TEACHER PERCEPTIONS RELATING TO THE
NEWER COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA:

A STUDY OF TEACHER PER‘CEPTIONS AS
RELATED TO THE USE OF THE NEWER
COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA AND THE
NATURE AND QUALITY OF SUCH USE

Them Ior II. ow... of Pb. D. *
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
John V. Battram

1963

THESIS

mmITIMI\I\\III1\T\;\\\\\IIM\II\\\\I

3

x ."
v

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
Teacher Perceptions Relating to the Newer communications
Media: A Study of Teacher Perceptions as Related to the
Use of the Newer Communications Media and the Nature and
Quality of Such Use ' "

presented by

John V. Battram

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

ph. D. degree in Education

‘ We

Major professor

Date Q7M‘): /7é3

 

 

0-169

,. , i , "'1‘ a -_.-.—. —.-..-_-_=-.. /.3".\ . . _ . . .. _ IA“\.\ m-

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

. ‘ LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

 

/
7

 

ABSTRACT

TEACHERS PERCEPTIONS RELATING TO THE NEWER
COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA: A STUDY OF TEACHER
PERCEPTIONS AS RELATED TO THE USE
OF THE NEWER COMMUNICATIONS
MEDIA AND THE NATURE AND
QUALTIY OF SUCH USE

By John V. Battram

The study began with four problems. They were:

1. The construction of an Index of Audiovisual Values.

2. Exploration of the extent to which teachers in an
individual school exhibit common perceptions about
the program, thus permitting the assignment of a
perceptual pattern to an individual school.

3. Measurement of the individual's level of behavior
with reSpect to instructional materials (e. g. the
extent and nature of use made).

4. EXploration of the relationship between a teacher's
perception of availability of materials and his
behavior.

The consturction of the perceptual instrument followed

a format origninated by Robert E. Bills in his Index of Ad-

Justment Values.l

 

1Robert E. Bills ”Instruction Manual for Index of
Adjustment Values", University of Kentucky. (Mimeographed
Manual).

John V. Battram
This format provided a scaling of a-group of 33
perceptual items on six different scales. The six scales
were as follows:

I. Self-concept of Program.

 

2. Self-acceptance of Program.

 

Self—idealization of Program.

 

 

Peer-acceptance of Program.

 

3
4. Peer—concept of Program.
5
6

Peer—idealization of Program.

 

The thirty-three items were selected from an original
list of 122 possible characteristics of audiovisual programs.
The process of elimination tailored the instrument to the
schools studied. Additional data for evaluation and correla-
tion was secured from interviews of the teachers.

The reporting of the data focused upon discrepancy
scores which were obtained by subtracting selected scale
scores. Originally an effort was made to characterize in-
dividual schools in terms of a common institutional pattern.
It did not prove possible to deveIOp a common institutional
pattern on the bases of the technique and instruments used

in this study.

Findings of the Study

 

In terms of the initial problems studied, findings
were as follows:
I. It is possible to construct an Index of Audio-
visual Values which will provide data concerning

how teachers perceive the audiovisual program.

John V. Battram
The index did not prove successful for the
establishment of a composite or group measure.
Teachers in the individual schools did not mani—
fest sufficiently similar scores on the per-
ceptual scales to permit the assignment of a
pattern or score which would be truly representa-
tive of the total group.
When, as in this case, the nature of use is con—
ceived as something more sophisticated than quantity
of use, the techniques used here are not adequate.
This study discovered no relationship between stated
performance and the perception of availability of

materials.

Conclusions

Conclusions and implications of the study were as

follows;

1.

Teachers who hold a high concept of their own
performance with modern media are more likely to
increase and improve their use of modern media than
those teachers who have a low concept of their

own performance with modern media.

Teachers with a high concept of their own perform—
ance with modern media are more likely to learn
from their peers and emulate their behavior than
are teachers who have a low self performance con—

cept.

John V. Battram

Teachers who perceive the audiovisual materials

as not being-available-are less likely to learn
from their peers and emulate their behavior with
reSpect to modern media than are teachers who
perceive the materials as being readily available.
Teachers who perceive materials as being readily
available do not share a common potential to act
upon that perception.

TeachersY perceptions of the availability of
materials do not appear to be capable of general-
ization because of their tendency to think primarily
in terms of specific materials and specific
sources of materials. I

There is no apparent relationship between a
teacher's concept of his own performance and his
perception of the availability of audiovisual mater-
ials. Any effort to infer one from the other
would be in error.

The use of perceptual patterns, as developed by
Robert E. Bills, to establish an institutional or
composite pattern of a school faculty's perception
of an audiovisual program, as attempted in this

study, is not a fruitful approach.

TEACHER PERCEPTIONS RELATING TO THE NEWER
COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA: A STUDY OF TEACHER
PERCEPTIONS AS RELATED TO THE USE OF THE
NEWER COMMUNICATIONS MEDIA AND THE NATURE

AND QUALITY OF SUCH USE

By

John V. Battram

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

32905 7
‘ claflw

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Gratitude and appreciation is expressed to all those
who aided and encouraged the writer toward the completion
of this study. To attempt to list them all would be futile;
leading to certain omissions. Especial appreciation is
extended to the members of the guidance committee Charles
F. Schuller, chairman; Walter F. Johnson, Herbert C. Rudman,

and William H. Form.

ii

Chapter

I.

II.

III.

IV.

VI.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM

Statement of the Problem

Statement of Sub—Problems

Purpose of the Study

Theoretical Assumptions

Definition of Terms. .

Limitations of the Study

Organization of the Remainder of the Thesis.

AUDIOVISUAL ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTUAL THEORY.

Introduction

Some Attitude Studies in Audiovisual
Instruction . . . . .
Perceptual Theory: An Historical
Perspective

THE SOCIAL SETTING: THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND
SCHOOLS SELECTED FOR THE STUDY

Criteria for Selection of a School System
The Audiovisual Program Selected

A Rationale for Selecting Individual Schools
The Program in the Individual Schools.

THE METHOD OF THE STUDY

General Description of the Method

The Instrument: DeveIOpment.

The Instrument: Administration.

The Instrument: Its Reliability and
Homogeneity of Variance

The Interview: DeveIOpment of the Schedule.

The Interview: Administration

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

Introduction . . .
Performance Statement Grouping
Availability Statement Grouping.
Low ”d” Scores

SUMMARY AND CONIC LUSIONS

Summary of the Method

iii

U7
U‘l

(DUI

\flU7

62
65

82
82

iv

Chapter Page
Conclusions . . . . . 85
Recommendations for Further Study. . . 88
Unsuccessful Methodology and Additional

Data . . . . 93

Discussion: The Utility of Perceptual

Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lOO

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
I. Reliability of Instruments Used. . . . . . 51
II. Homogeneity of Estimated Variances . . . . 52

III. Derivations, Ranges, and Means for the
Four Discrepancy Scores. . . . . . . . . . 59

IV. Summary of Data Obtained When the
Subjects were Grouped by Performance
Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

V. Summary of Data Obtained When the
Subjects were Grouped by Availability

Statement. . . . . 63
VI. Examination of Low and Negative

d1 Scores. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
VII. Low d2 Scores Grouped into High and

Low Contributing Scores. . . . . . 69

VIII. Summary of Data Obtained when the
Subjects were Grouped by School. . . . . . 72

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM

Education today is faced with a host of problems and
challenges: fewer teachers per capita, exploding school
population, more information to be presented, shortage of
classrooms, increasing costs, and others. At the same time,
it is being called upon to consistently improve communica-
tions in the classroom. Concurrent with the demand for in—
creased efficiency in classroom communication is a growing
emphasis upon the whole range of resources, materials, and
techniques now available to the classroom teacher. Some
of these have become a part of classroom tradition; most
have not. An indication of the nation‘s interest, in pro-
viding these modern media, is the National Defense Education
Act of 1958. One title of this act provides funds for the
provision of these media in increased amounts in the
schools. Another title supports research projects to study
modern media.

Studies have demonstrated the effectiveness and unique
potential of such media as films, slides, tapes, disc
recordings, and that group of visual media known as graphics.
Research has demonstrated the importance of intelligent use

and the adherence to proper techniques of utilization.

Most teacher—training institutions provide courses and
training in the use of these modern media. Hundreds of
school systems in United States and Canada have developed
programs and facilities to provide instructional materials
and the related consultation services and in—service train—
ing activities necessary to help improve their use in the
classroom. However, experience in many of these programs
has demonstrated that availability of materials and services
are not enough to achieve general use. Many teachers do not
readily accept new materials and techniques; nor do they, in
many instances, tend to seek related consultation even when
such assistance is readily available. It appears, therefore,
that there must be factors operating, other than the avail—
ability or nonavailability of materials and consultation
services, which influence teachers positively or negatively
toward use of the newer media in their teaching.

It is felt by this investigator that teachers' atti—
tudes play an important part in teachers' receptivity and
subsequent use of modern communications media. Leaders in
audiovisual instruction meeting at Yale University in Sept—
ember, 1953 and April, 195A recognized the need for awareness
and understanding of teachers' attitudes toward the audio—
visual program:

The attitudes and training of our teachers will

be the key factor in the success of any program for
increasing the effectiveness of graphic communica-

tion in education. The attitudes and procedures of
the teaching profession have been molded by centuries

of experience with the lecture and the textbook.
The new graphic materials have no such sanctified
tradition.

Therefore, this investigator conducted a study of
teachers‘ beliefs and feelings about the availability of
these materials and facilitating services. Attention was
given to the individual, his stated behavior, his beliefs

about the program and his beliefs about how others see the

program and their subsequent behavior.

II. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

It is the objective of this study to explore and
attempt to identify relationships between teachers' percep—
tions concerning the audiovisual program and teachers' use
or non—use of modern media of instruction. An important
part of this exploration is that phase of the study which
involves the construction and evaluation of a scale which
will measure the perceptions held by individual teachers

about the audiovisual program in their schools.

III. STATEMENT OF SUB—PROBLEMS

1. Construction and evaluation of an index of audio-
visual values. This instrument will be designed

to quantify the following:

 

1Neal E. Miller (ed.), Graphic Communication (Washing—
ton, D. C.: Department of Audiovisual Instruction, National
Educational Association, 195 ), p. 35.

 

a. How the teacher views the audiovisual program.
b. The value the teacher places upon these beliefs.

c. The ideal level the teacher would conceive for
the program.

d. How the teacher thinks others view the program.

e. The value the teacher thinks others place upon
their views of the program.

f. The ideal level the teacher thinks others
would like to see for the program.

To explore the extent to which teachers in an
individual school exhibit common perceptions about
the program, thus permitting the assignment of a
perceptual pattern to an individual school.
Measurement of the individual's level of behavior
with respect to instructional materials, e.g., the
extent and nature of use made. .
To explore the relationship between a teacher's

perception of availability and his stated behavior.

IV. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To develop direction for this investigator, and
others, in future investigations of teachers'
instructional materials behavior and ways in which
pertinent perceptions may be modified or improved.
To provide a useful approach to, and format for,
the study of teachers' views and beliefs concerning
modern media and the programs and procedures estab-

lished to encourage and facilitate their use.

V. THEORETICAL ASSUMPTIONS

Based upon the earlier work of Snygg and Combs in
theorizing the phenomenological field,2 Robert E. Bills has
formulated a theory of perception to aid in explaining per—
sonality and behavior. This theoretical base is helpful in
studying the problem posed in this study. The instrument
developed by Bills, known as the Index of Adjustment Values,
provides a unique format for the construction of an instru—
ment to study teachers' perceptions of the audiovisual pro—
gram in their school.

This theory holds that:

I. An individual‘s behavior is consistent with his
perceptions or beliefs about the world in which
he lives. Therefore, behavior is a reflection
of the perceptions held about another person,
program, or institution.

2. An individual‘s perceptions are influenced by
several variables, including his needs and values;
the presence or absence of threat to his self—
organization; opportunities for experience with
stimuli; the perceiver‘s physiological state; and
his beliefs about himself and other people. These
latter perceptions, which are considered crucial

to the foundation of this investigation, include

 

2Donald Snygg and Arthur W. Combs, Individual Behavior

 

(New York: Harper and Brothers, 1949).

such factors as the self—concept, concept of the
ideal self, self-acceptance and beliefs about

other people's acceptance of themselves.

An individual's behavior is the effort made to
maintain or enhance his self-organization. This
implies that a person has information relative to
his present self—organization (self—concept is a
part of this self—organization) and a view of
himself as he wished to be (concept of his ideal
self). A significant portion of his behavior is
directed toward bridging the gap. His self-
satisfaction is directly related to the difference
he perceives between his self—concept and his
concept of his ideal self.

Other people base their reactions and judgments
upon perceptions of the individual's overt behavior.
An individual can predict his behavior with about
80 per cent accuracy from his consciousness of his
perceptual field.

An individual's behavior can best be understood

by first becoming conscious of his perceptual field.
In studying a particular segment of an individual's
behavior, it is necessary to limit the investiga-
tion to that portion of the perceptual field which
has bearing upon the behavior in question. In

this study, the concern is limited to the

individual's audiovisual behavior and, there—
fore, only those perceptions pertaining to
audiovisual materials and programs need be in—

vestigated.3
VI. DEFINITION OF TERMS

Newer Communications Media

 

Modern technology has provided a wide range of visual
and aural media which can increase the effectiveness of the
classroom teacher by expanding the learning resources. In
the context of this study the term ”newer communications
media” is delimited to those media (materials and devices)
and their attendant services emanating from an audiovisual
director‘s office and those media and services assigned to
the responsibility of a building coordinator.

In the schools studied, the materials distributed
from the audiovisual director's office were films, filmstrips,
and recordings. In addition, the director participated in
the purchase of new equipment and circulated kits of science
equipment to elementary schools.

In the schools studies, the building coordinator
ordered materials and kits from the central office and sch-

eduled equipment in the individual building. This equipment

 

3Robert E. Bills, ”About People and Teaching,” Bulletin
of the Bureau of School Service, College of Education, Univer-
sity of Kentucky, XXXII (December, 1955).

 

consisted of motion picture projectors, filmstrip projectors,

record players, opaque projectors, and tape recorders.

Index of Audiovisual Values

 

The index of audiovisual values (see Appendix I) con-
sists of a list of thirty-three items which are pertinent in
defining the individual teacher's view of the audiovisual
program in the school system studied. Each item is applied
to six scales. The first three of these scales are the in—
dividual's present perception of each item; the value placed
upon this perception; and the ideal perception held for the
item. The remaining three scales require that the individual
respond to these same three scales in terms of how he thinks
his colleagues perceive the same items. The format for this
instrument is that developed by Bills in the Index of Adjust—

ment Values}1L

Self—Concept

The self—concept developed in this study is the view
of reality presently held by the individual teacher con—
cerning the audiovisual program in his school. In a school
system which provides centralized audiovisual services to
the teacher, a teacher's composite perception of the audio—
visual program in the individual school must include percep-

tion of the centralized activities.

 

“Robert E. Bills, ”Instruction Manual for Index of
Adjustment Values," University of Kentucky, Lexington,
Kentucky. (Mimeographed.)

Ideal—Concept
The ideal concept developed in this study is the in—
dividual's statement of how he would ideally see the program

functioning.

Instructional Materials Behavior

 

An individual's instructional materials behavior is
defined in terms of use or non—use of the equipment and

materials provided by the audiovisual service.

Perceptual Field

The individual teacher's perceptual field as applied
to the audiovisual program includes all of the beliefs,
thoughts, and values held about the audiovisual service;
and the persons, equipment, and materials included in that

service.

Perceptions

An individual teacher's perceptions are those discrete
beliefs, thoughts, and values about the audiovisual program
which, when combined, comprise his audiovisual perceptual

field.
VII. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

In the interests of internal consistency and in order
to eliminate additional levels of the school system, this
investigation is limited to teachers, building coordinators,

and principals in four elementary schools in the same school

 

10

system. A rationale for the selection of these schools is
presented in Chapter III which describes the schools and the
school system selected for the study.

A school system with an established audiovisual pro—
gram was selected. The presence of a full time audiovisual
director and centralized audiovisual services were among
the criteria for the selection of a school system. Selection
of a school system in this manner was designed to provide a
program about which teachers could generate perceptions and
would have had sufficient time for these perceptions to
have crystallized.

Questions asked of the teachers concerning the program
were limted to persons, equipment, and services having
identification with the centralized audiovisual program.
Services and materials of an audiovisual nature, such as
other film sources, museum materials, and textbooks, were
not included since they are not identified with the central-
ized program. Building coordinators chosen by a building
principal represent both the building audiovisual program
and the centralized program. Equipment scheduled by these
coordinators and housed in the individual building is iden—
‘Hfied with the total program by the teachers, at least in—
directly. A detailed description of the audiovisual program
chosen for study is presented in Chapter III describing the

schools and the school system selected for the study.

11

VIII. ORGANIZATION OF THE REMAINDER
OF THE THESIS

Chapter

II. Audiovisual Attitudes and Perceptual Theory

 

This chapter presents a survey of attitude
studies in Audiovisual Instruction and a historical
account of perceptual theory.

III. The Social Setting

 

This chapter describes the school system and

individual schools selected for study. ’

 

IV. The Method of the Study

 

This chapter describes the develOpment and
administration of the perceptual instrument and
the interviews.

V. Results of the Study

 

This chapter presents in detail the report and
interpretation of the data gathered in the study.

VI. Conclusions and Recommendations

 

The final chapter presents the interpretation
of the data reported in Chapter V and recommenda-
tions for further study which arose from this

exploration.

CHAPTER II
AUDIOVISUAL ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTUAL THEORY
I. INTRODUCTION

It is important that a foundation of research under-
ly the use of each of the modern media as it is integrated
in educational practice. The advantages and unique capabil—
ities, in terms of educational communications, should be
identified. The disadvantages and limitations of each must
also be indicated. Once this is accomplished, there is yet
another important consideration before the medium becomes
readily accepted in the classrooms of the nation.

The classroom teacher must understand and accept the
unique role of each of the modern media; the teacher must
perceive the media as being appropriate and necessary to
the learning process. To be able to describe, for an in—
dividual teacher or a group of teachers, the extent of this
perception of value or receptivity would be useful to those
actively promoting and facilitating the use of modern media.

Some would view this as an attitudinal problem. It
is essentially the task of describing for each individual
the discrepancy between reality and his perception of
reality. This is a broader treatment than an attitudinal

approach could provide.

I“!

13

To illustrate, suppose that two teachers, when compared
to their colleagues, manifest an equally low level of use of
modern media as indicated by records kept of such use. An
attitudinal study reveals that one of these two individuals
sees no value in these media and that the other values them
highly. The attitude of the first would satisfactorily ex-
plain the manifest behavior. The attitude of the other
would seem to be in contradiction to it. A perceptual ap—
proach to this contradition might reveal that the latter, in
addition to valuing these media highly, also perceives them
as not being available or at least difficult to procure.

With this background this researcher reviews some
attitude studies which have been conducted with teachers
concerning audiovisual instruction and then embraces a theory
of perception to aid in understanding this disparity between
reality and the perception of reality.

II. SOME ATTITUDE STUDIES IN AUDIO—
VISUAL INSTRUCTION

The first study in Audiovisual Instruction to give
attention to the classroom teacher and her thoughts, feelings,
and problems was conducted by Winnifred E. Crawford in 1942.5
This was a collection of dialogues or discussions, between
supervisors and teachers, on the subject of ”visual education."

Some attempt was made to subjectively report behavior change

 

5Winnifred E. Crawford, Counseling With Teachers Con—
cerning Visual Education (New York: New York University,
19H2).

 

‘aw
14

which occurred subsequent to the counseling. Although these
discussions contained the raw materials for an attitudinal
or perceptual analysis, no attempt was made to determine such
patterns. The study does represent the concern of one inves—
tigator, at an early date, with how teachers felt about
”visual education."

' In 1952, Hyer in reporting ”a study of the possible
deterrents to the use of motion pictures” observed, "Avail—

ability of films and projectors is no assurance that teachers

6
will use materials.” Pursuing this observation in an attempt

 

to isolate factors common to various levels of use, she found
that the following objective factors had little or no rela—
tionship to the level of film use:7

1. sex of teacher no relationship)

2. age of teacher slight negative relationship)

3. amount of education (no relationship)

She found that factors of an attitudinal or perceptual
nature had a positive relationship to film use. Teachers
who were rated highest in professional attitude were also
the highest film users.

The way in which an individual ideally sees the audio—

visual program becomes an important factor.

 

6Anna L. Hyer, ”A Study of Possible Deterrents to Use
of Motion Pictures Within a School system Where Films and
Facilities for Use Were Provided” (unpublished Doctoral Dis—
sertation, Indiana University, Bloomington, 1952); Studies
in Education (School of Education, Indiana University, 1952),
p. 171.

7Ibid., p. 174.

15

Teachers who state they would have liked to have
used more films than they did were already using
more films than teachers who gtated they would not
have liked to use more films.

The use of films appears to be a reflection of the
basic acceptance of them and their appropriateness to the
experiences being provided in the classroom. Since this
acceptance tends to widen the gap between high and low levels
of use, this becomes an important perceptual dimension.

Perception of the supervisor's attitude toward films
and their use as a factor in film use is suggested when she
states, ”Teachers who used more than the average number of
films tended to favor supervisory attitudes which would
"9

develop expectancy of use. It is noteworthy that in this
study a control factor was the relatively high availability
of adequate projection facilities and films. Still she
reports, ”Teachers . . . considered lack of adequate projec—
tion facilities and lack of available films important deter—
rents.”lO Here we see projection facilities and distribution
procedures occurring as deterrants to the use of audiovisual
media. These deterrants can be perceived or actual. Correct
understanding of the reality of the problem is essential
since two distinctly different procedures for remedy are sug—

gested depending upon the accuracy of the perception.

 

8Ibid.

9lbld.

lOlbld.

16

Yet another pair of statements reveal the necessity
for understanding the way in which an individual is valuing
the film service.

Whether or not teachers felt the available films

were suitable to meet class needs appeared to be an
important factor in the teacher's decision to use

or not to use films. Teachers within a subject did
not necessarily agree on evaluation of specific film
titles.ll

These statements represent valid considerations for
decision to use or not use films. They tend to bear out the
basic contention that teachers will vary in their perceptions
and valuing of the use of the modern media and that varia—
tions in behavior can only be meaningfully understood in
the light of these factors.

Another finding by Hyer suggests the presence of a
common perceptual pattern for an individual school and the
variability of these patterns between schools. She says,
”The effect of leadership was most apparent in the comparisons
of quantity of film use in the various subject areas from

school to school."12

This statement also suggests one factor
which may be operating to create this common perceptual pat—
tern for each school.

Finally, Hyer suggests three steps to reduce teacher
inertia:13
1. To make it easy for teachers to use materials.

2. To provide films which correlate with the curriculum

in sufficient abundance to challenge teachers to
select and use them.

 

l

lllbld. 2Ibid., p. 175. 13lbld.

l7
3. To increase the expectancy among teachers
that films will be used.

Two of these three proposed steps are clearly con-
cerned with the problem of teacher perception of the film
program. The second proposal would provide materials in
”sufficient abundance” to accommodate for the variability of
individual perception in film selection. The third proposal
would move directly to change and reshape a perception of
leadership expectancy.

The first proposal is implicitly concerned with teacher
perception since no change in administrative procedure to
make materials easy to acquire is effective unless the im—
provement is perceived by the teachers. Thus we see that a
number of the conclusions and implications direct attention
to the soundness of a perceptual approach to the problem of
attitudes toward audiovisual instruction.

In 1954, Nerden studied factors related to the use of
motion picture films.14 As did Hyer,15 he saw that avail-
ability in itself did not necessarily promote use. He says,
” under favorable circumstances, some teachers used or
limited their uses to only an occasional film.”16 Nerden
isolated numerous objective factors which seemed positively

related to film use. Then when he reports observations of

 

14Joseph T. Nerden, ”A Study of Factors Related to the
Use of Motion Picture Film by Public School Teachers" (unpub-
lished Doctor's thesis, Yale University, New Haven, I954).

16

15Hyer, op. cit., p. 174. Nerden, op. cit.,p. 136.

18

a perceptual nature, he lists the following:17

Hindrances

11. It is hard to obtain films to fit my lesson plans
or units of instruction.

12. It takes a great deal of my time to locate good
films.

13. It seldom happens that I can get the film I want
when I need it.

Encouraging Factors

 

16. I believe films make a substantial contribution
to the education of my students.

17. My students react very well to films, judging from
the discussions which follow.

Each of these statements reflects the value which
individual teachers place upon films and the programs serving
them. When teachers are encouraged to provide meaningful
statements c0ncerning their use or non—use of films, they tend
to answer in terms of the values held as indicated in these
statements.

Another grouping of responses collated by Nerden re—
flects the perceptions by one teacher of values held by
others. For instance:18

18. Our superintendent of schools likes to have
teachers use films.

19. Our principal of the school encourages teachers
to use films.

20. Some of my fellow-teachers have had excellent
results using films.

 

17lbid., p. 141.

l8lbid., pp. 141—142.

19
24. The board of education looks with favor on the
use of films by teachers.
Self-concept becomes a factor in film use as evidenced
by this statement:19

26. I like to regard myself as a modern teacher
using modern methods of instruction.

Nerden also found that such factors as sex, age, and
education bear no relationship to the use of films. Combined
with similar findings by Hyer,20 it would seem reasonable to
consider that such objective factors have no bearing upon the
individual's attitudes toward the audiovisual program. In
the light of these findings, it is suggested that a perceptu-
ally oriented theory may have utility in studying the views
teachers hold of the audiovisual program.

Among Nerden's final observations occurs one which
indicates that values placed upon films are but a part of a
larger set of values held for curriculum materials.

Film users also appeared to be the same individuals

who used a variety of other curriculum materials and
wenaalert and anxious to experiment with new teaching
techniques.

This quotation hints at the possibility that percep—
tions of an audiovisual program are not limited to films but
are developed with respect to a range of media. If such is
the case, a perceptual study should deal with a wider range

of materials and media.

 

19Ibid. 2OHyer, loc. cit.

21Nerden, op. cit., p. 144.

20

In another study of attitudes toward audiovisual
materials, Kelley states, "There is a very high degree of
relationship between the frequenCy with which teachers use
audiovisual materials and their attitudes toward these

materials. Those teachers who use materials most often seem

”22

to have better attitudes toward their use. This state— ‘

ment points to the efficacy of understanding how teachers
view and value the audiovisual program. Kelley states
further in this regard:

The results of this study emphasize the importance
of recognizing the place of attitude in any attempt
to analyze the utilization of audio—visual materials.
The teachers‘ attitudes may be more important in deter-
mining the use of audio-visual materials than botB
knowledge about materials and skill in their use. 3

Several of Kelley's findings suggest the need for
understanding how teachers view objective factors of the
program.

There is a definite tendency for teachers to have
better attitudes toward audio—visual materials if they
feel that it is an easy matter to order the materials.
This is a highly significant factor in determining
attitudes.2

When the materials used by teachers are in poor con-
dition, the teachers tend to have lower attitudes
toward their use. 5

 

22Galen B. Kelley, "An Analysis of Teachers' Attitudes
Toward the Use of Audio—Visual Materials” (unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Boston University, 1959), pp. 104—105.

23Galen B. Kelley, ”A Study of Teachers' Attitudes
Toward Audio—Visual Materials,” Educational Screen and Audio—
Visual Guide, Vol. 39 (March, 196o73 p. 121.

 

24lbid., p. 105. 25lbid., p. 107.

21

There is a very high degree of relationship between
attitude toward audio-visua% materials and satisfactory
experience with their use.2

There is a highly significant relationship between
the amount of equipment available and the attitudes of
teachers toward the use of audio—visual materials.

Another group of findings suggest the benefit to be

derived from understanding the ways that other people have
influenced the audiovisual attitudes and the value placed
upon the attitudes of others:

There is a highly significant relationship between
teachers' attitudes toward audio—visual materials and
whether or not they hage had the support of supervisors
in the school system.2

There is a very high degree of relationship between
teachers' attitudes toward audio—visual materials and

the frequency with which they are used by fellow-
teachers.

There is a highly significant relationship between
the type of learning experience the teachers have had
during their training and their attitudes toward audio-
visual materials.30
In the light of perceptually oriented considerations,
it becomes important to understand the accuracy as well as
the manifest quality or degree of attitude. In the foregoing
instances, the question of accuracy of perception suggests

whether the program or the perception of the program needs

to be the focus of efforts toward change.

 

26lbid., p. 105. 27lbid., p. 105.
28lbid., p. 104. 291bid., p. 105.

0
3 Ibid., p. 106.

22
III. PERCEPTUAL THEORY: AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

To find early conceptualization which contributes to
modern day perceptual theory, one can begin with two eight—
eenth century philosophers, George Berkeley and Immanuel Kant.
There appears no record of communication between Kant and
Berkeley. However, their writings bear testimony to the
similarity of conceptual development.

II

The basis of Berkeleian philosophy was esse is percipi”

(to be is to be perceived) as revealed by the quotation

 

”their (things, generically speaking) esse is percipi, nor
is it possible they (things) should have any existence, out
of the minds or thinking things which perceive them."31

He arrived at this conclusion from reasoning concerning
perception of distance; in his own words, ". . . it plainly
follows, that the judgment we make of the distance of an
object viewed with both eyes, is entirely a result of experi—
ence.”32 For Berkeley, to consider anything as existing
before, after, or independent of, the perceiving mind is an
error of logic.

Immanuel Kant also considered the function of time

concepts in his thoughts about perceptions.

 

31George Berkeley, ”Of the Principles of Human Knowl—
edge, " A New Theory of Vision and Other Writings of Berkeley,
Part I (London: J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd. 1910, p. 15.

 

32
Ibid., p. 17.

23

Space and time . . . are intuitions and consequently
single representations . . . through which many repre-
sentations are brought to us as contained in one and
in its consciousness . . . and those intuitions repre—
sent the unity of consciousness as synthetical, but
yet as primitive.3

Sense is . . . a source of knowledge in its own right

. our sensing is conditioned by the presence in our
sensibilities of the forms of time and space which are
not objective characteristics or frameworks of things,
but ”pure intuitions.

Upon these early insights latter day theorists were
able to build a more inclusive theoretical pattern. Another
important contribution to this development occurs in the
writings of Prescott Lecky.

Behavior cannot be explained in terms of either the
organism or the environment alone. The task of adapta-
tion must be conceived in relation to the organism and
its environment jointly.

Throughout his work is the theme of self—maintenance

and self—organization as evidenced by these statements:

. all the acts of an individual have the goal
of maintaining the same structure of values.

. predictability is a function of stability and
therefore of the basic need for consistent self—
organization.

 

33Immanuel Kant, ”Critique of Pure Reason,” Kant
Presented by Julien Benda (New York: Longmans, Green and
Co., 1940), p.

34

 

Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959) x111, 268.

 

35Prescott Lecky, Self—Consistency (New York: Island
Press, 1945), p. 76

6 37
3 Ibid., p. 81. Ibid., p. 90.

 

24

Lecky sees each individual striving for "movement from
a disequilibrated condition toward one of equilibrium."38
Lecky further sees these motivations influencing our values
and perceptions and subsequently influencing behavior.

. . he tends to select and avoid situations
according to his estimate of his own abilities. On
the basis of past experience, he predicts in advance
whether new situations will be solvable or insolvable,
and consequently whether his organization will be
strengthened or disturbed if he faced the problem.39

We conceive of the personality as an organization
of values which are felt to be consistent with one
another. Behavior expresses the effort to maintain
the integrity and unity of the organization. 0

 

He must keep his interpretations consistent with
his experience . . . he must organize his interpre—
tations to form a system which is internally con—
sistent. The consistency is not abjective . . . but
subjective and wholly individual. 1

Lecky's theory of ”Self—consistency” impresses the

need for understanding the individual's point of view or
more properly, perceptual field, before efforts are made
to improve or modify behavior.

Hilgard reports the influence of John Dewey upon

early perceptual theory.

Shortly before Dewey's death his interpretation
of perception as a transaction between the organism

and the environment began its way back into the
literature of psychology}I

 

38Ibid., p. 100. 391bid., p. 115.

40 41

Ibid., p. 152. Ibid., p. l52.

42Ernest R. Hilgard, Theories of Learning (New York:
Appleton—Century—Crofts, Inc., 1956), p. 331.

 

2 5 I

Earl C. Kelley, as a result of psychological experi—
ments of vision and perception, arrived at similar conclusions
concerning perceptions and reality.43 One of Kelley's dis-
coveries led him to state that ”we do not get our perceptions
from the things around us but that the perceptions come from
u8.44

Kelley became very aware of the function of experience
in perception and indicates its importance often.

No two people can do the same ascribing, because

no two people can b£%ng the same experiential back—
ground to the task.

Whatever we have that is real in the whole situation
comes from each of us (our past as Experiencing organ—
isms), and varies with each of us.“

Of reality, Kelley states:

Since the perception is the usable reality, and
since no two organisms can make the same use of clues

or bring the same experiental background to bear, £0
two of us can see alike. We have no common world.

Reality comes from what we make of our clues, re—
ceived by our sense organs, when we act upon them
external objects lack reality in their own right.”8

He also reiterates Lecky's thoughts on behavior when

he states that ”perception (not the object) is a directive

for action.”49 Hence, to understand the behavior one must

understand the perceptions underlying the behavior.

 

43Earl C. Kelley, Education for What is Real (New
York: Harper and Brothers, 1947).

 

44lbid., p. 25. Z~L51bid., p. 29. “51bid., p. 37.

47lbid. 481bid., p. 40. ”91bid.

 

26

Snygg and Combs made a major contribution to this
development with their definition of the ”phenomenological
frame of reference” which postulates the ”phenomenal field."50
A basic postulate of this theory is, ”All behavior, without
exception, is completely determined by and pertinent to the
phenomenal field of the behaving organism.”51

In a recent revision of the original work Combs has
reworked the above definition: ”. . . all behavior, with—
out exception, is determined by the perceptual field at the
moment of action.”52

It follows then that:

To produce change in behavior . . . it will be

necessary to produce some change in the individ—
ual's perceptual field. To understand other people
. we will need to understand, as clearly as
possible, the factors controlling and limiting the
processes of perceiving and the function of the
perceptual field.53

From this it is concluded a first step in this under—
standing is to establish a method of studying the perceptual
field of the individual. Robert E. Bills explains, ”To
”BLI‘

change behavior we must start with the person.

 

 

50Donald Snygg and Arthur W. Combs, Individual Behavior
(New York: Harper and Brothers, 1949).

51
Ibid., p. 15.

52Arthur W. Combs and Donald Snygg, Individual Behavior
(rev. ed.; New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959), p. 36.

 

531bid.

5LIRobert E. Bills, ”About People and Teaching,” Bulletin
of the Bureau of School Service, University of Kentucky, I

(December, 1955), p. 12.

 

27

Bills has contributed significantly through his con—
tribution of such a method. Both Bills and Combs delineate
certain factors which influence an individual's perceptual
field. Combs lists seven such factors: (1) needs; (2) in—
dividual physiology; (3) time and Opportunity; (4) goals,
values, and techniques; (5) self—concept; (6) environment
and culture; (7) availability of perceptions.55

Bills provides a similar list: ”. . . their needs,
values, physiological structure, threat, self—concept,
beliefs about other people, and opportunity.”56

Bills sets the stage for his method of investigation
when he designates two of these factors as being most im—

portant. ”.

the most important factors in determining
our perceptions are the beliefs we hold about ourselves and
other people which are learned in interaction with them.”57
Using these two factors, Bills has developed a technique
for characterizing an individual's self—other concept. By
assigning a plus (+) or a minus (—) to each of thest two
factors, he defines the following:58
(++) (1) People who accept themselves and who
believe that other people in their peer

group are equally or more accepting of
themselves . .

 

55Combs and Snygg, loc. cit.
56Bills, op. cit., p. 13.
57lbid., p. 19.

581bid., p. 20.

28

(-+) (2) People who are rejecting of themselves
but who believe that other people in
their peer group are more accepting of
themselves .

(+—) (3) People who accept themselves but who
believe that other people in their peer
group are not as accepting of themselves.

Bills' Index of Adjustment Values was conceived to

 

 

measure two perceptual dimensions, self—acceptance and
acceptance of others. These two dimensions in turn yield
the perceptual patterns explained previously. Bills' tech—
nique also yields these measurements: concept of ideal self,
propensity to change (discrepancy between self-concept and
concept of the ideal self). Research with this technique
has shown:

that ++ people are democratic individuals who have
a high regard for the dignity, worth and integrity of
people, including themselves, and faith in the efficacy
of group action. To a lesser degree, the —+ holds
these same beliefs and attitudes but he cannot believe
that people are as worthy as does the ++ because of his
attitudes toward himself. The +— person will obviously

rank lowest in these ideals.59

. . . —+ people are highly accurate (probably over
accurate) in their perceptions of reality, +— people
are quite inaccurate, and ++ people occupy a medial
position. . . . —+ people are unable to be inaccurate
while +— people are unable to be accurate.

. . the -+ attempts to build himself, the +—
assumes he is already built, 2nd the ++ responds to
the reality of the situation. 1
II

In agreement with these findings, Combs states,

from the point of View of the behaver himself, he is never

 

6

591bid., p. 21. 6OIbid., p. 23. lIbid., p. 24.

29

unmotivated.”62 We have stated the fundamental human need
as a continuous search for personal adequacy.

Carl Rogers in applying a perceptual frame of refer-
ence to psycho—therapy states, ”A person learns significantly
only those things which he perceives as being involved in the
maintenance or enhancement of the structure of self."63

Hilgard echoes these words in comparing Mead and Dewey
on the concept of self:

Mead's interpretation of the self as arising out

of social interaction is close to the spirit of
Dewey . . . who saw every act as the expression of
a unified self—seeking to resolve its conflicts
through intelligegt action in a world of objects
and other selves. 4

To understand the behavior of an individual, ”we must
understand him and this is most easily accomplished by
trying to see him and his world as he sees them.”65 The

Index of Adjustment Values provides a technique and a format

 

for approaching this understanding.

 

62Combs and Snygg, op. cit., p. 56.

63Carl Rogers, Client—Centered Therapy (Boston:
Houghton—Mifflin C0,, 1951), p. 389.

 

64Hilgard, 10c. cit.

65Bills, op. cit., p. 32.

CHAPTER III

THE SOCIAL SETTING: THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND

SCHOOLS SELECTED FOR THE STUDY

I. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF A SCHOOL SYSTEM

A school system with an audiovisual program that had
been established for a number of years was necessary to
provide a proper environment for a perceptual study. The
audiovisual program had to be in operation long enough for
procedures to have become routinized and effective, and for
teachers to have developed perceptions about the program.
Thus, a school system was sought which had a program that
had been in operation for at least eight years. This period
of time was considered sufficient for teachers to have devel—
oped perceptual patterns and patterns of use on an institu—
tional basis. The program was to have a director, building
coordinators, a well defined program of specific services
and materials, a distribution system, and a system of
cataloging and communicating its services and materials to
the teachers in the school system.

A school system was needed which was sufficiently
large to allow selection of several elementary schools on
the basis of a predetermined rationale. It was felt that a

school system in a city of 100,000 persons or more would

31

provide such flexibility. There were several school systems
in southern Michigan which fulfilled this requirement. It
was decided to investigate these cities for an established

program of audiovisual services.
II. THE AUDIOVISUAL PROGRAM SELECTED

The school system selected is in southwestern Michigan.
The audiovisual program had been established approximately
ten years at the time the study was conducted. The school
system had an audiovisual supervisor, who described his prim-
ary job as one of ”selection and distribution” of equipment
and materials. During the school year 1957-1958, this school
system had a total of 45 elementary schools. They varied in
size from three teachers to twenty-five teachers.

The materials that were distributed from the office
of the supervisor included films, filmstrips, and records.
In addition, some models, science kits, and specialized
equipment (e.g. microprojectors, telescopes, etc.) were cir-
culated from this office. The materials were distributed
daily to the schools by truck. Occasionally, special trips
were made, particularly to deliver equipment. The school
system also contracted with the local museum for mounted
pictures, charts, exhibits, recordings, models, stuffed
animals, collections of artifacts, etc. Under this contract,
the museum also sponsored field trips to the museum and to
other points of interest in the city, and presented illus-

trated talks to individual class groups as requested. The

 

 

32

museum had a small film library which covered primarily
scientific tOpics. These are all services which are identi-
fied with audiovisual or instructional material programs in
some school systems.

Children's books were circulated in collections by the
Elementary Division (Elementary Supervisor's Department).
This division also purchased and distributed maps, globes,
and less expensive models and realia which remained in the
individual schools.

The supervisor had a staff which handled all routine
matters such as accessioning, distributing, inspection, and
repair of materials and equipment, and all paper work atten-
dant to these services. The supervisor was involved in
in—service activities in the Operation of equipment and the
correct utilization of materials and devices. He also acted
as a consultant to building principals and to the adminis-
tration, in connection with purchase of equipment and the
equipping of buildings for use of audiovisual equipment. He
had recently been involved in the develOpment of an elemen-
tary science curriculum guide which included a complete
listing of materials and resources available for each topic.
This activity was to be extended to other subject matter
areas of the elementary curriculum.

The selection of materials was done by teacher com-
mittees chosen for each grade level and subject interest.
Materials were previewed by these committees and purchase

was determined by their recommendations. Materials were

33

also sent to individual schools to be viewed by groups of
teachers for their recommendations. From these reports, new
materials were added to the library.

Several copies of a printed catalog were available in
each school building. The catalog was revised, but not on a
regular schedule. Supplements were sent to the schools
regularly. At the time of this study, there were a sizeable
number of supplements.

Each building had an audiovisual building coordinator
whose responsibilities varied from school to school de—
pending upon the degree to which the principal was active
in the provision of learning resources. The role of this
person, in each school, will be described later in this
chapter when the schools are described. In the elementary
schools, each teacher was expected to perform certain non—
teaching duties, sometimes of a supervisory nature. The
position of audiovisual building coordinator was one of the
possible duties a teacher could assume to fulfill this ex—
pectation. Often principals asked for volunteers for the
various duties. Therefore, the position of audiovisual build—
ing coordinator was filled sometimes by a volunteer and other
times by an appointee. As a result, the motivation of the
building coordinator varied from school to school, perhaps
more than if the position were on a completely voluntary basis.

Although the building coordinator assisted with and
coordinated the requests for materials, she did not have to

concern herself with distributing the materials when they

34

arrived. Materials circulated by the central office were
addressed directly to the individual teacher who requested
them. The supervisor's experience in this matter indicated
that this resulted in better and more direct service to the
teachers, helped them to identify these materials with the
services of the central office, and helped to protect against
use of materials without advance planning.

Most of the elementary schools maintained filmstrip
and record collections and supplemented these with those
available from the central office.

III. A RATIONALE FOR SELECTING
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS

In selecting individual schools within the school
system, for the purposes of this study, two criteria, fre—
quency of audiovisual use and quality of audiovisual use,
were used to differentiate the schools. Frequency of use
was easily established by monthly utilization reports pre—
pared in the supervisor's office. The second factor was
the supervisor's judgment of the quality of audiovisual use
in the individual schools. The supervisor worked closely
with individual teachers and groups of teachers in the ele—
mentary schools. This relationship with the individual
schools enabled him to designate certain schools as being
characterized by highly effective use of audiovisual services
and materials, and to indicate others whose use was primarily

ineffective in nature.

 

 

 

35

It was recognized that having the supervisor select
the schools in terms of quality of use of materials intro—
duced a subjective factor in the selection process. He was
not asked to characterize each school in the system, but
rather to choose two schools at each of the extremes. This
did not require subtle delineations among the schools. Also,
his ability to do this was heightened by the closeness with
which he had worked with the individual schools.

Other methods of achieving this classification were
considered. The original purpose of such a classification
was to select schools which would have a greater likelihood,
than a random sample, of reflecting differing perceptual
patterns. In this light, it was not deemed necessary to
spend large amounts of time and effort with involved tech-
niques to achieve this categorization.

By placing these two factors, one objective and one
subjective, into a two—by—two table, four basic character—

istic patterns were produced. They are:

 

 

Frequent Infrequent
Effective A B
Ineffective C D ggj

 

 

 

 

One school was chosen for each combination of the two
criteria, thus resulting in four schools, each with a dif-

ferent utilization pattern in terms of the two factors.

36

FREQUENCY OF USE OF THE FOUR SCHOOLS 1958-1959

 

 

 

Circulation of Average Use
Materials From Per Teacher
Teachers Central Office for the Year
A 14 269 19.21
B 10 107 10.70
C 13 269 20.69
D 16 92 5.75
Average 13.6 174.71 12.84

 

Schools A and C were about average in size, but both
ranked in the upper 10 (or 25%) in circulation. School B
was a small school and fell below the average in circulation.
School D was one of the largest elementary schools in the
system. It ranked in the lower 10 (or 25%) in circulation.

In the supervisor's judgment, effective use was that
use which involved pr0per preparation of teacher and pupils
and pr0per follow—up discussion and testing. Ineffective
use was that use in which the above activities were lacking
or were handled in a perfunctory and minimal manner.

IV. THE PROGRAM IN THE
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS

It is important to develOp a degree of understanding
of the audiovisual program in the individual schools. This
description includes the equipment available, the light

control facilities in the building, and the roles of the

37

principal, building coordinator, and secretary in the sch-
eduling and distribution of equipment, materials, and
facilities. This information was gathered in visits to the
four schools and in interviews with the principals.

To assist in understanding the faculty of each school
and its unique characteristics, a short paragraph of descrip—
tive factors is provided for each school. Objective in
nature, these facts were secured on a cover sheet when the
scales were administered. From this data, certain basic

generalizations are drawn about the faculty of the school.

School A

School A exhibited a pattern of high frequency of use
and was designated by the supervisor as having teachers who
were considered highly effective in their use of audiovisual
materials.

This school was one of the older elementary schools
in the school system. Since it did not have large expanses
of glass, light control was not a major problem even in
those rooms which did not have blackout shades. The school
was a two—story building with one room on each floor specif—
ically equipped with blackout shades and wall screens. These
two rooms were not used as classrooms but were scheduled for
projection use by the secretary in the office. Each room had
a 16mm motion picture projector and a slide-filmstrip pro—
jector. The slide—filmstrip projectors were also available

for classroom use. In addition, there were two opaque

 

38

projectors, one tape recorder, a variety of phonographs, and
one standard lantern slide (3—1/4” x 4”) projector which were
available for use in the classrooms upon request.

The building principal and the building audiovisual
coordinator worked closely together. This was the coordin-
ator's first year in the position. The building secretary
handled routine matters such as scheduling.

School A had 14 teachers. Of these, 11 had had four
years or more of experience, 8 were forty years of age or

older, 7 had had four or more methods courses, 6 had had

 

audiovisual course or workshop experience, 11 held a life

certificate, and 11 had been in this school for three years
or more. The faculty of School A can be said to have been
mature, experienced, well trained, and had worked together

long enough for good rapport to be expected.

School B

School B exhibited a pattern of infrequent use but was
designated by the supervisor as having teachers who were
considered highly effective in their use of audiovisual
materials.

This school was also an older building. It was three
stories high. Here, too, light control in classrooms was
not the problem that it was in newer buildings. There was
one room in the building equipped for the use of projected
materials. There was one motion picture projector, two

slide—filmstrip projectors, one opaque projector, and several

39

phonographs. There was no tape recorder. On occasion, a
tape recorder was borrowed from the supervisor's office.
There appeared to be no organized method of scheduling the
projection room.

The principal of School B was one of the early promo-
ters of audiovisual instruction in Grand Rapids, having
served on a committee whose recommendations resulted in the
establishment of the central program and the hiring of the
present supervisor. She was proud of this early leadership
and felt the school was in step with modern media use.

The building coordinator's primary responsibility in
this building centered around the filmstrip library. She
assumed responsibilities for purchases and for distribution
of filmstrips.

School B had 10 teachers on the faculty. Of these, 8
had had four years or more of experience, 8 were thirty years
of age or over, and 7 were forty years of age or over, 8 had
had an audiovisual course or workshop, 8 held a life certi-
ficate, and 8 had been in this school for three years or more.
School B also had a mature, experienced, well trained group
of teachers (fewer had had a large number of methods courses)

and had worked together for some time.

School C
School C exhibited a pattern of frequent use and was
designated by the supervisor as having teachers who were

not using audiovisual materials in an effective manner.

40

This was a new building, having opened in September,
1956. It replaced an older building which had operated for
about fifty years. The building was two stories high. Light
control was a definite problem. The classrooms on the south
side of the building were equipped with audiovisual venetian
blinds to cover the outside windows. There was a clerestory
panel of glass opening on the hallway. There was no light
control for the clerestory in any of the classrooms. The
classrooms on the north side of the building had no light
control. Half of the fourteen classrooms had darkening
facilities and half did not. For those teachers whose rooms
were without darkening, there was a darkened room which
could be used for projection. The equipment consisted of
two 16mm projectors, one slide—filmstrip projector, one
opaque projector, several phonographs. There was a small
collection of filmstrips and disc recordings which were
housed in the building.

The principal worked very closely with the building
coordinator in scheduling equipment and maintaining the
equipment properly. The principal believed in the value of
modern media and actively promoted materials and services
in meetings and in a consultant capacity with the teachers.

School 0 had 13 teachers. Of these, 11 had had four
or more years experience, 9 were thirty years of age or
over, and 5 were forty years of age or over, 8 had had four
or more methods courses, 9 had had an audiovisual course or

workshop, and 7 held a life certificate; 6 teachers were

41

teaching in this school six years or more. This was a mature,
experienced, well trained group of teachers who have not
worked together for a long period of time, and were probably

still in the process of developing rapport and understanding.

School D

School D exhibited a pattern of infrequent use and was
designated by the supervisor as having teachers who were not
using audiovisual materials in an effective manner.

The elementary school was housed in a building with a
junior high school. The building was quite large, two
stories high and approximately twenty-five years old. The
building did not have large expanses of glass and each
classroom could be darkened for some projection although the
classrooms were not equipped with blackout shades or projec—
tion screens. One room was equipped for projection and was
scheduled by the secretary in the office. The equipment
consisted of one 16mm motion picture projector, two slide—
filmstrip projectors, and several phonographs. A tape
recorder and opaque projector could be borrowed from the
junior high school when they were not in use there. There
was a building collection of filmstrips and recordings.
These were kept in a storage room which opens to the hall.

Often when an elementary school is housed in a junior
high, the elementary classrooms are grouped together and
sometimes comprise one wing of the building. Such was not

the case in this school. The elementary classrooms were

 

42

interspersed with the junior high school classrooms on both
floors. Thus, at regular intervals, bells rang and pupils
moved outside each elementary classroom. There was a recently
furnished crafts room which was well equipped and supplied

for arts and crafts projects.

The principal, a woman, was in fact an assistant prin-
cipal to the junior high school principal. She also had
guidance and counseling responsibilities at the junior high
school level. She had been moved from another school in the
middle of the previous school year, upon the sudden retire—
ment of a principal of long standing.

Due to her part—time status, the principal left the
promotion of the program entirely to the building coordinator.
The building coordinator was very interested in her job and
actively worked to keep teachers informed, and to generally
smooth the way for effective use. She had little time to do
this work. This was her first year in this position.

Of the 11 teachers at School D, 8 had four or more
years experience, 7 were thirty years of age or over, 4 had
had four or more methods courses, 4 had had an audiovisual
course or workshop, 8 had held a life certificate, and 7 had
been in this school three years or more. This was a staff
who did not quite reflect the same degree of training as the
teachers in the other schools. They were mature and experi—

enced, and most of them had worked together for several years.

CHAPTER IV
THE METHOD OF THE STUDY
I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE METHOD

The study was conducted in two major parts. The first
part was the construction, administration, and interpretation
of a perceptual instrument. The second part included the
construction of an interview schedule, and conducting of .
interviews and the collation and correlation of the interview
data.
Previous applications of this theoretical position
had made use of a format originated by Robert E. Bills in

his Index of Adjustment Values.l This format provided a

 

scaling of a group of perceptual items on six different
scales. The six scales were as follows:

1. Self—concept of Program. This scale measured the

 

subject's present perception of the perceptual
items or characteristics.

2. Self-acceptance of Program. This scale measured

 

the subject's feelings or valuing of the percep-

tions expressed on Scale 1.

 

lBills, "Instruction Manual for index of Adjustment
II

Values, op. cit.

44

3. Self—idealization of Program. This scale measured

 

the subject's ideal perception of the perceptual
items.

4. Peer-concept of Program. This scale measured the

 

subject's perception of how his peers presently
perceive the perceptual items.

5. Peer—acceptance of Program. This scale measured

 

the subject's perception of his feelings or
valuing of the perceptions expressed on Scale 4.

6. Peer—idealization of Program. This scale measured

 

the subject's perception of how his peers would
ideally perceive the perceptual items.

This technique made it possible to gather a considerable
body of perceptual data in a minimum of time. The purpose of
using such an instrument was to scale the perceptions of
teachers on a list of items that were descriptive of the
audiovisual program. The construction of a perceptual instru—
. ment involved modifications of Bills' format and preliminary
testing of its construction.

The interview phase of the study was used to check and
validate the perceptual instrument. Therefore, the interview
questions were patterned around the questions and responses
of the perceptual instrument. Since the total population
studied was small (n = 51), all subjects were interviewed.

Sections II and III of this chapter describe in detail

the methods and techniques used to complete the steps outlined

1 ‘
\\

45

above. Section IV reports the statistics employed for
reliability and homogeneity of variance. These statistical
considerations were basic to the validation of the instru-
ment, and were also important to the development of the

interview questions.
II. THE INSTRUMENT: DEVELOPMENT

The first task in developing a perceptual instrument
for the study was the selection of a list of characteris—
tics of an audiovisual program about which teachers would
have perceptions. It was known that Bills in constructing

his Index of Adjustment Values had started with 129 per—

 

 

sonality variables and had reduced them to 49,2 which were
determined to be the most discriminating of the original
list.

It was decided to follow a similar procedure in

selecting items for the Index of Audiovisual Values. A

 

 

list of characteristics was prepared. In preparing this
list, a number of recognized publications were scanned for
such characteristics. This list was submitted to two auth—
orities in the field of audiovisual instruction for their
comments and suggestions. As a result of their suggestions,
the list was enlarged and corrections made for clarity of
statement. The enlarged list of characteristics number 122

items.

 

2lbid.

\N

46

At this point in the development of the instrument, it
was realized that reduction of these items would need to be
in terms of the school system being studied. Some charac—
teristics which would be valid in other programs were not
applicable due to the peculiar organization of the program
in the study. With the assistance of the supervisor, the
list of approximately 120 possible characteristics of an
audiovisual program was reduced to 34 characteristics which
were best descriptive of his program. In one or two cases,

this reduction took the form of combining two similar items

 

and reworking the statement of the item.

The 34 items were then typed on cards, one to a card,
and resubmitted to the two authorities who had checked the
original list. Each item was again checked with the two
authorities as a possible characteristic of an audiovisual
program about which teachers could develop perceptions. The
authorities also checked for clear, concise statement of
each characteristic.

Next, a pilot instrument was prepared and duplicated.
The pilot instrument used the first three scales of Robert
E. Bills' basic format for perceptual instruments. The
scales seek responses as follows:

Scale 1. How much of the time do you believe each

of the following characteristics of the audiovisual

program in your school is adequate?

47

Scale 2. How do you feel about the adequacy of each

of these characteristics of the audiovisual program

in your school?

Scale 3. Ideally, how much of the time do you believe

each of these characteristics of the audiovisual pro—

gram should be adequate?

The remaining three scales request that the subjects
respond to the same items with the same scales, but for their
peers rather than themselves. It was felt that for the pur—
poses of a pilot study that this repetition would be unnec-
essary.

The pilot instrument was administered to a group of
evening college students who were attending an introductory
course in Audiovisual Instruction at Michigan State University.
Of the 45 subjects in the pilot group, only 17 instruments
were completed with responses in all 102 spaces. In a number
of instances, the subjects stated that the item was not appli—
cable to their present situation. This inapplicability seemed
to indicate the need for individualizing the list of character—
istics in terms of the program being studied.

The pilot study provided the investigator with valuable
experience in anticipating the problems experienced by sub—
jects and also provided experience in the kind of urging
needed to encourage subjects to complete the instrument.

The value of this experiment is reflected in the low

number of incompleted instruments in the actual project.

"I!
\N

.11
xx

48

This information was also helpful when writing directions
and instructions to those administering the instrument.

Due to the low number of pilot subjects who felt that
they could respond to every item, it was decided not to run
reliability statistics on the pilot study. Even without
this information, the pilot study proved to be a very worth-
while step in the procedure.

After the pilot administration, one more item was
dropped from the list. The number of items in the final
instrument was 33. (See Appendix A for a sample copy of
the pilot instrument.) Several minor changes were also made
in wording at this time. Cover sheets and written directions
were developed and included in the final instrument. (See

Appendix A for sample copy of the final instrument.
III. THE INSTRUMENT: ADMINISTRATION

The administration of the perceptual instrument was
completed in one day through the cooperation of the four
principals whose schools were studied. This was considered
impractical until additional personnel became available to
assist in the administration of the instrument.

In the school system studied, Mondays are designated
for faculty meetings in the individual schools. In the
elementary schools, these are held either at lunch or after
school. With the cooperation of the four principals, two

faculty meetings were scheduled at noon and two after school.

49

A second person was engaged to assist in administering
the instrument. This individual had had experience with an—
other of the instruments developed on Bills' format and
required a minimum of orientation. Each administrator had
a set of typed instructions. (See Appendix A for a copy of
these instructions.) These were read to each group so that
all groups received uniform instructions and orientation to
the measuring instrument.

The administration of the instrument occurred with a
minimum of difficulty. At three of the four schools, no
problems arose. At School D, several small irregularities
occurred. After the teachers had begun the instrument, two
of them indicated that they worked with blind children in
special education classes. They were dropped from the
population being studied. No mention had been made of these
persons in preliminary arrangements with the principal.

Later, in the administration of the instrument, two
individuals, the principal and one teacher, refused to com—
plete the instrument. The principal indicated she had not
been at the school long enough to respond for others. All
efforts encouraging her to complete the instrument were
ineffective. The teacher did not inform the investigator
of her refusal until the others were almost finished. She
completed only a portion of the first three scales. She
was later interviewed and proved a willing subject.

Another teacher at School D was very intense about

responding to the instrument and took twice as long to

50

complete the instrument as any other teacher in the study.
When she left, she remarked to the investigator, ”I hated
every minute of the experience. You didn't learn anything
from me this way.” However, this teacher proved to be a
cooperative interview subject.
IV. THE INSTRUMENT: ITS RELIABILITY
AND HOMOGENEITY OF VARIANCE

This instrument represented a new application of
Robert Bills' format for gathering perceptual data. It was
"tailor—made" to explore the perceptions by teachers of a
particular audiovisual program. In order for data from a
newly constructed instrument to be useful in drawing compar—
isons, it must be tested for internal reliability. Earlier
instruments using this format have estimated test reliability
by using Hoyt's test of weighted measures by two-way analysis
of variance.3 The reliability coefficients (rtt) and F
ratios for the six scales are presented in Table I.

The F ratios for variance among the subjects were sig—
nificant at the .01 level of confidence for all six scales.

The F ratios for variance among the items were signifi—
cant at the .01 level of confidence for five of the six
scales. They were scales 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6. The F ratio

for scale 3 was significant at the .05 level of confidence.

 

3Cyril J. Hoyt and C. L. Stunkard, ”Estimation of
Test Reliability for Unrestricted Item Scoring Methods,”
Educational and Psychological Measurement, XII, No. 4 (1952),
pp. 759—758.

 

51

TABLE I

RELIABILITY OF INSTRUMENTS USED

 

 

 

r

Measure tt F1 F3 SEm

1. Self—concept of .931 14.528* 16.094* 5.47
Program

2. Self—acceptance of .922 12.801* 7.690* 4.91
Program

3. Self—idealization of .914 11.582* 6.84** 5.78

Program

4. Peer—concept of .900 10.047* 8513* 6.17
Program

5. Peer—acceptance of .934 15.166* 7.660* 4.36
Program

6. Peer—idealization of .969 31.179* 11.356* 4.29
Program

 

*F significant at .01 level; **F significant at .05 level.

When four institutions are to be compared in terms of
measures of central tendency on the same scale, the scores
must come from the same or comparable populations as re—
flected by homogeneity of variance. In this study, the
assumption of the homogeneity of variance was tested by
Welch's equation for L1 employing Hartley's modification of
the geometric mean and using Nayer's tables of the L1 dis-
tribution. (See Table II.)

The test of homogeneity of variance is accepted at
the .05 level of confidence for scales 1 through 5. Scale
6 does not meet the required level for acceptance of homo—

geneity. A check of the data revealed that the score of one

1’!
\‘t

52

individual, in School D, caused scale 6 to appear non—
homogeneous. This same individual has been mentioned earlier
as having taken exceedingly long with the instrument and
stating freely the distaste she felt in executing the instru—
ment. Removal of this individual's responses would result

in acceptance of the homogeneity test on scale 6 at the .05

level of confidence.

TABLE II

HOMOGENEITY OF ESTIMATED VARIANCES

 

 

 

Measure L F P
l. Self—concept of Program .9069 ll .05
2. Self—acceptance of Program .8887 ll .05
3. Self—idealization of Program .9052 ll .05
4. Peer—concept of Program .9286 ll .05
5. Peer—acceptance of Program .9125 ll .05
6. Peer—idealization of Program .7847 ll .06

 

V. THE INTERVIEW: DEVELOPMENT
OF THE SCHEDULE
In developing the interview schedule, the investigator
was originally interested in examining those attitudes and
factors which could reflect the perceptual pattern deter-

mined by the Index of_Audiovisual Values. The interview

 

questions were, therefore, designed to elicit attitude state—

ments on such items as the following:

53

l. The teacher's basic feeling about audiovisual
materials, as they related to his teaching
situation.

2. Why they felt this way.

3. A statement concerning the frequency of use of
filmstrips, films, and recordings.

4. A comparison of others' use with the teacher's
own use.

5. Whether the principal encouraged or discouraged
use of these media.

6. Feelings about the adequacy of the teacher's
own use and of use by others.

7. Whether teachers should make greater or less
use of the materials.

8. A statement of the inherent values of modern
media.

9. The strong features and shortcomings of the
program.

10. A statement concerning their use of materials
or techniques recommended by others.

11. Others' use of recommended techniques and
materials.

The remaining questions in the interviewing schedule
were patterned directly after items in the list of 33 char—
acteristics. These included: quality of materials available,
condition of materials available, adequacy of the selection,
availability of materials when desired, arrival of materials
on time, availability and condition of equipment, and the
need for more equipment. A copy of the interview questions
is provided in Appendix B. The same questions were used in

as close to the same manner as possible in each interview.

54
VI. THE INTERVIEW: ADMINISTRATION

A team of three experienced interviewers was engaged.
The investigator interviewed the four principals and also
conducted the interviews at School D. The interviews were
scheduled before school, during the noon hours, and after ‘ 1
school. By means of careful scheduling, all interviews were I
conducted within a period of one school week.

Each interviewer was provided with an instruction
sheet which also provided some background information con—

cerning the study. This information was supplied so that

 

they might answer questions intelligently and allay appre—
hensions where necessary. (See Appendix B for the interview
instruction sheet.)

Four individuals, who had completed the perceptual
instrument, were not interviewed by reason of absence or,
in one case, refusal to participate further. These four

cases were deleted from the data.

CHAPTER V
RESULTS OF THE STUDY
I. INTRODUCTION

The reporting of the data is based upon discrepancy
(d) scores which were derived by subtracting scores from
selected pairs of columns. Figure 1 shows the arrangement
of the column scores to secure four ”d" scores.

A small table of this kind was made for each subject.
The reporting concentrates upon dl and d2 and includes d3
and d4 when they seem pertinent or relevant.

The d1 discrepancy score is the difference between
the individual's idealization of the program (Column III)
and his actual perception of the audiovisual program at the
time of the study. If this difference is zero or close to
zero, then the individual does not manifest room for growth
or development. This lack of difference can result from
individuals who have a low actual perception and a low ideal.
They can also result from individuals who have high actual
and ideal perceptions or they can fall at points between the
extremes. These low ”d” scores are discussed later in this
chapter.

For individuals to have the necessary rOOm to improve

their use of modern media, they must first have a difference

~V
56

on the ”d1" discrepancy score. This difference must be suf—
ficiently large to provide ample room for such growth. How—
ever, an extremely large dl may be as paralyzing as the low

or zero d1.

Actual Ideal
Self I III d1 = III — I
Other IV VI d3 = VI — IV
d2 = IV—I d4 = VI-VIII

Figure l. Arrangement of Column Scores to Secure
Discrepancy Scores

According to the perceptual theory developed by Bills
and others, it is theoretically impossible to have a nega-
tive d1. However in this study, three negatives did occur.
These must be considered either "lie scores” or from individ—
uals who misunderstood the instructions for the instrument.

For the sake of discussion, d1 is dubbed ”ideal potential.”

The d2 discrepancy score is the difference between how
the individual thinks his peers presently view the program
(Column IV) and how the individual presently views the pro—
gram (Column I). As in the case of dl it is necessary to
seek meaning for the dg score by looking at the extreme scores.
Then those scores which are not extreme scores manifest
varying degrees of the characteristics defined by the extremes.

If an individual manifests a high negative d2, this indicates

57

that he has a high actual perception of the program but feels
that others do not perceive the program as highly as he does.
He is saying, ”I recognize the value of the audiovisual
program but others do not.” This situation would tend to
make the individual complacent and satisfied with his view
of the audiovisual program. He might, however, depending '
on circumstances and the degree of the negative d2, make
some efforts to help others elevate their view of the program.
If an individual manifests a high positive d2, it

indicates that he holds a low perception of the program while

 

feeling that others hold a higher perception of the program
than he does. He is saying, ”I do not see value in the audio—
visual program but many of my peers value it highly." For
the sake of discussion, d2 is dubbed ”self—other actual” per-
ception. This situation should tend to make the individual
dissatisfied with his own perception and could result in re-
evaluation and subsequent change of the perception. The
individual might conceivably copy the behavior of others
freely because of this perception. Audiovisual use on this
basis is likely to be poorly thought through and quite ineffec—
tive. The alternative to change of perception here is
rationalization of the difference. This rationalization
could very well be reflected in a low d1.

The individual with a low or zero d2 has the potential
for being a thoughtful and effective user of audiovisual

media. He is not bound by the complacency and self—satisfaction

a
58

of the high negative d2 nor is he moved by a high positive
d2 to make random use of the media.

The d3 and d4 discrepancy scores are not treated in
detail in the report of this study. A brief review of litera—
ture on the self—concept and the other concept revealed no
theory which would prove helpful in understanding the meaning I 7
of these two dimensions. It is, therefore, necessary to first
develop meaning and understanding for the d1 and d2 scores.
For instance, it is impossible to develop meaning of the d4
(Perception of Others Actual versus Perception of Others
Ideal) until d1 (Actual Perception for Self versus Ideal
Perception for Self) has been explored and studied. There
is much room in these two dimensions for further study and
research.

Table III presents the range and mean for each dis—
crepancy score for the 47 subjects.

Columns II and V were excluded from this treatment
of the data. These columns were utilized extensively in
attempting to develop a composite perceptual pattern for each
school. The unsuccessful nature of this effort is discussed

in Chapter VI.
II. PERFORMANCE STATEMENT GROUPING

Each subject had provided a performance statement on
the interview. The subjects were arranged in rank order and

the middle 17 subjects (36%) were removed to define more

- '11
s

 

 

59
TABLE III
DERIVATIONS, RANGES, AND MEANS FOR THE
FOUR DISCREPANCY SCORES
Discrepancy Difference
Score Between Range Mean Columns
d1 Actual and ideal
perceptions for self (—3)—54 19.76 III—1
d2 Actual perception for
self and actual for
others (-27)—20 15.30 IV-I
d3 Actual and ideal
perceptions for
others 0—51 21.98 VI—IV
d4 Ideal for self and
ideal for others (—34)—19 — 3.98 VI—III

 

clearly the high and low performance statements. Table IV
is a summary of the data obtained by this grouping.

In this table the range and mean are provided for both
high and low groups under the appropriate designation. It
should be explained that a high score indicates a low perfor—
mance statement and a low score indicates a high performance
statement. In addition to the means of the four ”d” scores,
the table summarizes the subjects' perceptions of availability
and the schools represented in each category.

There seems to be a difference in the means of the
dl's when the subjects are grouped high and low on performance.
Those subjects in the high group had a mean dl of 22.15 as

compared to a mean d1 of 16.71 for the subjects grouped low

.‘\

6O

 

 

.Czozm one mcon monoom :p: pom*
mm.oa one:

6 oz mfi-oH

m H m w mow mm.s- sm.sa as.oa- as.ma zoq
mm.© ace:

8 oz s-m

: a m s mos mm.m- mm.ma ma.m - ma.mm swam
o m a soaaaoaaas>< so me me He coccsnoonom

mHoocom

 

EZMEMB<BW moz<2mommmm Mm Qmmbomw

mmmz WHOMWMDW mmB zmmz *QMZH<Bmo <E<Q mo Mm<22bw

>H mam<B

\N

61

on the performance statement. This means that those subjects

reporting a high performance statement also reported a high

discrepancy between theiractual and ideal perceptions of the

audiovisual program. Those subjects reporting a low perfor—

mance statement also reported a low discrepancy between actual

and ideal. .

There seems to be a similar difference for the means
of the d2's. The subjects who provided a high performance
statement had a mean d2 of —3.15 while those who had a low
performance statement had a mean d2 of —lO.71. This indicates
that those who reported a high performance level viewed the
program with more favor than they felt their peers did.

Those who reported a low performance level viewed the program
with much more favor than they felt their peers held.

When their view of availability of materials was
checked in this grouping of scores, there appeared to be no
difference in the perception of availability held by the two
groups. The d3 and d4 means did not provide sufficient dif-
ferences to yield meaningful comparisons.

It is noted that both d2 scores were negative. Since
there is a difference between them, the question can be asked
if all positive d2's were gathered and analyzed in terms of
performance, would their mean performance statement be even
higher. Seven subjects were found to have positive d2's
with an average d2 of 10.28. The mean performance statement

for these seven subjects was 8. This does not vary appreciably

 

 
 

 

"H II” é“

\\

62

from the total mean for performance (Y'= 8.48). For such a
comparison of d2 scores to be meaningful more positive d2's

would be necessary.
III. AVAILABILITY STATEMENT GROUPING

Each subject had provided a ”yes” or ”no" answer to
the question, ”Are these materials always available when you
want them?” The subjects were grouped on the basis of their
availability statement. Table V is a summary of the data
obtained by this grouping. Means are shown for the four ”d"

scores and the performance statement. Of the 47 subjects who

 

reported on perception of availability, 25 reported ”Yes"
and 22 reported "N0.” Therefore, the means will not suffer
from one ”N" being substantially smaller than the other.
There seemed to be no appreciable difference on the
d1 between the ”No” and ”Yes” perception of availability.
The individuals answering ”N0” had a mean d1 of 20.55, while
those answering ”Yes” had a mean d1 of 19.08. This raises
further doubts about the usefulness of the perception of
availability. The dilemma would arise if performance and
availability both seemed to have some relationship to the dl
score but showed no relationship to each other. However,
the situation was that d1 seemed to have a relationship to
performance but not to the perception of availability, nor
do performance and availability reveal any relationship to

each other. This presents a rather clear suggestion that

63

.csofim one moooE .pCoEopmum ooCoEpowgoQ paw mosoom :p: som*

 

 

Annual
w H w m own madl wimm EN- 3.8 oz
Amnnev
m m m w wTw mm.m- 3.9 mm.m- no.3 mos
Q o m < oonEpowLom :6 me we Hp ooCoELOMAom
mHoonom

 

EszMEdBm NEHQHm<QH<>< Mm Qmmbomo
mmmz wBOMWme mmB ZMEB *QMZH<BmO <B<Q mo Wm<zzbm

> MAQ<B

_‘.‘
xx

64

the perception of availability is not a key factor in the
individuals' perceptions of the audiovisual program.

There were three negative d1 scores. All three of
these perceived the materials as not being available. This
perception is consistent with the three individuals' lack of
ideal potential.

The very dilemma described above as not occurring for
the d1 score does occur for the d2 score. Those teachers
reporting ”Yes” on perception of availability felt that they
had a slightly higher perception of the program than their
peers. Teachers reporting ”No” on perception of availability
felt that they had a much higher perception of the program
than their peers. There is inconsistency here which casts
further doubt on the utility of the perception of avail—
ability. Performance and availability appear to lack cor—
relation. The d2 scores seem to bear some degree of relation—
ship to both performance and availability. If the teachers
who answered ”Yes” to availability had the higher perception
of the program, there might be basis for analysis. However,
just the reverse occurred which presents a situation into
which little, if any, meaning can be projected. For these
reasons it is concluded that in this study the perception of
availability was not a significant factor in determining
discrepancy scores or the statement of performance.

For the d3 means there does appear to be a difference.

This, coupled with the lack of difference for d3 on the

\\

65

performance suggests that the d3 availability possibility
bears further investigation. The d4 score shows little or
no difference on the availability division of the scores.
Here again there was an opportunity to check the rela—
tionship between performance statement and availability
perception. There appeared to be no relationship between
the two. Those reporting ”Yes” on availability had a mean
performance statement of 8.38 while those reporting "No”
on availability had a mean statement of 8.60. This finding
is consistent with that reported in the section on ”The

Performance Statement.”
IV. LOW HdH SCORES

As explained earlier, low d1 and d2 scores have dif—
fering and important meanings. A low or zero d1 means that
the individual has little or no ”ideal potential.” This
means that their ideal perception is sufficiently similar to
their actual perception to preclude room for growth or
development. Thus in helping such individuals the first task
is to expand their ideal perception to provide the necessary
room for improvement.

A low d2 score means that an individual does not
perceive an appreciable difference between his perception of
the program and that of his peers. This frees the individual
to make thoughtful and knowledgeable choices concerning his
own use of the media available, in this case from the central

audiovisual service.

66

In order to observe low dl's an arbitrary cutoff point
was selected at +5. This seemed reasonable in the light of
a range of 1—54 for positive dl's. All dl scores +5 and below
were examined for similar characteristics. This data is
provided in Table VI. Three negative dl's occurred, although
the Bills' theory does not provide for negative dl's.

Low d scores result from two similar scores whether
they be high, low, or in between. In order to examine the
column scores for high or low values the data in Table VI is
ranked from high to low by column scores, with Column III as
the ranking score. There were not sufficient scores to group
them into separate high and low categories. Of the five low
dl scores, four resulted from high scores on Columns I and
III and only one resulted from low scores on the two columns.
A comparison of these teachers on performance revealed no
significant difference from the total mean performance state—
ment. On availability there were two ”No" and three ”Yes”
responses. Thus there was no unanimity or common response
on availability. The mean d2 for these five individuals was
—l3.63. This suggests that people with a low ideal potential
have a substantially higher view of the program than they
think their peers have. These two, low d1 and high negative
d2, may work together being reflected in average or below per—
formance and complacency about that level of performance. The
size of this sample is adequate for suggestion only. A more
definitive answer would require a sample selected specifically

for the purpose.

67

TABLE VI

EXAMINATION OF LOW AND NEGATIVE* d1 SCORES

 

 

 

Column
d1 III I Performance Availability d2
5 103 98 11 No —21
3 100 97 9 No —21
3 95 92 9 Yes — 4
4 94 9O 5 Yes —13
1 68 67 9 Yes — 7
x = 8.60 x = -13.63
-3* 96 99 10 No -27
-5* 92 97 7 NO - 7
—9§+ 83 92 10 No - 9

 

*Negatives are theoretically not possible.

For the examination of low scores for d2 arbitrary
cutoff points were chosen from +5 to -5. Thus all scores
between and including +5 and -5 were included. This choice
provided 18 subjects with low d2 scores. With this number
it was possible to secure a group with high column scores
and a group with low column scores. In order to better define
the extremes it was decided to remove the middle one—third of
these 18 subjects when ranked on the basis of the Column IV

scores. This would require the removal of six subjects.

68

Five subjects were finally removed in order to avoid the
arbitrary castingout of one of a pair of subjects with
identical Column IV scores. Table VII is the resulting
table after the removal of the center five scores.

When the high and low column score groups are compared
on performance, there seems to be little difference since
the high—high group had a mean performance of 8 and the low—
low group had a mean performance of 8.66. The overall per—
formance statement mean was 8.48.

There does seem to be a difference between the two
groups in their perception of availability. The low dg's
resulting from high column scores were accompanied by more
positive perceptions of availability (Yes 4, No 2). The
low d2's resulting from low column scores were accompanied
by almost all negative perceptions of availability (Yes 1,

No 6). This is consistent with a lower overall view of the
program, in these cases for both self and others.

There also seems to be an observable difference be—
tween the two groups on their dl scores. The low d2's
resulting from high column scores had a mean d1 of 22.16.

The low dg's resulting frOm 10w column scores had a mean

d1 of 35.43. This means that both groups have ideal potential.
It would appear that the difference here might be sufficiently
great for the larger of the two ideal potentials to be an
unrealistic one and, hence, to have discouraging effect. The
overall mean for dl scores was 19.76. It was mentioned earlier

that the d1 needed to be sufficiently large to permit room

\N

 

 

 

 

 

69
TABLE VII
LOW d2 SCORES GROUPED INTO HIGH AND
LOW CONTRIBUTING SCORES
Column Scores
d2 IV I Performance Availability d1
High

0 110 110 6 Yes 22

—4 109 113 7 Yes 19

1 105 106 10 No 18

0 103 103 9 No 24

—3 97 100 8 Yes 28

5 97 92 _* Yes 22
Y = 8 Yes 4 Y = 22.16

No 2
Low

3 81 78 -* No 26

4 81 77 7 Yes 36

-2 80 82 10 No 36

0 68 68 8 NO 21

_3 67 7O 6 NO 50

_4 66 70 9 No 45

0 60 60 12 No 34
Y = 8.66 Yes 1 Y = 35.43

No 6

 

*Principal, no performance statement available.

70

for growth and improvement. With an average d1 of 22.16
(only one of the six dl's was below 19.76) there should be
sufficient room for the improvement and yet the score is

not an extreme one so as to evidence an unrealistic ideal.
Thus a d1 of 22.16 seems to fit logically with the group who
had high column scores.

The dg's which resulted from low column scores may very
well have dl's which are too large, with an unrealistic ideal.
This might very well have resulted in their rationalizing
that the materials were not available.

Table VII makes it apparent that one should not talk ‘ I
about low discrepancy scores without defining the nature of
the scores which resulted in the low ”d.H There is a basic
difference between low d's resulting from two high column
scores and those resulting from two low column scores and
there are apparent differences between these two categories
on their statement of availability and their d's. This whole

area bears further investigation.

The Four Schools

The method of selection of the four schools was reported
in Chapter III along with some descriptive data for each
school. This rationale had greater meaning for the original
avenues of investigation. These unfruitful avenues of investi—
gation are reported at the end of this chapter. However, the
criteria for selection and the descriptive data are useful

here in viewing the discrepancy scores for the four schools.

aw
71

The discrepancy score data for the schools is sum—
marized in Table VIII. It is noteworthy that on discrepancy
scores d1, d2, and d3 the schools all ranked the same. That
is, School A was lowest on all three scores, School B highest,
School C high, and School D low. On the d4 score the highest
and lowest coincided (School A lowest and School B highest)
but the high and low ranking schools interchanged (School C
was low and School D was high).

Out of curiosity rather than necessity, several simple
rank order correlations were computed. This was done to see
if the ranking of the schools and certain scores on data had
any correlation. A rank order correlation, by schools, was
computed between performance and availability. This correla—
tion was found to be non—existent (rS 2 —.O5). A rank order
correlation between the d1 score and availability was found
to be extremely low (rS = —.15). The only correlation of
significant size was that between the dl score and performance
(rS = —.80). Since the ranking of the schools is the same on
the first three discrepancy scores, all three (d1, d2, and d3)
have the same correlation with the mean performance state—
ments. This aids in understanding the usefulness of the mean
performance statement since the relationship was neither a
perfect direct or inverse fit.

The remainder of this section will summarize and
analyze the information and discrepancy scores for the four

SChOOlS .

72

 

 

.onnm one mCmoE pCoEoumpm ooCmEnowpoQ one pr monoom :p: L0h*
w 02 Armonwanv Anwnnv Assay Aaoav Asoav OH H c
m now 0.0 m.m- m.ma s.w - m.ma o
H 62 Asoav Azoav Anahev Asmanv Armanv :H n e
ma mow mm.w as.©- aa.om am.m - mm.mm o
w 02 Apaozoav Armosmasv Aoaoserv Asmoemasv Aoaoemarv OH I e
m mos sm.s oa.m m.wm o.m om.am m
m 02 Anmflcv Apmosoi prosofiv Apmozo: Apmosoav ma u c
w hos mm.w am.w- ss.ma mw.oa- mc.fla a
seaaaosaassa oocsssoosom as me me as Hooeom

 

Hoomom Nm Qmmbomw mmmz
mBomhmbm mmB zmmz *QMZH<BmO <B<Q mo Nm<2§bm

HHH> mqm<B

73

School A. School A was originally characterized as
having frequent and effective use. The performance state—
ments in Table VIII placed it second highest in the ranking.
In Chapter III the average use per teacher also placed it
second highest in frequency of use.

The faculty of School A were reported in Chapter III
as being ”mature, experience, well trained” and as having
”worked together long enough for good rapport to be ex-
pected.” School A had the lowest entries on all four dis—
crepancy scores. Over 60 per cent of the teachers perceived
the materials as being available when they wanted them. The
principal felt that the level of use was satisfactory.

Although the d1 for School A was the lowest of the four
schools, it was not so low as to preclude some growth and im-
provement. The fact that this school had the lowest d2
(—lO.85) suggests that the teachers felt that they had a
higher perception of the program than did their peers.

This school can be said to have a desirable level of
use, reasonable perception of availability, and sufficient
room for growth and improvement. The d2 score is the highest
d2 and the only positive d2 among the four schools. However,
it is sufficiently close to zero to be desirable in terms of
the ability to make knowledgeable and thoughtful selections
without the factors mentioned earlier which can be introduced
by high positive or negative d2's. Based on this data, School
A appeared to be in a very desirable position with respect to

its audiovisual program and utilization of modern media.

“V

74

School B. School B was originally characterized as
having infrequent and effective use. The performance state—
ments in Table VIII placed it as the lowest of the four
schools. The average use per teacher in Chapter III placed
it as second lowest in frequent of use.

The faculty of School B were described in Chapter III
as follows: ”mature, experienced, well trained group of
teachers (fewer had had a large number of methods courses)
and had worked together for some time.” School B had the

highest scores on all four discrepancies. The materials were

 

perceived as not available by 80 per cent of the teachers.
The principal felt that there was a need for greater use in
her school.

School B had the only positive discrepancy scores for
d2 and d4. Thus, School B was the only school which felt
that their peers perceived the proper perception of the pro-
gram higher than they did themselves. The dl for this school
may be sufficiently high as to result in discouragement.
However, there are individuals in the school who have more
realistic dl's.

This school seemed to be in need of assistance before

improvement in perception and behavior could take place.

School C. School C was originally characterized as
having frequent but ineffective use. The performance state-
ments in Chapter III placed it as second lowest in this

column. The average use per teacher was reported in Chapter

1 "I
N

75

III as the highest of the four schools. If School D had not
had a mean performance statement that disagreed completely
with the data from the supervisor's office, School C would
have been placed second highest.

The teachers in School C were described in Chapter III
as a "mature, experienced, well trained group of teachers who
had not worked together for a long period of time, and who
were still in the process of developing rapport and under-
standing. School C had the second highest scores on d1, d2,
and d3. Almost all of the teachers perceived the materials
as being available (Yes 13, No l). I

This school had a dl which was slightly higher than the
overall average thus permitting considerable growth and im-
provement without an unrealistic idealization to discourage
the teachers. The d2 of -3.64 is the second highest of the
four schools but is sufficiently close to zero so that there
is not a disparate difference between the actual perception of
the program for self and others. As outlined earlier, this low
or zero d2 can be a desirable condition for individuals and
may be desirable for schools also.

In summary, it can be stated that this school is in a
desirable condition to improve its use of the audiovisual
program. The materials are perceived as available,there is
sufficient ideal potential to permit improvement, and the d2

is sufficiently low to permit fair and unbiased selection.

76

School D. School D was originally characterized as
having infrequent and ineffective use. The performance state-
ments as shown in Table VIII placed it as highest. It should
be remembered that the original assignment in Chapter III,
which placed it as lowest in average use per teacher, was
based on the circulation record from the central office.
Therefore, the performance statement appears to be a com—
pletely inaccurate assessment by the teachers of their per—
formance.

The faculty in School D were described in Chapter III
thusly: ”This is a staff which does not quite reflect the
degree of training as in the other schools. They are mature
and experienced and most of them had worked together for‘
several years." There were other factors which hinted at a
low degree of integration and rapport among this group. They
were scattered throughout a junior high building. It was at
School D that people refused to complete the perceptual instru—
ment (the principal was one of these) and one teacher firmly ob—
jected to being interviewed. The principalship was a part—time
assignment, her time being shared with responsibilities for
junior high school guidance.

The materials were perceived as not available by 80 per
cent of the teachers. This further supports the inaccuracy
of the mean performance statement. The principal felt unable
to generalize about her teachers but felt each one was an

individual. This is a valid position; however, the other three

77

principals felt able to make some large overall generaliza—
tions about their teachers. This further supports the sus—
pected low integration and rapport.

The d1 was below average but not so low as to rule out
completely the possibility of improvement. However, a higher
d1 might be more desirable. The d2 was sufficiently large
(—8.7) as to suggest that their own view of the program was
higher than that imputed to their peers. This could tend to
maintain the status quo.

This school seemed in need of leadership and assistance
to first improve its perceptions and to subsequently improve
its use of the audiovisual program. Had this study been able t
to report on the quality of use, it might have shed more
light on implications for this group particularly.

It would seem that efforts to use these discrepancy
scores and the other information to characterize schools in
terms of a common pattern proved ineffective and questionable
at best. It is apparent that easy generalizations based on
the d scores, even when there is the unique degree of ranking

agreement which occurred in this case, are not possible.

The Principals' Perceptions

 

A search was made of the interviews of the four prin—
cipals to uncover statements which would be indicative of
the principal's role as a leader or authority figure in the
audiovisual program in her building. In the interviews the

teachers in all schools, without exception, reported that

78

the principal encouraged the use of audiovisual materials.

It was unfortunate that one principal (School D) de—
clined the completion of the second portion of the perceptual
instrument. This meant that discrepancy scores were not
available for this one principal. The other three principals
all had low d2's (Principal A, d2 + — 4; Principal B, d2 = 3;
Principal C, d2 = 5) and they all had dl's which permitted
room for improvement but were not unrealistic. Three prin—
cipals perceived the materials as being available when
needed (A, D, and D).

A brief summary of each principal's view of the program

follows:

School A. This principal had a positive view of the
program in her building. She felt it was adequate and that
the mechanics (both internally and externally) were operating
satisfactorily. It would appear that she had communicated
her satisfaction to her teachers. The school had a high
performance statement and a d1 discrepancy which suggested
potential for growth and improvement. Her assessment of the
program was fairly accurate. She said, ”The teachers in this
building use all resources available for the presentation of
the richest learning experiences.” Her satisfaction was a
little too well established. This seems to be reflected
in the high d2 score (—10.85) whereby teachers felt that they

had a higher perception of the program than their peers.

79

The principal's satisfaction and complacency seemed to be

shared by the staff.

School B. This principal was quite dissatisfied with
the program. She felt the materials were not always avail—
able when they were needed. She further felt that there
should have been in—service training activities emanating
from the central office. She expressed a lack of faith in
the ability of some of her teachers to use materials effec—
tively. She felt it necessary to deny equipment to teachers
who had not been trained to make proper use of equipment and
materials.

She felt that the materials available and that the
mechanics of distribution were working satisfactorily. She
felt it necessary to make excuses for her teachers as to why
they did not make ”better use” of the materials. She
reported the need for improved use in her school but also
said, ”I do not see any new techniques which need to be
introduced.” It was felt that this attitude on behalf of the
principal could be a limiting factor in the use of audiovisual
materials. This school had the lowest use and the highest
discrepancy scores. The large mean dl suggests that the
teachers idealized far above their actual perceptions of the
program. The positive d2 suggests that they felt others had
a more positive view of the program than they did. The prin—
cipal's d2 coincides with the mean d2 for the school. The

principal's d1 score was the highest of the three principals.

80

School C. This principal had a positive view of the
program. She saw considerable potential in her own building
for increased and improved use. She felt that her teachers
had views similar to hers. She further felt that they were
competent to improve and she expected improvement. She indi—
cated the desire to facilitate and implement in any way
possible. Her d1 was almost congruent with the mean d1 for
her school (Principal 22, mean d1, 22.93). The principal had
a positive d2 as did the school. The school seemed to reflect

the perceptions of the principal.

School D. This principal felt that the city—wide pro—
gram was satisfactory and felt the materials were available
when needed. She, however, declined on several occasions to
generalize about the program in her building. She felt this
varied with the individual. She felt that she did not have
the time to provide leadership. The faculty seemed to be
unintegrated with a minimum of closeness. The school reported
the highest performance. However, the validity of this report
has been substantially diSCOunted. The d1 and d2 scores were
low. On availability 80 per cent of the teachers viewed the
materials as not available. The lack of integration, low
ideal potential, and high negative self—other score all
seemed to be consistent with the principal's lack of leader—

ship.

4.“

81

In each of these schools, the role of the principal
appeared important in the building perception of the audio-
visual program. In each school the perceptions of the
principal seemed to set the tone and be in general agreement
with the averages developed. The next logical extension of
this premise would be an objective check and comparis0n on

quantity and quality of use.

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

I. SUMMARY OF THE METHOD

The study began with the presentation of four problems.
They were:

1. The construction of an index of audiovisual values.

2. Exploration of the extent to which teachers in
an individual school exhibit common perceptions
about the program, thus permitting the assignment
of a perceptual pattern to an individual school.

3. Measurement of the individual's level of behavior
with respect to instructional materials (e. g.
the extent and nature of use made).

4. Exploration of the relationship between a teacher's
perception of availability of materials and his
behavior.

The study consisted of two major parts: the construc-
tion and administration of an index to provide perceptual
measures and the conducting of interviews intended to
correlate with the perceptual data. The perceptual in—
strument consisted of 33 items characterizing the audio-
visual program. Each subject responded to these items on

six scales:

83

Scale 1. Self—concept of Program
Scale 2. Self—acceptance of Program
Scale 3 Self—idealization of Program
Scale 4 Peer—concept of Program
Scale 5. Peer—acceptance of Program
Scale 6 Peer—idealization of Program

An extension of Bill's perceptual theory was employed
to develop the above indices. The theory provides a format
for getting at perceptions of individuals with respect to
the audiovisual program and the value they attach to the
program as well as the value held by others as they
conceive them. Since the study undertook to explore the
significance of such perceptions upon the development and
effectiveness of audiovisual programs, Bill's theoretical
construct was regarded as an appropriate base for the con—
struction of a useful index. As indicated later, it proved
to be useful in getting at individual measures but not for
group measures.

Bill's instrumentation of perceptual theory has been
extended by HengstLI and others to derive discrepancy scores
between selected perception scales on the instrument. Bills

theory does not embrace the application of discrepancy

scores. It provides guidance in the analysis of 3 such

 

AHerbert R. Hengst, ”A Measure of Propensity—to-change
in Selected Liberal Arts Colleges in the North Central
Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools” (Unpublished
Dogtpral thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
l9 0 .

 

 

84
scores but not specific meaning for their interpretation.
The four discrepancy scores developed in this study were
derived as follows:
Discrepancy Columns Difference Between
dl III — I Ideal and actual perceptions for self.
d2 IV — I Actual for others and actual for self.
d3 VI — IV Ideal and actual perceptions for others.
d4 VI — III Ideal for others and ideal for self.

The study focused upon dl (discrepancy between ideal
and actual perceptions) and d2 (discrepancy between actual
perception for others and self), perception of availability,
statement of performance, and the possible relationships 1
among these factors.

For the six scales on the perceptual instrument,
reliability was .90 or higher. Because an attempt was made
to develop group measures between the schools, homogeneity
of variance was also computed. The homogeneity of variance
was found to be at the .05 level of confidence or higher for
five of the six scales. The remaining scale had a confidence
level of .06.

In terms of the initial problems studied, findings
were as follows: (Conclusions and implications are dis-
cussed in the next section).

1. It is possible to construct an Index of Audio-

visual Values which will provide data concerning

how teachers perceive the audiovisual program.

85

The index did not prove successful for the estab—
lishment of a composite or group measure.
Teachers in the individual schools did not manifest
sufficiently similar scores on the perceptual
scales to permit the assignment of a pattern or
score which would be truly representative of the
total group.

When, as in this case, the nature of use is
conceived as something more sophisticated than
quantity of use, the techniques used here are not
adequate.

This study discovered no relationship between
stated performance and the perception of avail—

ability of materials.

II. CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions and implications of the study are as

follows:

1.

Teachers who hold a high concept of their own
performance with modern media are more likely

to increase and improve their use of modern media
than those teachers who have a low concept of
their own performance with modern media.

When teachers were grouped into high and low
groups on performance, teachers with a high per—

formance concept had a higher concept of the

86

potential of an ideal audiovisual program for
instruction than teachers with a low performance
concept.

Teachers with a high concept of their Own per—
formance with modern media are more likely to
learn from their peers and emulate their behavior
than are teachers who have a low self performance
concept.

Teachers with a high performance concept felt
that their peers viewed the audiovisual program
more favorably than they did themselves. There
was, therefore, a greater tendency for them to
borrow materials from and utilize techniques of
their peers.

Teachers who perceive the audiovisual materials
as not being available are less likely to learn
from their peers and emulate their behavior with
respect to modern media than are teachers

who perceive the materials as being readily
available.

Teachers who reported ”No” on perception of
availability felt that they had a much higher
perception of the program than their peers.
Teachers who perceive materials as being readily
available do not share a common potential to act

upon that perception.

87

When teachers were grouped by ”yes” and ”no”

on perceptions of availability of materials,
both groups had similar scores on their per-
ceptions of the nature of an ideal program.
Thus availability in itself does not appear

to be a significant factor in growth potential.
Teacher's perceptions of the availability of
materials do not appear to be capable of
generalization because of their tendency to
think primarily in terms of specific materials
and specific sources of materials.

Perceptions of availability of materials
tended to be directed specifically toward a
particular source and a specific type of material
even though subjects were asked to answer in
terms of the various materials provided by the
central audiovisual office.

There is no apparent relationship between a
teacher's concept of his own performance and
his perception of the availability of audio—
visual materials. Any effort to infer one
from the other would be in error.

When responses were grouped in terms of a
teacher's performance concepts, there was no

difference between the groups on perception of

88

availability. When they were grouped in terms
of perception of availability there was no
difference between the groups on performance
concept. When grouped by schools, the data
showed no correlation between stated performance
and the perception of availability.

7. The use of perceptual patterns, as developed
by Robert E. Bills, to establish an institutional
or composite pattern of a school faculty's per-
ception of an audiovisual program, as attempted
in this study, is not a fruitful approach.
In attempts to use the algebraic symbols (++,
+—, —+, ——) employed by Bills to describe
individual perceptions, the range of scores was
too great to establish representative groups and
cut off points were impossible to assign.
Further, the range of the above scale applications
in each school made measures of central tendency

unusable for comparative purposes.

III. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

There is a need for audiovisual administrators to
better understand the factors which cause teachers to hold

favorable and unfavorable views of the audiovisual program.

89
The original hypothesis in this study, that a school could
be considered to have an identifiable institutional per—
ception of the audiovisual program, proved unworkable.

When the emphasis in reporting the data was changed,
it was discovered that there were some places where the
amount of data was statistically inadequate to support
conclusion. They were sufficient to suggest recommendations
for useful followup studies.

The following recommendations are considered avenues
worthy of attention in the further use of perceptual dis—
crepancy scores in attempting to understand teachers' per—
ceptions and attendant behavior with respect to audiovisual
media.

1. There is a need for a sufficiently large sample
of teachers so that certain selected discrepancy
patterns can have more teachers fall into those
categories. If the low d1 (discrepancy between
ideal and actual perceptions) scores (0 to 5)
and low d2 (discrepancy between actual perception
for others and self) scores (—5 to +5) are to be
studied in detail, the original base of data must
be broadened to provide adequate numbers of sub—
jects in each category.

2. It is recommended that the low discrepancy scores

for differences between ideal and actual perceptions

90

and differences between actual perception for
self and others to be studied in greater

detail.

In this study one of the low discrepancy
groupings (difference between actual perceptions
for self and others) revealed no significant data
until the discrepancy scores were separated

into high and low contributing scores. In the
writer's opinion, a teacher with a low discrepancy
derived from two very high scale scores is per—
ceiving quite differently from a teacher with

a low discrepancy score derived from two very

low scale scores.

Here, too, increased sample size would be helpful
since the distribution of the low discrepancy
scores into a high and low group provided only

6 subjects for the high group and 7 subjects for
the low group.

To establish relationship between teacher per—
ceptions and effectiveness of use, better means
of measuring quality of use must be developed.
Measures of quantity are fairly simple to
develOp but the self—perception approach on
quality measurement, as attempted in this study,

proved quite inadequate.

91

The measure of quality of an individual's use

of modern educational media is a complex prob—
lem involving a variety of factors but a

highly important one for solution. It would
appear and still appears that the teacher's and
his colleague's perceptions would be one impor-
tant aspect of such a measure, but a more
sophisticated means of development and applica-
tion must be found than that used in this

study.

There is a need to develop techniques for finding
out how teachers value audiovisual programs,
which are intended to serve them, and for deter—
mining the degree of the individual teacher's
basic commitment to modern media.

The original idea which promoted this study was
that the instrumentation which had been developed
to utilize the perceptual theory of Robert E.
Bills might yield a neat and compact method for
studying the views of institutions and teachers.
The two columns which were not used in receiving
discrepancy scores (columns II and V) were
originally thought to possess the potential for
determining the value that teachers placed upon
the program. However, in retrospect it was real—

ized that they did not really go deeply into the

92
individual's basic motivation and commitment to
modern media. A somewhat open-ended question on
the interview left too much room for hedging and
evasive answers. These techniques must be care—
fully structured for the individual to provide
meaningful data.

If a study had available the information recommend—
ed above concerning quantity and quality of use,

a detailed analysis Of dl scores (discrepancy
between ideal and actual perceptions) would be
useful. The purpose should be to determine the
apparent effects of low, average and high dl's.

A future study using these perceptual discrepancies
should attempt to characterize the pattern for

the individual who has a high basic commitment to
modern media and who uses them thoughtfully and
skillfully. This study suggests that this individ—

ual may have an average d neither extreme) and

1 <
a low d2 score. The perceptual theory suggests
that this may not be the teacher with the highest
performance, due to the ability of the teacher to
make an intelligent selection or rejection of
materials in terms of their value to the content
being studied.

This is an important recommendation but must

follow others which prepare the ground work for

such analysis.

93
7. A future study could examine the d3 score (discrep—
ancy between ideal and actual for others) and d4
score (discrepancy between ideal for others and
ideal for self) to determine their utility. They
are subtle and complex dimensions and may have

significant meaning.
IV. UNSUCCESSFUL METHODOLOGY AND ADDITIONAL DATA

This section is included in the belief that negative
findings and unfruitful methods are sometimes as significant
as more positive results. In this study one rather large
avenue of data examination and reporting had to be abandoned.
Explanation of the reasons for abandonment could be helpful
to future investigators.

The Bills instrumentation of perceptual theory in-
volves the assignment of an algebraic symbol (+ or —)
to both one's self and other perceptions thus resulting in
four so—called perceptual patterns (++, +—, -+, -—). This
technique was found to be fraught with problems since the
assignment of the algebraic symbol requires the selection
and justification of cutoff points. Individuals with scores
which varied significantly from the mean could be treated
easily. However, for those subjects whose scores fell near
to the mean, either the cutoff points must be lowered or
they must be discarded from the analysis. Basically, the
theory does not provide for the question of differing degree

or magnitude in the perceptual scores.

94 (

It also became apparent that columns II and V were
dealing with the valuing of the perceptions of the 33 items
and were in no way really tapping the individual's basic
belief or motivation toward modern media.

When an effort was made to combine individual per—
ceptions to derive an institutional pattern, the F tests and
T tests for variability were not significant. Further
reflection on this point resulted in the feeling that it
is not possible to characterize one school as having a
composite pattern. This was most clearly shown when an
effort was made to derive the same institutional pattern
from the interview data for comparative purposes. Here the
attempts to assign a perceptual pattern to the institutions
failed completely.

The use of a non—parametric correlation technique, the
Contingency Coefficient, provided no significant results
whatsoever.

In the Bills theory the difference between Column
III and I (Ideal and Actual for Self) is considered to be
a ”Propensity to Change”. Several questions in the interview
were designed to check this dimension. These questions
caused peOple to become evasive and to hedge on their
answers. These interview questions proved to be a source of
apprehension to a number of subjects. Thus, correlation
and validation of the perceptual pattern and associated

measures became unworkable.

95
Consultation with a research specialist revealed that
the body of data gathered in this study could be examined
in a variety of ways. The writer chose one of these
possibilities for this study. This data will be avail—

able to anyone who wishes to conduct further analysis.
V. DISCUSSION: THE UTILITY OF PERCEPTUAL THEORY

Several problems which arose in the course of this
study cause this writer to raise serious questions concerning
the utility of Bill's perceptual theory in the kind of
analysis conceived for this study. The first of these was
the realization that the two scales designed to measure the
value placed upon perceptions were not securing information
about a subject's basic commitment to modern media. In
the writer's opinion, the idea of an ”audiovisual self" is
too subtle a distinction for either present day perceptual
theory or self theory.

The writer feels that further study of the discrep-
ancy scores would have considerable worth. However, since
the theory does not encompass this treatment of data it
provides only a base for such investigation rather than over—
all direction

The theory recognizes reality as that which the
individual perceives. However, in the study of modern
media it is possible to compare an individual's perception

of availability with what is really available. This kind of

96
comparison can have considerable meaning for an audiovisual
director. Although in this study no relationship could be
- established between perception of—availability and per—
formance concept,it still seems reasonable to insist that
a teacher must have an awareness of the materials and media
available if he is to manifest patterns of use involving

them.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bartlett, M. S. ”The Use of Transformations,” BiOmetrics,
Vol. 3 (194 >. p. 39. —

Berkeley, George. ”Of the Principles of Human Knowledge,"
A New Theory of Vision and Other Writings of Berkeley.
Part I. London: J. M Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1910.

Bills, Robert E. ”About People and Teaching,” Bulletin of
the Bureau of School Service, College of Education,
Vol. 38 (December, 1955) University of Kentucky.

 

. ”Instruction Manual for Index of Adjustment
Values.” University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.
Mimeographed.

Crawford, Winnifred E. Counseling with Teachers Concerning
Visual Education. New York: New York University,
1942.

Encyclopedia Britannica. (1959), XIII, pp. 266-272.

 

Hengst, Herbert R. ”A Measure of Propensity—to—Change in
Selected Liberal Arts Colleges in the North Central
Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools.”
Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Michigna State University,
19 O.

Hilgard, Ernest R. Theories of Learning. New York: Appleton—
Century—Crofts, Inc., 1956.

 

Hoyt, Cyril J. and Stunkard, C. L. ”Estimation of Test
Reliability for Unrestricted Item Scoring Methods,”
Education and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 12, No.
R (1952), pp- 759-758-

Hyer, Anna L. "A Study of Possible Deterrents to Use of
Motion Pictures Within a School System Where Films
and Facilities for Use Were Provided.” Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington,
1952.

 

Kant, Immanuel. ”Critique of Pure Reason,” Kant Presented by

Julien Benda. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1940.

98

Kelley, Earl C. Education for What Is Real. New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1947.

 

Kelley, Galen B. ”An Analysis of Teachers' Attitudes Toward
he Use of Audiovisual Materials.” Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, Boston University, 1959.

”A Study of Teachers' Attitudes Toward Audiovisual
Materials,” Education Screen and Audio—Visual Guide,
Vol. 39 (March, 1960), pp. 119—121.

 

Lecky, Prescott. Self—Consistency. New York: Island
Press, 1945.

 

Miller, Neal E. (ed.). Graphic Communication. Washington,
D Department of Audiovisual Instruction,
National Education Association, 1957.

Nerden, Joseph T. ”A Study of Factors Related to the Use
of Motion Picture Film by Public School Teachers.”
Unpublished Doctor's thesis, Yale University, New
Haven, 1954.

Rogers, Carl. Client-Centered Therapy. Boston: Houghton—
Mifflin Company, 1951.

 

Snygg, Donald and Combs, Arthur W. Individual Behavior.
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1949.

 

Individual Behavior. Rev. Ed. New York: Harper
and Brothers, 1959.

 

APPENDIX A

INSTRUMENT MATERIALS

Instructions for Administration
Sample of Pilot Instrument
Sample of Final Instrument

 

 

 

100

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE

INDEX OF AUDIOVISUAL VALUES

I. Points to be Covered in Introduction

A. This research project is being conducted under the
auspices of the Audiovisual Center at Michigan State
University.

B. The purpose of this study is not to evaluate the
Audiovisual Program in the
This study could have been conducted in any schOol
system with an active program. The purpose is to
find out if this is an effective way to find out
how teachers feel about the various aspects of an
audiovisual program. (Read Paragraph at top of
Page 1.

C. For this reason accurate responses are needed. All
responses will be confidential. All reporting of
data will be in terms of groups and institutions,
not individuals.

D. Your name is needed on the questionnaire since some
of you may be contacted later for a brief interview.
One question whcih is anonymous is being circulated
separately.

E. Have them count to be sure they all have pages 1
through 9.

 

II. Instructions

A. Read instructions on Page 2, referring to example
on page .

B. Point out that they are to work down the columns
for the 33 items.

C. The questionnaire is in two parts. When you have
completed Part A, you will find the instructions
to Part B on Page 6.
Read them and do Part B. Since there are no average
teachers in this group, the second part is a teach—
nique to get the feelings of the average teacher in
your school. Other studies have shown this technique
to be more effective than the well known numerical
average for this purpose.

D. There are some small corrections:
Page 1 —— (see copy) Check at least one if applicable.
Page 3 -— Column 1, response #4 add ”of".
Page 6 -- 2nd paragraph, 2nd line, change' 'college”

to "school.

III.

01>

Things to Watch for:

Frustration, prod them gently.
Impossible answers (1 l 1). Try to
it, e. g. ”Let's see what you have
They can complete front page before
of instrument.

Have principals identify themselves
naire.

lOl

help them see
said.”
or after body

on the question—

 

 

 

102

monsoaefian

cos asaan no cononecoo

oHowHHm>m wQanmEHHn
pom mEHHn no handmaa

oaomHHm>m mnflnmeHnn
UCw mEHHn no hpoanm>

pop:m3 Con;

wasnsooss no soafiaosaassa

ooa>now pomuasmcoo

Emnwonn one no mononnsn

 

Conwn>oao9 no me "mqmz<xm

 

 

IIIWII : .lllmll

oEHp one no who: .m oEHn esp no who: .m
oEHp oxfla nose nno> .m oEHo

one no Hoop @000 .a oxflq .: one no Hemp poem :
oEHp one oxflfimflp oEHo

no nfisn osoo< .m soc oxafi soeoaoz .m can no naps ssooa .m

nafiwCOAmwooo .m oxHHmHQ .m kHHoCOHmmooo .m

Eonfiom .H oxflamflb nose Ngone .H Eopflom .H

aOQdSUOpw daooflom oopwswopw ma

on Ufisosm monpwfl
Inopomnmflo omonp no
some o>onaon 50%
on oEHp oflp no
flosE Son «naawopH

95o» CH.Emnwonn Hodmfl>

loapsm one no moan
ImHnoeomnmno omonp no
Loco no newswopm ogp

poops noon son on son

Hoozom nson CH Ewnw
Iona HQSmH>oH©sm why
no monpwflnopomnmno
monsoaflon one no
homo o>oaaop son Op
oEHp esp no SosE 3oz

 

HHH CESHOO

HH CESHOO

H CESHoo

Emnwonn

ecu no onpmnsopomnmco

 

WMDQ<> H<DmH>OHQD< mo NMQZH

103

mamfinopms camp
coonooon no nonnnoonno><

moapnooon onmp
Eoonmmmao non oonmn>onn

pomegnsoo pom mamnnopms
no owHLOpm non COAmH>onn

A.ouo qmuonpso

HmonnpOOHo .pCoEpmonp pcsom
.conoonnnco> .mononnnoon
mongoxnmp ..w.ov COHQOOhonQ
Eoonmmwao non nonma>onn

nonconnp HmSmH>onpsm pom
mnogomop Coospop mCoHpoHom

nonmznpnooo Harmn>onp5m pcm
mnohomon coo3pop moonpmaom

mnnnomEHHn
pom mEHHn psonm Conn
IssnoncH no nonnnosnno><

ESHSOHnLSO
one on popwaon nHOmOHo
onm mfiwnnonme OHQmHHw><

.3H

ma

.NH

HH

OH

O\

[\

 

Emnmonm

 

cans och no omoz .m cans can no nmoa .m
oEHp oxfla Loss nno> .m oEHp
one no Hoop woos .3 oan .3 can no Home ooow .3
oEHn one oxnnmnp cane
no nae: pson< .m non oxen nospnoz .m esp no namn pson< .m
hfifimconmwooo .m oxHHmHQ .m nnamoonmwooo .m
Eopflom .H oxnflmnp nose knno> .H Eopaom .H
HHH oasaoo HH oSofioo H oasaoo

one no onpmnnopomnmno

 

mMDH<> Q<DmH>OHQD< mo XMQZH

n onon -- m omen

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 

104

mnoLOHOp no
meHnonmE no on; o>nnoonnm

mHoHnonmE no nnonnw> onmnnnonn

Ina cw no wnocomou an on:

monnomsnnn
coo mannn no nannnssnno><

AnOpooHonn

osomno .nonooHonn QHnnmEHHn
Ioanm .mnOpoowonn onspOHQ
connoE ..w.ov ncoEnnsoo
oonooonono no nonnnoonns><

mnopnooon onmn Eco mcgmnm
-oconn no nnnnnosnns><

A.ono nmmcHnooE .mnozooon
.momnsoo Hozmn>onp5m .mnonm
Ignoz ..w.ov moroHCLOOp

who mHmHnonmE zoo poops
anOH on monnHosnnonno

on: EoonmmoHo
ononop meHnonmE nmo:
no 3oH> on anCSQnonno

Hm

ON

0H

-

wH

.HH

.mH

mn

 

Ewnwonn

 

oEHp oLp no nmoz .m oEHp onp no nmoz m
oEHp oxHH nosE nno> .m oEHn
ohp no Hmop poow .3 oxHq .3 opp no Hwop woos .3
oEHn one oxHHmHU oEHn
no nHmz pson< .m noc oxHH noanoz .m one no nHmc psop< .m
HHHmCOHmmooo m oxHHmHQ .m nHHmCOHmmooo .m
EopHom H oxHHme nose nno> .H EOCHom .H
HHH QESHOQ HH CESHOO H CESHOO

one no onnwnnopomnwco

 

mMDH<> H<DWH>OHQD< no NMQZH H nnwn II m wwmn

 

"‘4

105

AmnnnmeHHn pCm qmopHHw
.mEHHn ..w.ov meHnome
popoomonn no on: _mnocomoe

nonoowong

oodmno .nonoomonn QHnnm
IEHHnIopHHm .nOpoomonn on5n
Ionn ConpoE q.wdv pcoennsoo
COHpoowonn no ow: _mno£omoe

mnopnooon onmn poo
mcnwnmococn no om: .mnozomoe

moronccoon pom mHmHnopoE 3o:
. prone cnmoH on moHpHCSp
Inonno no mnofiowop an own

ems Eoon

ImmmHo ononop wHonnonmE
noon no 3oH> on monnncsn
Inonno no mnonowon n9 om:

moanm no connwnwnonn CH
mnCopSnm no ow: _wno£omoe

nocnmoH esp on oSHm>

mm

Hm

mm

mm

3m

.mm

.mm

 

oEHp one no who:
oEHn

opp no Hwop poow
oEHn onp

no nHms pson<
HHHwQOHmmooo
EopHom

.m cane one no omoz .

oxHH £055 nno>

3 oRHH .

oxHHmHU

m nos oxHH noanoz
m
H

oEHp

onn no Hoop pooo .
oEHp

o£n no nHms psop< .
HHHHCOwaooo .
EopHom

Ewnwonn

oxHHmHQ .
oxHHme nose nno> .

Homo :I'Lfl
Hmm :I' LO

 

HHH QESHOO

HH CEsHoo H cEsHoo

ocn no onnwnnopomnwco

 

mmpq<> H<DmH>OHQD< no MMQZH H pnmn II 3 Oman

 

106

moonsw ESHSOHnnzo

 

 

on mHmHnonmE no wcnnmnq .3m
mOHmnmo
_mennonoE no om: _mno£owoe .mm
noncoan Hmsmn>
IOHpsm no om: .mnocoooB .mm
nonmchnooO Hmsmn>
Ionpzo no end _mno£omoB .Hm
meHnome HoSmH>oHpsm
no on: onn CH oocmnmnmmm
enroom on monnncsnnonno .om
poosnnsoo no Conpnpooo .mm
oEHn one no pmoz m oEHn one no nmoz .m
oEHp oxHH cosE nno> m oEHp
esp no Hmop boom 3 oan 3 onn no Hoop boom 3
oEHp onn oxHHme oEHn Emnwonn
no nHos nson< m no: oxHH noSnHoz m one no nHmL pson< .m ocn no onpmnnonoonono
HHHmoonwmooo m oxHHwHQ m nHHmoonmmooo m
EocHom H oxHHme Loss nno> H EopHom .H
HHH CEBHOU HH QESHOO H QESHOO

 

mm3q<> Q<DmH>OHQD< no XMQZH

H onon .. m omen

107

INDEX OF AUDIOVISUAL VALUES

This study is concerned with understanding-how teachers
view audio-visual programs and their contribution to the learn—
ing environment. By completing this instrument you will be
providing information which may very well help to improve
audiovisual programs and their services to teachers in the
public schools of Michigan.

All responses are in strictest confidence. Report of
data is to be in terms of groups and institutions, not
individuals. Thank you for your assistance.

 

 

Name:

School:

Sex Years of Experience Age Bracket: 20—30 ( )30-45
40 and over

Undergraduate major:

 

Courses in teaching methods in undergraduate program:
How many?

 

Course in audiovisual methods: (yes) (no)
Workshop in audiovisual methods: (yes) (no)
In—service training in audiovisual methods: (yes) (no)

Number of educators in immediate family:
(Father, Mother, Brother, Sister, Other —— check one)

 

Type of Certificate held:

 

Present grade taught:

 

Number of years in this school:

 

As you see them, what are the major problems or shortcomings
which need attention in the audiovisual program as it is now
operating?

What are the strong points of the program?

 

108

PART A—-DIRECTIONS

On the following five pages is a list of 33 character-
istics associated with the audiovisual program in your school.
Please examine each characteristic as it applies to the audio—
visual program in your school. Then do three things with each
of the characteristics:

First,

Second,

Third,

in column I, describe how the audiovisual program
appears to be at this time in terms of these
characteristics. To do so decide how much of the
time each of the 33 characteristics appears to be
adequate in your school. At the top of column I
is a list of five possible responses. Choose the
response which best describes how much of the
time each characteristic is adequate in our
school. Place the number (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 of the
response which you have chosen in the blank
Opposite each characteristic.

 

 

 

in column II, describe how you feel about the
audiovisual program in your school as it appears
to be at this time. To do so, decide how you
feel about each of the 33 characteristics which
you have described in column I. At the top of
column II is a list of five possible responses.
Choose the one response which best describes

how you feel about each characteristic. Place
the number (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) of the response which
you have chosen in the blank opposite each
characteristic.

in column III, describe how you would like the
audiovisual program in your school to be ideally.
To do so, decide how much of the time each of
the 33 characteristics should ideally be adequate
in your school. At the top of column III is a
list of five possible responses. Choose the
response which best describes how much of the
time each characteristic should ideally be ade-
quate in your school. Place the number (1, 2,

3, 4, 5) of the response which you have chosen
in the blank opposite each characteristic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

EsHsoHnnSO
onp on oonoHon nHomOHo
ono mHoHnopoE oHnoHHo>< .w
w monnnaefln
1 one main no cononocoo .m
oHnoHHm>m mannmeHnn
poo mannn no nonnoso .3
oHpmHno>o mannmeHHn
pom mEHHn no nnonno> .m
bongo; Cons
mHoHnonoE no Hm>Hnn< .m
Eonwonn ocn no momonnsn .H
m 3 3 COHmH>oHon no om: “manz<xm
oEHp ocn no who: .m oEHn one no nmoz .m
oEHn ozn oxHH Lode nno> .m oEHn
no Hoop 6000 .3 oxHq .3 ogn no Hoop oooo .3
oEHp one oxHHmHo oEHn
no nHoc noop< .m nos oxHH noznnoz .m onp no nHwL n509< .m
HHHwoOHmoooo .m oxHHmHQ .m HHHocOHmoooo .m
EooHom .H oxHHme hose nno> .H EooHom .H
nonosoooo on oHsonm oonwsooow mH
Emnwonn HoSmH> oHOOLom nson Hoonom nson CH Eonw
Ionpso onp no menu CH Eonwonn HoSmH> Ionn HoSmH>OHo5o ofln
ImHnonoonono owocn IOHpso one no monp no wonpmHnopoonoLo Eonwonn
no cooo o>oHHop Iwnnopoonmno omosp no moHSOHHon one no onn no onnmnnonoonoco

son on oEHp one no
£058 30: “HHHooUH

homo no noosoooo oSn
poops Hoon son on son

Looo o>oHHoQ son on
oEHn one no Lose 30m

 

HHH CESHOU

HH CESHOO

H CESHOO

 

mmbq<> H<DmH>OHQD< mo XMQZH n< Bm<n

llO

om: EoonmmMHo
ononop mHoHnopoE noon
no 3oH> on HQHCSpnonno

Honnonoa onmp
econooon no nonnnosnns><

monpnooon onop
EoonmmoHo non oonmn>onn

nCoEQHSUo poo mHoHnopoE
no owononm non Conmn>onn

A.ono qmpoHnso

HoonnnooHo npcoEnoono. pcsom
.conoonnoco> .oononnnoon
wcHCoxnoo n.wov COHnoomonn
EoonmmoHo non COHmH>onn

nonconno HosmH>OHpso poo
mnogomon Cooznop moonnoHom

nonocHUnooo HosmH>OHU5o poo
wnogooon Coosnon mCOHnoHom

nonnBaEHnn
pco mEHHn psopo Conn
-osnoncn no nonnnoonnosa

e

3n

Mn

.mH

HH

.0H

d)

N

 

 

mane ooh no omoz .m oEnn one no nooz .m
oEHp oxHH nosE nno> .m oEHp
onn no Hoop @003 .3 oRHH .3 one no Hoop boom .3
oEHn ocp oXHHmHU oEHn Eonwonn
no nHoQ pson< .m nos oxHH nognnoz .m one no nHoh pson< .m one no oHannopoonoLo
HHHoconmoooo .N oxHHmHQ .m HHHooonmoooo .m
EopHow .H oxHHmHC nose nno> .H EooHom .H
HHH QESHOO HH QESHOQ H QESHOO

 

UoSCHpCOo II < Bm<n

nocnmoH on» on osHo> .Hm

lll

mnonomop an
mHmHnonwE no om: o>npoonnm

ON

mHmHnonmE no nuoHno> opmnnn
Ionnno so no mnonooon HQ om: .mH

mnnnnmEHHn
new wEHHn no nunHHQoHHo>< .wH

. Anonoononn
osoono .mnOpoomonQ QanmEHHn
IooHHm .mnonoononn onzponn
connoE ..w.ov psoEQHSUo
eonooonono no nnnnnoonno>< .sn

mnopnooon onon poo mznonw

 

 

-ocono no nonnnoonno>< .on
A.ono .mwcHnooE
1mnocooop nmomnsoo
Ho5mn>onoso .mnozw
Ixnos n.wov wordncnoon
new mHoHnonoE 3o: ozone
GnooH on moHpHcsnnonno .mH
oEHn one no who: .m oEHn onn no poo: .m
oEHn one oxHH nose nno> .m oEHn
no Hoop ooow .3 oan .3 ozn no Hoop pooo .3
oEHn one oxHHme oEHn Eonmonn
no nHon nsop< .m noo oxHH nohnnoz .m ocn no nHo: nsoo< .m ocn no onnmnnonoonoso
HHHmoonmoooo .m oxHHwHQ .m HHHocQHmoooo .m
EOUHom .H oxHHme nose nno> .H EooHom .H
HHH cszHoo HH oESHoo H ossHoo

 

UoSCHpCoo II < Bm<n

112

AmnnnnmEHHn coo .mopHHw
.wEHHn ..w.ov mHmHnonoE
oopoononn no om: .mnocoooe

AnOpoononn

oodwno .nOpoononQ annmEHHn
IopHHm nnoncomonn oLSBOHQ
connoE ..w.ov pcoEQHsoo
connoomonn no om: m_no£oooB

wnoonooon onmn poo
mcnonmocozn no om: .mnoCOwoB

mozdnoooon poo mHonnonoE zoo
poops cnooH on monpnosn
Inonno no mnonooon no om:

om: EoonmmoHo

ononop mHoHnonoE noon no
3oH> on moHnHQSpnonno

no mnonomon n9 ow:

moanm no
COHnonononn CH mucop
I5pm no om: lwnozoooe

Hm

mm

mm

3m

.mm

.mm

 

oEfln one no pmoz
oEHp

on» no Hoop boom
oEHp one

no nHoE pson<
nHHoCOHmoooo
EooHom

oEHn ocn no pmoz
oxHH cosE nno> .m oEHp
oan .3 ocn no Hoop poow

oxHHme oEHp

nos oxHH nocpnoz .m one no nHoz pson<
oxnnmno .m nnnoconooooo .

oxHHmHo nose nno> .H EooHom

Eonmonn

Homo :I' Lfl

 

HHH CESHOO

HH CESHOO H CESHOO

oSn no OHannonoonono

 

poschCoo II < Em<n

113

 

moonsm EstonnnSO
CH mHmHnopoE no wchmHH

wOHmnoo HosmH>
Ionooo no on: .mnogomoe

nonconnp HoSmH>
Ionosm no om: .mnonoooe

nonoonpnooo Hmzmn>
IOHpso no om: m_nocoooB

wHoHnonoE HwSmH>onoso
no om: CH oooonmnmmo
onSOom on monnncsnnonno

nCoEnHSUo no COHancoo

.mm

.mm

.Hm

om

.mm
.mm

 

 

osno oso no poo: m oEnn one no poo: .m
oEHn oxHH SosE nno> .m oEHp
one no Hoop @003 3 oxHH .3 onn no Hooo oooo 3
oEHp onn oxHHmno oEHn
no nHo: psop< m nos oxHH noznnoz .m ogn no nHon noon< .m
HHHoCOHmoooo m oxHHmHQ .m HHHocOHmoooo m
EooHow H oxHHmHo zoos nno> .H EooHom .H
HHH QESHOO HH QESHOO H QESHoo

Emnwonn

ogn no OHpmHnonoonono

 

UoSCHucoo II < Bm<n

.Inlfllriflflluhv cum-J.- ills

 

 

114
PART B—-DIRECTIONS

In the following five pages, you can help us describe
how the average person within your school feels about the
audiovisual program.

In order to represent the views of the average person
within the college, would you complete the following ques—
tionnaire as you think the average person in your own peer
group would complete it for himself. In other words, complete
the questionnaire as you think the average teacher in your
school would fill it out.

 

 

Complete columns I, II, and III of the next five pages
in the same manner in which you did yourself on the previous
five pages.

u”.
|

 

 

115

EsHsoHnnso
onp on popoHon nHomOHo
one mHmHnonoE oHpoHno><

manpwEHnn
one mEHnn no Connncho

oHnoHHo>o wnnnmeHHn
poo mEHnn no anHmsa

oHpoHHo>o mnnnmeHHn
one mannn.no noonno>

connoz cos:
onsnnoooe no nonnnosnns><

Emnwonn onn no momonnsn

o

 

oEHn oSp no poo: .m
oEHp

ocp no Hoop boom .3
oEHn ozp

no nHoQ pson< .m

HHHoQOHwoooO .m

EopHom .H

oxHH cosE nno> .
oxHH

oxHHmHU

no: oxHH noEpHoz
oxHHmHm .

oxHHwHU nose nno>

HCUW) 3WD

osno one no oooz .
osno

ooo no Hoop oooo
osno

one no nHoc nsop<
HHHooonwoooo

EOUme .

fiKUW)-¢ m

 

oopmsoopo on pHsocm
Eonwonn HoSmH>
IOHUSo ocn no monnmn
Inopownoco wcHSOHHon
one no cooo o>oHHop
Comnon owono>o one
moon oEHp ocn no
cosE 30S “HHHooUH

nEonmonn,Ho5mH>
IOHpso ohn no mOHn
Imnnonoonogo owogn
no homo no noosoooo
one nsopo Hoon noonm
noon noon CH comnon
owono>o one moon so:

nonosoooo on
Eonwonn HmSmH>OH©5o
one no monnmnnop

Iconoco wCHBOHHon one
no Sooo o>oHHoQ noonw

noon noon on Com

Inon owono>o osn moon

oEHn onp no LosE 30m

 

HHH CESHOO

HH QESHOO

H CESHOQ

Eonwonn
ocn no onnmnnonoonono

 

pHsoz nsonw

XMQZH WMDH<> H<DmH>OHDD<

.nHomEHQ non pH onoHnEoo

“m Bm<n

noon nson CH Comnon owono>o one o>oHHoQ son mo ponoHnEoo on QB

 

116

om:
EoonmmoHo ononop mHmHnome
noon no zon> on anCSpnomno

meHnopoE onop
oopnooon no anHHQmHHo><

wcHonooon onwn
EoonmmoHo non oonmn>onn

noosnnsoo poo mHoHnonoE
no owmnonm non oonmn>onn

A.ono .mnoHpso

HoonnnooHo .pCoEnmonn pcsom
.oonnoHHnoo> .monnanoon
monsoxnoo ..m.ov Connoowonn
Eoonmmmno non Conmn>onn

nonconnp HoSmH>onp5o coo
mnonooon Cooznop moonnoHom

nonocHonooo HoSmH>onp5o poo
mnonooon Cooznop chHpoHom

monsoosnnn
poo mEHHn psono Conn
-ossonen no nnnnnosnnssa

.3H

.MH

.NH

HH

OH

CO

[\.

 

 

Ln

 

oEHn ocn no who: u oEHn one no nmoz

oEHp oxHH nose nno> .m oEHn
onn no Hoop poow .3 oxHq .3 onp no Hooo pooo .3

mans ono oannono osno Esnoonn
no nHon nson< .m no: oxHH nonnHoz .m osp no nHog ndoo< .m one no oHpmHnonoonoco
HHHoQOHmoooo .m oxHHmHQ .m HHHooOHmoooo .m
EOUHom .H oxHHmHo floss knno> .H EopHom .H
HHH CESHoo HH CESHOQ H CESHOO

 

poschcoo II m Bm<n

117

nocnooH ocp on ozHo>

mnocooon n9
meHnome no on: o>npoonnm

mHonnonwE no nponnw> opmnnn
Ionnno Co no mnoCOoop n9 owb

mannmeHHn poo
msnnn no nnnnnsonns><

“noncomonn

osoono .nonoomonn nnnnmEHHn
IopHHm nmnonoononn onSQOHQ
connoE ..m.ov nCoEQnsoo
sonooomono no nonnnosnno><

mnocnooon onop pco mflnonw
-ocoeo no nonnnnonno><

A.ono qmmcnnooE
mnocooon .momnsoo
HoSmH>Oszo .wnozm
Ixnos q.mov mosoncsoon
poo mHoHnonoE 3o: nsopo

.HN

ON

0H

wH

NH

0H

 

 

cnooH on moHnHCSpnonQo .
oEHn ocp no nmoz .m oEHp ocp no nmoz .m
oEHp oxHH nosE Hno> .m oEHp
o£p no Hoop boom .3 oxHH .3 ocp no Hoop @000 .3
oEHn ocn oxHHme oEHp Eonmonn
no nHoQ nsop< .m no: oxHH nonnnoz .m onn no nHoc psop< .m one no OHannopoonono
HHHoCOHmoooo .m oxHHmHQ .m HHHocOHmoooo .m
EopHom .H oxHHmHU Lose nno> .H EooHom .H
HHH CESHOO HH EESHOO H CESHOQ

 

UoSQHpnoo II m Bm<n

. 4 if! ..
5.4.2.1 rrwi Lorri .é
. Ira-WI.
..I...I. .
L ....
Urns. ..
writ

. . .Fwtnll... ..
. q, tilting“

:....

 

 

 

118

AmannmeHnn p:o .moUHHm
.wEHHn ..w.ov wHonnopoE
popoomonn no om5 _wno:ooo9

AnOpoononn

o5oono .nonoononn nnnmeHnn
IopHHm .nonoononn on5ponn
:onnoE ..w.ov n:oEQH5oo :oHn
Ioomonn no om5 .mnocoooe

mnoonooon onon p:o mLQonw
Io:o:n no om5 _mno:omoB

moson::oon oco meHnonoE 3o:
n5opo :nooH on monpn:5n
Inonno no mno:ooop no omb

om5 Eoon

ImmoHo ononon mHoHnopoE
noo: no 3oH> on monpn:5n
Inonno no mno:ooon nn om:

mooHHm no
:OHnonononQ :H wn:op
I5nm no om5 m_no:oooH

0

pm

.mm

.mm

.3m

.mm

.mm

 

oEHp o:n no poo:
oEHn

o:p no Hoop boom
oEHp o:n

no nHo: @5024
HHHo:OHmoooo
EooHom

oEHn o:n no poo: .
oxHH :o5E nno> .m oEHp
oan .3 onp no Hoop oooo .
oxHHmHU oEHn Eonwonn
no: oxHH no:nnoz .m o:n no nHo: n5op<
oxHHan .m HHHo:OHmoooo .
Cannons nose Conn .n soenom

I—Imm if L(\

 

HHH :E5Hoo

HH :E5Hoo H :E5Hoo

o:n no onpmnnonoonono

 

Uo5:Hp:oo II m Bm<n

 

 

119

 

moonsw EsasonnnSo
an mHMflnome no anpwHA

monwpmo mnwnnmuwe
no om: .mnocowme

nonoonno Hmsmn>
Ionosw no om: ,mnwnomoB

nonmcflonooo Hmsmfl>
uOnUSm no om: .mnonowoe

mawnnopwE HwSmH>onosm
no on: ogp :n mocwpmflmmm
onSomm op mmnnHCSpnogmo

psoEQHSUo no Conpnocoo

mm

mm

Am

.om

.mm
.mm

 

Emnwonn

 

oEnn ozp no pmo: m oEHp ogp no poo: .m
oEHp mxfln zosa nno> .m oEHn
mnp no Homo ooow : oxflq .: mnp no Homo boos .:
wenp oxHHmHo oEnp
no nams psop< m noc oxfla noSnHoz .m ocp no nnmg psop< .m
nHchonmmooo m oxHHmHQ .m nHHmConmwooo .m
Eooaom H oxHHmno nose nno> .H Eoonom .H
HHH CESHoo HH cesfioo H QEdnoo

ogp no onpmnnmnomnmco

 

U®SCHPCOO In m Em<m

APPENDIX B

INTERVIEW MATERIALS

Interview Instructions
Interview Schedule

121

INSTRUCTIONS FOR: AUDIOVISUAL INTERVIEW

In the School System and, therefore, in

this study the term Audiovisual Materials refers to
films, filmstrips, and disc and tape recordings. Thus
the program consists of the supplying of these materials,
distribution of them and the provision of the necessary
equipment and facilities for their use. This is a

narrow meaning for the term Audiovisual Materials, but

it is nevertheless the context within which the interview
should operate. In most other school systems this term
has a much broader meaning which includes other materials
and services. These are available in but
from varying sources. In order to narrow the investiga—
tion this limited meaning of the term has been accepted
for the study.

Should the interviewee get way off the track you might
point this out. However, if he varies from this context
slightly, it is understandable, due to the broader meaning
usually understood for the term. In such a case, do not
make an issue of the departure.

It can be pointed out that the purpose of the study is

not to study individuals, schools, or the

System for purposes of evaluation. The interest here is

to study methods of finding out teachers' attitudes

toward such programs. All reporting will be in terms of
groups or institutions, both of which will remain anonymous
as will individual identities.

Those questions which appear quite personal have, as their
purpose, the defining of characteristics of the program
only. You will notice some concern with self—other pat—
terns here. These are to be generalized to institutions
in the reporting.

Either read the opening paragraphs or cover the same points
in your own words. You may find the above information
helpful in introducing the interview, or in answering
questions during or after the interview. You will inter—
view only the teachers. The principals will be interviewed
by someone else.

Try for specific answers (e. g., No or Yes, More or Less).
Use answers such as (Sometimes or about the same only as

a last resort). The real import of the interview will

lie in the commentary which is evoked after the committal.
Prod them gently but firmly. Do not put words in their

122

mouths. Encourage them to amplify any answer they wish
to make more clear. Go for ”Quotes.” If possible,
verbatim recording is desirable. However, there is no
need for the interviewee to go on indefinitely. This is
pretty much in your hands. Short, succinct answers
which are well thOughtthrough will give the best results.
Push for this type of response if you can get it. If
they become verbose don't try to get everything, but get
the salient thoughts.

If you need additional room for recording of responses
write on back of sheet, labeling the response clearly.

Keep the interview to 30 minutes, or less, if possible.
This will be necessary where subsequent interviews are
scheduled.

After the interviewee has left, write on the interview
form the identifying code which accompanies the name on
the list. This number will be a letter and a number,
such as: Bl, H6, D13, etc.

 

 

123

AUDIOVISUAL INTERVIEW

This study is being conducted under the auspices of the Audio-
visual Center at Michigan State University. The directors of
the project feel that more and better information may be
acquired by an interview than was originally secured from the
questionnaire which you filled out earlier.

The results of the interview will be completely anonymous
since your name will not appear on the sheet. By supplying
this information, you may very well be helping to improve
the audiovisual programs and their services to teachers, in
the public schools in Michigan.

The following questions are designed to find out how you
feel about the audiovisual service in your school.

1. Teachers do not agree in their feelings about audiovisual
materials. Where would you place yourself on this scale?
(We are not seeking your endorsement. We want your real

 

opinion.)

2 .L z i l
Full Use them Not much faith
Encorsement when appropriate in them

Why do you feel this way?

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. How often do you use:

filmstrips? 1. Almost daily A. 1—2 times
films? 2. Weekly yearly
recordings? 3. At least once 5. Never used

each month

 

3.

\Il

124

(a) Do others tend to use these materials more or less fre-
quently than you? More Same Less
(If more or less) Why?

 

 

 

(b) Does the principal encourage or discourage heavy use
of Audiovisual materials? Encourage Discourage
Would you care to explain?

 

 

 

Should teachers make greater or less use of Audiovisual
materials than they do now? More Same Less
Other Would you care to explain?

 

 

 

 

(a) Are the audiovisual materials you have at your dis-
posal good or not? Yes No Please explain.

 

 

 

(b) Do they do the job you want them to do? Yes No__
Please explain.

 

 

 

(c) Are they in good or poor condition? Good Poor
Please explain.

 

 

 

U1

125

Do you have an adequate selection from which to choose
or not? Please explain. (Engourage them to break
them down into films, filmstrips, and recordings, if
they wish.)

 

 

 

Do you feel that the teachers in your school use
these materials to their best advantage or not?
Yes No Sometimes Don't Know

Do you feel that your own use of these materials is
satisfactory or not? Yes No Can your use be
improved? Yes No '___ '_—_

If Yes, How? _—_

 

 

 

Do you think most teachers would like to use them
more or are they satisfied with their rate of use?
Desire more use Satisfied Desire less use___
(If more) Why donTt they use them more?

 

 

 

Are these materials always available when you want
them? Yes No (If No) Why do you think they
are not available?

 

 

 

Do they arrive when you want to use them? Yes
No Sometimes (If hot on time) Why not?

 

 

 

V

126

Is theequipment available and operable when you need
it? Yes No (If No) Why not?

 

 

 

v

Is there a need for more equipment than you presently
have at your disposal? Yes __ No (If Yes) What?
and How much?

 

 

 

V

Do you feel that these materials do certain things
better than the teacher can do them? Yes No '
(If Yes ) What? How? (If No)Why not? :

 

 

 

V

What do you feel is the real function of Audiovisual
materials in the classroom?

 

 

 

V

We've been talking indirectly about the strong and
weak points of the Audiovisual program. What do you
feel are the strong eatures, if any, of the program?

 

 

 

v

What problems do you see in the program which need
attention?

 

 

 

10.

127

Do you feel those can be solved? Yes No
How? or Why not?

 

 

 

Have you tried anything new in the way of Audiovisual
use this year? Yes No (If yes) What? Where
did you get the idea?

 

 

 

Do your fellow teachers ever try new ideas and tech-
niques? Yes No (If yes) Where do you think
they get their ideas? (If no) Why not?

 

 

 

Have you ever tried something one of your colleagues
recommended to you? Yes No (If yes) What?

 

 

 

 

 

"7'11IIIEIWIII'III