Instructional Television: a Comparative Study Of
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
, DOCUMENT RESUME M 138 242 IR 004 630 TITLE ,Instructional Television: A Comparative Study of ' Satellites and Other Delivery Systems. FiDa) ,Report.' INSTITUTION Syracuse Univ. Research Corp., N.Y.Educational Policy Research Center. SPONS AGENCY National Inst. of Education (DHEW) ,Washington, D.C. REPORT NG SRC-TR76-596 PUB DATE Nov 76 CONTRACT 11E-c-74-0145 ' NOTE 303p. EDRS PRICE MF-$0.83 HC-$16.73 Plus Postage. DECRIPTORS Airborne Televi,sion; Cable Television;*Communication Satellites; *Comparative Analysis; *Cost Effectiveness; *Educational Television; Experimental Programs; Pubr.'d Telerision;*Television,Research IDENTIFIERS EducationzU Satellite Communication Demonstration ABSTRACT This report summarizes the results of a twoyear 'investigation into the feasibility of usingtelecommunications satelliteg'for educational purposes coi.paredwith the use of other' delivery systems. Different systems emerge aspreferable depending upon such circumgtances astopography, number, and geographic . distribution of participants, and/the number of hours tobe supplied. The Executive Summary provides an overview anCconclusions about the costs of providing InstructionalTelevision.(ITV) by satellite as opposea to :non-gatellite systems; an examinationof the resUlts of several special studies indluding one on theimpact of the new copyright legislation; implications ofthe forthcoming Worad Allied Radio Conferences; and a variqt,y ofnon-cost,variables. Itincludes also a brief review of the EducationalSatellite Communication Demonstration and a summary of the find:ngfrom a-beries of case A studies reviewing different possiblepatte'rns of,ITV delivery and usage. The repaining twp chapterspresent an.indepth cost analysis of delivery system performance,and the findings from.a. set of case .' studies examinidg characteristicsof exisiing systems in various settings: Appendices include cost components,derivation of ' comparative costequations gnd notes on the revised copyrightlaw. (WBC) --.1c********************************************* * Documents acuired by.ERIC include manyinformal unpublished, * materials not available from other sources.ERIC.makes every effort,* * to obtain the bestCopy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal * reproducibility'are often elthountered andthis affects the'quality * * of the microfiche and hardcopyreproductions ERIC makes available * :°,1e via'the ERIC Document Reproduction4Service (EDRS). EDRSis not * responsible for the quality ofthe original document. Reproductions *' * supplied by EDRS aret-re best that can be made from theoriginal. '*******************,*****************************************************- , U S OEPARTMENT 0 HEALTH, EOUCAtIONO.WELFARE ("NJ NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CO EOUCAT1ON THIS, DOCUMENT HA S BEEN REPRO- Pr. SRCS=TR76 -596 DUCED E-OACTLY A5 RECEIVED FRO.V November 1976 THE.PERSON OR ORGANiZATIONOPIGIN rt' POINTS Of V,ENqu STATED DO NO1 NECESSARav RuppE. s C=11 SENT OFt ocHAL. NAT ONAL. rNST tut F..oa EDUCAT ON POSITIO( OW POLICY INSTRUCTIONAL TELEVISION: 'A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SATELLITES AND OTHER DELLVERY'SYSTEMS Ir Final Report,' Contract No. NIE C-74-0145 Prepared for The.National Institute of Education , 1200 NineteenthStreet, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20208-' Prepared by br) The. Educational.Policy Research Center * IP C) , 'Syracuse Research COrporation. MerIll LaneSyracuse, New York'', 3210Telephone (315).425-5100 2 PREFACE Two years ago th7 Educational POlicy Research Center began asYstematic analysis of the wayjin which satellites couldbeIeSt used-÷if at all--for educati nal purposes. e were aware that many, pexhps most,of the previotis studies of the educational uses of sophisticated technologies havetended to concentrate on the technologies themselves, not onthe educational pro- cesses and Impacts of th'e uses 6f.those technologies, Accordingly, we have attempted to make sure that educational considerations and criteria shaped our analysis. Our.Troject actually evolved into two quite different, tl-oughrelated, First, we were charged with conducting a study and dodumentatioh of . tasks. thelEducati.mal.SatelLite Communications Demonstration (ESCD).'project, a multi-million dollar, federally.funded demonstration Of the possible educa- tional uses of telecommunication satellites.',Our goal was to pl-ovide documencation on what actually transpired, as well as to discoverlessons that could be learned from this experience. The bulk of onr fesources were allocated to-this-effort. Our second task was to deVelop a more generalizedandlysi--one not '- .1tmited to the'ESCD context--of the potentiaf educaLionalrole pf satellites. Toward this.end we created whatis essentially a.comparativeanalysis of alternative ways to make instructional televisiorravailable toleargers: satellites; cable; public television; instructional televisionfixed service;, and the.distribution of vadeetapes and videocassette§. Eafly ir our.analysis , , -. it b'ecame clear that none f these methods of delivering instructional tee- vision-Was ,-,Ring tcvetherge as'elear3y superior to the othersfOr all possible A.- 'uses or 'Users. Therefore,.we have examined these delivery.modesin order to deterlie their comparative.advantagesand disadvantages; placing special P'S emphasis on cost, c6hsiderations. ".5-:( t`s pre Our Am subMitteid to the2National Pdstitute of. Fduation in January, oun findings with respect to theESCD. This Final Report is concerned primarily.withthe comparative analysis. There are% however, a number pf references tothe Educational Satellite CommUpications Demonstration, since:itconsti.tti6ed an important source 0 relevant information. We have included a brief summary of findings fllom the earlier report.in the Executive Summary of the present report. -; q. We are in debt to a greatanyl people. for advice ,ind asSiStance during the course of this projecly and it isnotpossible to name all of them. variety of the,dirferent I fact, it iA difficult to 'even list\the range and agenCies and inatitutiont' with whicfi wedealt.' "The EPRC research team included 'thefollowing: Laurence B. DeWitt, PtO)ect .Director Fred D. Baldwin Steven Porter John Hudder Augustus Root Peter White Laurence F. :Kinney Naomi White- Emily E. Haynes Thomas Carroll. - TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 Page INTRODUCTION 1 . 3 , tHAPTER,ONE: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY cs Backgtound --- - -- 9 Cost AnalysS . , : Noa)n-st Considerarions : 29 Educational Satellite CommuntcatiOns Demonstration 43 Case Studies. 57' : -A! CRAFTER TWO: ITV DELIVERY SYSTEMS-ESTIMATING AND COMPARING COSTS . ' 61 ) In'troductiOn- 63 The Cost:Estimation Model-The Complete Model. 67 Comparative Cost Model 91 . , 107 . Extensions of the -Basic COmparative Model, SelecVd Topics 115 SummqTy. 123 .., CHAPTER THREE: A COST-SERVICE STUDY 0 INE SELECT.ED ITV SYSTEMS .. 127' ,-. 129 ' Introduction i . 135 Caae Studies. ., . ... ...... .... ..... I. Instructional Television Center, , 'Aichdioc(_.se of-N9w York 135 ,T.I. '.The Catholic Television Network of Chicago 153 . III. Broward County, Florida . 165. IV. WVIZ, .Cleveland 173 V. Thstructional Resource Center, School board of Washington, HagerstoWn, MaryLand . 195 The Instructional Materials Service.Intermediate . 211- Unit #14, Berks, County, Pennsylvania . The Clarion Manor System 223 VIII. TheStanford ITV Network 229 245 IX., University of Sogtherm California -Summary-and-Conclusions'. APPENDIX A Cost Components' 265 APPENDIX B - Derivinrg Compaiative Cost Equations 281 287 APPENDIX,-C.- Notes'on.the Revisod Copyright Law . .3 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of a two year inVestigation.by.the Educationat P,oliey.Research Center (EPRC) into the feasibility of Using tele- .. communiCationSsatellites f.or educational purposes. Much of our work, parti- , cuLarly during tliefirst year and a:half, was directed:towards a studyof\the operation an1.s..impl4Cat1Ons'Of, thc Educational Satellite Communications .DemonstratOn (ESCD). Tha results of this study were-presented in .our Annual 1 4 RepOrtwhichwas submitted to the National Institut,2 of Education in January 4976 ahd is.sutmarized briafty 'within this report. Since that time we have. - tOcused Oh' q.:-1 examination of the comparative advantages and disadvantages of,'. ,of d'elivering instructional television .(17....V) by satellite as opposed todelivering it. by some othermeans, su..ch as cable, pliblic.television0 mailedvideotapes, and.mjcroave broadcasting. For the ,Iart we viewedcthese systems as, equiValent in terms oT their utility to educatOr and students: they are simply alternative ways of getting ITV tO plices of instruction. However, ))) ;there are in facC sbme dIfferences among thesedelivery systems with respect to such potentially important factors astwo-way communication capability , andT.flexibi.lity with regard to instructor contr=ol over-what programs are Viewed and When they are 'viewed.' We haVe also examinedseveral "hybrid" systems which use two or more delivery systems.(i.e.,satellite broadcasting with local distribution by cable) to reach the final Users. 4.t :.The central purpose of our studY has beeno delineate the'circumstances ' under which satellites appear to be a vi4b1e meansfor making ITV available. Our approach-has been one of "putting satellites into competitionwith alter- native delivery systems" and seeing which one or ones emerge asoptimal in terMs of both cost and non-cost ConSiderations. Unfortunately for our analysis, this 1-as not been a simple-matter, and are.unable to say.that one systeM is in all cases better than another. Some systems