. <.,... 3.1;... .....l. £22... .12.. ...:1.... I: ‘ K... . _..::. I; .. . 3 . r. . y ‘ .2. ._~.‘.f_...f_v_r._ . I: :7...) _ _. .2371. 1 _ .2; .: .. :l‘ 1-.P\. .. :;. 2...: : . . ‘._.. ‘5‘“.R. .. 2:“ ..V.':...:. ., .. r: _;_... 2...: .2. if 1......47 ._ I... .3; :..: ..T V .2.‘ . I. . Z . :3 . .. ;;.: u» ._ . 1. _ . 1...... . INE, I,..:.. 2.1., _ . :3: .5 . .._ 9‘. ., 2.; _ . ._.‘ .:. .i.,.: in? ‘ 3.7:... If!» If: v. . .; .yarfi ...r;. .12.»; .vb C. .. ' 1111... all. .. .,r.I...‘. .1...‘ :2 ,. ., 1.? . 1, ‘..m,...,.;:.. ,‘ _ _ v . A .. 1 P511; . ‘ . 2:514. .1: ‘eiilnil, \. . . h..| #8759“... .42 .. , .1. .. . Kunfifit ‘zn. . ‘. ‘ . $.33": .1511; , ..1p91%.nsr.i :1. ”$59 a ...C «.1. ....... trauma? r......,...‘ ‘2. fit. .7: , .1::;:, 3.1;; VB. f: r . . , .I.f,3.4. ”£5.44 .2... 3...: . , .. .. , J .. .. 21.31. 2; ., 2:;5. f , V. . . . ‘ rust. 3.1.1.7111. ‘ .. . V .l . . ~ :y: ‘ . . . , . A A , — 7‘ ( ‘3. ~ . . n n A. . . l . . Icylrz; ‘ . . .;::Z V ., , C i I. ‘ mum-av a l/lllittl’lflllll/llllfll University ~ ”I :11 d i ' ‘: ’\.,-"":'.}::7,351:- This is to certify that the thesis entitled THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY: A PROPOSITIONAL INVENTORY OF THE LITERATURE presented by EDWARD P. CAFEARELLA JR. has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph 0D 0 degree in Education 5/126me Major professor - M . Date 3/,0 I7 .5 “a" . :1 .- .- ‘ .' -. 0—7639 Q11"! .r t “I... ABSTRACT THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY: A PROPOSITIONAL INVENTORY OF THE LITERATURE BY Edward P. Caffarella, Jr. This study contains a list of propositions pertain— ing to the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology. The propositions were formulated by collecting, analyzing, and synthesizing existing studies that deal with the sub— ject. Statement of the problem Colleges and universities across the country are currently facing financial problems. The problems are not limited to any particular type of institution but are found throughout higher education. One cause of the prob— lem is that tuition costs have risen sharply during the past fifteen years. However, even with these increases in tuition the student paid a smaller percentage of the costs Of his education in 1970 than he did in 1960. Another Cause is that since education is a labor-intensive industry, it must expend a major percentage of its budget for personnel. Edward P. Caffarella, Jr. Before productivity can be raised in a labor-intensive industry, it must become more capital—intensive. ,Institutions are meeting the financial crisis primarily by utilizing short-range, stop—gap solutions. Among those being utilized now are the following: 1) delay of non—essential building repairs, 2) elimination of non- productiye programs, 3) elimination of faculty positions, 4) decrease in the budgets of all departments, and 5) post— ponement of faculty raises. Higher education must find long—range solutions to the financial crisis; otherwise it will continually need to find new short-range solutions for financial problems. It appears that if the long—range solution is to be a real solution, then the current structure of higher education, particularly the organization of instruction, must change. Instructional technology as a solution Many leading educators have been suggesting instruc— tional technology as a means by which institutions of higher education can meet, at least in part, the current financial crisis. Through the use of instructional technology higher education can become less labor-intensive and more capital— intensive. Thus, it will be possible to increase the pro— ductivity of higher education and simultaneously to increase the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology. Edward P. Caffarella, Jr. Purpose of this study The purpose of this study was to formulate a list of propositions pertaining to the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology by collecting, analyzing, and synthesizing existing studies that deal with the subject. Methodology The methodology used is the propositional inven- tory research design which has been used in a number of sociological studies. The first step in the methodology was the development of a bibliography of all studies which measured the cost-effectiveness of instructional technol- ogy. The initial bibliography consisted of four hundred and twenty-nine references. Of this number approximately three hundred were evaluated in terms of two criteria. The first criterion was that the study must deal with the cost— effectiveness of instructional technology. The second criterion was that the study had to be either an empirical study or its findings had to be supported with quantative data. From the thirty-two studies that met these criteria sixteen propositions were formulated which encompass the findings of these studies. Propositions The propositions cover such subjects as closed- circuit television, sixteen millimeter films, production of instructional materials, student time, and audience size. Edward P. Caffarella, Jr. A typical proposition is: Proposition Number 1B. The cost of utilizing open circuit television for instruction will be less expensive than the cost of providing instruc— tion through the use of one instructor for each thirty students when the total course size is greater than five hundred students. THE COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY: A PROPOSITIONAL INVENTORY OF THE LITERATURE BY Edward Pf Caffarella, Jr. A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum 1973 Copyright by EDWARD P . CAFFARELLA , JR . 1973 H To my wife, Rosemary, I dedicate this study. need so much the quiet of your love After the day's loud strife; need your calm all other things above After the stress of life. crave the haven that in your heart lies, After all toil is done; need the starshine of your heavenly eyes, After the day's great sun. ——Charles Hanson Towne ii PREFACE This study, though it is comprehensive, certainly does not include all the existing research on the cost- effectiveness of instructional technology. Research which was conducted after the writing of this study is, of course, not included. As readers identify additional research which should be included in a subsequent edition of this study the author would appreciate being informed of the research. Any dissertation, and particularly this one, in- volves the work and encouragement of many people. To these people the author owes a great debt: To Dr. Paul W. F. Witt for his untiring guidance and encouragement during my entire doctoral program and especially for serving as a dis- tinguished exemplar of the profession that I now enter as a college professor. To Dr. James R. Nord for giving me the opportun- ity to learn so much from him while working as his administrative assistant. To Drs. Kent L. Gustafson, Floyd G. Parker, and Everett M. Rogers for exposing me to new frontiers in the fields of education and communi- cation. PREFACE--continued To the Resource Utilization Project Staff and Fellows for providing a dynamic and exciting environment within which to work during the past year. To the Instructional Development and Technology Graduate Students for teaching me so much during the past two years. To the authors of the thirty—two reports in this study for providing me with the data used in formulating the propositions. To my wife for persevering with loving care during my doctoral study. To all, a heartfelt thank you. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Chapter I PROBLEM, RATIONALE AND PURPOSE . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . 2 Financial crisis in higher education . . . 2 Explanations for the crisis . . . . . . . 3 The rise in tuition costs . . . . . 4 Education is a labor- intensive industry. 6 Solutions to the financial crisis proposed in the past . . . . . . 9 Instructional Technology as a Solution . . . 14 The use of instructional technology . . . 14 The need for the current study . . . . . . 18 Purpose of This Study . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Summary of Chapter I . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 II DEFINITIONS AND MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Definitions . . . 23 Description of a Cost— Effectiveness Model . 26 Summary of Chapter II . . . . . . . . . . . 30 III METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Examples of Propositional Inventory Types of Research Designs . . . . . . . . 31 Explanation of the Propositional Inventory Research Design . . . 32 The Research Design for the Current Study . 36 Development of the bibliography . . . . . 36 Securing the references . . . . . . . . 37 Criteria for selection . . . . . . . 38 Development of the postulated relationships . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Summary of Chapter III . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Chapter IV V PROPOSITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Review of the Research Design . . . . Limitations of the Propositions . . Generalizability of the propositions Utilization of the propositions . . Propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . Television . . . . . . Class size for closed— circuit television--#1A and 1B . . . . . . Class size for open circuit broadcast-—#2 . . . . . . . . . . Airborne television-—#3 . . . . . Shared broadcast facilities—-#4 . . Sixteen Millimeter Films--#5 . . . . . Amplified Telephone——#6 . . . . Production of Instructional Materials- Student Time——#8 . . . . . . . . . . . Administration . . . . . . . . . . Utilization of facilities-—#9 . . . Increase in the student/faculty ratio--#10 . . . . . . . . . . Institutional savings——#11 . . . . . Audience Size . . . . . . . . . . . . Enrollment—-#12 . . . . . . . . . Reuse of materials—-#l3 . . . . . . Expanding Opportunities . . . . . . Instruction not otherwise available— Enrichment of the curriculum—-#15 Summary of Chapter IV . . . . . . . . SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . Purpose of this study . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . Implementation of the Propositions . . Recommended Research . . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY FROM THE PROPOSITIONS CHAPTER . . GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY ON COST-ANALYSIS MODELS . . . . . . vi I o O o APPENDICES Page A Research Design from Collins and Guetzkow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 B Research Design from Rogers and Shoemaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 C Analysis of Data Used for Acceptance or Rejection of Generalizations by Rogers and Shoemaker . . . . . . . . . . . 104 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Levine's cost—effectiveness model . . . . 27 2. Diagram of a middle range analysis. . . . 35 3. Cost per student in relation to the number of students enrolled in the course . . . . 66 viii CHAPTER I PROBLEM, RATIONALE AND PURPOSE This study contains a list of propositions pertain- ing to the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology that were formulated by collecting, analyzing, and synthe- sizing existing studies that deal with the subject. The propositions should be viewed with caution since they are supported by a relatively small number of studies. Instructional technology has been suggested as a means whereby higher education can overcome, at least in part, the financial crisis it now faces. Although most of the studies are not empirical or data—based investi- gations, several have been executed which measure the cost-effectiveness of specific aspects of instructional technology. However, there is no study which measures the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology in general. This study advances sixteen propositions relating to the general cost-effectiveness of instructional technology that have been developed from existing studies on specific aspects of instructional technology. Statement of the Problem ' Financial'crisis in higher education Higher education in America is in the midst of a financial crisis affecting colleges and universities, both public and private, across the nation. The titles of two books by Jellema describe succinctly the financial crisis in higher education. The. first book is entitled The Red and the Black: Special Preliminary Report on the Financial Status, Present and l Projected, of Private Institutions of Higher Learning. The second book shows the increasing seriousness of the financial condition of colleges and universities by refer— ing to the color of the ink on the ledger page in its title which is Redder and Much Redder: A Follow—Up Study to "The 2 Red and the Black." 3 Cheit in 1971 studied the financial conditions of forty—one institutions of higher education including 1William W. Jellema, The Red and the Black: Spec- ial Preliminary Report on the Financial Status, Present and Projected, of Private Institutions of Higher-Learning (Washington, D. C.: Association of American Colleges, n.d.). 2William W. Jellema, Redder and Much Redder: A Follow-Up Study to "The Red and the Black" (Washington, D. C.: Association of American Colleges, 1971). 3Earl F. Cheit, The New Depression in Higher Educa— tion: A Study of Financial Conditions at 41 Colleges and Universities (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971). nationally prominent universities, local community colleges, public institutions, private institutions, science colleges and liberal arts colleges. His findings show rather con- clusively that a large percentage of American institutions of higher education were either in financial trouble or were headed for financial trouble. He found that: . . . 29 of the 41 colleges and universities in the study (71 percent) were, at the time of the campus] visit, headed for financial trouble or were in finan— cial difficulty. The remaining 29 percent, 12 schools, were considered not in financial trouble at the time of the campus visit. For purposes of this study, an institution was judged in financial difficulty if its current finan— cial condition forced upon it a loss of program or services that are regarded as part of the program. An institution was classified as headed for finan— cial trouble if, at the time of the study, it had been able to meet current responsibilities with- out reducing quality, but either could not ensure that it could much longer meet current program and quality standards or could not plan support for evolving program growth. Based upon Jellema's report on the financial condition of private colleges and Cheit's study of a fairly represent— ative sample of American institutions of higher education it is quite clear that a great many of the colleges and universities of the nation are in serious financial diffi- culty. Explanations for the crisis While several explanations have been proposed for the present financial problems in higher education, two: lIbid., p. 139. rise in tuition costs; and the fact that education is a labor-intensive industry, are regarded as of major signif- icance. The rise in tuition costs. One explanation for the financial crisis is that tuition covers a much smaller percentage of the cost of educating the student than it did ten years ago. A study of independent colleges in Ohio1 showed that in 1959-60 tuition and fees covered 76% of the costs of educating the students and by 1969-70 this had dropped to 64%. As a consequence of this explanation one suggested means of solving the financial crisis is to increase the percentage of the costs which students pay in tuition and fees. This has been attempted by private colleges in Ohio where the average tuition was $748 in 1959-60 and by 1969-70 had risen to $1,559. Even with this increase in tuition the percentage of the costs of educating the students covered by tuition fell from 76% to 64% during the same period. Obviously, the increase in tuition has not solved the financial problems of the collegesin Ohio. Howard R. Bowen in a review of the financial needs of higher education indicates that increases in tuition 1Association of Independent Colleges and Universi— ties of Ohio, Toward an Effective Utilization of Independ- ent Colleges and Universities by the State of Ohio (Columbus, Ohio: Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Ohio, 1971), p. 17. do not solve the financial problems of higher education because: "Rising expenditures for higher education are due not only to expanding enrollments but also to rising costs per student. . . . costs per student nearly doubled between 1955 and 1968."1 There is a point beyond which many students are unable to pay higher rates for tuition. Consequently when an institution charges tuition a student cannot afford he is quite likely to withdraw from the institution. Thus by charging higher tuition an institution runs the risk of making its financial plight worse rather than better. For example, if a college with an enrollment of 4,000 students were to attempt to increase its operating budget by raising its fees from $4,000 to $5,000 per year, it would actually decrease its income from fees from $16,000,000 to $15,000,000 if the higher fees caused 1,000 of its students to withdraw from the college. Since tuition in many colleges is approaching levels many students cannot pay, other means must be found to meet the financial crisis. One possible means is to reduce the overall costs of educating students through the use of technology. If the overall cost is reduced, then the amount paid by the student covers a larger percentage of it. For lHoward R. Bowen, "Financial Needs of the Campus," in The Corporation and the Campus, ed. by Robert H. Connery, Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, 1970, p. 80. example, if a college with a tuition fee of $2,000 were to decrease the cost of educating the student from $3,000 to $2,750 per year, it would actually increase the per- centage that tuition covers of the costs from 67% to 73% without an increase in tuition fees. Education is a labor-intensive industry. Industries that expend a major percentage of their resources for personnel are referred to as labor—intensive industries. Industries that expend a major percentage of their resources for capital goods (raw materials, machinery, etc.) are con- sidered capital-intensive industries. Because education expends a major percentage of its budget for salaries of faculty and staff it is categorized as a labor-intensive industry. Conversely, since the auto- motive industry expends a large percentage of its budget on capital goods it is a capital-intensive industry. A parallel can be drawn between education and the performing arts. The performing arts, like education, is a labor-intensive industry. The performing arts largely utilize the talents of a live performer or a group of live performers to entertain a live audience. Because of the current high cost of live performers, the performing arts are also facing serious financial problems. Since both education and the performing arts are labor-intensive indus- tries, the financial problems encountered by both are similar. In 1966 the Twentieth Century Fund conducted a study to investigate the financial problems plaguing the performing arts. In a report of that study Baumol and Bowen state that: . . . because of the economic structure of the performing arts, these financial pressures (i.e.: cost of the performer, maximum ticket price which patrons will pay) are here to stay, and there are fundamental reasons for expecting the income gap to widen steadily with the passage of time. Later in the same volume these authors describe the prob- lem that a labor-intensive industry encounters when it attempts to increase its produdtivity. Human ingenuity has devised ways to reduce the labor necessary to produce an automobile, but no one has yet succeeded in decreasing the human effort expended at a live performance of a 45 minute Schubert uartet much below a total of three man hours. Since the largest percentage of the costs of the performing arts and education is for salaries, the costs of both performanCe and instruction increase almost directly proportional to the increase in salaries making it almost impossible to increase the productivity of a labor-intensive industry. On the other hand, the manu- facturing industry, a capital-intensive industry, has been able to increase its productivity at a rate of 2%% 1William J. Baumol and William G. Bowen, Perform- ing Arts: The Economic Dilemma (Cambridge, Massachusetts: MoIoTo Press, 1966), p. 161. ' 2 Ibid., p. 164. per year primarily through the use of technology.1 Howard Bowen further substantiates the finding of the Twentieth Century Fund study that education is a labor— intensive industry when he states that: Higher education is a labor-intensive industry. The bulk of the budget goes to pay salaries. The size of the staff, both professional and non— professional, relative to the work load, is there- fore a critical factor in cost. And within the salary budget, professional salaries bulk large.2 Bowen also implies that as long as education remains a labor-intensive industry it will continue to have major financial problems. Jenny and Wynn believe that education should change from a labor—intensive industry to an industry that is more capital-intensive. It has been our experience that higher education is and has been denied precisely those types of funds in adequate amounts which are most needed to combat inflation and to enhance educational quality. Capital has been a most scarce economic resource for colleges . . . .3 Education, in all likelihood, will never become a capital—intensive industry. If, however, education can invest a larger percentage of its resources in capital, such lIbid., p. 162. 2Bowen, "Financial Needs," p. 82. 3Hans H. Jenny and G. Richard Wynn, Turning Point: A Study of Income and Expenditure Growth and Distribution of 48 Private Four-Year Liberal Arts Colleges, 1960-1970 (Wooster, Ohio: The College of Wooster, 1972). as instructional technology systems, it may be possible to make education less labor-intensive. By making eduCation less labor-intensive, it will be easier to increase the productivity of education. The two explanations presented in this section have centered around a lack of resources in sufficient quantities to meet the increasing costs of education and the financial structure of education whereby a large per- centage of the available resources are expended for personnel. Solutions to the financial crisis proposed in the past For many years higher education has been involved in numerous financial crises and a variety of solutions has been proposed and implemented. For example, Harvard University, the oldest univer- sity in America, founded in 1636, attempted these financial reforms: 1) In 1824 the faculty voted not to fill any vacancies thereby saving money for the university.1 2) The combining of Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has for decades been the object of feasibility studies.2 3) The Harvard Veterinary School was lSeymour E. Harris, Economics of Harvard (New York: 2 Ibid., p. 402 10 closed in 1900 because it had incurred a deficit of $4,206.96.1 For each of the examples from Harvard's his- tory, parallel situations can be found in contemporary higher education. For example: 1) In 1973 Syracuse University is not filling faculty vacancies when they occur. 2) The state supported institutions of higher educa- tion in New York, California and Maine have in each state been merged into one statewide institution. 3) Parsons College was recently forced to close because its deficit grew too large. As with the institutions described above other institutions have responded to the financial crisis in a variety of ways. The Carnegie Commission on Higher Educa- tion in a study of the means by which higher education could meet the financial crisis expands on how institu- tions are currently dealing with it. Already the financial crisis has forced many insti- tutions of higher education to curb increases in expenditures. Some have taken great care to assure that expenditures might be pruned in ways that would be least harmful to the quality of education. But too often the pattern is one of across—the—board costcutting, such as deferred maintenance, a general freeze on hiring, uniform budget cuts for all departments, and, in public institutions, restric— tions on the enrollment of qualified students. Some of these measures, such as deferred mainten- ance, may help in the short run but merely exacer- bate problems in the long run, as costs rise. A general freeze on hiring may, unless it is admin— istered with some degree of flexibility, have lIbid., p. 402. 11 undesirable repercusions in a situation in which there is a need for expansion in some fields and contraction in others in response to the dramatic changes that are occuring in the job market for college graduates. As this quotation makes clearly evident, institutions of higher education are not achieving long—range solutions to their present financial crises. Instead they are employ— ing short-range, stop-gap measures which may, in fact, have negative_1ong-term effects on their institutions. Two case examples illustrate some of the short range solutions which have been employed by institutions which are in financial difficulty in order to extricate themselves from their plight. New York University. In 1970-71 (the situation has worsened since then) the university will carry a deficit of over $5 million and will need to borrow to cover it. The university has partially offset its difficult financial situation by the sale of noneducational business assets. The num- ber of faculty has been frozen and the number of teaching assistants reduced. Research has been cut back, and a moderate reduction has been made in the number of administrative posts. The student faculty ratio will rise in 1970-71. Saint Louis University. The School of Dentistry, the four engineering departments, and Parks College --a small affiliate specializing in aeronautical science-—have been closed. Forty-five faculty positions were eliminated,and forty permanent faculty members were consequently given two years' notice of severance from employment. The current allocation of the Medical School is one-third what it was three years ago. Library acquisitions and lCarnegie Commission on Higher Education, The More Effective Use of Resources: An Imperative for Higher Egucation (New York: McGraw—Hill, 1972), p. 31. 12 research programs were trimmed. Faculty salaries were raised only 3 percent--it is feared that some faculty may leave as a result. Many courses were postponed, and the student-faculty ratio has risen. The debate program has been eliminated for next year. As evidenced by these examples, institutions of higher education are meeting the financial crisis by employ- ing two basic strategies. One strategy has been to curtail or eliminate certain programs and/or services within the institution. The other strategy has been not to expand the institution's offerings even though there was a need for programs in new fields. Both of these strategies are short— range solutions to the financial crisis which will have long-term negative effects on the institutions. Higher education must find long-term solutions to the financial crisis. Otherwise, it will be limited to continually substituting short-range solutions and will never solve the financial problems. It is highly probable that the long-range solutions will entail a restructuring of the current organization of higher education. - Howard Bowen and Gordon Douglass, in a recent study sponsored by the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, proposed several means for increasing the efficiency of higher education. Each of the means, however, necessitates a restructuring of the present organization of instruction which is used in higher education. lCheit, Depression, p. 99. 13 The instructional systems which Bowen and Douglass considered (in addition to the conventional plan) were modification of the conventional plan by introducing a few large lecture courses of large enrollment (a variant of the Ruml plan), programmed independent study of a type that would require minimal time of the instructor and minimal special- ized equipment other than library books, tutorial instruction (the Bakan plan), programmed independ- ent study using mechanical aids (the Kieffer plan), and a plan of our own (the eclectic plan) combin— ing these several methods.1 Bowen and Douglass presented and described the costs of these systems using a hypothetical liberal arts college with an enrollment of 1200 students as a setting. For purposes of this study, the important point is that Bowen and Douglass see a need to modify the current organization of instruction if higher education is to become more efficient. In the examples cited in this section there were no institutions which increased their efficiency by employing the strategies suggested by Bowen and Douglass. If higher education is to find long-range solutions to the financial problems which it faces, it must restructure the organiza- tion of instruction utilizing strategies similar to those suggested by Bowen and Douglass. Instructional technology is one such strategy that can be utilized in long-range solutions. lHoward R. Bowen and Gordon K. Douglass, Efficiency in Liberal Education: A Study of Comparative InstructionaI Costs for Different Ways of Organizing Teaching-Learning in a Liberal Arts College (New York: McGraw—Hill, 1971), p. 95. 14 Instructional Technology as a Solution As is suggested above, instructional technology may be a means by which higher education can solve, at least in part, the financial crisis which it now faces. This section contains a description of the ways that instruc— tional technology can be utilized to help to solve the financial crisis. The use of instructional technology by higher education Currently the usage of instructional technology by colleges is at a relatively low level. "Only a small per- centage of the annual budget of any school, college or university is available for instructional materials (includ- 1 ing books)." If instructional technology is to help solve the financial crisis, then the level of use of technology will need be increased. As already noted, the performing arts, like educa- tion is a labor-intensive industry, has increased its use of technology during the past two decades. The performing arts have changed somewhat from a labor-intensive indus- try toward a capital-intensive industry by utilizing tele— 'vision to increase their productivity. _‘ lSidney G. Tickton, ed., To Improve Learning: An Eyeluation of Instructional Technology, Vol. I (New York: Bowker, 1970), p. l, 84. 15 . . . An orchestral performance on television, which we are told by the professionals, takes less than twice the man-hours of a live performance, can reach an audience of 20 million instead of the 2,500 per- sons who occupy a concert hall, thus yielding an increase in productivity of four hundred thousand per cent! Four hundred thousand percent is an astonishing in- crease in productivity. If all programs in a college could increase their productivity by just one hundred percent the college could double its present program without an increase in the current level of expenditure. Although an increase in productivity will not solve the financial crisis, it can provide a means which educators can use to solve, at least in part, the problem. The report of the President's Commission on Instruc- tional Technology states that technology can be used to relieve teachers of many of the administrative and inform- ation transmission tasks which they currently perform. By relieving teachers of these tasks the teacher can then assume those tasks which human beings can perform best. Technology can make education more productive. With the demand for education outstripping educa- tion's income, more effective and more efficient learning is vital. Instructional Technology has shown its ability to speed up the rate of learn— ing. It can help the teacher make better use of his time. It can reduce the teacher's heavy burden of administrative tasks and take over some of the teacher's routine job of information trans- mission. Thus, the teacher would be able to lBaumol, Performing Arts, p. 163. 16 spend more time on teaching-inspiring students to learn and encouraging them to apply newly acquired information in useful and interesting ways. The use of instructional technology in a way such as this will mean a restructuring of the organization of the aca- demic program in higher education. The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education released in June of 1972 a report entitled The Fourth Revolution: Instructional Technology in Higher Education. The report deals with the role which instructional technology has played in the past and the role which it will play in the future of higher education. Its recommendations for the future state that: Although short-run costs for the development and introduction of new technology are expected to be very great, they will ultimately yield dividends. Much of the expanding technology has the poten- tial economic effect of spreading the benefit of investment in a single unit of instruction among very large numbers of students. It therefore has an ability to increase the productivity of higher education. The earlier efforts are made to develop the expanding instructional technology fully, the earlier this increased productivity will be realized.2 In a further discussion of the role instructional technology will play in higher education in the future the report lists the following ways technology can help college and univer- sity professors increase their productivity: lTickton, To Improve Learning, Vol. I, p. 32. 2Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, The Fourth Revolution: Instructional Technology in Higher Education (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972), pp. 45-46. 17 1. By decreasing the time required by students to learn specified modules of information. 2. By taking maximum advantage of the capabilities of available technological capacity. 3. By releasing faculty time. 4. By prolonging the time during which instruc— tion is available. 5. By utilizing quality instructional materials produced off the campus. 6. By sharing high—quality instructional programs and learning materials with other institutions. 7. By a conscious integration of all available technologies to produce desired objectives. 8. By enlarging the market for instructional mater- ials and instructional media. By increasing the productivity of professors, colleges and universities canalleviate part of the financial crisis. In the eight point list above, the Carnegie Commiss- ion on Higher Education is suggesting, although not in these words, that the use of instructional technology in higher education is cost-effective. That is, instructional tech— nology programs will either cost the least or will yield the highest effectiveness when two or more programs are compared. However they do not support their points with data or references. The other studies in this section also suggest that the use of instructional technology is cost— effective but do not support their statements with data. Since they are not documented it is impossible to determine lIbid., pp. 83-85. 18 the validity of the statements. However, it may be possible to measure the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology by examining existing studies on the subject. The need for-the current study The need to investigate the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology is recognized by several prominent educators writing in a variety of publications. For example, Robert Heinich in a discussion of the management of instruction through the application of instructional technology states that: We need to experiment with instructional management arrangements that permit mediated instruction to pay for itself. Cost-effectiveness information is a first step in buttressing arguments for such arrangements. Much more research, time, and effort are needed in this area.1 He further emphasizes the need for data on cost- |effectiveness in his monograph entitled Technology and the Management of Instruction when he states that: The first step would be a thorough examination of places that have claimed savings in staff or buildings, such aleade County, Hagerstown, and Pennsylvania State University, and other programs where economies are implied such as IPI. Much of the use of technology in education today is very akin to featherbedding and we cannot afford the comparison. Increased productivity with differen— tiated staffs will place the profession in a much more favorable position in respect to available money. lRobert Heinich, "What is Instructional Technology?" flpdiovisual Instruction, 13 (March, 1968), p. 222. 2Robert Heinich, Technology and the Management of yinstruction (Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 1970), p. 181. 19 Heinich sees a need to devote more research to the study of the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology. He also sees a need to examine those places which have claimed savings from the use of instructional technology. The report of the President's Commission on Instructional Technology stresses the lack of data on the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology in the con— tention that: Most data on the costs of instructional technology lack the necessary scope and depth to help educa- tion's managers make policy decisions. The data are usually subject to many limitations and foot- notes . . . .1 If educators are to make data-based decisions regarding the use of instructional technology then they must have the data upon which to base those decisions. Currently educators do not have the data in a form usable for decision making. Johnson and Dietrich see an immediate need for cost-effectiveness information on instructional technology. They believe that the lack of cost-effectiveness informa- tion is hurting the educational decision making process. They claim that: At present, cost data on educational technology is almost nonexistent. The lack of these data severely impedes the academic decision-making process. Regardless of costing procedures used . . . , ways must be found to place costs of educational technology in perspective. lTickton, To Improve Learning, Vol. I, p. 87. 20 Present inadequate cost data are frequently so )subjective that they are nothing more than pious hOpes. The time is here to come to grips with the reality of cost analysis in the academic decision making process. The ideas stated in this quotation are parallel to the ideas expressed by Heinich and the Commission on Instructional Technology. These three quotations make clear that there is a need for information on the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology which can be used in the educa— tional decision making process. The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, in its publication The Fourth Revolution, goes beyond stating a need for information on the cost-effectiveness of instruc- tional technology. Recommendation number fifteen exhorts that: An independent commission, supported either by an. appropriate agency of the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare or by one or more private foundations should be created to make assessments of the instructional effectiveness and cost benefits of currently available instructional technology. Findings of the commission should be published and appropriately disseminated for the advice of institutions of higher education, such cooperative learning-technology centers as may be established, and governments and foundations support- ing the advancement of instructional technology. lF. Craig Johnson and John E. Dietrich, "Cost Analysis of Instructional Technology," in To Improve Learning, Vol. II, ed. by Sidney G. Tickton (New York: Bowker, 1971), p. 365. 2Carnegie Commission, Fourth Revolution, p. 87. 21 While this study will not achieve the same results that an independent commission is likely to achieve, it will provide an initial assessment of the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology. Possibly this study could also serve as a basic resource when and if such a commiss- ion is created. It is clear that the user of instructional tech- nology must be prepared to make educational decisions which reflect the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology. If the user of instructional technology is to make such decisions he must have data upon which to make the decisions that are cost-effective. This study meets the need by providing data on the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology. Purpose of This Study The purpose of this study was to formulate a list of propositions pertaining to the cost-effectiveness of instructional technology by collecting, analyzing and synthesizing existing studies that deal with the subject. To achieve this purpose a propositional inventory research design was employed to develop the propositions listed in Chapter IV. Summarygof Chapter I In this chapter, higher education in America has been shown to be in the midst of a grave financial crisis. 22 Among the reasons presented for this crisis were the financial problems encountered by labor-intensive indus- tries. Several means of dealing with the financial crises in the past were described. Instructional tech- nology was suggested as a means to solve, at least in part, the financial crisis in higher education. The need was presented for a study to investigate the cost- effectiveness of instructional technology. The chapter concluded with the statement of the purpose for this study. CHAPTER II DEFINITIONS AND MODEL This chapter is composed of two sections. The first section contains definitions of terms used in this study and the second section contains a description of a cost-effectiveness model. Definitions This section contains the definitions for all terms used in this study that may be confusing or new terms to the reader. Cost-Benefit is the ratio of the cost of a project to the benefits to be derived from that project. An example is the ratio of the costs of a flood control dam to the value of the prOperty which will be saved from flood damage by the dam. This definition is based upon a report of the Organization for Economic Co—Operation and Development (OECD).1 1Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Budgeting, Proqramme Analysis and Cost— Effectiveness in Educational Planning (Paris: Organi- zation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 1968, ED 057477, p. 34. 23 24 Cost-Effectiveness is the comparison of the costs and effectiveness of two or more programs. The compari- SOn takes either of two forms. In the first form, the comparison is made between the costs of alternative pro- grams which have equal effectiveness. In the second form, the comparison is made between effectiveness levels of alternative programs with the cost factor held constant. An example of the first form (comparison of costs) is the decision between constructing a concrete flood control dam and a less expensive earthen flood control dam. An example of the second form (comparison of effectiveness) is the selection of a dam type which will provide the most protection for the fixed number of dollars which have been appropriated for the project. This definition of cost- effectiveness is derived from the writings of the OECD and Harmon.1 Productivity is the ratio of the quantity of out- put for a given product for each unit of input. Normally productivity is shown as a change in this ratio over time. An example of productivity is the ratio of the number of cubic yards of concrete poured for each man working on a dam project. An increase in the ratio from one day to the 1Ibid., p. 30; Paul Harmon, "Curriculum Cost- Effectiveness Evaluation," Audiovisual Instruction 15 (January, 1970), p. 26. 25 next shows an increase in productivity. Two reports, by Rogers and Smith,1 provided the conceptualization for this definition. Instructional Technology, as defined for purposes of this study, includes any of the technologies, human and machine, which are available to the educator to achieve the instructional goals of the educational institution. Some examples of technologies available to the educator are instructional television, programmed instruction, audio tapes, scheduling systems, and filmstrips. This meaning of instructional technology is con- sistent with the first definition expressed in the Report of the Commission on Instructional Technology. The second definition used in the Report, however, is being adopted by more and more instructional technologists. It defines instructional technology as . . . a systematic way of designing, carrying out and evaluating the total process of learning and teaching in terms of specific objectives, based on research in human learning and nonhuman resources to bring about more effective instruction. lDaniel Rogers, "Productivity and Efficiency within Education," Education in National Development, ed. by Don Adams (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1971), p. 47; Virginia B. Smith, "More for Less: Higher Education's New Priority," in Universal Higher Education: Costs, Benefits, Options, ed. by Logan Wilson and Olive Miles (Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, 1972), p. 126. 2Tickton, To Improve Learning, Vol. I. p. 7. 26 Since the reports in this study are based upon the first definition, it will be accepted as the meaning for instruc- tional technology. Description of a Cost-Effectiveness Model This section contains a description of one of the less complicated cost-effectiveness models that have been prOposed during the past decade.1 It is adapted from a model prOposed by Levine2 at the 26th Joint Study Group on Military Research Allocation Methodology in 1970. The pro- cess entailed in the measurement of the cost-effectiveness can be Viewed through the graphic design of this model. Cost-effectiveness, as defined in the previous sec- tion, is the comparison of two or more programs. The com— parison can take either of two forms: comparison of costs or comparison of effectiveness. Levine's cost-effectiveness model (Figure 1) is a graphic representation of the process entailed in making either of the two forms of comparison. The first step in the process is to design alterna- tive programs to achieve a given goal. For this example the goal will be an increase in the score for high school 1A special bibliography of references on cost— analysis models, including cost—effectiveness models, is included at the end of this study for the reader desiring more information. 2Donald M. Levine, Structuring_Program Analysis for Educationa;_Research Publication P-4565, (Santa Monica, California: The Rand Corporation, 1971), ED 057467. 27 .Hmcoa mmmcm>flpoommmlumoo m_mcH>TQII.H wuomflm .5002 20.5.55 mUngOmamm ) - >052.» l: A _+V 3.33:0er o ”5222‘ + «.52QO .220 34 mo 20808850”. oucoEeotom to... n< 7.. 3023:2030 Bruno» o< up: nutmtflugozu aeration .093. 2581a n atom toruoo._.\.cov2m < .< .. Na _ mm 82%.} ad. A 7...; toU L— m. 23:3:qu m OQQ o— , "HM”. t a F< 00:230.... mo .33 cm 02:.mOU corona... mm>Z_._.