once a weapon in the hands of free-thinkers who demanded freedom from authoritarian ecclesiastical control, today humanism has been redefined and expanded to express a this-wordly concern for human happiness. Can Humanism be Defined? Any attempt at defining humanism runs the risk of excluding one form of humanism or truncating the other. ”There are Humanists who are naturalists (John Dewey)," wrote Sidney Hook , 70 "Humanists who are supernaturalists (like William James) and Humanists who are non-naturalists (like Felix Adler and G.E. Moore)." The result has been an 68 outgrowth in humanistic outlook that ramified into an endless array of adjectives: Christian Humanism, Greek Humanism, Radical Humanism, Liberal Humanism, Scientific Humanism, Socialist Humanism, etc. Blackham, author and former director of British Humanist Association, deprecates any definition of humanism that mutilates it with an epithet like 'scientific,‘ 'religious,‘ or 'ethical.‘ "For this gives exclusive or special right to a selected aspect of human life and maims the body of all-round Humanist concern with human being."71 The impossibility of defining Humanism in the sense in. which scientific concepts are defined was underscored by J.P. Van Praag, President of the International Humanist and Ethical Union. While scientific concepts that are meant for a theoretical framework of coherent notions can be unam- biguously defined by eliminating all confusing elements, humanism due to the existential value it professes defied such an attempt, he said. "It is bound up with emotions and evaluations. Humanism is a moral conviction rather than a theortical speculation. Therefore it is more suited for a clarifying description rather than for an unambigous definition.'72 Varieties of Humanistic Outlooks It is beyond the scope of this study to undertake an analysis of various humanist outlooks, but an attempt is 69 made here to encapsulate the main tenets of selected forms of humanism. They will be of help in understanding the humanist teachings of Maslow and Maritain whose humanist perspectives are employed in studying the decision pro- cesses of the IDI Model. ETHICAL HUMANISM Ethical Humanism grew principally out of the American Ethical Union and emphasizes ”right relations” between peoples as the most important thing. Sidney Hook defines an ethical humnist as one "who relies on the arts of inte1-. ligence to defend, enlarge and enhance the areas of human freedom in the world."73 There may be differences in their views, but respect is always maintained for the opponent. To these conflicts, they bring the only value that is also the judge of its own efficacy and limitation-- human intelligence. It is a philosophy founded upon the twin principles of human responsibility and personal worth. Ethical humanist views are held among educators, religious leaders, and secularists. Edward Ericson who was the philos- ophical successor of William James, F.C.S. Schiller, John Dewey, and Morris Cohen are also counted among ethical humanists. NATURALISTIC HUMANISM Naturalistic Humanism recognizes that vast stretches of reality yet remain beyond the present ambit of human 70 knowledge and is confident that future discoveries of truth will reveal an extension of the natural realm of being. One of its protagonists, Corliss Lamont, says: The term naturalistic shows that humanism, in its most accurate philosophical sense, implies a world-view in which Nature is everything, in which there is no supernatural and in which man is an integral part of Nature and not separated from it by any sharp cleavage or discontinuity.74 SCIENTIFIC HUMANISM Scientific Humanism arose through the thinking of_ John Dewey, Julian Huxley and others, but can be traced back to Francis Bacon and his maxim given in m Organum which declared: "Pursue science in order that the human estate may be enhanced.” To commit oneself to humanist values is to put the welfare of human beings first, to make the people supremely important, to adopt human welfare and human goods as the ultimate criteria of right and wrong. The Scientific Humanism of Julian Huxley is not so much a question of humanism founded on science as of a balance beween science and humanism. "Humanism, Huxley maintains, should combine a devotion to human values, derived from traditional and developing religious and 76 aesthetic experience, with respect to science.” Huxley's own brand of humanism is called Evolutionary 71 Humanism because he holds that man's highest destiny is to paricipate in the creative process of evolution. Lamont who calls himself a Naturalist Humanist lists Huxley in his ranks; this may look erroneous, but can be logical. "I cannot see that the adjectives used make much difference--Naturalistic Humanism and Scientific Humanism are much the same.'77 NEW HUMANISM New Humanism was born out of a profound disaffection with the twentieth century conception of man who had lost. his bearings in the triumph of relativism in philosophy and social thought, of materialism in daily living, and of romanticism and naturalism in literature. Back to the first principles, New Humanists exhorted, back to a precise and adequate conception of the nature of man! They forged an intellectual conservatism which defends cultural tradition- alism and classical principles of art against Darwinism, which placed a premium of adjustment to external conditions as a measure of progress, and pragmatism which, in register- ing the impact of science on modern thought, overstated man's ties to his environment:78 Irving Babbitt and Paul Elmer More are the most important figures in the movement of New Humanism which also includes names like Stuart Shuman and George Ray E-7-:L:i.ott. 72 MARXI ST HUMANI SM Marx maintained in his Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts that he was a humanist and attacked the usurious character of capitalism for dehumanizing and alienating man and wanted to find a "way out of the despair and decomposition of human personality."79 P.N. Fedoseyev, head of the Institute of Philosophy in the U.S.S.R., maintained that "Communists are undoubtedly the most consistent humanists. Communism is a real Humanism. The philosophy of Communism does not tolerate any form of anti-Humanism."80 Marx proposed that in the place. of the profit motive of capitalism or the substitution of state for private ownership in socialism, the principle of communism be the freedom of man, the reconstitution of his wholeness, and the unity of mental and manual labor which society so far had exploited, thus alienating man not only from the products of his labor but from the very activity of labor itself. This form of humanism is now carried into Marxist Humanism. Broadly viewed, one could look at Humanism as a cultural movement with meanings and developments which the adjectival epithets attached to it fail to entirely exPress. It is broader than the organizations that alleged- 1y represent it, whether they are religious, professional, Political, or cultural. It is present in many active thrusts without any conscious formulation. Disparate ldeclogies find common ground to nest on humanism, Marxist 73 Humanism and Christian Humanism discovering commonalities in their concern of man and directing him to a paradise-- the former to an earthly one, and the latter to a heavenly one. One might say that Humanism expresses the belief that man has potentially the intelligence, good will, and cooperative skills to survive on planet Earth. Humanist Psychology of Maslow B.F. Skinner once wrote that there were two ways of knowing about a person: one way is associated with what a. person d_o_e§, the way he turns his environment through which he acquires a repertoire of behavior; the second way is that of knowing what someone _i_§ or what he is coming to be or becoming. He places Abraham Maslow's humanistic psychology in this second way of knowing a person because, with its emphasis on what a person is or is becoming, humanistic psychology is ”at home in existentialism, phenomenology, and structuralism."81 Along with C.G. Jung, Carl Rogers, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm and other psychotherapists, Abraham Harold Maslow represents a divergent trend of thought and a dramatic change in thinking about human nature. It represents a reaction to what Maslow considered as "the gross in- adequacies of behavioristic and Freudian psychologies in their treatment of the higher nature of man."8:2 74 An early disciple of J.B. Watson and his "programmatic writings which promised a clear road,” Maslow had exuberant- ly followed behaviorism with the hope that ”it could be a real science of psychology, something solid and reliable to depend on to advance steadily and irreversibly from one 83 Maslow was soon disillusioned certainty to the next.” with the behavioristic approach which he described as associationist, experimental, mechanomorphic psychology, the psychology which can be called 'classical' because it 'is in 8direct line with the class1cal concept of sc1ence. Freudian psychoanalysis, which dominated the whole field of clinical psychology, was to Maslow a theory of art and a religion of society as well as of every major endeavor. Maslow did not contend with its ambitious pro- grams, but rather with its reflections of an inadequate view of human beings and their world. The triumphs of natural sciences had galvanized psychologists to emulate successful mathematicians and physicists of the nineteenth century that belied the conviction that "their success can be ours." Maslow argued that psychology, as a science in its infancy, had to work out its own methodology and philos- ophy, instead of indiscriminately copying and applying exPerimental methods of natural sciences which truncated its world-view and resulted in an atomistic world where complex things are built out of simple elements. These 75 'reductionist' tendencies have succeded well enough else- where in science, for a time at least, but in psychology, it has not. ”Attacking such reductive efforts is then not an attack on science in general but rather on one of the possible attitudes toward science."85 Maslow saw that many psychologists were content to work with but a portion of the human being, forgetting that "ultimately their task is to give us a unified, empirically based conception of the whole human being, of human nature in general."86 The trouble with Freudian psychologists is that they are guided by a half-known map which is disavowed and_ denied, and subsequently, immune to intrusion and correc- tion by newly acquired knowledge. This unconscious map or theory guides his reactions far more than does his experi- mental knowledge, argued Maslow. The issue was not over whether or not to have a philosophy of psychology, but whether to have a conscious or an unconscious one. Freud dealt with the unconscious and Maslow elected the conscious. As a result, Maslow believes that in the early stages of exploration, a discipline like psychology will have to be content with inexactness and uncertainty. In an undated note, he wrote: To demand rigor, exactness, detail from a first exploration of a wilderness is just plain silly, and I've refuseg7 to be apologetic about discovering a gold mine. 76 It is necessary for a move from “scientific accuracy" to "scientific adequacy.” It is this preoccupation with accuracy at the expense of adequacy that forces classical academic psychology to deny any systematic place for higher-order elements of personality, such as altruism or search for beauty. Maslow said: "You simply do not ask questions about ultimate human values if you are working in an animal lab."88 Maslow would gladly accord Freudian psychoanalysis, with its improvements, recent revisions and variants, the highest accolade saying that there is ”not even a near. second available” to this theory; he calls it "our best system of psychopathology,” and its characterology useful for the therapist trying to cure psychological illness. However, it is quite unsatisfactory as a general psycho- logy. "The picture of man it presents is lopsided, distort- ed puffing up of his weaknesses and shortcomings that purports then to describe him fully. This it clearly fails to do . '89 Practically all the activities that man prides himself on, and that give meaning, richness and values to his life, are either omitted or pathologized by Freud. Generosity, for instance, is interpreted as a reaction formation against stinginess, which is deep down and un- conscious, and therefore somehow more real; kindliness is a defense mechanism against violence, rage, and the tendency to‘ murder. Maslow wrote: Partly because of this preconception, it has 77 so far revealed to us much about man's short- comings, his illnesses, his sins and his weak- nesses, but rather little about his virturgfi, his potent1a11t1es, or hlS h1ghest asp1rations. This negative attitude of the Freudians seeps into their view of a healthy human being as simply ”not very sick" and regard "normality as a special case of the abnormal."91 In contrast, Maslow espouses a "health psychology" that he believes will lead us to conclude that psychological illness is primarily a struggle toward health. Freud and behavioristic psychologists had too narrowly defined human nature and its development to afford it the. opportunity of 'becoming' much more than what the society had credited him or her with. Through an intense study of “self-actualizing" or "more fully evolved” world citizens, Maslow proceeded to offer what he considers to be adequate conceptions of 'human wholeness' and the full development of human potentials.‘ They constitute satisfying criteria for optimum human growth. In his classical work, Toward a Psychology of Being (1962), Maslow coined the phrase, "the third force" and sent it surging into the world of psychology which was until then dominated by two psychological forces, Freudian- ism and Behaviorism. Logical positivism and extreme behaviorism, with their emphases on observable responses and external pressures rather than thoughts, feelings and internal promptings, were concerned with explanations of 78 human behavior and not with its subject matter p3; pg. Humanism, as espoused by the "Third Force" psychologists, leads to a psychology which is not only centered on the human being but sets positive value on human capabilities and aspirations. With an existentialist tinge, it also reflects on human actions and the meaning and value of human existence. Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) Abraham Harold Maslow, one of the most provocative thinkers of modern psychology, was born in 1908, in Brooklyn, New York. His father, an uneducated immigrant from Russia, hoped that his son would perhaps as a lawyer be successful in life. But Abraham, who grew up a Jew in a non-Jewish neighborhood, lived among books and, while still in high school, fell in love with Bertha whom he married four years later, when he was 20 and she 19. For young Maslow, "life didn't really start" until he got married 92 After which gave him a sense of worth and direction. two years in Cornell, Maslow went to the University of Wisconsin "where he had discovered J.B. Watson and was sold on behaviorism." To his intense disappointment, Maslow found in Wisconsin that the University catalog had erroneously listed famous professors with whom he wanted to study, Whereas they were only visiting academics. But studying under Thorndike, Clark Hull, and Harry Nelson, he finished 79 his Ph.D. with a dissertation on an observational study of sexual behavior among monkeys. From animal behavior, Maslow switched to the study of human behavior and wrote a paper which became an integration of Freud and Adler. The man who liked 'discovery, not proving,“ discovered also in the writings of Whitehead, Bergson, and Bertalanffy, the intellectual foundations for his latter humanistic views. While formal classes and famous teachers failed to mould him into a confirmed behaviorist, the birth of his baby came as a 'thunderclap that settled things.“ He remarked once: "I'd say that anyone who had a baby couldn't. be a behaviorist."93 Personal experiences during this period exerted an enormous influence in shaping Maslow's future orientations in humanism; informal and personal contacts with Erich Fromm, Karen Horney, Ruth Benedict, Max Wertheimer, Alfred Adler, and others charted for him (a growth-promoting developmental experience. Maslow taught psychology’ in Wisconsin from 1930 to 1935, and at Columbia University for another two years; he also served at Brooklyn college as associate professor until 1951. He became a professor and chairman of the department of psychology at Brandeis University in 1951, and remained in this post until shortly before his death. Taking a leave of absence from Brandeis in March 1969, Has low accepted a four-year grant from the W.P. Laughlin Foundation (which was later renamed International Study 80 Project) to study the philosophy of democratic politics, economics, and ethics generated by humanistic psychology. While he was working in California with the Foundation, Maslow died on June 8, 1970. Major Works of Maslow The major works of Maslow are the following: Moti- vation and Personality (1954), Toward a Psychology of Epipg (1962), and The Psychology of Science: A Recon- naissance (1968). He co-authored. with Bela Mittelman on Principles of Abnormal Psychology (1941), and wrote a number of papers like "A Theory of Human Motivation" (1943), 'Self-Actualizing People: A Study of Psychological Health” (1950), "Deficiency Motivation and Growth Moti- vation" (1955), and "Philosophy of Psycholgy' (1956), which went into a number of reprints.94 The main lines of Maslow's thought will be detailed in chapter III where they would provide the analytic perspec- tive for the philosophical investigation of the IDI Model. Relevance of Humanistic Psychology Humanism, as a stance, is a positive evaluation and an article of faith in human capabilities that stand in con- trast to those conceptualizations that are negative or neutral. Maslow's psychology provides a holistic view in the tradition of the Gestalt school and his views on such 81 areas as human nature, personality development, self- actualization, are analogous to the ethical considerations of a philosopher. As he indicated in his “Philosophy of Psychology,“ one should not allow the discipline of psycho- logy to be cut adrift in the mainstream of philosophical investigation. I'm sorry that psychology has officially cut itself off from philosophy because this means no more than giving up good philosophies for bad ones. Every man living has a philosophy, an uncriticized, uncorrectable, unimprovable, unconscious one. If you want to improve it, and make it more realistic, more useful, and more fruitful, you have to be conscious of it, and work with it, criticize it, improve it. This 1510355 people (including most psychologists) don't 0. Those who are adamant in holding that a philosophical system should be analytically interrelated and structurally whole, admitting neither apparent contradictions nor invalid generalizations, might find Maslow's humanistic psychology less than appetizing. Maslow himself noted: Humanistic psychology is essentially empirical and scientific in the sense of (a) the humble recognition of not knowing enough; (b) the expectation or faith that in part the salvation of mankind lies in the advancement of knowledge; (c) the Socratic notion that the advancement of knowledge--especially of persons--automatically improves human and social values; (d) the idea that knowledge can improve in reliability, validity, pertinence, exactnefig, and in holistic interconnection and relevance. Unlike Dewey and James, who turned to philosophy from psychology, Maslow considered himself a researcher, a “scientist rather than an essayist or philosopher.“ He 82 added: ”I feel myself very bound to and by the facts that I 97 .Maslow's am trying to perceive, not to create." perceptions took on a bold claim to a "new vision” of the possibilities of human destiny and he must be given a hearing in educational circles, since its implications for education could be significant ones.98 James Finn, while Speaking about a sense of direction to be given to industry, stated that, if no direction is given, it was inevitable that technology would take off on its own. He continued: "We will have lost a battle and a war; a war that can be won easily if you leave Okoboji with the determination to be on the side of human beings and the 99 Finn believed that the Bill of Rights no matter what.” products and efforts of the industry should be concentrated on human beings and urged more to follow the lead of Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow than B.F. Skinner and other behaviorists. From these considerations, it becomes evident that the humanistic psychology of Abraham Maslow provides a suitable and ‘worthwhile philosophical perspective to consider the decision processes of the IDI Model. Integral Humanism If medieval Christendom is characterized by an ”un- gpnscious and unreflecting simplicity of neh's response to the effusion of divine grace,"loo Renaissance, Refor- mation, Rationalism and the Industrial Revolutions gave 83 birth tx> a secular civilization which severed itself more from God and ushered in an era of an anthropocentric rehabilitation of the creature. Classical Renaissance humanism, as mentioned earlier, had indeed discovered the values of human liberty. The radical pessimism of Machiavelli had effected. a cynical separation of politics and morality, contending that man is evil and that deception and use of power are legitimate in safeguarding oneself. Descartes made man a disembodied spirit and denied man's dependence upon nature which was seen as a soulless mechanism. Reformation had let loose upon the world egocenticism, a self-assertive individual- ism in search of salvation. Rousseau, the 'saint of the nature,‘ proclaimed that to live by instinct is natural and therefore right. Jacques Maritain saw all these developments as necessary ingredients for a christian humanism to return to its creator. When the nineteenth century French philosopher August Comte established a nontheistic religion of humanity designed to promote social reform, the Swiss theologian Karl Barth, a century later, affirmed that there could be no humanism without the gospel. The flaw in classical humanism was not that it was humanist; but that it was anthropocentric. The question of christian humanism is intimately linked with the question of the person, for if the person is a consciously unified being, or at least one who tries 84 consciously to attain a unity, then, an: inner' division between the christian and the human could not be tolerated. "It is not a question simply of balancing two realities of the same order, such as thought and action, or such as body and soul. But it is a matter of uniting two realities, the natural and the supernatural."101 A person is a unity of spiritual nature endowed with freedom of choice, said Jacques Maritain. In point of existence, a human being is at the same time a natural and 102 Maritain sees christian humanism supernatural being. as integrating all that is best in the humanist effort of the centuries. Even the great intuition of Marxist humanism is a redeeming feature, says Maritain, since it recognizes the estrangement of the proletariate from their true nature by being dispossessed of property and subordinated to material economic forces. In the Marxian approach, there exists "a great flash of truth" especially in its ”reli- gious' insight that the neterialism of the bourgeois world had dehumanized both rich and poor alike, since in such a world people exist, not as persons, but as consumers.103 The central error, however, both in Marxism and in earlier forms of christian humanism,was its humanistic conceptuali- zation in an anthropocentric metaphysics. Maritain sees the christian humanism of the anthropocentric epoch caught in a parallelogram of forces. “God and man stand together at the wheel of the ship of his 85 destiny, and so far as the direction is in his hands, it is not in the hands of God."104 Thus, Maritain's 'Integral Humanism' recognizes the autonomy of the secular, while it 105 This also acknowledges the primacy of the spiritual. spiritual journey into the future does not allow people to turn their backs against the world, but rather man is rendered truly human and his original greatness made manifest when he participates in all that can enrich him in nature and history. "It at once demands that man make use of all the potentialities within him, his creative powers and the life of the reason, and labor to make the powers of the physical world the instrument of his freedom."106 For Christians, Integral Humanism represents a new Christendom "no longer sacral, but secular or lay" and a new humanism ”that does not worship man but really and effectively respects human dignity and does justice to the integral demands of the person” and is truly ppgg: centric.107 The man who proposed 'Integral Humanism' was born exactly a century ago. Jacques Maritain (1882-1973) This noted French Catholic ‘philosopher, one of the most renowned exponents of Thomism, was born in Paris on November 18, 1882. Educated in the Sorbonne where he met his future wife, Raissa Oumansoff, Maritain was later instrumental in forming the Cercle 'Thomiste (Center for 86 Thomistic Study) which brought together a number of French intellectuals like Henri Bergson, André Gide, Jean Cocteau and Nikolai Berdyaev. Under the influence of Bergson and Leon Bloy, the Maritains became Catholics. Maritain spent two years (1907-1908) in Heidelberg where he studied biology under Hans Driesch. Upon return to Paris, In: spent three years directing the compilation of a Dictionapy of Practical Life which gave him also the chance to ponder over philosophical problems. It was during this period that he turned to a deeper study of the writings of Aquinas. Maritain began his teaching career in 1912, in Paris. He also taught for many years at various universities in the United States and in Canada: at Toronto, Chicago, Princeton, Notre Dame, and Columbia. After World War II, he was appointed the French Ambassador to the Vatican. In 1948, he accepted the post of a professor at ZPrinceton. After his 'wife's death 1J1 1960, Maritain went to live with the Little Brothers of Jesus in Toulouse, France, in 1961, where he remained till his death on April 28, 1973. It is difficult to think of a philosophical area to which Maritain did not contribute; he wrote textbooks (Ap Introduction to Philosophy) as well as masterpieces like Art and Scholasticism (1920), The Degrees of Knowledge (1937), Existence and the Existent (1947). Besides Science and Wisdom and Frontiers of Poetry, his work on 87 theological themes, The Peasant of Garonne (1966), are also notable. In 1936, True Humanism was published; it was the expansion and revision of six lectures on ”The Spiritual and Temporal Problems of a New Christendom" which Maritain had delivered two years earlier at the summer school of the University of Santander, Spain. In Thomistic spirit, Maritain traces in this book the historical development of western humanism to defend what remained in it of christian values, and to propose some solutions. 'The New Chris- tendom' outlined in True Humanism (French title: Humanisme Intégral) is conceivable even in today's world, 108 The co- although conditions are far from being ideal. existence of believers and unbelievers in a temporal world is placed in a society that is distinguished by civil toler- ation, non-capitalist economy, rights of human personality, and 'fraternal community.‘ True Humanism to which a small number of corrections were added was again published under its more appropriate title, Integral Humanism, in 1968. Relevance of Maritain's Integral Humanism 1. If Maslow's advocacy of a 'holistic' psychology was built on the premise that any consideration of human nature should take into account the wholeness of human personality with scientific adequacy, the thrust of Maritain's Integral Humanism is also directed at a conception of the person, not only within society, but also beyond 88 society. As within society, the human person is part of a larger whole and must recognize a common good--happiness, freedom and growth--to which individual interests may need to be sacrificed. From the second point of view, society must always respect an authority beyond its own; common good is not apart from individuals nor is it a sum total of individual goods, but rather to be realized in the com- munity which is enriched by the growth and development of individual freedom. The increasing and innovative assimilation. of tech- nology in the field of educational technology has raised among its professionals legitimate fears of dehumanization in education and the possible spectre of an erosion of values. Instead of marching' to (different drummers, edu- cational technology needs to subject itself to some soul- searching inquiries that may reach out beyond the confining parameters of scientific accuracy. Maritain's integral humanism may provide such a framework for inquiry although its religious, political and social concerns my fail to involve educational technoloy directly and substantially. 2. The idea set forth in Integral Humanism does not subscribe to any particular ideology, but transcends culture and civilization. If the concern of educational technology is the facilitation of 9213.32 learning, then the significance of Maritain's ideas need to be incorporat- ed in a larger concern about the end and aim of education itself. 89 3. Inasmuch as educational technology is predominantly an American phenomenon, the relevance of the thoughts of this French thinker and philosopher on education in America may be reasonably questioned. But Maritain himself sees quite a close affinity between Integral Humanism and many aspects in the American body politic. When he wrote the book, the perspective for a new Christendom was definitely European, Maritain said, but over the years he became aware of the kind of congeniality which existed between what is going on in the U.S.A. and a number of views he had expressed in his book. In Reflections on America (1958), Maritain wrote that the concrete historical ideal of integral humanism was different from any reality then existent. But from the direction of certain essential trends characteristic of American civilization, it appeared to him that Humanisme Intégral "had, so to speak, an affinity with the American “109 climate by anticipation. Because of these considerations, Jacques Maritain's Integral Humanism would provide the second humanistic perspective for the study of the I.D. Model. INSTRUCT I ONAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE Systems Approach in ID The systems approach to designing instruction was adopted. by the instructional development. movement "which synthesized these concepts with those from the behavioral 90 sciences to create a formalized approach to how instruction is technology developed within educational technology."110 As mentioned earlier, along with communications, tech- nological and systems approach concepts provided a powerful paradigmatic direction for the emerging profession of educational technology. The emerging theoretical framework of instructional development synthesized and formalized mamy of the concepts that were integral to these paradig- matic changes: process, systems approach, functions. This framework also helped in expanding and indicating relation- ships among behavioral objectives, use of appropriate human and nonhuman resources, criterion-referenced tests, appro- priate use of individualized instruction, development of complete instructional systems, emphasis on the learner, evaluation and revision of instructional products after prototype testing, and systems management. These systematic processes of instructional development were presented in the form of models. Although no universally accepted model existed, the IDI Model contained elements and sequences which, either explicitly or implicitly, were found in most other models. NSMI and UCIDT Prorams The National Special Media Institute (NSMI), a con- sortium of institutions with strong programs in instruction- al technology, was established in 1965; it shifted its 91 primary focus, in 1969-70, from training institute di- rectors in higher education institutions, to work with public school systems on the principles and procedures of instructional development. Following its change in focus, in 1973-74, NSMI also changed its name to Instructional Development Institutes (IDI). The IHII and related programs were established under the aegis of the University Consortiunl of Instructional Development and Technology (UCIDT). Participating members of this Consortium at that time were Syracuse University, University of Southern California (USC), Michigan State University (MSU), and the Teaching Research Division of the Oregon State System of Higher Education. Representing these universities were James Finn (USC), Charles Schuller (MSU), Donald Ely (Syracuse U.), and Jack Edling (Teaching Re- search); later, when Jack Edling accepted a post with the U.S. International University in San Diego, many of his staff members ”went along with him," and, subsequently U.S. International University in San Diego, CA., became the fourth member of the UCIDT, in place of Teaching Re- search.111 Early Beginnings of the IDI Program The NDEA had provided the initial funding to launch the National Special Media Institute (NSMI) in 1965. With additional grants provided in 1970, by the Bureau of Libraries and Educational Technology of the U.S. Office of 92 Education, the institutions connected with the NSMI set to work on the IDI program.112 The rationale for this project rested in the convic- tion that the problems confronting education were multi- tudinous and that few viable solutions were to be found. This was understandable for the following reasons: (i) Sound solutions require careful diagnois and specification of the problem. Complex educational problems defied facile simplifications and the task of ferreting out deep-rooted causes of these problems was often time-consum- ing and, generally, beyond the competence and ambit of school systems. (ii) Valid solutions to complex problems involved risk, trial and error, revision and retrial. This is an arduous task which educators from various school systems were unwilling to subject themselves to. It was apparent that these school systems required expert outside assistance in finding and learning a practical system which would enable them to deal with educational problems in their school districts effectively and efficiently. The IDI program was planned and developed to be such a system to meet these needs. Briefly described, the IDI program involved - (a) careful analysis and identification of what the problem really was, (b) the formulation of specific objectives, (c) assessment of management requirements, (d) the development, testing, and selection among viable solutions, 93 (e) tryout, revision, and retesting of the solution, and (f) continuing evaluation of the systemlff a whole, as well as its constitutive elements. The IDI Program Objectives The IDI Progrm was developed to achieve the following objectives: 1. Cogperative Action: Instead of aiming at either the administration or the teachers alone, the IDI Program was designed to produce instuctional development teams at the institutions where it was run. A team included '_I‘_eachers, Administrators, goard Members, and Specia- lists in related instructional specialties, and the team, originally, was called the TABS team, so labelled after the first letter of each of these groups. It was soon found that the term 'Board Members' was too restrictive and narrow to allow the policy-making capabilities and inputs from other experienced personnel, such as assistant super- intendents of the school system, or even an informed citizen committed to instructional innovation, into the ID process. Accordingly, a year later, the term "Policy Makers” substituted “Board Members" and TABS team became TAPS team. 2. Multiplier Plan: The IDI program was designed to be free-standing so that it could be used effectively by other agencies with school systems in their respective 94 areas. This was accomplished through a comprehensive ”How To” Management Guide for those who would run the IDI. Developers of the IDI concentrated on using a wide variety of media and learning techniques including simulations. Instructional Development Multiplier (IDM) agencies ‘were trained and were further assisted until they could operate institutes (M1 their own and train other multipliers. These IDMs and their trainees--IDM/Ts--received complete IDI training "packages" along with further assistance from UCIDT members during the conducting of the initial insti- tutes during 1971-72. The IDI was planned to grow in geometric progression. The IDI Prototype Testing Program It was obvious that prior to an effective nation-wide application, the IDI training packages had to undergo rigorous design, development, field testing and revision, first as separate components, and later, as a whole under varying field conditions. The UCIDT members were assigned separate modules and were obligated to design, develop, and evaluate their respective system modules before combining them for integrated field tests. These were field-tested in prototype institutes in Detroit (1970), Phoenix (1971), and Atlanta (1971). A final training session for Multiplier Agency teams was also scheduled to be held at Syracuse University.114 95 DETROIT (1970) The first tryout was scheduled for the Detroit Public School System in October, 1970.115 Selected representa- tives from the TAPS team of Detroit were the participants. The IDI program consisted of a seven-day, 40-hour series with somewhat rigorous training experiences for the partici- pants. At the conclusion of the Institute, each participat- ing team was expected to develop a feasible plan for attacking' a local problem. of their choice. As would be expected, in prototype tryout difficulties developed and not all of the components of the IDI worked with complete satisfaction. The general structure of the entire IDI program had to be set in a suitable framework so that the participants in the IDI program could be affectively and attitudinally influenced to accept this innovative practice. A basic synthesis of various components was slowly emerging and the section on "Stage III: Evaluation“ was simplified; improvements were also incorporated by shortening time for discussions and, thus, tightening the schedule itself. Evaluation of the IDI program indicated that a good share of the IDI needed further development. PHOENIX (1971) The Bureau of Indian Affairs school at Phoenix partici- pated in the second field test in February 1971. This trial was extended over a two-week period to investigate this strategy as an alternative. Many of the conceptual problems 96 with training modules, identified in the Detroit tryout, were ironed out; some specific problems, however, concern- ing prototype testing remained, but these were mainly logistical and programmatic. ATLANTA (1971) The participants were from the Atlanta Public Schools and the time was June 1971, immediately after the beginning of summer vacation; predictably, participants entered with low motivation since their required attendance pushed their vacation date back. Hectic schedules were attended to by the UCIDT coordinators as they continued module revisions and were trained to manage the institute. The development of the IDI was fairly complete except for the revision and tightening up of the components in the Coordinator's Manual. In the final moments, everything fell into place and the program proceeded smoothly. At the conclusion of this program, the participants stood up as one and applaud- ed the organizing UCIDT teams for their excellent perfor- mance and the conclusive results it produced. At Syracuse University the seven-day IDI Program was implemented on an expanded schedule, i.e., over several weeks. This appeared to affect program effectiveness and, eventually, the expanded schedule was replaced with the 40-hour, five-day program. The five-day IDI program was essentially achieved by lengthening the work hours of the seven-day program. The major reason for this revision was 97 logistical: school systems could better accommodate a five- day format for its personnel to participate in the IDI pro- gram and, further, it also suited their budget constraints (See FIGURE 1). The IDI programs, so far, have been given in approxi- mately 40 states including Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Louisiana, Texas, Indiana, Florida, as well as Puerto Rico, Iran, Philippines, Mexico, Netherlands, and Okinawa, Japan. In the glory years of the IDI program from 1972 to 1974, dedicated UCIDT members either organized or helped to organize numerous programs by travelling away from their own campuses for long periods. Current Activities of UCIDT Over the years, the IDI program has lost some of the vigor, acuity and comprehensiveness of its original appli- cation, mainly due to budget cuts in educational spending and the competitive edge of industry and other programs in the increasing technology in education. In 1974, the UCIDT revised the IDI with a tryout in Lansing, Michigan. While the basic model of the IDI remained intact in this Lansing tryout, emphases were added in some components with additional modules in diffusion, needs assessment, manage- ment and evaluation. These individual units were designed to be free-standing modules and discretely packaged that they could be used either sequentially or separately. This 98 FIGURE 1 INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE The Five-Day Schedule DAY - Introduction, motivational session incorporating a DAY DAY DAY DAY series of 16 mm films, slide/tape and game on dis- tinctive alternatives in education, followed by small group discussion. Introduction to systems approach, introduction to 1K) ID process; game sequence introducing the concept of team work. - Concept of change in small group discussions. Innovation Interaction Game through which partici- pants are introduced to Stage : DEFINE of the ID process. - Films on ”Analyze Setting” and ”Organize Manage- ment” Functions in the ID Model. Stage I: DEFINE is concluded. Slide/tape and discussion on the Norwalk- LaMirada School ID program and review of activities. IDI participants are divided into 'TAPS teams and begin work on decision points; they work on a feasi- ble instructional plan for their school district. - Introduction to Stage II: DEVELOP with Objective Marketplace Game (game on behavioral objectives). Mediated examples of the use and misuse of objec- tives. Series of slide/tapes on the design and development of a prototype solution. - Introduction to Stage III: EVALUATE which is carried through Functions 7, 8, and 9. By mid-day, the various TAPS teams will have developed feasible plans for instructional development. to be carried back to their school districts for eventual implemen- tation. Debriefing; Closing and Synthesis. 99 was intended to meet the specific needs of various school systems that could not opt for the five-day IDI program package. The UCIDT continues to offer in-service training programs, irx a number of areas like diffusion strategies, managing ID and evaluating ID, in one-day sessions across the country. Three newcomers to the original UCIDT are Indiana University (joined in 1973-74, when NSMI became IDI), Florida State University (joined in 1979), and Arizona State University (joined in 1981). The University of Georgia became an associate member in 1982. These are represented through their departments of Instructional Development and Technology. The five-day, 40-hour IDI sessions are normally offered as regular courses in some of these eight universities. The purpose of the consortium still remains the offer of a level and quality of profes- sional service in instructional development and technology, a task which would be impossible through a single or lesser combination of these institutions. The Instructional Development Model A review of the instructional development model- building literature reveals various efforts by enterprising instructional technologists to develop instructional systems through a systematic process which aims, through the application of the systems approach, at developing feasible solutions to identified teaching and learning 100 problems.116 Most of the significant Instructional Development (ID) Models have been developed and reported in the professional literature of media specialists over the past 15 years. Some of the better known are: The Barson Model (1965), The Kaufman Model (1968), The Childs Model (1968), The Banathy Model (1968), The Stowe Model (1968), The Briggs Model (1970), The Gustafson Model (1970), The Gerlach-Ely Model (1971), The Douglas Model (1971), The Kemp Model (1971), and the Hamreus Model (1968) which was the forerunner of the IDI Model on which this study is based.117 Why there should be so many variations purporting to be instructional development models can be seen easily when one realizes that a nedel can be enhanced through progres- sive evolution in removing structural flaws, in improving sequences, in tending to be comprehensive, and in being descriptive to account for all relational elements. They also attest to the earnestness and keenness of model developers in perfecting models that are heuristically important, effective, efficient and relevant in instruction- al development. Some of the deficiencies in this model-building activity can be briefly stated as follows: 1. Various steps of the model are not specific enough; Operational value is limited; Model lacks comprehensiveness; Model is largely seen as a linear process; Feedback loop is absent; 0‘th 101 6. Flowchart steps are incomplete, or flowchart components are not adequately described; 7. Process efficiency is assumed to be achievable by one instructor, instead of a team of specialists. The present study is more concerned with IDI Model and its forerunner, the Hamreus Model. The Hamreus Model (1968) Dale Hamreus graphically displayed a 22-step model of an instructional system.‘which were distributed into the following three distinct stages: (1) systems definition and management, (2) design analysis, and (3) development and assessment (See FIGURE 2). STAGE 1: SYSTEMS DEFINITION AND MANAGEMENT--pertains to those start-up or lead-in activities that must be planned and organized before the detailed tasks of designing and develgping the actual instructional system can begin. STAGE 2: DESIGN ANALYSIS--defines the necessary tech- niques for specifying performance standards, specification of materials, and design and oper- ational constraints imposed by the educational industry. STAGE 3: DEVELOPMENT AND ASSESSMENT--provides for empirical prototype testing including all necessary content, media, and methods. "Correc- tive iteration of all aspects of development and evaluation is continued until the instructional technologist is satisfied. with the validity' of the new system.” A feedback line indicates that information from Stage 3 is important for the other two stages as a way of provid- ing some organized means of quality control. Within the three major stages are twenty-two precise 102 '0:- Hdcouauauunsa 9:93:13. 5 £03.36? Vienna 23 no can: 3:8...— 05 9.3.6:- lasw-«v to...» 0.5:..— 6.2.0: cog-3:32.00 .l T I T on 3 a 1025.... - 53m . £33333 'thm .figgm éOOdOLL «XE OCUE _ 0.3.610: . Hlnogushanzn ONES 2:..th # 2030352; 9 1139.3 _ «a a .58: S has: 5 a not . 3 .528 . IIIIIIII I IIIILIII Illlrlrll IIIIL 33.3.3.3 00.330: 3.263: 1:35.35 3 oiouuom coil—0:!— osoaaaanng gnu—B o dosh-:00 35$ . 9 51.32— 3 8.538 3033305 H pH 2.3388 nopaaoonvupo 3.3828 .33 9953 ”so .25 Busiin £235 58% n 5253 one-hung... 53553 a 5:3 . rllrlhll lllllll L Sascha omaam Hosanna—EH 0:253:12 0:."qu «.5 toads» auodom 23...?“qu uglunhw N use can-Fugue 83C .68» mammals may N ”2:on 103 steps which must be considered by instructional developers when applying the Hamreus model. They provide an interpre- tation of the tasks to be completed within each of these steps. While Hamreus was the first to detail the input and task information at each of these twenty-two steps, the "explanations are not comprehensive enough to be of maximum operational value."119 Instructional Development Institute (IDI) Model The NSMI instructional technologists condensed the twenty-two steps of the Hamreus Model into the nine steps across three stages (DEFINE, DEVELOP, and EVALUATE) to formulate the IDI Model (See FIGURE 3). The reason for this condensation was due to the complexity of the Hamreus Model (and most others) that went beyond the comprehension of the learners. Given the short duration of the IDI (40 hours), it was important, early on, to give a clear concept of "systems approach.” Users are guided through the nine functions by attending to twenty-four decision points. At the close of the workshop, the participants to the IDI program were expected to have not only learned the instructional development process, but, in the bargain, to have also come up with a solution to an existing problem affecting the educational practices of their school district. 104 .A_ha_ .ha_u: .mmu=o_um=_ scmsao_m>oo _~=o_uu=tum=_v .muoz ”as uo< muzcwcgoou auou ouwomo :o_uu:—a>u :o_um=_u>m 3w~>mm avenue: bump—cu . mm>_uoonno uaoxgu aozucou m_o»omm mupzmmm mmaxuouoga \ucmEmpas_ m u~x_a:< w amok m m_~_tmuas :owua3—m>u a_uoz mpuvtoums :owuuatum=_ Aomv m:__na:m .ucopuoatumzu m:_:tmo4 Aoahv pa:_sgop mquoouota. muozuaz mm>_uuonno uuatumcou m »t_umam m »t_pcwuH e mootaomot Em—aota mumum no u mwcmhommwp acu>o_m¢ mm_u_so_ta _ ...n. m we“ m=o_u_u=ou =m__nmumu x h wo:o_u:< mama: mmomm< acmeommzmz mcpuumm Eo_n0ta m~_=umto m m~>_a=< N am_u:mu_ _ m og:m_m mh<=4<>u HH~ mobm>ma Hm mzmmma 105 The IDI Model, according to Stamas, exhibits a sequen- tial order and may suffer from a lack of feedback. The Gustafson Model (1971), a variation of the IDI Model, would correct this deficiency by making it a dynamic and non- linear process; further, it would underscore the importance of human factors which assures success for the IDI Model. But this improvement has not been incorporated into the IDI Model in theory.120 The twenty-four decision processes of the IDI Model representing the instructional development process selected for this study have been subjected to a philosophical investigation (See FIGURE 4). While introducing his instruc- tional development model, Hamreus suggested that the strategy and technology employed in achieving educational objectives have not finally arrived, but one must consider it as "just scratching the surface of :man's ability to learn."121 The IDI Model is not touted to be the panacea for all the instructional ills that have been plaguing the educational enterprise. Behavioral technologists have been struggling to tighten up this means-end incongruity and still vast amounts of information and technical know-how are required to bridge this gap. It was an attempt ”to get the most out of our educational plans.” He further stated: Today's behavioral technologists who know what the systems approach is in developing instructional systems, might find the: question ”why" systems approach rather academic. They know that on organized, systematic approach to instruc- tional development is essential to the production an instructional system that works; i.e., one 106 FIGURE 4 i STAGE I: DEFINE FUNCTION I: IDENTIFY PROBLEM - i FUNCTION 2: ANALYZE SETTING i FUNCTION 3: ORGANIZE MANAGEMENT I STAGE n: DEVELOP + J FUNCTION 4: IDENTIFY OBJECTIVES A FUNCTION 5: SPECIFY METHODS H I 3:- I FUNCTION 6: CONSTRUCT PROTOTYPES I STAGE III: EVALUATE TEST PROTOTYPES [ FUNCTION 8: I I lMPLEMENT/RECYCLE l FUNCTION 9: F (FUNCTION 7: ANALYZE RESULTS TWENTY-FOUR DECISION PROCESSES OF IDI MODEL .Decision Processes 99 sn- e99 .r-T' Compere stetus one to ideel Propose tentetive solutionIsI Determine leerner cherecteristics Inventory shoollcommunity resources Assign TAPS teem responsibilities Estwlish lines of communicetion Specify proiect plenning end control procedures Stete terminel pertormence obiecsives Stete enebiing objectives end de- termine reletiondtips between objectives Construct pertormence meesures Specily instructionel stretegies end medie forms Specify elternetive methods Prepere comprehensive descrip- tion of instructionel deem specificetions Specily desim tor eveluetion of instruction‘ end eveluetion designs Conduct technicel review of instructionel end eveluetion designs Specify procedures lor collection end development of instructionel meteriels Construct endeseemble instruc- tionel meterieis Specify procedures to be used by peronnei during tryout oi instructionel protOtype Gerry out instruction es plenned Cerry out eveluetion es planned Tebulete end process eveluetion Determine reletionships between results. methods. objectives end pets lndicete whet kinds 0! revisions (it enyI ere sugested by the interpretetion oi results. methods. objectives end goels Determine if suggested revisions indicete thet the prototype is to be recycled or it the design cen be implemented without meior revisions. 107 that achieves its objective. To a novice, however, neither the ”what” nor the "YE?" of systems approach are of general knowledge. If this statement evidences a flavor of dehumani- zation, Hamreus dismisses this concern as unfounded. He sees the systems approach as an enhancement of human inter- actions in the learning proces. But when the "what" and "how” of this model have been sufficiently explained, an educational philosopher is still entitled to ask ”why?“ There may be value questions and axiological truths that still need to be posed. A philosophical investigation from the humanist and pragmatist viewpoints, may provide some perspectives to better understand the IDI Model and, in the process, also hold out the promise for similar inquiries not only connected with the IDI Model but also other aspects of instructional and educational technology. The twenty-four decision processes will be treated in detail in Chapter IV, along with their philosophical implications. In this chapter, we have so far discussed the origins of educational technology with a view to accentuate its quest for an organized body of theoretical formulations constantly expanding by research. Then we directed our attention to the consideration of pragmatism, humanism, and the IDI Model to provide a contextual relief against which the present study will be conducted. It is time now to formulate other relevant concerns 108 like literature support, precedents of the study, implications of the study, and its limitations. LITERATURE SUPPORT While the specific topic proposed in this study has not been previously investigated, there is an abundance of literature consisting of the writings of philosophers from both the humanist and pragmatist camps, critical essays on the relative merits of these philosophical positions, commentaries, journal articles, and other scholarly work to initiate and sustain a selective study of these schools of philosophy. Since the focus of the present study is the influence and impact of these philosophical systems on instructional technology, specifically on decision processes within the IDI Model as evidenced in their explicit and/or implicit assumptions, a relevant literature search included the history of the design, development, and evaluation of the instructional development process, and the major theoretic- al concepts, principles, and practices of educational technology. PRECEDENTS FOR THE STUDY No precedents for the present study have been reported. Theoretical studies that investigated the philos- ophical assumptions underlying practices in the field of 109 instructional development and technology are rare. A comparative study of the influx of distinctive philosophi- cal systems in the area of both instructional and education- al technology appears to be nonexistent. A computer search of Dissertation Abstracts Inter- national generated 39 citations under on descriptor, "Instructional Technology"; a total of 32 dissertations were found that included the term "educational tachnology" in their titles. But a cross-search employing the terms "instructional technology," "educational technology" with the terms ”pragmatism" and/or ”humanism“ yield no citations an: all. Descriptors like "instructional development," "educational development," "instructional systems,” and "systems" were similarly unsuccessful in providing any substantive cues for a fruitful research. A similar computer search of the ERIC system did not generate any evidence of research done in the area. of concern in this study. The conclusion drawn from a thorough search of the literature is that a comparative examination of the philo- sophical assumptions of both humanism and pragmatism with regard to instructional development has not yet been undertaken, prior to this study. IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY The following are some of the concerns that need to be taken into account by instructional developers. 110 1. Instructional developers need to know the impli- cations of their decisions when advocating one philosophy, rather than another. It is assumed that their personal philosophies, implicit in their actions, act as a screening device through. ‘which their individual. decisions Tare filtered. 2. Instructional developers may be inconsistent in decision making as a result of inadequate conceptualizing of philosophical positions. These eclectic ‘philosophical positions may be chosen with a view to achieving effective- ness, efficiency, and relevance in discovering instruction- al solutions, Hamofim Iaoomm no: mmz mmoooum cowmflowo was? nonszo 02 .mucfiom meow cues mmmumm moses .3 zHaeHmmz 30Hmmz .mcoflum>uomou nua3 umooom “MBHAHdem¢> .m.o .m.o omuao mondem oudumnouaa HoH scum =.s= can; mmummmnp cohumcmfldxm Homecom ca mumwcmabm .cowumosv n no snow mo>fiuomnno =.£: may ca owmom mocmshomummw mmoooum :ofimflooo nua3 finances: Hmcwsuos. momma Hmuocom cw mumflumsmnnm Emflumemmum :H moousom :moom: on mo>wu oumum ca moounom o>wumuwuocuan Iooflno Hmnofl>nn mmummmna m>numunuonu=m scum Inn pasonmg ”mum gs: mmmoomm. no mmumc ”wozmomozoo scum mconumuno mgOnumuno ucflom canmnomo onmHomo .m.o mmHBHAHdem¢> mZOHmHUWQ mZOHmHUmQ unwom mmwooum w mmHuszmOZOU BmHedzwdmm BmHzHB€mBmDAAH um mmaon 178 FOOTNOTES 1Ruth Calvin Bovy, "Successful Instructional Methods: A Cognitive Information Processing Approach,” ECTJ 29 (Winter 1981): 203. 2Godwin C. Chu and Wilbur Schramm, Learning from Television: What the Research Says (Washington, D.C.: National Association of Educational Broadcasters, 1968). 3Dean Jamison, Patrick Suppes, and Stuart Wells, ”The Effectiveness of Alternative Instructional Media: A Survey," Review of Educational Research 44 (1974): 1-68. 4Robert Dubin & R. Alan Hedley, The Medium ng be Related to the Message: College Instruction by TV (Portland, Ore.: Center for the Advanced Study of Education- al Administration. University of Oregon, 1969). 5Gavriel Salomon, "On the Future of Media Research: No More Full Acceleration in Neutral Gear,” ECTJ 26 (Spring 1978): 37-38. 6Robert M.W. Travers, An Introduction to Education- al Research, 3rd ed. (New York: The Macmillan, 1964), p. 2. 7 Maddi & Costa, ibid., p. 34. 8Travers, ibid., p. 3. 9Travers, ibid., p. 6. 10Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.13. 11Horace S. Thayer, Meaning and Action: A Study of American Pragmatism (Indianapolis: Hobbs-Merrill, 1973), p. 29. 12 Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.402. 13Peirce, Collected Papers, 2.93. 14Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.175. lsibid. 16James, Pragmatism (1974), p. 42. 17ibid. 179 18William James, The Varieties of Religious Experi- ence (New York: Longmans, 1902), p. 45. 19 Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.66. 20Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.9. 21Lovejoy, Thirteen Pragmatisms, p. 3. 22Frederick Copleston, A History of Philosophy Vol. VIII, Part 2 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966; Image Books, 1967), p. 68. 23 Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.26. 24Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.14. 25Thayer, Meaning and Action, p. 22. 26James, Pragmatism (1974), p. 44. 27James, Pragmatism (1974), p. 47. 28Thayer, Meaning and Action, p. 22. 29ibid. 30 In a letter to Christine Ladd-Franklin and quoted in "Charles S. Peirce at the (John Hopkins," Journal. of PLhilosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods 12 (1916): 718. 31Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.414. 32William James, The Meaning of Truth: A Sequel to Pragmatism (New York: Longmans, Green, 1909), p. v. 33 p. 253. 34 James, Pragmatism and the Meaning of Truth (1978), James, Pragmatism p. 132. 35James, Pragmatism and the Meaning of Truth (1978), p. 257. 36James, Pragmatism and the Meaning of Truth p. 97. 37James, Pragmatism, p. 133. 38Copleston, A History of Philosophy, p. 93. 180 39James, Pragmatism and the Meaning of Truth p. 277. 40 . James, Pragmatism, p. 135. 4lipid. 42Thayer, Introduction to Pragmatism and the Meaning of Truth, 1978, p. xxviii. 43 James, Pragmatism, p. 145. 44Alfred J. Ayer, Foreword to Pragmatism by William James, (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1975), pp. xxiv-xxv. 45 Ayer, ibid., p. xxviii. 46Peirce, Collected Papers, 1.3. 47Peirce, Collected Papers, 3.155. 48Peirce, Collected Papers, 3.157. 49 Peirce, Collected Papers, 3.158. 50Thomas a Goudge, The Thouggt of C.S. Peirce (New York: Dover Publications, 1950), p. 12. 51Peirce, Collected Papers, 6.228. 52Peirce, Collected Papers, 2.148. 53Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.443. 54Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.417. 55Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.374. 56Peirce, Collected Papers, 2.173. S7Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.396. 58 Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.397. 59Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.397. 60John Smith, Purpose and Thought: Meaning of Prag- matism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1978), p. 113. 61 Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.443. 181 62Peirce, Collected Papers, 6.498. 63Goudge, ibid., p. 15. 64Peirce, Collected Papers, 2.29. 65Peirce, Collected Papers, 1.129. 66John Smith, Purpose and Thought, p. 115. 67ibid. 68Maritain, Intergral Humanism, p. 128. Note: Maritain employs italics rather extravagantly, and the original passages quoted here may often be found to be italicized by Maritain himself. 69Charles A. Fecher, The Philosophy of Jacques Maritain (Westminster, MD: The Newman Press, 1953), p. 266. 70Maritain, Integral Humanism, p. 132. 71Maritain, Integral Humanism, p. 30. 72Maritain, The Range of IReason (New ‘York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1952), p. 105. 73 Brooke William Smith, Jacques Maritain: Anti- modern or Ultramodern? An Historical Analysis of his patios, His Thought, and His Life (New York: Elsevier, 1976), p. 89. 74 Maritain, Integral Humanism, p. 28. 7sibid. 76Jacques Maritain, The Person and the Common Good, tr. (NEH) J. Fitzgerald (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1948), p. 27. 77Jacques Maritain, Freedom in the Modern WOrld, tr. Richard O'Sullivan (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936), p. 50. 78 Fecher, ibid., p. 159. 79Jacques Maritain, The Rights of Man and Natural Law, trans. Doris C. Anson (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1943), p. 2. 80 Maritain, The Person and the Common Good, p. 33. 182 8lJacques Maritain, Education at Crossroads (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1943). 82Leo R. Ward, "Maritain's Philosophy of Education," in Jacques Maritain: The Man and His Achievement, ed. Joseph W. Evans (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1963), p. 193. 83Donald and Idella Gallagher (eds.) The Education of Man: The Educational Philosgphy of Jacques Maritain (New York: Doubleday, 1962), p. 69. 84 Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 11. 85Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 39. 86ibid. 87Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 42. 88ibid. 89Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 44. 90Ward, ibid., p. 199. 91Maritain, Education at Crossroads, pp. 25-26. 92Maritain, Education at Crossroads, pp. 46-47. 93Maritain, Education at Crossroads, pp. 86-87. 94Maslow, Motivation and Personality, p. 32. 95Maddi & Costa, Humanism in Personology, p. 50. 96Maslow, Motivation and Personality, ch. 8. 97Maslow, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, ed. M.R. Jones (Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 1955); included in Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, Ch. III. 98Abraham Maslow , ”Psychologi cal Data and Value Theory,” in New Knowledge in Human Values, ed. A.H. Maslow (New York: Harpers, 1959), p. 123. 99 Maslow, Motivation and Personality, p. 102. 100 Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, p. 29. 101Maslow, ibid., p. 30. 102Quoted in C.S. Hall & G. Lindzey, Theories of Personality (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1957), p. 236. 10 3Abraham Mas low , 183 The Psychology of Science: A Reconnaissance (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), p. 25. 104 Morris, Philosophy of the American School, p. 224. 105 106Maslow, Toward a MacDonald, ibid., p. 80. Psychology of Being, 107Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, 108Maslow, Toward a 109Maslow, Toward a Psychology Psychology of of Being, Being, 110Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, Illibid. 112Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, ll3ibid. 114 115 mously in this study. MacDonald, ibid., p. 89. Steps and decision processes p. p. p. p. p. 4. 153. 158. 171. 160. will be used synony- CHAPTER IV COMPARATIVE STUDY Introduction This chapter arrays the three-stage (DEFINE, DEVELOP, and EVALUATE), nine-function, twenty-four-step IDI Model which forms the basis fOr the analytical comparative study for the pragmatist and humanist philosophical standpoints, that follows. DEFINING INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT The AECT Task Force on Definition and Terminology provided an ”endorsed” definition of Instructional Develop- ment (ID) as follows: INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: A systematic approach to the design, production, evaluation and utilization of complete systems of instruc- tion, including all appropriate components and management patterns for using them; instructional development is larger than instructional product management, which is concerned with only isolat- ed products, and is larger than instructional design which.L is only one phase of instructional development. The all-inclusiveness of the AECT definition has not stilled voices of discontent among’ practitioners of the profession. "The lingering disagreements persist because 184 185 definition is closely related to philosophical posi- tions."2 The explicitness of the AECT definition seems to be the major flaw: it is too explicit to be profitably applied. Kent Gustafson's definition of ID is preferred by some. He defines it as ”a process for improving the quality 3 It not only has the quality of being of instruction.” easily understood, but is sufficiently profound due to its focus upon the learning event and the learner. The thrust of all these efforts at defining ID has culminated in an increased understanding and acknowledge- ment of ID as a systematic process. Instructional develop- ment is now generally defined as a systematic process for selecting, adapting, or creating (i.e., developing) an instructional innovation which has the potential for improv- ing teaching and learning. The various ID models, ranging from the 70-step ”maxi" model of Allen Abedor to the six- step Kaufman model, however, reveal "a surprising paucity of information relating to the antecedent conditions necessary for successful implementation of the processes,"4 nor have they clearly delineated the various reasons that they found cogent in modelling instructional development to what they believed to be "instruction" and “learning." This may doubtlessly be attributed to the articulated influences of their inarticulate premises or philosophical orientations. Instructional development is referred very often to the systems approach. There is an abounding confusion with 186 respect to the definition of ID: systems approach, instruc- tional development, instructional technology, and education- al technology are used interchangeably. A man-machine system in the utilization of resources has given rise to a problem, according to some, of man attempting to maximising the minimum, i.e., the resources, instead of minimising the maximum.5 Unacknowledged yet implicit in the multi—level activi- ties of the socio-political man, the systems approach concept had offered, from the early beginnings of history, guidelines for an understanding of the environmental world man lives in. With the Age of Enlightenment, the systems approach concept began to emerge as a rational principle for focussing (n1 relationships that welded man and nature; with the triumph of natural sciences in the application of scientific method two centuries ago, systems approaches are becoming increasingly acknowledged as a powerful method for understanding man in his many worlds of activity. The systems approach to instruction is exemplified in the Dale Hamreus Model which was the forerunner of the IDI Model. Stage I of this model, called "systems definition and management” includes those start-up activities that must be planned and organized before the next two stages could be initiated. During this stage, the identification and marshalling of all the needed human and nonhuman resources are accomplished. Stage II, "Design Analysis," is 187 concerned with performance standards and material specifi- cations. Constraints within the system are identified and related to feasible solutions. Stage III, concerned with "Development and Assessment Procedures," details the construction and empirical validation of prototypes with corrective iteration of all aspects of development and evaluation until the new system could be ”satisfactorily" launched. The IDI Model reflects many of the concerns of the Hamreus Model, especially in its systematic. approach to instruction. The IDI Coordinator's Manual provides not only information on general systems theory as a method, but also guidelines to the participant in assuming responsibili- ty in its three stages of Define, Develop, and Evaluate. It presents and defends the logical necessity of a systems approach. INTRODUCTION TO COMPARATIVE STUDY Although the twenty-four processes in the IDI Model (See FIGURE 6) are labelled ”decision points," a closer analysis reveals that they are best described as 'pro- cesses" along which an ID team is required to make a number of specific decisions. If not explicitly stated, at least implicitly imbedded in these decision processes are a number of specified decision points with which this compara- tive study is vitally concerned. The extensiveness of such decision points preclude their comprehensive treatment; for FIGURE 6 188 A STAGE I: DEFINE J FUNCTION 1: IDENTIFY PROBLEM i FUNCTION 2: ANALYZE SETTING j FUNCTION 3: ORGANIZE MANAGEMENT l STAGE II: DEVELOP A FUNCTION 4: IDENTIFY OBJECTIVES T FUNCTION 5: SPECIFY METHODS I H 1... FUNCTION 6: CONSTRUCT PROTOTYPES I STAGE III: EVALUATE I FUNCTION 7: TEST PROTOTYPES J FUNCTION 8: ANALYZE RESULTS I FUNCTION 9: lMPLEMENT/RECYCLE TWENTY-FOUR DECISION PROCESSES OF IDI MODEL .Decision Processes so we 99.. .RT' Compere stetus cue to ideel Propose tentetive solutionlsl Determine leerner cherecteristics Inventory schoollcommunity resources Assign TAPS teem responsibilities Esteblish lines of communicetion Specify project plenning end control procedures Stete terminel pertormence objectives Stete enebling objectives end de- termine reletiondtips between objectives Construct performence meeeures Specify instructionel stretegies end medie forms Specity etternetive methods Prepere comprehensive descrip- tion of instructionel design specificetions Speciiy design for eveluetion of instruction‘ end eveluetion designs Conduct technicel review of instructionel end eveluetion designs Specify procedures for collection end development of instructionel meteriels Construct endessernble instruc- tionel meteriels Specify procedures to be used by permnel during tryout of instructionel prototype Cerry out instruction es plenned Ceny out eveluetion es plenned Tebulete end process eveluetion Determine reletionships between results. methods. objectives end goels lndicete whet kinds of revisions (if eny) ere suggested by the interpretetion of results. methods. objectives end goels Determine if suggested revisions indicete thet the prototype is to be rccycledor if thedesigncenbe implemented without mejor revisions. 189 example, Decision Process "k" is a process regarding the specification of instructional strategies and media forms which theoretically lead to an extensive consideration of various media, each taken separately--a task that could be uselessly prolonged. Consequently, this study is concerned economically with two decision points or more, as warrant- ed, in each of these twenty-four decision processes. Each of these twenty-four decision processes are, therefore, presented sequentially with an IDI Introduc— tion which is a descriptive explanation of the decision processes provided in the IDI Coordinator's Manual. The more specific decision points with which the instructional developer or the ID team has to deal with under the decision processes are then analyzed in terms of how a pragmatist or a humanist might respond to the decision point in question. These are critically examined from humanist and pragmatist viewpoints through a consider- ation of relevant philosopical thoughts and passages drawn from pragmatist and humanist writings. Examples are provided to illustrate the agreement or divergence (CONGRUENCE) of pragmatist and humanist philos- ophers with these decision points; if VARIABILITY (agree- ment with reservations) is involved, then it is so indicat- ed. It is also possible neither have anything to say on these questions. Thus, this comparative study seeks to analyze some of the decision points in each of the twenty-four processes 190 involved in the instructional development decision making. STAGE I: DEFINE DECISION PROCESS "a" (Function 1: Identify Problems): Compare Statusggpo to Ideal IDI Introduction: A crucial step in the systems approach, states the IDI Coordinator's Manual, is the definition of a problem with an estimate for its solution. Through the collection of relevant information from the total setting in which the problem is said to have emerged, one may be able to define the various elements of this setting and their interactions and relationships. This brings into focus the necessity of understanding general systems concepts like suprasystem, subsystem, system of interest, system dissonance and the boundaries of open and closed systems. Analytical descriptors like efficient- inefficient and appropriate-inappropriate are likewise used and loaded value terms are shunned, such as good-bad and right-wrong. It is not required that the problem definition be thoroughly completed before the next step, because additional information garnered in later processes could cause the instructional developer to modify previous decision points and their concomitant decisions. The problem in the IDI Model is defined as any dis- crepancy between the status quo (the way things are) with 191 an ideal situation (the way things ought to be). When ID teams attempt problem solving, there are bound to be different opinions regarding ideal solutions with its attendant system dissonance or emotional heat. This fact may lead to a need for distinguishing symptoms from real causes. The IDI Coordinator's Manual states that the ideal could be conceived as "the collective image of the way the world ought to be" and the individual image itself is made up of a person's “total perception of the world."6 This perception, whether group or individual, is shaped by experience, knowledge, and attitudes. There are a large number of decision points that an instructional developer would be expected to deal with in this process, but only five of the many will be considered here. a 1: This decision point for decision process 'a" (Compare Status Quo to Ideal) can be formulated as a question: "Does there exist a real problem?" If there is no real problem or if it is not solvable with available resources, the ID team may decide to abort a project. In a client-ID team relationship, it is often the perception of an apparent problem by the client that brings the instructional developers to the scene. This perception of an “apparent" problem by the client needs to be attended to, since it originated as a perceived discrepancy between the current state of affairs in instruction (status quo) 192 and tunr things ought to be (ideal). This perception by the client may be a mistaken one, but the ID team cannot make a valid judgment about the truth. or falsity' of this per- ception until they have examined detailed information concerning the status quo and the ideal. So the ID process is triggered when a level of dissatisfaction within the system arises. According to pragmatists, the process of inquiry starts when the stage of equilibrium is upset by an "irritating condition that usually originates from external surprises."7 James calls this stage of equilibrium commonsense when human mind is laden with discoveries and knowledge of the past.8 Similarly, Peirce calls it the current state of mind "in. which you are laden ‘with an immense mass of cognition already formed,"9 which consists (Hf a number of fundamental beliefs as a result of experience over a period of time. The status quo, for the pragmatists, is the present state of mind; scientific inquiry does not start from a priori conditions or self- evident truths. For Maritain, the humanist, the relationship between the status quo and the ideal is more than a carbon copy faithfulness, because if the status quo were identical to the ideal in every detail, there could be not discrepancy and hence no real problem would exist. For the humanists, a process is initiated when there is an unsatisfactory state 193 of affairs. :n: is the principle of individuation, which is the constitutive principle of an individual, that brings about this unsatisfactory state of affairs, Maritain says. The reality of man involves both the individual and the person, integrally considered, and the person tends to surge upward to realize fully his destiny in God, while individuation keeps him shackled. Education may provide for the liberation of the person. Maslow, on the other hand, finds that there exists a state of tension and deprivaton when basic needs are not gratified. In other words, lower needs which represent "deprivation motivation" will have to be first met before higher needs, which represent "growth motivation", can be successfully pursued. "The need or drive presses toward its own elimination."10 Example: Dr. Smith, who teaches Biology 101 to under— graduates :hi Lincoln University, finds that the Fall term enrollment for his classes has hit an all-time low of 45 students. This is an unsettling situation for Dr. Smith who needs more students in Biology' 101. to :make that course viable and, to some extent, self-supporting by way of revenue from course fees. In such a circumstance, the ID team asks, "Is there a real problem?" If the: drop in enrollment is due to a university policy to phase out this course by discontinuing to make it a prerequisite for other disciplines, there exists no real problem. If not, this could be termed an unsatisfactory state of affairs. Both pragmatists and humanists agree that an irritating external 194 condition has arisen in this case which has upset the equilibrium of the organism or system. a 2: ”Should an ID team monitor an instructional situation where no evident discrepancy exists?" Sometimes, an ID team may be invited to monitor an instructional scene where apparently no problem exists and where their task would consist in acting as experts, diagnosing the flow of instructional process and checking the symptoms for a potential instructional breakdown. The rationale being that they would act proactively to prevent any potential irritating conditions, very much like a medical doctor who administers a checkup for cancer. To act reactively, when the cancer has dangerously spread would be too late for the patient. But, even here, a comparison is involved, for implicit in any monitoring situation is a conceptualization of an ideal state of affairs, whether this be in health or in instruction, to which the current state of affairs is compared. Thus it is apparent that both pragmatists and hu- manists would agree that to decide as to whether a problem exists or not is in agreement with their philosophies. The same information or comparison data will be used by both pragmatists and humanists. In this case, however, the treatment of the data or the terms of comparison pragmatists and humanists would bring to bear on the identification of the instructional problem would be 195 different for these twoljphilosophies. Consequently; what appears to be a discrepancy for the humanists may not be so for the pragmatists. Example: Biology 101 has a respectable student enrollment of 105 students; but, 65 per cent of its classes are on ITV which frees Dr. Smith to lecture at other university campuses on his successful course program. Inexplicably, thrice in one week the TV cable in the classroom was found cut and thus classes were disrupted. When an anonymous letter reached the departmental chairman with the message, "We want a flesh-and-blood teacher!", the chairman realizes that something is amiss. For the pragmatists, Biology 101 does not evidence any discrepancy in time state of affairs, but from the humanist point of view, there indeed exists a discrepancy which was brought about by the dehumanizing treatment of the students by engaging a TV teacher. a 3: "What criteria should be employed in deciding whether discrepancies do exist?” The pragmatist would apply the specific pragmatist maxim: "Does it work?” or "What are the conceivable practi- cal consequences of such a decision?“ The humanist concern would be expressed in the question: "Does it work and does it work for the good of the human being?" If the proposed solution works app, in so doing, goes counter to the humanist concerns, i.e., the good of the human person, as evidenced in the case of making the learner' a. passive 196 recipient and conditioned to react automatically to external stimuli with the resultant degradation of his or her humanity, the humanists would argue that a discrepancy exists. Example: In deciding whether any discrepancies exist in the current status of Biology 101, the pragmatists would look into the effectiveness of instruction, for example, the use of ITV, which makes up 75 per cent of classroom instruction, its effectiveness in course content, treat- ment, and presentation. For the humanists, the excessive use of ITV and the resultant dehumanization of the students would constitute the criteria for deciding that a discrep- ancy does exist, even if the course content, course treat- ment, and course presentation were adjudged effective. The differential application of criteria by the pragmatists and humanists may be reflected in rank-ordering problem areas or discrepancies in instruction. After a brain-storming session which lists many discrepancies, the ID team needs to determine which among these discrepancies seems to be the most important and urgent one for consider- ation. a 4: "What kinds of rank-ordering or jrioritization of decisions are acceptable?" According to the pragmatism of Peirce, inquiry starts with a genuine doubt and all such doubts, inasmuch as they are irritating conditions, have to be resolved before 197 thought comes to rest in belief. A rank-ordering will have to be seen as a temporary phase and eventually all genuine doubts will have to remove this irritation so that thought can relax and rest for a moment.11 James speaks about our various purposes being at war with each other; where one cannot crush the other out, they compromise, “and the result is again different from what any one was distinctly proposed beforehand."12 For the humanists, in general, the fuller development of the human person is of paramount importance. The instinctoid basic needs, according to Maslow, initiate a goal-directed behavior and are classed as higher and lower needs; there is a prioritization possible in such a schema but Maslow cautions that across different people, these may account for levels of similarities and differentiations. Example: An acceptable rank-ordering of problems in Biology 101 may be assumed as follows: # 1 - Lecture method in instruction is boring #2 #3 Biology 101 is no longer a prerequisite Inadequate funding # 4 - Nationwide slump in college enrollment Such a rank-ordering of problems would explain to pragma- tists why the enrollment for Biology 101 keeps plummeting: instruction is ineffective. Add another reason to this list: the course is offered with TV lectures and the teacher is most often absent from the classroom, and the 198 humanists would rank it high as the problem or discrepancy where the individual student is downgraded because he or she has to interact with a nonhuman instructional medium. a 5: "Given knowledge about the current state of affairs how does the instructional developer decide what should constitute the ideal situation?" The pragmatists assert the reality of an ideal situation. The reasoning, according to the pragmatists, consists in this. A process of inquiry is instituted to reestablish and 'fix' beliefs, i.e., to render them secure against surprise and irritating conditions. The resolution of doubt, or the removal of obstacles, results in attainment of a new belief. This new belief is both a stopping-place and a new starting-point, since belief always contains a reference to action. The logical corollary of this thinking is that resolute action requires firm belief; but belief, in itself, contains a reference to action, which means that only when belief is firmest, action would not ensue. As a result, an ideal situation, where belief is the firmest without any further reference to action, can be aimed at, but never attained. All one could hope for would be approxi- mations to the ideal. In a similar way, James takes the pragmatic method to mean a theory of truth, a process of verification. Truth is not a stagnant property in an idea, through which we are led into other ideas and experiences 13 with which the original ideas remain in agreement. This teleological dynamism inherent in every kind of inquiry 199 covers the process of conduction from present idea (status quo) to a future terminus (ideal situation) that can be verified. As for humanists, they also affirm the processual progression from a status quo to an ideal situation. Maritain asserted: "Truth in the mind consists in its 14 conformity with the thing." There is a purposive dynamism between these two in which, ”the knower, while all the time keeping its own nature intact, becomes the known 15 Maritain makes a itself and is identified with it." distinction between speculative and practical knowledge. _ While 'speculative' knowledge is concerned with the 'true' (the acquisition of knowledge for its own sake), the 'practical' knowledge is concerned with the 'good' (acqui- sition of knowledge for right conduct). The 'practical' knowledge or science par excellence is ethics, which is a body of knowledge that deals with human actions and the moral concerns that they involve. But a system of ethics cannot be constituted without first answering the ultimate questions: ”What is man? Why is he made?" Thus, the ulti- mate destiny to which ethics tends to is the Supreme Good (Summum Bonum) which is unattainable through purely human means, unless aided by grace. The Supreme Good can only be aimed at, but not totally realized. The Freudian conception of human functioning as a homeostatic tendency to return to a low, steady level of organismic tension is rejected by Maslow because such a 200 conception is inadequate to account for the complex behavior of human beings which precipitate higher levels of tension. In place of these Freudian conceptualizations, Maslow proposes his own explanations of such behaviors as growth-oriented efforts of self-actualizing people. Such a theory implies progressions from the current state of affairs toward an ideal state, toward a fuller Being. Example: The ideal state which Dr. Smith could aspire to may have the following criteria: a student enroll- ment of about 120 per term, a mastery of 85 per cent or more of the course content by the students, the possibility of a ”Distinguished Professor” award for Dr. Smith next year, and his own satisfaction in teaching, with an accompanying increase in self-worth and enjoyment. Both the pragmatists and humanists would accept such an ideal state, although the increase in self-worth and enjoyment would be points that the humanists would opt for. If there is a concomitant increase in time self-worth of the students and their fuller development as human beings, this would be humanistic too. DECISION PROCESS ”b" (Function 1: Identify Problem): Propose Tentative Solutions IDI Introduction: According to the IDI Model, the search for an ideal solution may ordinarily result in a number of tentative solutions with varying degrees of 201 probability in meeting a need. If the problem has been adequately defined and the symptoms of the instructional malaise have been carefully sifted from its causes, it is often possible to arrive at solutions which must have the prerequisite of meeting effectively these instructional problems. In addition, there may be a need to consider the ramifications of each of these solutions. If the evalu- ation of an instructional solution can be termed as a retrospective phase where the effectiveness, efficiency, and relevance of the solution are measured and judged, the proposal of tentative solutions should be considered as a prospective phase, although in this case the terms of comparison will less rigorously be employed. Given this IDI Introduction, there are a number of decision points that an instructional developer may be expected to face. b 1: "Should solutions be assumed as tentative? Should not the developer begin with a firm and valid solution?" The pragmatists view solutions as tentative because thought is always in transit, and the element of tentative- ness is inherent in all thought processes. For Peirce, as well as for James, tentativeness belongs essentially to all inquiries and, in principle, can never be overcome.16 One is constantly forced to believe and act-—here and now-- against the background of an imperfect knowledge, which fact points out both the importance and precariousness of 202 the 'practical' from a pragmatic point of view. Action does not require one to convert a tentative knowledge into an absolute certainty, but only to 'make up our minds.” The humanists do not seem to have specifically dealt with the question of tentativeness of solutions. Two extra- polations may be relevant here. Maslow argued that human beings, in their most human activities, actually tolerate and even enjoy increases rather than decreases in tension; such an increased tension is in tune with the future- oriented, complexly organized behavior that strives for self-actualization. This may point to the tentativeness in the functioning state since in a satisfactory state of affairs, human functioning would have attained equilibrium. Secondly, personality is continually transacting with environmental contexts.17 This constant interaction invests the input with a certain element of tentativeness. From these two extrapolations, it seems that tentativeness of solutions was acceptable to humanists, but they did not offer any specific views on this subject. Example: Many tentative solutions for the problems of Biology 101 may be offered: get another teacher (Dr. Smith may not like it), initiate a campus-wide promotional campaign for Biology 101, make it a prerequisite for allied disciplines, improve the course content with instructional aids and other strategies to give it a face-lift, etc. All of these are tentative solutions, in the sense that they can only approximate the ideal solution. At this point in 203 the ID process any single solution cannot be offered as 1:113 solution or the valid one, because in the process of verification, we enter the area of the probable. The pragmatists would accept them as tentative, but the human- ists have not any consideration to this point, even though the extrapolation of their philosophical stand indicates that they would accept them as tentative. b 2: "Should there be more than one tentative solution?” This is a question of successive approximations in which more and more information about the probable success of a solution would be welcome. The pragmatist's prepared- ness to act, initially resides in tentative or incomplete knowledge, but the call to action, here and now, prompts them to embrace one solution as more probable to "work" successfully than the other. A greater amount of infor- mation will minimize the probability of failure. Thus the pragmatists will Opt for more than one solution until final— ly, they have sufficient information to make up their minds to act. The humanists, as noted earlier, have not consider- ed the question. Example: To meet a particular instructional need, 1) team teaching, 2) individualized instruction, or 3) instruc- tion with more sophisticated aids, etc., may be offered as alternative solutions. The pragmatists will equally weigh their effectiveness till they select one as the more appro- priate. From among these three solutions, the humanists 204 would opt for individual or personalized instruction if it also achieves effectiveness. b 3: "What decision rule should be used in deciding most suitable solution in an instructional context?" The pragmatic method is designed primarily to settle metaphysical, linguistic and other disputes that otherwise might be interminable. If solution K and solution _Y are offered, both claiming equal weight and consideration as capable of achieving a specified instructional objective, these two solutions will be tested by the pragmatists; if no difference is found between the respective practical consequences of these two solutions, solutions 5 and Y are one and the same, to all practical intents and pur- poses, and the claim of greater effectiveness is purely a verbal quibbling. If, however, one solution is found to be superior to another, the former is to be adopted. For the humanists, Maritain lays down four fundamental norms or rules of education: (1) to liberate the principal agent (i.e. the learner) to grow in the life of the mind, (2) to stress inwardness and internalization of education, (3) to foster internal unity of man, and (4) to free human mind through the mastery of reason over things learned. Example: For effective and efficient instruction in Biology 101, Dr. Smith and Dr. Jones are proposed as competent teachers to handle this teaching assignment. If no difference is found between the practical consequences of their teaching the claim for superiority in teaching for 205 one is unfounded; but if Dr. Smith's teaching is found to be superior, he should be retained. But the humanists would weigh the effects of dropping one or the other with the effects of their teaching on the students if, for example, rote memorization of course content is made mandatory. DECISION PROCESS "c" (Function 2: Analyze Setting): Determine Learner Characteristics IDI Introduction: The identification of the problem and the proposal of tentative solutions enable the ID team ‘ workers to define the kinds of information they need for analyzing the setting. One of the basic steps in this analysis of the setting is to gather' as much information. as possible about the students who are the target audience. Undoubtedly, there is a multiplicity of such learner characteristics that could be collected, but the crucial. question that guides the process of data gathering is the following: "What de- cision/s will be made on the basis of this information?” Some categories of information may prove to be interesting, but otherwise costly and useless. Once a decision is taken concerning the kind of information to be gathered, system- atic and objective means must be employed in obtaining this information, so as to make this process efficient and the data so gathered. accurate. The following' represents the usual kind of information about learner characteristics 206 that are gathered: age, sex, ethnic composition, religious affiliation, family size, socio-economic background, peer group interaction, emotional and physical health, grade reports, vocational test scores, and self-image. This decision process "c" can generate a number of related decision points. p__1: "Should learner characteristics be determin- 293" The pragmatists have not directly dealt with this question of detemining learner characteristics. But the pragmatic concept of 'verification' involved in scientific inquiry can be extrapolated to provide an understanding for this decision point. Verification, Peirce says, is suscepti- ble of degrees, and there will be considerable variation in the firmness with which different beliefs are 'fixed' when thought finally comes to rest. With added information on the nature of the problem, the proposed solution, the methods employed, and the target audience, the verification finally reached will be firmer and proximate to reality. Thus, it could be said that the pragmatists emphasize the reason for determining learner characteristics, but there is 1“) specific reference to it in the pragmatic literature examined. As for the humanists, who are concerned with the improvement of human nature, determination of learner characteristics is an essential component in the process of this improvement. "Improve human nature and. you improve 207 all," Maslow said, but "before you improve human beings, you must understand them We just don't know-enough about people and this is the task facing the psycho- logists."18 By psychologists Maslow does not mean just professors of psychology, but "all sorts of people” includ- ing educators. It is from this position on the uniqueness of human beings that Maslow is able to accommodate the concepts of projective techniques, observation, direct self-report, performance tests, etc., as appropriate sources of information about learner characteristics.19 Thus, a humanist instructional developer will find valid reasons for undertaking this task of knowing more about learner characteristics. Example: To know the entry level competencies of the students which data can be gathered by questionnaires, grade reports, etc., can really help the specific forms in which the course Biology 101 has to be restructured. The humanists would agree to this point, and the pragmatists, in general, are not averse to such procedures. c 2: ”Should the determination of learner character- istics include also the attitudes and values of the learner?" The pragmatists are silent over this decision point. But the humanists, with their concern for the Fuller Being of the human beings or their integral development, are intensely involved in establishing the right attitudes and values in the learners that would enable them to grow into 208 ”fuller maturity." To realize fully their potentialities, capabilities, and talents, learners need to have an adequate understanding of the attitudes they manifest and the values they cherish. Example: With a view to finding a suitable solution for Biology 101 problems, questionnaires are distributed in the class to find out information about the students who enroll, their grade points, their career goals and aspi- rations and the reasons for choosing this course. ”Good idea," the humanists would say, "but do not forget the end, nor allow the means to dominate the end." DECISION PROCESS "d” (Function 2: Analyze Setting): Inventory of School and Community Resources IDI Introduction: The analysis of the instructional setting also envisages a determination of the school and community characteristics that may be related to the prob- lem and its solution. This kind of information acquaints the ID team of conditions under which they must work and the various kinds of resources they might reasonably expect in finding at solution. If additional resources are requir- ed, then the question arises where and how these could be procured. Within the constraints of available resources, the tentative solution may also undergo some revision. Grouped under this decision process are a number of decision points that an instructional developer would face. 209 d 1: "Should the ID team consider human resources as an essential component in seeking an instructional solution?” The pragmatists accentuate the importance of this decision. One of the six distinctive characteristics of scientific inquiry, as a method of fixing belief, is that it is a cooperative, social venture, not an individual affair. "The progress of science cannot go far except by collaboration," Peirce stated, ”or, to speak more accurate- ly, no mind can take one step without the aid of other minds."20 One readily sees this trait being realized in physical sciences where a true scientist attaches positive value to the views of every man as competent as himself. At another place, Peirce stated that the very origins of the conception of reality showed that this conception essential- ly involved the notion of a community, without definite limits, and capable of definite increase in knowledge.21 Thus, the pragmatist stand is very clear when it comes to the matter of marshalling all available human resources in this common venture. Maritain, for the humanists, is the chief spokesman to attest to the necessity of availing' all. possible human resources in educational enterprises. Man cannot progress, both morally and intellectually, he said, "without being helped by collective experience previously accumulated and preserved by a regular transmission of acquired knowledge."22 210 Example: Dr. Smith and the ID team would find it expedient to enlist the help of colleagues, graduate assistants, media technicians, etc., a decision with which the humanists and pragmatists would heartily concur. These are human resources and the humanists would place a premium on such step. d 2: ”Is it advisable to catalogue the nonhuman resources as a component in the ID solution?" The pragmatists have not considered this question, but an extension of the Peircean notion of 'community' of scientists can be logically seen as not restriced to their . statements and views, but as extended to include their achievements as well. A technique of conducting a lab experiment in electrolysis is a nonhuman resource, but it also enshrines the accepted norm for a scientific 'com- munity' and, in this sense, it is a decision that the pragmatists would endorse. Maritain specifically' speaks about the necessity' of the state involving itself in education (e.g. by providing funds) and the arrangement of educational levels with physical arrangements which would aid the students to learn. For Maslow, the possibility of men and women becoming more fully human is very real when they are given better conditions: "basic needs and meta-need gratifi- cations via all sorts of external social, political, 23 ecOnomic, biological conditions.” He decries, however, the cult of education for "earning a degree" and contrasts 211 it with the school resources that are conducive to the humanist goals of education. Example: For Biology 101, it would be advisable to have the classroom equipped with CCTV (closed circuit TV) or be ciose to the instructional media center. The pragma- tists would welcome such a. decision, but the humanists would insist that the use of instructional TV be so con- formed as not to be dehumanizing to the students. DECISION PROCESS "e" (Function 3: Organize Management): Assign TAPS team Responsibilities IDI Introduction: The ID team consists of teachers, administrators, policy makers, and specialists who are experts in educational psychology, curriculum, evaluation and media design and production. They are expected to assume responsibilities of steering, designing, developing, and Operating the ID product. Some of these tasks may take the form of policy making and team coordination in monitor- ing team performance, approving expense requests, establish- ing timelines for completion of various phases of the ID program; these also could involve specification and develop- ment of materials and the tryout and evaluation of proto- types. Each member of the TAPS team will have a list or responsibilities assigned to them, after they had consented to such an arrangement, as well as the necessary authority commensurate with these responsibilities. They aim at 212 effectiveness and efficiency. For the sake of brevity, two of the decision points involved in this process are examined here. e 1: "What management model should be used in this task? For example, should it be democratic or authori- tarian?” Peirce lists and evaluates four ways of 'fixing belief' among which are the scientific method (which he accepts) and the method of authority (which he rejects). Judged in terms of material efficiency, Peirce finds the method of authority vastly superior to the method of tenaci- ty, but this method of authority outrages the sensibilities) of any rational man, because of the premium it places on cruelty, ruthlessness, and intellectual slavery.24 It is evident that an authoritarian structure goes counter to the community of scientific minds that Peirce upheld. For humanists, free will and the liberation of the spirit are of supreme importance. Both Maslow and Maritain would even argue for the inclusion of the learners in such a management model because they are the primary factors in the process of education. Example: If the TAPS team for Biology 101 decides to institute a democratic management model by giving equal voice and vote for all participating members (including student representatives, the humanists would say), this process would be acceptable to both philosophies. The 213 authoritarian method will be rejected by both. If a democratic method without student representation is pursued, the humanists are more likely to reject it. e 2: "How will the assignment of responsibilities be determined?” Among the pragmatists, James characterized ideas and beliefs as 'plans of action,‘ theories as 'instruments' or 'modes of adaptation to reality.‘ His pragmatic method with its ”practical consequences” provided an arbiter in the court of appeal where what is "useful and workable" was the criterion. His main preoccupation was the theory of truth, which was anchored, in a theory' of gppg_ and. yalpp, The truth is that which is valuable, expedient, workable, and successful. "'True' refers to such of those means as work 25 efficiently and satisfactorily." If the assignment of TAPS team responsibilities to different team members will work toward true and workable instructional product, then, James sees such a decision as compatible with the pragmatic viewpoint, without concerning himself with the apportioning of responsibilities. Maritain acknowledges both educational and extra- educational spheres impinging upon education. These spheres of influence should act responsibly through mutual help, knowing at the same time that there will always be a reciprocal tension between various team members that cannot be completely overcome. Teachers are ndnisterial agents in 214 education and a dynamic factor in the intellectual for- mation of a learner. The primary dynamic factor, however, is always the ”internal vital principle in the one to be educated."26 TAPS teams are welcome in furthering the advancement of the educative process, but these should not be construed as the totality of agents in this important venture. The predominant concern here is not one of determining who should be responsible, but rather what they should be responsible to, namely, the education of the individual. Example: In Biology 101, the TAPS team works in_ upgrading the course content, where the TAPS team member who is a curriculum specialist is reponsible for the content, and the media specialist has to supervise over the production of the instructional aids. The departmental chairman must approve a budget for this ID program. in consultation with and approval from the university authori- ties. All these tasks are conducive, but not central, to the essential consideration. of instruction. Both pragma- tists and humanists are neutral in this decision process, but the latter ndght ask pointedly: ”Where do the students come in? While effectiveness and efficiency will be safe- guarded in such an arrangement, is there any provision for relevance of the ID product as far as the students are concerned?” 215 DECISION PROCESS "f” (Function 3: Organize Management): Establish Lines of Communication IDI Introduction: Once tasks and responsibilities have been assigned, it becomes apparent that the TAPS team members need to communicate with each other to solve problems that may crop up occasionally: personal dif— ferences and animosities, failure to inquire about the availability of resource people, and occasional forgetful- ness as to who is to do ‘what. The establishment of a communications network among the ID team members will help to facilitate the procuring of information and transmitting_ it in various ways. Why, when, what and how of information transmission will have to be spelled out. Some individuals may recommend or suggest solutions, others need to be informed of decisions, and still others must be consulted and their approval secured. Two decision points may be mentioned here. f 1: "Which methods of communication (feedback) should be employed among the TAPS team members?" For the pragmatists, scientific inquiry involves a vast cooperative enterprise within the scientific community in which an issue is not regarded as settled until all intelligent doubt has been cleared and all have come to a common agreement. Consequently, there must be a communi- cation of ideas, doubts, and. other information. so ‘that objective truth could be achieved, even if this process takes generations of study. If such a search for truth 216 takes an indefinite timeline, it is much more so with an instructional solution to be sought in a definite timeline where lines of communication must be established. Again, the pragmatists affirm the need for communication without spelling out how this has to be achieved. Alike the pragmatists, the humanists also do not spell out how lines of communication ought to be established except that this should be done; one does not rid family or state from. the sphere of education, because of some of their unwholesome influences in the past on the learner, but "endeavor to make them more and more aware and worthy- of their call."27 Example: The TAPS team for Biology 101 decides on information feedback to be achieved through items like written memos, meetings, and oral agreements. The decision by the TAPS team to follow a single method or a combination of methods is of little consequence to either pragmatists or humanists; but the latter are more likely to opt for meetings and oral agreements because of the personal inter- actions these involve than for depersonalized and officious memos. f 2: "What should be the source of authority in such TAPS team decisions?" For the pragmatists, the term 'authority' was replete with bad connotations and both Peirce and James excluded at the outset of pragmatic method any reference to authori- tative pronouncements and a priori conditions. Should there 217 be any authority that exacts dispassionate compliance, it is the strict and ”diligent inquiry into truth for truth's sake, without any sort of axe to grind."28 Hence, authori- ty is not vested in a person or persons, but in truth and its sole possession. Maslow feels that the average person is not conscious of all his needs, but ”sophisticated people" can help him to be conscious of his needs. Maritain considers teachers are ministerial agents, while the primary dynamic factor in education is the vital principle in the learner himself. Authority, understood in the limited sense of guiding the. learner to understand himself, is welcome, but can never impose itself. Example: Biology 101 TAPS team gives veto power to departmental chairman over final product, if he so feels. This is unacceptable both to pragmatists and humanists, because the possession of truth is not the sole prerogative of one individual, but it must be sought in the community of scientists who strive to achieve it. DECISION PROCESS "9" (Function 3: Organize Management): Specify Project Planning and Control Procedures IDI Introduction: At this phase of ID activities, the critical step in the organization of management is to establish a broad outline of developmental tasks. Such a provision becomes an effective management tool for the team 218 because each individual member of the TAPS team has not only sufficient information concerning the tasks and responsibilities expected of each of them, but also the time schedule within which these tasks mut be accomplished, lest serious personnel conflicts and missed assignments ensue. Both human and nonhuman functional factors need to be taken into account in such a setup. g 1: ”Which management techniques should be used to achieve the predetermined solution?" For example, should one use the PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) Method, or the PBBS (Planning, Programming, Budgeting. System) Method?” The pragmatists would welcome management tachniques in the pursuance of an ID solution. Peirce proposes that meaning can be determined through an appeal to the fu_nc: _t_i_o_n of thought in producing beliefs or habits of action. Thus, the use of a management technique, i.e., specifi- cation of project planning, is a prospective affair in which attention is riveted on the ends at which the idea aims. Purpose comes to function as a principle of selec- tion by indicating what actually counts as part of thought and rejecting all other irrelevant considerations. This appeal to purpose and relevance is basic to pragmatism in all its forms. Without first defining some selective princi— ple or management technique, the process of knowledge would entail theoretically an unending array of logical determi- nations, but the pragmatic method seeks to arrest such a 219 total mirroring of everything in thought by delineating a finite situation, i.e., definite timeline, where the possibility of specifying what serves and what does not serve the purpose of thought exists. The effective management of an ID solution. is not unwelcome to the humanists where management techniques seek to combine effectiveness with efficiency. But the central concern for the humanists in all aspects of education is the dignity of the human person. While the humanists agree with the pragmatists in the use of management techniques, they caution against a cult of efficiency which disregards. the person. Example: The ID team assigns 25 days for the comple- tion of course content for Biology 101 and another 35 days for the media forms to be finalized, because it has to plan within budget constraints. If the curriculum specialist requests 45 days (and the media specialist. 60 days) to complete the work, this request will have to be overridden. If the request of the curriculum specialist is a genuine one, which, however, cannot be honored, its end product will be a forced one which affects the eventual effective- ness and also the specialist in a. dehumanizing *way 'by forcing him or her to work like a machine. This is not acceptable to the humanists. But, if the specific timelines can be met, this decision will be agreeable to humanists. 220 STAGE II: DEVELOP DECISION PROCESS “h" (Function 4: Identify Objectives): State Terminal Performance Objectives IDI Introduction: The initial thrust and direction provided in the previous steps will now guide the TAPS team to shift its focus from identifying objectives to specify- ing the methods of instruction and learning. What has been so far vaguely stated, now needs to be spelled out in a concrete form which helps to refine the problem in a more acute and precise manner. The performance objectives are constituted precisely to identity student or learner performance levels attained at the end of the instruction and to establish measurable goals for individual learners. Hamreus explained behavioral objectives as statements that precisely state what changes in the learner's behavior are expected to occur as a result of the experience provided him/her by the instructional system.29 It states precisely under what conditions sets of specified tasks must be performed as well as the criteria of acceptable performance. Two decision points are examined here which are illustrative of the concerns instructional developers have with terminal performance objectives (TPOs). h 1: "Should behavioral objectives! be 'used. as 'the form for the development. of Terminal. Performance Objec- tives?" 221 For the pragmatists, the method of inquiry is primari- ly aimed at the meanig of an idea or a proposition which is arrived at through an examination of its practical con- sequences. From this perspective, the need to state termin- al performance objectives behaviorally is in agreement with pragmatism. Since from a cognitive standpoint, the sole purpose of inquiry is to render things intelligible, the verification of observed facts as providing meaning in the inferential phase of inquiry needs to be referred back to the conceivable performance of things to their objectives. Purpose cannot be set forth without something 'general' and the intellectual purport of a concept (and hence, the) reality in question) cannot be set in singular effects. Reality or the real covers not only the will be's, the i_s's, and the have been's (all of which cover actuali- ty), but also the would be's and the can be's. Thus, Peirce was directing attention to what an object would do if it is characterized in a certain way. The meaning of concepts has a clear reference to outcome and the pragmatic idea of conceivable practical consequences refers to the statement of TPOs. But a behavioristic position with a set of should be's summing up the totality of meaning of would be's and can be's falls short of the pragmatist meaning. For the humanists, the integral unity of human being must be preserved holistically and the prevalent tendency of dividing up man and his acts into a series of artificial 222 compartments is totally unsatisfactory. "The villain is the atomistic conception of the expert, where he does his thing without reference or tie-in with anyone else and is thus dehumanizing his job, technologizing it," said .Maslow.30 For the humanists, a holistic conception of man and his performances provide the valid criteria rather than an atomistic conception, as represented by behavioral objectives. Example: The ID team for Biology 101 fixes 100 per cent memory retention of 220 bits of information, a 10- minute oral presentation, and a 1800-word essay on a selected portion of the biology course as behavioral) terminal performance objectives. The pragmatists find such determinations as acceptable, but the entire meaning of the biology course would not have been fully' realized. The humanists would propose instead, for example, that the 220 bits of information be not learned in an atomistic fashion, but rather be internalized and made relevant to the value structures of the student through which he could consider biological questions as they affect him and his relation- ships with other human beings. h 2: ”How do we determine acceptable degrees of performance measures?" The principle of pragmatism as formulated by Peirce stated that to ascertain meaning one should consider the conceivable practical consequences resulting from the truth of that conception and "the sum of these consequences will 223 constitute the entire meaning of that conception."31 Thus, a pragmatistic sum of consequences is different from a behavioristically oriented collection of consequences, however comprehensive they purport to be, and the degree of acceptable performance it dictates. For pragmatists, meaning of a reality is m_or_e_ than what is supplied by the TPOs. For the humanists, the atomistic conception of human beings and their performances has led to a dehumanization that is inherent in every behavioristic determination. Maritain makes a distinction between the "scientific idea" of man and the "philosophical-religious" idea of man; the former, recast by strictly experimental science, has the "distinguished merit of providing invaluable and ever growing information concerning the means and tools of education,"32 but is divested of any ontological content which the latter necessarily implies. In its concern for observable and measurable data, the scientific idea of man is now reduced to a 'phenomenalized idea without reference to ultimate reality."33 Example: Biology 101 fixes that the 220 bits of information be memorized with 85 percent retention, the 10-minute oral presentation be rated on a seven-point scale for cohesion of ideas, presentation, voice modulation, etc., and the 1800-word essay be similarly rated for comprehensiveness, originality, documentation, etc. The 224 pragmatists would accept it with reservations, but the humanists would reject it. They would favor, for example, that the lO-minute oral presentation be not judged solely on the particular skills involved such as voice modulation and presentation, but that the overall content and cohesion of ideas, instead of being retained by sheer rote memori- zation, reflect how the student has unified and internaliz- ed them into his value structures. DECISION PROCESS "i" (Function 4: Identify Objectives): State Enabling Objectives and determine relationships between (among) them IDI Introduction: Once the terminal. performance objectives (TPOs) are specified, the question that faces the TAPS team is what is to be taught and in what order. In the first case, the question is, "What knowledge or skills are required of the learner that are a must for the learner in satisfactorily completing the TPOs?” A corollary to this question will be: “In what order should the instruction be arranged so as to effectively achieve the TPO?” What are identified through this process are usually called Enabling Objectives (EOs). At each stage of the instructional activity so defined, enabling Objectives specify what increments of skill, knowledge, or affect are essential to enable the learner to successfully take the next stage of learning, which would then produce a pyramidal lattice-work 225 with the TPO at the apex and the EOs leading downward to the base. When a learner has arrived at the apex, he or she would have successfully completed the TPO. It should be understood that clearer distinctions cannot be provided at every level of these enabling objec- tives, at least in some cases. Enabling objectives and TPOs are relevant to each other, but not in an absolute sense; a TPO could be an E0 for a higher level TPO. An ID team might consider the following decision points. i 1: "How does one determine the relationship be- tween E08 and TPO?” This question might be seen as a 'logical' sequencing of skills, competencies, and knowledge which are considered prerequisite before a higher order skill, competency, or knowledge could be acquired. The instructional developers usually resort to empirical means of system and task analyses to determine such relationships between E03 and TPO. For the pragmatists, the behavioristically defined TPO and E05 suffer from their inability to "sum up" all go_n_: ceivable practical consequences, whereas these are concern- ed primarily with measurable practical consequences. System and task analyses, despite their exhaustive and meticulous details, often fail to "sum up" all conceivable practical consequences under all kinds of conditions which these task and system analyses, for the sake of economy, 226 cannot fully and adequately respond to. The pragmatists accept these analyses as efficient instrumentalities, but acknowledge their limitations as well. Similarly, for the humanists, the atomistic conception of man and his performances is the chief villain. Maslow particularly rejects the so-called Stimulus-Response psychology which has created without meaning to do so, a Stimulus-Response man who is passive, adjusted, shaping, and learning . 34 His hierarchy of need gratificatoins will not hold uniform at all times, and for all kinds Of people in the world. Maritain also accepts the viability of such a logical sequencing, but there exist many individual dif- ferences, which cannot be adequately subsumed into uniform methods of analyses. Example: Biology 101 is so structured that weekly quizzes, occasional papers, and mid term exams are related to an effective achievement of mastering the total content and import of the course in the finals. Pragmatists would accept it with reservations; the humanists are not averse to quizzes, papers and exams, but question whether these burden the mind of the learner to such an extent that he is passively receiving information, instead of actively perceiving its logical connection to his life and to the world he lives in. i 2: "Are the skills and knowledge to be acquired sequentiallyithrough the instrumentality of the E03?” 227 Peirce speaks about simple explanations taking' pre- cedence over more complex solutions in scientific inquiry when he re-echoed the scholastic maxim, 'Entia sine necessitate non sunt multiplicanda" (Entities are not to be multiplied without valid reason). Simple explanations can be conceived as building blocks for more complex ones. In this sense, initially acquired information and skills on various levels, can be followed sequentially by more complex skills and information. The process of 'verifi- cation' in scientific inquiry imports such levels of under- standing and the pragmatists would accept such a decision, point. Notwithstanding serious objections about the atomistic conception of man, Maritain acknowledges various levels in the educational process where the content and direction are attuned to the budding capabilities of the learner. Such a progressive unfolding of knowledge yields to the sovereign- ty of the child and freeing of the intuitive power. Humanists would accept this decision point. Example: Thrice every week, the Biology 101 teacher conducts "surprise" quizzes to check whether the students understood preliminary concepts, simple terms and classifi- cations upon which, as building-blocks, more complex course matter could be built up. A general fortnightly quiz will enable the teacher to introduce the students in a sequenti- al manner to more complex course matter. Both pragmatists and humanists would accept such a decision. 228 DECISION PROCESS "j" (Function 4: Identify Objectives): Construct Performance Measures IDI Introduction : Concurrent with determining terminal and enabling objectives is the need to develop measures capable of assessing terminal and enabling per- formance. It makes no sense to specify objectives without also making provisions for specified ways of measuring these performances which will help the ID team to determine whether the expected behaviors have been successfully acquired by the learners. Hamreus commented: “The primary function of these measures is to determine whether or not the expected behaviors were acquired by the learners as a 35 Whether the instruments are result of the instruction.” valid or not is an issue under discussion. j 1: "What kind of evaluation measures are to be used for each TPO and E0?" The pragmatic question is "Does it work?" With particu- lar regard to methodology, the pragmatists are right: there can be no more natural way of justifying a method than by establishing that it 'works' with regard to a specific task. To be justified instrumentally is to be justified in the manner inherently appropriate and adequate to a tool, a method, a technique, a medium, etc. By their very nature, instrumentalities, such as techniques and methods, are means for doing things of a certain sort. An instrumental justification is one given in a manner appropriate to means 229 as such and is ”fitting and proper” with regard to instru- mentalities. But this presupposes that this action be accomplished in a purposive and teleological manner. A method is instrinsically purpose-relative: it cannot be thought of as pure and simple, a “method for method's sake,” but always as a method for the sake of the reali- zation of some end, so that the teleological question of its effectiveness be always brought to the central issue of instrumental justification. Humanists, in general, are averse to the employment of performance measures as the sole criterion for assessing, educational excellence. It must be noted that the pragmatic criterion ("Does it work?") is not contradicted by the humanist criterion ("Does it work for the good of the human person?") but that the latter is more inclusive than the former. It is integral or integrated development that Maritain insists upon; the needs of both the individual and the person must be respected. Hence, any performance measure that works for the good of the person, but will not work effectively is also a truncated version of education. Example: The TAPS team specifies criterion-referenc- ed tests for Biology 101. If the instrumentality is fitting and proper, such tests are acceptable to the pragmatists. But the humanists would like that these tests be adapted not only to the course content, but also to the value structures of individual students. These may be provided 230 through value statements from the students that need not be graded. j 2: ”Who interprets the evaluation data?" From what was explained in i_l, it is apparent that the pragmatic maxim, 'Does it ‘work?', provides justifi- cation to the instruments. The designation of an interpeter of evaluation data is only a secondary concern for the pragmatists. However, an evaluation specialist who under- stands the import of this maxim is more suited for the task than another, for instance, who understands only statis- tics. In this regard, the humanists follow the pragmatists for whom such considerations are not significant. Maslow's preference ‘would. be for ”sophisticated" scientists using "sophisticated techniques." Example: The TAPS team. assigns the evaluation specialist to the task of interpreting the data. Such a decision makes no difference for the pragmatists, but the humanists would wish to control the criteria by which the evaluation specialists would interpret the data. DECISION PROCESS "k” (Function 5: Specify Methods): Specify Instructional Strategies and Media IDI Introduction: The TAPS tem now proceeds to Specify instructional strategies and media to help the 231 learners achieve the objectives the team had established earlier. These specifications describe both the procedures and the materials to be employed. Since the time the IDI Coordinator's Manual was published irI 1972, there have been newer recognitions and fresher insights into the nature of 'strategies' and 'media.‘ The term 'strategy' is now being broadly under- stood as consisting of 'expository' strategy (i.e. teach- ing) in which the course content is expounded as in lecture method, and 'discovery' or inquiry strategy (i.e. learning) in which, through deductive and inductive reasoning, the students are progressively led to understand the course content. The term 'media' can generally be subsumed under tactics or methods, since the term 'media' is particularly restrictive to instructional materials like audiovisual media, whereas 'methods' can be extended to arrangements of the instructional context to facilitate learning. Besides effectiveness of media and strategies, considerations of efficiency, expressed in time and cost factors are also operative here. A set of activities, deemed appropriate for strategies, will be plotted out which will include plans for evaluation of learning, student practice, and presentation of materials. There could be a number of decision points. k 1: "How are instructional strategies and/or media selected?" It is very evident that the pragmatic method of 232 inquiry with its concern for conceivable practical con- sequences makes observation and the instruments of obser- vation a cardinal point in their pragmatist philosophy. Instrumentalities are justified in a pragmatic method to the extent they are appropriate to and validating the scientific inquiry. Hence, instructional strategies and/or media are to be employed to the extent they refer to the pivotal issue of the pragmatists, posed in the question, "Does it work?" For humanists in general and for Maritain in parti- cular, pedagogical means and methods and their scientific improvement are a matter of pride and an outstanding progress. But the surprising weakness of today's education lies in the failure to bend these means toward their end. The humanistic concern in education is the development of human mind, says Maritain, and neither the richest material facilities nor the richest equipment in methods, information, and erudition are the main point. The great thing is the awakening of the inner resources and creati- vity.36 Instructional strategies and/or media may be consider- ed as improving mental faculties, but they must give way to respect for the dawning intellect of man. Example: The TAPS team specifies a 20-point, itemized, fortnightly quiz, and an 800-word essay which is graded independently by three graduate assistants. The pragmatists accept such a decision as long as they are 233 instrumental to the purpose at hand. But the humanists would require something more personal in this testing so that the internalization of this information could be gauged; but, they have not indicated how this must be done. k 2: ”Should I consider the comparison between 'expository' strategies in instruction and 'discovery' strategies to be value—free?" The pragmatist stand on the question of instructional strategies has been clarified earlier. The instrumental justificaton is intimately tied with purposive behavior as the verification phase in scientific inquiry validates it, through instrumentalities, whether these be variously termed as strategies, techniques, media, and methods. As a result, 'expository' strategies and 'discovery' strategies are given equal weight and consideration; the comparison itself is value-neutral. The humanists, however, view this comparison quite differently. The central issue in education is the develop- ment and maturation of human person and a 'discovery' strategy, as exemplified in discovery or inquiry learning, eminently respects human intelligence and the learning process itself becomes a humanistic endeavor. Hence, such a comparison as posed in the above question is not value- free, but very much in line with humanistic thinking. Example: To teach portions of Biology 101, there is a choice of using lectures alone and of 'discovery learn- ing' strategies where the lecturer is only a ministerial 234 agent. While the pragmatists would. find. either strategy equally attractive, the choice for the humanists would be discovery learning. DECISION PROCESS "1" (Function 5: Specify Methods): Specify Alternative Methods IDI Introduction: The specification of alternative methods is motivated by considerations of cost-benefits; an analysis needs to be performed to align the concerns of efficiency with that of effectiveness. Savings in time, cost, and energy expenditure are reflected in this quest for efficiency. Accordingly, there shouLd be provisions in the ID process for determining alternative methods that are judged compatible to the original situation and still capable of achieving the objectives. 1_1: ”How do we choose among alternative methods?" For pragmatists, there is a particular interest in the question of the comparative appraisal of competing or alternative methods for realizing the same set of Specified objectives. To the degree we are enabled to examine the projected relevance of a single ‘method, the pragmatists say, we shall be able to weigh the relative justification of rival methods. This comparative analysis is carried on in the direction of the dynamic process of refining' or improving a method. If one method emerges as more suited 235 towards the realization of the instructional goal, this implies the iterative procedure of feedback recycling in the initial stage too. It is rationally tenable that a revision in method or a choice of an alternative method as superior is made on the teleological basis of results and is an actual improvement. The role of the considerations regarding effectiveness and efficiency in realizing the purposive raison d'étre of the method is central here. The principal factor in the selection from among alter- native methods is the critical rationality in adopting a method as more conducive to goal realization, and the subsequent abandonment of other methods as less conducive. The humanists have not specifically treated this question of alternative methods, apart from their in- sistence on retaining the humanistic goals in the specifi- cation of methods and materials in instruction. The humanistic assumption, however, would be that alternative methods also are goal-purposive and are selected in the exercise of personal freedom of choice. But the choice should fall on an alternative that is effective; if it has the added attraction of relevance, this would be preferred to another which is merely effective. Further, the students would have the option to choose from among many alternatives because of their preferred ways of learning. Example: For Biology 101, the TAPS team prescribes that a portion of the course be not presented through a 236 lecture, but rather by a group discussion, even though both are effective. A list of topics is suggested that would cover the course content. Pragmatists would welcome both alternatives, but the humanists would find the group discussion more attractive. l 2: "Should the systems concept of eguifinality be considered pertinent here in the search for adequate and more suitable methods in an instructional situation?” The concept, equifinality, expresses the idea that final end result may be reached in a number of ways from various starting points.37 The fact that all these different pathways would reach the same destination or goal attests to the effectiveness of the methods being consider- ed. Once that is assumed as given, the cost-effective methods of realizing that goal or reaching the destination would indicate which of them could be accepted as the most efficient method. The pragmatist approach subscribes to this systems concept which was treated in p_g. If fuller human development is the ultimate end, a humanist interpretation of a goal-purposive method with inherent possibilities of efficiency is logical and it is in this sense that Maritain speaks admiringly about "the technical equipment of our industrial civilization."38 Example: See the example provided where l__l was being considered (above). The group discussion method is attractive to the humanists in comparison with the lecture 237 method because of its possibilities for enhancing human intelligence and the enrichment to be gathered from human interaction. DECISION PROCESS ”m" (Function 6: Construct Prototypes): Prepare Comprehensive Description of Instructional Design Specifications IDI Introduction: Function 6 is concerned with the construction of the prototype to be tested; through its six decision processes this function initiates the process of pulling together specifications and organizing them for production. At this point, development work beings on the instructional content, media and equipment, and instruction- al sequences are designated. Content is formed into auditory and/or visual messages, formats for each message element are established, each aspect of time content is placed in sequential order, and specific learner activities are introduced. All specifications, examples, and decisions are combined in a comprehensive package so that even an outsider would be able to produce the instructional package, should that be necessary. Such an arrangement enables the ID team to review the progress made so far. The result would be a summary of the problem, objectives, learning domains, and instructional strategies, along with strategy and media specifications, all coherently making up 238 a kind of blueprint of the plan to be implemented. There could be a number of decision points in this decision process; two of them are considered. m 1: “Should this summary plan with description of instructional design specifications allow any deviations?“ If it allows for any deviation, then the presumed comprehensiveness suffers from hidden flaws and the claim for comprehensiveness will seem vacuous. If it does not allow any deviations, then a provision for evaluation specification should have been subsumed under decision process "m" and decision process "n” should have been scrapped. The crux of the problem is imbedded in the ”conclusive” certainty with which any proposition might be advanced. Peirce's formulation of "Fallibilism', in its widest sense, affirms that "every proposition which we can be entitled to make about the real world must be an approxi- "39 The important point is that no assertion mate one. about existential facts is completely certain. For the humanists, there are so many intangibles, including perceptual judgments, enjoyments in 'increased tension' in the Maslowian sense, ”intuitive power and poetry” as Maritain explained, which, in the inner dynamism of the human personality, defy precise and comprehensive statements. Humanists argue for the possibility of an “open mind“ and free will to be arbiters in decisions such as a comprehensive description of instructional design specifi- cation. For them, no comprehensive plan is comprehensive 239 enough to rule out all possible deviations. Example: Biology 101 specifies the cognitive doman Of undergraduate students to be affected with a course presentation that uses a multiplicity of media and tech- niques (such as films, slides, TV, discussion, and oral presentations) for one term which should. result. in the course content being understood with 85 per cent accuracy. However praiseworthy such comprehensive formulations be, for the pragmatists and humanists, these should allow for deviations. u: "How can the blueprint move from the general to the particular?" Specifications are supposedly so clear and comprehensive that even an outsider should be able to draw up a particular prototype based on the blueprint. Peirce asserts that any experiment cannot be consider- ed as isolated from every other and that any connected series of experiments constitutes a single collective experiment. The pragmatic theory of meaning finds its validation not in a single event, but in the ”experimental phenomena" because this particular experiment and its validation is generalizable to future events as well. He does not mean any particular event that g happen to somebody in the past, but what will surely happen to everybody in the future who shall fulfill certain con- ditions. It is necessary for the ID team to refer back the results of one prototype testing or experiment to future 240 occurrences under similar conditions. In this sense, the generalized blueprint can be moved to a particular proto- type, and the totality of the experimental phenomena can be generalized to future events. ”It must be simply the general description of all the experimental phenomena which the assertion of the proposition virtually predicts."40 The humanists find fault with this 'blueprint' because it assumes that all the components are interrelated and their actions and reactions are all observable and measura- ble. Some are, but many are not. Maritain's theory' of knowledge affirms that distinctive human faculties such as intellect, will, sense, imagination, "loving" are, indeed, interlinked and they operate in a 'synergistic' manner (Both Maritain and Maslow were fond of this idea) through a deep and nonconscious world of activity, a single root called man. It is man who suffers, not merely his toe. The failure of contemporary education is in its sole concern with sensory observations, the conscious acts of reasoning, and the deliberate choices of the free will which can be explained in observable terms. Such a thinking is correct, but inadequate; it fails to take notice of other nonconscious acts such as "poetry, love, and human desires.” A blueprint particularized in a single event concerns itself with knowledge about, but not with knowledge into; but the latter also is an educational concern. The error of present education is more of an 241 omission than of commission. Hence, the humanists see such a comprehensive blueprint as a.truncated view of education which rejects human values because they cannot be explained away in measurable terms. When the learner is made docile and too passively permeable, even an adult learner ends up being an ”intellectual jellyfish." Example: The comprehensive blueprint for Biology 101 (as examplified in m__1) indeed can be expressed in any instructional prototype. According to pragmatists, the fact that it is a prototype constructed according to specifi- cations laid down in the original blueprint can be had by referring it back to the blueprint itself and the general- izability of the experimental phenomena such a prototype involves. For the humanists, such a blueprint is a flawed one from the start, since it concerns itself with observa- ble phenomena and neglects or sidesteps the consideration of 'nonconscious' and nonobservable, yet eminently human, activities such as love, human desires, imagination, etc. which may synergistically affect the instructional outcome. DECISION PROCESS "n” (Function 6: Construct Prototypes): Specify Design for Evaluation of Instructional Materials and Strategies IDI Introduction: Evaluation may broadly be defined as the examination of certain objects and events, according to certain value standards for the purpose of making 242 decisions about these objects and events. Such an exami- nation would be conducive to the collection of information regrading the object being evaluated and is related to these value standards. One of the objectives of evaluation is to demonstrate that the achievements are in tune with the goals and objectives proposed and accepted by the IDI team. It is also necessary to determine what type of evaluation should be initiated since the IDI Coordinator's Manual lists three such types: developmental tryout, validation tryout, and field tryout. DEVELOPMENTAL TRYOUT assesses the performance of the system during the time of its development itself, so that there is an opportunity to revise the prototype in the light of a number of factors like learner reactions to the instructional materials, use and handling of these materi- als, and the difficulties in learning the material. This kind of evaluation has long been an integral part of the media field. Today it is known as Formative Evaluation where the objective is to "provide data to those responsi- ble for designing media so that revisions may be made on the basis of tryouts with samples of the target audi- ence.n41 VALIDATION TRYOUT is concerned with the analysis of evaluation data in the light of the terminal performance objectives to be carried out and the test results obtained 243 so that no discrepancy between these two be found. This is called Summative Evaluation where those responsible for curricular and instructional planning could be supplied with data so that products can be evaluated on the basis of effectiveness with the intended population. FIELD TRYOUT is the transferral of the instructional package from the simulated laboratory conditions, where it was developed, to actual field conditions in a test for robustness of the ID product. n 1: ”Should evaluation be concerned solely with test results and achievements that are observable and measurable?” For pragmatists, scientific inquiry' must yield con- clusions that are verifiable by observation, experiment, or both. Theoretical elaborations must yield to experiential results. In 'real' experimentation, nonhuman entities, such as objects and processes of the perceptible world, are manipulated to force nature to answer questions. Facts of observation provide the material for knowledge which the intellect feeds upon. But it is one thing to affirm the importance of observation and experiment, and quite another to know in detail what that affirmation really entails. The epistemological problems connected with experimentation and observation are notoriously difficult and Peirce has not provided any systematic analysis of its validation. So, the pragmatists theoretically affirm observable phenomena 244 involved in evaluation, but there are no conclusive state- ments about it. For the humanists, Maritain sees that the tragedy of contemporary education lies in its concentrated attention in the training of the individual, while the awakening of the person is virtually neglected. The various tests, researches, measurements, analyses and statistical com- parisons that educators are constantly putting forward, no doubt, have their value, but they can really present only what emerges from the human being in the realm of sense observation.42 This is not to deny the inherent value of the specific design for evaluation in the instructional setting, but to point out that such decisions in the education of individuals be made subordinate to the education of the human persons. Example: The effectiveness of Biology 101 will depend upon the extent to which the students will inter- nalize the information, skills, attitudinal and affective content of this course, as set forth in the course objec- tives. Since internal changes effected in the student will validate the course objectives, it is necessary to set up a design for evaluation which may take the form of final examinations, midterms, quizzes, papers, etc. Such a decision is agreeable to pragmatists; the humanists, though they will accept it as valuable, will still seek to find an evaluation which will make them become better human beings as a result of this course. 245 n 2: "In a developmental tryout, how are the data collected referred to evaluation?” This point refers to the instrumental justification of methods and techniques explained in decision point L2. An evaluative method is purpose-relative and in the develop- mental tryout the purpose is to assess the system's per- formance and improve it, if necessary. In experimental manipulations, the data collected may contain 'rational' reactions of the human subjects-- rational, in the sense that these human subjects reacted in a nature and manner that are appropriate to the essential constituent of rationality that they are endowed with. The educational context, in which they allow themselves to be placed, is distinct and set apart from an "animal training session“ when stimuli are responded to in controlled patterns. The relevance and impact of legislations concern- ing experimentation involving human subjects cannot be minimized. The pragmatic concern for the dignity of human subjects in scientific inquiry is evident in the manner in which Peirce rejects the three methods of 'fixing' belief—- method of tenacity, method of authority, and method of a priori conditions--in favor of the scientific method. The man who adopts the method of tenacity will find that ”other men think differently from him, and it will be apt to occur to him, in some saner moment, that their opinions are quite 43 as good as his own." There is a possibility of change in opinion, when confronted with the rationality of other 246 arguments. Peirce reserves strong and harsh words for the method of authoriy in enforcing compliance and making of human beings “intellectual slaves." ”When complete agree- ment could not otherwise be reached, a general massacre of all who have not thought in a certain way has paved a very effective means of settling opinion in a country."44 Hence, the pragmatist stand affirms that data collection from human subjects cannot be referred to any evaluation without underscoring the humanistic concerns underlying these data. If pragmatists are found to be so strong in vindicatg- ing humanistic concerns, it may only be imagined the paramount concern of the humanists in this regard, especial- ly as it related to human subjects legislation. The legis- lation brings to fore the critical relevance of evaluating evaluation designs and the myopic attitude, in the past, of the designers of performance measurements and evaluations in manipulating human subjects, all in the name of science. So, according to humanists, in a developmental tryout (or formative evaluation), the data collected from human subjects need to be referred to evaluation in a manner worthy of their human dignity. Example: In the tryout of a 24-minute film for Biology 101, it is found that some of the students slept through it, one was totally disinterested because of a high fever, and three were emotionally upset because the film 247 showed the clubbing of baby seals. Both pragmatists and humanists maintain that data referred to evaluation should uphold humanistic concerns, in this case, the emotional outbursts and the disinterestedness of the students. DECISION PROCESS ”o“ (Function 6: Construct Prototypes): Conduct Technical Review of Instructional and Evaluation Desigp IDI Introduction: Even if the ID team has done a creditable :kfl) so far, this step provides a summary review of the decisions reached along with reasons and aims of such efforts. Presumably, all major components in the ID process have been identified and their interactions speci- fied by the ID team, but individuals may be found who might possess unique insights into ‘what might turn out to be critical faults that substantially affect the ID product. As was done in previous decision points or processes, the present decision process incorporates features of an inter- face analysis through the identificaiton, interpretation, and prioritization of essential. points of contact among system and subsystem boundaries.45 The appropriate oper- ation of all system components requires an exchange of essential information and this must be detailed so that identification of potential flaws can be detected. A technical review of instructional and evaluation 248 design as specified in "o" is definitely a process that goes back txilall previous decision processes in a detailed fashion. The decision points could be numerous; their number has been conservatively estimated at more than 100, according to the explanation given in the IDI Coordi- 46 nator's Manual. One might start with questioning its necessity. o 1: "Should one conduct a technical review of instructional and evaluation design?" The pragmatists' view of the scientific inquiry has been explained in sufficient detail and their stand on the decision processes indicates a fair amount of agreement with the ID decision making process. In some instances, specific decision points were not considered by the pragmatists. It could be said that this process under study is implicitly acknowledged and accepted as congruent with the position of the pragmatists. As for the humanists, to orchestrate the various components of instruction and evaluation in the ID process in such a technical and comprehensive manner that potential loopholes are plugged and instruction itself becomes completely structured is a concept that goes counter to the humanist view about human intelligence. Education should be aimed at the liberation of human intelligence where the person, in freedom of will, strives to achieve maturity and integral development, said Maritain, and ”what is learned should never be passively or mechanically received, as dead 249 information which weighs down and dulls the mind."47 Wherever it is not actively transformed by understanding into the very life of mind, instruction itself turns out to be a "big mass of damp wood thrown into the fire only to put out" the ardour of the questing mind. Maritain vehement- ly rejects any attempt at manipulating intelligence because reason which receives knowledge in a servile manner does not really know and is only depressed. Example: The solution proposed by the TAPS team for Bioloy 101 would include, presumably, the following' de- cisions: 1) that the course be presented by Dr. Smith with assistance from two graduate assistants; 2) the course effectiveness be determined by a 85 per cent mastery of the biology concepts by two-thirds of the class, a 90 per cent mastery in group discussion skills, and 75 per cent mastery in oral presentation skills; 3) these skills and com- petencies be gauged by 18 ungraded 'surprise' quizzes, five fortnightly quizzes which are graded, three term papers, one oral presentation, one midterm and one final exami- nation; 4) that grades be awarded according to predetermin- ed ratios and. percentages; and 5) a: 75 per cent class attendance be considered mandatory. This summarized technical review could be detailed further, but it is sufficient to note that such a detailed prescription would be accepted by the pragmatists; the humanists, however, would consider it as ”dehumanizing," 250 because it shackles the human spirit, instead of liberating it. DECISION PROCESS "p" (Function 6: Construct Prototypes): Specify Procedures for Collection and Develgpment of Instructional Materials IDI Introduction: The purpose of this decision process is to ensure that procedures for collecting, developing, and pmrchasing instructional materials be clearly outlined. The new product may result from existing materials with minor modifications or major overhauls; the various components may individualLy be purchased and assembled together or they may have to be substantially built In) anew. Hence, it is necessary that the designs for the materials to be developed and methods for collecting, collating, and cataloguing materials be determined. This step provides for such processes by' detailing procedures for the purchase, payment of materials, identifi- cation of sources that could provide the needed materials, arrangements for commercial production if they are so needed, and tflma overall activities for such production and development. p__l: "Should the ID product the prepared through minor modifications of existing materials?” For the pragmatists, the overriding concern in instituting the use of particular instruments in scientific 251 inquiry is its instrumental justification; whatever may be considered relevant and appropriate to the purposive dynamism of inquiry is instrumentally justified. It does not matter if the ID product is adapted from existing materials as long as the product, in its new form, is fittingly relevant to the goals of inquiry. Further, from the perspective of efficiency, this may be cost-effective as well. A controversy that has been raging for a long time is the issue of commercial vs. local production of ID materials. Technology in education has made considerable inroads into the burgeoning educational industry with a mass-produced, stereotyped, innovative and profitable array of instructional aids. Commercial enterprises thrive through a marketing strategy of launching small-sized instructional systems that could be combined with other units to produce a complete and larger system. Vying to gain a foothold in the educational industry are the locally produced instructional materials which are better tailored to meet the local educational needs. Effectiveness, in such instances, is the main pragmatic concern and the locally produced units may be more capable of meeting that require- ment. But efficiency, in terms of lower cost per unit Offered by larger commercial firms, may clinch the issue, but from a pragmatic standpoint, effectiveness comes first, and then efficiency. When the humanists acknowledge the validity and 252 usefulness of educational materials, they too follow the pragmatic path. The relevance of locally produced materials which are designed for a specific audience also carries a humanistic import in ,its respect for learner character- istics. Example: An existing l4-minute slide/tape program is altered with additional slides and text for Biology 101. Given the conditions mentioned above, both pragmatists and humanists would be in agreement with such a decision. p__2: ”Should the ID project be constructed anew through localgproduction of various components?” This consideration is an extension of what was discussed above. The pragmatist stand in this respect is very clear. A cost-benefit analysis may persuade a slight alteration of existing materials and adapting it instead of a totally new product, if both solutions (i.e. products) are found to be equally effective. The humanists embrace the pragmatic viewpoint with the condition that humanist goals be safeguarded. Example: The ID team allots funds for the production of a new 20-minute videotape for Biology 101. If this solution is equally effective as an inexpensive slide/tape program, both humanists and pragmatists would opt for the slide/tape program. 253 DECISION PROCESS "q" (Function 6: Construct Prototypes): Construct and Assemble Instructional Materials IDI Introduction: Up in) this point, all instruciton— al materials, with the exception of commercially acquired materials, are still in blueprint form. Now begin the efforts at converting this paper design into actual usable materials. It is also necessary' at this stage that all personnel be cognizant of the specification of the standards in production so that each individual component can fit in smoothly with the overall product according to the formats previously established. These standards may extend to ID materials such as size of films (35 mm or 16 mm), audio recordings (2-track or 4-track), stylebooks, and printing manuals. Considerations of improved quality in design, product, and performance as well as attractive packaging of the ID product are discussed and agreed upon at this decision process. g 1: ”Should the ID team construct a computer- assisted instructional (CAI) product for the sake of efficiency, rather than an individually prescribed instructional (IPI) product?” The question for pragmatists is one Of instrumental justification in scientific inquiry. The verification phase in inquiry imports two activities: (1) 'action' or modifi- cation of objects by the experimenter, and (2) a subsequent 'reaction' in which the objects that are acted upon induce perception on the experimenter and his eventual recognition 254 of what it teaches him. Assembly of instructional materials belongs to the 'action' phase where the process is a series of purposive steps that are situated in the experimental phenomena of inquiry. As long as modification of Objects can be achieved equally through both instrumentalities, the claim of the pre-eminence of one solution (i.e. CAI) over another (i.e. IPI) is merely a "verbal quibbling.” For the humanists, this is a vital consideration. First and foremost, the supremacy of ends over means must be vindicated at all costs. Instrumentalities or instruc- tional materials should never be allowed to dominate the human being. Subsequently, instrumental effectiveness and efficiency will have to be made subservient to the dignity of human nature. Example: If Biology 101 makes use of an IPI program, this will be preferred by the humanists to a CAI program, even if the latter is both efficient and effective. The reason is that CAI presumably does not provide for human interaction in instruction. Similarly a lecture method coupled with group discussion providing for student inter- action, will be preferred to a TV class without inter- action. One might think of similar situations and media, but the predominant concern here is that of vindicating the human dignity in education, whereas the pragmatists would be least interested in the preference for an efficient medium as along as effectiveness is reassured. 255 g 2: "Should the production gguality of nonprint media be aimed at higher or more refined tastes?” For the pragmatists, the instrumental justification of a solution. the sample audience for Biology 101 will provide the ID team with enough material that could be subjected tx> an evaluative study. In the first place, this evaluation will have to determine the effectiveness of the instruction; secondly, the matter of efficiency will have to be made clear. Both these points will find backers in the pragmatist and humanist camps. As regards the relevance of the course, there may be disagreements stemming from the humanist camp. DECISION PROCESS ”u" (Function 7: Test Prototypes): Tabulate and Process Evaluation Data IDI Introduction: If carried out properly, this decision process is a natural activity in the chain of events that started with the determination of appropriate tryout behaviors prescribed earlier and then carried out in the tryout. The task now is to arrange systematically and summarize the data in a form suitable for interpretation. Assisting the TAPS team would be an evaluation specialist 266 whose expertise in the interpretation of results would become necessary. Once the data reduction procedures have been accomplished, then the question is whether any pro- cedures need to be changed in lieu of future tryouts. Also, it must be determined whether the procedures are clear as to the methods of reducing these data from each instrument such as grouping similar comments, tallying frequency of test scores, computing percentages, and calculating means and standard deviation of scores. Ll: "Are statistical comparisons a necessary part of evaluation?” For the pragmatists, the instrumental justification of a method or prototype is inevitably in general, and, as it were, statistical in its bearing. If a method were applied just once and was 'proven' to be successful, this does not affirm anything beyond this particular instance. The so- called success of the prototype testing may have come gratuitously through a mixture of events and circumstances, through accident, 'luck', or some other unrecognized special feature of a particular case. If a prototype is to be validly accepted for successive applications, it must be capable of producing a determinate result when the necessary conditions have been met. Maslow, among the humanists, remarks that psychology be more problem-centered and less absorbed with means and methods. If the insistence is only on elegant techniques, 267 "scientific" exactness, and questions of validity, then much cannot be hoped to be accomplished. It is a senseless game or ritual if science is defined primarily as a method. “If pertinence, worth, goal, value are underscored, and validity and reliability exclusively sought for, this is very much like boasting, 'I do not know or care what I am 58 To the doing, but see how accurately I'm doing it." concerns of efficacy and efficiency, the humanists add another important dimension: pertinence or relevance. Mere empirical considerations will not help determine the relevance of an instructional product, which has to be sought in a unified conception of the whole human being. As Maritain mentioned, one could teach somebody to be a 'good' pickpocket, but if he is not taught to be a 'good' man, then education would have failed. A central emphasis of Maslow's humanistically oriented research is to describe the entire personality--not only all its facts, but the 59 It holistic flavor of the integration of these parts. is this synergistic dimension which, according to Maritain and Maslow, is found wanting in behavioral researches. Example: If the post-test data and other question- naires and attitudinal measurements taken at the end of the course in Biology 101 are tabulated and processed, these might indicate that the students obtained 85 per cent or more marks in the post-test and that they have a positive attitude toward the ID product. This decision is a sound 268 pragmatist practice, but the question of its relevance to the students will come under heavy fire from the humanists. g__g: I'Should the analysis of results be conducted only of those that aregprecisely stated and measured?" James was suspicious of an analysis of experience where the clear-cut and precise are taken to be basic or the 'first.‘ Clarity and precision are the results of analysis or 'reflected products' and, however legitimate one would presume them to be, they are not to be thought of as basic. Experiencing is initially an affair of vagueness with its 'fringes' extending beyond the directly noticed and focused content. Whatever is experienced comes with associates and connections, not just its focal points. Hence, tabulation of results should not be viewed in an atomistic fashion as clear-cut and precise components and relations, but rather 'experientially” in an integrative whole. Peirce also pointed out that one "sets out“ .ig medias res, in the sense that the actual thinker ap- proaches a task already laden with a body' of previous experiments and not, as the empiricists would advocate, with first percepts.60 Like James, the humanists also underscore the experien- tial validation of scientific inquiries where facts are not viewed analytically, but holistically and integrally. Research is best conducted under naturalistic conditions with a minimum of subject manipulations; the emphasis is 269 upon complete data collection and the establishment of close relationships between the experimenter and the subject. Such a humanistic conviction is contrary to strictly defined objectivity which requires total experi- mental control. If the humanists suggest revisions, this persuasion will be mainly due to incomplete data collection rather than through the failure of analytical interpre- tation of data to validate the findings. Example: In a group discussion as part of the Biology 101 prototype testing, eight. small, groups, each consisting of five students, are formed. Three groups, under three ID members as monitors, recorded their attitudes on ten topics on a 7-point Likert scale; three groups could finish only six to eight topics thus listed; in two groups, the first topic generated a heated dis- cussion and they did not continue beyond the first listed topic. The ID team decides to accept the findings from the first six groups. Such a decision for the humanists would be tantamount to atomistic consideration of results. It is possible that the ID monitors may have pressured the first three groups to hasten to conclusions which may have adversely influenc- ed the free flow of views and information. The pragmatists would side with the humanists in this respect. 270 DECISION PROCESS ”v" (Function 8: Analyze Results): Determine Relationships Between Results, Methods! Objectives, and Goals IDI Introduction: With the test data procured, it is the responsibility of the TAPS team to interpret the data. Pre-determined data analysis procedures now must be followed closely in order to establish any kind of relation- ship between the methods planned and the methods observed during the tryout period. The quality of any revision to be incorporated will, to a large extent, depend upon the ability of the ID team to analyze and interpret the test data. A number of questions are likely to be raised: does the evaluation indicate whether the learner did what was expected of him or her, was the teaching strategy adequate, were the interfacings of various elements functional, etc. The comparative analysis initiated at this step will have to provide the answer not only with regard to the success or failure of the ID product, but also related questions such as why it happened so, and to what degree. There could be a number of decision points that could be raised here. In the place of many such decision points that deal with the agreement or disagreement of the pragmatists and humanists, one decision point is being pursued here which is rather comprehensive in its treatment of the major concerns here. v 1: "Will objective truth be the result, once the relationships between methods 4p1anned and observed are 271 determined?” The triad of doubt, inquiry, and belief forms the background of Peirce's well-known claim that the “sole 61 But it object of inquiry is the settlement of opinion." is not mere opinion that is wanted, but a $1.9. opinion. This is an ideal, but Peirce could not accept it as the correct procedure of what actually happens in a larger number of cases regarding the determination of relation- ships between goals and the instrumentalities used thereby. When a firm or resolute belief is finally reached, we are satisfied, whether the belief be actually false or true, because the doubt or irritation that initiated the inquiry has been appeased by "a belief that we shall M to be true."62 Peirce was not asserting that the actual believing has anything to do with the establishment of the truth of the belief, but rather that, in the absence of real doubt based on solid grounds for supposing that the belief might be false, inquiry ceases to progress further; it is arrested and the belief thus reached is presumed to be true. To the extent that no actual doubt is entertained, the belief remains firm, even though the open-ended character of inquiry can potentially entertain new claimants for truth. Both Peirce and James, thus, accurately represented what usually takes place in a majority of situations involving this triad of doubt, inquiry, and belief. Once a 272 belief is held firm as a satisfactorily true explanation, it will not only drive out rival claimants vying as the Egg solution, it will even stand in the way of looking for another possible explanation. After the test of prototypes, the 'conclusive' determination about the 'true' relationship between goals on the one hand, and results, methods, and objectives, on the other hand, is potentially amenable to revision, but the more firm a belief, the more unlikely it is to search for another solution. HUMANISTS: The basic stance of humanists toward evalu- ation has been mentioned earlier in Decision Process 'u". Extensive data collection, whether this be through numerous questionnaires, interviews, fantasy' tests, performance tasks and behavioral ratings in attempting a description of the motivations of subjects, distinguishes Maslow's research efforts. Maslow who considered himself ”as a scientist rather than an essayist or philosopher," felt himself very bound to and by the facts that he was trying 63 There is a need for a to perceive, not to create. science, he said, with a far wider jurisdiction than it now has when it tries to be value-neutral and value-free. Values cannot be left to be decided by nonempirical people on nonfactual grounds, but it can be achieved simply ”by enlarging our conception of objectivity to include not only spectator knowledge, but also our experiential knowledge."64 273 Example: The interpretation of the post-test data, after the prototye for Biology 101 was tested, leads to a comparison of what was originally intended (student mastery of the course content by 85 per cent, interest and enthusi- asm for the course) and what was actually obtained (mastery of about 80 per cent, relatively high interest and enthusi- asm for the new biology course as evidenced by attitudinal questionnaires, etc.). According to pragmatists, objective truth may not have been reached, but, in the absence of any serious doubt to the contrary, this truth will hold. Apart from these test results, the humanists would seek for other indications such as interest for other courses as well, greater interactions among students, tolerance for divergent opinions of other students. DECISION PROCESS "w" (Function 9: Implement/Recycle): Indicate What Kind of Revision, if any, Are Suggested by the Interpretation of Results IDI Introduction: Certain revisions may often be suggested by the interpretation of the data. These may be minor, and possibily not worth the effort to change. They may also be crucial and substantial revisions which the TAPS team will have to make. These revisions may be related to the prototype itself, the evaluation design and proce- dures, or the collection of more data than what was 274 planned, when things did not go as well as expected. If everything turned out satisfactorily, then the question would be whether to revise the prototype materials further, or to implement it without any revision; it may further ask that any revision be temporarily shelved, pending further evaluations. v_v__l_: "Can absolute certainty be the outcome of an ID prototype testing?” Logic, as exemplified in scientific inquiry, and ethics, concerned with conduct, both look forward to action and conduct. Pragmatism teaches that ”what we think is to be interpreted in terms of what we are prepared to do."65 But absolute certainty concerning the truth of our hypo- theses cannot be attained at any given moment by any given individual. At the same time, there can be an unending approximation to it through the continuing community of observers by means of repeated verifications. Peirce makes a sharp distinction between science, with its attitude toward facts as merely the vehicle of eternal truths, and practice, which needs something to go on. Science is a purely theoretical affair and, when unencumbered by the need to solve essentially engineering problems, has "all 66 Practice, on the time in the world" to pursue its ends. the other hand, aims at objective truth or the closest approximation of it, because practice cannot wait till everything is known; one must decide, here and now, what to do. Thus, an approximation to an ideal solution is the 27S closest result one might expect from the testing of prototypes, and revision of previous positions and methods is a necessity. For the humanists, there could be no absolute certainty in any of the intellectual enterprises of man, because the teleological dynamism inherent in human activities, surges ever forward, taking nwmentary respites in low level homeostatic equilibrium. For Maritain, a well-grounded Thomist, absolute certainty implies infinite intelligence that not only apprehends realities, but also comprehends them in their immeasurable totality--a task a finite intellect, fallen from grace, can never hope to perform, as long as man stands rooted in his individuation. Example: The post-test data indicate that in the prototype testing, every one of the students had perfect scores. Does this mean that the new ID product for Biology 101 is an instructional panacea? No, the course may have succeeded in meeting all the content and informaton requirements as specified for the course. But what Biology 101 really imports in all its ecological, economical, sociological and other implications may only be partially grasped. It is in this sense that pragmatists and humanists would assert there could be no absolute certainty. 276 DECISION PROCESS "x" (Function 9: Implement/Recycle): Determine if Suggested Revisions Indicate that the instructional Prototype be Recycled or if the Prototype can be Implemented without Revision IDI Introduction: If the obtained results indicate the desirability of revisions, the TAPS team will now have to determine whether to implement the ID package or recycle it. If it is to be implemented, then, it must be asked whether minor revisions are to be made and what should constitute the next steps for a smoother implementation of the ID package. If the decision is for recycling, the question that faces the TAPS team is one of determining from which of the nine functions such a recycling needs to be started and a clear enunciation of the reason leading up to such a decision. They will also discuss the next step. When the corrective iteration of the recycling step has been completed or when the decision by the TAPS team has been reached to implement the final ID product, the instructional system is ready for being launched into the real educational world. x 1: "Are approximations to reality all that we can hope for? What is the critical factor that provides stability to any ID product that is implemented?” It was Peirce's thesis that inquiry can never yield results that are completely certain, exact, necessary or universal. Such a stand originates from two points: (1) the 277 acquisition of a new belief, called 'thought at rest,’ involves further doubt and further thought, because belief is a rule for action; (2) there is an element of vagueness in the very nature of observation, because ”no cognition and no sign is absolutely precise, not even a percept."67 It is always possible to come up with further refinements in methods of empirical discrimination. When one general- izes (n1 the basis of a limited number of observations, one inevitably stumbles into the region of the uncertain and the probable. This observation led Peirce to state that ”no man of self-respect ever nOW' states his result. without fixing to it its probable error."68 But, Peirce was also concerned with the question of stability: can there be a final stabilization as the evolutionary process of method- ological development ultimately attains an essentialy 'steady state'? If there could be a methodological sta- bility over a long period of time, this would provide the effective mark of efficacy and adequacy, furnishing an indi- cation that we are, in fact, doing as well as the operative conditions of the case admit of. Stability over a long period of time can help establish a theoretical justifi- cation of the methodological instrumentalities in hand. Thus the pragmatists would assert that a stability over a long period of time among the members of a scienti— fic community would provide the critical factor for the decision to implement an ID product. 278 Among the humanists, Maslow considered the hierarchy of needs to be a developmental continuum, starting with the most basic psychological needs and progressing to the need for self-actualization. Even though the principle of tension reduction governs functioning at the lower level needs, the satisfaction of one need does not imply satiation and quiescence. It is a temporary need gratifi- cation which brings about a temporary state of rest, but the emergence into consciousness of another higher need impels it to seek higher need gratification. In this sense, it could be said that stability could be brought about in gratified needs in the human organism till tension is sought for the gratification of higher needs in the tendential dynamism of the human personality toward self- actualization. Example: The implementation of the ID product for Biology 101, achieved through eventual course presentation (e.g. with instructional aids and strategies, performance measures, evaluation techniques etc.) would remain stable as long as students, faculty members and the department accept it as a "fine and well-developed” course, without entertaining doubts about its ability 'to deliver the goods.‘ In this sense, both pragmatists and humanists are in agreement on this decision point. 279 SUMMARY The comparative analysis of instructional development, as deatiled in the Instructional Development Institute Model, in terms of the philosophical positions of Pragma- tism advocated by Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, and Humanism espoused by Abraham Maslow and Jacques Maritain, has resulted in a discovery of congruences (agree- ment or disagreement regarding decisions made), variabili— ties (agreement with reservations or modification of a decision process) and of empty sets (where neither philo- sophy seems to have anything to say) of both pragmatism and humanism with instructional development decision making processes. These congruences, variabilities, and empty sets were the results of subjecting the twenty-four decision processes and their concomitant decision points to an analysis guided by the tenets of pragmatism and humanism. The study found that implicit in these decision pro- cesses were a number of decision points that an instruction- al developer was called or obligated to responsd to in order to effect a program or a product in the instructional development context. While it was theoretically possible to identify a number of decision points in each of these twenty-four decision processes, only an average of two decision points, within the constraints of time and scope of this study, were subjected to the comparative analysis 280 by pragmatism and humanism. The decision points, in the form of specific instruc- tional development decisions to be made, were considered to be the most representative of each of the twenty-four decision processes. Each of these decision points was often, posed as an individual question that an instruction- a1 developer was called to answer, and was analyzed through the philosophical perspectives of both pragmatism and humanism. They were also illustrated with specific examples situated in the instructional context. The bearing and import of the philosophical vieWpoints of pragmatism and humanism on these decision points were accentuated through specific texts culled from the writings of the pragmatist and humanist philosophers. Whenever a decision point was not specifically addressed, extrapo- lations from related writings which exuded an overall consistency with their major philosophical theories (explained in Chapter III), were applied; in some cases, it was found that a particular decision point did not enter the purview of humanist and/or pragmatist philosophy. The twenty-four decision processes were analyzed through a total of 46 decision points for this comparative study of the pragmatist and humanist philosophies on instructional development decision making and their congruences and variabilities with these: decision jpoints were recorded. The philosophical analysis of the decision 281 points, contained in and representative of each of the decision processes, reflect the bearing, import, and flavor of the philosophical congruences, variabilities and empty sets of both pragmatism and humanism on these twenty-four decision processes. In this sense, it is possible to structure a composite picture of the IDI Model decision making processes vis-a-vis the philosophies of pragmatism and humanism. (See FIGURE 7). PRAGMATISTS The Pragmatist position with regard to the decision points of 22 of the 24 decision processes is positive, i.e., the pragmatists overwhelmingly agree with the instructional development decision making process. Decision processes 'c" and "e" (”Determine Learner Characteristics" and ”Assign TAPS team Responsibilities” respectively) and their decision points do not evidence any clear pragmatist stand on them. The conclusion, therefore, will be an agree- ment of pragmatism in the philosophical traditions of Peirce and James, with the ID decision making process, as demonstrated by this limited set of decision points. HUMANISTS The comparative study of ID decision making by humanist thinkers, Maslow and Maritain, reveal agreements, rejections, and agreements with reservations on a number of 282 FIGURE 7 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN TERMS OF HUMANISM AND PRAGMATISM u c s n O O m PRAGMATISM n HUMANISM -H fl a u a: 2: .2 ° " m c ()3 1 2 3 :: 1 2 3 u s m a " m m can u T u I l a X a x b X n X 2 c ? H X d x :1 x 3 e ? ll ? u f X u X g X H X II 4 h X H x i X ll X j x u x 5 k X II x u l X ll X 6 m x {j x n X z: x o X ll X p x :: X q X :: X r X ll X III 7 s x u x t X :: X u X ll X 8 v x 3 x 9 w X l: x x X (I X n u u KEY: l = Agree with decision process 2 = Disagree with decision process 3 = Agree with reservations ? = Position not known 283 decision points. Specifically, they are the following: AGREEMENT : Decision points for processes; 3' E! 2: E! l! B! 9' fit E! w, and 5 (Eleven) DISAGREEMENT: Decision points for processes; 3, g, p, and 3 (Four) AGREEMENT with Decision points for processes; RESERVATIONS: g, i, j, 5, m, p, 5, and 1 (Eight) NO OPINION Decision points for process; 3 (EMPTY SET) (One) Analysis of the decision points revealed that about one-half (eleven) of the ID decision processes are con- gruent with humanist thinking. The humanists also agree with the decision points of nine of the decision processes, but with reservations. Four decision points are rejected as not reflective of humanistic thought. The conclusion is that one cannot be a humanist in the tradition of Maslow and Maritain and approve all of the decision points in the ID decision making. Nine of the decision points are accepted by the humanists, but with caution and reservations. Such reser- vations stem from the humanistic conception of a holistic or integral education in opposition to individual instruc- tion which they perceive as atomistic. The key concepts in 284 this contrariety of terms are--individual vs. person, instruction vs. education, and irrational conscious vs. 'preconscious spirit.‘ The humanists conceive the latter of these contrarieties, i.e., person, education, and 'pre- conscious spirit' as more inclusive and holistic than their counterparts. These are only contrarieties and not contradi- ctions, and, subsequently, their emphasis on education of the human person goes beyond the instruction of the indi- vidual. As a result, the humanists agree with these decisions, but are unhappy at the lack of comprehensiveness or omission of the wider dimensions of education evidenced in the ID decision making process. An decision process 'e”, which relates to assignment of TAPS team responsibilities, the humanists have nothing specific to say, this leaving it as an empty (No Opinion) set. The comparative analysis of the ID decision making process from pragmatist and humanist viewpoints has yielded some significant results. Their philosophical underpinnings in the ID decision making process are clear and their implications will be examined in the next chapter. 285 FOOTNOTES lAECT Task Force, Glossary and Definition, p. 1. 2Robert A. Braden & Willianl R. Terrell, "The Challenge from Within: Some Unpopular Views on Instruction- al Development Topics,“ in Instructional Develgment: State of the Art, ed. Ronald K. Bass et al. (Columbus, Ohio: Collegiate Publishing, 1978), p. 218. 3Kent L. Gustafson, ”Toward a Definition of Instruc- tional Development: A System Approach View," Paper present- ed at the annual meeting of the Division of Instructional Development, AECT, Philadelphia, March 1971. 4Allen J. Abedor and Steven G. Sachs, "The Relation- ship Between Faculty Development (FD), Organizational Development (OD), and Instructional Development (ID): Readi- ness for Instructional Innovation in Higher Education,” in Instructional Development: State of the Amt, ed. by Ronald K. Bass et a1. (Columbus, Ohio: Collegiate Publish- ing, 1978), p. 15. 5Marvin E. Duncan, "The Intricacies of Instructional Development," in Instructional Development: State! of the Art, ed. Ronald K. Bass et al., 1978, p. 22. 6Thomas E. Harries, "Application of General Systems Theory to Instructional Development," p. 14. 7Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.443. 8 James, Pragmatism, p. 125. 9peirce, Collected papers, 5.416. 10 Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, p. 29. 11Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.397. 12 James, Pragmatism, p. 97. 13James, Pragmatism, p. 127. 14Maritain, Introduction to Philosophy, p. 180. 15Fecher, The Philosophy of Jacques Maritain, p. 97. 16John Smith, Purpose and Thought, p. 115. 17Maslow, Motivation and Personality, p. 74. 286 18Maslow, Philosophy of Psychology, p. 227. 19Maddi & Costa, Humanism in Personology, p. 31. 20Peirce, Collected Papers, 2.220. 21Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.311. 22Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 2. 23Maslow, Memorial Volume, p. 93. 24Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.379. 25Thayer, Meaning and Action, p. 90. 26Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 24. 27Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 24. 28Peirce, Collected Papers, 1.44. 29Hamreus, ”The Systems Approach to Instructional DevelOpment,' p. I-23. 30 Maslow, Journals of Abraham Maslow, p. 260. 31Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.9. 32Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 5. 33ibid. 34Maslow, Philosophy of Psychology, p. 241. 35Hamreus, "The Systems Approach to Intructional Development,” p. I-24. 36Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 43. 37Trimby and Gentry, "State: of ID Systems Approach Models,” p. 3. 38Gallagher, Education of Man, p. 94. 39Peirce, Collected Papers, 1.404. 40Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.150. 41Robert: Heinich, "Is There a Field of Educational Communications and Technology?" in Audiovisual Instruc- tion, 13 (May 1973): 45. 287 42Fecher, The Philosophy of Jacques Maritain, p. 280. 43Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.378. 44Peirce, Collected Papprs, 5.381. 45Castelle G. Gentry and Madeline J. Trimby, ”Inter- face Analysis of ID Systems," Michigan State University, August, 1980. [To be published in Instructional Develop- ment: State of the Art (2nd ed.), by Ronald K. Bass et al.] 73 46See Prototype Specifications Exercise, pp. 71- 47Maritain, Education at Crossroads, p. 50. 48IDI Prototype Specifications Exercise, p. 80. 49Peirce, Collected Papers, cf. 5.424 - 5.437. 50Peirce, Collected ngers, 5.424. 61 51Maritain, Introduction in) Philosophy, pp. 154- 52Maslow, Philosgphy of Psychology, p. 232. 53NSMI, IDI Evaluation for Instructional Development, p. 32. 54 Charles F. Hoban and Alkananda Rege, "Value Structures of Researchers and Non-researchers,” AVCR 17 (1969): 411-2. 55Maslow, Philosophy of Psychology, p. 236. 56Milton ‘Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes, 'Values: .A Theory of Organization and Change (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968), p. 159. 57Maritain, Education at Crossroads, pp. 51-52. 58Maslow, philosophy of Psychology, p. 236. 59Maddi & Costa, Humanism in Personology, p. 100. 60Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.416. 61Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.375. 288 62ibid. 63Maslow, Memorial Volume, p. 63. 64Maslow, ibid, p. 41. 65Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.35. 66 Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.589. 67Peirce, Collected Papers, 5.543. 68Peirce, Collected Papers, 1.9. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS Introduction This study was triggered by' the (question: "Will a philosophical investigation of educational and instruction- al practices and techniques prove to be a fruitful under- taking which would provide a framework that enables instruc- tional developers to make better and more consistent decisions? More specifically, the study attempted to answer the following four questions: 1. How do humanists and pragmatists differ or agree in the way they respond to instructional develop- ment decision points based on the IDI Model? 2. Why do humanists and pragmatists so differ or agree in the way they respond to ID decision points? 3. Are there steps in the IDI Model that are not responded to by either or both of these philos- ophies? 4. What is the effect on the IDI product or instruc- tional solution when decisions are consistent with one philosophy, and not with the other? A personal philosophy, that is, a composite statement 289 290 based on beliefs and attitudes from which one draws person- al purpose and direction, is assumed to be operative in every individual. This philosophy operates as a set of major inarticulate premises by which an individual inter- acts with the environment. Such a 'personal philosophy' of an instructional developer is instrumental in acting as a screening device so that in either personal or professional life, he or she makes decisions that are consonant with this philOSOphy. Consequently, it is advantageous for the instructional developer to understand how these inarticulate premises filter the articulated statements, programs, and activities of an instructional developer and see their implications in professional work. It is possible that there may be a complete unawareness of a personal philosophy, or even an eclectic philosophical stand in which professional conduct is rationalized by espousing various philosophies. The inadequate conceptualizing of a personal philosophy may lead to hesitations and even contradictions, if one were forced to enunciate reasons that guided actions. To understand these philosophical implications is to accept their involvements in many phases of personal and professional activities, including patterns of decision making. For a professional educational technologist, it is important to bring these philosophical considerations into focus when faced with situations where he or she has to accept or reject instructional decisions as well as to 291 provide reasons for such behaviors. Thus, consistency with philosophical positions will not only affect instructional development decision making :hl a critical manner, but also provide a conceptual frame- work for theory building in educational technology that may dictate newer directions and fresher insights into this young profession that is constantly expanding by research. Philosophical implications for educational technology is a field of research that has been little explored. One of the main concerns of this study was to search for a methodology that might treat philosophical concerns which future researchers could use in improving, refining, validating, or even rejecting existing and future concerns of educational technology. With this end in mind, the present study investigated literature reporting on attempts at professionalizing the field of educational technology and examined the efforts toward building up an organized body of intellectual theory. Chapter I of this study details, in a summary fashion, those efforts at theory building and the role of educational technology as an essentially open system permeable to unifying inputs from the world of education, psychology, technology, and communication. A brief journey through the history of educational technology, undertaken in Chapter II, detailed the various concerns and preoccupations of professionals in educational 292 technology, both research-theorists and research—practi- tioners, to come to grips with this pressing' need for theory building. This historical survey of persons, events, and movements in their field helped to highlight some of the trends both away from experimental studies that investi- gated mostly marginal themes, like pieces of a jig-saw puzzle, and t1) building up of unifying theories that could put these pieces of research into some coherent pattern. Breaking new ground in unexplored research areas is fraught with difficulties and uncertainties. The broad topic of philosophical implications relevant to educational technology far exceeds the expectations of any one disser- tation, and there was full understanding that this study could at best serve as a desirable step in the right direction. But it was thought that the urgency of such an enterprise was well worth the risk of criticism which could question its comprehensiveness. It is hoped that this study may be one in a series of similar studies which may benefit the educational technology community. Lacking any prescriptive precedents that may augur well for the design of a preliminary study like this, the scope of the present study has been purposely limited to a philosophical consideration of the decision making processes as exemplified in the IDI Model (See FIGURE 6). The IDI Model is both descriptive and prescriptive, in the sense that the entire decision making process involved in this Model is placed in three stages (Define, Develop, 293 and Evaluate), and subsumed under twenty-four decision processes, that can be expanded into a number of specific decision points which an ID team or instructional developer is called upon to respond to, while aiming at an effective and efficient instructional solution. The choice of the philosophical systems has been determined by similar considerations. Pragmatism has been a singularly unique American phenomenon and has exercised considerable influence on American education through the writings of William James and John Dewey. The posthumous publications of the Collected Papers of Charles S. Peirce establishes him as an American thinker of the 'first magnitude' who coupled incisive insights with logical rigor. Similarly, the humanistic reactions to the practice of technology in education has been both relevant and insistent. That educational technology, in its quest for relevance, must constantly examine its progression and directionality, has been a theme repeatedly emphasized by concerned professionals from this field. Subsequently, the humanistic psychology of Abraham Maslow and the integral humanism of Jacques Maritain were chosen to provide a second pmilosophical framework. Additionally, the philoso- phies of pragmatism and humanism were chosen because of their polar quality. This consideration was made on the assumption that if one's philosophical position does in— fluence the decisions, and thus the product of instruction- al development, then it would be more likely to surface in _— 294 comparison with the more polar philosophical positions. The methodology employed in this study included brief descriptions of the major theoretical stances of pragma- tists and humanists with regard to questions of ethics, epistemology, and education, which were detailed in Chapter III, with more pointed references to specific ID decisions as given in Chapter IV. Each of the twenty-four decision processes is taken separately and introduced by an expla- nation from the IDI literature; specific decision points, considered representative of the decision processes are usually posed as questions and the pragmatist and humanist viewpoints are focused on the implications of these questions. They are followed by examples to highlight the specific positions of these two philosophies, and the comparative study concludes the examination in terms of congruence and variability' in terms of their respective responses to decision points drawn from the IDI decision making processes (Chapter IV). CONCLUSIONS The conclusions of this analytico-comparative study may be grouped under the four research questions that were posed earlier. 1. How do humanists and pragmatists differ or agree in the way they respond to ID decisionjoints which are based on the IDI Model? "295 While the pragmatists ask what the conceivable practi- cal consequences of an action or decision are, the humanists take this pragmatist query a step further, by asking what the conceivable practical consequences of a decision are with regard to the good of the human being who strives to achieve fuller self-realization. The pragma- tist's query is subsumed into the humanist's position, but with the added dimension of the humanist's concern. The humanists and the pragmatists could agree about the effectiveness of an instructional solution, but when the humanistic dimension is found to be wanting, either disagreement or a guarded agreement (i.e., accept with reservations) is the result. So, when an instructional solution is pragmatically effective without any perceived discrepancy, as in the case of TV teaching, the humanists would reject it for its ”dehumanizing” treatment of the students (See g__). This humanist concern is evidenced in the rank- ordering of TV teaching as a more urgent and important instructional problem (§_g), as well as: - in the choice of personalized instruction over instruction with more sophisticated aids (p_g), - in the choice of a teacher, from among two equally effective one, who did not insist on a “dehumanizing" rote memorization of course content by the students (p_§), and - in preferring personal meetings and oral agreements to impersonal memos and notes, as a means for establishing 296 lines of communication among TAPS team members (£_l). Even if a: specific ID solution does not sport evident indications of a humanistic goal, i.e., is not directly contributing to an enhanced self—worth, still it could be acceptable tx> the humanists because the ID solution satisfies a lower level need gratification or improvement of a mental skill. The interpretation of the post-test data is not manifestly humanistic in orientation, but it satisfies, in some measure, the knowledge need. gratifi- cations of a person or helps to indicate the level of a mental 'faculty' or skill. In such ID solutions, both pragmatists and humanists would agree with each other. 2. Why do Humanists and pragmatists so differ or agree in the way they respond to ID decision points? The pragmatists apply the pragmatist maxim "Does it work?" or ”What are the conceivable practical consequences of a decision?” to every' decision jpoint. as a rule for determining its meaning. The meaning’ of an intellectual concept or a proposition is explicable in terms of con- ditional propositions. The meaning of the effectiveness, for instance, of a multimedia presentation would be real- ized if it could be conceivably shown that it worked. The humanist concern, however, centers around the Full- er Being (Maslow) or the integral development (Maritain) of the human person who, through interactions with the environ- ment, strives to realize the full potentialities within oneself to be a self-actualizing person (Maslow) or find 297 one's true destiny in God (Maritain). As long as the pragmatist and humanist philosophical concerns coincide, i.e., when the specific decision points ensure the realization of both the pragmatist and humanist objectives, there would be agreement. In this sense, carrying out of an evaluation would be considered as testing for the effectiveness of an ID solu- tion, and there would be agreement between the pragmatists and the humanists (p_l). An existing l4-minute slide/tape program, effective in itself, is altered with additional slides 1K) adapt. the program to local needs, thus respecting the different characteristics of the students. Thus, the effectiveness and the humanistic design of the slide/tape program would find both the pmagmatists and humanists agreeing with each other on the new ID product. But if the humanistic concerns are sidestepped or neglected in favor of effective instructional solutions, the humanists would clash with the pragmatist's solutions. According to the humanists, this philosophical stance of the pragmatists is tantamount to an Option for the suprem- acy of the means over ends, a position abhorrent to the humanists, and they would disagree with the pragmatists. If there is a choice between a CAI program coupled with group discussion and the same without discussion, which have been previously proven as equally effective, the humanists would disagree with the pragmatists if the CAI 298 program without discussion were chosen over the one with discussion (g_l). Similarly, specifying detailed procedures for instruc— tional tryout needs to be tailored to the particular needs and characteristics of learners according to the humanists. An indiscriminate use of such procedures would generally be unacceptable to the humanists (£_2). Sometimes, effectiveness is safeguarded by the pragma- tist's ID solution and, for the sake of efficiency, they might advise procedures that might go counter to humanistic aims. To require that a learning task be completed may be indicative of its effectiveness, and to require that this be done in eight minutes may be efficient as well. But, if it places undue burden on the students and thus becomes dehumanizing, it would be rejected by the humanists (r l). 3. Are there steg in the IDI Model that are not responded to by either or both of these philosophies? The decision points relevant to "Determining Learner Characteristics" (decision process "c") do not fall within the immediate purview of the pragmatists, because the veri- fiability of the practical consequences of a decision is independent of learner characteristics, such as attitudinal postures, sex, and age. The goal-purposive behavior is proven to be effective when the verification phase of the solution attests that the paragmatist's solution actually worked or would work conditionally in given circumstances. 299 One might extrapolate from pragmatist viewpoints to cover this decision process, but it must be concluded that the pragmatists did not specifically deal with decision points relevant to this decision process. Similarly, both pragmatists and humanists did not specifically address themselves to the consideration of decision points relevant to TAPS team responsibilities (decision process 'e"). The consideration of suitable management models and assignment. of responsibilities are not central to the consideration of effectiveness, even though they might influence the outcome. For the humanists, it is the individual person that is vital to the decision making process, and others are only ministerial agents. For the pragmatists, the question "Does it work?" cannot be satisfactorily answered by saying that it depended upon who was in charge. 4. What is the effect on the IDI product or instruc- tional solution, when decisions are consistent with one philosophy, and not with the other? The instrumental justification, for time pragmatists, is vitally linked with purposive behaviors and, in a scien- tific inquiry, it is validated in the verification phase. Whether these instrumentalities be variously termed as methods, techniques, media, or strategies, they receive their justification tn) the extent they are able to realize the purpose for which they were intended. Here, the question of effectiveness is the prime consideration. 300 But for humanists, the effectiveness of an instrumen— tality has to be extended also to include humanist concerns of personal growth of the learners in an instructional situation. For instance, 'expository' strategies (e.g. lecture method) employed in an instructional situation could be effective in achieving an intended purpose, but if this effectiveness could be coupled with the personal growth of the learner, the strategy would be humanistic as well. If a humanist were the instructional developer, he might more likely substitute the "effective only" lecture method with an "effective ia1n_d humanistic" method of discovery learning. The ID product would have undergone a change due to the humanistic concerns of the instructional developer (5_;). - LE a course presentation could be achieved with equal effectiveness by a lecture method or a group discussion, a humanist teacher would change the lecture method to a group discussion (l_1). On the other hand, if a group discussion, originally viewed as enhancing the problem solving skills of the participants were to slip away from its intended purpose, and thus lack effectiveness, this ID solution. would be rejected by the pragmatists. For the humanists, such a group discussion could contribute to enhanced self-worth; nevertheless, the pragmatists would consider it as having failed to achieve the goal in this particular situation. It 301 is not goal-purposive and would be rejected by the prag- matists. It is pertinent to point out that, although this analysis suggests that their decisions and, therefore, their instructional systems, may differ, this analysis does not tell us if, in fact, these differently conformed systems perform with any significant difference in terms of their respective effects on learners. That is a subject for further reserch. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY Though the present study sought to cut fresh ground for educational technology through a pioneering effort of the nature of a philosophical investigation, it is not extended, by constraints of scope and time, to a complete philosophical analysis of the IDI Model by complete systems of pragmatism and humanism. These could be more specifically stated. 1. A more comprehensive exposition of pragmatism will not only include the philosophical writings of Peirce and James, but also those of JOhn Dewey, F.C.S. Schiller, and possibly those of George Herbert Mead and Clarence Irving Lewis. The present study is concerned only with the views of Peirce and James. 2. Even within the writings of Peirce and James, only two of their major works, namely, Pragmatism by William 302 James, and Volume 5 ("Pragmatism") of the Collected Papers of Charles S. Peirce, provided the focal points for this study. 3. Similarly, it was found that the term 'humanism' was too elastic and extensive to permit a precise defi- nition and the varieties of humanistic outlooks had to be sidestepped with an option only for the humanisms of Maslow and Maritain. While it is debatable whether these two philosophers completely reflect the major theories of humanism, they are worth being looked into and judged according to their own merits. 4. Humanism and pragmatism are not viewed as totally disparate entities, diametrically opposed to each other, but rather as distinctive, and, sometimes, epistemological- ly contiguous. The possibility of one championing the concerns of the other is not totally excluded. 5. It is not contemplated that the IDI Model be viewed as coextensive with all the concerns of educational tech- nology, or even instructional development, but rather as one of its subsets. The implication is a trust in the wider possibilities of educational technology that could be subjected to such investigations. 6. One final concern that may demand consideration is the possibility that the "systems approach” (of which the 24 ID decision processes represent a prime example) could be viewed as a pragmatic creation, to begin with. If true, 303 then unintentionally as it was, the cards may have been stacked against the humanists to start with, and this bias may have been carried through the analysis. The understanding about the limitations of the present study may lead to a potentially promising area for further research in theory building. IMPLICATONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Future researchers in educational technology might consider some of the following approaches for building toward a synthesized and unified philosophy serving instructional development. 1. A full range of decision points could be generated for the twenty-four decision processes. The present study concerned itself with only a few of the possible decision points relevant to each of the twenty-four processes. 2. Replicate the study in depth for just one of the three stages, for example, Stage I (Define) or Stage III (Evaluate), for a more thorough examination of the impact of pragmatism and humanism on any of these stages and its concomitant decision processes and decision points. 3. Some other subsets of educational technology which could be subjected to such philosophical investigations might be mentioned: higher education, teacher training, management systems, economics of :media, and the growing field of computer technology in instruction. 304 4. Replicate the study, using philosophies other than pragmatism and humanism. As examples, the following could be mentioned: the philosophies of John Dewey, Alfred North Whitehead, and any of the existentialist philosophies (e.g. Sartre, Jaspers). In this respect, relating philosophical positions to learning theory and their resultant impli- cations for design of instruction, similar to the cognitive learning theories of Ausubel and Carl Rogers, may prove to be advantageous. 5. Carry out a longitudinal study of the decision points responded to by the members of an ID team. The researcher could follow through the actual decision making situations and processes as guided by the twenty-four decision processes. The present study was placed in a hyothetical situation, whereas the neW' study could. deal with actual conditions. 6. Study the possible implications of eclectic philoso- phical positions of instructional developers as they affect their decisions and products. It is conceivable that effective and efficient instructional solutions would argue for an eclectic approach, at least in some cases, in the place of a strict adherence to a single philosophical stand. The impact of the philosophies of pragmatism and humanism on ID decision making processes are not to be construed in an "either...or' fashion, in the sense that an adherence to one philosophy necessarily precludes loyalty to the other. Rather, a more productive ”both...and' 305 approach may prove to be viable, in the sense that a pragmatist stand would prove to be effective and successful in some ID decision making’ processes, while: a humanist viewpoint would be more acceptable in another case. A future researcher could study whether this could be true and, if so, under what conditions. 7. Replicate the study using a real situation rather than a hypothetical one to determine if switching philo- sophic positions during a project causes conflicts or cancelling effects that reduce the effectiveness or efficiency of an instructional solution. 8. A weightier consideration 'would be the need for future students of instructional/educational technology to state their philosophical positions even if these initially seem to be inarticulate or embryonic. Such an articulation of philosophies would help a future researcher to study their implications in actual decision making processes made by these students. The result could lead to the posing of meaningful questions in ID decision making processes. 9. Relate Ervin Laszlo's "System-theoretical Analysis Experience"1 to the decision making processes of instruc- tional developers, especially where philosophical problems inherent in educational concerns could. be .attacked. with fresh and testable concepts. Laszlo's work may be recommend- ed as a possible conceptual framework for future studies. This study could more accurately be viewed as an inchoate philosophical investigation that endeavored to 306 chart unexplored fields in educational technology. What is required is a series of more refined and incisive studies concerning the philosophical assumptions or biases of instructional developers at various levels and phases of their activities in educational technology. Obviously, this task is of a magnitude requiring the efforts of many scholarly researchers. For the present, however, this study is intended as a 'moving target' for future researchers who would advance and elaborate scientific research by initi- ating new and productive methodologies. As Donald Hebb once stated, "a good theory is one that holds together long enough to get you a better theory.” FOOTNOTE lErvin Laszlo, System, Structure, and Experience: Toward A Scientific Theory of Mind. (New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1969). BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Abedor, Allen J. & Sachs, Steven G. ”The Relationship Between Faculty Development (FD), Organizational Development (OD), and Instructional Development (ID): Readiness for Instructional Innovation in Higher Education.” In Instructional Development: State of the Art. Edited by Ronald K. Bass, D. Barry Lumsden, and Charles Dill. Columbus, Ohio: Collegiate Publishing, 1978. Abraham H. Maslow: A Memorial Volume. International Study Project, Inc. Completed with assistance from Bertha G. Maslow. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing, 1972. AECT Task Force on Definition and Terminology. Educational Technology: Definition and Glossary of Terms. Vol. 1. Washington, D.C.: AECT, 1977. Allen, William H. "Research on New Education Media: Summary and Problems." AV Communication Review 7 (Spring 1959): 83-96. , Allen, William H. "Instructional Media Research: Past, Present, and Future.” AV' Communication. Review .19 (Spring 1971): 5-18. Association for Educational Communications and Technology. 'The Field of Educational Technology: A Statement of Definition.” Audiovisual Instruction 17 (October 1972): 36-43. Ayer, Alfred J. "Introduction" in Pragmatism by William James. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1978. Bass, Ronald K.; Lumsden, D. Barry; and. Dills, Charles (eds.). Instructional Development: The State of the Art. Columbus, Ohio: Collegiate Publishing, 1978. 307 308 Blackham, H.J. "A Definition of Humanism.“ In Humanist Alternative: Some Definitions of Humanism, pp. 31- 34. Edited by Paul Kurtz. Buffalo, NY.: Prometheus Books, 1973. Bovy, Ruth Calvin. "Successful Instructional Methods: A Cognitive Information Processing Approach." Edu- cational Communications and TechnologLJournal 29 (Winter 1981): 203-17. Bowyer, Carlton H. Philosophical Perspectives for Edu- cation. Glenview, 111.: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1970. Braden, Robert A. & Terrell, William R. "The Challenge from Within: Some Unpopular Views on Instructional Development Topics, " pp. 216-31. In Instructional Development: State of the Art. Edited by Ronald K. Bass et al. Columbus, Ohio: Collegiate Publishing, 1978. Chu, Godwin C. & Schramm, Wilbur. Learning from Tele-. vision: What the Research Says. Washington, D.C.: National Association of Educational Broadcasters, 1968. Coates, J.B. A Challenge to Christianity. London: Watts, 1958. Commission on Instructional Technology. "Report to the President of the United States." In To Improve Learning. Edited by Sidney G. Tickton. New York: R.R. Bowker, 1970. Copleston, Frederick. A History of Philosophy. 8 vols. Garden City, N.Y. : Doubleday, 1966: Image Books, 1967, Vol. VIII, Part II. Dooley, Patrick Kieran. Pragmatism as Humanism: The Philos- ophy of William James. Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1974; Nelson-Hall Paperback, 1978. Dubin, Robert & Hedley, R. Alan. The Medium May be Related to the Message: College Instruction by TV. Portland, Oregon: Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon, 1969. Duncan, Marvin E. "The Intricacies of Instructional Develop- ment.” In Instructional Development: State of the Ari, pp. 20-37. Edited by Ronald K. Bass et al. Columbus, Ohio: Collegiate Publishing, 1978. 309 Ehrenfeld, David. The Arrogance of Humanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981. Ely, Donald P. "Toward a Philosophy of Instructional Tech- nology.“ Journal of Educational. Technology' 1 (l970)2: 81-94. Ely, Donald P. ”Defining the Field of Educational Tech- nology.” Audiovisual Instruction 13 (March 1973): 52-54. Fecher, Charles A. The Philosophy, of Jacques Maritain. Westminster, MD: The Newman Press, 1953. "The Field of Educational Technology: A Statement of Defini- tion." By Donald P. Ely, Chairman of the Committee on Definition, in Audiovisual Instruction .17 (October 1972): 36-43. Finn, James D. 'Professionalizing the Audio-Visual Field.” AV Communication Review 1 (Winter 1953): 6-17. Finn, James D. "AV Development and the Concept of Systems." Teaching Tools 3 (Fall 1956): 164-65. Finn, James D. The Teacher and Technology. 16 mm film, b&w, sound. Columbus, Ohio: Motion Picture Divi- sion, Ohio State University, 1967. Finn, James D. "Dialog in Search of Relevance." in Se- lected Writings. Edited by Ronald J. McBeath. Washington, D.C.: AECT, 1972. Finn, James D. Extending Education Through Technology: Selected Writings by James D. Finn. Edited by Ronald J. McBeath. Washington, D.C.: AECT, 1972. Fisch, Max H. ”Alexander Bain and the Genealogy of Pragma- tism." Journal of the History' of Ideas 5 (June 1954): 413-44. Fisch, Max H. “Was There a Metaphysical Club at Cambridge?" in Studies in the Philosgphy' of Charles Sanders Peirce. 2 vols. Edited by Richard S. Robin and Edward C. Moore. Amherst: University of Massachue- setts Press, 1964. Galbraith, John Kenneth. The New Industrial Estate. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1967. Gallagher, Donald and Idella. The Education of Man: The Educational Philosophy of Jacques Maritain. Edited with an Introduction, by Donald and Idella Gallagher. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1962. 310 Gentry, Casetelle G. & Trimby, Madeline J. ”Interface Analysis of ID Systems." Michigan State University, August, 1980. Gilmore, Myron P. The World of Humanism: 1453-1517. New York: Harper & Row, 1952. Goudge, Thomas A. The Thought of C.S. Peirce. New York: Dover Publications, 1969. Gunther, John R. "Technology, Philosophy, and Education.” In To Improve Learning, pp. 75-87. Edited by Sidney G. Tickton. New York: R.R. Bowker, 1970. Gustafson, Kent L. "Toward a Definition of Instructional Development: A System Approach View.” Paper present- ed at the annual meeting of the Division Instruc- tional. Development, AECT, Philadelphia, March, 1971. Hall, C.S. & Lindzey, G. Theories of Personality. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1957. Hall, Mary Harrington. "Abraham Maslow." Psychology Today 2 (July 1968): 35-57. Hamreus, Dale G. "The Systems Approach to Instructional Development." In The Contribution of Behavioral Science to Instructional Technology:t A Resource Book For Media Specialists, pp: I. 1-59. Monmouth, Oregon: Teaching Division of the Oregon State System of Higher Education, n.d. Harries, Thomas E. "Application of General Systems Theory to Instructional Developments.” In IDI Coordi- nator's_Manual. n.p.: National Special Media Insti- tute, 1972. Hawkridge, David G. ”Next Year Jerusalem! The Rise of Educa- tional Tbchnology." Bripish Journal of Educational Technology 6 (January 1976): 7-29. Hebb, Donald Olding. Organization of Behavior: A Neuropsy- chological Theory. New York: Wiley, 1949. Heinich, Robert. "Is There a Field of Educational Communi- cations and Technology?” Audiovisual Instruction 13 (May 1973): 44-46. Hoban, Charles F. "A Systems Approach to Audiovisual Com- munications." Keynote address at the Lake Okoboji Audiovisual Leadership Conference, August, 1956. Iowa City: University of Iowa, 1956. 311 Hoban, Charles F. & Rege, Alkananda. "Value Structure of Researchers and Non-Researchers." AV Communication Review 17 (1969): 410-27. Hoeveler, Jr., J. David. The New Humanism: A Critique of Modern America: 1900-1940. Charlottsville: Uni- versity Press of Virginia, 1977. Hook, Sidney. “The Snare of Definitions.“ In Humanist Alternative: Some Definitios of Humanism, Edited by Paul Kurtz. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1973. "IAC Objective Rating.” In IDI Cbordinator'g Manual. n.p.: National Special Media Institute, 1972. Instructional Development Institute: Coordinator's _Manu- 31. n.p.: National Special Media Institute, 1972. James, William. The Principles of Psychology. 2 vols. New York: Henry Holt, 1980. James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience.: New York: Longmans, 1902. James, William. Pragmatism and Four Essays from the Theory of Meaning. New York: Longmans, Green, 1909; A Meridian Book, 1974. James, William. The Letters of William James. 2 vols. Edited by Henry James. Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1920. James, William. A Pluralistic Universe. New York: Longmans, Green. 1932. James, William. Pragmatism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1975. James, William. Pragmatism : A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking and The Meaning of Truth: A Seguel to Pragmatism. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1978. Jamison, Dean; Suppes, Patrick; and. Wells, Stuart. "The Effectiveness of Alternative Instructional Media: A Survey." Review of Educational Research 44 (1974): 1-68. Kant, Immanuel. Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Norman Kemp Smith. New York: The Humanities Press, 1929. 312 Kernan, Julie. Our Friend, Jacques Maritain:rA Personal Memoir. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1975. Kohlberg, Lawrence & Mayer, Rochelle. ”Development as the Aim of Education.” Harvard Educational Review 42 (November 1972): 449-96. Kurtz. Paul, ed. The Humanist Alternative: Some Defi- nitions of Humanism. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1973. Ladd-Franklin, Christine. “Charles S. Peirce at the John HOpkins." Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods 12 (1916): 715-22. Lamont, Corliss. The Philosoptfl of Humanism. Foreword by Edwin H. Wilson, 5th ed., revised and enlarged. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing, 1965. Lamont, Corliss. "Naturalistic Humanism." In The Humanist Alternative: Some Definitions of Humanism, pp. 129-32. Edited by Paul Kurtz. Buffalo, NY: Pro- . metheus Books, 1973. Langer, Susanne. "On the Relations Between Philosophy and Education.“ Harvard Educational Review 26 (Spring 1956): 139-41. Lasswell, Harold D. “Communications as an Emerging Dis- cipline." AV Communication Review 6 (Fall 1958): Laszlo, Ervin. System, Structure, and Experience: Toward A Scientific Theory of Mind. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1969. Levi, Albert William. Humanism 5. Politics: Studies in the Relationship of Power and Value in the Western Tradition. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana Universi- ty Press, 1969. Lovejoy, Arthur 0. The Thirteen Pragmatisms and Other Essays. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press, 1963. MacDonald, Robert Earl. ”The Psychology of Abraham Maslow in Educational Perspetive: Selected Criticisms and Applications." Ph.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1969. Maddi, Salvatore R. & Costa, Paul T. Humanism in Perso- nology: Allport, Maslow, and Murray. Chicago: Aldine Atherton, 1972. 313 Maritain, Jacques. Freedom in the Modern World. New York: Scribner, 1936. Maritain, Jacques. Ransoming the Time. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1941. Maritain, Jacques. Education at Crossroads. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1943. Maritain, Jacques. The Rights of Man and Natural Law. Translated by Dor i s C . Anson . New York : Charles Scribner's Sons, 1943. Maritain, Jacques. The Person and the Common Good. Trans- lated by John J. Fitzgerald. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1948. Maritain, Jacques. True Humanism. 5th ed. Translated by M.R. Adamson. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1950. Maritain, Jacques. The Range of Reason. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1952. Maritain, Jacques. Reflections on America. New York: Scribner, 1958. Maritain, Jacques. Integral Humanism: Temporal and Spiritu- al Problems of a New Christendom. Translated by Joseph W. Evans. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1968; University of Notre Dame Press, 1973. Maslow, Abraham. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper & Row, 1954. Maslow, Abraham. "A Philosophy of Psychology." In Personal Problems and Psychological Frontiers, pp. 225-44. Edited by J. Fairchild. Chicago: Sheridan, 1957. Maslow, Abraham. ”Psychological Data and value Theory." 1p New Knowledge in Human Values. Edited by A.H. Maslow. New York: Harpers, 1959. Maslow, Abraham. The Psychology of Science: A Reconnais- sance. New York: Harper & Row, 1966. Maslow, Abraham. Toward A Psychology of Beim. 2nd edition. New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1962; Insight Books, 1968. Maslow, Abraham. "Some Educational Implications of the . Humanist Psychologies." Harvard Educational Review 38 (Fall 1969): 685-96. 314 Maslow, Abraham. The Farther ieaches of Human Nature. New York: Viking Press, 1971. Maslow, Abraham. "Deficiency Motivation. and. Growth Moti- vation . " In Nebraska Smosium on Motivation . Edited by M.R. Jones. Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 1955: included in Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being, Chapter III. Maslow, Abraham. Abraham Maslow: A Memorial Volume. Edited by International Study Project. Compiled with assistance from. Bertha. G. Maslow. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing, 1972. Maslow, Abraham. The Journals of Abrahanl Maslow. Edited by Richard J. Lowry in cooperation with Bertha G. Maslow. Abridged by Jonathan Freedman. Lexington, Mass.: The Lewis Publishing, 1982. Merrill, M. David. & Godman, R. Irwin. “Selecting Instruc- tional Strategies and Media." In IDI Coordinator's Manual. n.p.: National Special Media Institute,- 1972. Montecheuil, Yves de. ”The Ideal of Christian Humanism." In Modern Catholic Thinkers: An Anthology, pp. 97- 108. Edited by Robert Caponegri. New York: Harper & Row, 1958. Morris, Van Cleve. Philosophy and the American School: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961. Mumford, Lewis. The Myth of the Machine. Vol. 2. The Pentagon of Power . New York : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1970. "The National Special Media Institutes." in Media Manpower _for the 70's: II Media Specialist Projects 1970- 71. A Report of the Leadership Training Institute, pp. 47-51. Edited by John L. Martinson. Menlo Park, CA: Media Manpower, 1971. ED 056 474. Nelson, Frank. "Evaluation for Instructional Development." In IDI Coordinator's Manual. n.p.: National Special Media Institute, 1972. The New Encyclopaedia Britannica. 15th edition, 1981. s.v. "History of Humanistic Scholarship." Novack, George. Humanism and Socialism. New York: Path- finder Press, 1973. 315 Passmore, John Arthur. A Hundred Years of Philosgphy. London: Duckworth, 1957; Penguin Books, 1966. Peirce, Charles Sanders. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. 8 vols. Edited by Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss. vols. 1-6 (1931-35): edited by A.W. Burke. vols. 7-8 (1958). First six vols. in three books. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1960. Perry, Ralph Barton. The Thought and Character of William James. 2 vols. Boston: Little, Brown, 1935. Pressey, Sidney IL. "A Third and Fourth Contribution Toward the Coming of Industrial Revolution in Education.” School and Society 36 (1932): 668-72. Promoting Educational Technology: A Summaay Report of the Annual Like Okobgji Educational Media. Leadership Conference (25th, Milford, Iowa, August 20-24, 1979), Washington D.C.: AECT, 1979. Rescher, Nicholas. Methodological Pragmatism: A. Systems- theoretic Approach to the_ Theory of Knowledge. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1977. Rokeach, Milton. Beliefs, Attitudes, Values: A Theory of Organization and Change. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, 1968. Royce, Josiah. "Charles Sanders Peirce: Peirce as a Philos- opher.” Journal of Philosophy, Psycholggy, and Scientific Methods 13 (December 21, 1916): 701-9. Saettler, Paul. A History of Instructional Technology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968. Salomon, Gavriel. I'On the Future of Media Research: No More Full Acceleration in Neutral Gear." Educational Cpmmunications and Technology Journal 26 (Spring 1978): 37-46. Schiller, F.C.S. "William James and the Making of Pragma- tism." The Personalist 8 (1927): 81-93. Sellars, Ray Wood. ”The Humanist Outlook.” In The Humanist Alternative: Some Definitions of Humanism, pp. 133-40. Edited by Paul Kurtz. Buffalo, NY: Pro- metheus Books, 1973. Silber, Kenneth H. ”What Field Are We in, Anyhow?" Audio- visual Instruction 15 (May 1970): 21-24. 316 Skinner, B.F. 'The Science of Learning and the Art of Teaching." Harvard Educational Review’ 24 (Spring 1954): 86-97. Skinner, B.F. ”Humanism and Behaviorism.” In The Humanist Alternative: Some Definitions of Humanism, pp. 98- 105. Edited by Paul Kurtz. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1973. Smith, B. Othanael; Benne, Kenneth D.: Stanley, William 0.; and Anderson, Archibald W. Readings in the Social Aspects of Education. Danville, IL: Interstate Printers and Publishers, 1951. Smith, Brookes William. Jacques Maritain: Antimodern or Ultramodern? An Historical Analysis of his Critica, his Thought, and his Life. New York: Elsevier, 1976. Smith, John Edwin. Purpose and Thought: Meaning of Pragmat- ism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1978. Snelbecker, Glenn E. learning Theory, Instructional Theory- Paycho-Educational Design. New' York: McGraw-Hill, 1974. Sparks, Lanny. "Prototype Specifications Exercise." In IDI Coordinator's Manual. n.p.: National Special Media Institute, 1972. Stamas, Spelios Theodore. ”A Descriptive Study of a Synthe- sized Operational Instructional Development Model, Reporting Its Effectiveness, Efficiency, and the Cognitive and Affective Influence on the Develop- mental Process on a Client." Ph.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972. Thayer, Horace Standish. Meaning and Action: A Study of American Pragmatism. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1973. Thorndike, Edward L. Education: A First Book. New York: MacMillan, 1912. Thorndike , Edward L . Educational Psychology . 2 vols . Vol . II: The Psychology of Learning. New York: Teacher's College, Columbia University Press, 1913. To Improve Learning: An Evaluation of Instructional Tech- nology. 2 vols. Edited by Sidney G. Tickton with the staff of the Academy for Educational Develop- ment. New York: R.R. Bowker, 1970. 317 Toffanin, Giuseppe. History of Humanism. English trans- lation, Foreword, and Augmented Bibliography by Elio Gianturco. lst American edition. New York: Las Americas Publishing, 1954. Torkelson, Gerald M. "AVCR - One Quarter Century: Evolution of Theory’ and. Research." AV’ Communication iReview 25 (Winter 1977): 317-58. Travers, Robert M.W. An Introduction to Educational Re- search. 3rd Edition. New York: The Macmillan, 1964. Trimby, Madeline J. & Gentry, Castelle G. "State of ID Systems Approach Models.” Michigan State Universi- ty, August, 1982. Urbach, Floyd; Sparks, Lanny; and Kepner, Tom. "IDI Follow Up Procedures." In IDI Coordinatoris Manual n.p.: National Special Media Institute, 1972. Van Pragg, J.P. "What is Humanism?” In Humanist Alterna- tive: Some Definitions of Humanism, pp. 43-45. Edited by Paul Kurtz. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1973. Wallington, Clinton J. ”A. Theoretical Construct for the Application of the Concept of New Careers to Instructional Technology." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern California, 1974. Ward, Leo R. “Maritain's Philosophy of Education.” In Jacques Maritain: The Man and His Achievements, pp. 193-214. Edited by Joseph W. Evans. New York: Sheed & Ward, 1963. Wiener, Philip P. Evolution and the Founders of Pragma- tism, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1949. Winn, William. ”Relationship Between Research and Instruc- tion." International _Jgarnal of Instructional Media 8 (1980-1981): 297-307. Wittich, Walter A" & Schuller, Charles F. Instructional Technology: Its Natur_e and Use. 5th edition. New York: Harper & Row, 1973. \‘7/ "immm“