A STUDY OF MEDTA USE, ATTSTUDES, AND BARRIERS AS
MEASUREMENTS FOR EVALUATING THE ENFLUENCE OF
EXTRA - MEDIA SUPPORT SERVICE FOR FACULTY
TEACHING EN LARGE CLASSROQMS

Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
RECHARU ALLAN MARGOLES

1369

 

LIBRARY

Trusts

Michigan State
University

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
A Study of Media Use Attitudes and Barriers
as Measurements for Evaluating the Influence
of Extra-Media Support Service on Faculty
Teaching in Large Classrooms

presented by

Richard A. Margole s

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph. D. degree in Curriculum

 

 

 

 

0-169

 

 

A STUDY OF MEDIA USE,
ATTITUDES, AND BARRIERS
AS MEASUREMENTS FOR
EVALUATING THE INFLUENCE
OF EXTRA—MEDIA SUPPORT
SERVICE FOR FACULTY TEACHING
IN LARGE CLASSROOMS

By

Richard Allan Margoles

AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State UniverSity
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Education

1969

 

ABSTRACT
A STUDY OF MEDIA USE,
ATTITUDES, AND BARRIERS
K AS MEASUREMENTS FOR
EVALUATING THE INFLUENCE
BY

Richard Allan Margoles

Purpose:
This study is concerned with providing descriptive

measurements by which a media administrator could evalu-
ate the influence of extra-media support service for facul-
ty who teach in large campus classrooms. Three measure-
ments were used: (1) attitude scores toward media: (2)
scores representing the selection of barriers instruc-
tionally relevant toward media, and (3) faculty usage
scores. Working from the construct that usage of media
is a function of one's attitude toward media and of one's
attitude toward the barriers associated with using media,
this study undertook the following: to determine the re-
lative influence of extra-media support service by deter-
mining (a) the participating facultys' quantitative use of
media, (b) the participating facultys' selection of bar-
riers relevant to instruction, and (c) the participating
facultys' general attitude toward newer media in education.
A series of null hypotheses generated by the state-
ment of the problem are tested for comparison of mean dif—

ferences through the analysis of variance technique. The

-1-

RICHARD ALLAN MARGOLES
null hypotheses tested weighed the evidence for Judging
whether or not faculty who receive extra—media support ser~
vice will reflect attitudes and behavior toward media dif-
ferent from those faculty who have not received extra—media
support service. The study also examined the relationship
between the following sets of ideas: content area and use
of media; beliefs and attitude toward educational media.

Procedure:

 

The study employed three faculty samples which approxi-
mated 10% of the university's academic teaching staff. In
keeping with the design of this study, half of each sample
was assigned randomly to one of two groups. Such procedures
allowed for statistical comparisons between individual scores
and between group scores.

To demonstrate that extra—media support service can be
measured for reasons relating to evaluation, three concepts
were derrived: (1) that attitude scores toward media and
usage scores of media are related; (2) that recipients fami-
liar to the experience of extra-media support service have
scores on attitude toward media and on their selection of
barriers instructionally relevant to media which are differ—
ent from the sampling population of faculty at large; (3)
that faculty new to extra—media support service will demon-
strate at the end of their experience that their scores on
both measurements are different from the sampling popula-
tion of faculty at large. If it could be demonstrated that

attitude scores correlate with use, and that attitude and

 

-3-
RICHARD ALLAN MARGOLES

barriers both change favorably after receiving extra+media

support service, then such service might be considered a

significant influence.

Conclusions:

Any discussion of the findings must stress that the
construct itself was not under direct investigation: rather,
the instruments used to measure the components of the con—
struct were under investigation. Analyses of the data pro-
vide the following conclusions:

1. A general measurement of attitude to—
ward media may not be indicative of
one's actual use of media.

2. A general measurement of barriers to—
ward media may not be indicative of
one's actual use of media.

3. Faculty who received extra—media sup—
port service will, as a group, use
some form of equipment for approxi-
mately half of their total instruc-
tional time.

A. Content area rather than experience
with extra-media support service is
related to use of media.

The evidence from data collected in this study suggests
that extra-media support cannot be evaluated with the in-
struments used in this study. Perhaps this is because atti-
tude and barriers toward media are related in rather specific

ways to particular situations.

 

A STUDY OF MEDIA USE
ATTITUDES, AND BARRIERS
AS MEASUREMENTS FOR
EVALUATING THE INFLUENCE
OF EXTRA-MEDIA SUPPORT
SERVICE FOR FACULTY TEACHING
IN LARGE CLASSROOMS

By

Richard Allan Margoles

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
College of Education
1969

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

A number of peOple deserve thanks for their support in
the writing of this dissertation. This group ranges from
the faculty at Michigan State University, who had the kind-
ness to cooperate on the study, to colleagues who offered
criticism and assistance.

I would like to thank Dr. Charles F. Schuller, my ad-
visor. His friendship, thoughtfulness and interest has-
played an important part in guiding me and others to de-
velop as students of educational communications. I would
also like to thank Dr.;Horace Hartsell, Dr. Hideya Kumata,
Dr. James Page, Dr. Troy Stearns, and Dr. Paul Witt for
their assistance as members of my committee.

Special thanks go to Dr. Robert Davis, Dr. Robert Ebel,
Dr. Andrew Porter, and Dr. Clinton Snyder, who provided tHe
sounding board for ideas which ranged from soundless to
sound. And special thanks go to Mr. Somnath Chatterjee,
Mr. David Lockwood, and Mr. Archie Watson, who Opened my

eyes as to what makes an operation run smoothly.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF EXHIBITS IN THE APPENDIX 9 . . . .

CHAPTER
I.

II.

THE PROBLEM. . . . . . .

Introduction . . . . .
The Need for the Study .
The Purpose of the Study
The Hypotheses . . . . .
Definition of Terms. . .
Theoretical Framework. .
Limitations of the Study
Overview . . . . . . . .

REVIEW or THE LITERATURE . . . . .

Introduction . . . . .
Utilization of Media Services.
A. Present Degree of Utilization

B. Reasons for Limited Utilization.

C. Process of Utilization . . .
Types of Change. . . . . . . . . .
Unidelines o e e e 0 0‘. e c e e a
Media Consultants as Change Agents
Antecedents. . . . . . . . .
Barriers to Using Media. . . . .
Attitudes. . . .

A. Attitudes and Development.

B. Attitude Function. . . .

C. Attitude Change and Behavio
Attitude Measurement . . . . . .
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . .

a

00.1000.

111

ooHooooeooo

3'

oomooooooooooooo

0000.000...

:3

oomooooooocooooo

(D

11

vi

10
11
13
1A
15
16

18

18.

20A
22;f

2h"

29
31
35

Al’

52

56.

59
62
67
70
76

CHAPTER
III. PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . .
Plan of the Study. . . . . .

O

O

A. Selection of the Faculty Participants.
8. Operations Involved in the Study .

C. Instruments Used in the Study.
D. Concommitant Information . . .
Statistical Analysis . . . . . . . .
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . ... .

Introduction . . . . . . .
Findings of the Study. . . .
Discussion of the Findings .
Summary of Results . . . . .

V. SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions. . .

Implication for Media Administrators
Recommendations for Further Study. .
BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O O 0

APPENDIX 0 O O O O O O O Q 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0

iv

81‘

81
8A
87
90
91
96

101
103
103
ion
11!: ,
125
130
130.
133
139
um
inf};
156'.

 

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE

1.

SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
GROUP I'S PRE-TEST SCORES ON THE NEW EDUCATION-
AL MEDIA ATTITUDE INVENTORY: EXPERIENCED SAMPLE
AND CONTROL SAMPLE ON FEE-TEST. o e e c e e e 0

SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
GROUP I'S PRE-TEST SCORES ON THE NEW EDUCATION-
AL MEDIA ATTITUDE INVENTORY: EXPERIENCED SAMPLE
AND NEW FACULTY SAMPLE ON PRE-TEST. . . . . . .

SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
THE POST-TEST SCORES ON THE NEW EDUCATIONAL

MEDIA ATTITUDE INVENTORY: FACULTY SAMPLE NEWLY
EXPERIENCED AND CONTROL SAMPLE ON POST-TEST . .

SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
GROUP II'S SELECTION OF BARRIERS RELEVANT TO IN-
STRUCTION: EXPERIENCED SAMPLE AND CONTROL SAM-
PLE ON POST-TEST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
GROUP I'S SELECTION OF BARRIERS RELEVANT TO IN-
STRUCTION: EXPERIENCED SAMPLE AND NEW FACULTY
SAMPLE ON PRE-TEST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
GROUP II'S POST-TEST SELECTION OF BARRIERS RELE-
VANT TO INSTRUCTION: FACULTY SAMPLE NEWLY EX-
PERIENCED AND CONTROL SAMPLE. . . . . . . . . .

Page

107

108

109

111

112

113

APPENDIX

I.

II.

III.

VI.

VII.

VIII.

LIST OF APPENDICES

SERVICES PROVIDED BY MEDIA CENTERS . .
CORRESPONDENCE: COLLECTION OF DATA

A. Initial Contact Letter: Phase One.

B. Follow-up Letter. . . . . . . . .
C. Contact Letter: Phase Two . . . .

D. Follow-up Letter. . . . . . . . .

BREAKDOWN OF RETURNS

A. Group I: Pre-test. . . . . . . .
B. Group I: POSt‘teSt e e o e c o e
C. Group II: Post-test. . . . . . .

DEMOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
A. Extra-Media Support Experience

and Academic Areas . . . . . . .
B. Professional Status . . . . . . .

DISSERTATION ABSTRACT'S TABLE OF CONTENTS.

A. Humanities and Social Sciences. .
B. Sciences and Engineering. . . . .

BREAKDOWN OF FACULTY RANKS WITHIN EACH OF THE.

UNIVERSITY'S THREE ACADEMIC PROGRAMS .
DESIGN FOR GROUP I AND GROUP II

A. Breakdown of the Responses. . .

B. Identification of the Samples Used in

Hypotheses Testing. . . . . . .
CORRESPONDENCE: CONTROL STUDY

A. Initial Contact Letter. . . . . .

B. FOllow-up Letter 0 .c o o c o I 0

vi

Page

156

157
158

159
160

161
162
163

16“
165

166
167

169

170
171

172
173

APPENDIX Page
VIX. DAILY OBSERVATION FORMS

A. Direction Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . 17”
B. Daily Log Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . 175

X. NEW EDUCATIONAL MEDIA ACCEPTANCE INVENTORY. 176

XI. BASELINE DATA SHEET FOR NEW EDUCATIONAL
MEDIA ACCEPTANCE INVENTORY. . . . . . . . . 179

XII. BARRIERS TO USING EDUCATIONAL MEDIA AT THE
COLLEGE LEVEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

XIII. DIFFERENCES IN ATTITUDE SCORES

A. Between the Same New Faculty Members
Who have Taken the NEMA Pre-test and
POSTS-”PEST; . c e c e e e c c e o c e o 182

B. Between the Same Experienced Faculty
Members who have Taken the NEMA Pre-
Test and Post—Test. . . . . . . . . . 183

C. Between the Same Contral Sample of
Faculty Members who have Taken the
NEMA Pre-Test and Post-Test . . . . . 18A

XIV. PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN OF ALL THE MEDIA USED
BY FACULTY WHO RECEIVED EXTRA~MEDIA SUPPORT
SERVICE 0 C O O O I O O O 0 O I O O O C O I 186

XV. NEW EDUCATIONAL MEDIA ACCEPTANCE INVENTORY.
CORRELATIONS WITH THE USE OF THE OVERHEAD
PROJECTOR C O O O I O C I 0 C O O O 9 O O O 187

XVI. DISTRIBUTION OF FACULTY CLASSIFIED AS TO
DISCIPLINES AND QUANTITY OF MEDIA USE . . . 188

XVII. BARRIERS TO USING MEDIA AT THE COLLEGE

LEVEL
A. Arranged in Order of Frequency of
Returns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
B. Arranged for Comparing Different
samples 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O I O O 0 190

vii

 

APPENDIX Page
C. Arranged for Comparing Level of
Usage 0 c e c c e e a o o c e e c c e 191
D. Arranged for Comparing Range of Atti-
tude Scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
XVIII. SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR
COMPARING ATTITUDE SCORES AND SELECTION OF
TWO SPECIFIC "BELIEF—BARRIERS". . . . . . . . 193
XIX. DISTRIBUTION OF USAGE PATTERNS EXHIBITED BY
EXPERIENCED AND NEWLY-EXPERIENCED FACULTY . . 19A

viii

 

CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM

Introduction:

 

The complexity and diversity of the modern university
is itself a major obstacle to closing the gap between cur-
rent technology and educational practice. When the decision
makers in higher education finally realize the force of me-
dia innovation, the newer educational media will undoubtedly
q find their place on the college scene. In fact, many insti-
j tutions today are developing their campus instructional re-
“ sources. 'But for any innovations to be effective, they must
first somehow generate a general climate favorable to change.
"Such a climate," according to Dietrich and Johnson, "de-
pends upon the success met with developing an institutional
commitment to improvement."1

Administrators may employ a variety of strategies for
introducing newer media;2 but we cannot yet determine Just
which strategy is the most effective for a given situation.

We are not even sure, for instance, how attitudes about the

 

1John E. Dietrich and F. Craig Johnson, "A Catalytic
Agent for Innovation in Higher Education," Educational Re:
cord, XLVIII (Summer, 1967), p. 208.

g 2Matthew B. Miles discusses this with great clarity;

j see, e.g. his chapter on "Educational Innovation: The Na-

7 ture of the Problem," (Innovation in Education (New York:

Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia Univer-
sity, 1964)).

 

-2-

newer educational media may be related to the opportunities
that faculty have for using them in the classroom. The pre—
sent study investigates one possible strategy for develop—
ing a faculty climate more conducive to the acceptance of
newer media. Essentially that strategy involves providing
a saturation of media services to professors instructing in
selected large classrooms on the Michigan State University
Campus. The study seeks to evaluate how far the availabil-
ity and use of extensive media service has influenced parti-‘
cipating faculty members' use of media as well. Various face
ets of the role media are to play in higher education will of
course continue to be discussed for many years; what we can
do now, however, is develop guidelines to establishing a cli-
mate favorable to media innovations.

Although it has never been intended that educational me—
dia should replace the role of the faculty member in large
class instruction, a variety of additional factors including

the inertia Of faculties and administrations limited media 3
19
L.-

use in most higher education institutions.’ Media center reja

l I

search studies into improving the quality of instruction must
concern themselves not only with the enormous tasks of in- !
structional development but with people as well.3 Dressell
specifically identified several barriers to the coordination
of learning and teaching resources:

A natural reluctance on the part
of faculty members to modify habitual

 

3David K. Berlo, "You Are in the Peeple Business," Au—

diovisual Instruction, VIII (June, 1963), p. 373. (Herein—
after referred to as "People Business.").

_~—

 

. -3_

practices and skepticism, commendable in
limited degree, in regard to the effica—
cy of these newer media and methods.

The lack of qualified personnel to
assist faculty members in rethinking and
programming their courses.

The lack of funds to provide the
equipment, materials and released facul-
ty time necessary for such programming.

We shall be concerned in this study primarily with the first.
Previously, scholars have approabhed this complex set

of problems by disseminating information to the teaching staff

about the instructional potential technology offers. Both

McIntyre5 and the Evans6

gt_al, report have demonstrated that
although there are many ways to accomplish this diffusion, no
single method works in all cases since needs for educational
media at the college level vary. As Carpenter and Greenhill
phrase it,
The introduction of the media must
have clear relations to needs as per—

ceived by faculty members . . . hen the
new media actually help meet critical

 

“Paul Dressel, Learning Resources for Higher Education,
Report of the All-Faculty Conference, East Lansing, Michigan,
April 3-5, 1962 (Michigan State University, Michigan) p. 13.

5Kenneth M. McIntyre, A Study to Determine Specific
Sources of Resistance to the Use of Audiovisual Materials
bl:College and University Teachers and the Development of
Procedures for Overcoming the Barriers to Optimum Use‘L Title
VII (A) Final Report, Grant No. 731052, 1963, University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill. (Hereinafter referred to as
Resistance to the Use.)

6Richard I. Evans, The University Faculty and Education
Television: Hostility, Resistance, andwChange, TTFT§”Y:IfN—
Report, Grant No. 731015, 1962, University of Houston. (Here—
inafter referred to as Hostility,__ResistanceL and Chanch)

 

 

 

 

r“-

.needs as perceived by faculty members,

the introduction of the media is ad-

vanced, although not assured.7

As Michigan State,faculty acceptance of media for sup-

porting and facilitating instruction has spurred the expand-
ing campus—media services. In particular, faculty requests
for additional media support to the larger auditorium~type
classrooms suggested saturation experiments in conjunction

with the Classroom Media Capability Project.8

Presumably,
faculty members receiving such extra support would become
more sophisticated in their handling of instructional probw
lems centering around media than their counter parts. Re~
search, regarding faculty members' attitudes toward media
and their usage of media, might have two possible kinds of
significance, the first regarding advance planning for media
services and facilities, and the second regarding innovative
uses, the domain of diffusion theory.
The Need for the Study:

This study assumes that extra—media support programs _
such as the Classroom Media Capability Project help promote

a campus climate favorable to media and, in particular, a

more favorable faculty attitude toward media utilization.

 

7C.R. Carpenter and L.P. Greenhill, "Providing the Con~
ditions for Learning: the 'New' Media,” in Higher Education,

ed. by Samuel Baskin (New York: McCraw~HillT’l§bB) p. lh7.
(Hereinafter referred to as ”Conditions for Learning.")

8U.S., Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Application for Grant Equipment and_Materials to Improve
Undergraduate Instruction, John E. Dietrich, authorIEEE
officer (Michigan State University: East Lansing, Michigan,
April 28, 1966), Exhibit B, p. 3.

 

 

_. --,-- —'

. -5-

Despite the energy and resources already applied in pro-
viding a physical climate favorable for media utilizations,
more research is needed. We specifically need information
on how projects like the Classroom Media Capability Pro-.
ject influence attitudes, although studies in higher educa—
tion by Evans,9 Handleman,10 and McIntyrell clearly suggest
that faculty attitudes improve after exposure to and use of
media. Equipment and manpower are already directed into
many large Michigan State University classrooms, but no re-
search studies have yet explored the "why's" and "how's"
determining just how frequently faculty members utilize the
available equipment and student—technician service.

We have neglected the opportunity to identify and de-
scribe the mechanisms operating daily in large classroomS,
including those variables influencing administrative deci-
sions. Rogers considers such variables, termed antecedents
in diffusion theory, as prerequisite to the awareness of a
new idea: A

Antecedents are those factors pre~
sent in the situation prior to the in-

troduction of an innovation. Antece-
dents are of two major types: (1) the

 

~r f i'_v_

9Richard I. Evans, Hostility,gResistance and Chang_.

 

10Stanley D. Handleman, "A Comparative Study of Tea-
cher Attitudes Toward Teaching by Closed—Circuit Televi—
sion," (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, New York Univer—
sity, 1960), from second page of abstract. (Hereinafter
referred to as "Teacher Attitudes.")

11Kenneth M. McIntyre, Resistance to the Use.

-6...

actor's identity and (2) his perception
_ of the situation.12 .

If, in fact, the Classroom Media Capability Project provides
a class of activities tending to innovation practice, then
research into its antecedents is essential to our knowledge
of diffusion theory. For example, before administrators
decide which instructional devices to place in large class—
rooms, they should know how efficient the various equipment
and services are in actual use.

This study may also further organizational plans for
extra-media support services. Without guidelines covering
organizational patterns, provisions for equipment and mate-
rial, personnel assignments, physical facilities, and bud-
getary needs, saturation projects like the Audiovisual Satu~
ration Project No. 032 may continue to be plagued by low use
and high cost.13 Mayhew alluded to such guidelines in re-
viewing the full range of higher educational curricular pos-
sibilities:

One is also struck by the few people
actually using the equipment available
One matter which must be settled first is

the provision of greater time for faculties
to use the devices. Relatively few of the

 

12Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations. (New
York: The Free Press, 1962), p. 305 (Hereinafter referred
to as Diffusion.)

13Instructional DevelOpment Service, "Project No. 032,
Audiovisual Saturation-eAudio Student Learning Laboratory”,
Third annual Report to the Ford Foundation, (Final Report),
July 1, 196“ - June 30, 1967. (Mimeographed.)

 

 

-7-

experiments realistically face the bud-
getary and personnel problems of allowing
faculty members more free time to use
television, teaching machines, labora-
tories, or slide equipment to enrich or
improve their teaching.14

Research necessarily underlies good decisions. According to
Hoban,

The purpose of research is generally
accepted to be that of discovering order
and regularity of events and identifying
and describing the mechanisms and dynamics
of orderly and regularly occurring events,
and testing results for likelihood of
random occurrence. Once established, or-
der, regularitv and their dynamics enable
prediction of consequences. Prediction
of consequences pgrmits increased control
of consequences.

The guidelines we may extrapolate from observing the effect
of extra-media support may thus reflect the administrator’s
control of consequences.

And the absence of guidelines and knowledge of the an:
tecedents-to any use of media may even increase resistance
to the use of media. Evans reports just such a phenomenon,
observing that, I

'threatening-insecurity' attitudes

not_only jeopardize the faculty's pro-
gress toward the adeption of ITV, but

 

1“Lewis B. Mayhew, "A Summing Up," in New Media in
Higher Education, ed. by James W. Brown and James w. Thorn—
ton, Jr. (Washington, D. 0.: Association for Higher Educa—
tion and the Division of Audiovisual Instructional Service
of the National Education Association, 1963), p. 173.

 

 

15Charles F. Hoban, "Dial "T" Tryst", in Media and
Educational Innovation, ed. by Wesley C. Meierhenry (The
University ofTNebraska: The University of Nebraska Exten—
sion Division and the University of Nebraska Press, 196M),

p. 3H6.

 

 

-3.
constitute what seems to be the begin-
. ning of a dangerous climate for future

educators.15
Studies by Atwood,17 Eichholz and Rogers,18 and M11es19 simi-
larly indicate that without control over an innovation's con-
sequences, faculty will retain their natural reluctance to
modify instructional practice. Incidentally, any understand»
ing of the conditions essential to educational media adop-
tions must of course involve both administration and faculty;
in fact, academic planning and educational development are
primarily a cooperative responsibility.

While higher education has certainly provided strong
stimulus to technology in our society, it has remained re-
sistant to its use. McIntyre's introduction to his study
of faculty resistance to using media reflects this paradox:

An understanding of the techniques

essential to the application of educa-
tional media at the present college level

 

16Richard I. Evans, Hostility, Resistance and Change:

 

17M.S. Atwood, "Small-Scale Administrative Change: Re~
sistance to the Introduction of a High School Guidance Pro—
ram," in Innovation in Education, ed. by Matthew B. Miles
Ne: York:'Téachers College, Gelumbia University, 196“),
p0 90

 

18Gerhard Eichholz and Everett M. Rogers, "Resistance to
the Adoption of Audiovisual Aids by Elementary School Teach-
ers: Contrasts and Similarities to Agricultural Innovation,"

in Innovation in Education, ed. by Matthew B. Miles (New York:

 

Teachers 0011989, Columbia University, 196”, p. 299. (Here—'
inafter referred to as "Resistance to the Adoption.")

19Matthew B. Miles, "Educational Innovation: Some genem
ralizations," in Media and Educational Innovation, ed. by
Wesley C. Meierhenry (The‘University offiNebraska: The Uni~
versity of Nebraska Extension Division and The University of
Nebraska Press, l96fl), p. 198.

 

 

“in"
,
(

'96

‘is a critical need in order to meet the
current problems of higher education.

The identification of specific
barriers to the optimum use of audio-
visual media in education is the first
step toward devising ways of overcoming
each barrier. When it is possible to
make an accurate diagnosis, perhaps a
cure can be prescribed. 0

In an age when college administrators are being pres-
sured into experimenting with educational technology21, we
ought to identify both guidelines for "understanding of the

techniques essential to the application of educational media,"

 

and antecedents to "the identification of specific barriers
to the optimum use of audiovisual media." Both are to be
identified from existing programs which offer media for in-
structional purposes; and, once identified, such guidelines
and antecedents could assist administrators faced with the
‘problem, "How can we best overcome resistance to change and
definitely promote acceptance and use of new technological
media in instruction?"22

The findings of this study may suggest some new ap—
proaches toward media support in selected large classrooms.

If’the findings reveal only a chance association between

20Kenneth M. McIntyre, Resistance to the Use, pp. 1-2.

21Wilbert J. McKeachie, "Automation: New Media in Edum
cation Concerns and Challenges," Association for Higher Edu~
gation: Collegg and University Bulletin, XVII (November,
1965), 1. *7

22
Wesley C. Meierhenry, ed., "Needed Research in the In—
troduction and Use of Audiovisual Materials: A Special Re—
port," Audiovisual Communication Review, X (November—Deccm«

ber, 1962), 31A.

’;°7

attitude or behavioral change, we_have helped verify this
approach to identifying and defining faculties' instruction-
al needs.

The study's findings may also point out barriers to_
media utilization unrelated, until now, to the Classroom
Media Capability Project. For example, we might find that
the availability of equipment and technicians is relatively
unimportant compared to the availability of media materials
and planning time. Through isolating barriers which affect
attitudes toward media, then, we might construct more pro-
ductive formulae for media usage.

.21): 233329;: 9: the Study:

Specifically, this study will investigate measurements
:for observing the influence of extra-media support to the
‘teaching staff using selected large classrooms at Michigan!
State University. In the study, influence will be measured
by'comparing group scores on a media-acceptance inventory
<1uestionnaire, group selections of media barriers relevant
‘to instruction, and group usage of media.

This study will also seek antecedents, as defined in
<iiffusion theory, which relate to faculty usage. And final-
1y, the study will check the reliability of the media ques-
‘tionnaire, seeing how its scores correlate to actual media
use.

WOrking from these purposes, then, this study under-
takes the following: to determine the relative influence
Of extra-media support by ascertaining the participating

faculty's scores on attitude toward media, to determine the

 

. -11-
relative influence of extra-media support by observing the

participating facultyfs selection of barriers relevant to

instruction.

The Hypotheses:

The scientific method requires researchers to suggest
hypotheses and then test whether they offer accurate expla~
nations of phenomena. The phenomenon in this case, the sus-
pected difference among experienced faculty in regard to
their general attitude toward media, will be investigated
by testing the following hypotheses in order to determine
(1) what happens and (2) why it happens.

H : Media attitude scores will be correlated
with faculty usage scores.23
Faculty members who have received extra-
media support in the past will favor media
more than those who have received none.
H3: Faculty members who have received extra-

media support in the past will favor media

more than those who have been assigned to
receive extra—media support for the first
time.

H“: Faculty members who have just received
extra-media support for the first time
will favor media more than those who have
received none.

23These hypotheses are to be restated in testable form
in Chapter Three.

—12-.

H5: Faculty members who have received extra-
media support in the past will select more
barriers considered relevant to instruc-
tion than those who have received none.

H6: Faculty members who have received extra—
media support in the past will select
more barriers considered relevant to in-
struction than those who have been as-
signed to receive extra-media support
for the first time.

H7: Faculty members who have just received
extra-media support for the first time
will select more barriers considered
'relevant to instruction than those who

have received none.

Some literature, such as Knowltonzu and Streeter,25 as-

sert that attitudes toward the use of media in education re—

late to content area although this same literature describes

canly elementary and secondary education. This study will

thus explore as well the relationships between content area

2h
James Q. Knowlton, Studies of Patterns of Influence

.1p.the School Situation as The Affect the Use of Audio—
jgisual Materials, National Defense Education Act, Title VII,
Grant No. 7-12-029. (Division of Educational Media and Au—

<iiovisual Center, Indiana University, July, 1963), pp 87-107.

(Hereinafter referred to as Patterns of Influence.)

25Charles Edward Streeter, "A Study of Relationships
Among Selected Factors Affecting Media Use by Classroom
Teachers Within Selected School Systems," (unpublished Ph.D
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967), pp.79-91.
(Hereinafter referred to as "Factors Affecting Media.")

 

AiLH “w:- lm-asfl'

.-13-
and media attitude scores, content area and usage scores.

Finally some comparison between the experienced and the
tyros will enable us to examine a pattern of media usage
during the first and second half of the winter term desig-
nated for the study.

Definition of Terms:

Barrier to Media Use at the College Level:
scores on a questionnaire consisting of thirteen
items, six considered relevant and seven con-
sidered non-relevant (since a point is assigned
to each instructionally relevant item while no
points are assigned to non-relevant items, scores
range between zero and six).

Convenience of Media Support: measured by
faculty recognitibn of instructionally relevant
barriers to media use.

Experienced Faculty: the teaching staff at
Michigan State University who have received one
or more quarters of extra support service in
one of the larger classroom spaces (in the trial
adoption stage).

Extra-Media Support Service: includes a
full-time student Operator throughout the quar-
ter and a wide range of media equipment, plus
any other special equipment, which is immedi-
ately available for instruction.

General Attitude toward Media: scores on
the Newer Educational Media Acceptance Inven- 26
tor! questionnaire constructed byFCurtis Ramsey
as abbreviated by Guba and Snyder27 (high scores

 

26Curtis Paul Ramsey, A Research Project for the De-
velopment of a Measure to Assess Attitudes Regarding the
Uses of New Educational Media, Title VII, Project Number
A92, National Defense Education Act of 1958, Grant Number
7&0095, (Nashville, Tennessee: George Peabody College for
Teachers, December 1961). (Hereinafter referred to as Mggf
sure to Assess Attitudes.)

27Egon G. Guba and Clinton A. Snyder, Research and
Evaluation of MPATI Telecasts, Final Report, RF Project
I337T’ResearchFoundation, TCOlumbus, Ohio: Ohio State
University, April, 196A). (Hereinafter referred as MPATI

Telecasts.)

-1u-'

represent unfavorable attitudes toward media and
low scores favorable attitudes).

Instructionall Relevant Barriers: those
terms Identified 5y Knowlton28 a§”directly rele-
vant to instruction.

 

Media: instructional materials and tech-
niques that are used by faculty to supplement or
substitute for spoken communication.

New Faculty: the teaching staff at M.S. U. who
have receIVed no extra media support service in a
large classroom until the Winter 1968 term.

Re resentative Sam 1e: the teaching staff at
M.S.U. who (I) Have taught at least one academic
class on campus during the 1967-1968 school year,
and (2) have not taught in a large classroom ser-

viced by the extra-media support program (selec—
ted at random from the 1967 Staff and Faculty

Directory.)

Use: the amount of time that media equip-
ment Is engaged in relation to the total amount
of classroom instruction time during the Winter
1968 term (expressed as a proportion).

 

Theoretical Framework:
Research initiated by Lewin,29 explicated by Rokeach,30
and applied by Steininger31 suggests that behavior is basic—

ally a function of one's attitude toward objects and toward

 

28James Knowlton and Ernest Hawes, "Attitude: Helpful
Predictor of Audiovisual Usage?", Audiovisual Communication
Review, X (May-June 1962), 1H7. (Hereinafter referred to as
"Helpful Predictor.")

29Kurt Lewin A Dynamic Theory of Personality (New York:
McGraw Hill, 1935).

3°M11ton Rokeach, "Part One: The Theory and Measurement
of Belief Systems " The Open and Closed Mind (New York: Ba-
sic Books, Inc., i960); ' ' ' 'P

31Marion Steininger, "Situational and Individual Deter—
minants of Attitude Scale Responsesé" Educational and Psycho-
)

lo ical Measurement, XXV (Autumn 19 5), 757-765. (Herein—
after referred to‘as "Situational".

 

 

-15-
situations. In the terms of this study, attitude toward
the object becomes the score on barriers to using media.

Essentially, this theoretical framework tends to con—
firm the postulated correlation between media support and
attitudes toward media in education. If faculty members
perceive potential reward from extra support as outweighing
the barriers which stand in the way of use, then those facul-
ty members receiving extra support should have a higher in-
dex of media usage than their colleagues. Since faculty
members receiving extra support need not concern themselves
with the setting-up or maintenance of the equipment, their
attitude about the convenience and worth of media improves,
resulting in more media utilization.

Limitations of the Study:

This study has not considered: (1) how media improves
student learning, (2) the qualitative use of media in the
large classrooms, (3) the characteristics of the Classroom
Media Capability Project as an innovation, (A) lateral and
horizontal channels of communication, and (5) the rates of
increasing awareness during the adoption process. These con-
siderations were not excluded because of their irrelevance,
but rather because the study had to be limited to emphasize
the influence of extra-media support in the large classrooms.

The study is limited in three further ways: first, as
with any questionnaire, there was very little chance here to
validate responses and to check the motives which might be
behind each reply, although such analysis might help facili—

tate further media use. Second, the report of barriers to

-16..
using media in higher education was arranged in a total fre-
quency of acknowledgements without securing individual rank-
ing: the arranged listing of barriers might thus have incor-
porated the researcher's guesses as to what faculty members
believed the use of media might offer them, thereby rendering
the barriers assembled in this study contrived rather than
derived; no attempt was made to determine the respondents'
reasons for their selections. Third, no generalizations
should be inferred to a population beyond Michigan State Uni-
versity.

The reader is reminded that this study deals only with
the explorations of possible influence which extra-media sup—
port service might have on recipient faculty members. The
quality of the Distribution and Facilities Services is ac-
knowledged to be that of the highest caliber: its services
and contributions are visible throughout this campus.'
Overview:

This first chapter has described the need and the pur-
pose of the study, establishing that institutions seeking a
campus climate favorable to media should consider administra—
tive guidelines and antecedents related to innovations. In
presenting the hypotheses, definition of terms, and theoreti-
cal framework for the study, chapter one has assembled infor-
mation warranting an investigation into how extra-media sup-
Dort influences faculty members' attitudes toward media and

toward barriers to using media.

In the second chapter literature in each of two related

-17-
areas is reviewed: (1) factors relating to utilization, and
(2) attitudes and their formation. The implication will be
consolidated, pointing the direction to be taken in the third
chapter. That chapter, which covers the design of the study,
will consider the sample and its population, the instrumenta-
tion, and the null hypotheses with their directional alterna—
tives. ‘The fourth chapter is organized for presenting the
findings which the data suggest; each hypothesis will be sta-
ted, the probability for rejecting or accepting the null hy-
pothesis established, and the hypothesis formally rejected or
accepted. Interpretations based on additional analysis will
be represented prior to the summary. Chapter five, after col-
lating the previous chapters, will state the concluSions and

recmmmendations of the study and its possible implications.

 

4 CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction:

This chapter reviews research studies and writings se-
lected to describe the development of faculty attitudes to-
ward the use of media and organizing them into two sections.
The first section concentrates on factors affecting the se-
lection and utilization of media, suggesting that any media
center that wishes to further educational innovation must
build a staff able to work with faculties in order to over—
come barriers to changes. The second section concentrates
on attitudes toward media, suggesting that many attitudes
toward media are specifically related to particular situa~
tions. Initially the campus media movement grew in response
to mounting enrollments, demands for a more highly educated
population, and the increasing lack of trained faculty, all
leading universities to seek innovations in instructionalli
methods. As one study states the trend:

Current thinking about learning
.resource centers tends to emphasize
"new" media-like films of all kinds,
audio and video tapes, graphics, mOe
dels, simulation mechanisms, and,
prospectively, programmed instruc—
tion. Emphasis is also put on faci-
lities for distributing high-quality

pretested stimulus materials and on
presenting them to students in a

-18—

 

'-19-

wide range of study situations both on
and off campus.1

Tomorrow's expectations regarding learning resources will

far outstrip the media services available at the present, as
Eurich projects, by analogy with the past: .

The most prominent difference be-
tween today’s colleges and those of fifty
years ago, however, is not in the curri-
culum but in the area of learning re-
sources. We have introduced devices and
techniques which were not even thought
of prior to the mid-twentieth century.
Curriculum has always been the subject
of educational debate and reform. But
the learning resources which our stu-
dents now take for granted were developed

- for the first time in the 1950's and 60's.
These enabled us to fulfill the psycholo-
gist's dreams of making the best teaching
available to all students and of truly
adapting insSruction to individual rates
of learning.

Thus media services are increasingly considered essen-

tial in higher education instructional service. Eboch3 sees

these services as involving the design and implementationfipf

$

information and transmission display systems with specifid
objectives. Most of their activities, however, (Appendix;
I), necessitate constantly communicating with faculty about

the potential of media support available to them. Diffusion

a,

1Carpenter and Greenhill, "Conditions for Learning,”
p. 1&6. . .

2Alvin C. Eurich, "A Twenty-First-Century Look at High—
er Education," in Revolution in Teaching: New Theory, Tech—
nolo , and Curricula} ed. by Alfred de Grazia and David A.
gofin, Bantam Matrix‘Editions (New York: Bantam Books, 196”).

D. 15.

3Sidney C. Eboch, "The AV Specialist: Some Reflections
On an Image," Audiovisual Instruction, VIII (January, 1963),
15-17, passim.

-20—
theory research predicts that media services are most accept-
able when they support or slightly modify academic practices.
In fact, however, media utilization has been relatively un-,
successful for reasons which we shall explore in this section.
Utilization ovaedia Services:

A. Present Degree of Utilization. The absence of any
consensus regarding media effectiveness at the college level,
as late as the mid-sixties, has been explained as the absence
of a rationale. Brown and Thornton, Jr.“, in surveying media
in higher education, imply that trial-usage and adoption are
limited and uneven, while Harcleroad5 suggests that the tech-
nological revolution has caught most colleges without an ap-
propriate framework for developing such services. And others
point out that the introduction of educational media into the
academic marketplace tend to make decision making more diffi-
cult. Hence, media selection is uneven because of both the
vast quantity of resources and lack of any rationale defining
how items should be selected in terms of instruction: We shall

primarily investigate the latter reason. Briggs6 traces such

”James w. Brown and James w. Thornton. Jr., ed., New Me-
dia in Higher Education (Washington, D.C." Association for
Higher Education and the Department of Audiovisual Instruc—
tional Service of the National Education Association, 1963).

5Fred F. Harcleroad, Learning Resources for Colleges and
Universities (Hayward, California: California State College
at Hayward, 196”), NDEA Title VII, Grant No. OE—3—l6-02V. pp.
1-"0, passim.

6Leslie J. Briggs, et al., Instructional Media: A Pro-
cedure for the Design of Multi-Media lnstruction,_A Critical
PevIew oT‘ResearchJ and suggestions Tor-Future ResearCh "’
(PittSBurgh: American Institutes for Research, 1067), pp.
1-10, passim.

 

 

-2l-‘
vagueness to the learning theories associated with such new
types of media equipment as computer-assisted instruction.
Gentile's review of technology's progress in education re-
veals the ". . . . negative attitude of many teachers toward

"7

programmed instruction, and goes on to suggest how media

will influence curricula in the future as technology and psy—
chology work toward a new approach to curriculum. McKeachie8
suggests that limited media utilization reflect the perceived
demands preceding it, as for instance with professors who now
feel insecure in their traditional role as an instructor. Or-
as Tobias has suggested, ". . . . the threat of automation
is of some importance in the attitudes of teachers toward edu—
cational media."9 Certainly media usage requires more than
merely the availability of media support. And it is equally
certain that
Media that imply a radical shift in
educational roles or that require the
creation of new positions of the retrain—

ing of personnel are less likely to be
adopted.10

 

—r

7J. Ronald Gentile, "The First Generation of Computer-
Assisted Instructional Systems: An evaluative Review,” 52“
diovisual Communication Review, XV (spring, 1967), A2.

8Wilbert J.McKeachie, "Higher Education," in The New
Media and Education, ed. by Peter H. Rossi and Bruce J.
Biddle, Anchoe Books (New York: Doubleday and Company,
Inc., 1967), pp. 307—319.

9Sigmund Tobias, "Dimensions of Teachers' Attitudes
Toward Instructional Media," American Educational Research
Journal, V (January, 1968), pTfi98. (Hereinafter referred to
as "Dimensions of Teachers' Attitudes.”)

10Peter H. Rossi and Bruce J. Biddle, "Educational Me—
dia, Education, and Society," in the New Media and Educa—
tion, ed. by Peter H. Rossi and Bruce J. Biddle, Ancho

Books (New York: Doubleday and Cdmpany, Inc., 1067), p. P“.

 

-22-

All this, combined with the need yet to document media effec—
tiveness with testimonials of overwhelming success in areas
of cost, learning, and consumer reaction, underscores the ne-
cessity of our understanding how personal and institutional
prejudices contribute to limited utilization.

B. Reasons for Limited Utilization. All faculty mem-
bers are not convinced of the worth of media. As a report
by Michigan State University's Learning Resource Panel11 re—
vealed, many recipients of media services do not consider
them necessary for instruction; rather, they utilize limited
services to support existing instruction.12‘ In the context
of Rossi and Biddle's observation that faculties use media
which do not threaten their teaching role, it becomes clear
that media services are most acceptable when they are con-
sistent with a professoris existing eXperiences, but in those
very circumstances, they are least likely to change their
reasons for media use.‘

Other factors limiting media utilization involve faculty
. preoccupation in the sense that they are unwilling to think

about media: For as Eichholz and Rogers speculate:

There is some reason to believe that a
person may either be a potential adopter

 

11A Report of the Provost Prepared by the Learning Re-
sources Advisory Panel, "Observations and Recommendations
on the Development and Use of Learning Resources at M.S.U.,"
Paul Dressel, Chairman (East Lansing: Michigan State Uni-
versity, March, 1962), pp. 709 (Mimeographed). (Herein-
after referred to as "Use of Learning Resources.")

12Such behavior is identified by Rogers as Compatibi—
lity: the degree to which an innovation is consistent with
existing values and past experiences of the adopters. See
Everett M. Rogers, Diffusion, p. 127.

 

-23-

or'a potential rejecter, approaching an
innovation with adopter or rejecterwsets.

 

The Joint Economic Hearings on Technologyll4 and the M.S.U.?s
Learning Resources Panel Report15 list these further reaSons:
. Information about media service has been scanty
with those bits of information that do get across

coming from sources with low credibility.t

. Since there is little incentive for a commercial
producer to supply materials of suitable academic
quality to a small market, faculty find inade-
quate resources for their needs just don't exist.

. Professors who do not order equipment and materi-
als do so because they believe that they would
become involved with time, which they feel could
be devoted to more important matters; and they
would encounter budgetary problems just enough to
question whether or not the academic need justi-
fies the expenditure. ‘

We shall explore the reasons for limited utilization a-
gain when we review barriers to using media. For now, suf-
fice it to say that these reasons range from psychological to
organizational. Such limitations can be obviated only if we
know what conditions and restrictions control utilization 7
process. But it takes rare skill to survey the possible per-
mutations of prospective solutions and emerge with just the

right plan to motivate a particular faculty.

 

13Eichholz and Rogers, "Resistance to the Adoption," pp.
310-312; italics mine.

luU.S., Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Technology
in Education, Wright Patman, Chairman, Joint Committee Print,
89th Cong}, 2nd sess., (Washington, D. 0.: Government Print—
ing Office, 1966), pp. 197-209. .

 

15A Report to the Provost Prepared by the Learning Re—
scurces Advisory Panel, "Use of Learning Resources," pp. 7-
26, passim. ,

C. Process of Utilization. Utilization has been con—
sidered a sequential process whenever constraints block com-
plete media adoption. And since there may be types of utili-
zation, it is well to attempt some ordering of the process
although an order implies greater differences than actually
exist; for such an ordering, when expanded, may bring to
light components associated with utilization which are worthy
of analysis.‘ Using conceptual schemes for descriptive pur-
poses, common practice in the physical sciences and some of
the social sciences, is somewhat uncommon in education.

For reasons not only of adequacy
but also of parsimony and elegance of
,thought, the ideal conceptual scheme at
any given time is that which has the
greatest generality, that is, the one
in which the number of conceptual cate-
gories or variables in terms of which

abstract general pigpositions are sta-
ted is very small.

We may base a conceptual scheme for describing the pro-

18

cess of utilization upon the ideas of Firm,17 Fritz, . and

Barson.19 Prom Finn we derive actual levels of media rela~

 

16Bernard Barber, Science and the Social Order, Collier
Books (New York: The Frés‘rress, 19527, p: 38f“

 

17James D. Finn, "A Possible Model for Considering the
Use of Media in Higher Education" Audiovisual Communication
Benign, XV (Summer, 1967). 153e157. , .

18John 0. Fritz, The Effect on Instruction of the Com-
plementary Use of Audiovisual Media with Modified Patterns
in the Use of'the Teaching Staff, Title VII Report, Grant No.
7311-068, 1963, The University of Chicago. (Hereinafter re-
ferred to as "Complementary Use of Audiovisual.")

19John Barson, A Procedural and Cost Analysis Study of
Media in Instructional Systems Development - Parts A and B,
0.3. Department of Health, Education and Welfare Report,
Grant No. 0E-3—l6-O30, 1965, Michigan State University. (Here-
inafter referred to as Procedural and Cost Analysis Study of

Media.)

 

tionships, frOm Fritz's research come their modes of applica-
tion, and from Barson comes the possible restrictions.

And so we begin our discussion of the process of utili—
zation with Finn's consideration of media relationships in_,
college instruction, a scheme enabling us to identify hypo-
thetical teaching situations for the instructor at various
stages of utilization:

The Tool Level: The tool level may be defined

as providing the instructor with certain devices

and materials with which he may do better what he

is already accustomed to doing. The prime example

of a tool level device (and the material to go

with it) is the overhead transparency projector. *
s a e s s s n a s e s s a s a e s s s e s a s s s

 

The Date Level: This concept refers to the
fact that information of all kinds is no longer
stored exclusively in conventional print form.
Data may be originally recorded on or transferred
to various forms of photographic, magnetic, or
even thermoplastic storage. * * * * * * * * * ‘ *

 

The Behavioral Control Level: Here we refer
to the area known as programmed instruction con-
sidered broadly (without commitment to a particu-
lar programming theory). It is characteristic of
all such programming that great energy is spent
on a rior basis encoding the content into some
form of program designed either to shape the be-
havior (mainly verbal) of the student on a con-
trolled basis or to lead the student through care-

fully planned sequences of subject matter branched
or unbranched. i i i § § l I k i i k l G i 5 i G *

 

The Research Level: The research level is the
complement of therdata level. The only difference,
really, is purpose, and, perhaps, time. Today,
many forms of instrumentation are used in research,
to record, to measure, to observe. Much of this
instrumentation is, in fact, communication tech-

nology applied to research instead of instruction.
1 a a a e s s e s I a s x s s s s n s s s a s s s

The Meaning Level: The term, "meaning level,"
is used to describe the applicability of a wide
range of educational media to the problem of build—
ing meaning into abstractions. In a simple case,

 

-26-

a motion picture might be used to convey a cer-
tain amount of concrete background so that a stu-

dent may build meaning into an abstraction. * *
s a s s a e a s e a e a s s s e s s a s s n s x.

 

The S stems Level: An interesting tendency
of the last decade has been a move toward the so-
called systems approach to instruction. Generally,
this has meant the creation of systems of instruc-
tional materials -— books, manuals, recording,
film, programmed materials, tests, etc., covering
an area of subject matter in a systematic way

designed to achieve rather precise objectives. * 20
s e s e e e a s e e e e s s s x a s s s t s w s x

Of course, the terms used in Finn's classification do not de~
velOp mutually exclusive categories, so communication prob—
lems could arise when consultant and client use the same de-
scriptive terms with different connotations.

Fritz's findings involve the professor's method of using
media. During a planned saturation study which involved sev-
eral high school physics departments, Fritz maintained that
effective use of media depends on the context in which they
are used. He suggests that media will prove more effective
in instruction if they are applied in the context of other
key determinants which may be represented within a context
of four basic patterns:

Complementary Role of Media: Their role is

seen as complementing rather than supplementing

the human resources in the school's program. Two

use formats are identified as "autonomous" and

"functionally relevant." Films and specially pre-

pared slide-tapes, when used in autonomous fashion,

can assume the burden of instruction on selected

occasions. Overhead projection and closed—circuit

television, when used in "functionally relevant”

ways, meet the unique communication demands of
formal instruction. * * * * * * fl * * s * * * t *

 

20Finn, "Possible Model," pp. 2 - 6.

.27.

Teacher Collaboration: Two teachers collabo-
rate continuously in implementing the instructional
program. This collaboration includes modification

of their traditional involvement in class activity.
a s s s s e a e e a e e e s s s s e a s x s s s s a

 

Variable Class Structure: Timely subgrouping

is introduced as suggested by prevailing teaching
objectives 5 s s s s s s s e e s s s x a e x

 

Free Access: An increased opportunity to use

instructional sources . . . to pursue independent
study.21 s e e s s s s s s s s s s e s a s x s s s

 

The strength of these dimensions lies in their total impact
on utilization. In an educational system where students as-
sume some responsibility for their own learning, the direc-
tions concerning how to use media are implicitly for in-
structional purposes.

But there are barriers, the foremost being the cost of
media utilization. A survey of instructional cost figures
undertaken by Jones et al. shows that such costs may be ana-
lyzed rather precisely:

. . . relationship can be established

between resource usage (i.e. costs, econo-

mic inputs) and the 'products' of a uni-

veristy . . . cost analysis can play a

part in evaluating alternatives for the

assignment of . . . resources.22
And this evaluation is the job of the media consultant. But
educational psychologists such as Krathwohl suspect that me-
dia people do not really know where they are going, that
they have no scientific basis for their decisions:

.v—w

21Fritz, "Complementary Use of Audio-Visual," pp. 102—
103.

zzBarson, Procedural and Cost Analysis Study of Media,
Part B, pp. A- 5

e -28.
We do not have enough psychological
knowledge for the teacher and the develop-
er of instructional materials to move with
certainty from an intermediate-level ob-
jective to a single set of very detailed
and concrete objectives . . . both the in-
structional material specialist and the
teacher precede the psychologist into an
area of most-needed research. They must
make choices while the psychologist is
still developing the knowledge to help
them.23
These aspects, both of cost controls and of the primacy of
experience rather than theory in most media consultant de-
cisions suggest that mundane problems of media utilization
impose significant restrictions on media classifications
and methods. Barson cited five such restrictions which he
and his investigators found were problems in instructional
development consultation. These restrictions are, (l) the
physical characteristics of the instructional space, (2)
the availability of equipment and technician services, (3)
the faculty member's time in regard to booking, production
or experimentation, (A) the suitability of existing resource
materials in terms of cost and time.2u
This conceptual scheme, based on Finn's levels of clas-

sification, Fritz's dimensions of use, and Barson's observed

 

23David R. Krathwohl, "Stating Objectives Appropriate-
ly for Program, for Curriculum, and Instructional Materials
Bevelopment," Journal of Teacher Education, XVI (March, 1965)

2“Quarterl Technical Report on a Procedural and Cost
AnalysisIStudy o Iwedia InInstructipnal,System’Developmenp,
Pau . Dressel, Chairman, Title VII U.S. Office of Educa-
tion Contract OE-3-l6-030, (East Lansing: Michigan State
University, period ending March 31, 1965), p. 11. (Herein-
after referred to as Quarterly_Technical Report.)

-29-
restrictions on implementation, seeks to provide a foundation
upon which other schemes may be constructed, in other words,
to start with simple constructs and then develop theories.
But before any process of utilization begins, those concerned
must know what to look for; media specialist and client must
know what aspects of both media are important to the kinds of
activities they want to perform. One key problem in under-
standing the process of utilization, therefore, is the deter-
mination of performance criteria in order to measure what has
changed.

Types of Change:

Performance measures are the norm against which a scheme
is evaluated: they may be defined points along scales of mea-
surement, or implicit in the statement of criteria. Perfor-
mance criteria for a scheme depend on the specialist and his
objectives. And since these criteria may conflict with one
and another, it is always necessary to choose from among
those criteria that are available.25 Performance criteria
represent changes. If the standards against which criteria
are evaluated range from discovery to institutionalization,
then we must place the criteria into the perspective of a

typology of change, such as the one suggested by Chin26 and

 

25Robert H. Davis and Richard A. Behan, "Evaluating Sys-
tem Performance in Simulated Environments," Psychological
Principles in System Development, ed. by Robert M. Gagne (New
York: HoItVRinehart and Winston, 1962), p. A9A.

26Robert Chin, "Models of and Ideas about Changing," in
Media and Educational Innovation, ed. Wesley C. Meierhenry
iIHfikoln,‘Nebraska:“The University of Nebraska Extension Di-
vision and the University of Nebraska Press, 196“). (Herein—
after referred to as "Ideas about Changing.")

-30-

eXpanded by Meierhenry:27

Substitution: The simplest form of change in
which one element is merely substituted for another
element already present.

Alteration: The change which appears minor
and thus is readily adopted even though the al-
teration can often lead to unanticipated effects.

Pertubations and Variations: Changes in the
performance of a given'clientis system which some—
times lead to temporary shifts in the system, but
not to a change in the structure of the system it—
self.

 

Restructuring: Changes which lead to modifi-
cations and’reorganizations of the structure of the
social system.

'RTE “Ii-6.1]... mam-.4337
4

Value Orientation Change: Changes which lead

to modifications and reorganizatiogs of the struc-

ture of the psychological system.2

Change itself is neutral. Its worth is measured in com—
parison with criteria that exist prior to the introduction of
something new. In the case of the overhead projector, for
instance, we could not attribute change to a professor who
merely redirects his writing arm from the blackboard to the
stage of an overhead projector. Similarly, change in a sat-
uration study is difficult to measure unless there are rea~
sonable criteria at the start. Fritz's study has implied
that increasing the technical power of instruction through
equipment and service without considering the purposes of the
change wastes money and time. Norberg expresses it thus:

"In order to change something we must know what it is we want

 

27Wesley C. Meierhenry, "Innovation, Education and Me—
dia," Audiovisual Communication Review, XIV (Spring—Winter,
1966),‘F§ilu57;

28Chin, "Ideas about Changing" pp. 6 - 12.

 

-31-
to change and whatform of change we desire to bring about.29
A technOlogy is effective only as concrete plans provide for
bringing constructive change into an organizational setting.
Utilization opportunities have little significance when they
only enable an educator to continue what he has already been
doing. Eboch's study of the Project Discovery events sug-
gests that many saturation Opportunities represent adminis-
trative rather than instructional changes:
Although the addition of resources

per teacher was a large 'change' for

the individual teachers, the use of the

equipment and materials was a conven-

tional practice for them. Regardless

of the amount of the available resources

teachers were doing primarily the same
things they had been doing.3 .

Identifying types of changes in terms of the optimum use of
media facilitates devising guidelines for introducing facul-
ty to media. .The scheme for utilization enables us to iden-
tify changes desired, our guidelines will become more of a
reality.
Guidelineszi

Observations about utilization and change suggest that
we can best minimize the problems of introducing media into

higher education by controlling the circumstances under which

v

29Kenneth D. Norberg, "Some Implications Drawn from pa—
pers Read at the Symposium," in Media and Educational Inno-
vation, ed. by Wesley C. Meierhenry (Lincoln, Nebraska: The
University of Nebraska Extension Division and the University
of Nebraska Press, 196A), p. 367.

30Sidney C. Eboch, Implementation of Research Strate«
gies and Tactics for Demonstrations of Newer Media, U.S.
Departmentmoffiealth, Education, and Welfare Report, Grant
No. OE-5-16-016, 1966) The Ohio State University Research
Foundation.

 

 

 

-32-
faculty are introduced to their use. Although media can
help solve instructional problems, the problems must first
be identified. That is why we must know how the media are
to be used instructionally before experimenting with usage.
Besides these instructional matters, certain broad guide-
lines must be adhered to if media are to be infused into
the instructional process.

Source Credibility: The right peeple must
sponsor the introduction of the media. * * * *

Proper Timing: Two time factors are impor-
tant. First, when the media are introduced to a
significant degree may determine their success or
failure. Second, the amount of time provided for
the introduction is important . . . . Time must
be allowed for familarization, for accommodation,
for changes in attitudes, for changes of roles
and habits of teachers, and for learning how to
use and learn from the newer media.

Perceived Needs: The introduction of the
media must“have clear relations to needs as per-
ceived by faculty members. * * * * * * * * * *

Competent Specialists: Many of the newer
media require the services of competent Specia-
lists. If these needed skills exist in the 'in
group' of the faculty, the introduction is made
easier; if the specialists do not exist in the
family and "outsiders" must be engaged, the in-
troduction is made more difficult.

Budget Considerations: The costs of the
newer media should’be provided as supplements
to regular instruction. *.* * * * * f * * * *

Service Operations: It is not only ad~
vantageous but also essential to have media
equipment systems that are reliable and work
well, when and where needed.31 * * * * * * *

Carpenter and Greenhill's recommendations have been

3ICarpenter and Greenhill, "Conditions of Learning,"

,,33-
substantiated in studies involving campus media services.
For example, Hubbard's suggested service operations coincide
with many of the preceding guidelines:

It is obvious that the Audio-Visual
Service must increase the efficiency of
the lines of communication and the effec-
tiveness of its services when such items
are considered by the faculty, users and
limited users, as important limitations.
Certain deterrents must seriously be
investigated by the Audio-Visual Service
in order to improve the total program.
These include such factors as difficul-
ty in getting the right material in the
right place at the right time, lack of
information on services and sources,
lack of appreciation and understanding
of audiovisual materials, and lack of
training in usingthese materials.

In the same manner, McIntyre's study verifies restrictions
regarding media finances and facilities:
Ninety-two per cent of the respond—

ents were adamant in their statement re-

garding the need to have the personnel,

fiscal support, and technical facilities

for the use of those aggiovisual materi-

als readily available.
In fact, in his final recommendations McIntyre refers to
media cost as a deterrent to use which can best be obviated"
by recourse to other funds. Carpenter and Greenhill make
this suggestion:

Any request by a faculty member for
audiovisual materials and services for

 

32Richard Dean Hubbard, "A Study of the Reasons Given
for the Limited Use of Certain Audio-Visual Materials at
Syracuse," (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Syracuse Uni-
versity, 1960), p. 80. (Hereinafter referred to as "Rea-
sons Given for the Limited Use.")

33McIntyre, Resistance to the Use, p. A9.

 

~3A—
classroom instruction should be honored
by the Bureau oguAudio-Visual Education
without charge.
Brown-and Norberg, on the other hand, underscore the impor—
tance of "getting the materials there, at the right time"

since teaching staff members who are experimenting with me-

dia are impressed with the media being there, caring little

...*TFF

about how it got there. To repeat, then, one quite impor-
tant guideline involves actual availability:

No matter how well trained or how ex-
perienced and skilled teachers may be, they
obviously cannot make effective use of the L
media unless the instruments of instruc- _ 1
tion are available and usable. The proper ““
media and materials must be there -- in
the right place at the right time. If
materials are to be projected, broadcast,
played, or displayed, the teacher must
have the necessary equipment in good
working order, the confidence to use t,
and technical assistance when needed.-

 

We have touched lightly on several guidelines which cover
the physical and the psychological needs, the matters of
cost and time and of peer approval. EThese guidelines thus
involve many elements whose interactions merely reflect the
larger problem of how best to allow faculty members to ex-
periment with media. Services offered by a media center
cannot in themselves generate change, since the services
are only as effective as the media actually put into op~

eration by the faculty. As with technology in general the

 

"r—

3“Ihid., p. 50.

35James W. Brown and Kenneth D. Norberg, Administering
Educational Media (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company I965),
p. 1622 iHereinafter referred to as Administering Educational

Media.)

 

 

 

, -35«
results depend most on what media is used for and how ef-
Afectively it is applied. As educational media are intro-
duced onto the campuses, the guidelines employed by media
consultants become more difficult to implement, since good
guidelines for utilization of educational media is primarily
a matter of human understanding, competence, and motivation.

If part of a professor's response to use has involved resis-

iii

tance and taken use, then one must investigate causes rather
than symptoms. So, guidelines must not be thought of only

as conditions and restrictions of use, but rather as reflec-

 

_ .4 __.._...

tions of a faculty member's feelings about use as well. 1;
Media Consultants as Change Agents:
Most studies imply that utilization of media services
can best be increased by controlling those circumstances
which affect a professor's frame of reference. When we con-
sider the role of the media center in instructional develOp-
ment, we generally emphasize only what a center must do in

order for faculty members to receive media support. Surveys
37

by Hailer36 and Hubbard, for example, neglect the plausibi—

lity of media personnel helping faculty members institute

instructional decisions:

The Audio—Visual Service must do
everything possible to make it easier for
faculty members to get materials, equip~
ment, and operators. This includes simple

 

36Harold H. Hailer, "A Study of the Role of the Campus
Audio—Visual Services on Providing Audio-Visual Materials"
(unpublished Ed.D dissertation, University of Wisconsin,

1955).

7 ,
3 Hubbard, "Reasons Given for the Limited Use," pp.
l-AO, passim.

—36-

ordering procedures; delivery and pick-
up service; efficient projectionists;
and easily available catalogs, bro-
chures, and special materials' lists .
. . Not only must the services be main-
tained, improved, expanded, but the
staff must be told and retold of the
service extended and available to them
in addition to the value of audigvisual
materials as educational tools.

Perhaps we must look into how the media consultant works
with his client. After all, our scheme of utilization has
assumed the competence of the media consultant to advise
his clients regarding the ways to use media.

Barson feels that there is really no one correct use of
devices, but rather a correct way to communicate with one's
associates. He advocates that studies investigate how far
the media consultant can relate to and consolidate the needs
of his client:

Study upon study has assessed such
subtlties as the open-mindedness of the
faculty, their resistance to change, and
other ways of seeking reasons for the
felt discrepency between potential and
usage. Few have had the insight and sta-
bility to examine their own activities
or house rather than look for faults in
the prospective user. This study changeg9
from the question; What's wrong with us?

In answer to this last question, we might propose that
media personnel attempt to cope with far too broad a range
of decisions with far too limited a basis in theory. As we

have already suggested, in most cases the "role of the me—

dia consultant is determined by the hard practicalities of
381bid., p. 157.

39Barson, Procedural and Cost Analysis Study of Media.
Part A‘—, p. 65.

~37;

cost and production.”0

His roles are many buthis functions
are few.. His roles, as envisioned by Berlo,“1 involved com-
municating with faculty in regard to instructional develop—
ment, while his function is to perpetuate his own existence

within the media organization. The specialist”2

helps his
client evolve innovative behavior in instructional tasks,

while the media specialist in a sort of symbiotic relation—
ship merely maintains his existence in the educational hier—

archy.“3 -In Berlo's opinion the assumption of new responsi-

 

bilities, although it implies risks, also means the enlarge-

'i

ment of the center's reason for being, namely the initiating

of educational innovations.M Thus the media specialist has

been termed a change agent,“5 which implies " . . . a pro-

 

a.

“OIbid., p. 9A.
ulBerlo, People Business, p. 9A.

“zsarson, Procedural and Cost Analysis of Media, Part A,
pp. 90—91.

u3Etzioni maintains that when an organization reverses
its goal -— that is, substitutes for its legitimate goal some
other goal for which it was not created -— the organization
makes the means a goal and the goal a means. The fact that
some college media services have gone from media support to
instructional development suggest a form of displacement of
goals. ,

For further information on "Displacement of Goals," con~
sult: Amitai Etzioni, Modern Organizations (New Jersey: Pren-
tice-Hall, Inc., 196A), p. 10.

uuBerlo, "People Business," p. 381

usThe media specialist as a change agent has been the
theme of such works as the following:

Wesley C. Meierhenry, ed., Media and Educational Inno-
vation (Lincoln, Nebraska: The University of Nebraska Exten~
sion Division and The University of Nebraska Press, 196A)

Anna L. Hyer, ed., "Convention Report 1965." Audio~
visual Instruction, X (June-July, 1965).

 

-33-

fessional person who attempts to influence adoption decisions
in a direction that he feels desirable."u6 Just why the me-
dia specialist is relied upon to offer instructional sugges-
tions is explained by Pellegrin's interpretation of role
theory:

Role theory assumes that for every
position or status in an organization or
other group setting, there are accompa-
nying role behaviors and normative expec—v
tations. The norms or rules indicate
to incumbents of positions what behavior
is appropriate for them and expected of
them. Normative expectations may be
formed or official, or they may be a
product of the informal groups to which
an individual belongs. Further implied
in role theory is that certain kinds of
behavior -- for example, innovation -—
are expected of incumbents of certain
kinds °£ positions but not expected of
others. 7

But accepting a change agent's role and fulfilling that role
are two different matters. In part we can explain the accEp—
tance of the position through role theory; the difficulty lies
in trying to describe this role as a social process which in-
cludes

A transactional relationship be—

tween source and receiver -- A message
must be the basis for that transactional

 

“6Rogers, Diffusion, p. 17.

“7Roland J. Pellegrin, An Analysis of Sources and Pro—l
cesses of Innovation in Education, Paper presented at the
Conference on Educational Change sponsored by the Demonstra—
tion Project for Gifted Youth and the U.S. Office of Educa—
tion at Allerton Park, Illinois, February 28, 1966 (Aller~
ton Park, Illinois: Demonstration Project for Gifted Youth,
1966), p. S. (Hereinafter referred to as Sources and Pro-
cesses of Innovation.) ’

 

-39-

relationship, and that message wgst be
transmitted in a symbolic code.

The role of change agentug necessitates the media consul-
tant's being trained to understand his client's personal
and situational needs. As pointed out by Gallaher, change
agent's ability to perform with his client depends upon re—
ciprocity: rs
For our purposes, we can assume
that the success of any directed cul-
ture change rests initially on the abil-

ity Of the advocate to convey the form,
meaning, and function of innovation to

 

1
potential acceptors . . . he must first E
have knowledge about the acceptors. The E
kind of knowledge . . . is that which ~~

comes from understanding the value sys-

tems through which the acceptors vieg

and understand the world about them. 0
The type of knowledge that Berlo and Gallaher speak of re-
quires many competencies besides that of an educational

designer and strategist:

 

uBDavid K. Berlo, "Instructional Communication and
Technology -- Converging Concepts," address delivered to
the Syracuse University Summer Conference on Technology
and Education, July, 1A, 1965, p. 5. Mimeographed (Here-
inafter referred to as "Communication and Technology.")

"9A relationship compatible with Sear's formulation'
that the behavior of each person -- e.g. the change agent
and his client -- is essential to the other's successful
completion of his goal-directed sequence of action. For
further information on the didactic sequence, see: Robert
R. Sears, "A Theoretical Framework for Personality and
Social Behavior," in Current Perspectives in Social Pey-
cholo ed. by Edwin P. Hollander and Raymond G. Hunt
(2nd ed.; New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1963),
pp. 168-167.

50Art Gallaher, Jr., "The Role of the Advocate and
Directed Change," in Media and Educational Innovation, ed.
by Wesley C. Meierhenry (Lincoln, Nebraska: The Univer-
sity of Nebraska Extension Division and the University of
Nebraska Press, 196A), p. 39.

-A0-
The instructional media strategist

must be a social scientist; in particular,

he should be a communication scientist.

He needs to understand the psychological,

sociological and social psychological as-

pects of human belief systems, he must

understand the variability that can be in-

duced into message-media events, he must

understand the scientific frame for analy—

zing communication transactions, and he

must understand and contribute to the

theories of various communication sub-

processes. That is the basic weakness

today within the field. That 1g the com—

petence which must be acquired. 1
Berlo and Gallaher are representative of those social beha-
viorists who contend that the role of a change agent has
not, as yet, been fully realized by the media specialist.
According to Berlo and Gallaher's observations, the role
of change agent may be unfulfilled52 because of insuffi-
cient training in the area of understanding a client's sys-
tem of values. And it would follow that without such ex-
perience in understanding the client's background that
change would be difficult to initiate. Such a point of
view may have passed away without a reply of a few years
ago, when it appeared that various institutions were re—
stricted in the scope and sequence of media programs. How-
ever, what with media programs taking on new directions --
especially in the areas of social psychology, business ad-
ministration, and computer sciences -- the role of the me—

dia professional is becoming more clearly defined in the

f

51Berlo, "Communication and Technology," p. 15.

52Unfulfilled on the part of the change agent to un-
derstand his client's needs will affect the agent's ef—
forts to secure change on the behalf of his client.

-A1-
task of initiating educational innovations. Faculty, admin-
istrative, media, curricular and learning theory personnel
are working together as teams to examine, appraise and rede—
sign instruction in a more systematic manner. All concerned
must show a willingness to accept and deal with the challenge
of helping others to improve the instructional process. And
perhaps one of the many ways to fulfill this challenge is to
better understand some of the personal characteristics of
one's clients which are involved in the utilization of media.
Antecedents:

Antecedents, or those factors present within the profes-
sor's thoughts even before the introduction of a new idea,
involve personal characteristics such as methodology, content
area, and value of academic autonomy, as well as situational
perceptions, such as compliances and norm incentives. Know-
ledge of both types of antecedents can aid our understanding
of why individuals behave as they do toward media. For exam-
ple, Barson's observations of faculty preference for commu-
nicative patterns led him to conclude that utilization pro-
cedures are to some extent determined by the professor's pre-
ferred method of instruction: "In most cases, either the
instructor has a 'pet method,’ or some logistic restriction
determines the final choice."53 Pellegrin finds it not at

all difficult to postulate a relationship between instructing

style and use:

 

53Barson, Procedural and Cost Analysis of Media, — Part
A "’ p. 880

-ug-

Role expectations permit the teacher
to be involved in the selection of curri-
culum content to a limited extent, but in
the main, the teacher is expected to have
autonomy primarily with regard to the
mode of presentation of materials.5“

Rogers transcends teaching styles by suggesting that teaché?
ers be classed in terms of innovative internalization, i.e.,
the extent to which a teacher perceives the innovation as
relevant and valuable to his role performance; innovation
internalization is the degree of a teacher's attitudinal ac-
ceptance of a specific innovation.55 McKeachie attributes
the effectiveness of a method to the enthusiasm and compe-
tence of the instructor; the style of presentation does seem
to have an influence on outcomes.

What can we say about the work of
the teacher? Clearly it is not possible
to detail in a few summary statements the
"best" methods of teaching. Nevertheless,
recent research suggests that decisions a-
bout teaching methods do have important
consequences in terms of differential
achievement of the differing objectives
of a course, differential effects upon _
different types of students, and pro— 1%
bable differential effects depending ‘
upon other factors such as the instruc-
tor, the course content, and the 0 er-
all "climate" of the institution.5

 

1'

SuPellegrin, Sources and Processes of Innovation, p. 6.

55Rogers et al. suggest that there is sufficient evi-
dence from their present study to posit "Innovation internali—
zation" as a significant concept for the study of innovation
diffusion in education; see e.g., his chapter on "Innovation"
Internalization": The Diffusion of an Innovation in Three
Michigan High SchoOis: Institution Building Through Change,
Michigan State University: Institute for International Studies
in Education and Department of Communication, 1966).

 

S6W.J. McKeachie, "Procedures and Techniques of Teach-
ing: A Survey of Experimental Studies," in The American College
ed. by Nevitt Sanford, Science Editions (New York: John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., 1962), p. 353.

i-A3-
Evans supports McKeachie's interpretive findings; for af-
ter administering semantic differentials to professors,
he concluded that methodology plays an important part in
instructing and evaluating:

In his approach to instruction, the
Pro-ITV professor will use a much great-
er variety of teaching methods than will
an Anti-ITV professor. Included in the
battery of teaching methods which the
Pro-ITV professors might be willing to
use are the following: Lecture method
with discussion groups; Correspondence
courses; Teaching machines; Class demon-
strations; Field trips; Motion pictures;
Supplemental television viewing; and
Television lectures; Furthermore, the
Pro-ITV professor is more willing to
express the need for training in teach-
ing, both for himeelf and for prospec-
tive professors.5

Course content, another personal characteristic, similarly.
influences the use of media. At the college level, Barson
remarks, "Progress was closely related to the instructor's
familiarity and depth with the subject matter."58 On the
public school level, Knowlton,59 Godfrey60 and Streeter6}
found that subject matter is associated with media utilie

zation. In fact, Streeter goes on to say, the subject

 

*1

57Evans, Hostility, Resistance, and Change, p. 73.
58Barson et al., Quarterly Technical Report, p. 9.
59Know1ton, Patterns of Influence, p. 51.

6oEleanor Godfrey, The State of Audiovisual Techno-
logy: l96l~l966, NDEA Title‘VII, Monograph No 3, Stock
No.: 071-02872, (Washington, D. 0.: National Education
Association: 1967).

61Streeter, "Factors Affecting Media Use," p. 83.

 

5AA-
taught is more influential than the teacher's media competen-
cy:
The preceding findings thus support

the conclusions of Godfrey, 'the most im-

portant variable related to extent of a

teacher's use of audiovisual materials

was the subject he taught,‘ and Knowlton,

". . . the subject a teacher taught turned

out to be a better predictor of frequency

of usage than attitude. 2 '
Knowlton has speculated that course content influences one's
personal characteristics significantly because the more com-
mercial materials are available, the more the teachers have
the opportunity to recognize and familiarize themselves with
that material. And after they acquire confidence about the
subject content, all that remains is finding a suitable ve-
hicle for transmitting the message. Such a relationship may
account for the link between some subject areas, such as
science, and usage.53 Still, such studies as Kelley's and
Wygal's throw doubt on this relationship. Kelley reports
that "The subject matter area in which a teacher works is
not significantly related to teachers' attitudes toward au—

[I614

diovisual materials, while Wygal's study of deans' iden-'

tification of innovative junior college instructors rejects

 

-621bid, p. 8n.

63Knowlton, Patterns of Influence, pp. 90~93, passim.

6“Gayl'en Berton Kelley, "An Analysis of Teachers' Atti-
tudes toward the Use of Audio-Visual Materials" (unpublished
Ed.D dissertation, Boston University, 1959), p. 108. (Here~
inafter referred to as "Analysis of Teachers' Attitudes to~
ward the Use.")

«A5—
the hypothesis that the instructors' teaching fields are re-

Ilated to their innovative ratings.65'

While we have no rea-
son to doubt these findings, we should note that Kelley's
questionnaire stressed questions that revealed more of one's
opinion than one's attitude.66 Hence one's Opinion of coh-
tent area is presumed to be based on cognitive beliefs rath-
er than a combination Of cognitive and affective beliefs.
And in Wygal's study, personal characteristics appear to be
weak variables for judging one's innovativeness in one con-
siders innovativeness as a descriptive process and usage as
an observed product.

A professor's value of autonomy is the last of three im-
portant components characterizing personal antecedents. Much

has been written about the teacher's autonomy in the class:

room.67 "Teachers have an expectation which they must main-

 

65BenjaminRaymond Wygal, "Personal Characteristics and
Situational Perceptions Of Junior College Instructors as re-
lated to Innovativeness" (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation,
The University of Texas, 1966), p. 5A. .

66Attitude is the predisposition of the individual to
evaluate some symbol or Object or aspect Of his world in
a favorable or unfavorable manner. Opinion may be at times
the verbal expression of an attitude although one should keep
in mind that "An Opinion typically represents a public atti-
tude -- but may come closer to private ones under increas—
ing conditions of privacy." For further information, see
Milton Rokeach, Beliefsl Attitudes, and Values (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, Inc., Publishers, I968), pp. 125-139.

67Russell M. Cooper, "Improving College Teaching and
Administration," in Higher Education: Some newer Developments
ed. by Samuel Baskin (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
1965), pp. 196- 222, passim; Joseph Katz, "Personality and
Interpersonal Relations in the College Classroom, " In the
American College, ed. Nevitt Sanford, Science Editiona (New
YEFk: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1962, pp. 365 - 395) pas—
sim.

 

—A6-'
tain," as Pellegrin et al. put it; "This expectation deals
with their teaching behavior in the classroom:"

It is clear that the teacher parti-
cipates almost exclusively in activities
pertaining to her own classroom, mainly
determining her own schedule and the
method Of instruction she will use. Fur-
thermore . . . and this may be surprising
to some ... the teacher believes that these
are the only activities in which other
teachers establish policy, and that these
are the only ones an which teachers should
establish policy.

Although these comments deal with public schools, Dale dis—
cusses similar feelings in the college professor who rejects
new media as a threat to his academic privacy and autono-
my.69 To acknowledge this form Of autonomy is to acknow-
ledge that media specialists may represent a threat. Berlo.
traces the reasons for this threat:

To understand one basis for your
credibility problem, let us look at in—
structional technology from the instruc-
tor's point Of view. TO many, it is
threatening and punishing. Effective
use of technology requires the instruc-
tor to specify his educational objec-
tives operationally. It requires him
to review his traditional content and
ask "why this?" as he teaches. It
requires him to relinquish considerable

 

68Pellegrin, Sources and Processes Of Innovation, p. 7.
The information cited is from a forthcoming book: Roland J.
Pellegrin and Keith Goldhammer, Power Structure and Deci—
sion-Making in the Local Community.

69Kenneth Norberg, "The New Media in Higher Education:
A Rationale," in New Media in Higher Education, ed. by James
W. Brown and James W. Thornton, Jr. iWashington, D. C. As-
sociation for Higher Education and the Division Of Audiovisu-
al Instructional Service of the National Education Associa-
tion, 1963) Edgar Dale cited on p. 1A. (Hereinafter re-~
ferred to as New Media in Higher Education.)

-47-.
‘ control over the activities engaging his
students, and raises the possibility Of 0
overt and perceptible failure on his part?
Hubbard's investigation supports Berlo's contention that me-
dia personnel represent a threat to faculty autonomy, find—
ing that faculty consider the lack Of media leadership to be
of little importance. Hubbard reasons that either the pre—
sent media administration is adequate Or college faculties
prefer to have as little administration as possible He con~
eludes,
This is all indicative Of a previous
statement that academic freedom is charac-
teristic Of university faculties . . . .
Any forceful attempt to improve instruc-
tion at the university level is taken by71
many as an infringement Of their rights.

Faculties sometimes go to such great lengths in protec-
ting their professional status, Or in using their profession-
al status to satisfy their desires for security, that they
neglect the legitimate needs of the institution. Certain
ideological beliefs serve to block effective innovation by
effectively insulating one from reality. Miles elaborates
on this point in connection with school teachers:

. . . that the teacher's role is actually
that Of a bureaucratic functionary who
has little power to initiate system-wide
changes, but -—- because of the ideology
concerning professionalism —-- tends to

resist innovative demands like most profes-
sionals in bureaucratic organizations.

 

17 v

7oBerlo, "PeOple Business," pp. 378-379.

71Hubbard, "Reasons Given for the Limited Use," pp. 1A7—
1A8.

72Miles, Innovation, p. 63A.

-A8—
Thus, in essence, the measures cOntrived for one purpose tend
to serve other purposes as well. Such a process is demon-
strated by faculty members who cling tenaciously to views
that technology prevents classroom interaction: ironically
they fail to display the very quality which they insist must
be maintained. Evan's study reveals that valuing autonomy is
related closely to hostility and resistance to change:
To the Anti-ITV professor, ITV also
Offers what appears to be a feasible threat
to job security; it has an undesirable ef-
fect on learning; and it limits teaching
techniques.
However superficially rational these
Anti-ITV concepts appear to be, the over-
all pattern Of what we have termed "objec-
tive" responses seems to suggest, never-
theless, the existence of a very keen
personal threat, not easily ignored, is
evidently seated more deeply in the
traditional social structure of the
university than would be imagined, and
possibly includes the professor's indi-
vidual epistemological concepts.73
We have seen how some personal characteristics, like.
teaching methodology, content area, and the value Of class-
room autonomy, may influence a person's predisposition td‘
respond. This again adds credence to the implied sugges-
tion from social scientists, such as Gallaher, Jr. and Berlo,
that a media specialist must understand his client's system
of values and beliefs if he is to induce him to change. If
he understands how change is structured within his client
even before that client is introduced to utilization, a me-

dia specialist can perhaps help his colleagues to overcome

 

73Evans, Hostility, Resistance, and Change, p. 95.

-ugi
a resistance to change. For as Zander contends:
Resistance will be prevented to the

degree that the changer helps the changees

to develop their own understanding of the

need for the change, and an explicit aware-

ness of how they feel about it and what can

be done about those feelings.74
In addition to personal factors present within a person's
thoughts long before the introduction of a new idea, ante-
cedents stemming from situations surrounding a person may
also hinder media utilization.75 Since antecedents can vary
more from situation to situation, than they do from indivi-
dual tO individual, Mann says, the more important variations
of behavior are based on situational factors.76 Within the
educational settings, either the institution or the indivie
dual may be the adopting agent.77 But in a special case

called contingent innovation,78 the decision is made at both

 

‘—

7“Alvin Zander, "Resistance to Change --- Its Analysis
and Prevention," in the Planning of Change, ed. by Warren.
G. Bennis, Kenneth D. Benne and RObert Chin (New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1961) p. 5A6.‘

 

75In this definition, "surrounding a person" can be con—
strued as social norms and social settings which are per—
ceived to be important due to sanctions such as compliance,
identification, and renumerations.

76John M. Mann, "Studies of Role Performance," Genetic
Psychology Monographs, LXIV (Winter—Spring, 1969), 287-367,
passim.

77Some educational studies involving the diffusion of
an innovation erroneously equate the adOption times for
the institution with the adoption times for the teaching
staff.

78Nan Lin et al., The Digfusion of an Innovation in
Three Michi an Hi h Schools: Institfition Building through
Chan e, Project on the Diffusion Of Educational Practices
in Thailand Research Report Number 1 (Michigan State Univer-

sity: Institute for International Studies in Education and
Department of Communication, December, 1966), p. 5A.

 

-50-
the organizational and the personal level, as for example
with the use of overhead transparencies. First the institu—
tion must decide to provide an overhead projector before
our hypothetical faculty member can begin to use transparen-
cies. Only after the institution provides the projector
can the individual faculty member adopt, reject, or adapt
and then discontinue at a later time the use Of overhead
transparencies. The media specialist may interpret the ac-
ceptance by our hypothetical professor as evidence Of his
commitment to using media, while in reality, had the equip-
ment not been present, this faculty member might not have
thought of trying it. In such faculty-media situations,
it is exceedingly difficult to establish direct links with
either personal or situational characteristics. Interesting-
ly enough, we do know that utilizing media tends more to be
internalized if the professor is primarily affected by per—
sonal characteristics; where situational characteristics in—
tervene, on the other hand, the prognosis is poorer. Rogers
emphasized the importance of distinguishing between personal
and situational characteristics:
I feel personality variables can, in

part, explain innovativeness, especially

in settings where compliance decisions are

not forced upon the individual by the so-

cial structure.79

When compliance decisions are involved, false expectations

 

79Everett M. Rogers, "Innovations: Research Design and
Field Studies," (Paper presented at the Conference on Novel
Strategies and Tactics for Field Studies Involving New Educa-
tional Media, the Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, May
10-12, 1965). p. 10.

, -51-
may seem to indicate a premature "readiness" for instruc-
tional change. ‘TO illustrate, suppose a media consultant
cannot determine whether a given faculty member's usage is
due to his selection of resources or simply to the presence
of materials made available by the administration. The cOn-
sultant might very well end up discovering that when his in-
structional problems are obviated, the instructor no longer
seeks media services.. Under such circumstances of social
compliance, utilization must be illuminated by a clearer un-
derstanding of the forces determining it. Limited utiliza-
tion may defy analysis when faculty members' perceptions
confuse institutional goals with personal interests. Media
specialists need guidelines about human behavior so they can
predict their client's attitude toward any given change.
For example, Apel's hypothesis states that.
Both 'effect on goals' and 'effects

on personal interests' are important de-

terminants of attitude toward changes;

therefore, it is necessary to consider

both before one can adequately pregéct

attitudes toward any given change.
Putting the matter another way, Sears suggests that if facul-
ty members consider good instruction a goal, then the media

specialist might develop ". . . expectancies that make the be-

havior of two people truly interdependent"81 by discovering

 

.fi fi

80John Dale Apel, Prediction Of Adult Educators' Atti—

tudes toward Institutional Chan es, U.S. Office of Education
Contract No. 656-5-6-668675—68AE, April 1967, The University
of Chicago, p. 3, (Hereinafter referred to as Prediction of _
Adult Educators' Attitudes.)

(BISears, "Personality and Social Behavior," p. 17A.

 

~u.v\) \

-52,
barriers hindering their access to that goal. Let us con—
sider therefore, some of the barriers needing to be overcome
in order to improve utilization. ‘

Berriers to UsingMedia:

A knowledge of barriers is helpful in planning admini-
strative and media service policies, and ultimately in pro-
viding opportunities fOr greater utilization. For example,
Hubbard advises that budgeting and classroom facilities are
barriers that media administrators can best attend to, while
improving services and materials are barriers best handled by

82 Information campaigns encourage

the audiovisual service.
ing media use may additionally grow from our identifying bar—
riers. McIntyre's study and the Knowlton and Hawe's study
presumably operated on the premise that information campaigns
could be designed in order to make the barriers seem less in—
surmountable. Of course, one important contribution which
the identification of barriers could offer would be a scheme
of classification for users and non-users of media.

Swineford identified four barriers: (1) teacher atti;
tudes, (2) quality and variety of academic experience, (3)
administrative provisions, and (A) emotional reactions to
materials. But his effort failed to discriminate between

users and non—users.83' Eichholz became interested in bar-

riers through investigating whether an educational lag can be

 

82Hubbard, "Reasons Given for the Limited Use," p. 8A.

83B. J. Swineford, "Obstacles in the Use of Audiovisuals,"
Educational Screen and Audio Visual Guide, XXXVIII (January,

1959) 19.

 

-53- _
studied through the rejection of new ideas rather than their
acceptance. .

Teachers do not seem to reject the
newer media per se. The rejection might
be considered a 'unit' rejection. The
various innovations making up the newer
media are accepted or rejected individu-
ally.8"

 

Separate studies by Hubbard and Knowlton support Eichholz's
findings. For Hubbard, the greatest deterrents to film use,

in order, were (1) inadequate room facilities, (2) poor qual-

 

ity, (3) lack of class time, and (A) prohibitive cost. And
from the same faculty, Hubbard obtained the following order
of deterrents to filmstrip use: (1) prohibitive cost, (2)
lack of class time, (3) out-dated materials, (A) inadequate
classroom facilities, and (5) the unavailability of equip-'
ment.85 Quite evidently the different media were evaluated
on different ordering of barriers because they perceived dif-

ferences in situations.

Knowlton similarly found that there is no one attitude

toward media:

Different types of vehicles surely
have different strengths and weaknesses.
If, among other things, these strengths
and weaknesses are correlated with the
kinds of restrictions vehicles place
upon the messages they can carry, then

*—

8"Gerhard Carl Eichholz, "Development Of a Rejection
Classification for Newer Educational Media" (unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1961), pp. 163, 16A.
(Hereinafter referred to as "Rejection Classification for New—
er Educational Media")

85Hubbard, "Reasons Given for the Limited Use," p. 86.

-5A._

a "generality hypothesis" is to be sharply

challenged. Thus, depending upon what is

needed to meet a particular instructional

objective, different sets Of values wégl

be placed upon the very same vehicle.
In an early investigation, Knowlton and Hawes reasoned that
there were at least two sorts of deterrents: (1) utilization
barriers, and (2) instructional inadequacies. Statements a-
bout media were divided into the instructional aspects Of me-
dia and the conditions or situations surrounding their use.
And they speculated that barriers influence teacher's atti-

tudes both toward media equipment and toward content material

within the media:

Let us assume, on the one hand, that
a person holds a negative attitude toward
instructional film. In this situation,
attitude (or motivational structure) must
be modified before anything else can be
done. In the second situation, attitude
is favorable but the expected behavior ~-
an increased use Of film in this instance
. . . fails to occur. In this case, the
competing motivations, caused by frustra-
tion in trying to overcome barriers to
usage. prove to be the stronger motiva-
tions.8

Clearly, the, attitudes toward media vary more from situation
to situation than they do from individual tO individual. At
individual interpretations Of the environment, deterrents may
be considered a function of the professor's antecedents and l
Of his expectations of a role.

Before claiming that barriers or deterrents are always

prejudicial, incidentally, we should note that faculty list-

 

86Knowlton, Patterns of Influence, p. 91.
87Knowlton and Hawes, "Helpful Predictor," pp. 155-156.

-55-
ings of barriers could be a set response, that they list bar-
riers which they think they should list. For a start, in his
investigation of those types of barriers which best separate
individuals holding positions on a continuum of attitudes,
Knowlton reports that ". . . 'tOO little money' and 'inade-
quate physical facilities' were responses that attracted al-
most everybody."88 And Hubbard's report as well calls atten—
tion to the possibility of a set response:
. . . 'the difficulty in getting the

materials and equipment at the right time

and in the right place.’ A great deal of

inconsistency is displayed here because a

phone call or memo or personal visit to

the Audio-Visual Service would get any

professor, any mateséal, any place at any

time he desired it.

As Hailer, Hubbard, Evans, and McIntyre all.found, facul-
ty members can identify and describe factors which limit uti-
lization. To name just a few: the unavailability of useful
materials, insufficient time for selection and utilization,
budget restrictions, malfunctioning equipment, inadequate
classroom facilities, and unfamiliarity with equipment. While
steps can be taken to remove many of these barriers, as the
guidelines attest, those in the field must still ask them-
selves, "Do media consultants understand why their clients
perceive the barriers that they do?" Perhaps the answer is

in the better understanding of attitudes. Knowlton and Hawes

reflect that an " . . . attitude may become more favorable

f,’ 17

88Knowlton, Patterns of Influence, p. 126.

89Hubbard, "Reasons Given for the Limited Use," p. 1A9.

 

-55-
(changed motivational structure) when mOre information is
acquired (changed cognitive structure).90 Given the vali-
dity of this statement, a professor's attitude toward a par-
ticular medium may improve when the physical barriers are
resolved. And needless to say, a professor's attitude to-
ward a particular medium may deteriorate when the physical
barriers remain unresolved. One's feelings toward media or
toward the convenience of having certain barriers lessened
could come through manipulating messages about a particular
medium or through removing some of the utilization barriers
associated with equipment in large classrooms. More impor—
tant than any of these, however, is how a professor believes
extra-media support may advance the institutional goals or
his personal interests. Such speculations explore further
the possible attitudes faculty may hold toward the use of
media.
Attitudes:

Definition. An attitude represents a motivational struc-

 

ture in the social-psychological realm. Essentially it is
the predisposition of an individual to evaluate some symbol
or aspect Of his world on a psychi continuum which ranges be-
tween favorable and unfavorable. Although not directly Ob-
servable, an attitude can be inferred from a persistent and
characteristic mode of reaction to an object and to the situ—
ation accompanying that object. In this review, we shall

adopt Rokeach's extended definition:

90Knowlton and Hawes, "Helpful Predictor," p. 155.

. -57-

« An attitude is a relatively enduring
organization of interrelated beliefs that de-
scribe, evaluate, and advocate action with re-
spect to an Object or situation, with each be-
lief having cognitive, affective, and behavioral
-components. Each Of these beliefs is a predis-
position that, when suitably activated, results
in some preferential response toward the atti-
tude object or situation, or toward others who
take a position with respect to the attitude ,
object or situation, or toward the maintenance
or preservation of the attitude itself. Since
an attitude object must always be encountered
within some situation about which we also have
an attitude, a minimum condition for social be-
havior is the activation Of at least two inter-
acting attitudes, one concerning the attitude 1
object and the other concerning the situation.9

Media attitude studies have traditionally been conducted

with populations from the public schools92 or universities,93

 

, 91R0keach, Beliefs Attitudes and Values,'p. 132.

92Kelley, "Attitudes toward the Use of Audio-Visual Ma—"
terials."

Eichholz, "Rejection Classification for Newer Educational
Media."

Knowlton, Patterns of Influence.

Guba and Snyder, MPATI Telecasts.

Duane Ronald Smith, "A Study of Elementary Teachers' Atti-
tudes toward, Beliefs about, and Use of Newer Instructional Ma-
terials," (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University of Pitts-
burgh, 1966). (Hereinafter referred tO as "Attitudes toward,j
Beliefs about, and Use of Newer Instructional Materials.") ‘

Tobias, "Dimensions of Teachers' Attitudes."

Edwin M. Bridges and Larry B. Reynolds, "Teacher Receptivity
to Change," Administrator's Notebook, XVI (February 1968). (Here-
inafter referred to as "Teacher Receptivity to Change.").

93Handleman, "Teacher Attitudes,"

Evans, Hostilit Resistance and Change.

K.M. Mahmoudi, he Relationship between 'Authoritarianism'
and Attitude toward Educational Television" (unpublished Ed.D.
dissertation, Indiana University, 1962). (Hereinafter referred
to as "Authoritarianism and Attitude.")

McIntyre,.Resistance to the Use.

Charles Goetzinger and”Miltine Valentine, "Faculty Attitude
toward Educational Television: A Survey Report and Preliminary
Analysis," The Speech Teacher, XV February, 1963), 127—130.

Delayne R. Hudspeth, "A—Study Of Belief Systems and Accep-
tance of New Educational Media with Users and Non-users of audio-
visual Graphics," (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1966). (Hereinafter referred to as "Belief Systems
and Acceptance Of New Educational Media.")

 

-53-
but always with the same gOal, determining why educators
hold the-attitudes they do toward media. Each of a number
of scholars has considered social and psychological compo-
nents, both thought to be fundamental to the development
Of attitudes. And the studies we shall review each suggest?
that the formation of attitudes toward media somehow relates
to theories of personality development, and that faculty
behaviors are based on attitudes toward media and toward
situations, although we are most interested in behavior—
al rather than attitudinal changes. Our review immediate-
1y suggests that many attitudes toward media are related in
rather specific ways to particular situations. For instance
a professor's beliefs regarding message content, message
transmission, and medium control might well influence his
attitude toward media. Beliefs regarding the conditions
of media use and especially the restrictions and barriers

related to use, are thought to influence one's attitude tog

i.
L]

ward the media situation. H
We shall now review those media studies which relate
to any Of the three aspects Of an attitude discussed by Katz:

(1) source, in the sense of develop-
ment, (2) function, related to the ways in.
which attitude are integrated in behavior,
and (3) change, having to do with the way
new experiences become incorporated in an
already existing logical-psychological
system.

9“Daniel Katz, "The Functional Approach to the Study of
Attitudes," in Current Perspectives in Social Psychology, ed.
by E. P. Hollandér and—Raymond 5. Hunt 2nd"edition; New York:
Oxford University Press, 1963, pp. 3AO—350, passim.

-59-

Each aspect introduced relevant informationneeded to under-
stand the meaning of attitude; and under each aspect we shall
seek to bring research findings to consonance with attitude
theories. Finally we shall refer to scale judgments which
have been used to describe generalized attitudes toward me-
dia, mentioning specifically the questionnaire used in this
study.

A. Attitudes and Development:

Considered in its developmental aspect, an attitude to-
ward media is acquired either as a means for reaching a de—
sired goal or as a means for avoiding an undesirable one.
Take the hypothetical case of a professor who favors some
form of media for enhancing his presentation but becomes dis-
illusioned by mechanical failure. Here the development Of an
attitude depends on the professor's perceptions of the prace
ticality of the medium: there are attitudes toward the medium
(an overhead projector) implying feelings toward the message
or the vehicle for the message, and on the other hand there
are attitudes toward the situation, including the performance
of the equipment, inconvenience in front Of class, and sanc-
tion of media by the department. We are more likely to be
aware of the professor's attitude toward the medium since it
is easier to codify one's feelings and expressions toward a
concrete object, and since we have better scales to measure
". . . attitudes toward objects, across situations, than in

the theory and measurement of attitudes toward situations, a«

cross objects."95 Tobias study " . . . Offers continuing

_,

95Rokeach, Beliefs Attitudes and Values, p. 119.

_ “5°:
support for the idea that the threat of automation is of
some.importance in the attitudes of teachers toward educa-
tional media."96 But is the threat of automation related,
to the medium itself, or to the situation where the thought
of lost autonomy produces a feeling Of threat? In the‘
Tobias study, the negative feelings were a compound Of two

attributes:

. . . the content area from which the
terms are drawn (programmed instruction, or
audio-visual education), and the degree to
which the terms connote replacement of the
teachers instructional function . . .9

Introducing faculty members to media under favorable
circumstances encourages what Rokeach terms "the degree of
articulation of the various beliefs within the organization;"
that is, the more one learns and the greater the correct
knowledge possessed about the attitude, the better the pro—
bability of interrelated beliefs that describe, evaluate,
and advocate action with respect to an object or situation.
Perhaps this is what Greenhill meant when he says " . . . .

people are often down on things they are not up on."

Several studies have indicated that
one way of gaining increased faculty ac-
ceptance of instructional television is
to involve faculty members actively in the
planning and conducting of an experiment
in the use of television for teaching a
course in their own discipline.98

 

96Tobias, "Dimensions of Teachers' Attitudes," p. 98.
97Ibid., p. 108.

98Leslie P. Greenhill, "Review Of Trends in Research on
Instructional Television and Film," Research in Instructional
Television and Film," ed. by J. Christopher Reid and Donald W.
MscLennan (WaShington D.C.: Bureau of Research, Government
Printing Office, 1967), p. 12. (Hereinafter referred to as
"Research on Instructional Television.")

-614
Group meetings and formal method classes might help faculty
restructure certain beliefs held about media; but the infor—
mation campaign
. . . appears to have a propor-
tionately greater effect in weakening
the perceived strength of barriers than

in enhancing the perceived worth of
audiovisuals for instruction.99

As Rokeach explained, attitudes display a "compartmentaliza-
tion of parts within a psychological whole whenever two or
more parts within a whole are . . . not seen to be inter—
related with one another."100 Thus, a faculty member could
accept instructional television but feel hostile toward com-
puter-aided instruction. Apparently changes in the beliefs
about an Object do not necessarily correspond with changes

in the beliefs about a situation. Knowlton remarks of teache

ers who were familiar with television,

The threat that television apparen-
tly holds for some teachers . . . at
least initially . . . seems to have very
little to do with the medium as such,
but a great deal to do with the way the
medium is used.101

Here thedevelopment of an attitude toward instructional
television was influenced by an attitude toward the situation
in this case regarding autonomy. Hudspeth points out the
difficulty of measuring attitudes toward media due to this

categorization Of parts:

Apart from the semantic problem
wherein 'attitude-toward-object' has

 

99Know1ton and Hawes, "Helpful Predictor," p. 15A.
100Rokeach, Beliefs Attitudes and Values, p. 117.

101Knowlton, Patterns Of Influence, p. 98.

-62..
a rather specific meaning for members
Of the measurement profession, the
situation exists where the feeling
of an individual toward specific tools
(i.e., a 16 mm projector, is not the
same as a more general attitude to-

ward an abstract 'system' of educa-
tional media.102

And any "compartmentalization and differentiation" of atti-
tudes exposes the logically contradictory beliefs about me-
dia held within each faculty member's belief system. In
his indepth study on faculty resistance tO change, Evans
acknowledges
A clear instance Of some individu-

als displaying a rather isolated attitude

(relating specifically to ITV) and other

individuals expressing a high interrela-

tionship among attitudes (ITV as related

to the individual and his academic environ-

ment).103
Each of these three critics Observes, about an attitude that
it can be influenced by one's perception Of the situation,
that it can be compartmentalized, and that it could reflect
logically contradictory beliefs within the belief system.
Each reflects a different manner in which beliefs are organ-

9

ized and structured: for Obviously any faculty member, on
being exposed to media, has a variety Of attitudes toward
media which are based on perceived information and his abil-
ity to arrange these bits of information suitably.
B. Attitude Function:

When confronted with media, the professor unfamiliar

 

102Hudspeth, "Belief Systems and Acceptance of New Edue
cational Media," p. 73.

103Evans, Hostility, Resistance,,and Change, p. 66.

-639.
with them may try to wrestle with various restrictions, but
have limited success. At this stage, his acquiring of be,
liefs could give overall meaning to what might otherwise
appear as confusion: attitudes toward media, that is to
say, are formed through over generalizations which provide
order and clarity within a bewildering set of complexities.
This function of satisfying One's needs can be clarified
by organizing personality development into types of beliefs,
into the cognitive structure Of dogmatism.

Rokeach's analysis of types Of beliefs (ranging from
primitiveto inconsequential beliefs)10u acknowledges that
the more closely these beliefs bring actual need satisfac~
tion, the greater the probabilities that positive attitudes
will be formed; that is, the more closely the sets of be—
liefs selected approximate one's sense of reality and self-
esteem, the more the attitude (toward media, for instance)
will remain stationary. The closer the sets of beliefs
selected resemble one's identification with authority and
one's acceptance of compliance situations, then the less;
one's attitude toward media matters. Eichholz validates
this functional notion about attitudes on the basis that
teachers selectively reject media in order to protect their

selféimage:

The basic idea . . . that if the
innovation does not fit into the stereo-
type, or the image, or the role the teach-
er is playipg5 he will be and will remain
a non-user.

‘—

10"Rokeach,sBeliefs Attitudes and Values, pp. 3-13.

105Eichholz, "Rejection Classification for Newer Educa-
tional Media," p. 55. ”

-5u-

This finding supports the-proposition that the less one
perceives media to be important, the less one's beliefs
associated with it are likely to matter. The uncertainty
of one's need for media, combined with the lack of infor-
mation proving its contribution to the instructional pro-
cess, produces non-usage of media. In this sort of situ-
ation, the media specialist can do the most good. As Berlo
found, " . . . it useful to characterize the source-receiv-
er system as a set Of related constructs; i.e., as a belief
system . . . to alter the state of the belief system."106
In short, the media specialist and client work together in
allowing 222$! belief systems to become Open to alteration.

The second way in which personality development deals
with dogmatism depends on two assumptions about faculty memi
bers: (1) that they have a set of expectations for their
role and a set Of preconceptions about what constitutes ap-
propriate and inappropriate role performance, and (2) that
they differ in their ability to integrate new beliefs into-
their system which contradict their everyday belief system.
Rokeach contends that the belief-disbelief system theory,
as it relates to belief structure and content, is a general
personality theory made operational to some extent by his
Dogmatism Scale which purports to measure how beliefs are
held by an individual. The concept of dogmatism also in-
volves how variOus individual beliefs are interrelated with-

in a person's larger system Of beliefs. Theoretically, the

 

106Berlo, "Communication and Technology," p. 7.

-65-
highly dogmatic (or closed-minded) person has a relatively
undifferentiated belief-disbelief system within which one
can scarcely separate one belief system or subsystem from
another.

In studying how attitudes toward media relate to 22g:
matism, Hudspeth reports an overall correlation of .29 be- '
tween attitude and dogmatism; but including only high users
of graphic materials, Hudspeth arrived at a cOrrelation of
.A7.107 Interestingly enough, he failed to obtain a signi—
ficant correlation between high usage and Open-mindedness,
even though high usage was correlated significantly with
favorable attitude scores. Presumably the .29 correlation
represents that component of a belief involving a way of
performing a certain procedure, while the .A7 correlation
represents those high users of graphics who hold advocative
as well as connotative and affective beliefs. Measuring
these components may suggest better ways of integrating at—
titudes toward media with attitudes toward instructional I
situations, especially since there were so many higher users
with favorable attitude scores. The fact that there were
also many high users who were closed-minded merely points
up the effect of role expectation or compliance sanctions.
Although his dOgmatism determines the extent to which a per—
son can receive, evaluate and act on relevant information
unencumbered by irrelevant factors, it is not by itself an

index to one's use of media.

 

107Hudspeth, "Belief Systems and Acceptance of New Edu-
cational Media," p. 7“.

-669
If dOgmatism by itself is not a predictive variable
'for explaining one's use of media, then it should be con-
sidered as.a predictive variable for ascertaining one's re-
ceptiveness toward media. For example, Bridges and Reynolds
report that dogmatism may account for some of the variance
in subjects reported receptive to change:

The apparent consistency of these
studies increases one's confidence that
dogmatismppd receptivity to change are
related. The practical as opposed to
the statistical significance of these
findings is quite limited, however, since
so much of the variance in'regeptivity to
change remains unexplained.10

 

And Evans acknowledges that dogmatic beliefs are powerful in
developing a professor's frame of reference, findings in
accord with Rokeach and Festinger's theoretical postulate
that an understanding of beliefs and dogmatism is necessary
in any attempt to contemplate how attitudes influence a per«
son's behavior.109 Certainly media specialists have much to
gain from understanding the development of those attitudes:
toward media which preserve what their clients believe to i
be true. We know that even with group involvement and spe-
cial information campaigns, faculty members still can or-
ganize and structure their system of beliefs only in a man-
ner which is consistent with their own psychological system.
Many come through overgeneralization of beliefs, which are

linked with those beliefs deemed inconsequential. It's no

 

r

108Edwin M. Bridges and Larry B. Reynolds, "Teacher Re-
ceptivity to Change," Administrator's Notebook, 3 XVI (Febru«
ary, 1068), N.C. '

Inn

 

Hvunn, Hostility, Hnnintnncv, and Change, p. 1A.

g -67-

wonder that McKeachie writes:
Except for the minority of fac-

ulty members who have been actively

involved in preparing materials for

and using the newer teaching media,

faculty memberslisem to be distrustful

of their value.
Add to this the fact that most attitudes have some inter-
personal antecedents such as conformity to social norms re—
garding innovativeness, that the professor's views are sta-
bilized by his perception of the attitudes others appear to
have and it follows that new information cannot modify ex-
isting attitudes without there being some inadequacy or in—
consistency in the existing attitudinal structure as it re—
lates to the perceptions of new situations.

For in fact faculty members often have predispositions
to act while being simultaneously influenced from many dif—
ferent sources. To assume that attitudes toward media are-
too confusing to cope with is to refuse to work with peOple.
Attitude and behavioral change can indeed be researched, gs
evidenced by Knowlton's studies on relationships between 5
attitude, on the one hand, and knowledge, usage, perception
of deterrents, and academic content.111
C. Attitude Change and Behavioral Change:

The most general trait we can isolate which describes
the conditions conducive to attitude change is that express-

ing the old attitude no longer satisfies the related need

state. As they influence attitudes, comparative beliefs

“—

lloMcKeachie, "New Media and Education," p. 311.

111Knowlton, Patterns of Influence, pp. 3u-51, 9&551m-

-6 8..
take shape against a whole complex of similar beliefs re—
garding similar objects, as they have been perceived and
categorized within the professor's experience. Needless
to say, the attitudes most resistant to change are those
invoking beliefs associated with the professor's sense of
reality and self-esteem. In a review of the socia1~psycho—
logical literature, Rokeach notes that few studies report
actual attitude change:
That Festinger and Cohen find vir—

tually no studies in the experimental

literature showing behavioral change

following an attitude change only

serves to reinforce my suspicion that

most current experimental studies on

opinion change do not deal with true

attitude change, but with superficial

opinion changes.
This distinction between attitudinal and behavioral change
is based upon concepts implied within their definition. At-
titude change, for instance, involves possible changes in
either the organization or the structure or the content of
beliefs. But behavior change involves possible changes in
attitudes toward the object or the situation or toward both
or toward neither.

Attitude changes may be inferred from altered concepts

about reality, altered constructs and propositions about
value, or altered acceptance of various propositional re—

lationships.113 To assess attitude change, we must test

for opinion change across different situations, changes of

 

11‘G‘Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes_and Values, p. 18?.

1131b1d..pp. ins-155, passim.

ua
1a

or.

 

.51.

mil

-69-‘

several opinions in one situation, or other behavioral chan-
ges accompanying a given opinion change.llé Behavior change
is inferred from the relationships between attitude-toward-
object and attitude-toward-situation (to be called A0 and

As respectively). The more important A0 is perceived to be
with respect to As, the more the behavioral outcome will be
a function of A0. And conversely, the more important AS is

perceived to be with respect to A the more the behavioral

o)
outcome will be a function of AS.115 The distinction be-

tween attitude change and behavior change is useful for eval-
uating faculty usage patterns, since behavioral changes may
only be temporary and cease after the period under surveil—
lance. Note that Evans writes about the department's be-
havioral change rather than a professor's attitude change . .
. . . after an experiment to reduce "dissonance" toward in—
structional television:

The most significant results of
the present investigation, in be-
havior rather than cognitive terms,
is the fact that (1) of the two de-
partments involved, one subsequently
began offering a telecourse, a move
which the department had previously
rejected, and (2) the other depart-
ment spontaneously began using some
of their own video-taped material
as a supplemipg to traditional teach-
ing efforts.

This review on the relations existing among faculty attitude,

 

11“Berlo, "Communication and Technology," pp. 7-8.

115Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values, p. 137.

116Evans, Hostility, Resistance, and Change, p- 91-

-70-
attitude change, and behavioral change is necessarily incom-
plete, having neglected other kinds of change, as in values
in ideology and in total belief systems. Although sooner or
later these must be considered, there are no references to
these forms of change in media attitudes toward education
except briefly in Evans's study of hostility, resistance and
change. For the present, we shall have to be content to as-
certain whether a given media attitude or media behavior has
undergone change, a problem which involves questionnaire con-

struction and measurement. ,

 

Attitude Measurement:

An attitude, as just defined, is a relatively enduring
organization of beliefs about an object or situation which
predisposes one to respond in some preferential manner. .The
judgment of a belief relative to an attitude involves com-
parison on some appropriate reference scale:

. . . the judgment of items re-
lated to an attitude involves place-
ment in terms of the individual's re-
ference scale, but it becomes place—
ment in which the degree of Eigeptance
or rejection is significant.

117Muzafer Sherif and Carl I. Hovland, "Judgmental Pro-
cesses and Problems of Attitude," in Current Perspectives in
Social Ps cholo , ed. by Edwin P. Hollander and Raymond G.
Hunt I§na ea.; fiew York: Oxford University Press, Inc. 1963),
P. 397.

Rokeach's notion of an attitude-toward-object being
manifested along a range of values is not the same idea as
that expressed by Sherif and Hovland's notion of psychologi-
cal scales based on psycho-social actualities. Rokeach's
distinction is found in Beliefs, Attitudes and Values,. p.

135.

 

-71-
additive concepts of Thurstone, with equal appearing inter-
vals and a continuum process for attitude measurement in
which the items range from a positive to a negative ten—
dency.

And Knowlton and Hawes have produced statistical evi-
dence to suggest that the method of equal appearing inter--
vals (as used by Kelly) can be affected by the position of
the teacher making the evaluation:

The results indicated that instruc-
tionally relevant scores were originally
higher than were the instructionally non-
relevant scores (p = .00006, two tailed
(Wilcoxon) test). It seems plausible,

therefore, to assume that Kelley's aiiéw
tude scale lacks uni-dimensionality.

In short, all the peOple measured may not have the same de-
gree of acceptance or rejection. One should consider judg-
mental variations attributable to parameters of acceptance
or rejection based on attitudes-toward-situation. The "po—
sition" of the teachers making the evaluation relative to
open-end and closed-end questions about media was taken by
Knowlton and Hawes toexplain the fact that:
. . the number of times in-

structionally non-relevant items were

named as deterrents significantly ex-

ceeded the number of times instruc-

tionally relevant items were so de-
signated.119

Smith further supports the interpreting of attitude measures

 

118Knowlton and Hawes, "Helpful Predictor," p. 15“.

119
Ibid., p. 149.

-72-
by the individual's expression of his attitude:
The attitude scores appear to have
the same direct relationship to belief
scores as beliefs had toward the atti-
tude scores. In this situation, low
belief scores are indicative of low
attitude scores, but not necessarily
of a low frequency of variety of use
score.1
Perhaps this can be interpreted to mean that even when a
teacher's value of media is low, it is still practicable to
exploit his attitudes as far as possible. From the view~
point of conceptual analysis, we can differentiate the judg-
ment process (which concerns the evaluative, affective and
directive components of belief) by comparing attitude scores
with one's feelings about the value of media, thus, invol—
ving the judgment of an item relevant to an attitude, making
the appropriate link with the worth of media.

‘ The development of Newer Media Attitude Scale - II,
more commonly known by its subtitle as, "Controversy in Aca—
demicia," was constructed in order to confirm the hypothesis
that:

"Curriculum and supervisory per~
sonnel, and audio-visual workers have
significantly different mean scores on
a measurement of attitude toward the

uses of newer educational media."121

And the NMAS - II questionnaire, with its 39 randomly selec-

 

ted items gauged on a Likert-type scale, did discriminate,

" . . . between individuals possessing attitudes hostile to

1208mith, "Attitudes toward, Beliefs about, and Use of
Newer Instructional Materials," p. 85.

121Ramsey, Measure to Assess Attitudes, p. 3.

f73-
or in sympathy with the uses of newer educational media for
instructional purposes."122 Specifically distinguishing the
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (A.S.
C.D.) group from the Department of Audio Visual Instruction
(D.A.V.I.) group. Interestingly enough, as Ramsey reports,
their responses show the D.A.V.I. to be a much more hetero—
geneous organization than the A.S.C.D. In seeking to ex-
plain this, Ramsey first noted that the constructed ques~
tionnaire contained three sorts of statements:
(1) an item which is pure advocacy.

. . . suggesting a point of view or a way

of doing a certain procedure; (2) an item

of belief about which one may either ex-

press a favorable or unfavorable attitude;

and (3) a statement which contains elements

of fact to be accepted or rejected.123
When analyzing the returned questionnaires, Ramsey found
that it was the last sort of statement . . . . elements of
fact .‘. . which enabled persons with the most information
about a particular item to exhibit greater variability of a
response than did those with more restricted information.:
And he concluded " . . . that the more information a group
possesses in regard to a particular topic in the attitude
measure, the more variable would be the attitude reSponses
to this item."12u Ramsey further claimed that the three
sorts of items included in NMAS - II resemble Rokeach's

description " . . . of interrelated beliefs that describe,

 

192Ib1d, p. 12.

1231bid, p. 18.

12“Ib1d., pp. 18—19.

-7u-

evaluate and advocate action. . . "125 The fact that media
'people'disagree among themselves thus reflects the evalua-
tive component that makes up their beliefs regarding an atti-
tude toward media.

Although the NMAS - II could distinguish groups of in—

 

dividuals possessing favorable and unfavorable attitudes to—
ward media, the research project could not: (1) compare their
questionnaire with another appropriate reference scale, and
(2) correlate their attitude assessment findings with criti-

cal analysis of Ramsey's U.S.O.E. Title VII project ended

 

as follows: "You might find it wise to check on the relia-
bility of the test, and to see how scores on it relate to
actual new media use."126 Not until Cuba and Snyder demon-
strated that their modified version of NMAS - II could be
compared with another appropriate reference did the M3133
Educational Media Acceptance Inventory (NEMA) attain any
degree of acceptance as a test for general attitudes toward
media. While studying the attitudes of elementary school
teachers toward the use of instructional television, Guba
and Snyder decided that attitudes could be assigned to one
of two possible categories: "specific attitudes toward in-

structional television, and more generalized attitudes toward

 

125Rokeach, Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values, pp. 119—118,
passim.

126Malcolm S. MacLean, Jr., "Critical Analysis of 12 Re—
cent Title VII Research Reports," in "Research Abstracts and
Analytical Review of Completed Projects: National Defense
Education Act," Title VII, Installment N, Audiovisual Commu—
nication Review,L (May-June, 1962) A~100.

j -75- .
the new media generally, e. g., teaching machines, films,
slides, tapes, etc."127 And they adapted Ramsey's instru-
ment to the task at hand. First, terminology and items
deemed unsuited to their audience were dropped, reducing the
number from 39 to 23 items; the items retained were re-writ-
ten to up-date their meaning. Second and more important,
the original five-point Likert scale was changed to a six- ‘
point Likert scale. The resultant form of the NEMA provided
a complete item analysis. Mean scores significantly dis-
criminated users from non-users on items 5, 6, 17, 21, 22,
and 23. 1
Finally, and most importantly,

we may note that the using group dis-

plays a substantially and significantly

more favorable attitude toward the newer

educational media than does the non-using

group. For the 23-item test the t-value

is n.3u which, with 571 degrees of free-

dom és significant beyond the .001 lev-
el 012

The data thus collected with the NEMA show that users of in—

structional television have a significantly more favorable

attitude toward the newer educational media than does the non-

using group. This fact, plus the fact that Hudspeth could

demonstrate that,

Faculty members who are considered
users of graphics in teaching will have a
more favorable attigude toward all educa-
tional media. . . 9

 

127Gub8 and Snyder, MPATI Telecasts, p. 59.

1281bid., p. 62.

129Hudspeth, "Belief Systems and Acceptance of New Edu—
cational Media," p. 69.

V" .0- - c-u

.J‘i:

 

‘Jlfrfl~ v ‘hio. 2‘

~76.
suggest that_§§!§ can be used to identify those faculty mem-
bers having a more generalized attitude toward all the media.
Summary: ‘ l _

Various research studies suggest that if a media center
is to promote and even generate educational innovation, then
the staff must be qualified in helping faculties overcome
barriers that influence attitudinal changes and patterns of
instructional usage. The work of Carpenter and Greenhill,13o
Barson,”1 Berlo,132 and Gallagher, Jr.133 suggests that we
must not consider only external conditidns which restrict use,
but internal feelings about use as well. Very little work I
has been undertaken along these lines —- although barriers‘
themselves have been explored. ‘

Such barriers as identified by the Joint Economic Hear-
ings on Technology and the Michigan State University's Learn-
ing Resources Advisory Panel Report13" and as identified in
Hubbard,135 McIntyre,136 and Knowlton and Hawesl37 can be

 

13°For cross-references to other portions of this paper,
the term Supra will be employed (See Supra, P. 32. ).

131§22£e; p. 36.
132§gggg. pp. 37-39.
133m, p. 39.
mm» P- 23-

135Supra, p. 33.
Supra, p. 33-
Supra, p. 5".

277-
partially controlled by getting the needed materials there
at the right time and in satisfactory condition." Brown and
Norberg have pointed out that
If materials are to be projected,
broadcast, played, or displayed, the tea-
cher must have the necessary equipment in

good working order, the confidence to use
it, and technical assistance when needed.138

But there is more to the problem of utilization than just ma-
nipulating equipment and assistance. In addition to the psy- ‘
chological setting. For example Briggs,139 Pellegrin,“O ‘
Hubbard,“1 Rogers,1u2 and Eichholz”3 all suggest that such
personality characteristics as one's view of methodological
approaches, academic autonomy, instructional compliances, and

m

content information may influence one's views about media.

In line with Rokeach's ideas about behavioral changes,“5 it
appears that attitudes toward media grow out of qualities

which pertain to personality development, or in other words,
that beliefs about media are often a way of protecting one's

self-esteem from reality.

 

61388rown and Norberg, Administering Educational Media,
p. l 2.

139

 

Su ra, pp. 20 - 21.
1140 u ra, pp. 38 and 142.
“I u ra,‘p. ll7.

1"'2Su ra, p. 50.

”38‘: ra. p. 53.

HFFF

1Milt is worthwhile to consider content as a possible
variable which includes one's views toward methodology and
autonomy. Suppose one's familiarity and depth with subject
matter is related with one's self-esteem. Perhaps then, there
is greater likelihood that disciplines with scientific para—
meters lend themselves more toward familiarity and depth then
with disciplines with non—scientific parameters.

1u5Supra, pp. 68-69.

.-73-

Nevertheless, the situation has its effect. And .
Steininger,”6 Mann,“7 Apel,“8 Rokeach“9 and Hudspeth150
all suggest that the more important variations in behavior
are based on situational factors. Knowlton's study151 sup—
ports this contention, finding that many attitudes toward
media are related in rather specific ways to particular sit-
uations, a view reflected Tobias's study of teachers' atti-
tudes toward media.152 So one's use of media and ones per-
ception of barriers relates directly to the situation of
receiving extra-media support service: the more that one is
involved, the more one learns and "the better the probability
of interrelated beliefs . . . with respect to an object or
situation."153

Rokeach's thesislsu

has suggested a series of constructs
for investigating the problem. For instance, does providing
extra-media support service result in a difference in facul-
ty members' identification of deterrents to media use, in

their attitude toward media in general, and eventually in

 

1u6§pp£g, p. l“.
I‘M-$2233., Po ”9.
11mm: P. 51.
1u9§22£,’,pp, 68-69.
150§22£En pp. 61-62.
ISIM’ p. 5“.
152§ppgp, pp. 59-60.

153Greenhill, "Research in Instructional Television,"
p. 12.

lsuBehavior change is inferred from the relationship of
the common elements, attitude-toward-object and attitude-to—
ward-situation (see Supra, p. 69.).

 

-79-

155 To describe and evaluate the questions just posed,

usage?
we may view utilization as a conceptual scheme which contains

156 (Along this line of reasoning, media

different categories.
are considered supportive and their effects are evaluated in
terms of individual or group levels of change.157

Instruments for this study were selected to discriminate
behavioral changes. Thus the barriers to instruction were
adapted from Knowlton and Hawe's study because of the statis-
tical process they used to identify situations relevant or

158

non-relevant to instruction. This distinction was used

 

because faculty members receiving extra-media support ser-
vice, it was assumed, were thus left to contend only with
situations relevant to instruction in their large classroom
classes. The Newer Educational Media Attitude scale (NEMA)
was used because of its reported success in discriminating
among groups of people who were otherwise designated only as
being more or less favorable to media in general. Both the
Cuba and Snyder159 and the Hudspeth16o study indicated sta—

tistically that users of various forms of media had scores.

 

155Although conclusions about the attitude of a general
faculty were not definitive, there were indications of changes
in the attitudes of individual faculty members toward media
and there were indications of utilization changes. (See Mc-
Intyre, Resistance to the Use, p. #8).

156Supra, PP- 2h-29.
157Supra, PPo 29'31°
158Knowlton and Hawes, "Helpful Predictor," pp. 1&8—150.
159

160

Supra, po 75.
5.2922. p. 75'

-30-
more favorable toward media.

Information in the following chapters of this study will
explore whether antecedents, both personal and situational,
can be evaluated in relation to usage in large classroom prac-
tices. We shall examine hypotheses and other postulates for
evidence that faculty who have received extra—media support
service in the past display different usage patterns, iden-

tification of barriers, and general attitude toward media.

 

CHAPTER III
PROCEDURES

Introduction: 8
This study is concerned with providing descriptive mea-
surements by which a media administrator can evaluate the in~
fluence of extra-media services for faculty members who teach
in large classrooms.1 It has been indicated in Chapter II
(pp. 52-70.) that faculty members who have been the recipi-
ents of support services in the past can be expected to dif-
fer in measurable ways in the use of media,2 in identifica-
tion of barriers, and in general attitude toward media. The
writer observed and compared a sample of experienced teach?
ing faculty with other instructors on the Michigan State Uni-
versity campus during the 1968 winter quarter (JanuaryeMarch,
1968). Observations and comparisons were undertaken between
the sample of experienced teaching faculty and the follo ing
two sample groups: (1) a sample of faculty members whoiwere
to receive extra—media support in a large classroom for the

1The thirteen classrooms used in this study are the fol—
lowing: Agricultural Engineering 116; Anthony Hall 109; An-
thony Hall 110; Computer Center “02; Conrad; Engineering 100;
Kiva, Erickson Hall; Giltner Hall 1H6; Horticulture 206: Music
Auditorium; Olds Hall III; Veterinary Clinic 100: and Wells
Hall 1088.

2The use of media, for the purposes of this study, is
‘identified as: (1) total usage and (2) total usage minus
the use of the overhead projector. The second identification
is based on the assumption that in the larger classrooms the
overhead projector has become a compliance situation which
forces many instructors to use the overhead projector in
place of the chalkboard.

-81..

. -82-
first time and (2)a sample of faculty members representative
of the University's teaching staff who had never received ex—
tra-media support services in a large classroom situation.
For analysis purposes the experienced, new, and control

samples were assigned by random method3

to one of two groups.
In this study, Group I represented a half of those faculty
members who were to be administered a pre—and post—test on
the inventory instruments, Newer Educational Media Attitude
(NEMA) and Barriers to Media Use At The College Level (BAR-

RIERS). Group II represented the second half of those fa—

 

culty members who comprised the remaining total of the ex—
perienced, new, and control sample. These members were to

be administered only the post—test of the above inventory in—
struments.” With this analysis design discussed, let us turn
our attention toward this specific service.

Extra-media support service is a special undertaking of
the Instructional Media Center and has been in operation since
the Fall Quarter of the 1963-64 academic year. The recipients
of that service are academic faculty members assigned to.§ny
of the 13 larger classrooms. Essentially the extra-media sup-
port service differs from regular service in the following
way: the provision for the permanent availability of all need-

ed equipment and student - operator services. The thought

 

3Robert D. Mason, Statistical Techniques in Business and
Education (Homewood, Illinois: Richard—Flfilrwin, Inc., 1967),

57—F§FT"'

“Group I consists of three samplings: Experienced faculty ’
(Nr3u); New faculty (N39); Control faculty (N870).

Group II consist of three samplings: Experienced faculty
(N-36); New faculty (N-18); Control faculty (N=85).

Total N - 252..

4'9839

behind this arrangement is to have all the necessary service
more readily at hand for professors teaching large classes.
While there is no assurance that use of equipment will in-
crease, the opportunity for this and perhaps for a better a
quality of use is enhanced for the professor. I

In order to demonstrate that extra-media support ser~
vice can be measured to ascertain its influence with the
classroom situations, four concepts are presented:

1. NEMA and use of media are correlated. For the

purpose of this study it is necessary to show

 

that E§§£ has a correlation coefficient with
use since it is on the basis of comparative
NEMA scores that experienced instructors are
statistically identified from the control group.
2. Experienced teaching faculty represent a dif—
ferent population sampling on measurements of
NEMA and BARRIERS. If differences on the NEMA
mean scores do exist, then it is reasonable to
suggest that the amount and manner of media use
are different between the experienced instruc-
tors and the non—experienced teaching faculty.
3. The teaching faculty who have recently experi-
enced extra-media support service have measure—
ments on NEMA and BARRIERS that are different
from the sampling population of the teaching
faculty at large. If it can be confirmed by
measurements, in terms of the importance of ex-

tra-media support, that NEMA scores as a group

-3u-
change in‘a more favorable direction after the
instructors have received the extra—media sup-

.port, then it could be suggested that patterns
in the use of media would also change.

A. Experienced teaching faculty identify more in-
structionally relevant barriers to using media.
Those who receive extra-media support need not
concern themselves with the physicalproblems
attributed to its use. Rather, consideration
is given to instructional problems that relate
to the use of media in a teaching situation.

The idea of influence is based on the premise that extra
media support allows for instructors to become less concerned
with the media-support and more concerned with the instruc—P
tional situation. This concern about instructional problems
is thought to alter one's attitude toward the use of media.
This attitude change is demonstrated by a change in amount
of media use and the manner in which it is used. Since these
premises are based on attitude scores which are assumed to be
correlated with use, it is necessary to present evidence of
the concurrent validity of the NEMA. If this can be accom—
plished, it then becomes necessary to show through one-way
analysis of variance that the mean-scores of the experienced
faculty are representative of a sampling population different
from that of the non-experienced teaching faculty.

Plan of the Stggyi
The Study was divided into two phases: (1) the adminis-

tration of questionnaires and (2) the observation of usage by

_ —85-
faculty. ’Phase One of the study made use of the three sample
groups drawn from the total teaching staff at Michigan State‘
University. The experienced teaching faculty were predeter-
mined by the fact that all room scheduling is done by theféf-
fice of Space Utilization. Classroom assignments are Schél
duled by this Office a month in advance of that academic Quare
ter during uhich the class is to be taught. Thus, any of the
faculty already identified as previous extra-media supportv
recipients are included in the sample of experienced teach-
ing faculty. (They are included in the sample if they have
been assigned to one of the 13 large classrooms already iden—
tified.) The second sample group -- those who had not pre-
viously used extra-media support, consisted of instructors
who had been scheduled by Space Utilization to be in one of
the large classrooms. Any faculty member scheduled to be ,
in a large classroom but who had never been a recipient of _
extra-media support was included in the sample of new teadh—

r a

ing faculty. The third sample group represented the control
group. These faculty members were selected from the faculty
staff directory.5 Random numbers were used in the selection.
Those names that were not used were based on two criteria:
(1) faculty members must have taught at least one course
during the previous academic year and (2) faculty members
must not have received extra-media support service in any

of the 13 large classrooms.~

Prior to the opening of the Winter Quarter, all of Group

 

Y— _ v r 7

‘Y

5Facult and Staff Director , (Michigan State Univer—
sity Publications, Fall), 1967-68.

-86- .
16 faculty members were contacted by mail. Accompanying the
questionnaire instruments was a letter of explanation signed
by the Director of the Instructional Media Center (see Appen—
dix II-A). Coding procedures were applied in order to iden-
tify those who failed to return the questionnaires and foltow-
up letters were sent to these individuals (see Appendix II B).
The returns for Group I were 100 out of a possible 113. Of-
those returned, 73 sets of questionnaires were usable.7' At
the end of the Winter Quarter, questionnaires were mailed to
Group I and Group II (see Appendix II’- C). Again, coded pro-
cedures made it possible to send a follow-up letter to in-
sure a greater number of responses. A breakdown of the re—
turns for those taking both the pre-test and the post-test as
well as for those who took only the post-test are given in i
the appendix (see Appendix III). Out of a combined total of
212 sets of forms sent out, 197 (or 89.1%) questionnaires were
returned. Of those returned, 8h.h% were usable. Thus, the N
for the final analysis was 172 facultymembers.8 :

The second phase of the study was concerned with the

 

f

6Group I consist of three sampling groups: Experienced
teaching faculty (N-3fl); New faculty (N89); and Control facul—
ty, (N-35). Each of these groups were to take the pre and
post test.

7Percentage of usable returns are given for each of the
sampling groups: Experienced faculty (61.8%); New faculty
(88.9%); and Control faculty (62.9%).

8Percentage of usable returns are given for the sampling
groups within Group I and Group II. Percentage of returns
from Group I: I-anorhmcrd faculty (MAX). I'rrccntugr or re—
turns from Group II: Experienced faculty (83.§%); New faculty
(88.91); and Control faculty (78.2%). Final usable returns
represented 68-31. that is, from the original 252 samples,

172 samples were used.

. «8'7.-
actual use of media by the instructors in the large claSs-
‘ rooms. Seventy faculty members9 were divided by the actual
amount of instructional time to give a ratio figure for the
purposes of analysis. The final scores from all of the mea-
surements were double-scored by hand. Final computations I
from the measurement instruments along with demographic data
about the faculty members (see Appendix IV) were entered on
IBM cards. The computations punched onto computer cards
underwent statistical analysis by the CDC 3600 Computer.10
A. Selection of the Faculty Participants:
The selection of teaching staff members who participated
in this study involved five steps: 8
1. Those faculty members experienced in the use of
media were identified from records kept by the
I Instructional Media Center for the period begin-
ning in the Fall Quarter of the l963-6u academic
year. Cards giving information on content area,:
number of quarters receiving support, academic I
rank, and impressions as to service were com-
piled for each instructor and arranged alpha—

11
betically. 0f the faculty identified for

 

I . r fi— .f

9The seventy faculty members refer to the faculty members
in Group I and Group II whose data were analyzed: Experienced
faculty (w-ué); New faculty (n-zn).

10The following statistical sequence was used: Michigan
State University: Agricultural Experiment Stations' BASTAT
Routine: Analysis of Covariance and Analysis of Variance with
Unequal Frequencies"?ermitted in Cells.

11Twohundred and forty—seven faculty members had received
extra-media support service. Eighty three percent of the forms
indicate that faculty and staff were content with the service.

-33-
observation, 20 represented the humanities and
social studies disciplines while 25 represented
the sciences and engineering.12 It was found

, that 57 members were experienced in the use of
media support and were scheduled to teach in
one of the 13 large classrooms during the winter
quarter.

2. Faculty new to extra-media support service were
identified from records processed at Space Uti-
lication. 0f the 26 new faculty scheduled to
be located in one of the large classrooms, l3
represented the humanities and social studies
while the remaining 13 represented the sciences
and engineering.

3. Faculty members representing the control group
were selected by random sampling techniques. *
Information received from the business office
of Michigan State University indicated that
1,800 people were included as part of the 1967-68
teaching staff (see Appendix VI). Of this num-
ber 129 faculty members were selected as the con~
trol group.

n. Questionnaires returned by faculty included in

the control sample were rejected if it was deg

termined that they had not taught at least one

.‘O‘h

f

“D

l'Thr variety of academic disciplines were nrhitrurily
'“Vhlmi into the two categories of the humanities and the
“"‘vuur-n. «luhlulim-n for this mmignmrni. were hnnmi on

wgntation Agata-act's indexing system (See Appendix V).

-89-
class during the previous year. The number
of usable questionnaires was further reduced
due to the following reasons: (a) requests by
individual faculty members that their question-
naires not be used in the study, (b) the unavaila-
bility of certain faculty members at the end of
the winter quarter due to travel, or leaves of
-absence, incompleted questionnaires, and (d)
changes in room assignments. From the experienced
sample group, #6 sets ofreturns could be used;
from the control sample, 102 sets of returns were
analyzed; and from the new sample group, 2“ sets
of returns could be used, (see Appendix VII A-B).
5. A possible bias or influence factor was investiga-
ted. It was believed that the signature of the
Instructional Media Center Director on the cover.
letter might have influenced the faculty members
contacted relative to the study to respond to the"
questionnaires in a more cautious manner.
Such responses could be brought about as a result of
"but, Orne has called the "demand characteristics."13 In order
to determine if this had occurred, a second group of faculty
menlbers were selected at random and sent the questionnaires.

Insizead of using the original cover letter, the researcher's

\

——1

13M.T. Orne, "0n the Social Psychology of the Psycholo-
gical Experiment: with Particular Reference to Demand Charac-
ter‘1stics and Their Implication," American Psychologist, XVII
(1952), 776-783, passim. .

‘ -90.
‘name was signed toxa similar letter (see Appendix VIII).
Scores on the QEMA were compared.1" The results of a one~
way analysis of variance show an F statistic of 0.07 with

a significance-probability of 0.79. This implied that the
mean scores of the two groups were probably drawn from the
same population. This eliminated the concern as to the pos-
sible "demand characteristic" as represented by the influ-
ence or bias factor produced by a letter signed by the in-
structional Media Center's Director.

'8. Operations Involvedfiin the Study:

With the cooperation of the Instructional Media Center
personnel, student technicians were trained to serve as ob-
servers. A week of preparation was made possible through
the cooperation and participation of the Distribution and
Facilities Services staff. Before the start of the winter.
quarter, 29 student operators were able to use the daily log
sheets (see Appendix IX). During the winter quarter, daily
logs were turned in to the center. The reliability of each
studentis observations was tested by comparing their obser-
vations with that of a master-Judge. Student observations
were compared to the observations of the master-Judge and
their reliability computed through procedures in agreement
with the PearsoneProduct Correlation Coefficient.

The master-Judge observed throughout the winter quarter.

f W W—v*
0

1"Thirty questionnaires were sent out. Of the 26 that
came back, 2“ could be used. Eighty per cent of the question-
naires were usable. These returns were analyzed against the
67 returns for the Group II control Group. Seventy eight per
cent of these questionnaires were usable.

-91-
Each of his observations was then compared with the student-
operator's observation for that class period. The following
correlation represents two sets of independent observations
undertaken at the same time by the master-Judge and each of
the 30 student operators: A correlation of 0.96 was compu?
ted; the average difference in minutes was 1.26.15 Inter~
pretation of this computed correlation suggest that the stu-
dents' observations, as a group, were quite similar to that
of the master—Judge's separate observations. On this basis,
the observations of the students were accepted as being re-
liable with one another's observations.
0. InstrumentsfiUsed in the Study:

Three instruments were used in this study: (1) 33133
Educational Media Inventory, (2) The Barriers To Usinngee.
dia At The College Level, and (3) the observation scores on
the media usage for the experienced and new faculty. All
three instruments were used in hypotheses testing.

The background of the Egg; has been described in Chap-
ter II. Both the Guba and Snyder and the Hudspeth study of-
fered evidence that 5§§g_1s related to use. In the Guba and
Snyder study, this relationship was demonstrated when it was
shown that most teachers who were users of instructional tele-

vision were the same teachers who had representative scores

15 ' .
Homogeneity of Variances is assumed. An F of 1.08

was obtained. An F of 1.85 or larger is required to reject
the null hypothesis that the variances are homogeneous. (See

Allen F- Edwards, Experimental Design in Psychological Re-
New York:fi—Holt, fiinehart and Winston, Inc.,'l960),

search
pp. lat-106.

w . -92-
which were favorable to media.16 Hudspeth, in a later study,
reported that the same faculty members, who were identified
as heavy users of graphics, had scores considered favorable
to media. Hudspeth's null hypothesis was that the propor-
tion of faculty having favorable media attitude scores will
be the same for users of graphics as for non-users. A Chi-
Square Test was employed to test this null hypothesis.
The Chi-Square obtained . . . was

0.02. At the specified level of signifi-

cance, alpha - .05 a chi-square equal to

or greater than 3.éu with one degree of

freedom was needed to reject the null

hypothesis. Since the obtained value

was greater than 1 9&, the null hypothe-

sis was rejected. 7 -
An explanation for these findings would be that the NEMA mea-
sures one's attitude toward the mechanisms of media.

It was Guba and Snyder who conceptualized that the atti-
tudes to teachers under study would fall into two broad cate4
gories, " . . . specific attitudes toward instructional tele-
vision, and more generalized attitudes toward the new media
generally."18 They considered the modified version of NEMA as
a means of identifying general attitude although they admitted
that this generalized attitude was still in the form of objects

rather than in the form of situations. Hudspeth concurred with

 

16Egon G. Guba and Clinton A. Snyder "Instructional Tele-
vision and the Classroom Teacher," Audiovisual Communication
Review, XIII (Spring, 1965) 21, (Hereinafter referred to as
"Instructional Television.") '

17Hudspeth, "Belief Systems and Acceptance of New Educa—
tional Media," p. 71.

IBGuba and Snyder, MPATI Telecasts, p. 59.

f

-93-
their findings.
When certain teaching situations are
implied in this definition of educational
media, the emphasis is on the machines or
é:b:e:::;1:;.pgposed to being on the method
we can speculate that the importance of the use of the
55!; is on the significance of the objects rather than on the
situation. And if the situation is interpreted by faculty ,-
members to be due to the extra-media support service, then the
scores of the ggg; should become more favorable.20
In his study, Hudspeth used the Cubs and Snyder version
of the !§!£,which consists of 23 items. All items were used
although Mudspeth made certain revisions: the word "education-
al media" was substituted for the abbreviation "HEM"; the word
college was placed in front of the word student; and the term
faculty member was used instead of the word teacher. The final
form of this instrument is shown in (Appendix X)in which all
scoring was done on a six-point Likert scale, ranging from a
"l-agree strongly" to "6-disagree strongly.” Items phrased:
negatively (to avoid response set) were reverse scored in ar-
riving at a total attitude score. All such reverse-scored items
are coded with the letter "R” in the appendix copy. High total

scores for subjects indicate an unfavorable attitude toward

 

19Hudspeth, "Belief Systems and Acceptance of New Educa-
tional Media," pp. 73-7".

20This is based on the assumption that behavior is an
interraction of one's attitude to the object and one's atti-
tude to the situation. Since nothing has occurred to suggest
a change toward the object, it is speculated that the change
may be in relation to new attitudes toward the situation.

A-9u-
educational media and low scores indicate a favorable attitude.
Although Hudspeth reports no reliability figures as to the'
QEEA, Guba and Snyder report a reliability of 0.85.21 This
study, which deals with faculty members in higher education,
reports a similar correlation of 0.86 when Group I's (pre-test
and post-test) was correlated. Baseline figures for the §§MA
means for users and non-users are given in Appendix XI.

The second instrument used in the study being reported is
the Barriers To UsinggMedia At The College Level (see Appendix
XII). Although the original instrument was designed to demon-
strate that teachers need information campaigns about media on
two different levels, it was reasoned that college faculty may
have the same discriminatory needs as teachers in public edu-
cation. Therefore, it was decided that the Knowlton and Hawes
identification of deterrents to instruction had worth in this
study since faculty members who received extra-media support
service would not have to bother with problems that could be
assigned to the student technician. Faculty members who had
received extra-media support service would be most concerned
with instructionally relevant barriers which the student tech-
nician did not handle.

All scoring was based on the assignment of one point to
each of the six statements which were considered to be instruc-
tionally relevant concerns. A list of these relevant barriers
was added to a list of seven additional statements that were

considered to be non-instructionally relevant concerns. These

2
1Guba and Snyder, "Instructional Television" p. 13.

-95-
13 statements were arranged in alphabetical order. All in-
structionally relevant items are coded with the letters "IR"
in the appendix copy. High total scores for subjects indicate
that their selection contained many of the coded six items
considered to be instructionally relevant barriers to using
media; low scores indicate a selection of the seven items con-
sidered to be non-instructionally relevant barriers.

The third instrument used in the study is the observation
scores on media usage. Observations were undertaken by the
same student-operators who were assigned to the large class-
rooms. These 30 operators observed each of the ”6 experienced
teaching faculty and each of the 2A new faculty members.22
Daily observations were continued over eight of the ten weeks
during the 1968 winter quarter. Each time a faculty member
used media, his usage time was recorded along with the actual.
time that the class stayed in daily session. In this manner,
every faculty member's usage figure could be transformed into
a ratio measurement. For example, at the end of eight weeks:
it was calculated that a certain professor used media for 1,3"?
minutes. His class met for 1,u1u minutes. Using the media,
time as the numerator and the instructional time as the denom-
inator, a percentage ratio of 95.31 is obtained. Such ratio

measurements will be helpful in making comparisons.

 

22Observations undertaken were carried out with the know-

ledge that each of the 30 observers followed the same prede-
termined pattern. A Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coeffi-
ent of 0.96 was derrived when student—operator s observations
were compared (as a group) with the master-judge' s set of ob-
servations.

-95-

D. Concommitant Information:

 

Additional information was obtained which was not di-
rectly related to the hypOtheses to be tested. The following
questions were developed to obtain more information about the
study:

1. Could the NEMA discriminate between high
users and low users of media?

2. Could NEMA scores be differentiated into
different populations on the contingency
that certain barriers to media are really
beliefs?

3. Could discipline areas demonstrate a
difference in use of media?

u. Could usage patterns of media by ex-
perienced and new faculty be demonstra-
ted in terms of the first five weeks as
compared to the last five weeks?

5. What forms of media were used in the large
classroom in proportion to the actual in-
structional time?

Statistical Analysis:

In the test of the first hypothesis (use of media is cor-
related with favorable attitude toward educational media), the
two samples of the experienced and the new faculty were com-
bined. And these responses, on the NEMA, were compared across
all 70 subjects' computed ratios of use. The concept use is
thought of in two ways: The first represents total use and
the second represents all use of media except for the overhead
projector. The assumption was made that the combined samples
were representative of the total population of faculty members

from which the two samples were drawn. The nature of this

population will be discussed in Chapter V.

+97+
The correlation statistic used to test the first hypo-

thesis was the Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient:

Correlation coefficients may be
computed in various ways, depending up-
on the nature of the data. The most com-
mon is the Pearson Product-Moment Correla-
tion Coefficient. Such a correlation
takes into account not only the individu-
al's position in the group, but also the
amount of his deviation above or below
the mean.2

The correlation coefficient is particularly useful as a de—
scriptive statistic for a set of data for the reasons set

forth by Hayes:

It is not necessary to make any assump-
tions at all about the form of the distri-
bution, the variability of Y scores within
X columns or the true level of measurement
represented by the scores in order to em—
ploy linear regression and correlation in-
dices to describe a given set of data.2

To test the next six hypotheses, a one-way analysis of
variance test was employed for its independent estimates of
the population variance which are computed on the bases of
the variation within and between the group's means.

On the assumption that the groups or
samples making up a total series of mea-
surements are random samples from a com-
mon normal pOpulation, the two estimates
of the population variance may be expected
to differ only within the limits of ran-
dom sampling. We may test this null
hypothesis by dividing the larger vari-
ance by the smaller variance to get the
variance ratio.

 

vfi j’

23Anne Anastisi, Egychological Testing, (New York: Mac—
Millan Company, 195“), pp. 1036103.

2"William L. Hayes, Statistics for Paychologists, (New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963), p. 510.

25A11en L. Edwards, Statistical Methods for the Be-
havioral Sciences, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,

.196“). p. 316.

a , ~ -98-
‘ _ The following six hypotheses are broader in nature than
those used in the analysischapter, Chapter IV. ’They are
stated as null hypotheses and its directiona1_a1ternates:

H2: Faculty members who have received extra-media
support in the past will have (as a group)
scores that are more favorable toward media
than those faculty who have never received
such support.

Null Hypothesis: No difference will be
found in attitude as measured by NEMA be-
tween experienced teaching faculty and non—
experienced faculty.

Alternate Hypothesis: The experienced teach-
ng acu y group means score on a measure

vof attitude toward media will exceed26 that
of the control faculty group.

H3: Faculty members who have received extra-
media support in the past will have (as a
group) scores that are more favorable to-
ward media than those faculty who have been
assigned to receive extra-support for the
first time.* ~

Null H othesis: No difference will be
found in‘attitude as measured by NEMA
between experienced faculty and new faculty.

Alternate Hypothesis: The experienced fac-
ulty'group mean score on a measure of atti-
tude toward media will exceed27 that of the
new faculty group.

 

“A: Faculty members who have just experienced
extra-media support services for a full
quarter will have (as a group) scores that
are more favorable toward media than those
faculty who have not received such support.

Null H pothesis: No difference will be
found in attitude as measured by NEMA be-

tween faculty members wha have just ex-
perienced such service for a full quarter

wry— —r

26The actual scoring of the NEMA has reverse scoring;
therefore it is the lower scores which are representative of

a more favorable attitude toward media.

' 27Supra, footnote 26.

\

-99-

and faculty members who have never re-
ceived_such support. .

Alternate Hypothesis: The faculty members
Who haveijuSE'experienced such support
will have a mean score on a measure of
attitude toward media which will exceed28
that of the control group.

 

Faculty members who have received extra-
media support in the past will have (as a
group) scores that represent a selection
of instructionally relevant barriers

than those faculty who have never received
such support. '

Null Hypothesis: No difference will be
fauna in selection of barriers relevant
to instruction as measured by BARRIERS
between experienced faculty an non-
experienced faculty.

 

Alternate Hypothesis: No experienced
faculty group mean scores on a measure
of barriers relevant to instruction will
exceed that of the control group.

Faculty members who have received extra~
media support in the past will have (as

a group) scores that represent a selec-
tion of instructionally relevant barriers
than those faculty who have been assigned
to receive extra support for the first
time.

Null H pothesis: No difference will be
fauna n selection of barriers relevant
to instruction as measured by BARRIERS
between experienced faculty and new

faculty.

 

Alternate Hypothesis: The experienced fac-
ulty group mean scores on a measure of bar-
riers relevant to instruction will exceed

.that of the new faculty prior to their

exposure to extra-media support.

Faculty members who have just eXperienced
extra-media support for the first time will
have (as a group) scores that represent

a selection of instructionally relevant
barriers than those faculty who have
never received such support.

28Supra, footnote 26.

-100-

'Null H othesis: No difference will be
found in selection of barriers relevant to
instruction as measured by BARRIERS between
faculty who have just experienced extra-
media support for the first time and facul-
ty who have never received such support.

Alternate Hypothesis: The faculty group who
have just experienced extra support for the
first time will have a group mean score on
a measure of barriers relevant to instruction
which will exceed that of the control faculty.

To test for the possibility of individual scores chang—
ing on Group I's NEMA pre-test and then the post-test, the
W1 1coxon Matched-Pairs Signed-Ranks Test was employed. This

procedure was used in order to demonstrate whether or not

tilt! :influence of extra-media support, during the ten§week

Period, had anything to do with a proposed favorable atti-
tucle score change for each of the new recipients. For in

keeping with the theoretical constructs already presented in

this study, one would expect to find a favorable change to-
ward media exhibited by many of those new faculty members as-
8181"Ied to Group I. While at the same time, one would expect

to find no significant attitude-score change for many of those

experienced and control faculty members assigned to Group I.
11!E_Jflilcoxon Matched-Pairs Signed-Ranks Test, according to
Siegei

. . . is a most useful test for the
behavioral scientist. With behavioral
data, it is not uncommon that the research-
er can (a) tell which member of a pair is
greater than which, i.e., tell the sign
of the difference between any pair, and
(b) rank the differences in order of abso-
lute size, That is, he can make the judg-
ment of 'greater than' between any pair's
two performances, and also two difference
scores arising from any two pairs.29

\

29Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behav—
37‘Fg‘il Sciences (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956), pp.

-10.,

To test selected research questionsregardingdiscipline
areas, use of media, and quantitative usage patterns (between
the first and the last five weeks of the quarter), a Chi-
Square test was employed. Siegel has the following to say
about the Chi-Square.

The technique is of the goodness-of-
fit type in that it may be used to test
whether a significant difference exists be-

tween an observed number of objects or ree
sponses falling in each category and on

ex ected number based onthe null hypo-
EEesIs.3°

 

The way in which these statistics were used will be de—
scribed in the next chapter, Chapter IV.

Summary:

This study is concerned with providing descriptive mea~
surements by which a media administrator can evaluate the in-
fluence of extra-media support service. Influence, as used
in this study, was determined as being the comparison of
group means between experienced and non-experienced teaching
faculty members. The three measurements used were: (1) atti-
tude scores toward media, (2) usage scores, and (3) SCOPGS’
representing the selection of instructionally relevant bar-
riers to media.

The logic for this research was based on the premise that
faculty members who receive extra-media support are able to
concern themselves with deterrents relevant toward instruc—
tion. It is believed that this concern alters one's atti-

tude toward media in a favorable direction. Furthermore, it

_3oIbid, p. A3. Italics Siegel.

-102;.'

is postulated that these views can be demonstrated by a
change in usage although such a conjecture is founded on
the assumption that NEMA is positively correlated with use.

Statistical measurements are employed to show that ex-
perienced teaching faculty members representxa different sam-
pling population than those faculty members who are iden-
tified as having not received extra—media support service.
One way analysis of variance will be used in order to de-
termine that the variance of scores between these groups

will be greater than the variance of scores within these

groups.

CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS be DATA

Introduction:

Data collected and analyzed from the NEMA inventory,

time BARRIERS inventory, and the observation scores for facule

by utilization of media arereported in this chapter. These

measurements were administered to indicate differences in

the following:

1.

Mean scores obtained on the NEMA and BARRIERS

 

for the group of faculty who are considered
experienced in the use of extra-media sup-
port service in the large classroom and for
groups of faculty who are considered non-
experienced.

Mean scores obtained on the NEMA and BARRIERS

 

for the group of faculty who are considered
experienced in the use of extra-media support
service in the large classroom and for those
who have just finished receiving extra-media
support service for the first time.

Mean scores obtained on the NEMA and BARRIERS
for the faculty who have just finished re-
ceiving extra-media support service for the
first time and for those groups of faculty
who have never received extra—media support

in the large classroom.

-133-

-104-

A. [Individual scores obtained on the §§§5_ror
that group of faculty new to extra-media sup-
port who took the NEMA’pre-test and post-
test. ‘
5. Proportional scores obtained on the observa-
tions of faculty use of media for the group
of faculty who are considered experienced in
the use of extra-media support service in
the large classroom and for those who have
just finished receiving extra-media support
for the first time. 6
Findings from the study are treated separately from the dis-
cussion section which integrates the data with investigations
covered in the second chapter.
Findings Of TheStudy:
The first hypothesis tested in this study was that:
H1: There will be a correlation between compu-
ted usage scores of media used in the large
classrooms and media attitude scores which in-
dicate "general" attitude toward the use of
media.
and the null hypothesis tested was:
H01: There will be no correlation between the
scores obtained with the use of media in
large classrooms and the scores obtained
with the NEMA. Symbolically: H01: r = 0.
To determine the relationship between the two sets of

scores, a Pearson Product-Moment Correlation was computed.

-105-

This computation assumes that homogeneity of variance exists
and therefore the F Test was used. The assumption of homo-
geneity of variance can be assumed if a ratio of the vari-
ances does not produce a F which exceeds the critical value
of F at the .05 level of confidence.1 An F of 1.5“ was ob-
tained, an F of 2.fl2 or larger is required to reject the null
hypothesis that the variances are not homogeneous. There—
fore homogeneity of variances can be assumed. In fact, as
long as there are N distinct cases, each having two numeri-
cal scores, descriptive statistics of correlation may be used.
In computing correlations and regression equations for data,

Hay writes that,

It is not necessary to make any as-
sumptions aE—dll about the form of the
distribution, the variability of Y scores
within X columns or 'arrays,‘ or the true
level of measurement represented by the
scores in order to employ linear regression
and correlation indices to describe a given
set of data.2

A correlation of .05 was obtained for the two sets of scores
‘which represented use of media in large classrooms and gene-
ral attitude toward media. The F test for the hypothesis
<>f’zero correlation was computed as part of the BASTAT analy-
sis program which calculates basic statistics for all pairs
01‘ variables. An F value of .lh was obtained. The signifi—

cance of the probability for the F value is .71. At this

1Allen L. Edwards, Ex erimental Design of Ppychological
Research- (revised ed.: New iork: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,

, pp. 10A-106.

2winiam L. Hays, Statistics for Psychologists (New
York: Holt, Rinehart andwinston, Inc., 1963), p. 510.

'-106- _
time, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected at the .05 level
of significance. Evidence was not obtained for the hypothe-
sis that there is a correlation between computed usage scores
of media in the large classrooms and attitude scores which
indicate general attitude toward the use of media.

The second hypothesis tested in this study was that:

H2:

Experienced faculty members have mean scores
on the NEMA which are different from the
mean scores of faculty members who have not
experienced extra support.
sand the null hypothesis tested was
“02: No difference exists between mean attitude
scores for the experienced faculty sample
or for the non-experienced faculty sample.
Symbolically: H02: MEF - MNEF
To test the null hypothesis that there would be no dif-
lferences in the NEMA scores, the Michigan State University's
Agricultural Experiment Station's STAT Series Description
B¢<>. 18 was used. It provides all the necessary data for one-
"113 analysis of variance with unequal frequencies: tables;
computations of F ratios; F ratios for significance. (P ra-
t 10s significant at either the 5 or 1 percent level will be
ac cepted.) Summary data are given in Table 1, together with

tl’Ie table of the analysis of variance.

-107-'

SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cant at the

cannot be

perienced

 

TABLE 1.
dR5UF'TTS_FRE3TEST'SEdRES‘CN'TRE‘NEW"EDUCATT6N:
AE_REUIA'ITTITUDE—INVENTdRYT——EYRERTENdfifi—§KMFEE
Experienced Control
Items f figaculty ,i Faculty
n: fi21 an r
m: ,71.5 68.8 _

SD: 19.6 17.9
Source df» s.s m.s. P y
tween Groups 1 80.0 80.0 ‘ 0.2A (.63)

ithin Groups gggfiy fl 21,319.2 . §38,fl
Total 6” 21,399.; "
An F ratio of .2" was obtained. This is not signifi-

.05 level. At this time, the null hypothesis

rejected. Evidence was not obtained for the hypo-

thesis that a difference exists between mean scores for ex-

and non-experienced faculty.

The third hypothesis tested in this study was that:

H3:

Experienced faculty members have mean scores
on the NEMA which are different from the
mean scores of faculty members who are about

to receive extra support for the first time.

. No difference exists between mean attitude

scores for the experienced teaching faculty
sample or for the faculty sample who are to
receive extra-media support for the first

time. Symbolically: H03: ”RR = MNF

! ~108- ‘

To test the null hypothesis that there would be no dif-
ference in the NEMA scores, a one-way analysis of variance
was employed. Summary data are given in Table 2, together
with the table of the analysis of variance.

TABLE 2. SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING

AL—REDIA_ITTITUDE—INVENTDRYT_—EYPERIENDED"SKMPLE
AND NEW FACULTY SAMPLE ON PRE— TEST.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Experienced, New

Items . Faculty Faculty

n: . 21 8

m: _f‘ 71.5 7675

SD: V ‘. 19.6 I 12.“
Sourge df s.s.v jm.s. F

tween Groups 1_ yvl33.3 133.3 0.h3 (.52)
ithin Groupsfi 27 I 8367 . 3 309.9

Total 28 8500.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An F ratio of .A3 was obtained. This is not signifie ,
cant at the .05 level. At this time, the null hypothesis ‘
cannot be rejected. Evidence was not obtained for the hy—
pothesis that a difference exists between mean scores for
experienced faculty and for faculty who are about to receive
extra-media support for the first time.

The fourth hypothesis tested in this study was that:

H“: Faculty members who have just completed their

first quarter in large classrooms which re-
ceive extra-media support have mean scores on
the NEMA which are different from the mean

scores of faculty members who have not ex—

-109—

perienced extra-media support.3

and the null hypothesis tested was:
Hon: No difference exists between mean attitude
scores for the faculty sample who have
[just experienced extra-media support for
the first time or for the non-experienced

faculty sample. Symbolically: H0": MEN =MNEF
To test the null hypothesis that there would be no dif-

:ference in the NEMA scores, a one-way analysis of variance
'was employed. Summary data are given in Table 3, together

with the table of analysis of variance.
'TABLE 3. SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- COR A IONAL
REDIA—ITTITUDE'INVENTDRYT—_FADULTY“SARPLE—NEWLY
EXPERIENCEDyAND CONTROL SAMPLE ON POSTTTEST.

T D'Newly
Experienced Control
Items fiyfi Faculgy Faculty,
n: flan 102
n:_w , V 69.8 73.1
SD: f 15;; 19.0
rSource df s.s. . m.s. F
jBetween Groups. _, 1 212.1 212.1 0.63 (.13)
Agithin Groups 121 91901.1 _w;37.9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total ’ 125 u2i1ggs

 

3A ramification from this hypothesis deals with whether
02‘ not a change in individual scores is exhibited for members
01' the new sample between the time they took the pre—test and
Dost-test. To explore this possibility, members in Group I
t430k the NEMA pre-test and post-test. To test the null hypo—
theses that no change in individual attitude—scores is exhi-
bited for either the new, the experienced or the control sam—
Ples the Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Signed-Ranks Test was used.
FOP results, see Appendix XIII.

 

, +110-'

An F ratio of .63 was obtained. This is not significant
at the .05 level. At this time, the null hypothesis cannot
be rejected. Evidence was not obtained for the hypothesis
that a difference exists between mean scores for faculty
members newly experienced to extra-media support.

The fifth hypothesis tested in this study was that:

H : Experienced faculty members have mean scores

on the BARRIERS which are different from the
mean scores of faculty members who have not
experienced extra-media support.

and the null hypothesis tested was:

H05: No difference exists between mean scores
-on the selection of relevant barriers for
the experienced faculty sample or for the
non-experienced faculty sample. Symboli-
cally: H05: MEF - MNEF

To test the null hypothesis that there would be no dif-
ferences in the Selection of relevant barrier scores, a one-—
way analysis of variance was employed. Summary data are I

given in Table 18, together with the table of the analysis

of variance .

—111-:

TABLE u. SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
‘ T N ARR ERS LE ANTTO N—
STRUETTON?“EYPERTENEED SAMPLE AND CONTROL SAM-

‘s- fi . ’ —w—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Experienced Control.
Items VT Faculty_ A Faculty
n3 ‘ R6 102
km: W ޤ.0 ,: 2.89
SD: n , 1.37 : . 1.36
Source df ' s.s. m.s. » F .
lpetween Groups 1 . 0.h. : 0.“ 0.20 (.66)
[Within Groups 1186 , : 271 . 8 _ 1.9
If Total 1”? 272.2

 

 

An’F ratio of .20 was obtained. This is not signifie
cant at the .05 level. At this time, the null hypothesis
cannot be rejected. Evidence was not obtained for the
hypothesis that a difference exists between mean scores for
experienced and non-experienced faculty.

The sixth hypothesis tested in this study was thatzl

(H6: Experienced faculty members have mean scores

on the BARRIERS which are different from the
mean scores of faculty members who are about
to receive extra—media support for the first
time. I

and the null hypothesis tested was:

H06: No difference exists between mean scores on

the selection of relevant barriers for the
experienced faculty Sample or for the faculty

sample who'are to receive extra—media support

_-112— .
for the first time.‘ Symbolically: H06
"3p ' "Er ' MNP

To test the null hypothesis that there would be no dif-
ference in the selection of relevant barrier scores, a one~
way analysis of variance was employed. Summary data are
given in Table 5, together with the table of analysis of
variance.

TABLE 5. SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
dRDUF'iTS'SELECTiDN_DF"DARRYERS'RELEVINT’TD‘TN:

*3 “‘oNz‘ “'-'-* ‘c . -'P' A‘D ‘" ACI T'
SAMPLE 0N PRE-TEST.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Experienced New
Items f Facglty _y» y Faculty
n: Y 21 y 8
m: 2.8 2.9
SD:, 1.2 f 1.1
Source df s.s.) m.s. F
Between Groups 1 0.02 , 0.02 0.02 (.90)
itithin Groups 27 Q5.91 i 1.33 N
Total’ 28 35.9;_W {

 

 

An F ratio of .02 was obtained. This is not signifi4
cant at the .05 level. At this time, the null hypothesis
cannot be rejected. Evidence was not obtained for the hypo-
thesis that a difference exists between mean scores for ex--
Derienced faculty members and for faculty members who are a-
bout to receive extra-media support for their first time.

The seventh hypothesis tested in this study was that:

H7: Faculty members who have just completed their

first quarter in large classrooms which receive

-1l3-‘
. extra-media support, have mean scores on
the BARRIERS, which are different from facul-
ty members who have not experienced extra-
media support.
and the null hypothesis tested was:
H07: No difference exists between mean scores
on the selection of relevant barriers for
the faculty sample who have just experienced
extra-media support for their first time
or for the non—experienced faculty sample.
Symbolically: H07: MENF - MNEF
To test the null hypothesis that there would be no dif-
ference in the selection of relevant barrier scores, a one-
way analysis of variance was employed. Summary data are
given in Table 6, together with the table of analysis of
variance. V

'PABLE 6. SUMMARY DATA AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING
on I S o T-TE T'S LECT ON BAR RS RE-
LEVANT TO INSTRUCTION::PACULTY SAMPLE NEWLY
EYPERIENCED‘AND‘CCNTRCL SAMPLE.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.¥_ ‘Neily D7
Experienced Control
Items : Faaulty Faculty
___ n: ‘fi _ 2" 1,11 , 102 21
__ ym: ‘ 2.96 . 2:89‘
SD: 4, 1:1 Y 1°"l.
F Source y df *fifs.s. * m.s.- F
Etween Groups 1 0.09 0.09 0.01: (.83)
ithin Groups 124 216.77 I 1.75
Total 125 216.86

 

“fir

¥ .

-11A-

An F ratio of .0“ was obtained. This is not significant
'at the .05 level. At this time, the null hypothesis cannot
be rejected. Evidence was not obtained for the hypothesis
that a difference exists between mean scores for faculty mem-
bers newly eXperienced to extra-media support and faculty
members who have not received extra-media support.
Discussion of the Findings:

None of the seven hypotheses was supported by the data.
The first hypothesis dealt with the relationship of usage of
media in large classrooms to attitude toward educational me-
dia. It was found that for all faculty members examined,
there was no correlation between scores representing total
use and scores representing a favorable or unfavorable atti-
tude toward educational media. An interpretation is predi-
cated on the following assumption: The dual purpose for us-
ing media is to handle the various forms of message-treat-
ments and to transmit these various forms of messages. It
is suggested that although different types of media have dif-
ferent strengths and weaknesses along these lines of handling
and transmitting, faculty members (regardless of their as-
signed sampling groups) are unaware of this twofold purpose.
Possibly this unawareness is because of faculty expectations
regarding the need for media (in the large classroom settings)
as a means to extend their instruction. Consider Rogers'
writing on innovations in which he considered that the over-
head projector (used for spontaneous writing) represents a

contingent innovation." The physical disadvantages of using

 

(”Supra, pp. h9-50.

. -115-

the chalkboard in large classrooms has forced the faculty
'members to use the overhead projector. Could it be that the
use of this vehicle has no relation to the attitude that one
holds toward media?

Support for this question is based on an inspection of
the types of media used by the faculty during this study
(see Appendix XIV). On the average some form of media was
used which accounted for 54.3 percent of the observed total
instructional time. This percentage can be interpreted to
imply that, in general, some form of media was being used by
faculty members for over half their total time of instruc-
tion. An inspection of these data indicates that, of this
total use of media, spontaneous use of the Overhead projec-
tor accounted for 33.9 percent of the total instructional '
time. The remaining types of media accounted for 20.u per-
cent of the total instructional time. From this compilation
of data, the following interpretation is offered: Usage-
totals from types of media other than the use of the over-
head projector for spontaneous writing are related to atti—
tude toward media in education. And furthermore, when the
totals of use for the overhead projector are subtracted from
each faculty's usage tabulations, there will be a relation-
ship between scores obtained on the N§M5.8 The first hypo-
thesis was re-examined and a correlation, between other forms
of media and attitude, of .26 was obtained (significant at
‘the .05 level). Incidentally, when overhead projector (Spon~
‘taneously used) was correlated with NEMA, a negative correla-

tion of .27 was obtained (Significant at the .025 level).

-116-

The correlation obtained in testing the first hypothesis re-
flected an overlapping of reasons for using media in large
classrooms.

The second and third hypotheses examined dealt with
the attempt to show that experienced faculty had attitude
scores which exceeded either the new-faculty's scores or
the control-faculty's scores.5 The data collected did not
support either of these findings. I

Perhaps the NEMA is not the appropriate instrument for
discriminating between high and low users of media. Evidence
for this statement is based on the attempt to correlate sets-
of favorable and sets of unfavorable attitude scores with
the matched sets of usage scores (see Appendix XV). This
procedure involved the ranking of NEMA scores from more
favorable to less favorable. The first 35 scores were cor-
related with use. In both cases, a correlation of .11 was
obtained. To test the Significance of these correlations.
a T Test of the hypothesis of zero correlation was computed.
A t of .6” (df=33) was obtained. The probability of t=2.Ch
is .05 for a one-tailed test. In neither case did the test
indicate that either correlation was significant. Therefore.
it is suggested that if th8\flgfl£ in part correlates with use-
scores, (minus the spontaneous use of the overhead projector)
it is an unreliable measurement for discriminating between
high and low users.

A second reason, offered for the explanation as to why

 

SAttitude scores were based on group mean scores.

~117—
the NEMA did not identify different mean scores for experi-
enced faculty, is that the NEMA may be more sensitive to atti-
tude toward situations. Although the construction of NEMA
was founded on items based on affective and cognitive beliefs
about media, it is suggested that extra-media support ser—
vices in and by itself had no direct affect on recipients.
Rather there are factors which Could be considered more re-
lated to attitude such as values. MacLean Jr., a critic of
NEMA, suggested that there are better indications of use than
attitude scores:
The extent to learn about and make

use of new media techniques depends much

more on hierarchy of values in a more

general system of teacging-learning

methods and processes.
Following along these lines, it is likely that values would
be in evidence as to one's academic discipline and that a
better index to one's views and habits in regard to media
would be content rather than media support for the content.
A previous study was undertaken by Knowlton who reported:

In our early deliberations, we were

not sufficiently impressed with the vari-

able 'the subject a teacher taught.‘ It

turned out that the subject a teacher

taught was a better predictor of usage

than was the teachers' attitude.7
-It would appear that if, in fact, extra-media support did act
as an influence, the NEMA could not measure it. AS already

Shown, the NEMA does not suggest a relationship with total

use. Possibly what might be an influence on use is subject

6MacLean, "Critical Analysis." p. A—110.

7Knowlton, Patterns, p. “8.

y -118-

matter although, once again, it is cautioned that the NEMA
will not statistically indicate this relationship. To ex-
plain this limitation, one would have to investigate the pre—
mise that subject matter is linked strongly with content mes—
sages and that content massages are linked weakly with ve-
hiCles for transmitting messages. In order to explore what
factors other than attitude would account for use, our find;
ings were re-analyzed along the research methodology used by‘
Knowlton and our data were re-grouped in terms of total use
since message transmission was an important consideration.

The procedure involved an identification of three groups:
(1) 30 percent of the high users; (2) 30 percent of the low
users; and (3) the middle “0 percent of the users. Each of
these groups was assigned to either the Sciences or the Ru-
manities. A Chi-Square test was employed in order to test
the null hypothesis that the proportion of faculty members
categorized as either in the Humanities or the Science would
be the same in the high, middle and low percentage ranges,:

(see Appendix XVI). The Chi-Square test obtained was 6.51.

 

At the specified level of significance, alpha = .05, a chi—
square equal tocr greater than 5.99 with two degrees of free—
dom was needed to reject the null hypothesis that there were
no differences in the group's proportionment. The null hy-
pothesis was rejected suggesting that subject areas are a
stronger influence that extra-media support for using media.
Accordingly, we find that one's academic area has more of a

relation with media-use than one's attitude toward media.

-119-

The fourth hypothesis dealt with the attempt to Show'
that those who have experienced the extra—media support ser-
vice will exhibit attitude scores which, as a group, are more'
favorable toward media than for those who have not had the
experience of the support.‘ AS advanced in the previous dis-
cussion, NEMA is questionable as a sensitive measurement for
identifying a relationship between extra—media support and
attitude. Furthermore, the NEMA does not discriminate be-
tween groups of high and low users. Rather, it is suggested
that one's attitude is related to one's impression of equip-
ment associated with media. In addition, it is contemplated
that equipment use is influenced by one's values which are-
related to one's general system of methodology. An indica-
tion of the values that are interrelated with one's general.
system of methodology, might possibly be content area. As
advocated by Knowlton and others,8.as well as being demon—
strated in this study, academic disciplines are related with
use. In summary, two reasons are offered to suggest that
NEMA is an inappropriate instrument for measuring the influé
ence of extraemedia support service: (1) the NEMA cannot
discriminate between high and low users; and (2) the NEMA
measures a generalized attitude which is related more to con-
tent methodology than to utilization services.

Hypotheses five, six and seven were.founded on the con—
struct that extra-media support would allow for faculty to

center their concerns on media problems relevant to instruc~

 

8Supra, pp. HA-AS.

-120—

tion rather than on media problems nonerelevant to instruc—
tion. This construct was built around the assumption that
faculty members consider media and its alleged barriers as
being either relevant or non-relevant toward instruction.
The data did not support the above three hypotheses. 'There-
fore it is no longer sapient to consider the basic construct
as tenable. At this time all that can be said is that there
is no evidence to suggest that those faculty members who have
been the recipients of extra-media support service can dis-
cern as a group, certain barriers which were identified to be
relevant to instruction (see Appendix XVII - A and B).
Several factors might be studied in explaining the lack
of significant findings. First, the question may be raised
as to whether or not there does exist a listing of legiti~
mate utilization barriers. Research reports by Knowlton9

as well as by Hubbard10

counsel that certain sets of reSponses
might be expected for faculty members to list or check. In
‘other words, faculty members respond to what they think phe
questionnaire is intended to measure rather than to what they
think the actual barriers are. And when we divided our experi-
mental groups into high, in between, and low use of media, the
frequency of responses to barriers were similar (see Appendix

XVII ‘ C)e

Second, there may be uncontrolled concomitant variables

 

fi'

9Supra, p. 55.
10Supra, p. 55.

~121- ,
operatingwithin one group which are masking the relationship
between extra-media support and the selection of relevant
barriers. For example, the barriers that were checked by
the experienced group were ordered in terms of the most fre-
quently checked barriers to the least frequently checked bare
riers; however, when these returns are dichotomized as to
one's attitude, (see Appendix XVII - D) it is that experi-
enced teaching faculty with a favorable attitude score coh-
sider insufficient training and lack of funds as important
barriers. ExperienCed faculty, on the other hand, having
less favorable attitude scores consider the condition of me-
dia materials and equipment and that one uses too much time
for the results obtained. Perhaps experienced faculty mem-
bers with more favorable attitude scores are sensitive to
barriers that can be controllable whereas experienced facul-
ty members with less favorable attitude scores are sensitive
to barriers that are non-controllable. Certain barriers that

were designated to be instructionally relevant can be inter-;

preted to be considered as barriers that are non-controllable.
A problem that might have arisen is that our expectation for
an experienced faculty member to select these barriers may
be negated by their experience that there is no efficiency
in trying to cope with problems that are uncontrollable. If
this is so, then it is necessary to reconceptualize the bar—
riers as being controllable and noncontrollable by faculty
members.

A third factor to consider, then, has to do with the un-

controlled concomitant variable of one's beliefs about media.

~122-
The point emphasized here is that certain barriers might be
beliefs which are in essence components of an attitude. Two
such barriers were re-evaluated on the assumption that they
might be considered beliefs rather than barriers:

1. Media materials such as films are not impor-

tant aids to learning.

2. When one uses media, one uses too much time

for the results obtained.
One can consider the folly of using the measurement BARRIERS
when one considers that these "belief-barriers" were to be
identified as relevant toward instruction; and yet, these
same "belief-barriers" are negativebeliefs which make up
one's attitude toward media. BARRIERS, therefore, did not
discriminate between those who experienced extra-media sup-
port and those who did not experience extra-media support
because some of the barriers were actually beliefs about me-
dia. And these beliefs about media are related to attitude
toward media.

To test this suspicion that the two identified "barrierS"
are actually beliefs about media, it was hypothesized that
these two unfavorable beliefs would be related with less fa—
vorable attitude scores. A one—way analysis of variance was
employed to test the null hypothesis that these beliefs (for-
mally considered barriers) would not account for differences
on the NEMA mean scores. Summary data are given in Appendix
XVIII, The F Test was significant at the .0005 level of signi-
ficance. The null hypothesis can be rejected. The two be—

lief barriers are relevant in discriminating favorable and

-123—

less favorable attitude scores toward media. It may be spe-

 

culated that the insensitivity of the BARRIERS measurement
is explained by the fact that some of the barriers are be—
liefs. Furthermore, these less favorable beliefs were ori-
ginally identified as barriers relevant to instruction. The
lack of discrimination was due to the alloting of points for
these two instructionally relevant barriers while in reality
they are related to negative attitudes toward media. Hence,
influence of extra-media support could not be ascertained
from this measurement.

In the discussion of the findings, it has been shown
that the selection of the measuring instruments were not sat-
isfactory. In summarizing, it is emphasized that the lack
of supportative data to demonstrate the influence of extra-
media support service may be due to the insensitivity of the
measuring instruments. An example given for the insensiti-
vity of the NEMA_is based on its inability to discriminate
between high and low users of media. A reason may be that
NEMA attitudes are only indicative of affective and connota-
tive beliefs, whereas use is more indicative of the values
which are linked to instructional necessities. An example
given for the insensitivity of the BARRIERS is based on the
overlapping of certain barriers which may be, in reality,
negative beliefs about media.

The above discussion, based on the possible inappropri-

ateness of the NEMA and BARRIERS, has offered reasons as to

 

why there were no significant findings. It is still to be

shown whether a positive change in attitude toward media and

 

'-124-
a difference in media-use can be related to extra-media sup-
port service although a final exploration was undertaken to
investigate that new faculty members increase their use of
media. Findings along this line would show that patterns
of media-use increase in relation to time.

By patterns of usage, it was conceptualized that if ex—
perienced faculty were accustomed to extra-media support ser-
vice, they would maintain the same proportion of use through—
out the quarter. Furthermore, it was conceptualized that fac-
ulty members new to extra-media support would increase their.
usage as the quarter progressed. Therefore, it was specula-
ted that faculty new to extra—media support would, as a group'
display an increase of use during the second five weeks of
instruction. Comparisons made between each group's use of
media for the first and second half of the quarter would show:
that experienced faculty had more use—computations assigned.
to the no change category and that new faculty had more use-
computations assigned to the increase category. In order to

explore the above speculation, a Chi-Square test was used to

 

test the null hypothesis that experienced teaching faculty
and newly experienced faculty have the same prOportion of
comparisons.

The comparisons were derived from the differences of use
which were computed for each member. The mean use of the ex-
perienced faculty was 55.9%. The standard deviation for fluc-
tuations in use was 9.05%. The mean use of the newly experi-
enced faculty was 52.8%. The standard deviation for fluctu-

ations in use was 9.18. A Spread of plus or minus one stan—

e125-

dard deviation was used as the criterion for assigning an ex-
perienced member to one of the following three categories:
(1) increase in usage; (2) no change in usage; and (3) decrease
in usage. The same procedure was used for the assignment of
the newly experienced members. The results are shown in the
table in Appendix XIX. The chi-square obtained was 11.1. At
the level of significance, alpha - .05, a chi-square equal to
or greater than 7.82 (df-2) was needed to reject the null hy-
pothesis. Thus, the null hypothesis was not tenable. The pro—
bability of a given faculty member falling into one of the
three categories of use is influenced by the particular sample
group in which the facultymember falls. Inspection of the
distribution of usage patterns would suggest that as a group
the experienced faculty did not increase their frequency of
use, whereas the new faculty, as a group, exhibit a trend to-
ward an increase in the frequency of use. Caution is used in
describing these results because of the following reasons;
In the first place, the data could be viewed in regard to one-
third of the sample falling into each category. In that chse,
the new group does not show a strong trend toward an increase.
Closer inspection of the data by use of a Sign Test indicated
that the experienced group, more than by chance, showed a trend
toward a decrease, (The obtained value of Z was 2.5).
Summary of Results:

Seven hypotheses were examined and tested in this study.
The first dealt with the relationship of total use of media

and attitude scores toward educational media:

 

8-126-
H : There'will be a correlation between computed

usage scores of media used in the large class-
rooms and media attitude scores which indicate
"general" attitude toward the use of media.

The null hypothesis was not rejected at the .05 level
of significance. Although data were not obtained for the hy-
pothesis that there is a correlation between total use and»
attitude, evidence was obtained that there is a .26 correla—
tion (significant at the .05 level) between attitude and use
provided that overhead projection scores, when used for spon-
taneous writing, are excluded.

The second hypothesis dealt with two identified groups
of faculty. The first group was considered experienced to
extra-media support service. The second group was similar
in respect to certain identified criteria but the faculty was
considered non-exposed to extra-media support service. The
hypothesis examined was:

H2:

Experienced teaching faculty members have
mean scores on the NEMA which are different
from the mean scores of faculty members who
have not experienced extra-media support ser-
vice.
Data did not support this hypothesis.
The third hypothesis dealt with two identified groups of
faculty. The first group was considered experienced to extra-

media support serviCe. The second group was similar in re-

spect to certain identified criteria except that they were

 

-127.
about to receive extra-media support for the first time.

The hypothesis examined was:f

H3: Experienced faculty members have mean scores

on the NEMA which are different from the mean
scores of faculty members who are about to re—
ceive extra-media support service for the first
time.

Data did not support this hypothesis.

. The fourth hypothesis dealt with two identified groups of
faculty. The first group was considered those faculty who had
just experienced their first quarter of extra-media support in
the large classrooms. The second group was similar in respect
to certain identified criteria except that they never received
extra-media support in the large classrooms. The hypothesis
examined was:

H : Faculty members who have just completed their
A . first quarter in large classrooms which re-

ceive extra-media support have mean scores on

the NEMA which are different from the mean

scores of faculty members who have not ex—

perienced extra-media support service.

Data did not support this hypothesis.

The fifth hypothesis dealt with two identified groups of
faculty. The first group was considered experienced to extra-
media support service. The second group was similar in respect
to certain identified criteria but they were considered non-

experienced to extra-media support service in the large class-

rooms. The hypothesis examined was:

-128-

H : Experienced faculty members have mean scores
on the BARRIERS which are different from the
mean scores of faculty members who have not
experienced extra-media support service.

The sixth hypothesis dealt with two previously identi-
fied groups of faculty -- the experienced and the new group.
The hypothesis examined was:

H6: Experienced faculty members have mean scores

on the BARRIERS which are different from the
mean scores of faculty members who are about
to receive extra-media support for the first
time.

Data did not support this hypothesis.

The seventh hypothesis examined used two previously iden-
tified groups. The first group had Just experienced extra-
media support service while the second group has never experi-
enced extra-media support. The hypothesis examined was:

R7: Faculty members who have Just completed their

first quarter in large classrooms which re-
ceive extra support, have mean scores on the

BARRIERS which are different from the mean

 

scores of faculty members who have not ex-
perienced extra support.

Data did not support this hypothesis.

-129-

A discussion of the findings has suggested that usage
totals from types of media other than the use of the over-
head projector for spontaneous writing are related to atti-
tude toward media. The first hypothesis was re—examined and
a correlation between other forms of media and attitude, of
.26 was obtained (significant at the .05 level). Inciden~
tally, when overhead projector scores (spontaneous use) was
correlated with figflfl, a negative correlation of .27 was ob—
tained (significant at the .025 level).

In addition, a discussion of the findings has suggested
that the insensitivity of the BARRIERS measurement is ex-
plained by the fact that some of the instructionally rele~
vant barriers to using media are beliefs. The null hypo—
thesis that these beliefs (formally considered barriers)
would not account for differences on the §§35_mean scores
was rejected. That is, the F Test was significant at the
.0005 level of significance.

And finally, a discussion of the findings has suggested
the content area, rather than attitude would account for
use. And we find through the use of the Chi—Square Test
that one's academic area has more of a relation with media—

use than one's attitude score toward media.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY

This study has sought to determine the influence of ex-
tra-media support services on faculty members teaching in 13
larger classrooms on the campus of Michigan State University.
Influence was evaluated with the following measurements: (1)
attitude toward media; (2) degree of media use; and (3) se—
lection of barriers relevant to instruction. The hypotheses
tested weighed the evidence that faculty who received extra-
media support will reflect attitudes and behavior toward me—
dia different from those faculty who have not received extra-
media support in those large classrooms.

Seven hypotheses were formulated: .4
There will be a correlation between compu- :-
tated usage scores of media used in the 1.
large classrooms and media attitude scores

which indicate "general" attitude toward
.the use of media.

H1:

H2: Experienced faculty members will have mean
scores on the NEMA which are different
from the mean scores of faculty members
who have not experienced extra—media sup—
port service.

H3: Experienced faculty members will have mean
scores on the NEMA which are different
from the mean scores of faculty members
who are about to receive extra-media‘sup-
port for the first time.

~130—

4131-

R”: Faculty members who have just completed
their first quarter in large classrooms
which receive extraemedia support will
have mean.soores on the NEMA which are
different from the mean scores of facul-
ty members who have not experienced ex-
tra-media support.

. Experienced faculty members will have

5 mean scores on the BARRIERS which are
different from the mean scores of facul-
ty members who have not experienced ex-
tra-media support.

 

H : Experienced faculty members will have
5 mean scores on the BARRIERS which are
different from the mean scores of facul—
ty members who are about to receive ex-
tra-media support for the first time.

 

R7: Faculty members who have just completed
their first quarter in large classrooms
which receive extra—media support will‘
have mean scores on the BARRIERS which
are different from faculfyfmembers who
have not experienced extra-media support.

 

This study employed three faculty groups. The first
group, those who had been receiving extra-media support ser-
vice, all were assigned through regular university channels
to teach in the 13 larger classrooms; they were distinguished
according to their degree of prior exposure to extra-media
support, their academic department, and their academic rank.

The second group also involved faculty members who were
assigned by the administration to teach in one of the 13 lar-
ger classrooms; but none of these faculty had received any
extra-media support in the larger classrooms prior to the
1968 winter quarter. They too, were further identified as

to their academic department and their academic rank. Facul-

.‘132-

ty members from both groups, the experienced and new groups,
were observed inconspicuously throughout eight weeks of their
instruction during the quarter under study.

The third group included faculty members selected at
random from the university's total papulation of teaching
faculty; they too were further identified as to academic de-
partment and rank. Among these faculty randomly selected,
only those who indicated that they had never received extra-
media support in one of the larger classrooms were adminis-
tered the instruments:1 (1) The New Educational Media_Attié
tude Inventory Scale and, (2) The Barriers to Using Media
at the College Level.

To demonstrate that extra-media support service can be
considered a significant influence, we must develop four con-
cepts: (1) that gggg scores and usage are correlated; (2)
that experienced faculty may be distinguished in measure—
ments of yggg and BARRIERS; (3) that faculty members who
have just experienced extra-media support have flgflg and
BARRIERS measurements different from the sampling population
of the faculty at large; and (A) that experienced faculty
members can identify more instructionally relevant barriers
to instruction. If it could be shown that EEEA scores cor-

relate with use, and that NEMA and BARRIER both change

1Part of the study's statistical design called for half
the faculty members from each of the three groups to take
the questionnaire measurements twice. Therefore, half the
members in each group answered the questionnaires prior to
the winter quarter, and then at the end of the winter quarter.

. A ' A‘ ...-J-‘AJ‘A-T

’ 7133-
faculty at large; and (h) that.experienced faculty members
can identify more instructionally relevant barriers to in~
struction. If it could be shown that flgflg scores correlate
with use, and that 55!; and BARRIER both change favorably
after extra support, then we may consider the extra-media
support service a significant influence.

The first hypothesis predicted that the use of all
media would be correlated with attitudes toward education-
al media. This basic prediction could not be substanti-
ated because the scores from the attitude inventory scale
did not correlate with the tabulated usage scores.2 And
in keeping with this initial finding, the data elicited by
the study were unable to reject the null form of any of the
other six hypotheses: none of the theoretical hypotheses
received statistical support.

Conclusions:

The basic construct underlying this study considered
behavioral change as related to one's attitude toward ob-
jects and toward situations.3 According to this construct,
a faculty member's use of media should relate to his gene—
ral attitude toward media and his perception of barriers to
media which are relevant to instruction. Thus the construct
provided a guide for evaluating whether or not use, attitudes,

and barriers offered profitable measurements for assessing

 

1. wv fr V

2A correlation of .26 was derived when overhead pro—
jection scores were partialed out from total use scores.

3Rokeach. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values, p. 137.

. ~13u-
the influence of extra—media support service on faculty re—
cipients. The following measurements were employed in this
investigation: (1) usage scores tabulated from observa-

tions; (2) attitude scores drawn from the New Educational )

 

Media Attitude Inventory Scale; (3) relevant barriers to

instruction as contained in Barriers To Using Media At The

 

College Level .

'Any discussion of the findings must stress that the
construct itself was not under direct investigation: rather
the instruments used to measure the components of the con-
struct were under investigation. To state that none of
the null hypotheses could be rejected within the framework
of this study merely suggests that no influence could be
proved with the measurements that were used. So we have
now to consider the elaboration of the construct and its
measurements to facilitate future research on the influ~
ence of extra—media support services. Of course, any relae
tionship between psychological constructs and behavior is
subject to many intervening factors; such factors might
either have supported or stifled the inclination of a fac-
ulty member to behave in accordance with the construct.

Given these limitations, the following conclusions
seem reasonable. First, a general measurement of attitudes
toward media may not be indicative of one's actual use of
media. Some of the research studies reviewed anticipated
the evidence from data collected in this study, suggesting
that many attitudes toward media are related in rather spe-

cific ways to particular situations. Hudspeth, for example

r135- '
observed that media might be perceived either as aids to in«

struction or as a complementary part of the instructional

v.
‘i
'.

process." If groups of high and low users were identified?
and then interviewed, how would they respond to these ways‘
of using media as reasons for their use or non-use of me-I‘
dia? Could such explanations of use be ascribed to Apel's
hypothesized "effect on goals" and'bffect on personal in—
terests"?5 Possibly those who consider media as aids to in»
struction value their personal interest over their courses'
instructional goals, while those who consider media as a
complementary part of the instructional process value in—
structional goals over personal interest.
Those interested in media research might also examine
Knowlton's conjecture, that attitudes toward media depend
on a faculty member's awareness of content (messages) avail—
able and the equipment (vehicles) available for the materig
H
als' transmission: "
The fact of relative independence
of message and message-mediating device,
when unrecognized and replaced by the
implicit invalid assumption of a high
correlation between these two things,
is sufficient in itself to doom all
comparative media studied to failure.6

Accordingtb this study's secondary findings, more high—users

”Hudspeth, "Belief Systems and Acceptance of New Educa~'
tional Media," p. 8h.

5Apel, Prediction of Adult Educators' Attitudes, pp.

2'60

6Knowlton, Patterns_9f Influence, p. 92.

. -136-
appear from the science areas and more low-users from the
humanities. And if, as one can speculate, more materials
are presently available for faculty members to use in the‘“

science areas, is this because more money is available for;
curricular expenditures in science or because the sciences‘
permit readier identification of selected messages to be

transmitted. no such incentives produce behaviors which a
constitute favorable attitudes?

Another significant determinant of media use might in—

 

volve the degree of a faculty member's control over a par- , A
ticular media device in the production of messages. This
viewpoint helps explain why 33.9 percent of all instruc—
tional media time involved the overhead projector, which 3
allows a teacher to produce messages to fit his own instruc—
tional needs. Speculation along such avenues of research
may help educators make the transition from Dale's obser~
vation about media being a threat to the instructor's acaeg
demic privacy and autonomy7 to Eichholz's rejection classi;
fication due to "internal forces, real or imagined in the ’
mind of the teacher?"8

As the second major conclusion we made from this study,

faculty selection of barriers seems to be realted to a fac-

ulty member's attitudes toward media, his use of media, and

 

‘fir ‘r V T f r I 'Y

7Brown and Thornton, Jr. (ed.) New Media in Higher Edu-
cation: p. 1A.

8Eichholtz, "Rejection Classification for Newer Edu—
cational Media," p.‘ . a

-137-

hisexperience with the extradmedia support service in the
large classroom. we may project this conclusion even
though responses were based on frequency of responses ra-
ther than on ranking of barriers, since a manipulation of
the data suggests that certain barriers to using media are
related to specific conditions rather than to general con-‘
ditions. For example, considering only total frequency of-
response, inadequate classroom facilities were judged very
limiting; but those identified as low-users considered that
particular barrier of secondary importance. Interestingly
enough, high—users considered the availability of materials
as unimportant, while middle and low-users considered ma-
terials to be a reasonable deterrent. The relationship be—
tween specific conditions and barriers to using media sug—
gests several areas for future research: Hubbard,9 for
example, found that the faculty members considered the lack
of adequate classroom facilities a major deterrent to media
use. In the present study, both the experienced and the
control groups listed this barrier as important, but the
new group did not. Could the opportunity of working in
large classrooms with extra—media support focus one's at—
tention on the reasons why he can use media rather than on
reasons why he cannot use media? If this is so, why do the
faculty members with over one academic quarter of experi~
ence, regardless of their attitudes, now consider inade-

quate classroom facilities of importance?

 

9Hubbard, "Reasons Given for the Limited Use," p. 1H0.

d -1389

Other researchers might examine how other specific con-
ditions relate to the identification of barriers to media
use at the college level. Once respondents rank their iden-
tification of barriers in ordinal fashion, a number of per;
sonality theories should suggest hypotheses for the study“
of barriers under specific conditions. For example the the-
ory underlying the Qggmatism Scale suggests that Open-minded
faculty will be more receptive to the possibilities of re-
ceiving extra—media support service in large classrooms.
Other studies along these lines with public school teachers
indicate that personality antecedents do influence the teach-
ing staff's interpretation of barriers associated with use.
The results from public education should not be generalized
to higher education because the differences in social-or-
ganizational settings may be related to the educator's be-
havior. For example, teachers with high authoritarian scores
on the California F-Scale should become more favorable to-
ward instructional television as their experience with it;
increased, whereas faculty members in higher education with ‘
high authoritarian scores might resist the opportunity to!
experiment with the new media.10

At any rate, both attitude and barrier measurements
need closer scrutiny before being used in further research.

For as we indicated earlier, many attitudes and barriers

 

10This interpretation is made on the basis of a compa-
rison made between Mahmoudi's study of school teachers and
Evan's study of faculty members. Both works are cited pre-
viously in this study.

-l399
linked to media are associated in rather specific ways to
particular situations and conditions.
Implication for Media Administrators:

Coordinators and managers of media support and develop-
ment systems on the university level function not only in
the care and operation of such systems, but also in the re-
organisation and reorientation of instructional procedures
and human tasks. Hence we may suggest implications for me-
dia administrators with either of the following responsibi—
lities: (l) assessing continuously the desirability and
feasibility of applying the efficiencies of extra-media sup-
port to large classroom instruction; and (2) measuring and
evaluating the effects of uses of media and the desirability
of certain logistical arrangements.

For those who must assess the desirability of extra- .
support service, the EEEA and BARRIERS instruments offer
little more than general descriptions for specific prob-
lems. At best the NEMA instrument measures general atti—
tudes toward media in instruction. But a mere aggregation
of attitudes toward media, expressed as a score, does not
enable a media person to predict what a faculty member's
quantitative use of media would be. Nor does knowledge of
a faculty's attitude score point up the reasons that led to
the formulation of a general attitude toward media. And the
BARRIERS measure provides only a descriptive list of pro-
blems, which cannot be interpreted without additional fac-
tors; possibly these factors are unique across different

instructional situations.

-1140-

Data collected in this study suggests that neither
the use of media nor one's attitudes toward media are di-
rectly related to extra-media support services; that the
experience of extra-media support services do not contri-
bute to or detract from one's general attitude toward me-
dia in education. On the other hand, academic areas and
degree of control over message transmission may prove to
be significant predictors of use. For example, statisti-
cal tests show a relationship between use and content area
and between media use (other than the overhead projector)
and attitude. Perhaps use is determined not so much by
the convenience of having the facilities for transmitting
information, as by the convenience of being able to select
and produce the information. Since the availability of
equipment was never considered an important barrier, ad-
ministrative attention should concentrate on helping de-
partments update their instructional materials, thus, set-
ting the stage for transmission of materials with suitable
vehicles. *

Since the more experienced faculty members eased up
on their use of media during the second half of the quar-
ter studied, the benefits of extra-media support service
may seem to depreciate as the courses progress. Perhaps
there is some natural trend for using more media during
the first half of the quarter. But if this means that,

as one continues to use media, one becomes more aware of

problems related to use, then it would be worthwhile to

. ~1fll-
identify and compare the barriers reported by new and ex-
perienced media users. For example, the experienced and
control group selected barriers such as "inadequate class-
room facilities" in similar prOportions, whereas the new
group considered "dated materials" and"lack of money" as
more important barriers. Does this suggest that when the
new faculty members realize that they cannot use funds to
acquire materials, their identification of barriers will
change? Will their use of media change?

In regard to the purpose of supplying a student-opera—
tor, faculty members who have experienced extra-media sup-
port, evidently do not realize that the purposes of having
the services of the Operator is to compensate for their
lack of training with media equipment. Of both experienced
and newly-experienced users of the suport service in larger
classrooms, the only group who did not consider this "lack
of sufficient training" a major barrier, was those experi-}
enced faculty members who had scores which were less favor;
able to media. Thus, faculty members interested in media';
are looking for new ways to extend their information: they
wish to change their level of instruction.11 But, because
of the lack of time and money, they begin to question whether
or not it is worthwhile for them to undergo a shift in their
educational role. At the same time, those with less favor~

able attitudes toward media are not interested in learning

 

7*

11Finn has suggested several different levels of in-
struction (see Supra, pp. 25-26 ).

 

 

, —1uée
how to use media for change. Perhaps they are more likely
to accept media services which are consistent with their
existing experiences, but even less likely to change their
reason for its use. Hence, different information cam- .
paigns should be directed to different faculty members
using the large classroom. These faculty members could
be discriminated in termsof their attitude toward media -
and their identification of barriers which they should
rank from very serious to less serious.

For these media administrators involved in measuring

 

and evaluating the effect of uses, the following informa—
tion and interpretations are pertinent. Two patterns emer-
ging from this study are the weak relation between limited
forms of media used and attitude scores toward media, and
the relation between content areas and usage. One inter-
pretation of these patterns is that when the overhead pro-
jector and vocal explanation suffice, they may be preferred
not merely because of their relative advantage, but be- T
cause they permit the teacher the greatest control of his
messages. It may be that academic areas plentiful in in-
structional materials allow the professor a wider range of
controlling messages. And so perhaps the more one uses
media, the more one locates messages that are compatible
with one's personal interests and instructional goals. This
idea of message control is considered consistent with the
conceptualization of a professor's "hierarchy of values in

a more general system of teaching-learning methods and

-1u3-

"12 Hence, the use of media may be related to the

process.
methodology which is formulated around one's values associ-
ated with the teaching-learning process. Could this notion
be used in working with faculty involved in instructional.
development? If media consultants started off their in- '
quiry with questions about methodology rather than with
questions about final behavioral objectives, would faculty
members respond in a different manner?

This study found that high-users identify media as
representing "too much time for the results obtained." At
the same time, they did not consider the "availability of
materials" as important a barrier as did the intermediate
and low-users. This may signify that high-users know what

messages they need but they feel inadequate to evaluate

their efforts. Thus the media administrator might arrange

for high-users to confer with media consultants, since these

are the faculty who want to measure or compare with cri-
teria that existed prior to the introduction of something
new.

The administrator who arranges the Opportunities for
faculty members to change their instructional role takes
risks, of course. But utilization opportunities are in—
significant if they only help an educator do more of what
he has already been doing.

To summarize these implications: First, there seems

 

12MacLean, "Critical Analysis," p. A—llO.

0-1 A- r ‘lll‘l _~._ ...-“:1-
, n

~1hh-

to be a variety of strategies for conceptualizing the for-
mation of attitudes toward media including focuses on (1)
the effect of personal goals and organizational goals; (2)
message availability and vehicle accommodations; and (3)
content control and content with little control. Any of
these strategies can be linked to one's hierarchy of values
associated with instruction. But no strategy can produce A
by itself a strong correlation between attitude and use.
Second, faculty responses on the media attitude and
barriers inventories indicate that neither instrument can
effectively evaluate the influence of extra—media support
services on faculty recipients. Although there are ques-
tions about the sensitivity of the instruments, attitudes
and behaviors associated with media are apparently linked
to other personal and situational factors. Hence the ex-
perience of receiving extra-media support service in the
large classrooms affects one's attitude and behavior toward
media little. Perhaps the use of media depends less on the
availability of the media equipment than on the availabi-
lity of media materials. Perhaps diversified information
campaigns should be directed at faculty members in the large
classroom, particularly in reference to observed usage, gen-
eral attitude, and identification of barriers. Some sensi-
tivity to the faculty member's methodology would facilitate
the involvement and cooperation between the media consul—
tant and the academician.
Recommendations for Further Study:

First, of course, this study should be replicated with

I -1u5-
improved measurement techniques.13 Data thus acquired
-could be compared with this study in order to determine
(1) baselines for usage in the large classrooms; (2) base-
lines for attitude scores; and (3) a hierarchy of barriers
related to using media. Information obtained from further
studies should be used to distinguish and then to facili-
tate communication with faculty members who receive extra-
media support service. But these measurements are probably
inadequate to evaluate influence of extra-media support
service. The influence of such services will only be re—
cognized when media consultants and faculty cooperate to
discuss methods for improving the teaching-learning situa-
tion.

Because all the groups sampled agree that updated in-
structional materials are needed, the media administrator
should concentrate on bringing this problem to the atten-
tion of different department chairmen. Perhaps some de—
partments may be encouraged to provide liason personnel to
confer at scheduled intervals with the center's resource
specialist. If awareness of content materials is an impor—
tant factor in the use of media, then the media administra-
tor may need to encourage departments to initiate in—service
workshops concentrating on locating curricular materials

and then disseminating this information.

 

13The BARRIERS should be inspected for further belief
statements. They are to be withdrawn and replaced with ad-
ditional barrier statements. It is suggested that the bar-
riers should be divided into those which are and which are
not within the control of the faculty member; barriers should
be ranked from most serious to least serious.

—lu6- . .

Further studies might investigate the problem of chan-
nels of communication in regard to media information, on
both the organizational and person-person levels. That
is, how do departments respond to communications origina-
ting from the media center? What priority is assigned to
individual and departmental requests for media assistance?
How do different faculty members learn about the center's
instructional development service?

Studies are especially urgent in the area of utiliza—
tion. A review of the literature indicates that little has
been done to conceptualize the stages of using media. Per-
haps different stages of using media parallel different
stages of change. Such work might be useful in evaluating
media-support programs and in predicting the needs of the
faculty member. Perhaps this line of research might pro—
vide controls so that the validity of each barrier could
be checked.

And finally, as we have implied before, there is need
for the development of a scale which can cross reference
one's hierarchy of values (in regard to methodology) with
one's attitude toward media. Possibly the validation of
such a scale would be faculty usage under different in-
structional conditions. Such information, indeed, would
be another step forward in aiding the media specialist to
understand his client's value system. Until that time,
the services offered by a media center will not provide the
total solution for providing change since support services

are only as good as the media put into operation by the

faculty.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Mace

 

Anastisi, Anne. Psychological Testing. New York:
Millan Company, 195 . _

Predictions of Adult Educator's Attitudes
Project 6-8075, USCE‘Con-

Apel, John D.
Illinois:

Toward InstitutionaI Changes.
ract - 3 - 6’- 068075 - 08u3. Chicago,

The University of Chicago, 1967.

"Small Scale Administrative Change: Resistance

Atwood, M.S.
to the Introduction of a High School Guidance Program."
Edited by Matthew B. Miles.

Innovation in Education.
eachers college, Columbia University, 196A.

9' 01‘:
Science and the Social Order. Collier Books.

Barber, Bernard.
The FreePress, 1952.

New'York:
A Procedural and Cost Analysis Study of Media

Barson, John.
in InstructionaIIS stems DEveIopment - Parts A and B”
Grant No. CE-3-l -030. East Michigan: Michigan

State University, 1965.
Barson, John., Instructional Systems Development:
stration and Evaluation Progect. Final Report.
' ontract o. - - Lansing, Michigan:
Michigan State University, 1967.
Audio-e

Berlo, David K. "You Are in the People Business."
Visual Instruction, VIII (June, 1963), 373~81. ‘“1

 

A Demon-
USOE

 

Berlo, David K. "Instructional Communication and Technology
Converging Concepts." Address delivered to the Syracuse
University Summer Conference on Technology and Education,
Center for Instructional Communications." July 1M, 1965.

(Mimeographed.)

Bridges, Edwin M., and Reynolds, Larry B. "Teacher Recep-
tivity to Change." Administrator's Notebook, XVI

(February, 1968), l-H)

j

Briggs, Leslie, Campeau, Peggie L; Gagne, Robert M, and Mar,
Mark A. Instructional Media: A Procedure for the Design
of Multi-Media InstructIOn, A critical Review of he.cach

and Suggestibn fbr“Future Research. ‘Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania: *Imerican Institutes for Research, 1967.
Brown, James H. and Norberg, Kenneth D. Administering Edu-

cational Media. New York: McGraw-HIII Boo E C6mf-ahy,

1965-

 

-1u7_

 

 

1|!I'O" In} . I o‘er? 'l. ’4
_ _.

-lh8-

Brown, James W. and Thornton, James W. Jr., New Media in
Higher_Education. Washington, D.C.: Association for
Higher Education and Department of Audiovisual Instruc-
tion, NBA, 1963.

Carpenter, C.R. and Greenhill, L.P. "Providing the Conditions
for Learning: The 'New' Media." Higher Education:
Some Newer Developments. Edited by Samuel Baskin. New
York: McGraw-Hill Book company, 1965.

Chin, Robert. "Models of and Ideas About Changing." Media
and Educational Innovation. Edited by Wesley C. Meirhenry.
Lincoln, Nebraska: The University of Nebraska Extension
Division and the University of Nebraska Press, 196A.

Cooper, Russell M. "Improving College Teaching and Adminis-
tration." Higher Education: Some Newer Developments.
Edited by Samuel Baskin.‘ New York: McGraw-Hill Book

Company. 1955.

Davis, Robert H. and Behan, Richard A. "Evaluating System
Performance in Simulated Environments." Psychologicgl

Princi Ice in S stem Develo ment. Edited by Robert M.
Gagne. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1962.
Department of Audiovisual Instruction. "Convention Report

1965." Audiovisual Instruction, Edited by Anna L. Hyer,
X (June-July, 1965). AHH:AS7.

Dietrich, John E., and Johnson, F. Craig. "A Catalytic Agent
for Innovation in Higher Education." Educational Record,
XLVIII (Summer, 1967). 206-13. '

Eboch, Sidney C. "The AV Specialist: Some Reflection on an—
Image." Audiovisual Instruction, VIII (January, 1963),
15-17. ’ '

Eboch, Sidney C. Implementation of Research Strategies and
Tactics for Demonstrations of Newer Media. USOE, Project
No. -5-026n, Contract No. OE—t- 16- 016. Columbus, Ohio:
The Ohio State University Research Foundation, 1966.

Edwards, Allen L. Experimental Design in Psychological Research.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1950.

Edwards, Allen L. Statistical Methods for the Behgvioral
Sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969.

Eichholz, Gerhard C. "Development of a Rejection Classification
for Newer Educational Media." Unpublished Ph.D. dis-
sertation, The Ohio State University, 1961.

.1u9.

Eichholz, Gerhard C., and Rogers, Everett M. "Resistance to
the Adoption of the Adoption of AV Aids by Elementary
School Teachers." Innovation in Education. Edited by
Matthew B. Miles. New York: Teachers College, Columbia
University, 196A.

 

Etzioni, Amitai, Modern Organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-
H811, Inc., 1965. j ‘

Eurich, Alvin C. "A Twenty-First Century Look at Higher Edu-
cation." Revolution in Teaching: New Theory, Technology,

 

 

and Curricula. EaIted 5y AIfred de Grazia and7DavldEA.
$622. Bantam Matrix Editions. New York: Bantam Books,
.19 .

Evans, Richard I. The University Faculty and Educational
Television: Hostility ‘ResiEtance, and‘Change. AITitle

VII Report. USHER Grant No. 731015, Houston,’Texas: The

University of Houston, 1962.

 

 

Farquhar, William W. "Directions for Thesis Preparation." East
Lansing: Michigan, School of Education. Michigan State
University, 1967. (Mimeographed.)

Finn, James D. "A Possible Model for Considering the Use of
Media in Higher Education."

agyign, XV (Summer, 1967), 153-57.

Fritz, John O. The Effggt pg Ingtrugtign pf the Complementary
Uge of Audiovisual Medig with Modified Pgttgrng 1n the use

of the Tegching gggfifl.’ NDEA Title VII, Project No. 399,
Grant No. 7-11-0 , Chicago. The University of Chicago,
Illinois, 1963.

Gallaher, Art, Jr. "The Role of the Advocate and Directed ;
Change." Media and Educational Innovation. Edited by:
Wesley C. Milrhenry. Lincoln, Nebraska: *The University
of Nebraska Extension Division and the University of
Nebraska Press, 196“.

Gentile, J. Ronald. "The First Generation of Computer Assisted
Instructional Systems: An Evaluative Review." Audios
visual Communication Review, XV (Spring, 1967). 23-53.

Godfrey, Eleanor. The State of Audiovisual Technology:
- . Monograph No. 3, NDEA Title VII, Stock No.
'071-02872. Washington, D.C.: NBA, 1967.

 

Goetzinger,Char1es, and Valentine, Miltine. "Faculty Attitude
Toward Educational Television: A Survey Report and Pre-
liminary Analysis." The Speech Teacher, XII (March, 1963),
127-30.

 

~150-

Greenhill, Leslie P. "Review of Trends in Research on
Instructional Television and Film." Research in
ngtructional Television and Film. Edited by'
ChristOpher Reid and Donald W) MacLennan. Washington,
D.C.: Bureau of Research, Government Printing Office,

1967.

Cuba, Egon G., and Snyder, Clinton. Evaluation on MPATI
Telecasts. Final Report, RF Project’l367, Cqumbus,
o: esearch Foundation at Ohio State University,

l96fl.

Guba, Egon G., and Snyder, Clinton A. "Instructional
* Television and The Classroom Teacher." Audio-Visual
Communication Review, XIII (Spring, 1965), 5-27.

 

 

Hailer, Harold M. "A Study of the Role of the Campus Audio—
Visual Services Center in Providing Audio—Visual
Materials." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University
of Wisconsin, 1955.

Handleman, S. D. "A Comparative Study of Teacher Attitudes
Toward Teaching by Closed-Circuit Television." Un-
published Ph. D. dissertation, New York University, 1960.

Harcleroad, Fred F. Learnin Resources for Colleges and
Universities. NDEA TItIe VII Report, USOE Grant No.
5E-3-16—525, Hayward, California: California State,
College at Hayward, 196A.

Hayes, William L. Statistics for Psychologists. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and—Winston,'1963.

 

n

Hoban, Charles F. "Dial 'T' for Tryst." Media and Educaa
tional Innovation. Edited by Wesley CT‘MeiFhenry. ’
Lincoln, Nebraska: The University of Nebraska Extension
Division and The University of Nebraska Press, 196A. ‘

 

Hubbard, Richard Dean. "A Study of the Reasons Given for the
Limited Use of Certain AV Materials at Syracuse
University." Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation, Syracuse
University, 1960.

Hudspeth, DeLayne R. "A Study of Belief Systems and Accepte
ance of New Educational Media with Users and Non-Users
of Audiovisual Graphics." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1966.

Katz, Daniel. "The Functional Approach to the Study of
Attitudes." Current Perspectives in Social Psychology.
2nd edition. Edited by Edwin F. Hollander and Raymond
G. Hunt. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1967.

 

 

-l51-

Katz, Joseph. "Personality and Interpersonal Relations in I
the College Classroom." The Amergcan College. Edited
by Nevitt Sanford. Science Editions. New York: John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1962.

Kelley, Gaylen B. "An Analysis of Teachers' Attitudes Toward
the Use of Audio-Visual Materials." Unpublished Ed.D.
dissertation, Boston University, 1959.

Knowlton, James 0., Studies of Patterns of Inflngnce in the
School Situation as The% Affect the Use of Audio-Visual
Materials. ND tle II report, USOE Grant No. 7—12-
029, Bloomington, Indiana: Division of Educational Media
and AV Center at Indiana University, 1963.

Krathwohl, David R. "Stating Objectives Appropriately for
Instructional Materials Development." Journal of
Teacher Education, XVI (March, 1965). 83-89.

 

Lewin, Kurt. A D namic Theory of Personality. New York:
McGraw-Hill, I935. ' '

Lin, Nan; Leu, Donald J., Rogers, Everett M., and Schwartz,
Donald F. The Diffusion of an Innovation in Three
Michigan High Schools: InstitutionIBuildinnghrougp

hange. Research Report Number 1, Diffusion of Edu—
cational Practices in Thailand. East Lansing, Michigan:
Institute for International Studies in Education and
Depzrtment of Communication at Michigan State University,
19 .

MacLean, Malcolm 8., Jr., "Critical Analysis of 12 Recent Title
VII Research Projects." in "Research Abstracts and
Analytical Review of Completed Projects: National
Defense Education Act, NDEA Title VII." Installment u,
Audiovisual Communication Review, X (May-June, 1962),
A-109-10.

Mahmoudi, K.M. "The Relationship Between 'Authoritarian'
and Attitude Toward Educational Television." Unpub-
lished Ed.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1962.

Mann, John H. "Studies of Role Performance." Genetic

Ps cholo Mono ra hs, LXIV (Winter-Spring, 1961),
217-307.

Mason, Robert D. Stgtigtiggl nghnigues in Business and
Ednaatinn, Homewood, Illinois: Richard F. Irwin,
Inc., 1967.

-152.-

Mayhew, Lewis B. "A Summing Up. " New Media in Higher Educa-
tion. Edited by James W. Brown and James W. Thornton,
Jr., Washington, D. C. Association for Higher Education
and Department of Audiovisual Instruction - NBA, 1963.

McIntyre, Kenneth, and Brown, Robert. A Stud to Determine
Specific Sources of Resistance to the Use of AV Materials
b cellege and University Teachers and the DeveIOpment
o‘ProceduresITEr Overcoming the Barriers‘to Optimum‘Use.
NBEA, Title VIIA Project No. 332, Grantho. 731052, ‘Chapel
Hill, North Carolina: The University of North Carolina,

1963.

McKeachie, Wilbert J. "Automation: New Media in Education
Concerns and Challenges." Association for Higher Edu-
cation: College and University Bulletin, XVIII (November
1, 1965), l— 3.

McKeachie, Wilbert J. "Procedures and Techniques of Teaching:
A Survey of Experimental Studies." Edited by Nevitt
Sanford. Science Editions. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, Inc., 1967.

McKeachie, Wilbert J. "Higher Education." The New Media and
Education. Edited by Peter H. Rossi and Bruce J) Biddle.
Anchor Books. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc.,

1967.

Meierhenry, Wesley G., (ed.), "Needed Research in the Introduction
and Use of Audiovisual Materials: A Special Report."
Audiovisual Communication Review, X (November - December,

7-16.

 

 

Meierhenry, Wesley 0., (ed. ), Media and Educational Innovation.
Lincoln, Nebraska: The University ofN Nebraska Extension
Division and The University of Nebraska Press, 196A.

 

 

Meierhenry, Wesley C. "Innovation, Education, and Media. "
ggdiovisual Communication Review, XIV (Spring, 1966),
1e65

Michigan State University. The Fall Faculty and Staff_
Director , 1967-68. East Lansing, Michigan: ‘MIEhigan
State UniversityPublications, (Fall, 1967).

Michigan State University Computer Laboratory. "Analysis of
Covariance and Analysis of Variance with Unequal
Frequencies Permitted in the Cells -— (LS Routine)"

Agricultural Experiment Stations STAT Series Description
No. 18, East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University,
December, 1966. (Mimeographed.)

-153-

Michigan State University Computer Laboratory. "Calculation
of Basic Statistics on the BASTAT Routine. Agricultural
Experiment Station' s STAT Series Description No. 5. East
Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, January,
1966. (Mimeographed.)

Miles, Matthew B. "Educational Innovation: Some Generaliza— '
tions." Media and Educational Innovation. Edited by
Wesley C. Meirhenry. Lincoln, Nebraska: The University
of Nebraska Extension Division and the University of
Nebraska Press, 196h.

Miles, Matthew B. "Educational Innovation: The Nature of
the Problem." Innovation in Education. Edited by
Matthew B. Miles. New York: Bureau of Publications,
Teachers College Columbia University, 196".

Norberg, Kenneth D. "The New Media in Higher Education: A
Rationale." New Media in Higher Education. Edited by
James W. Brown and James W. Thornton, Jr., Washington,
D.C.: Association of Higher Education and Department
of Audiovisual Instruction - NBA, 1963.

Norberg, Kenneth D. "Some Implications Drawn from Papers
Read at the Symposium." Media and Educational Innovation.
Edited by Wesley C. Meirhenry. Lincoln, Nebraska: The
University of Nebraska Extension Division and the Univer-
sity of Nebraska Press, 196A.

Orne, M.T. "0n the Social Psychology of the Psychological
Experiment: With Particular Reference to Demand
Characteristics and Their Implications." American
Psychologist XVII (Spring, 1967), 776- 83.

Pellegrin, Roland J. An Analysis of Sources and Processes of
Innovation in Education. Paper presented at the Conference
on Educational Change sponsored by the Demonstration
Project for Gifted Youth and the USOE. Allerton Park,
Illinois: Demonstration Project for Gifted Youth,

February 28, 1966: Center for the Advanced Study of
Edggational Administration at University of Oregon,
19 .

Ramsey, Curtis P. P
a Measure to Assess Attitudes Regarding the Uses of
Educational Media. NDEA Title VIIA, Project No. N92.
USOE OEG-7h0095, Nashville, Tennessee. George Peabody
College for Teachers, 1961.

-1su—

Report to the Provost. Prepared by the Learning Resources
Advisory Panel. Paul L. Dressel, Chairman. East
Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1962.
(Mimeographed.)

Report of the All-Faculty Conferencelgconference Summation
on Learninngesources for Higher Education. Paul L.
Dressel, Chairman. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan
State University, 1962.

Rogers, Everett M. Diffusion of Innovation. New York: The
Free Press of Glencoe, 1962.

Rogers, Everett M. "Innovations: Research Design and Field
Studies." Paper presented at the Conference on Novel
Strategies and Tactics for Field Studies Involving New
Educational Media. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State
University, May 10-12, 1965. '

Rokeach, Milton. "Part One: The Theory and Measurement of
Belief Systems." The Open and Closed Mind. New York:
Basic Books, Inc. 1960.

Rokeach, Milton. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey - Bass Inc., 19

Rossi, Peter H., and Biddle, Bruce J. "Educational Media
Education and Society." The New Media and Education.
Edited by Peter H. Rossi and Bruce J. Biddle. Anchor
Books. New York: Doubleday and Co. , Inc. , 1967.

Sears, Robert R. "A Theoretical Framework for Personality
and Social Behavior." Current Perspectives in Social
Psychology, 2nd Edition. Edited by Edwin P. Hollander
and Raymond G. Hunt. New York: Oxford University Press,
Inc., 1963. -

Sherif Muzafer, and Hovland, Carl L. "Judgmental Processes
and Problems of Attitude." Current Perspectives in
Sogial Psychology, 2nd ed. Edited by Edwin F. Hollander
and Raymond G. Hunt, New York: Oxford University Press,
Inc., 1963.

Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral
Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1956.

 

Smith, Duane R. "A Study of Elementary Teachers' Attitudes
Toward, Beliefs About, and Use of Newer Instructional
Material." Unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, University
of Pittsburgh, 1966.

 

-155-

Steininger, Marion. "Situational and Individual Determinants
of Attitude Scale Responses." Educational and Psycho-
logical Measurement, XXV (Autumn, 1965), 757— 65.

Streeter, Charles E. "A Study of Relationships Among Selected
Factors Affecting Media Use by Classroom Teachers Within
Selected School Systems." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1967.

Swineford, E. J. "Obstacles in the Use of Audiovisuals.
Educational Screen and Audio Visual Guide, XXXVIII

TJanuary. 19593. 19- 23 '7‘

Third Annual Report to the Ford Foundation. "Project No. 032, .
Audiovisual Saturation, Audio Student Learning Laboratory," 1
Final report submitted by Instructional Development 7
Service, July 1, 196u-June 30, 1967.

 

Tobias, Sigmund. "Dimensions of Teacher's Attitudes Toward Q
Instructional Media." American Educational Research ~
Journal, V (January, 19687, 91-98. ‘

Turabian, Kate L. A Manual for Writers of Term Papers,_Thesg§,
and Dissertations. 3rd ed. Phoenix Books. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1967.

U.S., Congress, Joint Economic Committee. Technology in
Education. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Economic
Progress of the Joint Economic Committee, 89th Cong.,
2d sess., June 6, 10 and 13, 1966, Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, 1966.

University Microfilms, Inc., Dissertation Abstracts. Series
A: Humanities and Social Sciences. Series B: Sciences
and Engineering. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Micro-
films, Inc., 1966.

Hygal, BenJamin R. "Personal Characteristics and Situational
Perceptions of Junior College Instructors and Related to
Innovativeness." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, The
University of Texas, 1966.

Zander, Alvin. "Resistance to Change - Its Analysis and Pre-
vention." The Planning of Change. Edited by Warren G.
Bennis, Kenneth D. Benne, and Robert Chin. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 196A.

 

APPENDICES

“'1‘! J. .1

 

 

APPENDIX I

10.
ll.

12.
13.

1h.
15.

16.

17.

APPENDIX I

 

SERVICES PROVIDED BY MEDIA CENTERS

 

Ordering films and/or materials at the request of the
faculty;

Scheduling the use of such materials, including equip—»
ment and operator;

Organizing workshops, clinics, and conferences for spe~
cial groups;

Giving demonstrations and talks;

Arranging previews and evaluations of films, and other
media, for individuals, departments, classes, and the
such;

Making recommendations to departments or individuals con-
templating the purchase of equipment of materials;

Storing and maintaining many kinds of audio-visual equip-
ment and certain materials;

Keeping an up-to-date file of catalogs on all types of
audio—visual materials and equipment;

9
Procuring and distributing certain audio-visual books,
magazines, manuals, pamphlets, and such professional ma-

terials;
Developing and distributing audio-visual source lists;

Publishing and distributing Service Bulletins on a wide
variety of audio-visual topics;

1

Providing equipment labs;

Offering consultant services for any group or individual,
concerning problems in audio-visual education: Selection,
utilization and/or evaluation of materials and equipment;
sources of appropriate materials; simple production tech—
nique; and classroom planning or adapting;

Planning audio-visual curricula;

Participating in the Instructional Materials Advisory
Council:

Maintaining an Audio-Visual Library for genera]-1eference
and for audio-visual majors;

Providing staff for teaching audio-visual courses and
equipment labs and other in-service activities;

«156-

 

APPENDIX II

-157-

APPENDIX II - A

 

CORRESPONDENCE: Initial Contact Letter

 

December 29, 1967

Professor F
Michigan State—university

East Lansing, Michigan H8823

Dear Professor

 

fir

We are now in the process of evaluating certain aspects of
our campus media service programs here at MSU and would
greatly appreciate your assistance in furnishing informa— t
tion needed for a study being conducted during the winter "~
quarter.

 

Essentially, we need your cooperation in completing the
two enclosed questionnaires on or before January 10, 1968.
Completion of both forms will require approximately ten
minutes. There will be comparably brief follow-up forms
to complete at the close of the winter quarter.

For our results to have maximum validity and significance,
it is extremely important to have 100% returns. All indi-
vidual responses will be treated confidentially in accor-
dance with the ethics of such research.

Neither names nor responses will be individually identi—
fied in the interpretation and reporting of results.

Codes will be used for purposes of statistical comparison.
A return envelope is enclosed. When you have completed the
forms, please place them in this envelope, and return it to
us via campus mail.

Thank you very much for your cooperation in this project.

Cordially,

Charles F. Schuller, Director
Instructional Media Center

CPS/ram
Enclosures

-158—

APPENDIX II - B

 

CORRESPONDENCE: Follow-up Letter

 

January 8, 1968i

Professor ,
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan “8823

 

Dear Professor

 

We have now reached a point where we have to set a closing
date of March 18 for data recording.

A file search indicates that we do not have you listed as
completed. As was probably explained during our initial
letter, questionnaire identification is lost once they
enter recording procedures. Our only record of respon-
dents is our master list where we do not have a return
posted for you. If we have erred, we apologize for taking
up your time. If not, we do hope you will help us.

Research shows that late returns on questionnaires come
from important respondents who absolutely must not be
neglected. They are often involved with other matters
requiring their attention, they may have strong feelings
about the subject matter of a questionnaire, or converse-
ly, the matter at hand may seem totally irrelevant to

them. All of these indicate that you are "special people."
Therefore, it is extremely important that your views not

be omitted.

In case the questionnaire materials were misplaced, we
are enclosing another set for your convenience.

Thank you very much for your cooperation in this project.

Cordially,

Charles F. Schuller, Director
Instructional Media Center

CFS/ram
Enclosures

~159-

APPENDIX II - c
CORRESPONDENCE: CONTACT LETTER

 

March A, 1968

Professor
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan h8823

 

Dear Professor: :

We are now in the second and final stage Of our evalua-
tion of certain aspects of our campus media service pro-
grams at MSU. Thanks to your participation, and to that
of others in positions similar to yours, the first stage
of our evaluation has been successfully completed.

Once again, we ask for your cooperation in completing the
two enclosed questionnaires on or before March 15, 1968.
Completion of both forms will require approximately ten
minutes.

For our results to have maximum validity and significance,-
it is extremely important to have 1001 returns. All in-
dividual responses will be treated confidentially in ac-
cordance with the ethics of such research.

As mentioned in our first letter to you, neither names

nor responses will be individually identified in the in-
terpretation and reporting of results. Codes will be

used for purposes of statistical comparison. Upon request,
copies of our preliminary findings will be made available
at the end of the spring quarter. Such a request can be
indicated on the questionnaire.

A return envelope is enclosed. When you have completed
the forms, please place them in this envelOp and return
it to us via campus mail.

Thank you very much for your cooperation in this project.

Cordially,

Charles F. Schuller, Director
'Instructional Media Center

CPS/cs
Enclosures

 

~160-

APPENDIX II - D
' OW—UP ET R
March A, 1968

Professor :
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan #8823

We are now in the process of evaluating certain aspects
of our campus media service programs here at MSU and
would greatly appreciate your assistance in furnishing
information needed for a study being conducted during
the winter quarter.

Essentially, we need your cooperation in completing the
two enclosed questionnaires on or before March 15, 1968.
Completion of both forms will require approximately ten
minutes.

For our results to have maximum validity and significance,
it is extremely important to have 1001 returns. All in-
dividual responses will be treated confidentially in ac-
cordance with the ethics of such research.

Neither names nor responses will be individually identi—
fied in the interpretation and reporting of results.
Codes will be used for purposes of statistical campari-
son. Upon request, cOpies of our findings will be made
available at the end of the spring quarter.

A return enveIOp is enclosed. When you have completed
the forms, please place them in this envelope, and return -
it to us via campus mail.

Thank you very much for your cOOperation in this project.

Cordially,

Charles F. Schuller, Director
Instructional Media Center

CFSch'
Enclosures

 

APPENDIX III

 

APPENDIX III - A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 1. BREAKDOWN OF RETURNS FOR GROUP I - PRE—TESTS
Item Experience New Control

n: _§h 9 70

R: 29 9 55

on-usable: 8 l 11

Group if Usable Z Usable 1 Non-usable

xperience 21 61.8 g;8.2
New 8 88.9 11.1
Control "A 62.9 37.1
Total 73 64.6 35.h

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F41..-

 

 

—l62-

APPENDIX III - B

casts 2. BREAKDOWN_OF RETURNS FOR GROUP I — POST-TEST

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Item Experience New Control
n: 21 8 AA
,, .R‘ 17 8 35
Eon-usable: 1 0 0 _4
[_Group Usable % Usable z Non-usable
*99’39'193 16W 76 . 2 2 3.8
. Newfif Pf1 - 18 100.0 0.0
‘figontrol' 35 79.5 20.5
Total, g 59 80.8 19.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1r".

 

 

-..ll. ANSI

 

 

APPENDIX IV

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

' ‘ :— —
-l6h-
APPENDIX Iv '. A ‘
TABLE.A. DEMOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF FACULTY: TIME RE-
CEIVINU'EXTRIIMEDII‘SUPPORTEIND'ICIDEMIC‘IREIS

umber of I

Quarters

ith Extra-

Media Demand FIE
Support Character- 7
Service Experienced New Control isticv .Totals . g

0 -- 2!: 102 2a 150
1 -- -- --- -- 0 I
g.
2 1A -- --- -- 1h Sgt
3 15 -- --- -— 15
A 17 -- --- -- 17
Total "6 2A 102 2A 196
Academic
Areas
Sciences
and
Engineering 20 12 51 ll . f9h
Humanities
and

Social
Sciences 26 12 #51 1; - 102 h

Total 46 2A 102 2h 196

 

 

 

 

 

-165-

APPENDIX IV7- 3

TABLE 5 . DEMOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF FACULTY: PROFES-
SIONAL STATUS. r ' I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Demand
Character-
ofessional istic- ‘
ank xperienced New Control Control Totals
Dean -- -- 1 -- 1
Chairman -- -- 2 1 3:
Professor 15 if 29 6 53
Associate
Professor 12 fig 2A A “3
Assistant
Professor ,. 1A 10 30 6 60
Part-time
Professor 1 -- —- -- l
Instructor 2 2 5 1 10
Assistant
Instructor -— 2 l 1 _T9
Specialist 1 l l -- 3
Graduate
Assistant 1 2 9 3 15
Guest
Lecturer -- 1 -— -- 1
Totals “6 ‘ 21! 102 2A 196

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.F'

It!)

1!.

 

* .
'3

M3

APPENDIX V

1.3.0...

It.

 

_ ..

1.
2.

3.
u.

-166?

APPENDIX V — A

DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS: wJanuary, 1968

HURANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Table of Contents lists in alphabetical order the
principal subject categories of the dissertations abstracted.
For the convenience of readers an alphabetical author and
subject index is included following

ACCOUNTING
ENGLISH

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

ECONOMICS
Agricultural
Commerce-Business
Finance
History
Theory

EDUCATION
Administration
Adult
Guidance and Counseling
History
Physical
Psychology.
Religion
Teacher Training
Theory and Practice

FINE ARTS

nxsroay

Ancient

Medieval

Modern
JOURNALISM

LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE

10.
11.
12.
13.
1A.

15.
16.
17.
18.

19.
20.
21.

22.
23.

 

v—' ‘wv
.

the abstracts.

LAW

LIBRARY SCIENCE
MUSIC
PHILOSOPHY

POLITICAL SCIENCE
International Law and
Relations
Public Administration

RELIGION
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
SOCIAL WORK

SOCIOLOGY
Family
Labor Relations
Public Welfare
Race Question
Regional and City
Planning

SPEECH
SPEECH-THEATER

U.S. OFFICE OF
EDUCATION REPORTS

’SOCIAL SCIENCE

“TELEVISION AND RADIO

Incademic subject assigned to this category by researcher.

 

”ET
1

 

 

‘uflllujwlllj. l S T.E ril—

 

1.

13.
1”.

~16?-

APPENDIX V - s

DISSTERTATION ABSTRACTS:

Jan. 1968

 

SCIENCES AND ENGINEERING

Vol. 28'
No. 7

The Table of Contents lists in alphabetical order the
jprincipal subject categories of the dissertations abstracted.
iPor the convenience of readers an alphabetical author and sub-
Ject index is included following the abstracts.

AGRICULTURE
Animal Culture
Animal Pathology
Forestry and Wildlife
Plant Culture
Plant Pathology
Soil Science
Hood Technology

AGRONOMY
ANATOMY
ANTHROPOLOGY
ASTRONOMY
BACTERIOLOGY
BIOCHEMISTRY
BIOLOGY
BIOLOGY—GENETICS
BIOPHYSICS
BOTANY
CHEMISTRY
Analytical
Biological
Inorganic
Nuclear
Organic
Pharmaceutical
Physical
Polymer
ENTOMOLOGY

FOOD TECHNOLOGY

15.
l6.

17.

18.

19.

20.
21.
22.
23.
2A.

25.

26.

2?.

GEOGRAPHY
GEOPHYSICS

HEALTH SCIENCES
Nursing
Nutrition
Pathology
Pharmacy
Public Health

HYDROLOGY _
MARINE SCIENCE
MATHEMATICS
MICROBIOLOGY
MINERALOGY
OCEANOGRAPHY
PHARMACOLOGY

PHYSICS
Electronics and
Electricity
Meteorology
Molecular
Molecular Spectroscopy
Nuclear
Solid State
Spectroscopy

PHYSIOLOGY

PSYCHOLOGY
Clinical
Experimental
Industrial

 

 

2.8.
29.
30.
31.

-168-
SPEECH PATHOLOGY
STATISTICS
ZOOLOGY
_'COMPUTER SCIENCE

 

“Academic subject assigned to this category by researcher.

APPENDIX VI

 

 

 

3"" It. .

...!nh: .39, ‘:fi

 

 

 

 

-169-.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX VI
TABLE 6. A BREAKDOWN OF FACULTY RANKS WITHIN EACH OF
A ROGRAMS:
5URINE—TRE'FIEE—OF—I§67': '
enera *
University Research Extension
Rank Program Program Program? Total
AProfessor Cl. 532 121 26 679
Essociate
rofessor _ W 372 fif 95 2A 591
heistant A
ofessor A67 105 fl? 29' 601
kesearch
ssociate 0 77 O 77
Eistructor 257 ‘ f 61 . ‘ 8 326
hssistant
nstructor 213 77 0 290
I Total laul 536 87 2u6u

23!;

 

T I -r

I'Inrornation supplied by the Alumni Office at M.S.U.

 

7:

APPENDIX VII

. .. \3U7.t.o. . A A. CT.

 

-170-

APPENbe vII 3 A
TABLE 7. THE DESIGN FOR GROUP I AND GROUP II: A BREAK-

Wfi—

A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\B Pre-Test Post-Test A. Total .
roup .1 ’33" . ’ UAJE sed
Experienced Sample 33 29 21 21 17 16 7 16
‘Tewnjflample 9 9 _8 8 L 8 8 8
Lontrol Sample 70 55 M “A 35 35 35
\3 pre-Tegt Post-Test Total
rouppII ‘ I BE: RD. 05"”
Experienced Sample ’ 36 33 39 3:9
ew Sample f . 7 _ 18 18 l 16' 16
Control Sample f - ‘ 85 7;? 67 67
172

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a. Sent out.

b. Returned.

c. Used for analysis.

d. Sent again for post-test.

e. Returned again. .

f. Used again for post-test analysis.

 

 

Le~

 

 

‘-171—

APPENDIX VII - B

TABLE 8. THE DESIGN FOR GROUP I AND GROUP II: AN IDENTI-
EICATION OF THE SAMPLES USED IN HYPOTHESES TESTING.

r

Pre-Test Post-Test
Number Number ' '
21 16
8 8 Ha
an 35 H5 H5

Pre—Test Posthest

Number Number

30

16 Hg

67 H“ H7‘

 

 

I
N
F

H3 u ra, pp. 107-108.

F

Hu u ra, pp. 108-109.

F

u ra, pp. 110-111.

F

H6 u ra, pp. 111—112.

F

H7 u ra, pp. 112-113.

F

 

APPENDIX VI II

 

 

March 13, 1968

Professor
Michigan SEaEe UnIversIty
East Lansing, Michigan "8823

Dear Professor . :

We are now in the process of conducting a pilot study for
a committee meeting at the National Convention of Division
of Audiovisual Instruction. This preliminary study is
part of a larger study which intends to explore faculty
views on the state of media in higher education..

May we have your assistance?

Essentially, we need your cooperation in completing the
two enclosed questionnaires on or before March 18, 1968.
Completion of both forms will require-approximately ten
minutes.

For our results to have maximum validity and significance,

it is extremely important to have 100% returns. All indivi-,

dual responses will be treated confidentially in accordance'
with the ethics of such research.

Neither names ner responses will be individually identified '

in the interpretation and reporting of results. Codes will.
be used for purposes of statistical comparison. Upon re-
quest, copies of our findings will be made available at the
end of Spring.Quarter. ‘

A return envelope is enclosed. When you have completed the
forms, please place them in this envelOpe, and return it

to us via campus mail.

Thank you very much for your cooperation in this project.

Cordially,

Richard A. Margoles, Coordinator
DAVI Joint Pilot Study on Media at MSU

RAM/cs

Enclosures

 

 

 

 

 

 

-173-

APPENDIX VIII - B
CORRESPONDENCE: FOLLOW~UP LETTER

March 1“, 1968

Professor
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan ”8823

 

Dear Professor ‘ :

We have now reached a point where we have to set a closing
date of March 15 for data recording.

A file search indicates that we do not have you listed as
completed. As was probably explained during our initial
letter, questionnaire identification is lost once they
enter recording procedures. Our only record of respondents
is our master list, where we do not have a return posted
for you. If we have erred, we apologize for taking up
your time. If not, we do hope you will help us.

Research shows that late returns on questionnaires come
from important respondents who absolutely must not be ne~
glected. They are often involved with other matters re-
quiring their attention, they may have strong feelings

about the subject matter of a questionnaire, or conversely,
the matter at hand may seem totally irrelevant to them.

All of these indicate that you are "special people." There~
fore, it is extremely important that your views not be
omitted.

In case the questionnaire materials were misplaced, we are
enclosing another set for your convenience.

Thank you very much for your cOOperation in this project.

Cordially,

Richard A. Margoles, Coordinator
DAVI Joint Pilot Study on Media at MSU

RAM/baj

Enclosures

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX IX

 

—17u—

APPENDIX IX - A‘
DAILY OBSERVATIONS UNDERTAKEN IN THE LARGE CLASSROOMS
Directions:

In order that a daily record can be constructed for faculty
members' use of educational media equipment, student Oper-
ators are asked to keep a daily log on the amount of time
that media equipment is used. You are asked to record to
the nearest minute the instructor's use of media for each
class. *

At times there may be more than one faculty member who in-
structs during that class session. If this is the case,
you are asked to keep a separate log for that faculty mem-
ber. ’

The time continuum covers a time period from zero minutes
to sixty minutes. This time line does not correspond to
the use of media at a certain period during the class.
Rather the time continuum represents how much time a parti-
cular form of media was used during that class session.

At the end of each day's service, you are asked to return
your daily log(s) to Dave Lockwood. Daily logs will be
available in the Distribution & Facilities Office, located
on the lower level of the IMC.

. Use one time line for each type of media that is used.

. Always start from zero minutes and end at the appropriate
minute which corresponds to the duration of use.

. Don't trust your perception of time, use a watch.

. Although the same type of equipment is used more than
once during that session, enter each use on a different
time line. '

. If a faculty member appears to have stopped using the
overhead, but the overhead is still turned on. allow .
two more minutes of time, then record the time of use.

 

 

 

 

 

‘F

 

.83:me ow em we we
*OOOO*OOQO*OOOO*,OO
nouns—«8 ow em we we,
. “....OO*.OOOO*.OOOO*OO
333cc ow em we we
-. *WWOO*OOOO*OOOO*OO
8358 8 on 3 Ne
. .*.Q.IO*OOOO*OO0.0*OJ
.3335 ow em we we
*J..O*OOOO*OOOJ*OO
non—93,5 ow em we we
.- *Joeoh..o.ooo*ooo.o.*ee
5
7
1
.
was 3:930:3wa mo conga .350 mm
.3333 33333 US
330333 Dow
woeuooou one... 42
M30392“ ooze <3
«3039.3 5:2: 5.—
wgfln pwooon <2
.3333 3pm." 0.2
33.282: wofieuwoua neu
abandoned-:33 «wean-£9:— wefiugo 92
3300.— wsmouao 33039:— veoaugo an.

11 «as Vanda nevowow. :30

v.« m..— a . fl 3:: 58.6 :33: £35

 

‘II‘ I 1i ‘1

2.333250 we 8nd A
3835 3.3333

duo +~o 400 4-0 4-0 duo

§ ”.5

"m 0” .M .M .M

M

 

on em
0 * O O O a“: O O
on em
I * O O O *. O O
on em
0 .qv o a 0.“. o a
on em
0 k. a o o h. e a
on eN
o .m. o. o. a k. c o
On em
I *v C O O A‘- O O
wongz moan

 

D I #4 KHDZNLL<

 

3 2 w c ...: -
k. 0 o 0 o &. o o o o k a a o o end/.4.
* O O O O *- 0 0 O O h. o O 0 O that?”
w~ .2 w o ...l...

.* C C C O «I O O O O I“. O O O I OOH/fl
* O O O O *1 O I O O A". O o O O DOM“
*3 O O O 0 *w 0. O O O + O O O O .hvb..I.—v
k. 0 O O O A". -0 O O O I“. o o o O .05/H

33.0....
homeomofimonofifi 3...

6.509 oflosmmg

.. nobomoa. 8% 5 3,3 as

53m>m wooaioofi Om,
wumop macaw: Qm
LOuoonoum ammunfimm fie
«303.33 Egg 595 On
se.—«£0 >m~mmme Gm
canofifiwao n:

3m demon domnuom newnu
”oosnm Eooaoneno owned
33.532 and 032. 3.300
«0..th utmouosuummw

F

Ill
'
‘1

F”

..7 5... it‘s“ .p.k

 

.
£51315 h . 21...

APPENDIX 1

‘ .Lvlluil‘llui’ DJ

-176-

AfPsNDIx‘x
as! EDQQAIIONAD HEDIAWACCEPTANCE INVENTORY

sauna EDUCATIONAL MEDIA

During the past twenty years or so, many new teaching
aids have been developed. Some of these are sufficiently
elaborate to change, or even to replace temporarily, the

college classroom communication processes which were former- ram

ly pretty much limited to students and faculty. Radio, tele~
vision, overheads, motion pictures, slides and filmstrips,
phonograph and tape recorders, certain types of teaching
machines and programed learning methods -- all are examples
of what might be termed the "Newer Educational Media" in
educational technology.

 

 

In American education today, there is some controversy
concerning these educational media. The following statements
represent various points of view on this question.

Please indicate the extent of your agreement or dis-
agreement with each statement. Please don't make efforts to
be consistent or to select the "right answer" -- there are
none. Simply enter the proper number in the space before
each sentence according to the following code:

1. Agree strongly

2. Agree moderately

3. Agree slightly

h. Disagree slightly
5. Disagree moderately
6. Disagree strongly

l. The widespread use of educational media will revolu4
tioniae the process of instruction as we know it now.

2. The possible uses of educational media are limited
only by the imagination of the person directing the
usage.

3. The wide resources of educational media stimulate the
creative college student.

R. N. There are no educational frontiers in the educational
media domain -- Just new gadgets.

R 5. Most students see the educational media mainly as
entertainment, rather than as education.

R 6. Most faculty members lose the gratification of per-
sonal accomplishment when the student is taught by
educational media methods.

 

I .li... l.l"ll i l .

 

 

~177-

Please indicate the extent of your agreement or disagreement
with each statement. m

____ 7.

8.
R 9.

10.
R 11.
n 12.
R 13.
R 1h.
R 15.

16.
n 17.

.acceptance on the part of most students.

1. Agree strongly

2. Agree moderately

3. Agree slightly

u. Disagree slightly
5. Disagree moderately
6. Disagree strongly

Use of educational media constitutes a major ad-
vance in providing for individual differences in
the learning needs of students.

Much wider usage of the educational media is needed.

Vicarious learning by educational media methods is
not conducive to the most effective learning. as

 

If surplus funds exist which could be spend only
for supplementary books or for more educational
media equipment, the latter should be chosen.

College students can learn the basic value of a
good education only when taught by conventional
methods —- not by educational media methods.

The problems of getting materials and equipment

when you need it, darkening rooms, setting up the
equipment, and otherwise disrupting classes tend!
to counteract the value of most educational media
aids. '

The "authoritative" presentations of most of the
educational media tend to produce an uncritical

 

The passive quality of learning via educational
media is not conducive to the most effective
learning.

The proper student attitudes for effective learning
are not develOped as well by the educational media
as by conventional methods of teaching.

Only through educational media can vicarious learn-
ing experiences be provided in the Classroom.

The expense of most media equipment and materials
is out of all proportion to their educational value.

 

—l78—

Please indicate the extent of your agreement or disagreement

with each statement.

22.

3 23.

' i
1. Agree strongly ~ .;
2. Agree moderately .
3. Agree slightly‘

9. Disagree slightly

5. Disagree moderately

6. Disagree strongly

Educational media give little opportunity to provide
for the individual differences of students.

The personal relationship between faculty fitmbeP and
student is essentail in most learninp "3r”.LJOUS

Educational media materials are so specific as to
have little adaptability to different teaching re—
quirements or situations.

With increased usage of education media, the teach-
ing role may be down-graded to cler ice 1 u rk proc—
toring, grading, and other simple tunir.ct~atrvc
tasks.

The development of educational mecia centers in
every college unit should be necouraged and facili~
tated. . - fi

.51
Educational media do not suitably provide for the
special needs of either slow learners or brighter
students.

 

Have you taught at least one academic course on
campus during the past year?

Yes ( ) No ( )

 

!‘ ‘ ' -. .
Items designated "R" were designed as ‘ncgative“ items

and reverse scored in determining the subject's attitude.

 

and”; 4‘

 

1 3“.

 

 

APPENDIX XI

 

 

 

 

~179-

‘ APPENDIX x1
TABLE 9. BASEElNE DATA FOR NEMA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Item Guba-Snyder Hudspeth Margoles
n: 573 i 36 59*”
m: 67.1 6M.8 7l.h f———
SD: 15 .9 ‘ ~-* 17.2 j»
eliability: .85 --* .86 I

 

 

7.— firV—vw

s
Information not given.

 

”mam-am “ {I
l

|

i

as
Pre-test and Post—test correlation done for Group I:

Experienced (u-16); New (N-8); and Control (N=35).

 

APPENDIX XII

 

 

 

~180-

APPENDIXYXII
BARRIERS TO USING EDQCATIONAL MEDIA AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL

'-§ARRIERs go USING MEDIA

Below is a list of 13 statements concerning some major
barriers or deterrents to using media. Media in this case
refers to material and equipment, such as film and projec-
tor, used in the college classroom.

We are interested in finding out the conditions which
you feel are the greatest deterrents to the use of media in
your own teaching.

The listing of barriers is arranged in alphabetical
order. Study the list carefully. Then select any six state—
ments which in your opinion are the greatest barriers to you.

PLEASE CRECK ONLY SIX 0? THEFOLLOWING STATEMENTS:
When you have identified six barriers, go back and
check over your selection. Please take all the time you

need to think about this.

IR' Available media materials do not cover important sub—
Ject matter.-

 

Either the equipment or the media materials are in p
pobr physical shape. a

Faculty members in general lack sufficient training:
for the utilization of media equipment.

Inadequate classroom facilities stand in the way of
media use. .

IR It takes too much time to preview or select materials.
IR Media are used as "fillers" or entertainment.
Media equipment is seldom available when needed.
Media materials are seldom available when needed.

IR Media materials such as films are not very important
aids to learning.

 

v

.Items designated "IR" were designed as "instruction-
ally relevant".

 

 

 

 

IR

IR

-181-

APPENDIX XII
(Continued)

Media materials that are available are usually out
of date.

Our department is opposed or indifferent to media.
There is not enough money in the budget.

When one uses media, one uses too much time for the
results obtained.

 

 

APPENDIX XIII

 

 

 

 

—182-

 

AgrENbe_XIII - A

TABLE 10. DIFFERENCES IN ATTITUDE SCORES BETWEEN THE SAME

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

,NEfi-FI5UETY—HEfiEEFS'WEUIHKVE—TKKEN"TEE'fiEfiK-§EE;
Rank with
§§55.Pre-test NEMA Post—test Rank less
New Faculty prior to after of frequent
Sample: Group I extra-support fiextra-support d d sign
No. l - 98 f 88 -10 -§;§ -5.§_
fi_f No. 2 . 5" g 59 15‘3'0 -
No. 3 75 ‘ 75 . o
No. A 75 f 82 fi 7 u.o
No. 5 g 79 7 _ 66 -13 -7.0 f7.0
No. 6 88 98 Y 10<fi5.5
No. 7 pg 7§_ 72 -3 -l.5 —l.5
No. 8 '69' g #72 g g 3 1.5
T = ~1u

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i

* i. Null Hypothesis. % Faculty new to extra—media
support will show no signific change on their individual
pre-test and post-test scores on the NEMA.

ii. Statistical Test. The Wilcoxon matched—pairs
signed-ranks test is chosen because the study employs two re-
lated samples and it yields difference scores which may be
ranked in order of absolute magnitude.

iii. Significance Level. Let alpha - .05. N . the
number of pairs (8) minus any pairs whose d is zero.

iv. Decision. ,The one-tailed p of 2 greater than
.00 or Z less than .00 is p . .5000. Therefore we cannot re—
Ject the null hypothesis that faculty new to extra-media sup-
port will show no significant change on their individual pre-
test and post—test scores on NEMA.

 

-183-

APPENDIX XIII - B

TABLE 11. DIFFERENCES IN ATTITUDE SCORES BETWEEN THE SAME
E "E E ’11-! a':- “o ‘A"

 

 

Experienced Rank with less
culty Sample: NEMA NEMA of frequent Fa.
G I Pre-Eest Post-test d d si

No. 1 6H 6 j
00
o.
o.
O.
00

 

   

 

. i. Null Hypothesis. H0: Faculty experienced to

extra-media support will show no significant change on their
individual pre-test and post-test scores on the NEMA.

ii. Statistical Test. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs
signed-ranks test is chosen because the study employs two
related samples and it yields difference scores which may
be ranked in order of absolute magnitude.

iii. Significance Level. Let alpha I .05. N I the
number of pairs (16) minus any pairs whose d is zero.

iv. Decision. The one-tailed p of Z greater than
.518 or Z less than —.518 is p I .3015. Therefore we can-
not reject the null hypothesis that experienced facultv will
Show no significant change on their individual pre-test and
post-test scores on the NEMA.

 

 

~18h-

APPENDIX XIII - C

TABLE 12. DIFFERENCES IN ATTITUDE SCORES BETWEEN THE SAME
CONTROE SAMPEE 5R RACUETY MEMBERS WHO HAVE TAKEN

 

Rank with lees
of
d

 

 

 

 

' 1. Null Hypothesis. no: The control sample of‘

faculty members will Show no significant change‘on their
individual pre-test and post-test scores on the NEMA;

 

 

1

~185—

APPENDIX XIII - 0
(continued)

11. Statistical Test. The Wilcoxon matched pairs
signed-ranks test is chosen because the study employs two
related samples and it yields difference scores which may
be ranked in order of absolute magnitude.

iii. Significance Level. Let alpha I .05. N I number
of pairs (35) minus any pairs whose d is zero.

iv. Decision. The one-tailed p of Z greater than
1.322 or Z less than —l.322 is p I .093“. Therefore, we
cannot reject the null hypothesis that the control sample
of faculty members will show no significant change on their
individual pre—test and post-test scores on the NEMA.

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX XIV

 

[H

 

-186-

APPENDIX XI!

TABLE 13. A PERCENTAGE BREAKDONN OF ALL THE MEDIA USED BY
- We REC . A-ME SUPPORT SERVICE:
WWW R ATI N * O ER A A O A
IRSTRDCTTORKE‘TIEEZ R‘ ‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*7iof
total
1 of total instructional
__ Media media use time
Overhead (spontaneous use) 62.A01 33.88%
Overhead and transparencies 11.79 6.38
Chalkboard 8.66 n.70
16 mm film projector 5337 2.92
Slide projector 3.91 2.13
Satelite TV 3.83 2.08
Tape recorder 0.89 0.h6 w
8 mm_prglector , 0.81 0.Hh
Miscellaneous (piano) 0.66 0.36
HTV receiver 0.58 0.32
Record playgr 0.31 0.17
Fleetwood 0.25 0.1a
Lantern slide 0.22V 0.l3_
odels 0.19 0.10

Filmstrip _‘ 0.10 0.05
Telecture 0.10 0,05
Opaqueprojector f 0.02 0.01
krogram materials 0.01 0.01
total amount of teaching time 59.33%
cevoted to use N I_70 ” _**:- _“i“l_.wl_l._l-.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX XV

 

 

—187-

APPENDIX xv

TABLE 1”. 'NEMA CORRELATIONS BETWEEN HIGH AND LOW USERS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 A R J
NI7O
Item Favorable Mean Unfavorable Mean
11: r 45 g V 35
m: 59.9 8“.9 -
SD: 9.6 1 ' 11.6
Mean 28.9 . ,716.h
SD: 2fl.9 . 25.8
r: .11“ .10H

 

 

 

 

 

 

.Not significant at the .05 level.

uNot significant also at the .05 level.

 

APPENDIX XVI

-l88-

APPENDIX XVI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 15. DISTRIBUTION OF FACULTY CLASSIFIED AS TO DISCI-
'L NES A D QUANTI Y 0' MEDIA USE: ‘ G Mill E,
-‘n e“ s 0' I n . ‘ ‘ ’-: ‘ .1, A. .
Faculty High Use : Middle Use Low USJ ‘
Sciences 16 IA 8
hiumanities f 5 ll: 13
|_ Total 21 28 21

r

 

”Chi-square for this 3 x 2 table is 6.51, p. 05.

JaKJJJI‘ngx—A'r-

 

 

 

APPENDIX XVII

 

 

 

-l89-

APPENDIX XVII - A
TEE LISTING OF BARRIERS TO USING MEDIA AT THE COLLEGE

9“: . ‘ .0. a .r r. .V';. ‘.v- -~ ‘0‘ .

 

f

A Available media materials do not cover important sub-
ject matter. .

B It takes too much time to preview or select materials.

0 Faculty members in general lack sufficient training
of the utilization of media equipment.

D Inadequate classroom facilities stand in the way of
media use.

E Media materials that are available are usually out of
date.

F When one uses media, one uses too much time for the
results obtained.

G Media materials are seldom available when needed.
H There is not enough money in the budget.

I Either the equipment or the media materials are in
poor physical shape.

J Media materials such as films are not very important
aids to learning. .

K Media equipment is seldom available when needed.
L Media are used as "fillers" or entertainment.

M Our department is opposed or indifferent to media.

 

 

 

an-.. -

 

~190-

APPENDIx vaI,- B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 16. THE LISTING or BARRIERS TO USING MEDIA AT THE
r———————————"
mm

F? I

Experienced Control Newly Experienced

Sample Sample - Sample
A A vAr
B B E
D C C
C D B
F G H

‘ E F I: l,

G . E G
H H D
I I K
J J i I
K K M
L L L
M M J
'Based on 172 Returns.

 

~191—

APPENDIX XVII - g

 

TABLE 17. THE LISTING OF BARRIERS TO USING MEDIA AT THE
. E ‘ . ’L: . l PIRINU"EUW’USE
INBETWEEN USE, AND HIGH USE OF MEDIA.f

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Low Media Usage 1 Inbetween High Media Usa e
A ‘ A A
B D E
E B C
C C m_ F
fiG ' . G ‘_ I) ‘_
H E B
F F I
D H H
K I J
J L E K i.
I J G * A
L K I. ' I
M M M

 

 

*Based on 70 returns: Group I Experienced (N=16); New
(NIB). Group II Experienced (N230); New (NI16).

 

 

 

-192-

APPENDIX XVII — D

 

" 3
A

TABLE 18. THE LISTING OF BARRIERS TO USING MEDIA AT THE i?
GE LEVEL: ARRANGED FOR COMPARING UNPAV‘ORAJ
.;' \I "

... "Hr-Ir“ "ID TOWARD

 

~ 2
'1 a
l ,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nfavorable Attitudes Inbetween Scores Favorable Attitudes
A ' ' B C
F A A
B C D
E ,g E ii H
J G B
D D G
G F E
_C H I
L I K .
H L F f:
I A. M I;
K J L {A
M M J

 

 

 

 

 

s
Based on 172 returns.

 

APPENDIX XVIII

 

APPENDIX XVIII

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE 19. SUMMARY DATA'AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE COMPARING THE
_,,.. . , .. . . ,. ... .., . . .
' 1‘ ‘ I" “‘0 _ II ‘VI i I NOT SE CT
"BEIIEFZBKRRIERSI" “"I
Items Barrierl Non—Barrier
Exp/New] Exp/ New
n: 11/u 35/20
m: 88.8 66.6 ,
SD: 16.” fiLL 19.2 :4
Source df s.s. m.s. F
Between Groups _l 5798.9 5793.9 26.9(.0005}
Within Groups 68 19699.9 215.h T
l

Total

 

 

69 gonna;

 

 

 

 

 

r__
v

 

 

 

1% .flgwwi-

APPENDIX xxx

 

 

 

 

 

 

i.ll
Ail. -.Ill'
{4

{Iii-.0 I‘ll: ' I. .

 

 

TABLE 20. 'DISTRIBUTI

-19u-

APPENDIX XIX

ON OF USAGE PATTERNS EXHIBITED BY FACULTY

 

 

 

 

 

 

'l-' 0 8"0' I '00' ; -
‘ ' ' ' ' ‘ ' ‘ ' ‘ ' - ' ' ' ‘ D I ‘ . ‘I 0)
f Increase. ERR Change i *Decrease
Faculty In UBQEE In Usage in Usage FT”
Experienced 43 28 15 if;
ewl -Experienced 9 ‘fi 3 7 z
_ Total 12 36 22 g
E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chi-square for this 3 x 2 table is ll.1,<p. 05.