«\d.‘ ‘, ;:\_3"“;::T Q” I} "r, 1:7 a?! I \v . .f fit.- a'.» LIBRARY University l Linn»; lujlfllflllll Llll MI 1mg“ HM Ilfl I11 II Michigan This is to certify that the thesis entitled Guidelines Developed From A Comparative Investigation of Four College' Of Education Instructional Resource Centers presented by James E. Thompson has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph 0 D o Jame in Education flim/ fizz/Z ‘ Major professor Date Febrggrv 4 1 1 97 2 0-7639 ABSTRACT GUIDELINES DEVELOPED FROM A COMPARATIVE INVESTIGATION OF FOUR COLLEGE OF EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTERS by James E. Thompson The purpose of this study was to establish guidelines for the formulation of an instructional resource center for a college of education. The guidelines were developed by reviewing significant professional literature regarding instructional resource centers and surveying four insti- tutions that had established instructional resource centers in the college or department of education. The guidelines were formulated with the idea that the center was to con- tribute directly and importantly to the instructional process for training teachers and improvement of instruction. Essentially, this study was one of description and analysis of instructional resource centers. Existing pertinent professional literature was analyzed, inter- preted, and related to the college of education. The data collected from a personally administered information questionnaire was used to arrive at general trends and James E. Thompson observations. The study is subjective in nature and depends upon the investigator's perception of information gathered at the four institutions under study. Specific suggested guidelines were formulated around the following framework. 1. The philosophy under which the instructional resource center should be operated. The instructional resource center should be formed with the idea that unified learning resources will strengthen the link in the teaching-learning process. The functions the instructional resource center should serve for the student, faculty, and the instructional resource center staff. Instruc- tional development and curriculum planning should be an essential element for a functional instructional resource center. The material and equipment resources that an instructional resource center should include. The instructional resource should encourage pre- planning and evaluation of resource and procedures to promote maximum efficiency of the use of the center's personnel, equipment, and materials. The personnel both professional and technical- clerical should be included in an instructional James E. Thompson resource center. Professional instructional resource center staff should assist in seeking solutions to faculty and student identified teaching-learning problems. 5. The spaces the instructional resource center should include. The instructional resource center should provide an environment with a degree of informality and flexibility to encourage education faculty to seek instruc- tional resource center staff for assistance in possible solutions to teaching-learning problems. 6. The line and staff organization of personnel for a fully developed instructional resource center within a college of education. The instructional resource center staff should have an integrated assignment of teaching and instructional development to serve the students and faculty in teacher education. The guidelines developed from this study could assist in the formulation of other possible sub-centers within a university. GUIDELINES DEVELOPED FROM A COMPARATIVE INVESTIGATION OF FOUR COLLEGE OF EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTERS BY James E. Thompson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1971 (/2); ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express sincere gratitude to his doctoral committee: Dr. Elwood Miller, Dr. Paul Witt, Dr. James Page, Dr. Dale Alam, and Dr. John Collins. Additional thanks beyond the writer's ability to express go to fellow graduate students, colleagues, and friends. For this study would not have been possible without their advice, interest, and encouragement. Finally, to my wife, Jeannette, for her encouragement, support, and sacrifice throughout this study. J.E.T. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. II. III. PROBLEM O I O O O O O O I Introduction . . . . . . . Need for Study . . . . . . Purpose of Study. .’ . . . . Rationale . . . . . . . . Definition of Terms Used . . . Me thOdO logy o o o o o o 0 REVIEW or LITERATURE . .‘ . . . Philosophy. . . . . . . . Design of Space and Environment. Personnel . . . . . . . . Independent Study . . . . . Local Production . . . . . sumry. O O O O O O O O PROCEDURES 0 O O O O O O 0 Population. . . . . . . . iii Page ii vi a: «q as .5 h! [a 10 '11 11 16 25 28 31 ‘36 38 38 Chapter Page Instrument Design . . . . . . . . . 39 Analysis of Data. . . . . . . . . . 41 IV. SURVEY RESULTS . . . . . . . .. . . . 42 Section One--Demographic Data . . . . . 42 Response Analysis . . . . . . . . 42 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Section Two--Philosophy 46 Response Analysis. . . . . . . . . 46 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Section Three--Functions . . . . . . . 49 Response Analysis. . . . . . . . . 49 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Section Four—-Resources . . . . . . . 52 . Response Analysis. . . . . . . . . 53 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Section Five--Personnel . . . . . . . 74 Response Analysis . . . . . . . . 74 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Section Six--Space of Environment . . . . 78 . Response Analysis. . . . . . . . . 79 Section Seven--Budget and Finance of the . Resource Center . . . . . 84 Response Analysis. '. . . . . . . . 85 ,Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 iv Chapter Page Section Eight--Administration Organization . 87 V. DISCUSSION AND GUIDELINES . . . . . . . 91 Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Guidelines. . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Limitations of Study . . . . . . . . 104 Implications for Further Research . . . . 104 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE. . . . . . . . . . 111 APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS . . . . . . . 123 Table l. 2. 3A. 38. 4A. 48. 5A. 5B. LIST OF TABLES Philosophy - Scale of Importance . . . . . Functions - Scale of Importance . . . . . Material Resources - Scale of Importance . . Material Resources - Holding, Deficiencies, Ideal Program. . . . . . . . . . . Personnel - Scale of Importance Personnel - Holding, Deficiencies, and Ideal Program. 0 O O O O O I I I O O 0 Space and Environment - Scale of Importance . Space and Environment - Holding, Deficiencies, and Ideal Program . . . . . . . . . vi Page 124 125 126 129 132 133 134 135 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction Higher education is feeling the threat of many pressures of a changing society, burgeoning knowledge, and increasing technology. The hapless administrator is caught in the middle, trying to improve social and intellectual conditions on campus with limited resources and facing a public demanding justification for the great expenditures supported by their tax-dollar. In an article, "Change: Difficult, But Not Impossible," Diamond states: Faced with increasing enrollments, faculty shortages, expanding subject matter and limited financial support, colleges and universities must explore ways of improving their instruction. Instructional change, however, is only possible with full adminis- trative and faculty support. Programs to improve instruction are under way on various campuses. Their goals are identical: quality education for more students without dynamic increase in cost per student.1 1Robert M. Diamond, "Change: Difficult, But Not Impossible," College Management, III (October, 1968), 23. Institutions involved primarily in the preparation or education of teachers have a significant role to play in the improvement of instruction. Recently a project administered by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education in conjunction with Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, published a book titled, Teachers For The Real WOrld which "presents a call for change in teacher education."2 In October, 1965, Gardner emphasized the need for improvement of instruction when he called for restoring the status of teaching, undertaking a thorough reform of the undergraduate curriculum, and improving our pro- cedures for institutional planning.3 Commitment in institutional philosophy, faculty, students, governing boards, administration, financial, and physical resources is required if Eurich's forecast for higher education in the twenty-first century is to become an aetuality. Eurich stated that from twenty-first century point of view: 2Orthanel B. Smith, Saul B. Cohen, and Arthur Pearl (compilers), Teachers of the Real WOrld (washington: The American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1969), p. v. 3John Gardner, "Agenda for the Colleges and Universities," Journal of Higher Education, XXXVI (October, 1965), 359-360. The most radical difference between today's colleges and those of fifty years ago, however, is not in the curriculum but in the use of learning resources.4 The professional literature shows that much has been written on instructional resource centers that serve, elementary and secondary schools. Much has been written on the instructional media center for the total uni-7 varsity, but there is little or no information in the literature on the development of resource-centers within colleges of education. Combs in his book The Professional Education of Teachers suggested: What is needed is not courses in methods, but curriculum laboratories, places where curricu- lum materials are available in abundance and where students can explore and try out all kinds of equipment, supplies, and materials . . . [they] should also provide space for experiment- ing with materials needed by teachers in carrying out their jobs. They should also be available when students need them, open at all times so that students can browse as they wish or work by themselves or with others. There should even be Opportunity, if the student wishes, to set up materials and leave them for a period of time while he continues to experiment with them.5 4Alvin C. Eurich, "Higher Education in The 21st Century," Readin s in Curriculum, ed. Glenn Hess and Kimball Wiles (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1965), p. 564. 5Arthur W. Combs, The Professional Education of Teachers (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 6 , Torkelson in discussing the professional preparation of teachers called for an intergration of media resources to be included in students' education with the following recommendation: Provision should be made for adequate facilities and opportunities for preservice teachers to learn about and to use the latest instructional media . . . This preparation should include the incorporation of these media in student teaching situations . . . Instructional materials centers should be maintained in appropriate teacher training institutions which may act as centers for service to surrounding areas and as centers for continuing experimentation in the many problems.associated with effective use of these media.5 Need for Study Instructional resource centers in colleges of edu- cation exist to serve as a primary instructional materials resource for college faculty and students. A major obstacle in utilization of resources is the difficulty teachers have in obtaining resources when needed.7 This obstacle is being partially alleviated by 6G. M. Torkelson, "Implications of Research in Newer Educational Media for the Teacher and for Teacher Education," Newer Educational Media (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 1961), pp. 81-82. 7Charles F. Hoban, Jr., "Obstacles to the Use of Audio-Visual Materials," Audio-Visual Materials of Instruction, Forty-eighth YearBBok of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949), pp. 53-71. the growing trend of establishing resource centers within individual schools in a public school system. Increased development of instructional material centers in single schools is evident despite the lack of consistency in administrative organization for resource centers in the past.8 Out of this growing trend in the development of instructional resource centers there appears to be a need to investigate the perceptions that faculty members have about such centers. One major factor in the development of a resource center should be teachers' needs and wishes. Facts about teachers' needs and wishes should be taken into account in the decision-making process about the resources to be included and the functions a resource center should serve.9 ‘ Combs and Snygg have indicated that "all behavior is a function of the individual's perceptions."10 Conse- quently, if a director of an instructional resource center 8James W. Brown and Kenneth D. Norberg, Administerin ng Educational Media (New York: McGraw-Hill Bookr Company, 19657. p. 261. 9Carlton W. H. Erickson, Administering Instructional Media Programs (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1 , p. 61. 10Arthur W. Combs and Donald Snygg, Individual Behavior: A Perceptual_§pproach to Behavior (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959). P. 18. has different perceptions than those of the teaching faculty, their effective utilization of the materials and services they need to function within the classroom may be restrained. Most modern educators recognize that good use of a variety of instructional media is needed by teachers if students are going to learn effectively and efficiently in our present educational environment. In the past audiovisual specialists and librarians have established their own little empires with little concern for learners. In an article in Audiovisual Instruction, wyman claimed That an institution should base a resource center on the "essential process of education and assume that neither the library nor audiovisual empire exists."l1 One logical place for this combination is in the college of education. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study is to establish guidelines for the formulation of an instructional resource center for a college of education. The guidelines will be developed by reviewing significant professional literature regarding instructional resource centers and surveying individual institutions that have established instructional 11Raymond wyman, "The Instructional Materials Center: Whose Empire?," Audiovisual Instruction, XII (February, 1967), 115. instructional resource centers in the college (department) of education. The guidelines will be formulated with the idea that the center is to contribute directly and im- portantly to the instructional process for training teachers and that it is to be a significant factor in the improvement of instruction. Rationale The rationale for the study is embodied in the follow- ing list of organizational principles. 1. If an agency is going to be effective it must meet the needs of its attentive public. 2. One way an agency may meet the needs of its attentive public in regard to the services offered by the agency is to survey and use the attentive public's attitudes and per- ceptions. 3. There should be active participation in structuring an agency by its attentive public to increase the probability that the agency will be utilized. 4. COOperative planning of an agency with its attentive public is important in building good human relations. 5. There is a coalition of support within a college of education for an instructional resource center. Definition of Terms Used Instructional Media Center. An instructional media center is the central source for all types of instructional media resources and services provided to the total uni- versity pOpulation. Instructional Resource Center. An instructional re- source center is generally an administrative-formed service unit designed to serve the needs of the faculty in a college of education. The purpose of the center is to assist the professor in creating a richer learning environ- ment for his students. Through c00peration, the center's personnel and education faculty can provide appropriate learning resources and experiences. Ideally, all learning resources (print and non-print) receive equal consideration and status. Attentive Public. The attentive public consists of faculty, students, and administrators involved with teaching, learning, or directing programs in a college of education. Professional Education Courses. Professional education courses are courses provided by a college of education for elementary and secondary teachers, instructors in colleges, and adult-education instructors. This definition also includes courses for the preparation of personnel who offer leadership or special services in the educational system, such as counselors, principals, superintendents, super- visors, and visiting teachers.12 Resources The resources to be investigated are categorized into the following four areas: 1. Physical facilities refers to the logical arrangement of the space for media in special areas within an instructional resource center. 2. Materials refers to films, maps, transparencies, books, filmstrips, or any other items that are provided by an instructiona1_resource center for student and faculty use. Equipment refers to electrical and mechanical devices such as duplicating machines, teaching machines, video-tape recorders, and any other devices provided by an instructional resource center for student and faculty use. Personnel refers to staff required to operate an instructional resource center. 12Michigan State University Editors Office, Catalog of Courses and Academic Programs (Lansing: Michigan State University Publications, 1969), p. 131. 10 Methodology{ The methodology of this study is essentially one of description and analysis of instructional resource centers in an attempt to arrive at an ideal model for a college of“ education. Existing pertinent professional literature will be analyzed, interpreted, and related to the college of education. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE In general the literature describes institutional resource centers and not specific centers within the college of education. This chapter will review the literature of institutional resource centers as it applies to an instructional resource center within a college of education. Every college of education, regardless of its size, has the beginnings of an instructional resource center (here- after referred to as an IRC). Often such a center is also referred to as a curriculum center, teaching materials center, media center, or learning resources center. However, throughout this study only the term IRC will be used. Philosophy It appears logical that the design and planning of any unit of instruction should begin with the development of a philosophy. 11 12 To proceed without a basic master plan to govern the organized growth of the institution and to see that its physical environment is indeed a reflection of the philosophy of the institution and its educational objectives is to court disaster.1 In general, the philosOphy should be a rational explanation of aims and goals concerning the IRC commitments to its administrators, faculty, and students with regard to the center's functions and operation. This philosophy should describe the commitment of the faculty and administration to the IRC concept. In describing an overview of the philosophy of the IRC concept the following has been stated: The instructional materials concept has developed in response to the continuing search for better educational programs which unify the_many school resources, namely audio visual materials and printed materials. It says, in essence, that good teaching in today's schools requires effective use of the best.in learning materials and tools.2 The IRC concept is that centers are formed with the belief that individuals, not subjects, are taught. Students should be brought into effective contact with ideas and experiences so learning results and students have the desire to continue their search for knowledge on their own initiative. The 1Francis H. Horn, Jonathan King, and James J. Moresseau, ”Facilities and Learning," in Higher Education, ed. Samuel Baskin-(New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964i, p. 171. 2Delphine Artz and others, The Instructional Materials Center, Bulletin No. 369 (Lansing, Mich.: The Department of Education, 1965), p. 36. 13 center is a place where a student can go to learn at his own rate and on his own level of understanding. Miller in Graphic Communications and the Crisis i§_Education wrote that in order to learn, the student must (1) want something, (2) notice something, (3) do something, or (4) get some- thing he wants.3 Beggs noted that for years we have taught as we were taught, largely by listening to teacher's lectures. "Yet we know this results in less efficient learning than when students are active and highly involved in the learning process."4 Harcleroad stated that "local definition of learning resources can affect planning considerably."5 Harcleroad, principal investigator on a project for the development of plans for California State University Library and Audio- visual facilities, described learning resources as (l) stored knowledge in whatever form it may be preserved and (2) the media to store and reproduce it for later use by learners, for presentation by teachers or for the active developmental use of either. The term is meant to include equipment 3Neal Miller, "Graphic Communications and the Crisis in Education," Audiovisual Communications Review, V No. 3 (Summer, 1957), 63. 4David W. Beggs, III. "Organization Follows Use...The Instructional Materials Center," Audiovisual Instruction, 'IX No. 9 (November, 1964), 604. 5Fred Harcleroad and others, Learning Resources for Colle es and_Universities, NDEA-7B-394 (Hayward, Calif.: CaIifornia State College, 1964), p. 17. l4 and a wide variety of actual printed, electronic, or photographic materials -- ranging from simple slides or tape recordings to complex reference books which represent years of analytic effort.6 Only through commitment can an IRC concept be inte- grated into the mainstream of the teaching-learning process. Masiko and Bouwsma stated that the initial planning of the Miami-Dade Junior College IRC in Miami, Florida, began with "formulation of educational philosophy and behavioral objectives. After a decision was reached concerning innovative projects to be included in the building, the staff and faculty worked out the student and academic needs which had to be met."7 Many times the philosophy of an IRC is stated in its purpose. Brevard Junior College IRC has subscribed to "innovation through the systems approach." The major objective at Brevard is the nourishing of new approaches to learning based on experimentation, research, and integration of learning resources created to enrich and strengthen the progress and growth of the school as an educational institution.8 61bid. 7Peter Masiko, Jr., and Frank Bouwsma, "New Learning Center Stimulates Innovation at Miami-Dade,” American School and University, XXXIX No. 9 (May, 1967), 65. 8William Kenneth Cumming, "The Learning Center at Brevard Junior College," Audiovisual Instruction, XII No. 8 (October, 1967), 802. 15 A prospectus for Western Piedmont Community College on the IRC states: It shall be the policy of the Board of Trustees to provide teachers and students with the means required to facilitate effective curriculum development, effective accomplishment of learn- ing work by students. A learning resource center shall be basic to educational operations in Western Piedmont Community College. It is a principal key to the approaches to teaching and learning to which the College shall be committed.9 It appears that at Western Piedmont the IRC is the “hub of learning."10 Philipson and others at Minnesota University state: If Minnesota junior colleges are going to multiple goals of educating . . . the junior college aims will be best accomplished through the unified and integrated approach in the use of materials and media found in a Learning Resource Center.11 The authors also state, "It is time for specialists in library, audiovisual, curriculum, computeraided instruction, and programmed instruction to begin working 9"The Prospectus For Western Piedmont Community College" (Morganton, North Carolina: December, 1964), p. 26 (Mimeographed.) 10Stanley D. Saltzman, "Instructional Materials Center: The Hub of Learning," Audiovisual Instruction, XII No. 8 (October, 1967), 802. 11Willard Philipson and others, "An Exploration of the Learning Resources Philosophy and Services Being Developed in the Junior Colleges of Minnesota," Audio- visual Journal, III No. 2 (November, 1968), 34. 16 together for the establishment of the Learning Resource Centers in the state junior college system."12 Design of Space and Environment Ideally social institutions as in architecture design form follows function. The prime function of educational institutions is the effecting of communication. American heritage to a large extent is transmitted through the medium of our school curriculum. Learning is the process of facilitating communications for the purpose of acquiring and transferring meaning. The communications process should serve as a primary source for the design and operation of an IRC. Communi- cation data can be gathered in the form of feedback from users and potential users of the center, including teachers, administrators, students and possibly peOple from the community. Harcleroad feels planning for housing of learning resources should be based on the following critical variables: (1) methods used, (2) students served, (3) faculty served, and (4) local definition of the concept of learning resources.13 lzIbid., p. 32. 13Harcleroad, LearningResources for Colleges and Universities, p. 11. 17 A broad philosOphy in regard to instructional resource center design should include: 'natural' flow of movement consistent with the logic of the operation; there should be no frustration introduced, due to built-in diffi- culties of movement. At least the electronic avenues of communications within the system should be clear, open and two way . . . And space design to foster a close teacher-student relationship is likewise a good investment (e.g. library carrels large enough to seat two people--teacher and a student--so that the teacher occasionally may sit in, even though briefly, with a student during study periods). . . . Incorporating space for dis- cussion, planning, and sharing in the design, therefore, should be essential.14 The environment should also include an attractive exhibit area. The inside wall should be non-loadbearing so that change will be enhanced and not impeded. Movable walls give much more flexibility for space arrangement, and because the area should be thought of as experimental, it should be subject to change so that the design can follow the function within which it is operating. Greenhill and Carpenter reinforced the idea of flexibility in the following: Current thinking about learning resource centers tends to emphasize 'new' media like films of all kinds, audio and video tapes, graphics, models, simulation mechanisms, and, prospectively, programed 14David V. Guerin, "Implications and the Communi- cations Process For School Plant Design," Audiovisual Instruction, XII No. 8 (October, 1967), 815. 18 instruction. Emphasis is also put on facilities for distributing high-quality pretested stimulus materials and on pre- senting them to students in a wide range of study situations both on and off campus. The emphasis is on achieving enough flexibility so as to make instruc- tional materials availa 1e to students when and where desired. The IRC must operate under the philosophy that the major purpose of design is to improve learning and effective communications between the student and the environment. The report of the Higher Education Media Study indicated that "a convenient and attractive space of instructional services is very important to encourage faculty acceptance and utilization of these services."16 It should be obvious that this also applies to students. The Higher Education Media Study discovered that the highest staff morale was found in the visited campus institutions where unified services were offered by a resource center or where special facilities made ex- tensive use of media. 15C. R. Carpenter and L. P. Greenhill, "Providing Conditions for Learning the 'New' Media," in Hi her Education: Some Newer Developments, ed. by SamueI Baskin (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964), p. 146. 16James W. Thornton, Jr., and James W. Brown, (eds.), New Media and College Teaching (washington: The Department of Audiovisual Instruction of NBA, 1968), p. 132. 19 As stated by the authors of a report from the Edu- cational Facilities Laboratories, educators have used the catchword "flexibility" so much that architects are com- plaining that educators are placing educational problems on their shoulders without solutions. The word flexibility, a highly abstract term, becomes meaningful only when broken down into the particular requirements needed to meet a specific situation. As further reported, architect Caudell has discontinued the use of the word flexibility for more desirable terms such as versatile space, expandable space, convertible space, and malleable space. Caudill defines versatile space as space serving many functions, expandable space as space planned for growth, convertible space as space which can feasibly be adapted for program changes, and malleable space as space that can be changed at once and at will.17 Today's schools are more aware of planning and design as Gilliland reflected: Change in school planning and school design is the result of a concern of educators and architects that school buildings of the past 17Ronald Gross and Judith Murphy, Educatignal Change and Architegtural Consequences, A Report from Educational Facilities Laboratories (New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1968), p. 15. 20 were not being planned to meet the needs of the teachers and students who work in them. The day of the "egg crate" brick schoolhouse and its dis- tasteful environmental conditions is hopefully gone. If instructional resource centers are going to be functional units they must be "designed to grow and change with the growth and change of the college."19 Careful consideration needs to be given in the design and planning of illumination, thermal control, furniture and equipment, acoustical control, wall colors and textures, with emphasis on flexibility to accommodate change and adaptibility when opportunity presents itself to improve the learning environment. In designing for sound reduction, consideration must be given to acoustical treatment of ceiling, floor, room par- tition and room shape. Surfaces need to be selected that will absorb sound rather than help project it as do hard surfaces. One of the better materials for ceiling treatment in sound reduction is acoustic tile or panels.20 18John W. Gilliland, "The Trend Toward Functional Schools," American School and University, XXXIX No. 7 (March, 1967), 45. 19"A Trio of Libraries: 1. Green River Community College," AmericanlSchool and University, XXXIX No. 3 (November, 1966), 45. 20James W. Brown and Kenneth D. Norberg, Adminis- terin Educational Media (New York: The MacmiIIan Co., I968), p. 63. 21 A recommended floor covering is carpeting which helps elimdnate the noise of chairs and shoes on hard surfaces. The initial cost of carpeting is considerably more expensive than tile, but projected maintenance cost is 45 percent less. Initial cost of carpeting is expected to be offset in the saving in maintenance over six to eight year period.21 Flexible room dividers and partitions have improved considerably in the past few years. But it must be remembered in the selection of partitions the key to sound reduction is air—tightness. Material selected for wall partitions should be pliable, with dead air spaces to help absorb a considerable amount of the sound. The much used six-inch plastered cinder block is not as effective a sound barrier as is gypsum board attached on both sides of saw- split wood studs even though the block weighs three times as much as the gypsum wall.22 The ideal shape of a college library is "a three to five rectangle with the entrance at the one-third point 21Ralph E. Ellsworth and Hobart D. wagener, The School. Librar , ed. Ruth weinstock, A Report From EducatiOnal FaciIities Laboratories (New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1963). p. 95. 221bid., p. 90. 22 along one of the walls."23 In planning suggestions for controlling sound Brown and Norberg.suggest nonparallel walls are better than "parallel walls of square or rec- tangular rooms."24 The objective of good illumination design in schools is to provide instructors and students with a comfortable and efficient visual atmosphere free from unnecessary distractions. Learning space designed for proper lighting should meet the following four basic criteria: Visibility, as influenced by amount, distribution, color and control provided; Comfort, as determined by the absence of glare and eye strain; Atmosphere, as provided by the psychological reactions produced; and Composition, as seen in its effects upon the architectural surroundings.25 As reported by the Educational Facilities Laboratory, the findings of the Illuminating Engineering Society are that "Reading room light levels should be maintained at 70 footecandles after initial drop-off."26 The Educational 23Alan E. Green (ed.), Educational Facilities with New Media, (washington: The Department of Audiovisual Instruction of NEA, 1966), p. C-16. 24Brown and Norberg, AdministratinggEducational Media, p. 63. 25Green, Educational Facilities with New Media, p. C-6. 26Ellsworth and wagener, The School Library, p. 91. 23 Facilities Society further suggested the cold feeling of fluorescent tubes can be avoided by adding a few incan- descent lamps. Plastic lenses, baffles, or glass should be used to shield fluorescent tubes. For maximum lighting efficiency, light colors should be used on walls, ceilings and floors.27 ”The use of strong, bright colors may not be too good for the eyes, but if it helps students like the library perhaps these colors are justified. . . ."28 All display areas should provide good background contrast with the medium used in conjunction with them. Awareness of the background should not detract from objects being displayed. And accent lighting needs to be provided for display areas. Another concern in lighting is brightness that reflects from surfaces which are within the field of vision. "Brightness" ratio is a term applied to two relatively large areas; "contrast," a term with a similar meaning, refers to the relative brightness of small adjacent areas, such as printed characters and their background.29 Important considerations in brightness are surface textures and colors. A brightly colored matte finish should be used 27Green, Educational Facilities with New Media, p. C-lO. 28Ellsworth and wagener, The School Library, p. 92. 29Green, Educational Facilities with New Media, p. C-8. 24 for writing surfaces with a light reflection of no more than 56 percent.30 The climate needs to be controlled so students are kept attentive and alert if learning is going to be encouraged. The factors affecting the climate are humidity, air move- ment and temperature. Engineers recommend the relative humidity range should be between 30 and 50 percent.31 The following is reported for air movement and circu- lation: For sedentary adults, a minimum of 25 cubic feet _of fresh air should be provided per person in small, crowded spaces (100 cubic feet of volume per person) in larger, uncrowded spaces (400 to 500 cubic feet of volume per person) this may be as little as 7 cubic feet per occupant. For moderate activity these amounts should be increased by 50%. Thus the minimum amount of fresh air to be supplied in the larger and medium-sized learning spaces will probably range from 10 to 15 cfm per person, depending on the age of the students. Cooling requirements, however, as opposed to ventilation requirements, will often necessitate introducing larger volumes of air.32 Temperature should remain constant at all times using a combination of heating and cooling as required for the thermal loads of the room or rooms. It goes without saying that air-conditioning is essential for proper cooling. 3oGreen, Educational Facilities with New Media, p. C-ll. 31Green, Educational Facilities with New Media, Po C‘lgo 32Green, Educational Facilities with New Media, p. C-20. 25 Personnel Obviously, the physical facilities are not the only requirement of an ideal IRC. The personnel charged with the operation of the center are the vital links in the effective functioning of a center. In an article written by Kenneth.I. Taylor entitled "Instructional Materials Center" a question is raised on the type of personnel needed for a materials or resource center. Taylor proposes the following answer: Consultants who are trained and experienced in using all types of materials. They should have a knowledge of the curriculum of the school, knowledge that comes only from experience within the school itself. They should know how to teach, and should understand the needs and interests of young people. For years professionals have suggested the combination of print and non-print materials into single IRCs. Similar professionals suggest with this combination or integration of resources the director should be competent in all the media and their utilization. But there are few examples of this utopia to which we can point.34 33Kenneth I. Taylor, "Instructional Materials Center,” Nations Schools, LXVI No. 6 (December, 1960), 49. 34Raymond wyman, "The Instructional Materials Center: Whose Empire?," Audiovisual Instruction, XII, (February, 1967), 115. 26 An article by Bernotavicz and Wallington discusses a new approach to describing positions in instructional media. They described the methods used in classifying personnel in the Jobs in Instructional Media Study (JIMS). The project staff first divided jobs into tasks, and then examined tasks that were completed and what the worker actually did to complete the task. Project staff used direct obser- vations for analyzing the jobs. One hundred and ten jobs, were classified according to three areas: specialists, aids, and technicians. This classification represents the job requirements for responsibility and demand for super- vision. In general the specialist is involved with the "broad process approach." He deals with problem solving instead of having specified tasks and routines to perform. The technician is involved with the output of a product but only where all tasks and routines have been specified. Aids do not solve problems, but perform tasks where instructions are specified, and the task may just be a part of the total process.3S Another study closely related to the JIMS project is the Media Guideline Project which is funded under a United 35Freda D. Bernotavicz and Jim wellington, "Act 1 of JIMS,” Audiovisual Instruction, XV (May, 1970), 26-30. 27 States Office of Education grant. Media personnel are divided into six responsibility groupings: direct adminis- tration, professional, artistic-production, technical, clerical, and manual. They perform management functions relating to organization, information, and personnel, and operation functions relating to research-and development, evaluation, design, production, logistics, and utilization. These responsibility groupings and functions are performed at the various institutional settings: elementary-secondary, state educational agencies, county-district agencies, college and universities, business and industry, military, and government agencies.36 Planning for resources takes a considerable amount of time and effort on the part of personnel. The Materials Training Center at Chicago Teachers College took two years in equipment selection, installation procedures, and constant experimentation.37 Planning for resources is a continuing process of updating, revising, experimenting, and evaluation for the improvement of the efficiency of learning. 36Dale G. Hamreus "Media Guidelines," Audiovisual Instruction, XV (May, 1970), 32-33. 37Philip Lewis "From Blueprint to Reality," Edu- cational Sgreen and Audio-Visual Guide, XXXIII No. (March, 1954), 98. 28 Independent Study Learning is an individual matter for students. Unfortu- nately in most teacher education programs we are teaching the masses as Opposed to individuals. Media are thought of as being more economically feasible for teaching large groups of students, but Saettler set the stage for individualizing instruction using media when he stated: Within the educational context, the methods and media of communications, patterns of planning and utilization, and a modern logistics of instruction must be organized instructional syStems in order to secure more effective and efficient learning. . . . What is needed are integrated, organized systems of instruction, perhaps computer controlled, in which all components (including teachers) of the instructional process are fitted together into a system that is capable of providing individualized instruction for each learner- communicant.38 In reflecting about the past use of materials in the curricu- lum Lock wrote that all too often materials have determined the order in which we learn and what we have learned. Text- books generally have determined our content and course of study. The rational approach to teaching is the formulation of curriculum goals and the guides to implement them. The teacher should adapt materials to fit the students in light of the course objectives and not let materials determine 38Paul Saettler A History of Instructional Technology (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1968i, p. 270. 29 what she teaches or determine the curriculum.39 Perhaps with an abundance of carefully selected materials placed in an IRC it will help change teaching styles. Resource centers today can play a major role in making resources more readily available, thus assisting instructors in placing more emphasis on independent study. According to Sleeman and Goff significant future trends of instruc- tional material centers include (1) focus on the individual rather than the group; (2) making the individual more responsible for his own learning; (3) true inquiry in place of memorized learning, and (4) tOpics Saught in depth in view of 'fact teaching'.4 Lloyd Trump argued that independent learning or study is the heart of an academic program. Education is based on three types of instruction, "large-group instruction," "small group instruction," and "independent instruction." He stated that a comprehensive independent study program should consist of five facilities: (1) the learning resources center, (2) library, (3) conference room, (4) relaxation area, and (5) formal study area. The 39Caroline J. Locke, "Today's Materials and Equip- ment," The Instructor, LXXVI No. 2 (October, 1966), 58. 40Phillip J. Sleeman and Robert Goff, "The Instruc- tional Materials Center: Dialogue or Discord?," Audio- visual Communications Review, XV No. 2 (Summer, 1965), I64. 30 separation of these facilities is dependent upon the size of the school. The IRC described by Trump contains two parts: study area and workroom area. The study area is where students can go to write, think, read, converse, view materials, and listen. The workroom area is where specialized "tools of the trade" are easily accessible. He stated that these areas need to be supervised by paraprofessional-type personnel or instructional assistants who are knowledgeable in subject areas in that they have completed two years of college work. The professional staff would be responsible for training the assistants in techniques of cataloging materials, circulation, repair, and ordering. The major focus of the learning resources center should be on use rather than storage.41 The IRC at the University of Pittsburgh is devoting major efforts to "individually prescribed instruction" for students. The conceptual model for individualization consists of the following six components: (1) sequentially established curricular objectives in each area stated in behavioral terms; (2) a procedure and process objective of the curriculum and the proficiency level desired for 41Lloyd J. Trump, "Independent Study Centers: Their Relation to the Central Library," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, L No. 306 (fianuary, 1966), 46-48. 31 each student and each objective; (3) the necessary materials for individualizing learning to provide a variety of paths for attainment of mastery of any given objective; (4) a system for individually prescribing the learning task the student is ready to undertake; (5) the organization and management practices of the total school environment to facilitate individualization; and (6) strategies for continuous evaluation and feedback of information for teacher decision-making as well as information for continuous evaluation of the curricula for the curriculum developers."42 Local Production Area An important area of an IRC is where students and faculty may produce their own materials. Often commercial materials do not meet the needs of a particular teaching topic or unit to be presented, and, therefore, production facilities need to be provided so materials may be designed, adapted, or produced for local applications. In discussing facilities for an IRC Guerin saw the need of local production areas within satellite IRC's. He felt the production areas should provide equipment for quick preparation of transparencies, lettering, and graphics. The main center would be more elaborately staffed and equipped to give a more comprehensive graphic support. The advantage of placing production facilities in a satellite IRC is that it becomes a more comprehensive unit. 42John O. Bolvin, "Individually Prescribed Instruction," Educational Screenand Audiovisual Guide, XLVII No. 4 (April, 1968), 14-15. 32 The facilitation of communication is better because materials not only are catalogued and stored but also may be created or designed for or by specific students or groups of students.43 Another advantage of locally producing materials is that many persons are encouraged to examine more carefully the objectives of the message they are attempting to create. Production of materials requires considerable time and effort, and normally persons involved have high interest in what they are doing. Hopefully, the process of planning, organizing, and producing materials causes teachers to ask questions. The questions center around how to visualize certain teaching concepts; thus better insights are gained into student problems of understanding concepts which the instructor may previously have taken for granted. Local production of materials requires equipment, facilities, materials, and personnel for its management. Kemp suggested that the following activities should be considered: picture mounting, lettering, paper duplication, drawing and illustration, display, black-and-white pho- tography, construction of 3-D objects, coloring, color still 3Guerin, Audiovisual Instruction, X, No. 2, 97. 33 photography, motion picture photography, and sound recording.44 Professor Frye of Indiana University suggests pro- duction can be separated into six basic techniques. These techniques are photography, mounting, lettering, dupli- cation, coloring, and illustrating.45 When techniques of production are broken down into the classifications suggested by Frye, it is much easier to build work areas around these techniques. Tanzman listed the following points for inclusion in an ideal material center: making overhead transparencies, 35mm. slides, graphs, charts, posters, dry mounts, color lifts, laminations, duplicate and facsimilie reproductions, black and white (and color) study or display, prints, filmstrips, 16mm. 'motion pictures, enlargements or reductions from books or magazines, duplicate slides and so forth. He used the Punahou School in Honolulu, Hawaii as his model. The above materials are included in the Punahou IRC preparation room. 44Jerrold Kemp, "Local Production-Where Do You Begin?," Educational Screen and Audiovisual Guide, XLVII No. 1 (January, 1968), 27. 45Harvey R. Frye, Handout in R-573, Principles of Graphic Communications (Bloomington: Indiana University, Summer, 1965), (Mimeographed.) 46Jack Tanzman, "The Complete AV Center--What It Takes To Do The Job," School Management, X No. 11 (November, 1966). 141. 34 An article written by Swanson titled "Improving Instruction Through Materials Centers" suggested the following materials and equipment.for a production area: Materials and equipment should be provided so pupils and teachers can make maps, charts, graphs, models, mock-ups, objects, specimens, puppets, posters, dioramas, flannel boards, exhibits, slides, and items needed for demonstrations and experiments.47 Production facilities are further stressed in the "multi-media instructional systems" approach to teaching that is used at Mt. San Jacinto Junior College. The purpose of this approach is to assist students in accomplishing learning tasks in the most efficient and concise manner possible. The approach utilized the instructional center as an integral part of the system. Study materials with accompanying examinations to be used in custom-designed study carrels are available to the students in the instruc- tional center. The carrels are equipped with tape recorders and filmstrip projectors. The responsibility of designing the apprOpriate media for the carrels lies with each individual instructor. The instructor must prepare scripts, and make available artwork, props, and other materials needed for productions. 47Reynold A. Swanson, "Improving Instruction Through Materials Center," American School Board Journal CXXXIX No. 4 (October, 1959): 48. 35 Studies and evaluation of the "multi-media instruc- tional system" are being carried on cooperatively with the University of California. The research studies are being carried on under the direction of Mr. Bruce Munroe, executive assistant to the Dean, Program.on the Education of Teachers, University of California.48 Following the establishment of a need for a pro- duction facility and the determination of activities to be carried on, the question of organization and management arises. Many schools are attempting to organize program and exercises on basic production techniques that allow students to learn at their own rate and independently. These packages are being developed on slides with accompanying tapes, 8mm and 16mm films, video tapes or booklets which students and faculty secure from the labora- tory assistant or clerk and use in carrels. These packages contain illustrations of particular techniques with accompanying audio or written instruction on how to perform the particular technique. The packages usually require active involvement with the technique after it has been described. In a carrel the various equipment and materials 48Joseph L. Bishop, Jr., "Mt. San Jacinto Multi-Media. Instructional System," Educational Scpeen and Audiovisual Guide, XLVII No. 9 (September, 1968) 19, 37. 36 are provided to perform the specific production technique described in the package. The publication Educational Facilities With New Media suggests that all modern educational innovations for student learning have a common thread of providing a "warehouse" of learning resources. Two aspects of pro- viding resources are: (1) devising methods of producing student and teacher resources, and (2) devising methods for instant recall of resources already produced. The publications calls for a need for facilities to locally produce unSOphisti- cated materials by the faculty and students with minor or no supervision. 9 One way of accomplishing this objective is to organize self- instructional production laboratories. Summary The planning of an IRC necessitates formulating an underlying philosophy, a rationale specifying the IRC goals and aims that take into account the functions and operations of the center. The role of the IRC emphasizes educating the individual student in accordance with his particular needs while the student himself is actively involved in the learning process. The IRC resources themselves support this type of independent study. Generally, the IRC is intended to strengthen and enrich education through integration of learning resources. 49Green, Educational Facilities With New Media, p. A-l7. 37 The actual physical design of the IRC should promote the flow of natural movement while at the same time allowing for a close teacher-student relationship. A necessary area of the IRC is the local production area where students and teachers alike may produce their own materials. Here these materials can be designed and adapted to meet personal objectives, thereby encouraging people to analyze carefully the objectives of the message they are trying to convey. The designing of the entire physical facility should permit the IRC to adapt to the growth and change of the college or university. Such specific factors as good illumination, sound reduction, atmosphere free from dis- traction, and a controlled climate are vital for effective functioning. Since the scope of the IRC is so broad, the personnel are usually classified according to the job requirements for responsibility and demand for supervision. These peOple not only operate the IRC but spend much time revising and evaluating resources for continued improvement. As can be concluded, maximum effectiveness in an IRC is dependent on the good planning and integration of all facilities involved and cooperation among many people. CHAPTER III PROCEDURES This chapter presents the procedures used in gathering data for the study. This chapter explains who was involved in the study, the design of the instrument used in gather- ing information, and the method of describing and tabulating data collected. Population Four institutions were selected for the study, two from Illinois and two from Michigan. These institutions were selected on the basis that they had established IRC Centers in their Colleges (or departments) of Education and were in close enough proximity for the researcher personally to visit and interview the director of each institution. The schools appeared to be the best representative in each state for their IRC from information gathered informally from leaders in the field. The institutions were also selected because of considerable variance in quantity of resources for the IRC and because the background of each director was considerably different; therefore, common functions and resources were thought to be more valid and realistic. 38 39 The institutions selected were: western Michigan Uni- versity, Kalamazoo, Michigan; Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan; University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois; and Eastern Illinois University, Charleston, Illinois. For the purposes of this study these institutions were classified as institution A, B, C, and D, respectively. This classification was made so that the complete titles of the institutions did not need to be written out multiple times. Each institution contained a school (or department) of education and an established Instructional Resource Center for its particular school (or department) of edu- cation. Each institution contained an institutional library and media center. This instrument was administered to the directors of each institution. Instrument Design The instrument was divided into eight distinct sections. Section one, demographic data, was designed to elicit responses on background information for each director and his particular institution. Section two, philosophy, was designed to elicit responses as to the importance of the type of philosOphy needed for the operation of a college of education IRC. Section three, functions, was designed to elicit responses to questions asked with regard to the role or functions the IRC should perform in order to Operate. Section four, resources, was divided into two 40 divisions, material resources and equipment resources. The IRC directors were asked to rate the importance of selected material and equipment resources along with the number of their particular center's current holdings, current deficiencies, and the number of resources needed for an ideal program. Section five, personnel, was designed to elicit responses for rating the importance of personnel, both professional and technical-clerical, for inclusion in an IRC. Each director was asked to indicate the number of persons he currently employed, current deficiencies, and the number needed for an ideal program. Section six, space and environment, was designed to elicit the value the directors set on the space and environment that an IRC should provide. The second part of each question asked directors to indicate the number of square feet their center currently contains, how their center is currently deficient and the square footage that is needed to operate an ideal program, assuming the number of faculty and students remain constant. Section seven, budget and finance, was designed to elicit information on the budget required to support the IRC in the four institutions surveyed, the persons who control the budgets in the various institutions, and the particular method used to determine each individual institution's budget and finances. Section eight, administrative organization, was 41 designed to elicit responses on the line and staff organi- zation that currently operates at each particular insti- tution, and on the organizational patterns the IRC directors considered would better serve the IRC needs. The instrument is presented in Appendix A. Analysis of Data Data gathered from the information questionnaire were recorded and charted by the hand summary method. All sections except the second and eighth list number and per- centage of responses to each statement. Sections four, five, and six also list current holding, current de- ficiencies, and number of items needed for an ideal program for each statement by individual institutions. All data reported are also charted in Appendix B. CHAPTER IV SURVEY RESULTS Chapter four reports the responses and suggestions collected by personal interviews from instructional resource center directors of four selected institutions. The responses concern important components for inclusion in a college of education instructional resource center. The instrument was divided into eight sections. Each section is reported independently. Section One - Demographic Data The background information on each director and his particular institution is reported in this section. Response Analysis Question A - Enrollment in institution and in education. Institution Total Enrollment Engollment in Education A 21,750 6,890 B 40,820 11,246 C 31,000 1,396 D 9,000 6,000 42 43 Question B - Full-time equivalent faculty teaching in institution and in education Institution Total Faculty Faculty in Education A 921 169 B 800 232.8 C * 200 D 584 121 *Number was not available through normal channels. Question C - Department in which director's academic rank was held Institution Department A Teacher Education B Teacher Education C Secondary Education D Teacher Education Question D - Academic rank and professional title of director Institution Rank Title A Professor Director B Professor Director C Teaching Assistant Director * D Associate Professor Director *Employed on a three-fourths time base Question E - Semester hours director currently teaching for academic year Institution Semester Hours A Not Teaching B 12 C Not Teaching D 22 44 Question F - Years of teaching experience and level of teaching experience of director Institution Total Years A 27 B 25 C 16 D 13 *Part time Level Elementary, Secondary, University Elementary, Secondary, University Secondary, University* University Question G - Semester hours of preparation in media and type of courses taken by director Institution Total Hours A 3 B 36 C 0 D 139 Type of Courses Educational Research Media Administration, Production, Research, Utilization, Selection, and Television Media Administration, Production, Utilization, Selection, Message Design, Research, Tele- vision Communicator Question.H - Total years of media experience and type of experience of year Institution AZ| Library Admin. A 5 5 B 18 C D 13 AV Curriculum Admin. 3 2 21 13 These years represent combinations of teaching and adminis- tration. The director of Institution C did not see herself as an administrator even though she had the title of di- rector, but as a worker doing a job for an employer. The 45 director of Institution A reported a general background of educational experience which he felt contributed greatly in terms of experience. Question I - Highest earned degree of director Institution Degree A Masters B Doctorate C Masters D Doctorate Director of Institution C held a masters degree in English. Summary The demographic data collected from the institutions investigated showed that enrollment varied from 9,000 students to 40,820. The number of students enrolled in education by institution varied from 1,396 to 11,246. The questions asked for full-time equivalent students, but the investigator learned that this information could not be supplied with complete accuracy by the institutions. Two of the IRC Directors held doctoral degrees and were the only directors that were currently teaching. Three of the four directors had elementary and/or secondary teaching experience. This seems to suggest elementary and secondary experience is considered important in the selection of an IRC Director. Formal course work in media preparation ranged from none to 148 semester hours. During the interviewing the 46 investigator received the impression that media prepa- ration had a positive influence upon the directors' attitudes toward media needs and future IRC involvement. Section Two - Philosophy The importance of various concepts in the rationale or philoSOphy on which an IRC should be based is reported in this section. Each director was asked to indicate the extent of his agreement or disagreement with each statement. The importance was indicated by placing the prOper number in the space provided before each sentence according to the following code: 1. Very Important 2. Important 3. Not Very Important 4. Not Important Response Analysis Question A - IRC professional staff should hold academic rank Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) Question B - Advisory board for IRC Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Question Question Question Question Question Question 47 C - Organizing library, curriculum, and media resources within College of Education is desirable from students' point of view Very Important 1 (25%) Important 3 (75%) D - IRC should be located within the main education building Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) E - IRC should be a place for individualized learning Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) F - IRC should-encourage new approaches to instruction Very Important 1 (25%) Important 3 (75%) G - IRC should be center for learning resources for all courses within college of education Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) H - IRC should strengthen teaching-learning process Very Important 2 (50%) Important 2 (50%) 48 Question I - IRC should be primarily faculty oriented Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Question J - IRC should be primarily student oriented Very Important- 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Question K - IRC should be equally student, faculty oriented Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) Summary Data collected indicated the IRC should not be primarily faculty oriented. Reference to Table 1A, indicates that institutions have less need for servicing the college of education faculty. The reason could be college of education faculty in smaller institutions have closer physical prox- imity to the institutional media center and library; there- fore, duplication of services would be greater. During the interview the IRC directors stated the two largest IRC's had advisory committee, which might indicate part of the reason for their IRC growth. , 49 Section Three - Functions Section three reports the directors' responses to questions asked with regard to the role or functions the IRC should perform in order to operate properly. The degree importance of each function was indicated by placing the prOper number in the space provided before each sentence according to the following code: 1. Very Important 2. Important 3. Not Very Important 4. Not Important Response Analysis Question Question Question Question A - Students should have access to equipment for quickly making locally produced materials Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) B - IRC should provide learning laboratories for student use Very Important 3 (75%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) C - IRC should provide consultation directly to students Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) D - IRC should provide equipment for check- out by students Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 2 (50%) Question Question Question Question Question Question Question 50 E - Faculty should have access to equipment for quickly making locally produced materials Very Important 4 (100%) F - IRC should provide equipment for check- out by faculty Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) G - Learning laboratories require super- vision Very Important 4 (100%) H - IRC professional personnel should serve as I.D. consultants for the instructional programs in college of education Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) I - IRC should assist in planning of new facilities for college of education Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) J - IRC professional staff should assist in curriculum planning in college of education Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 2 (50%) K - IRC staff should assist in budget plan- ning of Institutional Media Center Very Important 1 (25%) Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Question Question Question Question Question Question 51 L - IRC staff should assist in budget plan- ning of Institutional Library Very Important 1 (25%) Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) M - IRC staff should assist in budget plan- ning of College of Education Very Important 1 (25%) Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) N - IRC staff should request resources for purchase to Institutional Media Center, Library, and College of Education Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) O - IRC staff should assist in selection of new faculty for College of Education Very Important 1 (25%) Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) P - IRC staff should assist in selection of new staff for Institutional Library Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important ' 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Q - IRC staff should assist in selection of new staff for Institutional Media Center Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) 52 Summary Instructional develOpment was listed by the directors as very important but assisting in curriculum planning was not listed as important. The investigator considers instruc- tional develOpment as an integral part of curriculum plan- ning; therefore, this response appears to need further investigation. The data appear to indicate inconsistency in regard to budgets for the IRC. The directors reported that it is important for the IRC to request budgets for resources from institutional library, instructional media center, and college of education. However, the directors did not place equal importance on assisting in budget planning of each of these departments. Assisting in budgeting was indicated low in importance possibly because in actuality the directors did not currently participate in their instructional media center college of education budget planning. Section Four - Resources ‘Section four is divided into two divisions, material resources and equipment resources, in each of which directors were asked to indicate how important each resource listed was to the Operation of an IRC. Directors also indicated the importance of any additional resources 53 in Open-ended responses. The information was indicated by placing the proper number in the space provided before each listed resource according to the following code: 1. Very Important 2. Important 3. Not Very Important 4. Not Important For each listed resource the directors were asked to indicate their particular centers current holdings, current deficiences, and the number needed for an ideal program. Regponse Analysis First Division - Material Resources This division presents data on material resources, commonly referred to as media software. Question 1 - 8mm Films Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 132 66 198 B O 100 500 C 0 O 0 D 30 45 120 Question 2 - 16mm Films Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 341 171 512 B 0 200 1000 C 0 0 O D 25 75 150 54 Question 3 - Filmstrips Very Important 2 (50%) Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 2516 629 3145 B 500 1000 2000 C 50 5 500 D 100 10 310 Question 4 - Slide Sets Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 8 0 8 B 15 75 100 C 0 10 10 D 1 4 20 Question 5 - Transparencies Very Important 1 (25%) Important 3 (75%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 124 93 217 B 1000 2000 5000 C 0 100 100 D 0 15 30 Question 6 - Pre-Recorded TV Tapes Very Important 1 (25%) Important 2 (50%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH); Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 99 99 B 6 0 100 C 0 0 0 D 2 40 75 55 Question 7 - Disc Recordings Important 4 (100%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 290 72 362 B 250 500 500 C 50 10 200 D 0 20 50 Question 8 - Pre-Recorded Audio Tapes Very Important 2 (50%) Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 139 35 174 B 200 0 100 C 20 4 100 D 45 20 100 Question 9 - Multimedia Kits Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 81 61 142 B 9 18 20 C 15 2 30 D 0 5 15 Question 10 - Picture Sets Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 149 37 186 B 100 0 50 C 5 1 - 20 D 0 10 10 Question Institution CCU? Question Institution CCU!» Question Institution 50w? Question Institution Utihl’ 56 ll - Maps Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 3 (75%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 0 50 100 0 0 20 0 10 12 - Globes Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 3 (75%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 0 50 17 25 0 0 0 4 13 - Models Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 3 (75%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 75 15 O 5 loroc>o l4 - Programmed Materials Important 3 (75%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 0 75 300 O 40 0 O 6 Ideal (IP) 50 25 30 10 Ideal (IP) 50 3O 2 6 Ideal (IP) 75 25 O 10 Ideal (IP) 75 50 40 12 57 Question 15 - Current Textbooks Very Important 4 (100%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 6,155 1,539 7,694 B 10,000 0 1,500 C 3,000 0 3,000 D 600 100 700 Question 16,- Reference Books Very Important 4 (100%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 10 10 B .400 0 250 C 1,000 0 1,050 D 300 200 500 Question 17 - Microfilms Very Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 1,301 130 1,431 B 0 0 0 C O 0 0 D 0 0 0 Question 18 - Microfiche Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 33,256 0 33,256 B 2,000 0 2,500 C 200 0 200 D 0 0 0 Question Institution Officiv Question Institution crass» Question Institution COW? 58 19 - Curriculum Guides Very Important 3 (75%) Important 1 (25%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 2,802 280 2,000 1,000 300 30 200 50 20 - Periodicals Very Important 1 (25%) Important 3 (75%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 2,703 270 0 0 10 0 0 10 21 - Newspapers Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 0000‘ OOWO Ideal (IP) 3,082 1,000 363 250 Ideal (IP) Ideal (IP) Question Institution A B C D *One per Question Institution Utah!» Question Institution A D Question Institution A 59 22 - Masters & Doctoral Theses in Education Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) 0 900 50 8 I-N-fl-I' graduate 23 - Pamphlets Very Important 1 (25%) Important 2 (50%) Not Important 1 (25%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) 3,555 889 4,444 0 30 30 200 0 200 0 0 0 24 - (Open-ended) Product Catalogues Very Important 2 (50%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) 1,579 0 1,579 40 0 4O 25 - (open-ended) Documents Very Important 1 (25%) Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) 192 0 192 Question 26 - 60 (open-ended) Curriculum Development Projects Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 1,799 0 1,799 Second Division - Equipment Resources This division presents data on equipment resources, commonly referred to as media hardware. Question 1 - Audio Only a. Record Players Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) Uf3h1V 11 1 3 1 6 NONIh ml—‘U‘lU'l Public Address and Voice Reenforcement (including Intercom) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 2 (50%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) Utah!» COD-'0 l-‘OOO MOI-'0 61 c. Tape Recorders & Duplicators Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 37 9 46 B 6 3 9 C l 0 1 D 12 15 15 Question 2 - Television Equipment, Production & Distribution a. Broadcast Not Important 4 (100%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A O O 0 B 0 0 0 C 0 O 0 D 0 0 0 b. Closed Circuit Very Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A O 0 0 B 1 9 10 C 0 0 0 D 2 3 5 62 Portables Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) U001? l-‘Oéw Deficiencies (CD) NOGN Question 3 - Photographic Cameras a. Institution Holding (CH) COW? Instamatic Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) _ Not Important 2 (50%) Deficiencies (CD) 19 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 2% x 2% Very Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 2 (50%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) 00w? 500° Deficiencies (CD) MOI-'0 Ideal (IP) Ideal (IP) 2 00010) Ideal (IP) NOD-‘0 63 c. 35mm Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (2 %) Not Important 1 (2 %) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 8 0 8 B 2 1 5 C 0 0 0 D 6 6 12 d. Process Very Important 2 (50%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A l l 2 B 0 1 3 C 0 0 0 D l 1 2 e. 35mm OOpy Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) DOW? HOHH HOHO woww 64 Question 4 - Darkroom Equipment a. Enlargers Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 6 O 6 B 0 l 5 C 0 0 0 D l 5 6 b. Dryers Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 2 O 2 B 0 l 5 C 0 0 0 D l 1 2 c. Printers Very Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) cow» ooom oowo oomw 65 d. Processors .Very Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important . 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 0 0 B 0 l 5 C 0 0 0 D 2 6 10 e. Sinks Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) cow» Hoom ono womm f. washers Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) l-‘OI-‘O MOUTH COW? HOOP 66 Question 5 - Graphic Equipment a. COpy Machines Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) COW? b. 9 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 Duplicators Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) DOW? 3 O 2 0 0 0 2 2 Lettering Devices. Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) 50111? 100 25 2 1 0 0 1 12 Ideal (IP) NOUID Ideal (IP) bout.) Ideal (IP) 127 5 0 15 67 d. Hot & Transfer Presses Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) C0111? wowH HOHO noeH e. Laminators Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) tow» ooom oowo OONH Question 6 - Motion Picture Equipment (8 & 16mm) a. Motion Picture Sound Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 1 1 2 B 0 3 5 C 0 0 0 D 0 6 10 68 b. Motion Picture Editing Very Important 1 (25%) Important 2 (50%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) COD)? HOON mow» come c. Motion Picture Processing Not Very Important 2 (50%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A O 0 O B 0 O O C 0 0 0 D 0 l 1 Question 7 - Projection Screens a. Microfiche Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) cow» owww COOP OHNh 69 Microfilm Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) CO!!!» C. Deficiencies (CD) 2 l l 0 0 0 0 0 Micro-opaque Important 1 (25%) Not Important 3 (75%) Institution Holding (CH) Utah!» Question 8 - Projectors a. Deficiencies (CD) 0 0 O l 0 0 0 O Filmstrip Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) DO!!!» 13 3 1 8 Deficiencies (CD) MOI-‘0 Ideal (IP) OONW Ideal (IP) Ideal (IP) 70 Motion Picture Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) UCDUI> 45 12 2 6 0 0 8 6 Opaque Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 2 (50%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) DOW» 5 O 1 2 0 0 l 2 Overhead Very Important 2 (50%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) com» 16 3 4 2 0 0 10 2 Ideal (IP) Ideal (IP) #00001 Ideal (IP) 71 e. Slide Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 30 6 36 B 4 4 8 C 0 0 0 D 1 3 4 Question 9 - Projection Screens a. Portable Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 5 0 5 B 1 10 5 C 0 0 0 D 0 2 2 b. Mounted Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 30 0 30 B 40 10 50 C 0 0 0 D 9 1 10 72 Question 10 - Projection Stands a. Portable Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 25 3 28 B 3 2 10 C O 0 0 D 12 2 16 b. Permanent Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 3 (75%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) COW? oowo 'oowo 0000 Question 11 - System, Learning Labs a. Programmed-Learning Devices Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) cow» oowo momo MONO 73 b. Reading Devices Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) cow» oowo wooo hOHO c. Self-Study Lab (open-ended) Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) D 1 1 2 Summary Data results indicate the IRC Directors were generally conservative in estimating the need for resources in their respective IRC's. Generally, the IRC Directors added current holdings and current deficiencies and listed these figures for their ideal program. Maps, charts, and models were listed low in importance but directors stated examples of each should be included in a center. Graphic equipment used for local production was in- dicated to be very important, but equipment used for high quality production was listed of little importance. This indicates to the investigator high quality production 74 equipment that is quite expensive should be located in the institutional media center. Section Five - Personnel Section five asked the IRC directors to evaluate the importance of personnel, both professional and technical- clerical, for inclusion in an IRC. Each director was asked to indicate the number of personnel they currently employed, current deficiencies, and number needed for an ideal program. Response Analysis Question A - Professional 1. Media Administrator Very Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 1 1/2 0 1 1/2 B 3/4 1/4 1 C 0 0 0 D 1/2 1/2 1 2. Instructional Media Specialist Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 5 1/2 0 5 1/2 B 1/4 3/4 1 C 0 O 0 D 0 0 0 75 3. Message Design Specialist Very Important 1 (25%) Not Very Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 0 0 B 1/2 1/2 1 C 0 0 0 D O 0 0 4. Resource Librarian Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CH) Ideal (IP) A 4 4 8 B 1/4 3/4 1 C 5/8 0 5/8 D 0 0 0 5. Curriculum Specialist Very Important 2 (50%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CH) Ideal (IP) A 0 1 1 B 1/4 3/4 1 C 5/8 0 5/8 D 0 0 0 6. Graphic Consultant (Open-ended) Very Important 1 (25%) Institution HOlding (CH) Deficiencies (CH) Ideal (IP) A 1 0 1 76 Question B - Technical-Clerical 1. Graphic Artist Very Important 1 (25%) Important 1 (25%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CH) Ideal (IP) A 0 1 1 B 1/4 3/4 1 C 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 2. Photographer Important 2 (50%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 0 0 B 1/4 3/4 1 C 0 0 0 D 0 0 O 3. Cataloger Very Important 2 (50%) Not Important 2 (50%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 0 0 B 1/2 1/2 1 C 0 0 0 D 0 , 0 0 Institution Holding (CH) UtauI? Institution Holding (CH) DOW? Institution Holding (CH) DOW? Institution Holding (CH) CON? 5. 6. 7. 77 (50%) (25%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) HOMO) (75%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) HONU'I (75%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 1 U'IOU'IO (100%) (CD) Ideal (IP) Supervisors for teaching laboratories and resources. Very Important 2 Important 1 Not Important 1 Deficiencies 1 2 l l 0 0 0 1 Clerk Very Important 3 Not Important 1 Deficiencies 3 2 1 1/2 1/2 0 0 1/2 1/2 Student Assistant Very Important 3 Not Important 1 Deficiencies 10 0 3 2 0 O 3 2 Programmer Not Important 4 Deficiencies O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0°00 78 8. Graduate Assistant (open-ended) Very Important 3 (75%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 2 4 6 B 3 2 5 D 1/2 1/2 1 Summary Response data on personnel listed the importance of our- riculum specialist very high but the responses to section three, question J on functions appeared to be contradictory when directors indicated low importance for IRC professional staff to assist in curriculum planning. This indicated some inconsistency. Most directors reported that they were rather satisfied with the number of personnel employed by their IRC. This response appears rather unusual to the investigator because an administrator is often regarded as an empire builder, while this response would indicate the opposite. Section Six - Space and Environment Section six asked questions to determine the value of the space and environment that an IRC should provide. The second part of each question asked directors to indicate the number of square feet their center currently held, the number that was currently deficient, and the number needed to operate an ideal program, assuming the number of faculty and students remain constant. Response Analysis Question A. Very Important 3 Important 1 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies A 0 690 B 1,000 500 C 45 0 D 192 24 Question B. Equipment Operation Very Important 3 Important 1 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies A 902 0 B 1,200 300 C 4 O D 500 500 Question C. Production Very Important 2 Important 1 NOt Very Important 1 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies A 420 420 B 144 156 C O 0 D 120 120 79 Exhibit Display Area (75%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 4690 1,500 45 216 (75%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 902 1,500 4 1,000 (50%) (25%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 840 300 o 240 Question Institution CCU? Question Institution Utdui> Question Institution DOW? Question Institution DOW? 80 D. Reading Very Important 4 Holding (CH) Deficiencies 9,456 2,544 1,000 1,000 270 O 96 25 E. Small Group Conference Very Important 2 Important 2 Holding (CH) Deficiencies 288 576 900 900 0 O O 120 F. Preview Very Important 2 Important 2 Holding (CH) Deficiencies 199 411 900 900 9 0 50 100 G. Audio Listening Very Important 2 Important 2 Holding (CH) Deficiencies * * 160 40 0 0 80 80 (100%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 12,000 2,000 270 121 (50%) (50%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 864 1,800 0 120 (50%) (50%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 630 1,800 9 150 (50%) (50%) (CD) Ideal (IP) * 200 0 160 81 *Director stated it was impossible for him to separate audio listening because it was combined with so many other areas. Question H. Office Very Important 2 Important 2 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies A 1,145 1,955 B 240 160 C 36 O D 120 30 Question I. Storage Very Important 3 Important 1 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies A 800 2,535 B 140 160 C 80 O D 30 80 Question J. Darkroom Very Important 2 Not Very Important 1 Not Important 1 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies A 473 121 B 120 480 C 0 0 D 64 126 (50%) (50%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 3,100 400 36 150 (75%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 3,335 300 80 110 (50%) (25%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 594 600 0 200 82 Question K. Computer Not Important 4 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies Until? 000° 0000 Question L. Internal Processing Very Important 2 Important 1 Not Very Important 1 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies Utah!» 1,040 1,040 200 300 72 0 64 20 Question M. Book Shelving Very Important 3 Important ' 1 Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies A B C D t a 3,500 1,500 405 0 75 30 (100%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 0000 (50%) (25%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) 2,080 500 72 84 (75%) (25%) (CD) Ideal (IP) * 5.000 405 105 *Institution A had at least three times more shelving than any institution surveyed. The director in this insti- tution stated he felt it was too much to measure. 83 Question N. Experimental Classroom Important 3 (75%) Not Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 0 0 B 0 2,200 2,200 C 0 0 0 D 0 600 600 Question 0. Television (Open-ended) Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) D 400 200 600 Question P. Graphic Classroom (open-ended) Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 1,333 1,333 2,666 Question Q. Periodical Room (Open-ended) Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 144 3,856 4,000 Question R. Curriculum Laboratory (open-ended) Very Important 1 (25%) Institution Holding (CH) Deficiencies (CD) Ideal (IP) A 0 2,000 2,000 84 §ummar 2 Two questions in this section received 100 percent common agreement but were at opposite ends of the important scale. The reading area was reported as very important while the computer area was listed as not important. Many schools of educations include computer areas for student use, but the IRC directors did not indicate that this was a resource that should be included in an IRC.‘ The investi- gator feels that if the IRC is to serve as a unified resource center for the school of education, it should include an area for computers. The investigator draws attention to the fact all space reported in this area cannot be added to equal the total square footage of each individual IRC because one space might be reported under several different areas because of multi-purpose use. Section Seven - Budget and Finance of: the Instructional Resource Center ~Section seven reports the budget required to support the four institutions IRC's investigated. The individuals controlling the budgets in the various institutions and the particular method used to determine each individual insti- tution's budget and finances are also reported. Response Analysis Question A Question B Question C Question D 85 Best description of current budget Adequate 1 (25%) Not Very Adequate 2 (50%) Not Adequate l (25%) To whom budget request were directly submitted Chief administrative officer for total university 1 (25%) Chief administrative officer for School of Education 3 (75%) Direct control over budget after approved 1. Director of IRC 2. Associate Dean of Education 3. Chairman Secondary Education 4. Dean-School of Education Budget base Need 2 (50%) Negotiation l (25%) Proportional l (25%) One institution reported that its budget was based primarily on need but the number of students enrolled in teacher education was taken into account. The one institution that reported a proportional base also reported that the allocation were based as the Dean saw the needs. 86 Question E - Capitalization l. Institution COW? Institution A 00113 Institution DOW? Institution A B C D *NO Amount Specified Total dollar value of equipment IRC has unlimited access to. Dollar Value $126,752 $20,000 $4,000 $29,400 Equipment IRC has limited access to Equipment Access Any equipment on campus that is not in use Rental from AudioVisual Center None Any equipment on campus that is not in use Yearly capital outlay for equipment Dollar Value $6,300 $5,000 $200 $6.000 Yearly capital outlay for supplies purchased Dollar Value $1,700 $400 * $200 87 5. Yearly capital outlay for software Institution Dollar Value A $26,000 B $4,000 C $300 D $1,000 Summary Most of the IRC directors considered their current budget funding as not very adequate. Dollar value of equip- ment owned ranged from $4,000 to $126,752. The investigator suggests that the wide range may be due in part to the length of time an IRC had been in operation. The wide ranges of figures on such a limited number of institutions makes this study impractical to analyze the numerical data statistically. Section Eight - Administrative Organization In this section the administrative organization under which each IRC operated is reported. Each IRC director was asked to list the line and staff organization that operates at each particular institution and to describe an organi- zational pattern they felt would better serve the IRC needs. Part A of this question asked the IRC directors to list the line and staff organization that operated at their institution. 88 Institution A reported the following: Director - Academic Services Dir - Library Dir AV Center \ \ Dean - School of Education, \ A ’ Adv. Committee \ ," Head:Teacher Edu “Director - E R (5" 11 Secretary . Assistant to Director Librarians Graphic AV Con Consultant Library Clerk Assistant AV Clerks ---- Advisory Authority 89 Institution B reported the following: President Provost _ l Assistant Provost l l l I Dir Dir Dir IMC LS ES Dean - College of Education L....._.1...._._J Associate Dean - Teacher Education l— — - ‘,’ ----- Director - IRC -LI - Coordinator Secretaries Graduate Assistants ---- Advisory Authority Institution C reported: Dean - College of Education Chairman - Secondary Education Director - IRC Assistant Authority 9O Institution D reported the following: President VP for Instruction Dean - Faculty of Education Chairman-Dept of Institutional - - - - Director IMC - - - Director-AV Center Materials Clerk Teaching Staff ---- Advisory Authority Part B of question eight asked the IRC directors to indicate an organizational pattern that they felt would better serve the IRC needs. Directors of Institutions A, B, and C indicated that they felt their present organi- zational pattern best met the needs of their particular. IRC. The director of Institution D stated the only improvement to better serve the IRC needs was for the insti- tution to staff the Chairman for the department of instructional materials and Director of the audiovisual center with two separate individuals rather than with only one person in charge of both organizations as at present. CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND GUIDELINES Discussion The purpose of this study was to establish guidelines for the formulation of an instructional resource center with the belief such a center would contribute directly and importantly to the instructional process for the training of teachers and that it could be a significant factor in the improvement of instruction. The guidelines were to be developed for the establishment and Operation of an instructional resource center in a college of education. The guidelines for an instructional resource center were to be developed by reviewing the significant pro- fessional literature regarding instructiOnal resource centers and by surveying selected institutions that had established instructional resource centers in the college (department) of education. I In an attempt to set forth resource center guidelines, it must be realized it is a difficult task to establish the ideal resource center because the needs of the faculty and students are constantly changing. The establishment of a philosOphy is one of the first necessary guides in the development of an IRC that is 91 92 designed to serve as a strong link in the teaching-learning process. This philosophy generally should include a logical discussion of the aims and goals of the center with respect to its functions and Operations. The IRC concept has evolved in the search for improved educational programs. It attempts to utilize and unify learning resources so that the individual student has a place where he can learn at his own rate and on his own level of comprehension. Physical facilities of an IRC need to be congruent with its established philosOphy. Since effective communications is a major function of education, the communications process should serve as a basis for the Operation and design of an IRC. In general the design should allow for the least difficulty in natural movement. More specifically, the area should be attractive, convenient, and flexible. Measures should be taken to insure sound reduction, good illumination, and effective climate control to promote student alertness. The effective functioning of an IRC greatly depends on the quality of its personnel. Professionals agree that it would be good to have all personnel competent in the use of all media, but they realize that this is an unrealistic thought. As a result, IRC personnel have been Classified according to their responsibilities. A major time-consuming function is planning for resources. This is a vital and 93 constant process to keep the center up to date. The most important person is the director of the Center. Studies in administration have shown that the success or failure of most organizations is directly influenced by the person at the top in charge of the organization. Therefore, the director should be a tOpnotCh educator committed to the center's philosophy. He should be a person who can execute and formulate policies, can work with peOple, be grounded in'technical as well as educational theory and principles, be knowledgeable in current educational innovations, and be able to plan and execute budgets. The number of personnel needed for an IRC is dependent on factors of budget limitations, space limitations, and the commitment to the center by the college (department) of education, library, and medial center. Because learning is an individual process, attempts for more individualized instruction are being made in most eduCational programs. Media lend themselves well to this type of independent study. The materials used should not determine the curriculum, but rather the materials should be adapted to serve the students and satisfy course objectives. The IRC should function to make these learning resources available to all students. Many times commercially produced materials are not adequate for the particular needs of students and faculty. 94 Therefore, it is important that the IRC provides an area where these peOple can design and produce their own materials. The persons involved in this production normally have great interest in it, and as a result, learning occurs. Formal organization and management of this production facility need to be established. Many schools are pro- moting the self-instructional production laboratory with little or no supervision. According to the philosophy, the IRC should be formu- lated to function as a vital link in the teaching-learning process. Therefore, it is essential that the professional personnel of the IRC serve as instructional consultants for faculty in the college (department) of education, assisting in the systematic improvement of the curriculum and courses within the curriculum. Limited resources and facilities in higher education have brought increasing concern for cost effectiveness in instruction. Instruc- tional improvement can play a positive role in helping alleviate these problems by placing a sense of high priority to the improvement of instruction through controlled experimentation and practical research within the Classroom. The IRC could provide the facilities for this planning and execution of pilot studies of controlled experimentation. Facilities need to be provided with possible television equipment so this experimentation may be recorded for later microanalysis of the process. 95 The following chart suggests a good administrative organization for an IRC within the College of Education for maximum cost effectiveness in the improvement of instruction. Director of Dean-College Director of Institutional of Institutional Media Center Education Library \ \ / \ _________ Director of.___,___1_IRC Advisory IRC Committee I ' . Student —————————— --4 ----- Faculty College of Education ---- Advisory Authority The advisory committee should be composed of three to ten members including a representative from each department or division within the School of Education, the director of the Media Center, director of the Library, students from the School of Education, director of IRC, and the Dean of the School of Education serving as chairman of the group. The main functions of the advisory committee should be to assist in determining the IRC needs and the distribution of its resources and services. The following is the line and staff organization of the personnel of the IRC within the College of Education. 96 The guidelines are for a fully developed center, a state which would be reached after the center had been function- ing for a few years. Director Assistant Director Interns 8 Graduate Assistants F VII *Librarians *Media *Instructional Development Resources Lab Supervisors Learning Specialists Catalog Production Evaluation Special- Reference Learning or ists Experimental Media Specialists 1 Equipment Message Designer 1 **Service Supervisor Photography Reproduction Check Out Clerks Student Asst. Artists *These people would be professional educators in which part of their responsibility would be teaching. **These peOple would be technical, paraprofessional, or student type personnel. It must be clearly stated that the IRC would not duplicate any services that might be in existence in the University unless the advisory committee found it to be more economical and/or functional. 97 Guidelines The following are specific suggested guidelines which were formulated from the analysis of data reported in the study. PhiloSOphy l. The Professional staff of the IRC should hold academic rank. 2. The IRC should provide instructional support and assist in faculty-assigned student projects, and should directly support students involved in their own projects. 3. The IRC should be a place where a student can go to learn at his own rate and level of understand- ing with resources available at different levels of comprehension. 4. The IRC should be formed with the idea that unified learning resources will strengthen the link in the teaching-learning process. Summary: Professional IRC staff should assist in seeking solutions to faculty and student identified teaching-learning problems. The IRC should encourage preplanning and evaluation of resources and procedures to promote maximum efficiency of the use of the center's personnel, equipment, and materials. 98 Functions For the Student: 1. Students should have access to equipment for quickly making locally-produced materials such as thermofax transparencies or slide-tape programs. The IRC should provide learning laboratories for use by students. The IRC should provide consultation and services directly to students. The IRC should provide material and equipment resources directly to students. Summary: The IRC should seek student suggestions and evaluation of the services and resource provided, then use these suggestions for implementation and Operation of the IRC as far as feasible. For the Faculty: 1. Faculty should have access to equipment for quickly making locally-produced materials such as thermofax transparencies or slide-tape programs. The IRC should provide equipment for check-out by the College (Department) of Education faculty. The IRC professional personnel should serve as instructional development consultants for the application and develOpment of technology in the 99 instructional programs in the College (Department) of Education. Summary: The IRC should provide an environment with a degree of informality and flexibility to encourage education faculty to seek IRC staff for assistance in possible solution to teaching-learning problems. For the IRC Staff: 1. The IRC should provide supervision if learning laboratories are included. 2. The Professional staff of the IRC should be involved in planning new facilities for the College (Department) of Education. 3. The Professional staff of the IRC should request materials, services, and equipment to the Instructional Media Center, Library, and College (Department) of Education for purchase. Summary: The IRC staff should have an integrated assignment of teaching and instructional develOpment to serve the students and faculty in teacher education. 100 Material Resources (Suggested Group order of importance) Group I Group II Group III Group IV Current Textbooks Reference Books Curriculum Guides Filmstrips Pre-Recorded Audio-Tapes 16mm Films Transparencies Multimedia Kits Picture Sets Periodicals 8 mm Films Disc Recordings Pre-Recorded RV Tapes Programmed Materials Microfiche Pamphlets Slide Sets Master & Doctoral Thesis in Education Maps Globes Models Newspapers Microfilms 101 Equipment Resources (Suggested Group order of importance) Group I Group II Group III Record Players Copy Machines Duplicators Hot & Transfer Presses Mounted Projector Screens Portable Projector Stands Tape Recorders & Duplicators Portable Television Equipment 35mm Copy Camera and Equipment Lettering Devices Programmed-Learning Devices & Lab Reading Devices and Lab 35mm Cameras Enlargers for Darkroom Dryers for Darkroom Sink for Darkroom washers for Darkroom Motion Picture Editing Equipment Filmstrip Projectors Motion Picture Projector Overhead Projectors 102 Process Cameras Motion Picture Sound Equipment Slide Projectors Group IV Instamatic Cameras 2% x 2% Camera Microfiche Equipment Microfilm Equipment Portable Screens Personnel (Suggested order of importance) Professional 1. Media Administrators 2. Resource Librarian 3. Curriculum Specialist 4. Instructional Media Specialist 5. Message Designer Technical-Clerical 1. Student Assistant 2. Clerk 3. Supervisors for teaching laboratories and resources 4. Cataloger 5. Graphic Artist 6. Photographer 103 In a small center one individual would serve in several different roles but as need arises the specialists should be employed in order of importance listed above. Space and Environment (Suggested Group order of importance) Group I Group II Group III Budgets Reading Area Equipment Operation Area Display Area Preview Area Audio-Listing Area Book Shelving Office Area Storage Area Small Group Conference Area Production Internal Processing Darkroom Experimental Classroom Television Area Budget should be based on need. This need will depend upon the potential number of students and faculty the IRC will serve and the functions which the center hopes to perform. 104 Administrative Organization The person in Charge of the IRC should be called Director. The IRC Director should report directly to the Dean of the College of Education. It would be advisable for the teaching faculty of media to serve directly under the IRC director and as specialists and consultants for the IRC. Limitations of Study 1. The instrument needs to be administered to a larger sample of institutions, whereby, making it possible to formulate specific guidelines on the suggested amounts of material and equipment re- sources an instructional resource center should include. 2. The instrument needs to be used comparing insti- tutions of similar size with sampling through the nation. 3. There is need for investigation into the historical develOpment of existing Instructional Resource Centers for College Of Education to give further insight into the formulation of guidelines. Implications for Further Research This investigation was only one small part in the development of guidelines for an instructional resource 105 center in the college of education. There is a great need to verify the application of these guidelines into other possible sub-centers in medical education, science edu- cation, and many other areas. At present these sub-centers for the most part are being formulated without formal guiding principles. The hope of this investigator is the guidelines develOped from this study will assist in the develOpment and organization of sub-centers to obtain better efficiency. BIBL IOGRAPHY BIBL IOGRAPHY Artz, Delphine and Others. The Instructional Materials Center. Bulletin No. 369. Lansing, Mich.: The Department of Education, 1965. Beggs, David W. III. "Organization Follows Use ... The Instructional Materials Center," Audiovisual Instruction; IX (November, 1964), 02-6 Bernotavicz, Freda D. and Wallington, Jim. "Act of JIMS," Audiovisual Instruction, XV (May, 1970), 26-30. BishOp, Joseph L., Jr. "Mt. San Jacinto Multi-Media Instructional System," Educational Screen and Audio- visual Guide, XLVII (September, 1968), I8-I9, 37. Bolvin, John O. "Individually Prescribed Instruction," Educationa1_Screen and Audiovisual Guide, XLVI (April, 19683YI 14-150 Brown, James w. and Norberg, Kenneth D. Administerin Educational Media. New York: McGraw-HilI'Book Company, 1965. Carpenter, C. R. and Greenhill, L. P. "Providing Conditions for Learning the 'New' Media," Higher_Education: Some Ngger Developments, edited by Samuel Baskin New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964. Combs, Arthur W. The Professional Education'of Teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1965. , and Snygg, Donald. Individual Behavior: A Perceptual Approach to Behavior. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959. ( Cumming, William Kenneth. "The Learning Center at Brevard Junior College," Audiovisual Instruction, XII (October, 1967), 793-797. Diamond, Robert M. "Charge: Difficult, But Not Impossible," College Management, III (October, 1968), 23-25. 107 108 Ellsworth, Ralph E. and wagener, Hobart D. The School Librar , edited by Ruth weinstock, A Report From EducatIonal Facilities Laboratories, New York: Educational Facilities Laboratories, 1963. Erickson, Carlton w. H. Administering Instructional Media Programs. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1968. Eurich, Alvin C. "Higher Education in the 21st Century," Readings in Curriculum, edited by Glenn Hess and Kimball Wiles. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1965. Frye, Harvey. "Principles of Graphic Communications." Handout in R573. Bloomington: Indiana University Summer, 1965. (Mimeographed.) Gardner, John. "Agenda for Colleges and Universities," Gilliland, John W. "The Trend Toward Functional Schools," American School.and University, XXXIX (March, 1967), 36-38. Guerin, David V. "Implications of the Communications Process For School Plant Design," Audiovisual Instruction, XII (October, 1967), 8I5-8I9. , "Media Influence on Design," Audiovisual Instruction, X (February, 1965), 95-97. Green, Alan C., ed. Educational Facilities With New Media. Washington: National Education Association, T e Department of Audiovisual Instruction, 1966. Hamreus, Dale G. "Media Guide," Audiovisual Instruction, Harcleroad, Fred and Others. Learnin Resources for Colle es and Universities. NDEA-7B-394. Hayward, Calif.: California State College, 1964. Hoban, Charles F., Jr. "Obstacles to the Use of Audio- Visual Materials," Audio-Visual Materials of In- struction. Forty-eighth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949. 109 Horn, Francis H., King, Jonathan, and Moresseau, ”Facili- ties and Learning," Higher Education: Some Newer Egyelopments. edited by Samuel Baskin. New York: MCGraw-Hill Book Co., 1964. Kemp, Jerrold, "Local Production--Where Do You Begin?" Educational Screen and Audiovisual Guide, XLVI (January, 1968), 27-29. Lewis, Philip. ”From Blueprint to Reality," Educational Screen and Audiovisual Guide, XXXIII (MarCE, I954), 98-100. Locke, Caroline J. "Today's Materials and Equipment," The Instructor, LXXVI (October, 1966), 58. Masiko, Peter, Jr. and Bouwsma, Frank. "New Learning Centers Stimulate Innovation at Miami-Dade,” American School and University, XXXIX (May, 1967), 60-62L Michigan State University Editors Office. Catalog of Courses and Academic Programs. Lansing: Michigan State University Publications, 1969. Miller, Neal: "Graphic Communications and The Crisis in Education," Audiovisual Communication Review, V (Summer, 1957), 1-120. Philipson, Willard and Others, "An Exploration of the Learning Resources Philosophy and Services Developed in the Junior Colleges of Minnesota," Audiovisual Journal, III (November, 1968), 31-34. "The Prospectus For Western Piedmont Community College," Morganton, North Carolina, 1964. (Mimeographed.) Saettler, Paul. A_Histopyof Instructional Technology, New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1968. Saltzman, Stanley D. "Instructional Material Center: The Hub of Learning," Audiovisual Instruction, XIII (October, 1967), 803-804. * Sleeman, Phillip J. and Goff, Robert, "The Instructional Materials Center: Dialogue or Discord?," Audiovisual Communications Review, XV (Summer, 1967), 160-168. 110 Smith, Orthanel B., Cohen, Saul B., and Pearl, Authur (compilers). Teachers of the Real WOrld. washington: The American Assoc1ation of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1969. Swanson, Reynold A. "Improving Instruction Through Materials Center," American School Board Journal, LXXXIX (October, 1959), 47-48. Tanzman, Jack. "The Complete AV Center--What It Takes to Do The Job," School Management, X (November, 1966), 135-141. Taylor, Kenneth I. "Instructional Materials Center," Nation's Schools, LXVII (December, 1960), 45-50. Thornton, James W., Jr. and Brown, James W., eds. Ng!_ Media and College Teaching. Washington: National Education Association, The Department of Audiovisual Instruction, 1968. Torkelson, G. M. "Implications of Research in Newer Education Media for the Teachers and for Teacher Education," New Educational Media. University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 1961. "A Trio of Libraries: 1. Green River Community College," American School and University, XXXIX (November, 1936) I 45-46. Trump, Lloyd J. "Independent Study Centers: Their Relation to Central Library," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, L (fianuary, 1966), 46:48. wyman, Raymond, "The Instructional Materials Center: Whose Empire?," Audiovisual Instruction, XII (February, 1967), 114-115. APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER GENERAL INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE Most universities have a Central Institutional Media Center which administers a program of‘media services. This questionnaire is only concerned with the College or DeEErtment,of Education Instructional Resource Center. Please answer e fallowing questions as’they apply to the Instructional Resource Center located in the School or Department of Education. I. Demographic Data A. B. 1 Indicate the number of full-time students on campus enrolled in: 1. Institution 2. Education Indicate the number of full-time equivalent faculty teaching in: l. Institution 2. Education Check the College or Department of Education in which you hold academic rank. 1. Teacher Education 2. Secondary Education 3. Educational Administration h. Elementary Education 5.. Educational Psychology 6. Special Education 7- _Do not hold rank (Other; please list.) Indicate the academic rank you currently hold and your professional title. 1. 2. ¥_ (Rink) (Pr—ofessional Title) Indicate the number of semester hours you are teaching in each course level this academic year. 1. Undergraduate 2. Graduate 3. " Both (Comb. of l and 2) 1+. —"" Not Teaching Indicate the number of years you have taught in the following areas. (Include present year.) 1. Elementary (Grades 1- 8) 2. Secondary (Grades 9-12) 3. —_Junior Coll. (Grades 13 1h) 1:. __University (Grades 13-up) 5. Present university 6. Total Years of Teaching E: Indicate the number of semester hours you have taken in your academic preparation from the following areas. 1.7 Media Administration 2. library Resources 3. Media Production h. Message Design 5. Computer Instruction 6. Television 7. Educational Research 8. Media Selection 9. Media Utilization 10. 1. 12. (Other; please list.) (Others; please listf) Indicate the number of years of experience you have in the following media areas. 1. AV Administration 2. library Administration 3. AV Teaching 4. library Teaching 5. AV Industry 6. library Industry 7. Curriculum Supervision 8. (other; please list.) Indicate the highest earned degree you have completed. 1., Baccalaureate 2. Masters 3. Specialist h. Doctorate statement. 113 Please indicate the extent of your agreement or disagreement with each Place the proper number in the space before each sentence according to the following code: II. 1. Very Important 2. Important 3. Not Very Important h. NOt Important Philosophy A. The professional staff of the IRC should hold academic rank B. There should be an advisory board elected from the COllege (Dept.) of Education to give direction to the IRC. C. Organizing library, curriculum, and media resources and services within the College (Dept.) of Education is desirable from student's point of view. D. The School (Dept.) of Education regardless of size, should have an IRC within the main building where the College (Dept.) is located. E. The IRC should be a place where a student can go to learn at his own rate and level of understanding with resources available at different levels of comprehension. F. The IRC should encourage new approaches to instruction through research and experimentation. G. The IRC should be the center of learning resources for all courses within the College (Dept.) of Education. H. The IRC should be formed with the idea that unifying learning resources will strengthen the link in the teaching-learning process. I. The IRC should be primarily faculty oriented. i.e. instructional services and research. J. The IRC should be primarily student oriented. i.e. instructional services and research. K. The IRC should provide instructional support and assist in faculty research, faculty-assigned student projects, and should directly support students involved in their own projects. III. Functions A. B. 11h Very Important Important NOt Very Important Not Important 4?me Students should have access to equipment for quickly making locally-produced materials such as thermofax transparencies or slide-tape programs. The IRC should provide learning laboratories for use by students, The IRC should provide consultation and services directly to students. The IRC should provide equipment for check-out by the College (Dept.) of Education students. Faculty should have access to equipment for quickly making locally-produced materials such as thermofax transparencies or slide-tape programs. The IRC should provide equipment for check-out by the College (Dept.) of Education faculty. The IRC should provide supervision ifllearning laboratories are included. The IRC professional personnel should serve as instructional development consultants for the applicatipn and development of technology in the instructional programs in the College (Dept.) of Education. Professional staff of the IRC should be involved in planning new facilities for the College (Dept.) of Education. Professional staff of the IRC should assist in curriculum planning for courses in the College (Dept.) of Education. Professional staff of the IRC should assist in budget planning of the Institutional Media Center. Professional staff of the IRC should assist in budget planning of the Institutional Library. Professional staff of the IRC should assist in budget planning of the College (Dept.) of Education. Professional staff of the IRC should request materials, ser- vices,.and equipment for purchases to the Institutional Media Center, Library, and College (Dept.) of Education for purchase. Professional staff of the IRC should assist in selection of new faculty for the College (Dept.) of Education. Professional staff of the IRC should assist in selection of new staff for Institutional Library. Professional staff of the IRC should assist in selection 115 IV. Resources A. Indicate the value of the follow- Indicate the number of items in the ing resource materials that the following columns assuming the IRC should provide by marking the number of faculty and students appropriate number in the space remain constant. ‘ before each item. 1. Very Important 2. Important Current 3. NOt vary Important Current Defici- Ideal A. Not Important Holdin encies Progr l. 8 mm Films 2. 16 mm Films . Filmstrips 3 4. Slide Sets . Transparencies . Pre-Recorded TV Tapes . Pre-Recorded Audio Tapes 5 6 7. Disc Recordings 8 9 . Multimedia Kits 10. Picture Sets 11. Maps 12. GIObes 13. Models 1h. Programmed Materials 15. Current Textbooks 16. Reference Books 17. Microfilms 18. Microfiche l9. Curriculum Guides 20. Periodicals 21. Newspapers 22. Master & Doctoral Thesis in Edu. 23. Pamphlets 24. 25. 116 B. Indicate the value of the follow- Indicate the number of items ing resource equipment that the in the following columns IRC should provide by marking the assuming the number of faculty appropriate number on the space and students remains constant. before each item. 1. Very Important 2. Important Current 3. Not Very Important Current Defici- Ideal h Not Important Holding encies Progr 1. Audio Only a. Record Players b. Public Address and Voice Re- enforcement (including Inter- com) 0. Tape Recorders & Duplicators 2. Television Equipment, Production 8: Distribution a. Broadcast b. Closed Circuit c. Portables 3. Photographic Cameras a. Instamatic b. 211;): 211; c. 35 mm d. Process e. 35 mm copy h. Darkroom Equipment a. Enlargers b. Dryers c. Printers d. Processors e. Sinks f. Washers 5. Graphic Equipment a. Copy Machines b. Duplicators c. Lettering Devices d. Hot & Transfer Presses e . Tami natnrs I I | lo. 117 Motion Picture Equipment (8 & 16 mm) a. Motion Picture Sound b. Motion Picture Editing c. Motion Picture Processing Microform Equipnent a, Microfiche b . Microfilm c. Micro-opaque Projectors a. Filmstrip b. Motion Picture c. Opaque d. Overhead e. Slide Projection Screens a. Portable b. Mbunted Projection Stands a. Portable b. Permanent System, Learning Labs a. Programmed-Learning Devices b. Reading Devices Tifiease list others.) Current Holdi Current Defici- encies Ideal Program V. Personnel Indicate the value of the following personnel to the IRC by marking the appropriate number on the space before each item. 118 1. Very Important 2. Important 3. Not Very Important h. Not Important A . Professional 1. 1. Media Administrator Instructional Media Specialist Message Design Specialist Resource librarian Curriculum Specialist (Please list others.) '3. Technical-Clerical Graphic Artist Photographer Cataloger Supervisors for teaching laboratories and resources Clerk Student Assistant Programmer (Please list others.) Holding Current Current Defici- encies Indicate the number of personnel in the following columns assum- ing the number of faculty and students remain constant. Ideal Pro | VI. 119 Space and Environment (Floor Space sq. ft.) Indicate the value of the following areas that the IRC should provide by marking the appropriate number before each item. FWNH Very Important Important Not Very Important Not Important Exhibit Display Area Equipment Operation Production Reading Small Group Conference Preview Audio Listening Office Storage Darkroom Computer Internal Processing Book Shelving Experimental Classroom (Please list others.) Indicate the number of square feet in the following columns assuming the number of faculty and students remain constant. Current Current Defici- Ideal Holding encies Program 120 VIII. Budget and Finance of the Instructional Resource Center A. Circle one of the following which best describes your current budget. Very Adequate, Adequate, Not Very Adequate, Not Adequate Budget request must be submitted directly to whom: 1. Chief administrative officer in charge of instruction for total university. 2. Chief administrative officer in School of Education. 3. Chief administrative officer in charge of Institutional Media Center. h. (Please list others.) 5. If budget requests must be submitted to more than one administrative, please describe. After budget has been approved, describe who controlls funds. Is your budget based on need or proportional allocations? (Please explain.) Capitalizations 1. What is the total dollar value of equipment you own or have unlimited access to? (Attach a copy of your inventory if possible.) 121 What equipment do you have limited access to: (What are the limits?) What is the amount you receive each year from capital outlay for equipment purchase? What is the amount you receive each year from capital outlay for supplies purchased? What is the amount you receive each year from capital outlay for software purchase? 122 VIII. Administration Organization A. would you list the line and staff organization that operates your institutions? B. Indicate a better organizational pattern that you feel would better serve the IRC needs. APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS 124 TABLE I PHILOSOPHY--Scale of Importance II. INSTITUTIONS QUESTIONS A B C D E F G H .I. J 125 TABLE II III. PUNCTIONS--Scale of Importance INSTITUTIONS QUESTIONS ABCDEFGB I JKLMNOPQ 126 TABLE III A MATERIAL RESOURCES--Scale of Importance IV A. INSTITUTIONS QUESTIONS 11222121133332114‘22‘24 44232422323332113312332 21121222112222111112212 111322211133331141.11241111 123456789 127 TABLE III A (continued) EQUIPMENT RESOURCES B. IV INSTITUTIONS QUESTIONS 12141241112114111111141134441121221 44444444444444444444444444444444444 13243123141333333112123232223333311 1314411331111141111113224114113.1.14.1 abcabCadeeadeefadeeabcabcadeeab QUESTIONS [—0 O ...: I" 128 Table III A (continued) OU‘WU’D’ INSTITUTIONS 4__ A B C D 1 l 4 1 4 1 4 4 1 1 4 2 1 1 4 2 1 129 ouocooum umm 0:0 a mmh.H o mmh.H NmH o NmH ov mum.H o C 0v mhmad o DON om vv¢.¢ o o om mom 0 CON 0 mmm.m a a s a m cm ooa o o 0 0H w o o m o o o o 0 ON OH 0N mum.N 0H 0 o CNN 0 OH 0 mah.N omN mmm ooo.a Nmo.m cm on ooo.a omN CON com Goo.N Nom.N 0 com oom.N me.mm o o o o o CON coo.N mmN.mm o o o Hmv.H o o o QMH o o o Hom.H com omo.a omN 0H CON 0 0 OH com ooo.a 00¢ 0 con ooo.N oom.a ¢¢0.5 OCH 0 o mmm.H ooo.a ooo.m ooo.oH mmH.m NH ov om mu m o 0 mu o co com o OH 0 mN m5 m 0 ma mm o N o o m N on om w o mN om o 0 NH 0 OH on mN om OH ON C om o o OCH 0 CH 0N om wma OH H 0 NM 0 m ooa med ma om ON NvH m N ma Ho o ma m Hm OCH OCH OCH «ha 0N o 0 mm mv 0N CON mma om CON oom Nmm 0N 0H com Nb 0 cm omN oaN m5 0 ooa mm ow c 0 mm N o o c on OOH ooo.m NAN ma ooa ooo.N ma o o ooo.H «NH ON OH OCH w v OH m5 o H 0 ma m can com coo.N m¢H.m 0H m coo.H me OOH om oom mam.N and o coo.H Nam m5 0 CON HhH mN o o H¢m ONH 0 com mad mv o ooa om cm 0 o NMH D U m d D U m d O U m 4 wZOHBDBHBmZH mZOHBDBHBmZH mZOHBDBHBmZH Edmuomm mmHUZmHUHme GZHQAOm A4HQH BZMMMDU BZQMMDU .wN .mN .VN .mN .NN .HN .ON .mH .mH .hH .ma .mH .vH .MH .NH .HH AH .m .w .h .m .m .v .m .N .H «ZOHBmMDO amumoum ammoH can mmaocmaoammo .maaoaomunmmomsommm anmmaaz .4 >H m HHH WAMdB 130 TABLE III B (continued) EQUIPMENT RESOURCES IV. IDEAL PROGRAM CURRENT DEFICIENCIES CURRENT HOLDING D C INSTITUTIONS B A D INSTITUTIONS B C A C D INSTITUTIONS B QUESTIONS: A 000 T O 3 T4nY9 000 096 002 021 014 003 3.00 00000 51532 30821.. 02611 00000 11111 4.0010 04.611 nVOAuhVO 10201 90811 adee 620032 000000 555555 622051 510621 000000. 111111 000000 110211 0000.00 000000 622051 .4de 6f 4 00000 001.11 00500 22130 00000 10 10 1 000 000 330 120 000 120 abc 100 222 000 001 110 110 320 abC 131 TABLE III B (continued) CURRENT CURRENT IDEAL HOLDING DEFICIENCIES PROGRAM INSTITUTIONS INSTITUTIONS INSTITUTIONS QUESTIONS: A B C D A B C D A B C D 8. a 13 3 1 8 1 '1 10 b 45 2 0 8 12 6 O 6 57 8 0 20 c 5 1 0 1 0 2 O 2 5 3 0 4 d 16 4 0 10 3 2 0 2 19 6 0 12 e 30 4 O 1 6 4 O 3 36 8 O 4 9. a 5 l O O O 10 O 2 5 S O 2 b 30 40 O 9 O 10 0 1 30 50 0 10 10. a 25 3 O 12 3 2 O 2 28 10 0 16 b 0 1 0 O O 0 O 0 O 1 0 0 11. a 0 2 O 0 0 2 O 2 0 5 0 6 b O 1 O 0 O 0 0 2 O 1 0 4 c 1 1 2 132 TABLE IV A PERSONNEL-~8ca1e of Importance V. i. QUESTIONS INSTITUTIONS 12345612345678 A B 133 TABLE IV B V. PERSONNEL--Sca1e of Importance CURRENT CURRENT IDEAL HOLDING DEFICIENCIES PROGRAM INSTITUTIONS INSTITUTIONS INSTITUTIONS QUESTIONS: A B C D A B C D A B C D A. 1 1% 3/4 0 1/2 0 1/4 0 1/2 18 1 O 1 2 5% 1/4 0 0 0 3/4 0 O 58 1 0 0 3 0 1/2 0 0 O 1/2 0 0 O 1 O 0 4 4 1/4 5/8 0 4 3/4 0 0 8 1 5/8 0 5 0 1/4 5/8 0 1 3/4 0 0 1 1 5/8 0 6 l O 1 B. 1 0 1/4 0 O 1 3/4 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 1/4 0 0 O 3/4 0 O 0 1 0 O 3 O 1/2 0 0 0 1/2 0 O 0 l O O 4 1 1 0 0 2 1 O 1 3 2 0 1 5 3 1% 0 1/2 2 1/2 0 1/2 5 2 0 1 6 10 3 O 3 O 2 O 2 10 5 0 5 7 O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O O 0 8 2 3 1/2 4 2 1/2 6 5 1 134 TABLE V A SPACE AND ENVIRONMENT--Sca1e of Importance VI. INSTITUTIONS QUESTIONS 212121111142121 12311222344324 11112222134112 11111111114112 111 ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQR 135 ooo.~ StallUQfiJfi-aUEH'dMn-JEZOQOM ¢ "ZOHBmmDO ooo.m o ooo.¢ omm.m va mom.~ mmm.H mmm.H com com oov com o oom.~ o com o oom.N o o o o o moa mow ooo.m on o oom.H m5 mow oom.m vm Nh com omo.m ON 0 com ovo.a wm Nb com ovo.H o o o o o o o o o o o 0 com 0 com «mm mNH o omc HNH vm o ONH Maw OHH om com mmm.m cm 0 cod mmm.~ om om ova com omH mm oov ooa.m on o omH mmm.H ONH mm oem mvH.H omH o CON om o o¢ om o omH omH m oom.H omw OOH o oom HAG m m com mad QNH o oom.a vow oNH o com mum o 0 com mmm HNH Ohm ooo.~ coo.NH mm o ooo.a wvm.m mm chm ooo.a mm¢.m ovN 0 com owm oma o oma omq QNH o voa omv ooo.a v oom.H mom com 0 com 0 com v oo~.H mom wHN mo oom.H omw vN o oom 0mm mad mv ooo.a o G C m d O U m ¢ Q U m monBDBHBmzH mZOHBDBHBmzH mZOHBDBHBmZH Edmwomm meuzmHUHme wzHaqom Bzmmmao Bzmmmoo emumoum ammuH can mmflocmflofimmo .mnfloaomuwezmzzomH>zm oz< mommm m > mdm<8 .H> "ITHJ’Tflifl‘flfli'fl'TMfliflflfl'flWTfl'1'“