CABLE TELEVISION AND EDUCATION--A STUDY OF 'MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY STUDENT ATTITUDES TOWARD CATV AND TELEVISED INSTRUCTION By Diana Lynn Eichinger A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Telecommunication 1978 Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Tele- communication, College of Communication Arts and Sciences, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree. Director of Thesis ‘: ABSTRACT CABLE TELEVISION AND EDUCATION--A STUDY OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY STUDENT ATTITUDES TOWARD CATV AND TELEVISED INSTRUCTION By Diana Lynn Eichinger This study was undertaken to research the history of cable television, how cable television is currently being used in education, and in particular its potential on the Michigan State University (MSU) campus. The aim of the Michigan State study was to seek out student opinion on tele- vised classes and whether student would be interested enough in receiving cable television in their dormitory room to pay a set term fee for it. The MSU campus is at this time wired with a lZ-channel instructional cable system. This system carries television courses to over 200 academic and dormitory classrooms in 26 buildings. The cable system proposed by this author would expand this wiring to include student dormitory rooms. The proposed system would then provide off air channels to the students as a supplement to the MSU educational channels. Students would choose to receive this service at dormitory registration, then be billed for it in their dormitory fees. A telephone survey was conducted among 276 on-campus undergraduate students. All respondents were questioned on television habits, past and present experience with cable, Diana Lynn Eichinger desire for cable in one's dormitory, willingness to take a class on television, and knowledge of public access. It was learned that the largest percentage of MSU students spend less than $10.00 a week for leisure time activities, but leisure expenditures do not appear to have any effect on owning a television set or the amount of tele- vision watched. Fifty-seven percent have television in their dormitory room, but 61 percent watched no television the previous day. A total of 41 percent had contact with cable prior to coming to MSU, and 45 percent have seen cable since becoming students at MSU. Of these respondents, 63 percent had watched cable television in an East Lansing resi- dence. Only 18 percent of the total sample were aware that any East Lansing resident could produce programs at public access free of charge, and only 9.6 percent of those who have watched cable while at MSU had also watched the public access channel. 0f the total sample, 86 percent wanted to subscribe to cable in their dormitory with 36 percent desir- ing individual room service and 33 percent preferring service in the community room. Overall, there was a favorable atti- tude toward televised classes with 46 percent expressing desire to enroll in a television course and 26 percent want- ing to watch part of a class on television. TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I: An Overview of Cable Television and Education Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2 History and Technology Chapter 3: Teaching by Television Chapter 4 Comparison of Closed Circuit and Cable Television Chapter 5: Use of Cable in Education Chapter 6: CATV Use in Institutions of Higher Learning Chapter 7: iMSU IPTV System PART II: Survey of MSU Student Attitudes Toward Cable Chapter 8: ‘Methodology --The Study Design --The Sample --Interviewer Selection and Administration —-The Questionnaire --Coding Chapter 9: Demographics Chapter 10: Survey Data - Frequencies Chapter 11: Survey Data ~ Cross Tabulations Chapter 12: Summary and Conclusions APPENDIX A: The Questionnaire APPENDIX B: Dormitory Complex Breakdown FOOTNOTES BIBLIOGRAPHY ii 12 14 18 22 22 23 23 24 25 26 29 35 45 49 56 59 Table mNOU'I‘L-‘LDNH 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 l7 l8 19 20A 20B 21 22A 223 23 24 25 26 27 28 LIST OF TABLES Frequencies Age Class Level Respondents by College Dormitory Complex Cable Cities TV Channels Received Hours of TV watched Yesterday Cable TV Location (Watched Since Attending MSU) Dormitory Cable Location Preference Leisure Money Spent per Week How Respondents Learned of Public Access . Desired Class Viewing Location Amount of TV vs. Live Class Cross Tabulations Leisure Money by Sex Spend $7.50 (Individual Room) by Sex Spend $5.00 (Community Room) by Sex Desire for TV Class by Sex TV in Dormitory Room by Leisure Money Hours TV watched by Leisure Money Spend $7.50 (Individual Room) by Leisure Money Spend $5.00 (Community Room) by Leisure Money Desired Cable Location by TV in Room Pay $7.50 (Individual Room) by TV in Room Pay $5.00 (Community Room) by TV in Room Desire for TV Class by TV in Room Desired Cable Location by Hours TV Watched Desire for TV Class by Hours TV Watched Desire for TV Class by Class Level Aware of Public Access by Watch Cable at MSU How Find Public Access by Knowing People at Public Access .. iii 26 26 27 28 29 30 30 31 31 32 33 33 34 35 36 36 37 37 38 38 39 40 40 40 41 42 42 43 43 44 PART I An Overview of Cable Television and Education CHAPTER 1 Introduction Cable television first came into use in 1949 as a signal importation service. And since its beginning cable's educa- tional uses have been widely acclaimed. The day was foreseen when educational institutions of all types could be linked together for the sharing of information. Education could be opened up to the homebound and those not able to find time during the day to attend classes. But such events have yet to arrive. Cable has been quoted as a medium with a bright past and future, but no present. This is where cable systems in education appear today. This research was undertaken to more fully determine the dimensions cable television holds as a method of teaching and transmitting information in institutions of higher learning. In order to accomplish this it was determined that this study include background information on current campus implementa- tion of television and attitudes toward its use. This analy- sis includes a short history on cable television stressing the reasons underlying development in institutions of higher education. The second part of this research deals solely with the use and potential of cable communication on the Michigan State University (MSU) campus. A telephone survey of over 250 undergraduate students living in campus dormitories was conducted. The study's specific objectives were: to determine how many students would favor taking a television class in their dormitory room, the number of students willing to pay for dormitory television service, and whether they would want this service to their room or a community room, overall awareness of cable television and the public access channel. CHAPTER 2 History Cable television began as a business venture for small towns in mountain valleys not long after conventional tele- vision made its breakthrough. One of the first uses of cable to transmit television signals came in 1949 when a Pennsyl— vania television dealer saw his sales dwindling due to poor reception. The dealer erected an antenna on a mountain to pick up the Philadelphia channels which were sixty miles away. The signals were sent to the town via cable and resi- cents were charged $125.00 for installation and a monthly fee of $3.00. As a result television sales rose, but more impor- tant, community antenna television (CATV) came into being.1 From this point CATV was expanded to include larger and less isolated communities. Here, cable was used as a signal importation service for distant network and independent stations not available off air.2 Technology CATV systems pick up off-air signals by using antennas and microwave relays. The signals are then processed at the head end. Here the signals are amplified, filtered, and then converted to channels on the cable system. Converted signals are carried by coaxial cable strung on telephone poles or city ducts to the homes of cable subscribers.3 3 The possible channel capacity of a cable system when compared to very high frequency (VHF) or ultra high frequency (UHF) broadcasting is tremendous. The Federal Communica- tions Commission (FCC) in 1945 allocated blocks of bandwidth for VHF.4 A television broadcaster is assigned a bandwidth and channel number by the FCC, but the television signal takes up such a large bandwidth only a small number of chan- nels can go into any one area. In theory the VHF spectrum allows for twelve channels but in practice adjacent channels in the same area interfere. Thus maximum channel capacity is cut about in half.5 To help expand channel capacity the FCC in 1952 opened up a second service to television broadcasters--this being the UHF spectrum. This opening meant the possibility of seventy more channels, but due to technical and economic disadvantages of competing with established VHF stations, UHF has not gained a strong foothold.6 Cable television, unlike VHF and UHF, does not have a limited channel capacity. The channel capacity of a CATV system is limited only by the bandwidth capability of the cable plant. The first cable systems developed had 12 channel capacity, but in systems built since 1970, 36 chan- nels are not uncommon. CHAPTER 3 Teaching by Television Universities today are continually searching for ways to cope with budget restrictions without reducing the quality of education. Televised instruction is one way that is cur- rently being implemented. "Clearly, television can be used to serve large numbers of students, the question that now remains is can it make an effective contribution to higher learning?"8‘ Televised instruction, like any innovation, has been scrutinized closely by both its advocates and critics. This . . . . 5 process has produced a list of limitations and advantages.9 Limitations 1. Lack of personal contact with the instructor, and lack of opportunity to ask questions are seen as the major limitations. Here, the system is seen as a one-way communication which de—humanizes the student-teacher relationship. 2. The television instructor, unlike the ”live" lecturer, cannot receive immediate feedback from students. 3. Television magnifies personal idiosyncracies like nervous hands and speech. Also the television pre- sents a "talking head" figure which becomes monolo- nous . 4. Lastly, television can be subject to technical dif- ficulties such as fuzzy picture and faulty sound. Advantages 1. Televised lectures are as good or superior to live lectures due to the increased amount of time spent by the instructor in preparation. 2. Television enables the most capable instructors to reach a larger amount of students. 3. By watching oneself on television, the instructor can see strengths and weaknesses in preparation. 4. Use of television saves time so that overloaded instructors may use their time for other activities such as seminars and research as well as added availability to students. 5. Where there is a teacher shortage, large numbers of students can be taught with limited faculty. 6. In large "live" calsses students complain of dif- ficulty in hearing the instructor and seeing the blackboard. A televised course allows the student to hear and see everything. 7. Televised instruction gives course uniformity. All students are provided with identical instruction and exams . Regardless how many advantages or limitations are laid upon televised teaching, to be used effectively it must be accepted by students and the faculty. There are a number of factors which influence a student's preference for live or televised classes. These include: instructor, class size, class scheduling and type of course. Students who prefer certain instructors will take them whether "live" or televised. A study done by Starlin and Lallas found that well over half the students who were in favor of televised teaching listed the instructor as important.10 7 Class size and scheduling are also important. When students at Penn State were given experience with both television and live classes of 150, they chose television six to four. In Oregon, 68 percent of the students said they would take a television class at a convenient time over a live class at an "inconvenient time."llLf Lastly, the type of course plays a major factor in willingness to watch it on television. In order of prefer- ence, students surveyed in five Oregon colleges and univer- sities would prefer physical science classes on television over social sciences, and social sciences over humanities. The survey revealed that students preferred a televised chemistry class, felt that literature was comparable on both, and that English composition was better when taught live.12 I Overall students tend to like television as they become more familiar with it. Schramm found that students with previous television experience were significantly more favor— 13 C i_ able toward it than those who had not. The attitudes of faculty members toward televised in- struction varies. Opinions range from.very negative to enthusiastic, but the largest group are undecided or indif- ferent. Tension is a large factor in an instructor's dislike of television teaching. Causes for this tension include the newness of teaching in front of a camera, and the thought that there are many students watching them which they cannot see. But, these do diminish as an instructor becomes more experienced in television use. Besides on-air tension, teachers believe their institu- tions must recognize the added burdens of preparing for a television class. Teachers report spending eight to twenty hours on each lecture. Time is spent on extra note prepara- tion, test preparation, and grading. To overcome this teachers feel that extra time should be allotted for prepa- ration and that they have access to qualified producers, f) directors, and clerical assistance.l4'¥” CHAPTER 4 Comparison of Closed Circuit and Cable Television Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) is the practice of conveying regular coursework to on-campus students through institutionally owned or controlled cable lines which may interconnect rooms in the same building, several different buildings, or the entire campus.15 The number of CCTV systems used in institutions of higher education increased steadily from the early 1950's through 1972. In fact, their numbers doubled every five years. A survey conducted by the Great Plains National ITV Library in 1972 found 725 CCTV systems in use. But since 1972 this growth has reached a plateau. There are two reasons for this. The first is there are not many colleges and universities left which can afford CCTV that have not already done so. And secondly, many of the functions once served by CCTV have been replaced by competing systems such as portable video tape units and video cassettes.16 Under FCC rules and regulations a cable television system (CATV) is classified as a non-broadcast facility con- sisting of a set of transmission parts and associated signal generation, reception and control equipment under common ownership and control, that distributes or is designed to distribute the signals of one or more television broadcast stations. Excluded are systems serving less than 50 9 10 subscribers or within commonly owned apartment houses and commercial establishments.17 When comparing CCTV to a CATV system, CCTV is oriented solely toward educational purposes. CATV is a commercial operation which brings in off air broadcast signals to a community for a profit. An on-campus system.would combine the virtues of both, providing students with televised classes plus off air channels. This would be done at a charge to the student. Use of cable television, unlike CCTV, is still in its infancy. A study conducted in 1975 by Jorgensen and Anderson turned up many examples of experimentation with CATV in education, but few full scale operations.l8 As of 1974 a poll taken by the National Cable Television Association (NCTA) listed only 65 institutions of higher education which use their local commercial cable TV systems for transmission of educational material.19 Use of a cable system in place of CCTV can provide an institution with a broader audience as well as unique techni- cal services. While CCTV reaches only on-campus students, cable has the ability to reach the off-campus student. Cable opens new opportunity for the homebound, hospitalbound or part~time student. On the technical side cable is unique in that it can sustain multiple channels for simultaneous com- munication with many small audiences. Cable also can facil- 20 itate two—way interaction between student and instructor. "Cable television supplies the opportunity for students to 11 actively participate in both the art and science of communi- cation." ‘Minority, special interest, and ethnic groups can discuss issues with the surrounding off-campus public. Cable television can also be used as a teaching facility for production and technical aspects of broadcasting through a 21 A work-study program. CHAPTER 5 Use of Cable in Education When searching for articles on cable use in education, one finds little documentation. Most articles written on the topic deal with the past and future of cable. Currently, almost nothing is being done to bring forth CATV's great edu- cational potential. Around 2,800 communities are now being served by cable, and at this time only a fraction of school buildings are tied into CATV systems. In fact, in many cases no off—air educational channel is carried to CATV subscribers. And of the 2,800 systems in operation, only 300 carry any kind of locally originated programming, educationa1.or otherwise.22 A survey conducted in 1975 by Michigan State University on the educational uses of cable systems found that 62 per- cent of use is in public elementary and secondary schools. Two- and four-year institutions of higher learning account for 37 percent. The survey found that cable use is indeed a very recent development with 61 percent of the institutions beginning service after 1972. And of these, the bulk have incorpo- rated cable from existing funding with no budget increase or added personnel. Fifty-two percent of the institutions dis- tribute their cable services to the local community, with 31 percent giving service only within their walls. Only 10 percent have contact with other school systems through cable. 12 13 Also, to deliver their services an institutions has an average of 1.47 channels at their disposal. Almost half of the responding institutions use cable television for direct teaching, and of these 39 percent produce their own instruc- tional programs. Twenty-nine percent use programs received off-air from commercial or public stations. The study also found that approximately half of the institutions originate the programs in their own studios as opposed to using the cable facilities.23 Overall, education does not rank high on the programming list of cable operators. Currently, cable is being used to redistribute film and off—air signals of ETV stations. More schools report using cable for public relations and sports than for teaching.24 CHAPTER 6 CATV Use in Institutions of Higher Learning Looking specifically at CATV uses in institutions of higher learning, the community college is far ahead of the four—year college or university. The boom in community col- leges may be largely due to their effort to serve a widely diversified population. ‘Many community college students are full-time working adults, not full-time students as in four- year institutions. CATV allows the community college to reach the population unable to leave home with the same instruction available on campus. One system.which has turned to cable is the Connecticut Regional Community College System" Their program began with seven Connecticut community colleges linking together with Connecticut Public Television. They first offered two courses in the fall and spring of 1973-74. Enrollment for this period was approximately 130 per semester. The program has since been broadened and as of spring 1976, over 1,000 students were enrolled in three courses. The program.was once again expanded in January of this year to present these same courses over the Greater Hartford Cable System. Using CATV allows for a greater number of showings for each lec- ture, thus affording anyone interested the opportunity to watch.25 14 15 Cable can also lend more flexibility to on-campus courses offered in the community college. Kirkwood College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, began its association with cable in 1971. But unlike Connecticut Regional, they own their on- campus system. Kirkwood operates a full-color cable distri- bution system and instead of tapes being delivered to instructors in classrooms, they are broadcast to the class- rooms. Students also can make use of the system independent- ly. The distribution system operates 15 hours a day, five days a week. Nearly 500 tapes are played a day. Programs can be received in one or any number of classrooms on their 24-channe1 system. The system can also pick up all four networks off air. What makes Kirkwood unique is that it is linked to the community's secondary schools via an underground cable hook- up. The school district uses channels 2 to 13, and the video, cassettes which feed them are located at the Kirkwood distri- bution center. The school district can feed back to Kirkwood on two channels. By the end of this year it is estimated that all of the 2,500 high school students will be using the system for part of their instruction.26 It is not so easy to find innovative uses of cable in the university. But one campus which has excelled in cable television use is Oregon State. As a result Oregon has been called "the first cable campus in the nation." Oregon State gained its start with cable television in 1966 when Liberty Communications gave the University channel 16 5 on the Corvallis Television Cable Company. The University now broadcasts 40 to 45 hours of instruction each week with most courses offered being ones higher in enrollment (250 or more). Students can watch in their homes, residence balls, or 18 buildings located on campus. At last tabulation more than 70 percent of enrolled students view off the campus. Over the school term this adds up to over 8,600 students, which is over half the total campus population. This high television enrollment helps to alleviate parking problems, and by Rand formulas, saves Oregon University $40,000 a year in classroom costs and $55,000 in faculty costs if conven- tional teaching methods were used. The cost of running the television facility when compared to this is low. In 1966 the budget was $69,000 and has only grown by $20,000. Their facilities include a professional monochrome studio which has the capability of transmitting monochrome or color. To help overcome faculty discomfort at being on television, a sepa— rate studio is set aside where instructors can come and practice. The University is also in charge of the community cable channel. Students produce 15 to 20 hours of regular programs a week for Corvallis cable subscribers. The general philosophy which the University operates under is "no talking heads." No more than 15 minutes of any 45-minute lecture is taken up by the instructor. The remain- ing time is spent with on—location examples or photographs to reinforce the lesson. The faculty also has a rule against complete use of television for any course. They have found 17 that direct contact with instructors is necessary for effec- tive teaching. To date, no empirical studies have been conducted to test the effectiveness of heavy television use, but depart- mental research at Oregon State shows student attitudes are 27‘” \_ .. better on the campus than at any time in the recent past. CHAPTER 7 MSU IPTV System The Michigan State University Instructional and Public Television (IPTV) provides free television services to all faculty'members. To help in the production, IPTV offers a professional staff to help plan, write and produce programs. Color pro- grams are produced in four professional studios and location shooting is accomplished by using the portable and mobile remote facilities. Credit and non-credit courses are offered over WKAR television and handled by the department responsi- ble for the course.28 Campus distribution is accomplished through a cable interconnection of more than 200 academic and dormitory classrooms in 26 buildings. The cable system has 12 channels and an antenna system makes it possible to feed any of them with the local off-air television signals. The East Lansing CATV system.can also feed their 21 channels into the campus syStem.29 The East Lansing CATV system has two channels reserved for University transmission. These are fed with instruction- al courses provided by IPTV. One hundred course hours are distributed each week over the CATV system to residents of Michigan State University married housing, as well as the surrounding community.30 18 19 When looking directly at how Michigan State University has made use of cable, one must confine their analysis to the off-campus East Lansing community (student and otherwise) and Michigan State University married housing. At this time no on-campus residences are linked to the East Lansing CATV system“ On-campus students now only receive televised courses (through IPTV) in classrooms located within dormi- tories. A survey conducted by MSU in the spring of 1976 found that 70 percent of the 831 East Lansing and married housing students surveyed (East Lansing, 563; married housing, 258) were aware that MSU courses were offered on channels 19 and 20 of the East Lansing CATV system. And of this, 45 per- cent of married housing and 32 percent of East Lansing sub- scribers had watched a course. Almost half of the sample would be willing to pay for credit in these. Seventy percent said they would come on campus to take the final.31 A second study done previously (winter 1975) by MSU centered solely on married housing subscribers. It must be noted that this survey differs from the one above for it deals only with MSU students. Of the students surveyed, 51 percent expressed interest in taking a non-credit general interest course. Seventy-six percent reported they would enroll in a course offered over CATV. Since the fall of 1975 enrollment has increased each quarter. And 75.8 percent of those who have taken a cable course thought they could learn as much from cable at home as from television on campus. Ninety-one percent stated they would take another course over cable. 20 In looking at student course preference, 78.8 percent said they would take an upper level course and 57.6 percent would enroll for a CATV graduate course.32 Keeping in mind that on-campus students cannot receive CATV, a third survey was conducted. An attempt was made during winter term 1976 to pinpoint all students who did watch any part of their course over cable. It was found approximately 6 percent of the students did view at least part of their class over East Lansing CATV. Of these students, 66.9 percent used East Lansing cable as a substitute for on-campus attendance. The most frequent response for doing so was convenience (64.6 percent). When asked about concentration level, 43.8 percent felt they could concentrate better at home and 46.1 percent said home had fewer distractions. Lack of contact with other students was not felt to be important, with only 12.3 percent believ- ing this to be a negative aspect of cable. In comparing at home cable viewing to on-campus television viewing, 40 per- cent felt they could learn easier at home while 37.8 percent said it made no difference. Overall, students wanted the service continued, with 76.9 percent responding they would take another course offered on cable.33 Faculty attitudes toward teaching on cable have been quite favorable. In general there was felt to be very little increase in workload, but some change was made in language and humor to account for the off-campus audience. 21 The professors felt that CATV courses fit in with the idea of life-long learning and a good public service. On the whole they felt it might encourage greater enrollment and improve the image of the department. Feedback professors received from students has, for the most part, been positive. Students like the opportunity of being able to watch a class twice as well as the chance to preview a class before enrolling. Negative feedback by students was centered on increased tendency to skip 34 ‘; classeSx PART 11 Survey of MSU Student Attitudes Toward Cable Television Instruction CHAPTER 8 Methodology The following survey results are the findings associated with the first cable study of on-campus undergraduate studenx; at MSU. The specific purpose of the questionnaire was to gather information on television habits, past and present association with cable, and attitudes toward televised class. This information was then used to profile MSU student atti- tudes toward cable. The Study DeSign In order to measure the Michigan State University undergraduate dormitory population, it was anticipated that most students would have some knowledge of a cable system, whether or not they watched while attending MSU. The on- campus population of the University currently numbers around 20,000, and even though the students come from various back- grounds and maintain different interests, they are a homo- geneous group. All are full-time undergraduate students, living in approximately the same living conditions, in a very small area of land. Thus, it was decided that a sample of 250 could adequately represent the on-campus population. It was realized that this type of survey would not include all desired students, for students are not required to list their phone numbers in the Student Directory. 22 23 The Sample The sample was drawn from the November 1977 Michigan State University Student Directory. The sample was systematic random. Skip intervals were computed and the distance of the intervals was measured with a ruler. Off— campus, married housing and graduate students were deleated when landed upon through a system of alternating between skipping up and down on the column either before or after the name, until the next undergraduate student telephone number was located. The total sample consisted of 310 undergraduate student on-campus telephone numbers. InterViewer Selection and Administration A total of seven interviewers were used. All were upper-level Telecommunication majors at Michigan State Uni- versity, except for one graduate student in the Communication Department. There were four male interviewers and three female. All interviewers were asked personally by this author to voluntarily participate. Each interviewer was then fully instructed on the procedures to be followed in administering the questionnaire. All dialing took place between 6 p.m. and 10 p.m. in the departmental offices of the Telecommunication Department. Calls were made from.May 22-29, 1978, excluding Friday and the weekend. Each evening questionnaires were counted and checked for interviewer error. Up to four callbacks on busy or no 24 answer numbers were attempted on each questionnaire. In an attempt to reach as many students as possible, callbacks were made at the same time on different days and at different times on other days. The best time to reach students was found to be between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m., with 276 usable questionnaires being gathered. The Questionnaire The questionnaire was specifically designed for a tele- phone survey, with only eight open-ended questions out of 32 items. The open-ended questions were designed for easy later coding. The survey was also designed to move quickly and be easily understood to avoid boredom and confusion over the phone. A rough draft was presented to Dr. Thomas Muth and instructor Jayne Zenaty for advice and approval. A pre-test was conducted to check for question wording, flow, and comprehension. A small selection of undergraduate telecommunication students were asked to participate. Pre- testing showed the questionnaire to be effective. The questionnaire appears in Appendix A. It is divided into four main sections. The first deals with past and pre— sent use of cable television and general television usage. The second with knowledge of the public access. The third centers on the educational channels on cable; and the last presents demographics. To eliminate bias, the introduction of the questionnaire was worded not to mention cable television. The introduction 25 simply stated the Telecommunication Department was conducting a study on television use. The first and fourth section of the questionnaire were administered to everyone. The second and third were only administered when a respondent was identified as having watched cable television since becoming an MSU student. Coding The coding process for the closed response questions was done on the questionnaire itself using pre-coding techniques. A total of eight open-ended questions were included. The coding for these was done by this author to assure accuracy. Coding was completed on open—ended questions by taking a large sample of questionnaires from.which the different re- sponses could be coded. Each completed interview was coded onto a standard cod- ing sheet, from which computer cards were punched. The computer program made use of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Actual computer set up was done after con- sultation with instructor Jayne Zenaty. The data was first programmed for frequencies. This included the raw tabulation of numbers and percentages for each variable. Upon completion of frequencies selected, tables were cross-tabulated to show relationships between the.variables. CHAPTER 9 Demographics Since this was the first study of on-campus students it was strongly felt that sample accuracy must be shown, thus a complete demographic breakdown of the sample is included. In reviewing the demographics of the sample, the average age was 19, with the youngest respondent being 18 and the oldest 23. Only one respondent was 24. Forty-five percent of the sample was female and 55 percent male. Of the re- spondents, 92 percent were caucasian, 5 percent black, and 2 percent were of another race. Table 1 18 16 19 39 20 20 21 16 22 6 23 2 All survey respondents were undergraduates. A breakdown of class levels follows. Table 2 Class Level Z Freshman 39 Sophomore 28 Junior 20 Senior 13 26 27 Eighteen of the twenty colleges were represented in the sample. The two which were not are Justin Morrell and Urban Development. Lyman Briggs and Osteopathic Medicine had only one respondent each. The two most frequently mentioned colleges were Business and Engineering. Table 3 Respondents by College Z Agriculture and Natural Resources Arts and Letters 4 Business 26 Communication Arts 7 Education 5 Engineering 14 Human Ecology Human‘Medicine James‘Madison Natural Science Social Science Veterinary‘Medicine University College \OHNkDmH-L‘N No Preference Dormitories were divided into six categories according to geographic location. Well over half (61.6%) of the sample was from South and East complex dormitories. The one dormi- tory not represented was Fee Hall. 28 Table 4 Dormitorinomplex Z Brody 13.4 North Circle Drive 9.8 Mason - Phillips 9.4 South Campus 36.6 East Campus 25.0 Shaw 5.8 See Appendix B for a breakdown of dormitories in each complex. To determine the amount of money a respondent would have to spend on cable television, the total sample was asked how much money they spend on leisure time activities per week. CHAPTER 10 Survey Data - Frequencies Forty-one percent of the sample had watched cable tele- vision before coming to MSU, while 58 percent had not. One percent of the respondents did not know. Of those who re- sponded as having watched cable before, half had watched in their home. Those who said they had watched cable before coming to MSU listed a number of cities within Michigan and outside the state. The questionnaires were reviewed and general categories were devised to this question. Table 5 Cable Cities % ogaiifigig Eggpzting Lansing - East Lansing 5.3 Grand Rapids - Muskegon Area 10.6 Kalamazoo 4.4 Ann Arbor - Detroit 14.2 Thumb Area 15.0 Upper Peninsula 1.8 Other Cities North of Mt. Pleasant 10.5 Other Cities South of Mt. Pleasant 13.3 Out of State 24.8 One of cable's advantages is its ability to bring in a variety of off air channels, thus student television recep- tion was felt to be an important factor in the desire for cable service. Fifty-seven percent of the sample reported having a television set in their dormitory room.at MSU. By 29 30 breaking this down into channels it was found as expected that almost all respondents with television received the two local channels 6 and 10. Only 24.3 percent of those with television reported reception of affiliates from all four networks. Table 6 EEEEEEl Repérginzaggizption WKZO - Channel 3 (CBS) 16 WJIM - Channel 6 (CBS) 95 WOTV - Channel 8 (NBC) 22 WILX - Channel 10 (NBC) 92 WJRT - Channel 12 (ABC) 70 WKAR - Channel 23 (PBS) . 33 WUHQ - Channel 41 (ABC) 21 The amount of television viewed by students was another factor when considering cable service, for those who do not watch television might be less interested in paying for cable service. Looking at the total sample, over half (61%) reported they had not watched any television in the previous day. Table 7 Hours watched Yesterday Z 0 61 1 21 2 12 3 or more 6 Watching cable since becoming a MSU student might also be a positive influence on one's decision to subscribe to 31 cable. Of the total sample, 45 percent reported having watched cable television since coming to Michigan State. Fifty-two percent said they had not, and 3 percent did not know. Upon asking those respondents where they had watched cable, over 60 percent reported viewing in a residence. Table 8 Cable TV Location ngicgzgpii figfiCh Residence _ 63.2 Public Place 19.2 30th 11.2 Other 8.0 Since not all students would want cable service, a question was posed to separate the students into four cate- gories of preference. Also, in order to separate desire for a particular type of service from.willingness to pay for it, a separate question dealt with cost. Eighty-six percent of the.total sample reported they would subscribe to cable tele- vision if it were available in their dormitory, with well over 30 percent wanting it in their room. Table 9 Cable Location Preference Z Own Room 36 Community Room 33 Both 18 Neither 14 To determine the amount of money a respondent would have to spend on cable television, the total sample was 32 asked how much money they spend on leisure time activities per week. 161213.19. Leisure Money per Week Z $0 - 5 46 $6 - 10 28 $11 - 15 1 $16 and above 25 The 54 percent who answered that they would subscribe to cable in their own room or both their room and community room were then asked if they would pay $7.50 per term for indi- vidual room service. Ninety percent of these people re- sponded affirmatively. Four percent said they did not know. A separate question was then posed which would include all respondents that reported wanting cable somewhere in their dormitory. Of these, 48.9 percent responded they would pay $5.00 per term for community room service. Two percent did not know. The East Lansing public access channel is open to all residents of the East Lansing community. Since MSU is lo- cated in East Lansing, University students are entitled to make use of this service. Thus, respondents who had watched cable television since becoming MSU students were questioned on knowledge and use of the public access channel. Only 9.6 percent had watched public access with 10.4 percent not sure. When asked if they could name the call letters or channel number of the East Lansing Cable System, only 1.6 percent 33 were correct; 7.2 percent were not sure. Only 18 percent were aware that any East Lansing resident could produce pro- grams for public access free of charge. Of those, 53 percent found this out by word of mouth. Six percent had actually been a volunteer at public access and 32.6 percent knew someone else who had. Table 11 How Respondents Learned Z Knowing of of Public Access Public Access Word of Mouth 53.0 Newspaper 26.5 Telecommunication Major 10.2 Other 10.2 Before any educational cable expansion can take place, student attitudes on televised classes must be brought out. Respondents who had watched cable since becoming MSU students were asked if they had ever watched a MSU class on East Lansing cable; 48.4 percent replied that they had. The total sample was then asked if they would watch their class on television if cable became available in their dormitory. Over 40 percent said they would watch an entire class over cable. Table 12 Desired Class Viewing LocatiOn Z Television Only 46 Class Only 28 Both 26 34 Those who reported they would watch on television and go to class were then asked what percent watch on television. Table 13 Amount of TV vs. Live Class Watch One-Quarter on TV Watch One-Half on TV Watch Three-Quarters on TV they planned to :7, 41.4 41.4 17.2 CHAPTER 11 Survey Data - Cross Tabulations After the frequencies were computed, variables were again looked at for possible relationships. To test for these 2-by—2 cross tabulation tables were created. At the same time chi-square was performed to test for significance at the .05 level. If certain cells of a table appeared to have significance, a Z-test (difference of proportions) was used to test for it. Not all tables which will be included in this study were found to be significant at the .05 level. Tables 14, 15 and 16 were computed to see if sex was a determining factor in subscribing to cable television. It was hypothesized that leisure money would be an important factor in affording cable, thus if one sex spends more money they would be more likely to desire and afford cable service. This was not to be the case. Table 14 Leisure Money by Sex Female Z Male Z $0 - 5 41.5 22.2 $6 - 10 38.2 32.7 $11 - 15 4.1 17.1 $l6+ 16.3 23.1 35 36 It was found that sex does influence the amount of leisure money one spends. (Leisure money is defined as money spent on non-essential items or activities.) There appears to be an inverse relationship on male-female spending pat- terns with 40 percent of male respondents spending over $16.00 per week as compared to 20 percent of the females. Table 15 Spend $7.50 (Individual Room) by Sex Female Z Male Z Yes 88.3 85.9 No 11.7 14.1 Table 16 Spend $5.00 (Community Room) by Sex Female Z Male Z Yes 51.5 47.0 No 48.5 53.0 Even though sex does hold an influence over the amount of leisure money one spends, it was found not to be a factor in the decision to pay for the service. Refer to Tables 15 and 16. Table 17 was undertaken with the idea there would be no difference between males and females in desire to take a television class. But once the table was tabulated, sex did make a difference. 37 Table 17 Desire for TV Class by Sex Female Male TV 54.5 39.2 Class 29.3 26.8 Neither 0.0 1.3 Both 16.3 32.7 Of the two sexes, females prefer television class over any other by a substantial margin. Male preference on the other hand is tied between television and a combination of live and televised class. Delving further, it can be said that there is a significant difference between males and females who chose only television as opposed to those who chose only live classes. Table 18 was calculated under the premise leisure money would be a factor in being able to afford a television in one's dormitory room. Table 19 was cross tabulated with the belief leisure money would have an inverse effect on the amount of television watched. It was thought that students with more leisure money would go out, while students without leisure money would occupy their spare time watching tele- vision. In both tables the premises were proven incorrect. ' Table 18 TV in Dormitory Room by Leisure Money $0-5 $6#10 $11-15 $l6+ Yes 55.3 55.7 43.3 69.8 No 44.7 44.3 56.7 30.2 38 Table 19 Hours TV watched by Leisure Money §9;§ §6—10 $11-15 _;9i 0 34.5 35.7 10.1 19.6 1 26.3 31.6 8.8 33.3 2 20.6 38.2 20.6 20.6 3+ 29.4 35.3 11.8 23.5 Leisure money does not appear to have much influence over whether one has a television in their room or the amount of television one watches. Both tables are spread out quite evenly. Looking at Table 18 the only significant break comes in the $16.00 and over category where almost 70 percent of the respondents had television in their room. Overall, leisure money does not affect the amount of television watched (Table 19). Those respondents with money to spend on outside activities watched just as much tele- vision as those with less leisure money. In Table 20A and 20B the computation was done under the supposition that as leisure money rises, so would the ability and desire to pay for cable television. Table 20A Spend $7.50 (Individual Room) by Leisure Money $0-5 $6-10 $11-15 $16+ Yes 84.2 84.2 81.3 95.1 No 15.8 15.8 18.8 4.9 39 Table 20B Spend $5.00 (Community Room) by Leisure Money $0-5 $6-10 $11-15 $16+ Yes 47.1 58.4 62.0 34.0 No 52.9 41.6 48.0 66.0 When comparing Table 20A with Table 20B, it should be noted that leisure money did not influence the desire to sub- scribe to an individual or community room. The overwhelming desire was for cable in one's own room, even if it cost more (Table 20A). Moving to Table 20B, paying for community room service was not as popular with approximately half of the respondents in each of the first three categories wanting cable in the community room. Again, the only deviation comes in the $16.00 and more bracket with over 60 percent not willing to pay for community room service. In the routing of the questionnaires, respondents who wanted cable in their own room or both their room and the community room were asked if they would spend $7.50 on indi- vidual room and $5.00 for community room. Those who respond- ed as only wanting community service were only asked about spending $5.00 for that one service. Thus, routing of the questionnaire might have balanced out the community room table due to many respondents who were asked both questions answering "ves" to the individual room and "no" to the communitv room. 40 Tables 21, 22A, 22B, and 23 were completed, for it was presupposed having television in the dormitory room would change one's attitude toward cable service. This was found to be true in all cases. Table 21 Desired Cable Location by_TV in Room 222 82 Room 43.9 24.8 Community 24.2 43.6 Both 22.3 12.0 Neither 9.6 19.7 As expected, possession of a television has a positive effect on one's preference for individual room.aervice over community room. Table 22A Pay $7.50 (Individual) by TV in Room Yes Np Yes 93.4 6.6 No 71.7 28.3 Table 228 Pay $5.00 (Community) by TV in Room Yes N9 Yes 50.4 46.3 No 49.6 53.7 Table 22A and 22B further support the findings of Table 21. As expected, people with television were willing to pay $7.50 a term for individual room service. What did come as 41 a surprise was those without television did not overwhelmr ingly desire community room service. Those owning televi- sion sets were just as willing to pay for the community room as those without television sets. Table 23 Desire for TV Class by TV in Room 229 _N_o TV 51.9 38.5 Class 26.6 29.1 Neither 0.0 1.7 Both 21.5 30.8 Table 23 shows that even respondents not owning a television still wanted to watch a televised class or a combination of televised and live. Almost 70 percent of those respondents mentioned one or the other. It appears that these peOple would be willing to watch their class in the community room or a friend's room. Tables 24 and 25 were undertaken for it was believed that television viewing would increase the desire to have cable service in the room (Table 24), and the desire to enroll in a class over cable television. In both tables this was proven true. 42 Table 24 Desired Cable Location by Hours TV watched 9 1 2 3_+. Room 29.5 40.4 48.5 52.9 Community 36.9 29.8 21.2 23.5 Both 16.1 19.3 21.2 23.5 Neither 17.3 10.5 9.1 0.0 As expected the results here show that the more televi- sion one watches, the more likely they are to want cable service to their room or both their own room and the commu- nity room. It is also logical that those not wanting any cable service watched very little television. Table 25 Desire for TV Class by Hours TV Watched 9 1 2 a. TV 42.9 42.1 61.8 58.8 Class 29.2 26.3 26.5 23.5 Neither 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Both 26.8 31.6 11.8 17.6 As television viewing goes up, so does the desire to take a class on television; where this has no real effect on those wanting live class or a combination of live and tele- vised. Looking specifically at the 3 hour and over column there appears to be a significant difference between the group who wanted television only and the group that wanted class only. Before computing Table 26, it was thought there would be an inverse relationship between class level and desire to 43 watch a class on television. Table 26 Desire for TV Class bnglass Level .1. 2 2 3 TV 44.0 42.9 32.7 48.6 Class 29.4 31.2 21.8 25.7 Neither 0.0 1.3 1.8 0.0 Both 26.6 24.7 23.6 25.7 Surprisingly, willingness to watch a class on television was not confined to lower level undergraduates. It was expected that Freshmen and Sophomores would prefer television due to the large class sections found in basic required courses. But upper classmen do not seem to possess any ani- mosity either. They are still willing to enroll in a tele- vision section even when they would be taking 300- and 400- level courses. It was thought that watching cable since coming to MSU would have a positive effect on awareness of the public access channel. Table 27 demonstrated this was false. Table 27 Aware of Public Access by Watch Cable at MSU 3.9.9: 80. Yes 20.8 15.4 No 79.2 84.6 This table points out student body unawareness of free public access production. As expected, over 80 percent of those not watching cable since coming to MSU were unaware of 44 public access. But of those who had watched, still almost 80 percent were unaware of free public access production. Table 28 HOW'Find Public Access by Know People at Public Access Les 22 Word of Mouth 75.0 50.0 Newspaper 12.5 35.7 Ad on Channel 11 6.3 14.3 Other 6.3 0.0 As expected, those who knew people at public access found out about the service by word of mouth, while those without contacts saw articles or ads in the newspaper. CHAPTER 12 Summary and Conclusions Focusing first on the Michigan State University (MSU) study, the average age of an MSU undergraduate was found to be 19 with 92 percent being caucasian and 5 percent black. Fifty-seven percent have television in their dormitory room but 61 percent watched no television the previous day. (hly 25.3 percent can receive affiliates from all four networks. Eight areas in Michigan were named as locations where respondents had watched cable before coming to MSU. A total of 41 percent had contact with cable prior to MSU, while 45 percent had seen cable since becoming an MSU student. Eighty-six percent, or 17,200, of MSU on-campus under- graduates wanted to subscribe to cable in their dormitory with 36 percent wanting individual room service and 33 per- cent community roomn Another 18 percent wanted both. Of those wanting individual room.service, 90 percent would pay the $7.50 per term to receive it. The community room was not as popular with only 48.9 percent willing to pay $5.00 per term for it. Eighteen percent were aware that any East Lansing resi— dent could produce programs at public access free of charge. Of these people, 53 percent found out by word of mouth. Only 9.6 percent of those who have watched cable while at MSU had also watched the public access channel. 45 46 There was an overall favorable attitude toward televised class with 46 percent wanting to enroll in a total television course and 26 percent wanting to watch part of a class on television. This amounts to 14,400 university students. Leisure money does not appear to have any effect on owning a television or the amount of television one watches. But it does affect whether one wants the individual or come munity room service. The relationship is inverse. As the amount of money one has to spend on leisure time activities rises, so does the desire for individual room service. The largest percentage of those wanting cable in the community room spend less than $5.00 per week on leisure time activi- ties. It was found that by comparing individual room to commu- nity room cable service, the overwhelming desire was for the individual room. And of those who wanted it, leisure money did not affect their willingness to pay. As television viewing increases, so does desire for cable in the individual room, with 52 percent of those watch- ing over three hours the previous day wanting it; whereas the largest percentage of people wanting community room ser- vice watched no television the previous day. Almost 70 percent of the respondents not owning a tele— vision still wanted to watch all or part of a class on it. And as television viewing goes up, so does the willingness to take a class on television. This had no real effect on those wanting to watch only part or none of a class over cable television. 47 Finally, it was learned that the student population of MSU is generally unaware of the public access channel. The percentage of unawareness (80 percent) was the same for those who had watched cable since coming here as those never seeing East Lansing cable. This was the first study done at Michigan State Univer- sity which focused upon on-campus undergraduate students' desire for cable television in the dormitory. Consequently, in order to profile the MSU undergraduate student, much of the information gathered had to be demographic in nature. The questionnaire was purposely designed to gather informatinl on television habits, past and present association with cable and attitudes toward televised class. Lastly, and maybe most important, attitudes toward pay- ing for cable service were examined. To date MSU has only used cable television as a way to transmit courses into classrooms. Wiring a campus for this purpose is expensive, and this expense must be borne by the University. But if the University were to expand the current system to the dormi- tories and include off air channels, students would be eager (86Z) to pay for the service. The public access channel(s) could become a new outlet for student expression with students cooperating in the writ- ing, producing and directing of programs. The end result will be more communication between students which would bring the campus population together. 48 If MSU decides to instrument this, there are two paths to choose from" The first would be to design and build their own cable system exclusively for University use. The second would be to negotiate an agreement with an outside franchise. This method appears to be the most economical since an out— side cable system would bear the expenses associated with cable installation and upkeep. Combining all the background information research on the educational uses of cable, its advantages far outweigh any limitations. Its broadband and two-way capabilities can open new avenues for teaching. Unfortunately, educational institutions, particularly those of higher learning, have not yet taken advantage of cable; even though cable television has proven to be successful in those instances where it was used (refer to Oregon University and Kirkwood College, Chapter 6). Reasons behind this could be economic, fear of television taking over for the live instructor, or just general fear of change. But whatever the reasons, it is very clear that cable's current educational development is at a standstill. APPENDICES APPENDIX A SPRING 1978 TELEPHONE NUMBER: ID NUMBER CALLBACKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 STATUS OF INTERVIEW: COMPLETED (1) REFUSED (2) DISCONTINUED (3) INTRODUCTION: Hello I'm the Telecommunication Department on campus. COLS. 1-3 calling from We're doing a study of television use and I have a few questions lid like to ask you. 1. First, have you ever watched cable TV before coming to MSU? YES (1) NO (2) (GO TO Q 4) DK (3) (GO TO Q 4) In what city? Was the TV located in your home? YES (1) No (2) Is there a TV set in your room at MSU? YES (1) NO (2) (GO TO Q 6) What channels do you receive? 3 (l) 10 (ft) 41 (1) 6 (2) 12 '(_5_) 8 (3) 23 (g) 49 8-14 10. 11. 50 9912- HOW'meny hours of television did you watch yesterday? 15 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9+ If cable were available in your dormitory would you prefer to subscribe to it: in your room, in a community room, both, or neither? l6 OWN ROOM (Z) COMMUNITY ROOM (_2_) BOTH (g) NEITHER (4) (GO TO Q 10) If cable service to an individual room cost $7.50 per term, would you want this service? 17 YES (Z) N0 (2) DK (3) If cable service to the community viewing room cost $5.00 per term, would you want this service? 18 YES (1) N0 (2) DK (Q) Have you ever watched cable TV since you've been a student at MSU? 19 YES (Z) No (2) DK (3) Was the cable TV located in a private resi— dence or in a public place such as a bar or restaurant? 20 RESIDENCE (Z) PUBLIC (Z) OTHER (g) 51 COLS. Now I have a few questions on local programming on cable. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. Have you ever watched the Public Access channel? YES (1) NO (g) (GO TO Q 16) DK (3) (Go To Q 16) Could you tell me the call letters/channel number of East Lansing Public Access? mm (1) CHANNEL 11 (g) BOTH (3) DK <4) What type programs have you watched on Public Access? ( VVVV ( ( ( What types of programs would you like to see offered over the Public Access? (BE SPECIFIC, IF ANSWER IS TOO GENERAL, PROBE) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Are you aware that any East Lansing resident can produce programs for Public Access free of charge? YES (1) NO (g) (GO TO Q 24) DK (g) (00 TO Q 24) 21 22 23 24 25 :wv lzfl . 52 COLS. 17. How did you first find out about free public access production? 26 WORD OF MOUTH (Z) NEWSPAPER (a) AD ON CHANNEL 11 (3) OTHER: 18. Have you ever worked on a production at Public Access? 27 YES (1) N0 (2) (GO TO Q 20) 19. What were your duties? 28 20. Do u know anyone who does production wor at Public Access? 29 YES <_1_) NO (g) (00 TO Q 22) DK (3) (GO TO Q 22) 21. What are their duties? 30 Now I have some questions about the educational channels on cable. 22. Could you tell me the MSU channel number on the East Lansing cable system? 31 CHANNEL 19 (l) CHANNEL 20 (g) BOTH (3) DK (4) 53 COLS. 23. Have you ever viewed a MSU class offered on the East Lansing cable system? 32 YES (_1_) N0 (2) 0K <3) 24. If cable were available in your dormitory, and you were enrolled in a class offered over the cable, would you watch it on TV or go to class? 33 TV (Z) (GO TO Q 26) CLASS (Z) (GO TO Q 26) NEITHER (Z) (GO TO Q 26) BOTH (Z) 25. WOuld you watch this class on TV approxi- mately one-fourth of the time, one-half of the time, or three-quarters of the time? 34 ONE-FOURTH (Z) ONE-HALF (Z) THREE-QUARTERS (Z) I have just a few more questions. 26. What is your major? 35-36 27. What is your age? 37-38 28. What is your class level? 39 FRESHMAN (_1_) SOPHOMORE (_2_) JUNIOR (_3_) SENIOR (ft) 29. What dormitory do you live in? 40-41 54 COLS. 30. How much money do you spend on leisure time activities per week? 42 $0-5 (_1_) $21-25 (2) $6—10 (Z) $26-30 (6) $11-15 (3) 330+ <1) $16-20 (3) 31. ‘May I ask your race? 43 CAUCASIAN (Z) BLACK‘ (Z) CHICANO (Z) ORIENTAL (3) OTHER (_5_) Thank you very much for your help. 32. RECORD SEX 44 FEMALE (Z) ‘MALE (Z) mb APPENDIX B BRODY Frequency Z Armstrong 8 3 Bailey 1 0 Bryan 3 1 Emmons 10 4 Rather 7 3 NORTH CIRCLE Frqueney Z Mayo 3 1 Williams 5 2 Landon 4 l Gilchrist 4 l Yakeley 6 2 Campbell 5 2 MASON-PHILLIPS Frequency Z Abbot 2 1 Mason 10 4 Phillips 6 2 Snyder 8 3 SOUTH COMPLEX Frequeney Z Case 16 6. Holden 29 11 Wilson 34 12 "Wonders 22 8 EAST COMPLEX Frequency Z Akers 18 7 Holmes 15 5 Hubbard 17 6 McDonel 6 2 Van Hoosen l 0 SHAW Frequency Z Shaw l6 6 55 FOOTNOTES 1Mary Lou Armiger, "Cable TV Educational Medium of the Future?" College of Education, Fairleigh Dickinson Univer- sity (January 1973), p. 3-4. 2W. Bowman Cutter, "Cable TV and the University, Pro- ceedings of the Dallas Texas Conference." Interuniversity Communicaion Council, Princeton, New Jersey (January 1974), p. 12. 3Armiger, gp. cit., p. 4. 4Sol Taishoff, Broadcasting Yearbook 1977, Broadcasting- Telecasting (Washington, D.C., 1977), p. A5. 5Armiger, gp. cit., p. 4. 61bid., p. 5. 71bid., p. 5-6. !//8Edward S. Herold, "Televised Instruction: Limitations and Advantages." Improving College and Universigy Teaching. 24 (Winter 1976), p. 18. , ’3,»9Ibid., p. 18-19. 3 leEdward S. Herold, "Televised Lectures: Attitudes of Students and Faculty." Improving College and University Teaching, XXV, 1 (Winter 1977), p. 16. “ ,llIbid., p. 16. ( ,/ 121818., p. 16. V? 131616., p. 17. .141bid., p. 17. 15 Michael Molenda, "Cable TV and the University, Proceed- ings of the Dallas Texas Conference." Interuniversity Commu— nication Council, Princeton, New Jersey (January 1974), p. 40. 56 57 151616., p. 40-41 17Steven R. Rivkin, A New Guide to Federal Cable Tele- vision Regulations, MIT Press (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1978)? p. 28. 18Erling S. Jorgensen, William A. Anderson, "Low Traffic on Education's Electronic Highway." Audiovisual Instruction, 20 (May 1975). P. 37. 19 Molenda, pp. cit., p. 47. 201bid., p. 47-48. 21Armiger, gp. cit., p. 6. 22Catharine Barrett, "The Enigma of a Tousand and One Channels," Today's Education, 61 (November 1972), p. 35. 23 Jorgensen, Anderson, gp. cit., p. 35. 241616., p. 36-37. 25Daniel G. McAuliffe, "How a College System Joined a TV Network." Community and Junior College Journal, 48 (March 1978). p. 40-41. 26"Iowa College Makes TV Pay.” American School and Uni- versity, 49 (June 1977), p. 40-41. (T 27Irv Letofsky, "The Cable Campus—~Oregon State." Audio- visual Instruction, 20 (May 1975), p. 21-23. 28"How Television Assists the Faculty." IPTV Information Release, Michigan State University (1977). 29"Facilities and Services." IPTV Information Release, Michigan State University (1977). 30"How Television Assists the Facult ." IPTV Information Release, Michigan State University (1977). 31 John Abel, Brian Fontes, "Student, Faculty and Public Attitudes Toward ITV Courses on CATV." Unpublished Survey, Michigan State University, (Spring 1976), p. 1-3. ‘5': ear-rm 58 32Thomas Baldwin, Lee Thornton, "Student Response to Michigan State University Married Housing Cablecourses." Unpublished Survey, Michigan State University, (Winter 1975), p. 5-10. 33Erling Jorgensen, "Survey of Students Who Report Having Viewed MSU TV Courses Over East Lansing Cable TV." Unpub- lished Survey, Michigan State University, (Winter 1976), p. 1-31. 3Z'Abel, Fontes, gp. cit., p. 2. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Abel, John and Brian Fontes, "Student, Faculty and Public Attitudes Toward ITV Courses on CATV." Unpublished, Michigan State University, (spring 1976). Armiger, Mary Lou, "Cable TV Educational Medium of the Future?‘ Fairleigh Dickinson University, (January 1973). Baldwin, Thomas and Lee Thornton, "Student Response to Michigan State University Married Housing Cablecourses." Unpublished, Michigan State University, (Winter 1975). Barrett, Catharine, "The Enigma of a Thousand and One Chan- nels." Today's Education, 61 (November 1972). Cutter, Bowman, "Cable TV and the University, Proceedings of the Dallas Texas Conference." Princeton, New Jersey, (January 1974). "Facilities and Services." Information for Public Release, Michigan State University, (1977). Herold, Edward, "Televised Instruction: Limitations and Advantages." Improving College and University Teaching, 24 (Winter 1976). , "Televised Lectures: Attitudes of Students and Faculty.” Improving College and University Teach- ing, XXV, No. 1 (Winter 1977). "How Television Assists the Faculty." Information for Public Release, Michigan State University, (1977). ”Iowa College Makes TV Pay." American School and University, 49 (June 1977). Jorgensen, Erling and William Anderson, "Low Traffic on Education's Electronic Highway." Audiovisual Instruc- tion, 20 (May 1975). Jorgensen, Erling, "Survey of Students Who Report Having Viewed MSU TV Courses Over East Lansing Cable TV." Unpublished, Michigan State University, (Winter 1976). Letofsky, Irv, "The Cable Campus--Oregon State." Audiovisual Instruction, 20 (May 1975). McAuliffe, Daniel, "HOW'a College System Joined a TV Networkf' Community and Junior College Journal, 48 (March 1978). 59 60 Molenda, Michael, "Cable TV and the University, Proceedings of the Dallas Texas Conference." Princeton, New Jersey, (January 1974). Rivkin, Steven, A New Guide to Federal Cable Television Regulations. Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press,1978. Taishoff, Sol, Broadcastinngearbook. Washington, D.C.: BroadcastingJTeIecasting, 1977.