INFORMATION TO USERS

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Com pany 300 North Z e eb R oad. Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 -1 3 4 6 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600

Order Number 9211217

Commercial media in public education: Conflicting values in the Channel One controversy

Sears, Anne, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1991

UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Aibor, MI 48106

COMMERCIAL MEDIA IN PUBLIC EDUCATION:

CONFLICTING VALUES IN THE CHANNEL ONE CONTROVERSY

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of

Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

Anne Sears, B.A., M.A.

* * * * *

The Ohio State University

1991

Dissertation Committee: Approved by

Thomas A. McCain

Donald J. Cegala Adviser Rohan Samarajiva Department of Communication ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications (CAST) is

gratefully acknowledged for its financial support to conduct the survey.

To Thom McCain, thank you for understanding how I think and allowing

me to develop those strengths more fully. To Don Cegala, thank your for letting

me follow interests and helping clarify them. To Rohan Samarajiva, thank you for the perspective you've given me on the policy process.

To my parents, Bill and Virginia Sears, thank you for all of the support you've given me which helped in my pursuit of this goal. Finally, to Scott

Patterson, your unfailing friendship helped see me through this difficult process. Thank you.

h VITA

December 23, 1962 Bom - Kiowa, Kansas

1984...... A.S., Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas

1985 B.A., Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas

1987 M.A., University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut

1987-1990 Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Communication, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1990-1991 Lecturer, Telecommunication and Electronic Media, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

HELD OF STUDY

Major Field: Communication TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments ...... ii V ita...... iii

List of Tables ...... viii

List of Figures...... ix

CHAPTER PAGE

I. THE CHANNEL ONE CONFLICT: PRACTICAL AND THEORETICAL ISSUES...... 1

Statement of the Problem ...... 1 Whittle Communications, Ltd...... 3 Channel One...... 6 Conflict over Channel One...... 12 Whittle Communications Announces Channel One...... 13 Channel One Pilot Test...... 13 Banning Channel One...... 16 Channel One Adapts...... 24 Channel One in Ohio...... 25 Sum m ary ...... 27 Values in Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains...... 28 Communication Technologies in the Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One D om ains...... 31 Communication Technologies in the Commercial Media Domain...... 31 Communication Technologies in the Public Education Domain...... 34 Communication Technology in the Channel One D om ain...... 38 Sum m ary...... 38 Public Affairs Content in the Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains 39 Public Affairs Content in the Commercial Media D om ain...... 39 Public Affairs Content in the Public Education D om ain...... 43 Public Affairs Content in the Channel One Domain. 45 Sum m ary...... 46 Funding in Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains...... 46 Funding in the Commercial Media Domain 47 Funding in the Public Education Domian 50 Funding in the Channel One Domain...... 52 Sum m ary...... 53 Control in the Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains...... 53 Control in the Commercial Media Domain 54 Control in the Public Education Domain...... 55 Control in the Channel One Domain...... 59 Sum m ary...... 59 Summary of Values in Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains...... 60 Theoretical Dimensions of the Channel One Case... 60 Policies and Values...... 65 Study of the Problem ...... 74

II. M ethod...... 77

Introduction...... 77 Sam ple...... 77 Procedures for Data Collection...... 80 Instrumentation...... 81 Measuring Values...... 82 Communication Technology Value Assessments.... 82. Public Affairs Content Value Assessments 85 Funding Value Assessments...... 86 Control Values...... 89 Summary of Instrumentation Scales...... 91 Channel One Experience...... 91 Professional Roles...... 92

v Pilot Test...... 92 Procedures for Data Analysis...... 93 Channel One Status...... 93 Differences in Role Characteristics...... 95 Differences in Experiences with Channel One 95 Value Assessments...... 98 Value Differences Among Teachers...... 99 Kinds of Value Differences Among Teachers 99 Media and Education Values...... 100 Summary of Data Analysis Procedures...... 100

III. Results...... 102

Introduction...... 102 Differences in Role Characteristics...... 103 Participation in Channel One Decision...... 105 Sources of Information About Channel One 106 Teacher Knowledge and Activity Regarding Channel One...... 108 Reliability of Instrument ...... 110 Commercial Media Domain Factor Analysis 110 Summary of Table Five ...... 113 Public Education Domain Factor Analysis 115 Summary of Table Six ...... 118 Channel One Factor Analysis ...... 118 Summary of Table Seven ...... 121 Summary of Instrument Reliability Issues 121 Differences Between Teachers on Media, Education and Whittle Values...... 121 Discriminant Analysis for Media and Education System s ...... 125 Nature of Differences Between Teachers 129 Media and Education Domain Values Which Account for Channel One Assessments...... 131 Media and Education Values Which Account for Value Assessment of Channel One...... 133 Media and Education Values Which Account for Control of Channel One...... 133 Summary of Results...... 134

IV. Discussion...... 136

Introduction...... 136 Information Accessed by Teachers in Relation to

vi Channel One...... 136 Teachers Values and Value Assessments in the Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains...... 138 Value Differences among Teachers in the Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains...... 139 Value Differences among Teachers in the Commercial Media and Public Education Domains.. 143 Discussion of Theoretical Issues...... 146 Communication Technology, Content, Funding and Control Values...... 146 Communication Technology...... 146 Public Affairs Content...... 147 Funding and Funding Effects...... 148 C ontrol...... 149 Toward a Model of Inter-Institutional Conflict over Communication Technologies...... 149 Limitations and Directions for Future Research 137 Reflections and Interpretations...... 161

NOTES...... 169

APPENDICES...... 172

Appendix A...... 173

REFERENCES...... 186 UST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE

1. Characteristics of teachers in the sample...... 104 2. Participants in Channel One decision ...... 105

3. Sources of information for Ohio teachers...... 107

4. Level of teacher knowledge and activity regarding Channel O ne...... 109

5. Factor loadings of the commercial media domain value item s...... 114

6. Factor loadings of the public education domain value items. 117

7. Factor loadings of the Channel One domain value items.... 120

8. Commercial media, public education and Channel One domain discriminant analysis of teachers in schools with and without Channel One...... 123

9. Pooled within-groups correlation matrix for media, education, and Channel One variables discriminating among teachers in schools with and without Channel One 124

10. Classification of cases using commercial media, public education and Channel One domain discriminant analysis of teachers in schools with and without Channel One 125

11. Summary data for media and education discriminant analysis of teachers in schools with and without Channel One 126

viii 12. Pooled within-groups correlation matrix for media and education values discriminandng among teachers in schools with and without Channel One...... 127

13. Classification of cases using media and education discriminant analysis of teachers in schools with and without Channel One...... 128

14. Mean differences between teachers on the commercial media, public education and Channel One domains 131

15. Summary of stepwise regression results for evaluation of Channel One...... 132

16. Summary of stepwise regression results for Channel One control value...... 133

17. Summary of stepwise regression results for funding effects of Channel One...... 134

ix LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURES PAGE

1. Commercial media, public education and Channel One values and policy issues displayed using Mejone's (1989) core and periphery conceptualization of stability and change in public policies...... 30 2. Commercial media and public education values and policy issues involved in the Channel One debate displayed using Mejone's (1989) core and periphery conceptualization of stability and change in public policies...... 151

3. Channel One's encroachment on public education core values and periphery policies...... 152

4. Economic, political administrative and sociocultural systems v hich propel society...... 153

5. System "crises" which encroach on political and sociocultural values...... 155

x CHAPTER I

The Channel One Conflict: Practical and Theoretical Issues

The introduction of new communication technologies 1 into social life have always been a source of conflict in the Urdted States. Channel One, commercially sponsored television for public schools, was no different. Whitde Communications offered $50,000 worth of television equipment and daily news programming to junior and senior high schools across the country. In return, students were required to watch the news shows and the two minutes of advertisements included in the programs. Immediately following this announcement a number of public interest and professional groups expressed opposition to the plan. Despite the controversy Whittle moved ahead with Channel One.

The conflict over Channel One is of interest to communication scholars for two reasons. First, it was used as a case study from which to gather evidence about how new communication technologies are introduced and implemented into public education. Much has been learned about communication technologies and

1 2 public schools but there is more to understand, especially in relation to the schism which occurs between adoption and use. A consideration of the users' perspective provides insight into why sophisticated communication technologies are so often underutilized or ignored in public education.

Second, much of the resistance to collaborative relationships stems from different assumptions about how the institution of mass media and the institution of public education ought to operate. Deeply entrenched value orientations surfaced in the arguments about the content, technology, funding and control dimensions of

Channel One. The tensions between public schools and communication industries arise from the common institutional goals of transmitting culture and the divergent models through which these two institutions attempt to reach those goals. The media model is based on the notion that a privately controlled, competitive marketplace which uses the newest of communication technologies to deliver a diversity of content about public affairs will best serve the interests of the public.

The education model assumes that the systemization and uniformity afforded by a bureaucracy, free to the user and funded through public taxes, using the personal contact of commonly trained teachers to deliver a curriculum unbiased by external economic or political influences will best serve the interests of students and the larger public. These values are one source of policy conflict among media and education institutions and are reflected through the people who work in them.

Reviewing the history of communication and education institutions provides a context for analyzing current issues surrounding the use of communication technologies in the schools. Innovations in communication technologies force concerns over policies which will stimulate the most beneficial uses of them. The speed and ease of distribution and delivery systems open the possibility for 3 applications previously prohibited due to technical limitations. For example, videotape recorders and satellite and cable transmission allow programs produced in distant locations to be used only hours after completion, but with significantly more flexibility than broadcast television allowed in the past (Romiszowski, 1988).

However, as history warns, technical prowess does not translate directly into effective use of communication technologies in classrooms (Cohen, 1988).

The struggles result, in part, from ignoring the differences in decisions to adopt and the conditions within which the communication technology will be used. A sophisticated communication technology may not be effective or appropriate in certain kinds of organizational environments. For example, Cuban estimates that television use in high school classrooms is limited to the afternoons, by a small proportion of teachers for occasional purposes (1986, p. 49). Cohen suggests that one reason may be the micro-organization of classrooms and the needs teachers have in relation to flexibility and student activity (1988). As Hefzallah notes, the issues of economic support, technical characteristics and the purpose and circumstances of use must be addressed in any communication technology based education project (1990). An understanding of the broader forces motivating the conflict over content, technology, control and funding helps identify recurring questions in the relationships between the institutions of media and education. The present study attempts to untangle both the substantive and theoretical issues involved in the Channel One case.

Whittle Communications. Ltd.

The following section provides details about Whittle Communications as a context for understanding Channel One and the history of the debate surrounding it.

Recognized as an innovator, sometimes even a renegade, Whittle Communications' 4 televised current events project for schools typifies the risks taken by this million dollar company (Burke, 1986; Floating a New Idea..., 1990; Kleinfield, 1989;

Lail* 1990; Pomice, 1989; Walley, 1989). The two strategies which characterize the variety of Whittle projects in the past relate to 1) targeting audiences; and, 2) creating media properties designed to meet the needs of advertisers (Barmash,

1988; Carter, 1989c; DArcy and Whittle..., 1988; Donaton, 1989; Kantrowitz,

1988; McDowell, 1989a, c; Perry, 1988; Sheets, 1988; Zuckerman, 1988). The development of Whittle properties involves finding a public place where people are forced to wait, defining the kinds of products and advertisements associated with those waiting places and then developing informational content which fits with the advertising concept (Blau, 1989; Book Reviewers..., 1989; Dougherty, 1986a;

Gilbert, 1989; McDowell, 1989b; This Chapter Paid for by..., 1989). "Space based" media products attract people who wait in places such as doctors' offices, laundromats, hair salons and schools. For example, hair products are advertised in magazines which focus on beauty and hair care and are provided free of charge to hair salons which agree to limit other media in their waiting areas. Advertisers are also guaranteed category exclusivity so that only one brand in a product category will be featured in a media property (Hammer, 1990). For example, commercials for Levi jeans would not appear in a magazine with ads for Guess jeans. Using these principles of space based target marketing and advertising category exclusivity, Whittle grew into a million dollar company within a decade (Whittle

Communications History and Background, a).

The history of Whittle Communications Ltd. is as unconventional as its products^. Chris Whittle and friends at the University of Tennessee began a campus magazine in 1969. After going deep into debt without being able to turn the business around, a local Nissan dealer offered to finance the magazine and become its sole advertising sponsor. Eventually, the company became 13-30, named after the age group to which products were targeted. Two partners dropped out but

Whittle and Phillip Moffett searched for new media properties to develop

(Kleinfeld, 1990). They bought the failing Esquire magazine in 1979 and revived it (Daniels, 1987; Dougherty, 1986b; Fabrikant, 1988b; Henry, 1983). Due to personal differences in vision Whitde and Moffett split their holdings in 1986 and dissolved 13-30. Whittle renamed his half Whittle Communications, Ltd. and continued to develop the target marketing concepts upon which 13-30 was based.

(Bradley, 1986; Lumbye, 1986).

Whittle's message gained so much attention from the media establishment, that Time, Inc. took notice (Rothenberg, 1990a). William Rukeyser, managing editor of Fortune and 21 year veteran of Time moved to Whittle in March, 1988

(Cuff, 1987). One month later Time, Inc. paid $183 million for half ownership of

Whittle Communications, Ltd. with an option to buy another 30% of the company in 1993 (Fabrikant, 1988a; Whittle Seen..., 1988). Public announcement of the

Channel One project followed in January, 1989 (Whittle to Test..., 1989). Several analyses of Channel One have noted that the timing of the deal between Whittle and

Time, Inc. and the introduction of the Channel One pilot were not a coincidence

(Carter, 1989b). Channel One required an investment of over $200 million in start­ up costs and Whittle needed the security of the Time's financial backing to proceed with the project Time built its empire on the mass audience concept and needed to diversify into niche marketing (Reilly, 1988a). Chris Whittle is a master at defining and discovering specific audiences and creating products for them, a technique 6 which Time viewed as part o f company's future (A Gathering of Entrepreneurs,

1989).

Channel One

Channel One, as a communication technology for schools, is innovative in delivery, content and funding. Whittle Communication installs television equipment and provides a daily 12-minute current affairs program. The schools are not charged for the equipment but the programming includes two minutes of advertisements for teen oriented products such as Nike shoes and Snickers candy.

Similar to commercial broadcast television in the United States, schools sell student audiences to Whittle Communication which then sells those audiences to advertisers. The advertising revenues cover the costs of the equipment and programming and generate a profit for Whittle. Four crucial aspects of the project involve the control relationships between Whittle and the school system, the technical and content related dimensions of the service, and its commercial sponsorship base.

The original details of the contract between Whittle Communications and school systems were more restrictive than those eventually adopted after the pilot test. When Whittle Communications first announced Channel One, the three year contract required that schools have an enrollment of 500 students to be eligible

(Whittle Communications Staff, a). Schools were expected to show the daily program to all students at the same time (Caimody, 1989a). Obviously, Whittle

Communications could not have forced students to watch the programs but they were to be present while the program was shown. The terms of the contract were revised after national education organizations expressed opposition to Channel One.

Schools were allowed to decide which classrooms would be wired to receive 7

Channel One as long as 92% of the students were daily viewers. This changed the

mandatory audience for the program (Carter, 1989b). Whittle Communications

also decided to offer contracts to all junior high and high schools in a district, not just those with a minimum number of students enrolled (Evans, 1989).

One reason many educators were attracted to Channel One was the

equipment provided with it (Gallagher, 1989). The communication technology

included under the terms of the contract was: i) 19" color television monitors for

each classroom in which Channel One was shown; 2) a video casette recorder for

taping the Channel One programs; 3) a satellite dish wired to receive Channel One;

4) installation and wiring of the equipment and maintenance for the length of the

contract (Whittle Communications Staff, 1989b). The wiring system allowed

schools to receive three programming services provided by Whittle

Communications which included Channel One, the Educator’s Channel and the Classroom Channel. Schools which had a master antenna or cable connection

could use the equipment to receive other programming. Another video cassette

recorder for use with programming other than Channel One was added to the contract after the pilot test. The fixed KU-band satellite dish was equipped so that

schools could purchase their own steerable dish if they chose to do so in order to receive programming other than that provided by the Whittle Educational Network

(Whittle Communications Staff, 1989e). If, after the three year contract, a school decided not to renew the Channel One service the equipment was returned to

Whittle but the wiring remained in the school (Evans, 1989).

Channel One was delivered to schools through the following five step process:^ 8 1) Program Production Every day, Channel One is produced in studios in New York City. Channel One world and national news footage comes from its own crews and VISNews, a joint venture of NBC, Reuters, and the British Broadcasting Company.

2) Broadcast by Satellite The complete Channel One broadcast - featuring late- breaking news- is transmitted to schools by satellite before dawn every day.

3) Reception by Satellite Dish The school receives the Channel One signal using a roof- or side- mounted, nonpenetrating, KU-Band satellite dish.

4) Taping and Preview The Channel One broadcast is automatically recorded on videotape in the principal's office, library, or other location of the school's choice. Recording occurs daily before 6 a.m. Eastern time to allow the principal or a designated representative ample time to preview the broadcast before it is shown.

5) Distribution to Classrooms Whittle provides 19-inch color televisions throughout your school as well as the internal wiring to receive all programming (The Whittle Educational Network).

Whittle Communications estimated that the use of this equipment was worth

$50,000 (Gerard, 1989).

Several types of programming were available with the Whittle Educational

Network. Channel one was a 12-minute current events program produced in New

York City (Whittle Communications Staff, 1989d). The content concept was designed with a teenage audience in mind so that students would leam how current events are relevant to their lives. Whittle representatives noted that the idea came from a teacher who said students needed a Today show specifically for them

(Gallagher, 1989). Channel One used young news anchors and reporters so that teens could identify with them more easily (Goodman, 1989). The five educational goals for the Channel One content were: 1) To enhance cultural literacy. Recent studies have shown that America's young people are deficient in their knowledge of world culture compared with their peers in other nations. Channel One helps teachers address the problem daily by offering students new-and-information programming. 2) To promote critical thinking. Through careful reporting and in-depth analysis, Channel One aims to explore the moral, social, and political issues of our day.

3) To provide a common language and shared experience. Each day, Channel One brings students across the country together. Issues of common concern are presented to young people of widely varying backgrounds.

4) To provide relevance and motivation. Channel One makes current events relevant by showing the direct connection between global news events and the everyday lives of its viewers. Once this connection is understood, young people may be motivated to care about current events and seek further information about the issues of the day.

5) To strengthen character and build a sense of responsibility. By presenting role models students can relate to and respect - political leaders, athletes, scholars, and the like - Channel One reinforces the positive values that schools aid teachers strive to develop in students (Whittle Communications Staff, 1989d).

The program format included the following segments:

Each broadcast opens with Up Front - approximately three minutes of the latest national and international news. Each story is preceded by an exclusive zoom-in map sequence that establishes where the news is happening.

Next comes News Focus - a segment that goes into a single story in detail. The format establishes context, presents different views, and helps teens understand why a particular story is important to them.

World Class - a weekly, 5 part series - is the third segment. Here students get an in-depth look at important subjects like the environment, careers and life in other countries. World Class explores a different topic every single week.

Concluding each broadcast is a motivational rotating feature. As with all Channel One programming, story selection and presentation are geared to teens. Some are introduced by well known celebrities - people whom young viewers can respect and consider positive role models. In addition, every day's broadcast contains a Pop Quiz that takes a little known general fact and makes it especially interesting.

One minute of advertising messages were included between the News

Focus and World Class segments and between the World Class segment and the

Rotating Feature. Teachers received a monthly study guide discussing the material to be shown on the World Class segments. These guides included classroom objectives, segment previews, additional resources, a glossary of terms and relates activities geared to history and government, science and technology, math and economics, social studies and geography and English and literature (Whittle

Communications Staff, 1990h).

The Classroom Channel was added after the pilot test and national opposition to Channel One occurred. The purpose of this channel was as follows:

The Classroom Channel is designed as an enrichment tool. Pacific Mountain Network, a nonprofit agency owned and operated by 43 public television stations, annually supplies 250 programs that are general and curriculum specific. Guides listing the individual transmission dates and a short description of each program are sent quarterly to your school's media specialist or librarian.

Whittle Communications provided the Pacific Mountain Network with a $5 million dollar grant to provide the service (Whittle Communications Staff, 1989f). The programming was part of a public television network and many of the programs could be archived for later use (Whittle Communications Staff, 1990i).

The Educator’s Channel was added after the Channel One pilot test. This programming provided teachers with professional information and ideas. Its purpose was as follows:

The Educators' Channel will provide valuable programs on teaching techniques, classroom strategies, and updates on current trends and research. 11

The Whittle Educational Network was funded through commercial advertising support The advertising arrangement was similar to network television. Whittle Communications sold time to sponsors for product messages.

These products ranged from snack foods to hygiene to clothing items (Reilly,

1989c). Advertisements for feminine hygiene products, political or religious affiliations, tobacco and alcohol, "R" or "X" rated movies and other such products were excluded from Channel One (Whittle Communications Staff, 1989c).

Guidelines for the curriculum and commercial content were established by two advisory boards composed of prominent national figures and educators across the country (Whittle Communications Staff, 1989g). Terrell Bell, former secretary of education during the Reagan administration and Albert Shanker, president of the

American Federation of Teachers union, were among the members of these boards.

Whittle Communications signed a contract with the advertisers. First, the advertiser agreed to a 1 to 3 year contract (Reilly, 1989c). Second, the cost per 30 second ad was approximately $130,000 (Reilly, 1990c). In return, the advertiser was guaranteed that their brand was the only product of its type advertised on

Channel One and that a projected audience of one in three teens in the United States would view the ads, eventually (Reilly, 1990c). Corporate funded public service advertisements comprised some of the two minute segments. For example, Burger

King sponsored a lengthy public service announcement type ad which featured the problems of a teen runaway. As Chris Whittle noted in an interview, the commercials on Channel One represented a portion of a company's total advertising budget Dollars spent to reach teens through Channel One were taken from other programming (Evans, 1989). 12

Channel One represented a break with traditional notions of how to use television in the classroom. Provision of monitors for every classroom alleviated the need to schedule and transport equipment around the school. Channel One was designed and developed before the education establishment was consulted on a wide scale basis with a staff drawn primarily form commercial television news.

Finally, products targeted at the teenage student market had never been advertised during class time. Educators, parents, students, academics and the media began developing positions on Channel One soon after it was announced. The views expressed by the interested parties varied enormously. Channel One gained national media attention and stimulated a debate about communication technologies, content, funding and control. Conflict over Channel One

A chronology of the debate over Channel One is provided below to highlight the key issues which were argued. The discussion is based on media coverage and has been divided into four periods when events critical to the outcome of the debate about Channel One happened (Sears, 1990). First, Whittle

Communications announced the Channel One project in January, 1989. The implications of commercially sponsored television for public education policy making were immediately recognized. Two distinct frames, one focusing on the media environment and the other on the school environment, were established at this time by Whittle Communications and professional educators. Second, Channel

One was pilot tested in six public schools during March and April, 1989 which generated attention from both the media and parties directly involved in the debate.

Third, two states decided to prohibit the use of Channel One in their school systems in May and June, 1989. Whittle Communications announced that the project would 13 be implemented nationwide after certain features had been altered in late June of

1989. Whittle continued developing Channel One and the Whittle Educational

Network after June, 1989. Although discussion of Channel One continued, the course of the debate was set

Whittle Communications Announces Channel One

The New York Times published three stories about Channel One during

January and February. The first story described the characteristics of the project in the business section ("Whittle to Test," January 17,1989). The second story appeared in the entertainment section and quoted Peggy Charren, representative for

Action for Children's Television (ACT), to establish reasons for opposition to

Channel One. ACT was concerned because schools should not be used as a vehicle for selling products. Whittle's response in this article was that corporate sponsorship already occurred in schools (Gerard, January 30,1989). Finally, during this period an article appeared in the education section which outlined the parameters of the debate. Charren was quoted regarding the precedent for using schools to sell, the negative impact on students and the resulting problems with curriculum content Whittle representatives noted that economic realities and student ignorance warranted the plan and that the advertising would not effect the content. Additional support for this position was provided by comments from a

Kansas City principal who had approved a pilot test for his middle school. Finally,

Patricia Graham the Dean of the College of Education at Harvard, sociologist David

Reisman and media critic Todd Gidin critiqued the Channel One concept (Carmody,

1989a). This article defined the issues each of the parties would focus on throughout the debate. 14

Channel One Pilot Test

The second phase of the debate began March 1,1989 when the Times printed an editorial written by Chris Whittle. This established Whittle

Communications' position on the issues more clearly. He argued that corporate sponsorship was required when public funds were limited, that technology was needed and the curriculum was insufficient fen: educating students about the world around them. He attacked the educational establishment directly for its refusal to accept progress and the economic realities faced by public education (Whittle,

1989). A second editorial, this one written by the New York Times, described the policy issues from both pro and con perspectives and based on those arguments suggested that the plan should be giver, a chance (In School News Is Worth a Test,

1989). Three letters to the editor in response to the Whittle editorial were printed on

March 22. An official for the Public Broadcasting System discussed the record of

PBS in providing programming to schools and took the position that educational systems should control the use of television in schools rather than corporate interests. Another letter advocated using Channel One to teach media criticism.

The third letter concurred with the arguments posed by those in the education establishment who opposed Channel One (Christiansen, 1989; Rettig; 1989;

Schrag, 1989).

The pilot test was covered three times in this period. The occurrence of the test was reported and opposition by public and education interest groups was discussed. In addition, use of the project in the classroom was discussed for the first time. The story noted that students did not pay attention during the commercials and that the students were already using the technology for other 15 projects. Students were quoted in a manner consistent with Whittle's position on

Channel One:

It's important for us to find out what's going on in the world and somebody's got to pay for this (Carmody, 1989b).

A second story, in the business section, briefly described the conditions under which Channel One was being offered and that the National Association of

Secondary School Principals and the National Parent Teacher Association opposed it The president of the NPTA was quoted as follows:

We are opposed to making the availability of that technology contingent upon subjecting a captive audience to the promotion of commercial products (Rothenberg, 1989c).

The pilot test was reviewed in the entertainment section. This included a description of the project, the fact that its use was being contested, a discussion of the programming and the ways it was being used. Several positive features were highlighted. The content was geared toward a teen audience and the administrators had the authority to preview and censor the content and/or the advertisements. The principal was quoted that he would have omitted a Levi's jeans ad which, he felt, contained sexual overtones if the media had not been present to preview the pilot test. The lack of detail and context in the programming was also noted. The reviewer stated that students were bored with the commercials and were capable of critiquing the claims made in them. The conclusion was:

For now, this reviewer, no fan of commercial clutter, must defer to the teachers, students and administrators who spoke up at Mumford. Sure, it would be better if teenagers read books, magazines and newspapers instead of staring at the tube for yet another 12 minutes a day, but I doubt that these few minutes will change the condition of the nation's nonreaders (Goodman, 1989a).

Channel One was mentioned twice more during March. The business section carried a story entitled, "Pair Leads Whittle School Fight," about the 16 advertising firm Whittle hired to promote the project Although the story focused on the firm it included a description of the full page ads to promote acceptance of

Channel One in the New York Times. It stated:

"Dinner's Ready!" was the headline of the first ad eight days ago. Underneath in bold letters was the counterpoint: "For too many students, this is the 6:00 news." The second ad bad 57 blank spaces above a line that read, "Here's a list of everyone willing to donate $250,000 to schools." For the third ad, in the center of an otherwise blank newspaper page, were the startling words: "You're holding what may be the single best place to hide something from a teenager." (Rothenberg, 1989b).

The business section carried a long profile interview with Chris Whittle which touted his creativity and innovation in the media field. This story described the Channel One project and Whittle's attempts to counter the opposition. He made several comments regarding how successful the pilot was and the positive feedback he was receiving from the test schools. Additionally, he admitted that he should have "tried to bring them (the NPTA and ACT) around before the pilot test"

(Kleinfield, 1989). Banning Channel One The controversy in the media lessened after the pilot test The only story related to Channel One during April was placed in the business section. Turner

Broadcasting announced that it would also provide news programming to school systems through cable operators. No commercials were included in the content and schools would not receive any equipment for use with the programming. Initially,

Turner had planned to use commercial sponsorship but chose not to after discussing the idea with education interest groups. A spokesperson for the company said:

We never intended to use advertising in the traditional sense because we know it's inappropriate in schools (Carter, 1989a). 17

The portion of the education establishment which opposed Whittle endorsed

CNNrNewsroom and devoted resources to promoting it.

Direct challenges to Channel One occurred in May and June. The business section reported that the California school system would withhold a small portion of funding for those schools which adopted the project. The legal opinion was cited along with a statement by Bill Honig, superintendent of California schools:

This is like being offered a 'free' tv that only gets one station - a station owned by the man who sold you the set ("News Programs," May 26,1989).

A Whittle employee commented that they expected to distribute Channel One nationally, in spite of the California decision. Finally, the principal of the

California test school expressed disappointment that Channel One was being prohibited. She noted that it made a "significant difference on our campus."

Superintendent Honig was one of the strongest detractors from Channel

One. The state policy on Channel One was decided according to the following legal opinion written at his request:

Questions

1) Does the Superintendent of Public Instruction have authority to refuse authorization of state reimbursement to school districts and country offices of education for time spent by students in the forced viewing of television commercials?

2) Do school districts and country offices of education have authority to enter into agreements for the "Channel One" program as proposed by Whittle?

Answers

1) Yes. The superintendent of Public Instruction certifies to the controller school apportionments based on average daily attendance, the forced viewing of television commercials is not a required "educational activity" within the meaning of Education Code section 45300 fa- purposes of computing average daily attendance. 2) No. We can find no specific statutory provisions authorizing school districts and country offices of education to enter into the type of agreement proposed by Whittle. The agreement cannot be undertaken under the general permissive authority of Section 14 of Article DC of the California Constitution and Education Code section 35160 because it is inconsistent with the purposes for which school districts and county offices of education were established, further, such an agreement may, in our opinion, violate the "free school clause" of the California Constitution.

In addition, Honig issued an estimate of the cost of Channel One to

California schools:

Assuming the proposal would impact grades 9-12 only, the loss of control over 12 minutes daily of instructional time would cost approximately $178,592,450 annually state wide. If this broadcast was extended to grades 7 and 8, the additional annual cost would be $110,793,006. These estimates are based on the following:

1988-1989 local assistance expenditures - $19,057,700,000

Expenditures per student - $4,226

Number of days in the school year -180

Required instructional minutes/year (grades 9-12) - 64,800 Required instructional minutes/year (grades 7-8) - 54,000

Cost per pupil minute (grades 9-12) - $0,065 Cost per pupil minute (grades 7-8) - $0,078

Cost for 12 instructional minutes (grades 9-12) - $0.78 Cost for 12 instructional minutes (grades 7-8) - $0.94

1988-89 grade 9-12 enrollment - 1,272,026 1988-1989 grade 7-8 enrollment - 654,805

If one makes the argument that only 2 minutes of instructional time are being lost because of the commercials, the cost of those 2 minutes for grades 9-12 is about $29,765,408, and for grades 7 and 8, it is about $18,386,924.

You also asked for a comparison between the dollar value of the 2 minutes of lost instructional time over the three year contract, and the one-time $50,000 expenditure per school by Whittle Communications to cover hardware and installation costs. Assuming all 823 high schools are provided $50,000 worth of equipment, the comparison is as follows: 19 $50,000 x 823 high schools = $41,150,000

Lost time over 3 year contract:

2 minutes ($29,765,408 x 3 years) = $89,296,224 12 minutes ($178,592,450 x 3 years) = $535,777,350

Difference between 2 minutes lost time and Whittle Communications $50,000 = $48,146,224

Difference between 12 minutes lost time and Whittle Communications $50,000 = $494,627,350 Based on these analyses the state of California education department developed a policy to withdraw the equivalent of the cost of two minutes of instructional time in state funds to local schools which contracted with Whittle Communications (Honig,

1989). Channel One was not banned but the state system made it more difficult for schools to receive it.

Two stories about the way Channel One was being adapted in response to the opposition appeared in early June in the business section. The first announced that the project would be offered across the nation. The project, the pilot test, the California decision and other opposition were mentioned. Additionally, a Whittle commissioned Gallup poll which found strong public support was discussed

(Carter, 1989b). The second reported that two services would be added to Channel

One, an educational development program for teachers and documentary programming for the students ("Whittle Planning," June 9,1989). These later became the Teachers Channel and the C lassroom Channel.

The state of New York decided to place an outright ban on the use of

Channel One in public schools. The following describes the basis for this decision

(New York Board of Regents Staff, 1989).

Arguments in support of the proposal:

1. Students in high school are generally inadequately informed about world affairs and the public policy issues which shape their lives and their future. A news program geared to them and to their perspective will make students better informed and better citizens. Whittle expects the results of the pilot program to support the expectation that students watching this broadcast will be more aware of world affairs.

2. This approach will provide schools with a technological capacity which they would otherwise not achieve. Local and state governments in most areas have been unwilling or unable to make the capital investment in television equipment which this agreement would provide through loan to the schools. While it is unclear how free schools will be use the equipment for purposes beyond the newscast, some other use, as for public broadcasting will most likely be possible. In addition, Whittle states its willingness to explore additional uses and technological enhancements as the project matures.

3. While the New York State Constitution prohibits the gift or loan of public school property in aid of a "private undertaking", various rulings have established that if the commercial gain is incidental to school purposes, the activity may be acceptable.

Arguments in opposition:

1. The New York State Constitution prohibits a gift or loan of school property in aid of a private individual. The proposed venture specifically trades the use of classroom time for two minutes a day for commercial purposes in return for the loan of capital equipment and a news broadcast Commercial purposes appear to be central to the undertaking. Whittle estimates that each sponsor would invest between $10 and $30 million for a three year contract. The Village Voice quotes Whittle as estimating revenues of between "$80 million to $100 million a year, and we would hope for an 11 % profit" The schools involved will not share in the profit although whey will be delivering each day an audience of millions of teenage "consumers" for ongoing advertising campaigns.

Instructional programming on world affairs, geography and public issues is available to New York schools without commercial messages. Moreover, the Whittle program, shown to all students at the same time, may not be easily integrated into the curriculum and thereby distracts from established school purposes by cutting 12 minutes out of the school day.

2. Beyond legal considerations, the approach is exploitative of students, deliberately reinforcing materialistic values and consumerism, as well as emphasizing to poor children their lack of ability to have certain material products.

3. The programming is superficial and without sufficient long-term pedagogical value to warrant every student's devoting one hour a week of school tune to it The school is, de facto, delegating that hour of curricular time to a national profit- making corporation which controls content and approach. Among other things, such a delegation provides a potential, intended or not for political bias or manipulation of student attitudes by an outside entity. There is no indication that Whittle has such an intention, but another vendor might.

4. If the State and local school boards believe that providing this technological capacity to schools is important they should be willing to invest public funds and to seek donations of equipment from private sources to assure such capability. Educational priorities should not be driven by an attractive commercial deal.

The conclusions based on these issues was as follows:

Legality: Staff concludes that private commercial benefit appears not to be incidental to the provision of educational services to the school in this instance. Therefore, the venture may violate Article Vin, Section 1 of the State Constitution's prohibition on the gift or loan of public buildings for private individuals.

Educational benefit: Because other programming and curricular aids related to current events and world affairs are available or are being planned, the unique benefit of the project is the free use of technology for the life of the contract. While it is still unclear how useable the equipment will be for other purposes, the potential capacity is most attractive. However, the ownership of the equipment, the nature of the system and its use will be controlled by Whittle, even as the content of the programming is. It is poor educational policy to delegate curriculum content or use of technology to an outside noneducational organization which has a primary profit motive.

Technological needs of schools: The Whittle enterprise has brought to the fore the importance of considering carefully and investing well in the rapidly expanding learning options made possible by technology. Educational television, in particular, has been around for many years, but early programming was not equal to the technological capacity and was hard for teachers to work easily into lesson plans. Therefore, investment by school systems and the State in television technology dwindled. However programming twenty years later is excellent, integrated with the curriculum, and completely flexible in use because of VCR and satellite technology. As the Regents noted in their meeting with public broadcasters last fall, there is a need for more teacher training in the use of instructional television and a need to provide equipment on an equitable basis to schools of the State. Staff will recommend to the Regents that the Board put forward a legislative proposal this year to provide funds for teacher training and for the provision of necessary instructional television equipment to the schools. This decision was reported in the New York Times. The first story reported that the Board of Regents was considering the proposal. The second, placed on the front page, described the reasons given by the Board of Education for the ban which primarily related to the harmful effects of the advertisements. Regent Shirley

C. Brown said:

"the insidious destruction of the lives and values of kids that those two minutes a day can accomplish means to me that we've got say here: 'Absolutely no. At least for that time that those kids are under our care, you will not do this," (Vorhovek, 1989).

Other reasons fra- the opposition were noted, including a question as to whether some of the Regents had been offered bribes by Whittle Communications. The story also contained conjecture as to whether Whittle could afford to continue since, in effect, it had been denied two of the largest education markets.

The following day the entertainment section carried another review of the

Channel One debate. It began with the position that no one, including Whittle, really wanted to use commercials to provide news programs in schools. In the same paragraph the reviewer quoted Whittle:

But we also believe that student news programs with commercials is preferable to no student news program at all (Goodman, 1989b).

The rest of the story supported this position. The success of the pilot test and the results of the quizzes based on Channel One content, and the belief that Channel

One programming was better than local news were detailed. The assumption that students are ignorant of current affairs was discussed. The limitations of the Turner and PBS alternatives were cited as well as the Whittle commissioned Gallup poll which found support for Channel One from parents and teens who were 23 interviewed over the telephone about the concept. From this set of assumptions the reviewer concurred with the position of Channel One by stating:

Given the choice between a dubious purity and the possibility of increasing youngsters acquaintance with current events, many schools are likely to decide albeit reluctantly, that a couple of minutes of commercials is a reasonable price. (Goodman, 1989b).

During this time a number of national level education associations released statements about their opposition to Channel One. Among those which took a position against the Whittle project were: State Departments of Education in

Alabama, California, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island and Wyoming;

Action for Children's Television; American Association of Colleges for Teacher

Education; American Association of School Administrators; American Montessori

Society; American Public Health Association; American Youth Work Center,

Association for childhood Education International; Association for Supervision and

Curriculum Development; The Center for Collaborative Education; Cincinnati

Federation of teachers; Council of Chief State School Officers; National Association of Elementary School Principals; National Association of Secondary School

Principals; National Association of State Boards of Education; National Consumers

League; National Council of Catholic Women; National Education Association;

National PTA; North American Federation of Temple Youth; Office of

Communication, United Church of Christ; and Strategies for Media Literacy (Partial

List of Groups...). Perhaps the most vocal of the opponents was the American

Association of School Administrators. The AAS A devoted an issue of their organization journal to the topic of classroom television. Much of the issue undermined Channel One, either directly or indirectly. A full page was used to 24 describe the AASA's position on Channel One (The School Administrator, March,

1990, p. 16):

The American Association of School Administrators opposes Whittle Communications' Channel One program primarily because it requires students in the classroom to view product commercials. This approach violates the following ethical principles:

- Commercial exploitation of a captive audience;

- The classroom is a marketplace for ideas, not for commercial products;

- Students in a classroom should not be used to develop a cost-per-thousand for the sale of advertising.

AASA also is concerned about time-on-task since Whittle Communications insists the entire program be seen by students. Schools already are hard-pressed to find the time they need to deliver the planned curriculum. Carving out an additional 12 to 15 minutes a day may not be reasonable in many schools.

Offering satellite dishes, satellite time, etc., as an incentive for schools to accept this program with its commercials does not handle these basic ethical concerns. Students should not be for sale or trade to any company.

Channel One Adapts

The remaining set of stories appeared as the 1989-90 school year began.

The entertainment section printed an extended analysis of the television news issue written by an education professor. Descriptions of both the Whittle and Turner projects were provided along with a discussion of the issues at stake. The author pointed out that the education establishment reacted instead of taking the initiative. His conclusion was that:

Technological innovations are not inherently of educational value; before hastily installing them in schools, educators should think through and take control of what they are likely to instill in the minds of children. The classroom is not and should not become simply another market to exploit (Kohl, 1989). 25

The following week another review appeared in response to Kohl. Again, Channel

One and the Turner plan were compared. This review concluded that, "News programs, with or without commercials, seem to fill a void," (Goodman, 1989c).

Three more stories about Channel One were published in 1989 in the business section. Sponsors for the commercial time were signed in September.

This article also mentioned, in passing, that some education groups had criticized the project ("Channel One," September 9,1989). Another story revealed that a

"Today" show executive would produce Channel One. Finally, the creation of an advisory board for the project was covered in the New York Times. The reason, according to Whittle, was to diffuse opposition to Channel One.

There has been an awful lot of debate about the channel, and we had not done all the homework in the political and educational world that we should have ("Whittle Names," August 28,1989).

Terrel Bell, Reagan's Secretary of Education, headed the board which includes H.

Ross Perot, Alex Haley, Albert Shanker, and a number of other public figures.

In late August, 1989,70 salespeople began marketing Channel One to

8,000 schools across the country. Channel One debuted in 400 schools in March,

1990 (Chira, 1990). By November, 1990 over 5,600 schools had signed contracts. Chris Whittle estimated that every high school student, in both public and private schools, would view Channel One or a similar competing service by

1992 (Reilly, 1990).

Channel One in Ohio

The following contextualizes the status of Channel One in Ohio, specifically, because it was a state in which there was both positive and negative feedback regarding Channel One. Withrow High School in Cincinnati, Ohio was the first school which experienced conflict over Channel One. Whittle 26

Communications approached school officials and asked whether the school could be used as one of six pilot test sites. The other pilot schools were Mumford High

School, Detroit, Michigan; Central High School, Knoxville, Tennessee; Gahr High

School, Cerritos, California; Billerica Memorial High School, Billerica,

Massachusetts and Eisenhower Middle School, Kansas City, Kansas (Carmody,

1989). Permission for the seven week pilot w?s given and the test began in March,

1989. A Cincinnati teachers union filed a labor grievance on March 20,1989 due to the loss of class time (Lewis, "Adult Jury," April 8, 1989). The teachers at

Withrow, however, were mixed in their opinions about Channel One. Tom

Mooney, president of the Cincinnati Federation of Teachers, commented:

After all the pros and cons are weighed, it's not the one or two commercials a day. The main point is the long-term consequences of commercial sponsorship of instructional materials. It is not going to stop at this. Why not give us textbooks with ads.

Another teacher, Larry Boyd, disagreed:

Even though it is slick and fast-paced, like MTV, it is solid information. Kids handle sound bites - after all, they grew up with Sesame Street - better than adults.

School board member, Virginia Rhodes, wrote a long column suggesting that

Channel One be approached critically (Cincinnati Enquirer, March 17,1989). The result was that Channel One was removed after the pilot test

Whittle Communications then developed two strategies for marketing

Channel One. First the company contracted with private schools which were not subject to the same restrictions as public schools. Bishop Ready High School,

Columbus, Ohio, went online with Channel One in March, 1990. It was in the earliest round of schools to have Channel One installed for regular use (Huesca,

1990). Second, Whittle Communications contracted with schools in less well organized districts and states (Evans, 1989). This strategy, it was presumed, 27 would strengthen their market to the point where original detractors would eventually relent and allow Channel One in the schools.

Whittle Communications continued working with school districts in Ohio.

Contracts with 250 schools had been signed by April, 1990, one year after the pilot test (Hoover, 1990a). The State Board of Education in Ohio was asked to review

Channel One and rule on its legality according to the state constitution. The board members met with a Whittle representative and were shown a tape of the programming. A resolution to oppose the use of Channel One was developed and sent to the State Attorney General for a ruling. The board members were mixed in their positions on Channel One. Some felt that it was a decision for local districts to make and to rule against Channel One after it had already been accepted would undermine the local autonomy of those schools. Others felt that commercials in the classroom should be banned (Hoover, 1990b). The result was a December, 1990 ruling which concurred with the opinions of board members who perceived it as a curricular matter to be decided at the district level. Whittle Communications continued to sign with schools in Ohio. Summag Channel One is innovative because of the design, programming, financing and control factors. However, it is an innovation which was resisted by many educators. Whittle Communication's Channel One project provides an opportunity for a case study of differences in value assumptions and resulting policy options.

A full understanding of responses from both the media company and education professionals requires an analysis of the history and status of the four issues involved in the Channel One debate. 28

Values in Commercial Media. Public Education and Channel One Domains

The first issue represents the conflict over the functions and use of communication technologies in American society and American public education.

Can/should television be used for educational purposes? The second issue involves the characteristics and properties of public affairs information disseminated through the mass media and through the education system. Can/should public affairs information reflect the homogeneity or the heterogeneity of the society? The third value concerns the mechanism through which media in the United States, generally, and the schools, specifically, are funded. Should advertising and commercial sponsorship be used to pay for public affairs content? The fourth conflict is a battle over who should control the operation of media systems and school systems.

Should private enterprise become directly involved in the operation and control of schools, eliminating the role of education professionals as mediator between students and larger social and economic forces?

Channel One's success signaled a new era in the relationships between schools and the media industries.^ Analysis of the press coverage of Whittle's

Channel One and the education organizations indicates that the basis of conflict revolved around four issues which included curricular content, institutional control, technological benefit and funding support (Barry, 1989; Kamerer, 1991; Sears,

1990). These issues arose from the differences in the institutions and models upon which the commercial media and public education are based. Whittle

Communications employed a "commercial media" strategy for promoting Channel

One. The company focused on teens, television, current affairs and advertising as situated within the larger context of American society. In sharp contrast, the education establishment framed the issue in terms of the public education model, 29 suggesting that the role of public schools is to educate and protect against the larger societal forces which influence teens. Adoption of these frames occurred soon after Channel One's unveiling and remained relatively unchanged throughout.

The relationships among the issues, values and institutions become more clear when diagrammed and modeled. Figure 1 indicates the four issues of concern in the Channel One case: 1) technology; 2) content; 3) control; and, 4) funding; as well as the three environments from which the issues arose: 1) public education; 2) commercial mass media; and, 3) Whitde Communication's Channel One and places these issues and domains according to a value and policy model developed by

Mejone (1989). The values are placed in the inner circles and the policies which reflect those values form the outer circles. This breakdown of the issues is considerably more discrete than was the actual case. However, the distinctions are helpful in clarifying the issues and were adopted in reviewing literature and gathering evidence about the issues. broadcast programming pluralism

electronic technology objective content private funds private control

advertising private support owners

standard textbooks content .

/ print technology ' objective content 1 public support \ bureaucratic control

taxes professional e d u c a to rs /

broadcast public affoirs programming^ objective content advertising support Whittle Communications controlled

Figure 1. Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Core Values and Periphery Policy Issues. 31

Communication Technology in Commercial Media. Public Education and Channel

One Domains

New technical developments in the communication industries create more possibilities for approaching applied problems than ever before. However, this potential simply implies different types of difficulties. Just as television supplied us with accessible information and entertainment on a mass scale, it also brought with it particular types of dependency. A brief discussion of the underlying assumptions and forces which directed the development of television in the U.S. provides a framework for analyzing the issues. The questions center around the uses of communication technologies and their related effects. The institution of public education has relied on print based media. Attempts to introduce other communication technologies into schools have been less than successful.

Consistent with these different perspectives between public education and the commercial media about communication technologies, players in the Channel One case addressed the same value issue and drew quite different conclusions. Their positions reflected the characteristic ambiguity which arises in discussions of communication technologies' role in society.

Communication Technologies in the Commercial Media Domain

Television developed much more rapidly than the communication technologies which proceeded it in the United States because the social, regulatory, and economic conditions of its use were developed before its diffusion (Becker,

1987). Broadcasting was a privately owned, commercial medium used by individual consumers in the home. The programming which most appealed to the home audience was entertainment oriented (Halberstam, 1979). As the communication technology developed it became more and more identified with inactivity. Although the presumed objective of technological development is an improvement in the quality and the amount of available leisure time, many fear that people become lazy and waste too much time when they spend it watching television.

Patdson argues that concerns about the demise of print literacy stem from a misunderstanding of the social transformation which is occurring in the late 20th century (1983). He points to the similarities between the fears people had about the transition from oral to print culture in ancient Greece and the fears people have experienced in the last one hundred years in relation to the transition from print to electronic communication technologies. Some have assumed detrimental effects as inevitable, especially in relation to youth, while others welcome new communication technologies rather blindly in the service of good.

The early responses to films, radio, television, and video games serve as examples of the problematic relationships with communication technologies since there were both proponents and doomsayers. Films, through the power of moving and realistic images, lauded immoral behavior and undermined literacy skills.

Children intoxicated with radio dramas were thought to develop all manner of delinquent behavior. Both the experience of and the content provided by television undermined social values, political participation, learning capacity and emotional development. Video games led to addictive behavior exacerbated by an inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality. Each development in communication technology brought with it a host of assumptions about its deleterious effects (Lowery & DeFleur, 1983; Starker, 1988).

The champions of communication technologies, however, embraced them with optimism, a consistent theme in relation to formal education systems. As a 33 replacement for books, films were to interest and thus motivate students to learn (Romiszowski, 1988). Radio was to transform the education of rural children.

Delivering a higher quality and more diverse curriculum to larger student populations using fewer teacher resources was the prediction for instructional television throughout the 1950's and 1960's (Institute for Communication

Research, 1960). The technological bandwagon of the 20th century rides with computers and their interactive and individualized learning capabilities (Perelman, 1987). Each new communication technology was to be a panacea for all manner of problems associated with developing mass literacy in the United States until gradually the hopes turned to disappointment and a newer technology came along.

Modes of public communication are once again shifting in the late 20th century and many sectors of society have trouble dealing with these changes.

Early proponents of television believed that it could serve as an important learning tool (Cooley, 1952; Siepman, 1958). The visual properties of television were assumed to make it a better tool for commanding people's attention and interest An individual did not need to rely on imaginative or abstract skills to understand ideas presented on television. Thus, it was possible that the medium was at least as well suited for motivating interest and stimulating further investigation of ideas and issues as other information gathering and learning methods. More recently, these often touted advantages of personalized experience and concrete representations have been critiqued (Postman, 1985; Clark, 1983).

The alternative concern is that television is a purely affective medium. The cognitive processing required in linear reading skills needed for reading abstract symbol-words into meaningful thoughts is much less likely to occur when activity is presumed to be in moving pictures. 34

Communication Technologies in the Public Education Domain

The basis of the debate about public education and communication technologies dates back to early developments in film. Edison forecast the demise of the textbook and suggested that eventually film would become the medium of choice for instruction (Cremin, 1988). However, Cuban (1986) provides evidence that films were used sporadically in the classroom (p. 17). Among the reasons cited for low usage rates were:

Teachers lack of skills in using equipment and film; cost of films, equipment and upkeep; inaccessibility of equipment when it is needed; finding and fitting die right film to the class (p. 18).

Although films received much attention in education, little was done to integrate them into the structure of American classrooms.

During the diffusion of radio in the 1920's, educators recognized its potential uses as a medium of instruction and labeled it "the textbook of the air"

(Cuban, 1986). However, as commercial broadcasting grew more lucrative, competition for licenses increased dramatically (Head & Sterling, 1990). The commercialization of radio, regulatory conflict and lack of vision in educational policy undermined its development as an educational medium (Cuban, 1986).

Throughout the 1920's to the end of World War II, programming was available for use in the classroom (Cuban, p. 21). However, availability did not equate with use. Explanations for limited use included;

"no radio-receiving equipment; school schedule difficulties; unsatisfactory radio equipment; lack of information; poor radio reception; programs not related to curriculum; classwork more valuable; and, teachers not interested" (p. 27).

By the end of the 1940's radio was no longer considered an important communication technology for educational purposes and instructional technologists 35 hailed television as the communication technology which could revolutionize public schools.

Television entered the scene at the same time a widespread change in the social organization of American life became apparent Thus, educators envisioned an end to the problems of increasing school populations and limited human and physical resources (Cooley, 1952; Joint Council on Educational Television, 1956;

Koenig & Hill, 1967; Siepmann, 1958). Funds to research the educational and instructional capacity of television, especially from the National Defense Education

A ct strengthened the hopes for educational television (Filep and Schramm, 1970).

After the Sixth Report and Order, released in 1952, television projects and evaluative research expanded even more rapidly. Public broadcasting stations, as part of their mission, produced and distributed instructional programming.

Additionally, the Ford Foundation spent over $170 million to develop educational television. Again, the optimism was shortlived.

The 1967 Carnegie Commission on Educational Television report determined that instructional television had never achieved its potential. The Ford

Foundation distanced itself from instructional television and focused on educational public television as the primary recipient of future resources. Unable to generate financial support, instructional television suffered from a lack of affordable and flexible programming and resistance to its use (Reiser, 1987). Clearly, the problems with the use of television in schools related to issues larger than the communication technology itself.

Despite wide differences in distribution and access, television equipment and programming are available to teachers in most public schools in the 1990s but availability bears little relation to the extent of use. Cuban (1986) employed 36 participant observation and survey summaries to draw several conclusions about television in the classroom. He determined that instructional television was used by a small portion of teachers for supplementary purposes, very few teachers used the medium on a regular and enthusiastic basis, television was used much more often in elementary schools than in high schools, and was used as an afternoon "break" more often than in the morning for "serious learning" (p. 49). Despite early predictions about how television could revolutionize classrooms, many teachers judge it as relatively unimportant in the classroom.

Cuban (1986) offered three hypotheses as to why communication technologies have not been used by classroom teachers on a wide scale basis.

These reasons have more to do with conditions of use than the communication technology, per se. They included issues related to teacher's professional culture, work setting and implementation (p. 55-61). The professional culture in which students become teachers is a conservative one, peopled by those who value interaction with children and hold entrenched views about the process and goals of education. The values of this culture are often inconsistent with the introduction of technologies (Cohen, 1983). Communication technologies, such as television, come between the teacher and student and violate the teacher-centered role orientations of administrators, teachers and the public. Schools are places where students learn because teachers teach. As Cuban notes, the perception that television is a communication technology designed for entertainment makes it seem inappropriate for classroom use.

Excessive use of televised lessons or films, for example, casts suspicion on the teacher as being less than professional or simply scratching for filler material (p. 63). 37

On the other hand, some teachers are able to incorporate television into their lesson

plans on a regular basis. Some teachers use video to interest and motivate students

and teach visual literacy in the process (Cuban, 1984, p. 68). However, these

teachers are far fewer than those who dislike using communication technologies for

instructional purposes.

A second reason teachers use television relatively infrequently relates to the

logic of classroom routine. The one communication technology which had a

significant and long lasting impact in public schools was the book (Cohen, 1988;

Cuban, 1986; Goldstein, 1979). Reasons for the impact of books had more to do

with its flexibility as a communication technology than its format or the content

delivered through it.

"The teacher is expected to maintain control, teach a prescribed content, capture student interest in that content, match levels of instruction to differences among students, and show tangible evidence that students have performed satisfactorily" (p. 57).

Given these constraints, teachers develop coping mechanisms for routinizing their

work. Books meet the requirements of routinization better than other

communication technologies because books are primarily used as an activity for

individuals rather than groups and because their portability makes them more

flexible for classroom planning and use. Teachers develop work routines and

strategies for organizing the classroom and often their perceptions of

communication technologies, such as television, do not mesh with other strategies.

Understanding the kinds of attributions teachers make about communication technologies is an important step in studying their use of the technologies. Communication Technology in the Channel One Domain

Whittle posed the Channel One question in terms of the need for equipment.

Television has been used as a teaching tool for forty years but the costs of equipment make its use prohibitive on any large scale and complicates scheduling among classrooms. Whittle contended that the residual benefits of television monitors in every room justified the conditions of Channel One. Additionally,

Whittle argued that the characteristics of television allowed educators to access current issues immediately and in ways which would hold the attention of high school students. Educators argued against television precisely because it is a medium of mass communication. The trend in public education is interactive instructional technology and individualized learning. Many educators were opposed to television as a communication technology for instructional purposes because it is not receiver oriented. They assume that students have preconceived notions about television which counter the logic of its use in the classroom. Part of the reason Channel One stirred up so much controversy was because of the communication technology through which it was delivered. Summary Television never became an integral part of the public school curriculum even though humans obtain more and more information and entertainment from mediated images. Viewed in this light, the evolution of the Channel One situation is not particularly surprising. Many argue that the nature of television in American society is entertainment oriented. Others, however, believe that television has the potential to serve as a powerful learning tool and act as a positive force in society.

Debates about the advantages and disadvantages of television center around attributions people make about the properties of the technology, its uses in different domains, and the impact those uses have on individuals and groups in society.

Despite the widespread diffusion of television in the United States it remains a source of conflict over which the the mass media, educators, academics and private citizens continue to battle. Public Affairs Content in the Commercial Media. Public Education and Channel One Domains

The American democratic experience presumed that effective government required citizens aware of public affairs and willing to participate in shaping them.

Granted with this responsibility during the mid- 19th century, public schools educated students in the history and traditions of American government while the press became the primary medium through which the public received information from and about the government and its regulatory agencies^ (Katz, 1987; Cremin,

1988; Schudson, 1978). Both of these institutions continue to wield considerable power in shaping perceptions of the political environment, and therefore, deserve consideration in any project designed to teach current events. The following discusses the influences on content in the environments of the commercial media, public education and Channel One domains. Public Affairs Content in the Commercial Media Domain

News and public affairs coverage has been an issue in the broadcast media since it began. The recognition that news coverage is not an analog to reality and that the process of producing news content is, by definition, a selective process leads to a variety of attempts at exerting control over content by the industry through codes and councils, by the FCC through blue book standards and the

Fairness Doctrine, and by pressure groups which lobby for changes in certain patterns of representation (Becker, 1987) However, the journalism profession and 40 the media industries promote the ideals of objective reporting and a fair and responsible press (Merrill & Dennis, 1990)

The rise of the penny press in the United States democratized access to news considerably in the 1830's. Competition among newspapers created the possibility for comparative judgments about the objectivity of the information and thus a redefinition of the role of the press (Schudson, 1978). The institutionalization of the objectivity standard meant that the press could defend itself as a neutral observer of events. It mediated the interests of the people and of the government without needing to accept responsibility for the conventions out of which objectivity grew (Schiller, 1979). Since then the commercial media has relied on first amendment and free press ideologies to protect production practices in public affairs content (Dennis & Merrill, 1990).

The development of broadcast communication technologies further complicated the issue of reporting information about political events and public affairs in at least two ways. First, broadcasting sends content to a mass and anonymous audience. Second, due to the scarcity of technical resources the number of channels through which sources send content was limited. The concerns for the Federal Communications Commission, then, were to make sure that a diversity of content was presented from which all potential viewers could choose.

Both structural and behavioral regulation was implemented to achieve these goals

(Head & Sterling, 1991). Structural regulations placed limitations on ownership and the degree of concentration in the industry structure. Through behavioral regulation the FCC encouraged certain types of programming as set out in the blue book guidelines of the 1940's and the National Association of Broadcasters codes. 41

Eventually, the Fairness Doctrine became the standard by which public affairs programming was judged (Head & Sterling, 1991). It encouraged coverage of diverse views and enforced rules requiring that opposing views on controversial issues be aired. However, as LeDuc argues, broadcasters had difficulty meeting the ideals set out in these regulations (1987). With the advent of cable television and other new communication technologies, a policy of deregulation has undermined most of these behavioral restrictions throughout the 1980's and has removed much of the structural regulation as well. During the 1990s developments in new communication technologies continue to encourage the marketplace model with the assumption that competition will foster diversity.

The problem with this model is that the ideals of objectivity and diversity are difficult to attain in the actual production of media content Hackett (1984) describes four limits to objectivity. They are: 1) that objectivity is possible; 2) that communicator selectivity is the main threat to attaining objectivity; 3) that bias is readily apparent; and, 4) that the most important type of bias is preference for a political party, position, or group (p. 255). Among the impediments to objectivity and fair representation in the media are the constraints of the profit motive and the economic ties between government and the press. Programming decisions depend on audiences and the commercial value of the content. Serious treatment of public affairs issues may lend credibility to a network or station but does not draw audiences. Although the press is protected from the government by the first amendment, it is not autonomous. The press may act as watchdog on particular administrations or issues but it cannot afford to question at the systemic level for to do so would undermine its own interest in maintaining the status quo (Becker,

1987). 42

Academic analysis has documented many constraints on the selection of public affairs content which results in insufficient representations of reality.

Shoemaker and Reese summarize the research on the number and types of influences on media content by considering media professionals, newsgathering practices, the structural constraints imposed by media organizations, industry and economic factors and ideological pressures (1991). Agenda setting research describes the fit between issues covered and the issues identified as important by citizens (McCombs & Shaw, 1972). Gatekeeping analyses demonstrate the number and types of editorial decisions made by reporters, photographers, wire services, editors and owners in determining what events to cover and how the news angles which frame them are chosen (White, 1950; Hirsch, 1977; McCombs & Shaw,

1977). News production strategies inherent in media organizations have also been shown to limit the bounds of public debate through the media (Breed, 1955;

Tuchman, 1978; Gans, 1979; Gitlin, 1980).

These findings have important implications for three reasons. First, the scope of television news programming has expanded enormously in the last two decades (Gunter, 1987). Second, more and more people rely on television for their news about national and local events. Third, information processing research reveals much about how television news is understood (Graber, 1990). People develop strategies to minimize the effort necessary to become aware of certain types of issues. Most develop a general familiarity with categories of stories which can be invoked as background for new developments which arise later (Graber, 1987).

Other research indicates that television plays a powerful role in "commanding attention and shaping opinion" (Iyengar and Kinder, 1987). While objectivity and diversity are upheld as values, the inherent constraints on reaching these ideals 43 suggest that media consumers need to be aware of the limitations to objectivity in public affairs content presented to them.

Public Affairs Content in the Public Education Domain

The problem of objectivity and diversity in the school curriculum has been of concern since common school movement. This section focuses on the primary source of content in public schools, the textbook. An understanding of the textbook and its relationship to both public interest groups and the private sector may help us understand more about the arguments over content in the Channel One case. Among the factors which influence the textbook industry are producers perceptions of consumer's needs, a market structure which stresses stability rather than innovation, and a long history of conservatism due to state and local politics.

The quality of textbooks depends on the interactions between the education establishment, local community interests and textbook publishers (Goldstein,

1979).

At the turn of the century when textbook practices were established and the country appeared to be more homogeneous, textbooks were considered a material product void of any cultural overtones. Thus, textbooks were purchased for durability and economic efficiency (Tyson-Bemstein, 1988, p. 4). Twenty-two states, primarily in the south and west, enacted "adoption" laws to control costs.

For example, in states such as Texas and California, textbooks were approved at the state level. The larger the state and its market share the greater its influence on textbook content and format Thus, diversity in textbooks was inherently limited by the economics of the industry structure (Goldstein, 1979, p. 8).

The problems arose when special interest groups, whether conservative community groups, minority groups, or corporate groups attempt to insert their 44 interests into textbooks. An example of the influence wielded by local conservative groups was the full scale protest of a language arts textbook series in Kentucky

(Moffett, 1989). It resulted in a miner's strike, school closings, national media attention and, eventual abandonment of the series. Debates over "political correctness" are the flip side of the conservative coin. During the last thirty years a variety of groups in American culture have come to new understanding of their important historical contributions and current role in the social milieux. Ethnic groups, women, homosexuals and the differently abled cannot be defined in terms of geographic location. However, all of these groups represent communities of shared interest. Their success in revising textbook history has been uneven but substantial. Textbooks have become more inclusive of diversity in culture and history.

The private sector influences the curriculum, also (Spring, 1988). This trend has increased since the social upheaval of the 1960's. Schor documents the ways in which businesses waged an all out campaign to restore an image of responsibility after the unrest experienced in education.

In addition to tilting all of curriculum towards occupationalism, business culture increased its presence through 'Adopt-a-school' programs. This business-school linkage, begun in the 1970s and accelerated in the comprehensive crisis of 1983, allied a corporation with a school, a college, a district or a whole city system. Curriculum materials and business personnel were offered to the classroom. Students and teachers were invited to make on­ site business visits. Excess machinery and supplies were donated from the company office to the school. Each linkage made the influence of business over curriculum more secure, thus providing the business world with a closer supervision of content and ideas. It also enhanced the public service image of private enterprise (p. 16).

Calls for more industry involvement in schools grow stronger due to the school 'crisis' of the 1980's. A number of the major reports evaluating the quality of schools recommended business involvement (Gross & Gross, 1985). As more 45 public funds are diverted away from schools the need for external sources of aid increase. Lamar Alexandar, Secretary of Education under George Bush, recently endorsed a for-profit school project to be developed by Chris Whittle. That curriculum content will continue to undergo significant pressure from external sources, such as fundamentalist, progressives and businesses, is undoubtable.

Educators continue to struggle with how to mediate these forces so that students receive a balanced perspective on history and current issues of public importance.

Public Affairs Content in the Channel One Domain

Content became an issue soon after Channel One was announced. The education establishment noted that the interests of the companies advertising on

Channel One might influence content decisions. It was suggested that the programming would reflect the economic interests of the businesses advertised on

Channel One and the private sector, generally, creating an inherent bias in the nature of the news presented. Channel One could not possibly provide balanced and diverse perspectives on current events and satisfy the needs of the advertisers.

Additionally, the structural constraints of the programming limited the content such that students would not be asked to consider the underlying causes and consequences of current events issues. Programs produced for teen audiences underplay and mask the importance of a thorough understanding of issues. Whittle

Communications responded to the criticisms in two ways. First, the company noted that the Channel One content would differ only slightly from national commercial news with similar biases. The production of Channel One was set up on the same model as network news, with separate advertising and editorial departments. Second, and most importantly, some familiarity with current events was better than none at all .5 Channel One could at least extend the bounds of the 46 world beyond local community interests. Debates over how events and groups in society are represented in public discourse, whether this discourse takes place in schools or the media, have existed since at least the mid- 19th century. Channel One became another domain in which value conflicts over how to objectively characterize subjective realities arose. Summary The American political system was founded on the belief that debate and discourse function to create a healthy, democratic government. The institutions of commercial media and public education attempt to uphold these values but external influences undermine the ideal. The degree to which people assume that diversity and objectivity exists within institutions indicates the extent to which they may trust that institution to provide and comment on information about the society. One of the guiding principles of education and broadcasting regulation was to expose a wide range of political ideas so people could come to conclusions for themselves, however, economic and political constraints have intervened in accomplishing these principles. Although these ideals of objectivity and diversity resonate throughout

American institutions and psyches, they remain elusive in the practical operation of schools and media organizations.

Binding and Eundine Effects in Mass Communication. Public Education and Channel One Domains

The economic question is fundamental to understanding the problems associated with providing communication technologies to schools. Startup costs necessitate a large initial investment and a continuous supply of programming involves a long tom, fixed expense. The commercial media circumvented this problem by separating the technology and content industries. Television sets were 47 sold as consumer products to individuals and programming was paid for by commercial sponsors. Television technology and programming was provided to public schools through government grants and philanthropic support early in its history. More recently schools have been faced with cuts in government funds and budgets that only permit the essentials for running school systems. Items perceived as luxuries, such as televisions, video equipment and computers, are not affordable without external assistance from those who can afford to subsidize them.

Strings are always attached to resources made available from the private sector regardless of whether the communication technology is a computer or a television set The attached string in the Channel One case was the inclusion of the kinds of advertisements from which were not allowed into the curriculum, formerly. The following discussion highlights the issues involved in using commercial sponsorship to fund portions of the public education curriculum by addressing the concerns in the mass media, public education and Channel One domains.

Funding and Funding Effects in the Commercial Media Domain

Background on the rise of mass consumption and the mass media provides insight into the issues related to advertising as a funding system for communication industries in the United States. Prior to the Industrial Revolution advertising appeared in newspapers available to the literate upper classes and in handbills and street posters (Dyer, 1982). For the most part, these ads contained printed information with few illustrations and functioned to bring attention to novelty products. The transformation of advertisements into persuasive campaigns for standard consumer goods began shortly after the industrial revolution (Beniger,

1986).6 Factories could produce a high volume of standardized goods at increasingly lower unit costs. Developments in transportation technology improved systems of distribution tremendously. Traditional patterns of consumption, however, were incompatible with mass production. Individuals crafted their own household goods and produced most of their own food. That which could not be made at home was purchased in bulk from general stores. Mass production became profitable by converting these habits of local, bulk consumption into habits of mass consumption.

Technological innovations made possible a profitable mass circulation press by the 1840's. Advertising and product packaging were recognized as a means through which to create a desire in individuals to purchase particular brands

(Beniger, 1986). Newspapers functioned as the perfect vehicle through which information about the brands could be disseminated. As Beniger notes, by 1920 advertising was already becoming an institution through which consumption could be stimulated and controlled. Broadcasting technology expanded this capability because it could reach more people more of the time. The final link, according to

Beniger, was the development of market feedback. Producers had to learn how to understand the markets for which they were creating products. Research on motivational techniques, audience needs and consumption patterns helped manufacturers, retailers and advertising agencies develop, produce and distribute their goods with increasing sophistication.

The advertising model in the United States evolved into a system which allows media companies to attract viewers with their content and then sell those viewers to advertisers who pay to have their commercial messages sent to the viewing audience. The consequences of these complex relationships have been widely debated by the industries, the American public, and academic communities.

Becker (1987) summarizes the argument of advertising advocates as: 1) reducing 49 costs through volume sales, mass production and consumption; 2) increasing the availability of mediated sources of information; and 3) increases the standard of living and reduces class distinctions. He summarizes the critiques of advertising as:

1) increasing the cost of living by increasing product costs to cover advertising budgets; 2) advertisers influence the content and reduce diversity of views presented through the media; and 3) promotes consumer values which influence people to buy things they shouldn't.

The evidence used to support these claims, both pro and con, depends on the ideological framework invoked. Those who defend advertising rely on rational decision making models. They argue that humans are rational in their exercise of choice and consumers are able to evaluate information and decide which products and services they wish to purchase. Consumers control demand because their buying behaviors signal their needs and markets respond by providing that which the public requests (Schudson, 1984). The effects of advertising are direct but limited (Pope, 1983).

The alternative position, that the disadvantages of advertising outweigh the benefits, assumes that advertising relies on consumers who use irrational information processing in an unequal power relation. Advertisers invade people's privacy because they contact consumers directly even though consumers cannot respond immediately. The persuasive techniques used in advertising are more often based on emotional appeal than logical reasoning. Contemporary cultural theorists have also demonstrated that advertising works because of its ability to sell an image and view of life. The aggregate effect is to make consumption a habit, the effectiveness of messages for specific products is less important than the general goal of motivating people to buy. Additionally, critics argue that the informational 50 content of advertising is limited and does not deal with the functional utility of products. Modem advertisements sell images and suggest that the intrinsic motivations for self-esteem and belonging can be obtained through the purchase of goods. Rather than fulfilling needs, advertising creates desires (Ewen, 1976;

Marchand, 1986). Individuals have little power in the advertising relationship and this leads to detrimental effects on individuals and the larger society.

Regardless of the position taken, advertising funds the mass media. The other funding alternatives are public taxes or subscription fees. Public broadcasting in the United States has provided quality programming for years, however, in the

1980s it too began turning to private corporations for funds. Foremost among the problems with subscription fees is the problem of access. Each audience member could pay according to use as is the case with other consumer products, however, this would result in wide disparities in the information available to individuals.

When framed in comparative terms, the drawbacks of each funding model become more apparent

Funding and Funding Effects in the Public Education Domain

One of the crucial issues facing early proponents of a mass education system was who should pay for it and how the funds should be allocated (Spring,

1987). As the public bureaucratic structure took control of mass education the corresponding funding mechanism became public tax support rather than funds from philanthropic organizations or the private, for-profit model (Katz, 1987).

Tax supported school systems were necessary to insure universal and uniform education which was the main goal of the common school movement and the education bureaucrats who eventually gained control of schools (Katz, 1987, pp.

55-56). The method adopted for funding schools became property taxes for both 51 individuals and corporations. While this funding model provides for universal education, it does not create a uniform system of education. Schools in districts where property value is high or where large corporations are located gamer more resources than schools in poverty ridden districts. Since the 1970's, these inequities have produced major battles among states and local communities about school finance reform (Spring, 1988).

Public schools face ever more serious budget crunches. Reasons for financial difficulties include unwillingness to vote for school levies, taxpayer revolts, parental flight from public to private schools, and the reduction of budget responsibilities from the federal to the state to local communities (Koch & McCain,

1982; Schor, 1986; Singer, 1985). Spring (1988) argues that one result of these reform attempts was to increase the role of the private sector in lobbying to protect its own interests. Businesses support sales taxes and lotteries as school funding mechanisms rather than increases in property and corporate taxes (pp. 33-37).

Additionally, the private sector encourages school-business partnerships so that they can control the use of their funds and write them off as tax deductions.

School business partnerships range from donation of equipment to employee involvement in schools during working hours to underwriting school projects in exchange for public acknowledgement. The nature of these relationships varies widely, however, many of them are developed by the corporations first and then presented to the schools as an opportunity. These types of arrangements have existed since at least as early as the 1920s when oil companies made educational films available to teachers (Kohl, 1989). The number and types of school-business partnerships has been steadily increasing since the 52

1980's. However, both schools and businesses draw careful distinctions between underwriting and advertising in these partnerships.

The one form of funding never considered in the early years of public education was advertising. The common school bureaucrats promoted universal and uniform education because it was viewed as a way to intervene in the family structure and mold children into upstanding citizens. Schools became the one location where children could be sheltered from negative external influences and socialized into discipline and moral behavior (Katz, 1987). Many educators have tried to protect students from mass communication and horn advertisers. These educators take the negative view of advertising, that it harms students and creates an unhealthy alliance between the private sector and curricular materials. Thus, direct commercial advertising in schools has been strictly avoided by the education establishment as a means of funding learning related projects. Educators prefer to rely on tax support and private donations.

Funding and Funding Effects in the Channel One Domain

Arguably, Channel One became an issue because of the commercial sponsorship base. Initially, education organizations objected to the project on the grounds that it forced students to view advertisements. Whether or not students attended to the advertisements in the Channel One programs, they were exposed to them. When other media products such as newspapers were used to teach current events, students chose whether or not to look at the ads and how long to expose themselves to the ads. Additionally, they noted that the institution of advertising in the United States is based on materialistic values rather than reasoned information regarding purchase choices. Thus, advertising contributes to a culture of consumerism, highlights social insecurities, and emphasizes class distinctions. 53

Schools, many educators argued, should protect students from such messages,

especially in relation to the curriculum. Moving the debate away from schools and

teens as students, Whittle retorted that teens receive thousands of advertising

messages daily and had developed the skills for processing them. The company

downplayed the importance and effects of the commercials. The functions and

effects of advertising in the commercial mass media are issues which resonates

deeply, perhaps because the underlying intentions contained in ad messages are

perceived as deceitful. One of the major conflicts over Channel One was the

funding model which paid forr service designed to appeal to the consumer potential

of students. Summary Funding options include three possibilities. These include funding through public taxes, commercial advertising, or business financing. Taxes are more and

more difficult to raise. Private donations come with strings attached. However, for

many the alternative seems even less palatable. The commercial system of funding

mass communication industries has long been critiqued for deleterious effects on

people. Educators, who view their role as that of protector of student interests, are

especially wary of advertising funded communication technologies. Since each of

the models has its own set of disadvantages, preference for one funding system or

another depends on perceived effects of the funding model under consideration.

The question of who pays for a service free to the user continues to perplex public decision makers.

Control in the Commercial Media Public Education and Channel One Domains

The final issue centered on the autonomy social institutions exercised in controlling the use of resources. Although fragmented among local, state and federal levels, the education establishment carefully protects its decision making authority on school related issues. However, diminishing public funds and widespread critique of schools pressed the education establishment to turn to external sources for assistance. Conflict resulted when media companies marketing new communication technologies, disrupted the entrenched autonomy of professional educators in the education domain. Outlining the historical factors relating to institutional power in the commercial mass media and public education suggest the likely responses and areas of greatest concern in turf battles.

Control in the Commercial Media Domain

The rationale for allocating control over the operation of the media dates back to colonial America when freedom of the press from government intervention was upheld as a principle in the trial of John Peter Zenger. Freedom of speech was later codified in the first amendment This right protects owners of mass communication channels from government involvement Although regulated by the federal government, mass communication industries exeicise a large degree of autonomy in matters of day-to-day decision making (LeDuc, 1987). Historically, the broadcast media have been subject to more regulation than other media industries in terms of both the economic structure and the programming behavior of networks and stations (Head & Sterling, 1990). However, the goal underlying all of this regulation has been to either naturally or artificially create a competitive marketplace system of broadcasting. Thus, decisions about what and when to program various content, the advertising used to support the programs, and the audiences to be reached by the programming have been and still are left to the industry. 55

The autonomy of the media is checked by the audience rather than the government. Theoretically, the marketplace model assumes that television competes for viewers and remains profitable to the extent that it appeals to and pleases audiences. Practically, many factors influence decisions about programming and sometimes audience feedback is overridden by other interests

(Gitlin, 19--). Because the institution of mass media in the United States is based on a model of private, for-profit ownership, media companies exercise a great deal of autonomy and have been largely successful in protecting the industry vision of how broadcast television ought to be organized.

Control in the Public Education Domain

The issue of control in the education domain involves a slightly different question because it is a public institution. Education obtains its authority and autonomy from the government. It is, in a sense, an apparatus of the state designed to provide a social service. However, the institution of education has been professionalized to the extent that those responsible for its operation protect it from direct external influences. In other words, the value assumption is that public education can and should shield students from larger social forces whether they originate from the political arena or the economic sector. Thus, the control issue manifests itself as a conflict between the professional education establishment and the market system which perceives a direct interest in the quality and cost of educating future citizens, workers and consumers.

The problem of control in public education dates back to the 19th century when the United States was moving toward industrialization. Although many believe that the system of mass public education developed out of concern for a democratic society, education historians point to the less than utopian forces which 56 provided the impetus for American schools (Katz, 1987). During the period 1795-

1855 commerce developed rapidly and with it came changes in the structure of the labor force and the family system. These social tensions resulted in five problems related to youth which suggested the need for instituting public education. These were:

...urban crime and poverty, increased cultural heterogeneity, the necessity to train and discipline an urban and industrial workforce, the crisis of youth in the nineteenth century city, and parental anxiety about adolescent children (Katz, 1987, p. 16).

Crime and poverty became interchangeable terms and were identified with unemployed youth, especially (Cohen, 1988). Mass education solved this problem by getting children off the streets and into a homogeneous and controlled environment.

Public education, viewed as a panacea for this bundle of problems, was widely embraced. However, debates about the model delivery system focused on four very different alternatives. Katz labeled these "paternalistic voluntarism; democratic localism; corporate voluntarism and incipient bureaucracy." The primary distinction among these models turned on issues of "size, control, professionalism and finance" (p. 25). Eventually, the bureaucratic structure won out and was characterized by a preference for a large scale system managed by public bodies but administered by education professionals and free to everyone.

The role of education, they felt, should be to shape the direction of society, standardize culture and practice and teach moral behavior to the masses (Katz, pp.

55-56). By the 1870's the bureacratic education structure was in place and has continued to grow since. Although minor adjustments have been made, the education system in America remains quite similar to the structure as originally designed. 57

Part of the reason this structure flourished was the widespread acceptance of ideas of scientific management and efficiency (Button & Provenzo, 1983). The organizational model for schools derived from systems of industrial organization and resulted in a hierarchical, many leveled, top down structure. Administrators gained power and professional status as the experts with the most knowledge regarding pedagogical content and practices. School systems developed into huge bureaucratic structures, largely independent of the community and private enterprise for their operation.

Just after World War n through the present day, public education systems have experienced wave after wave of criticism from private enterprise, parents and special interest groups. Attacks have been made about the quality of teachers and the colleges of education designed to train them, the top heavy administrative structure, the focus on discipline and management of students rather than the cultivation of intellectual abilities and the reification of socioeconomic and gender inequities (Schor, 1986; Katz, 1987; Kozol, 1985; Adler, 1983; Hirsch, 1987;

Bloom, 1987). Schools are targets from both the left and the right of the political spectrum and education professionals, as representatives of the schools, receive much of the barrage.

Cohen cites five reasons for the failures in public education that operate at three levels of the social system. 1) Contradictions between public needs and private wants, 2) a less than strenuous university system and 3) a labor market which undermines incentives to improve education. 4) Compulsory education limits the extent to which strong internal standards can be enforced within the school system because attendance rather than performance is required. 5)

Classroom organization which encourages discipline and orderliness also inhibits reform (1988, p. 251-252). Further, education reform has been most successful in those areas unified by special interests. For example, students identified as performing significantly above or below the average are handled in special subunits that operate somewhat autonomously from the larger school structure. Importantly, teachers working with either gifted or learning disabled students have gained more professional respect and are considered to be the elite of the regular teaching corp

(Cohen, 1988).

The struggle for control between local, state and national groups, teachers, administrators and private enterprise continues today. Two competing views of the function and administration of public education are gleaned from this discussion.

The first view leaves primary decision making authority with the education professionals and establishment Administrators and teachers are experts trained to deal with curriculum, teaching methods and school finances. They are charged with the responsibility of protecting the interests of students and fulfilling educational objectives. Because of their specialized knowledge they are best suited for this task. Influences from the private enterprise system and the local community must be carefully monitored so that students can obtain an education relatively free from the desires of special interest groups.

The second position advocates more direct involvement from other groups within society suggesting that it is no longer feasible for education systems to function autonomously. Schools are now charged with providing a wide array of social services as well as educating students (Ravitch, 1983). Funding the systems is enormously and increasingly costly. Taxpayers balk at giving more funds to an institution that many believe performs poorly. The alternative is to allow private businesses and community organizations provide funds and resources. However, 59 as economic influences from these sources increase so will their ability to offer input into other areas of decision making. These are the contradicting value perspectives embedded in Whittle Communications' attempt to enter the education system.

Control in the Channel One Domain

Channel One generated such heated controversy, in part, because it threatened the education establishment's autonomy. They argued that accepting the project meant relinquishing content control, scheduling responsibility, uses of the service and determination of student needs. Whittle challenged the motivations for this response by implying that the education establishment was more concerned with protecting their own interests than accepting innovative possibilities for students. Although concerned for students, both parties were self-interested or the entire issue never would have been raised. Control over decisions is an especially thorny issue when organizations and institutions motivated to serve the public interest and maintain their power to serve the public confront each other.

Summary

The control issue represents preference toward public or private institutional control. The commercial media enjoy considerable autonomy in decisions about what, when, and how people understand information about the social system.

Public educators, although somewhat more constrained by political exigencies, act relatively independently in executing the day-to-day operation of schools.

Questions as to which institution is most capable of serving the interests of the public school students deserve consideration given the technological and economic changes the United States is experiencing. The Channel One case brought this question to the fore because it was designed to allow a private media company to 60 dictate the specifics of curricular policies. These included students assigned to watch Channel One, conditions under which students viewed Channel One and the content of Channel One programming. Although private companies have always tinkered with education policy, Whittle Communications was perceived to be dictating policies traditionally controlled by education professionals. Conflict about these competing models, one based on public service through government support and the other based on public service through private competition, was bound to happen given the design of the Channel One service.

Summary of Values in Commercial Media. Public Education and Channel One Domains Both players argued that Channel One placed values associated with commercialism, control of public education, uses of technology and public affairs curriculum at stake. Only the analysis invoked to advocate positions differed.

After educators marked Channel One as outside the bounds of public schools,

Whittle was forced to extend the scope of the argument Schools and education organizations which recognized Channel One as an issue of education policy rejected Channel One. School systems were more likely to use the project when

Channel One resonated as an issue of media in society. Analysis of how these values were defined and tied together demonstrates why this case represents a fundamental break in assumptions about the role of communication technologies in education.

Theoretical Dimensions of the Channel One Case

The next section places these value concerns in a theoretical context A discussion of social institutions provides insight into the relationships between functions, goals and roles in public institutions. Embedded in these relationships 61 are values which resonate in different ways for different individuals and institutions. These differences create oppositional forces and dialectical dynamics.

These dialectical forces were operating in the Channel One case.

Public education, a relatively conservative institution, operates on a well entrenched set of assumptions about how to design and implement curriculum objectives (Ravitch, 1983). Communications companies, although in business for profit, employ First Amendment and "fourth estate" arguments to defend both responsible and irresponsible practices (Entman, 1990). The core values motivating the actions of these institutions arise from common concerns about the uses of communication technologies, provision of cultural content, financial independence and institutional autonomy. The underlying assumptions about the ideal outcome and means for achieving it, however, vary according to the historical role and development of the institutions. Conflict is bound to arise when these institutions meet and understanding how this conflict is defined and played out through communicative activity can increase understanding of stability and change in social institutions.

The present study focuses on the value based dialectical conflict between social institutions at the macro level and the values of the individuals' working within the institution of education at the micro level. Broadly put, "Any social institution comprises a set of activities, carried out by people occupying certain roles, according to rules and shared understandings" (McQuail, 1987, p. 38). The sociology of knowledge framework of Berger and Luckmann (1966) is useful for understanding more about the nature of institutions which form as people develop patterns of behavior.? These habits allow people to reduce minor tasks into routinized behavior so that energy can be conserved for other abilities. Institutions 62 arise naturally from the human need to reduce uncertainty in the environment and gain more control over it.

As more people join or are bom to share in the patterned behavior, original motives are taken for granted and are seldom immediately accessible to individuals.

Reasons and strategies for particular habits do not appear as dynamic coping measures but as objective and historical fact. Institutions, such as schools and the mass media, solidify when the continuity of the activity is separated from an evaluation of whether and how that activity is actually fulfilling needs (Berger &

Luckmann, p. 58). Both the commercial media and public education were designed to serve public needs and have done so in important ways. However, they have taken on an objective reality through the years.

A comparison of the media and public education provides insight into sources of conflict between them. The model for the American mass media provides for 1) the production and distribution of knowledge and culture; 2) using technological channels designed to reach anonymous audiences; 3) relatively free from direct government intervention; 4) in an advertising supported economic environment (McQuail, p. 67,1987). Because the mass media are ubiquitous and have no prescribed unity of purpose many traditional institutions, such as education and religion, have developed antagonistic relationships with the mass media.

Comparison of media functions with the functions of primary and secondary public education systems in the United States indicates the different models upon which they are based. Schools: 1) distribute knowledge and culture to children but do not directly engage in the production of that knowledge; 2) using interpersonal channels to reach an audience of students defined according to common age categories; 3) in a web of direct and competing interests and influences; 4) in a public tax supported 63 economic environment.** Thus, the institution of public education has less power than the mass media because it acts in a more constrained space for a smaller and less powerful group with less resources. Perhaps more importantly, education's primary function is perceived to be antithetical to the primary function of the mass commercial media. Common sense notions hold that learning environments require work and the media leisure activity9

The operation of the commercial media and public education institutions are established and maintained through shared rules and common understandings. One way of identifying the basis for the common understanding is through an analysis of the values individuals who work in and through these institutions hold. People who engage in patterned behavior do so through a dynamic process of negotiating which kinds of behaviors will result in achieving which kinds of purposes. Thus, teachers are trained in techniques for presenting various kinds of material, planning lesson objectives and maintaining discipline in the classroom. Reporters are trained to gather information, interview sources and write to deadlines. All of this training creates a common ground which professionals such as teachers and reporters use and share in their day to day work activities.

These individuals may then be said to occupy roles. Any individual engaged in a specified pattern of behavior learned from and performed for an organization of some type may be identified as fulfilling a role. For example, the role of "history teacher" or "science reporter" does not require that any particular individual teach history or report on scientific developments. Since the activity is patterned according to an established set of rules any person can perform those patterned activities with a basic knowledge of the subject matter and the conventions used to convey it. The primary requirement is that the person filling the role has 64 knowledge of why and how to act according to the institutional definition and that the person identifies both cognitively and affectively with that role (Berger & Luckmann, p. 78-79, 1966). As people perform the activities defined as characteristic of the role they begin to identify with and become an embodiment of the role.

People occupying roles are responsible for performing activities which fulfill institutional functions. These roles and functions are performed according to sets of values upheld through the institution's history and tradition. For example, teachers teach according to the conventions learned in colleges of education, tips learned from other teachers and day to day experience in the classroom. Much of their work activity is organized according to traditional knowledge handed down through time. This is not to say, however, that teachers do not have autonomy.

Through the course of a day teachers make hundreds of decisions. Many of these are consistent with prior role definitions but not all of them have to be consistent with prior conventions. Lipsky described this in relation to street level bureaucrats.

He noted:

When a large measure of discretion is necessary' to accomplish a certain task, implementation cannot be fully controlled. For instance, "street level bureaucrats" like teachers, judges, police­ men, and social workers have considerable discretion in determining the nature, amount and quality of the benefits and sanctions provided by their agencies. Their position permits them to decide more or less autonomously with respect to important aspects of their interactions with citizens (p. 160).

Individuals in roles, then, do have space which allows them to maintain or alter the institution of which they are a part

These assumptions point to the need for considering the micro level of individual activity and role performance to understand the stability and change experienced in institutional settings. For example, the institution of public 65 education operates through a common understanding about its mission within society. This mission is manifest in the ways the activities of educating children are carried out in schools. The activities are made possible by individuals who embody the roles of teacher, principal, janitor, student, etc. The nature of these activities depend on the history and reasons they were originally adopted. Policies and Values

This leads to issues of policy or the basic plans expected to bring about desired results. Policy tends to develop in a piecemeal way (Lindblom, 1990).

Incremental changes pile up until the shift in policy is recognizable. Some examples from the Channel One case illustrate the point Using commercial sponsorship to fund a curricular project would have been heresy had it been proposed during the 1970s. Some immediately dismissed the project on these grounds and many remain uncomfortable with the idea in the 1990s. However, that the project has even been considered suggests a considerable shift in views about school funding. Also, Channel One was hotly contested because the delivery system is television based. Although television in schools has always been treated with suspicion, a similar project introduced in the 1970s might have gained more acceptance. The diffusion of computers and interactive technologies made television less attractive in the 1990's.

Nonetheless, the present study argues that Channel One represents a policy issue that brings into focus many of these incremental changes. By design it could not be accepted incrementally. Whittle Communications told school systems they could either take Channel One or leave it The original tarns of the contract were modified slightly but the basic conditions remained intact Channel One opened the 66 door to commercial sponsorship and external control of scholastic news, delivery and use.

Specification of what is technically and economically feasible is only the first step in transforming goals into policy. The next move requires translating the completed policy proposal into an argument which decision makers will accept and promote to others (Dunn, 1980; Weiss, 1983). Framing a policy proposal in appealing terms is as crucial to gaining support for it as its technical sophistication

(Fisher, 1985; Jennings, 1983; & Mejone, 1989). This framing operation happens through a complex process of combining information and evidence to build and justify arguments regarding which programs of action to adopt (Forester, 1983).

The view of the policy process as an exercise in argument derives from the normative ethical theories of practical reasoning philosophers (Habermas, 1984; Toulmin, 1970; Baier, 1969). These theorists attempt to provide a basis for answering questions such as "...according to what criteria can we determine whether public actions are right or wrong? (Dunn, 1985). The function of meaning, values and interpretations is usually assumed in the policy process. Value dimensions are lost in the struggle to agree on technical and substantive points

(Lindblom, 1990). As the practical reasoning philosophers suggest, policy debate become more intelligible when value implications are dealt with openly.

Mejone offers a useful framework for understanding the importance of distinguishing between technical and practical arguments by dividing the problem into policy and meta-policy (1989). He refers to policy as the actual technical aspects of a proposal. Meta-policy describes the ideational level including all of the philosophical assumptions, goals, objectives and details underlying the proposal.

Breaking the discussion into these components allows one to consider both the 67 merits of the policy and the suppositions upon which it is based. The ideational dimensions of policies would then be the "core" and specific policies the "periphery.” Policy ideas firmly rooted in the core change incrementally over a long period because they are based on well entrenched values. Specific policies designed to meet sets of objectives are on the periphery and change much more quickly.

For policy analysis purposes the next question becomes one of identifying relevant values (Rein, 1983). These values occupy the core space and radiate out through the policy periphery. Analysis of the discourse produced by educators and

Whittle Communications revealed fundamental differences in assumptions about the benefits and consequences of particular values reflected in Channel One.

Investigating the basis for these differences is crucial to understanding interinstitutional conflict One method for gathering evidence about these differences is to ask those filling insutuiional roles to consider the values involved in the policy proposal. These people reflect both the structure of the institution through their roles and the dynamism possible through individual activity. A method for gathering evidence about values is necessary for this puipose. Baier provides a clear and detailed analysis of the concept of value. The following summarizes his main points and provides examples to illustrate how the concept relates to institutional policies and the values motivating those policies.

To assess the value of a thing is to appraise whether or not it can confer a benefit. Thus, value may be defined as the ability of an entity to provide a benefit by causing a goal state which improves lives to occur (Baier, p. 49,1969). To say that someone has a value, then, requires that an individual has a favorable attitude toward some entity because that person believes the entity will lead to a desired goal 68 state. A similar argument can be made about institutional values. People who created institutions did so because they thought the institutional activity would lead to something more desirable than what they had before. This concept breaks down into three parts:

When V [value] is one of S's [subject's] values [then] 1) V vaguely points to or indicates possible states of affairs 2) towards whose realization S has a favorable attitude 3) because S believes, explicitly or implicitly, that their realization makes a favorable difference to the life of someone, not necessarily S himself' (Baier, 1969, p.57).

Notice that a value may be imputed to an institution as well as an individual. An institution which has survived long enough that its dynamic historicity appears as objective fact to individuals also has an underlying set of value assumptions about desired states of affairs and the means through which to achieve them. For example:

'Equality of opportunity is one of Jones' institutional values' means that Jones favors the realization of a state of affairs, namely, one constituted by certain institutions granting or affording equality of opportunity to its members" (p. 59).

This implies that the institution values equality of opportunity and that an individual shares that value with the institution's stated mission. However, imputing a value to an individual or an institution does not necessarily imply anything about the mechanisms through which to achieve the desired goal state. This leads to the question of value assessment.

Baier makes clear the distinction between an assessment of value and an imputation that a person holds a particular value. The latter suggests the static nature of an entity. The former evaluates the extent to which the imputed value is achieved:

Even the meaning of the world "value" is different in these two kinds of claims. Assessed value is the measure of thecapacity 69 of some sort of thing to make favorable differences to people's lives. Imputed values are measures oftendencies of persons (and only person) to promote certain endsbecause they take the attainment of these ends to make a favorable difference to people's lives. The former gives relevant information about, and grades things as aids to, the betterment of people's lives. The latter gives relevant information about people's actual allocation of resources when guided by their conception of the good life and of how to attain it (p. 56).

For example, "equality of opportunity" could be imputed as a value held by an individual or an institution. An individual could also assess whether Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines contribute to achieving the value of "equality of opportunity." For purposes of this study, then, values are defined as possible states of affairs and can be either assessed or imputed to people and institutions. These values are the basis upon which institutions and people form common understandings about what functions an institution should perform and how to go about performing them.

Having defined the nature and characteristics of social values, the question of how to identify them in particular situations remains. Social values represent choices between alternatives and, in turn, the notion of choice implies the concept of dialectics. Analyzing arguments through a dialectical process runs through a number of schools of intellectual thought, including Plato's study of rhetoric, Hegel and Marx's consideration of historical materialism, Mao's treatise on the contradictions in political thought, Dewey's concern with rational choice, modem rhetoricians' concern with rhetorical epistemology, and contemporary critical theorists who analyze power relations in public debate. Rather than argue fine distinctions in the various definitions of the term, dialectics in this context are used broadly. It is taken to mean a process through which movement of mind or of policy or of public situations comes about through a consideration of the status quo, different perspectives on it, and beliefs about actions which must be taken to 70 transform the status quo into something better. Thus, social values may be identified by describing cunrent states of affairs and analyzing the forces that brought them to this state. This allows alternative possibilities available in the past and the kinds of alternatives possible (however improbable they may be) in the future to be explored.

Dialectical exploration of social values occurs in many applied contexts. McQuail invokes the concept to distinguish the various theoretical issues embedded in media systems. For example, he sets centripetal and centrifugal tendencies, materialist and cultural perspectives, and dominance and pluralism off as opposing forces which can be used to place both theoretical orientations and types of national media systems (1987). McCain and Lowe (1990) use dialectics to explore the conflicting policy options for organizing radio systems according to issues of local/national control and funding in western Europe. New institutional arrangements and perspectives were driven by changing audience needs and technological capabilities. The value implications of sender vs. receiver control in programming decisions and nationalism vs. localism in the U.S. public radio system highlight fundamental contradictions (Stavitsky, 1990; McCain, Stavitsky

& Patterson, 1990). Historians also refer to the dialectic nature of change in the institution of public education (Cuban; 1984; Katz, 1987). The idea may be explained as follows:

In time, altered circumstances make the origianl policy obsolete; a new contradiction surfaces and a demand for innovation or reform starts anew. Of course the dialectic varies in its pace and in the conflict it generates... However, the general moral is clear: no policy can be expected to last forever, policymakers should learn to build impermanently... For failure to appreciate the dialectical nature of institutional development has been a major recurrent weakness of social policy (Katz, p. 119). 71

The present study describes the dialectical nature of the values operating in

Channel One. These abstract commercial media and public education values are magnified in concrete arguments about communication technology, content, control and funding of Channel One. It serves as a case study of the theoretical issues involved in inter-institutional conflict over the use of communication technologies for educational purposes. The next question becomes how to define these abstract value differences in tangible ways.

Three criteria were of concern in defining each value. Each value related to:

1) a possible state of affairs; 2) about which an evaluation could be made; 3) because of the explicit or implicit belief that it would make a favorable difference.

The next task involved sorting out the theoretical meaning and implications of these criteria. As noted by Baier, a possible state of affairs is any "...possible feature, aspect, or state of the world around us, such as American big business being free from cramping restrictions" (p. 58). Thus, a value exists in conceptual space because language provides the mechanism through which a possible state of affairs may be expressed. A value may or may not be made manifest in human activity.

For example, a possible state of affairs might be a minimum level of education for all people. This value is manifest in the free system of public education in the

United States where, theoretically the system is designed as a place for all children to go and learn. But the value "all information for all people in all places at all times" can be stated as a desired possible state of affairs. This value is not made manifest in any real way because, among other things, property and ownership law prevent the possibility. Additionally, the domain in which this possible state of affairs is desired must be specified. While all information may not be possible when the domain is defined as the United States of America, the value "all 72 information for all people in all places at all times" could be attained if the domain is defined in terms of a five member work group with roughly equal status and information relevant to their specific project Thus, clarity about the domain in which the value is assumed is necessary. This study considered three domains, public education, American commercial media and Channel One.

Next, the phrase "towards whose realization S has a favorable attitude" must be considered. One purpose of defining values and value domains is to investigate how people respond to them, in other words, to gather evidence about whether or not individuals are favorable, neutral or unfavorable in their judgments about them. At this point, distinctions between atittudes, beliefs and values must be made clear. Attitude may be defined a s " a relatively enduring organization of beliefs around an object or situation predisposing one to respond in some preferential manner" (Rokeach, p. 112,1972) and "a multidimensional concept consisting of cognitive, affective and behavioral components" (Cegala, p. 19,

1987). Regardless of whether one takes the view that a belief is a subset of attitudes or is independent of attitudes, a belief may be defined as an inference that a person accepts without question that something is true or false (Cegala, p, 23,

1987). As defined above, an individual's values involve: "someone’s having a favorable attitude toward the realization of a state of affairs because of the belief that the realization will make a favorable difference to someone" (Baier, p. 58,1969).

From this it follows that, people accept and act on certain assumptions about the nature of the world and the things in it. In doing so, they develop and hold certain positions (positive, neutral, negative and weak, mild strong) toward the things in the world about which they have beliefs. People value certain states of being and certain methods for achieving those states because they believe (accept as true) that 73 certain objectives (values) can and should be attained because they lead to favorable results (attitude toward).

The terms "explicitly or implicitly" provide the link for constructing useful value statements. These terms refer to the degree of specificity and the kind of value involved. Baier makes clear the distinction between an assessment of value and an imputation that a person holds a particular value. Imputing a value refers to whether a person believes allocating resources in a particular way would lead to favorable results. Assessing value relates to how people make judgments about whether allocation of those resources does result in favorable or unfavorable consequences.

Both kinds of claims are relevant in the present case depending on the degree of specificity necessary for constructing the value statement. For example, it is both a possible and an actual state of affairs in the U.S. to maintain a broadcast media system owned and operated by the private sector and a system operated by the public. These two values can be stated explicitly, counterposed, and one or the other imputed as an individual's value in relation to the media institution. It makes less sense, however, to counterpose the value of high quality media content and low quality media content. A person would not likely favor poor quality media content and assume that it would benefit the lives of some people. The more useful approach is to attempt a value assessment Given the nature of commercial media content, is it assessed as high quality or low quality? This more specific level of assessment of value provides meaningful items for the respondent. These value differences will become more clear as the value items are defined. 74

Study of the Problem

Channel One generated a flurry of attention from educators, policy makers academic researchers. None of the components of the project represented a radical break with policy options when taken in isolation. The need for public affairs curriculum is well established in education circles. Teachers use television in secondary school classrooms. Commercial sponsorship of informational programs is standard in the U.S. and private companies support school activities in exchange for advertising space on a regular basis. However, once these factors were combined in a nationally distributed project, the implications could not be ignored.

The differences imbedded in deeply held political, economic and cultural values surfaced to force serious reflection. Epistimelogical assumptions emerged and created an arena for dialogue on the issues. Whittle Communications and the public education establishment took opposing sides.

As the debate continued it became clear that neither of these players was particularly interested in understanding how others viewed the issue as a whole.

Persuasive strategies took precedence over reasonable dialogue and the actual users, teachers, were not the primary group consulted about the implications for their classrooms. Issues of new communication technologies in education will remain a quagmire until more fruitful methods for dealing with the underlying value issues develop. Movement toward this goal depends, in part, on a consideration of value orientations and their manifestation in various contexts. Understanding how people view the core assumptions provides a basis for sorting theoretical concerns and reviewing related history and research. This could create a common ground from which to understand the implications of future communication technologies for instructional purposes where similar value issues coalesce. 75

This study operationalizes the value issues and indicates how Ohio teachers

view the Channel One proposal. Teachers were asked to indicate their position in

relation to media, education and Channel One on the four value dialectics. Some of

these teachers work in schools where Channel One has been used. Others are

employed in schools which do not use Channel One. Given the above discussion it

seems likely that these two groups will differ on some of the value dialectics due to

role definition in particular types of institutional settings. However, the groups are

not likely to differ on all of the dialectics because of similar assumptions afforded

by their individual autonomy in those institutions. This research seeks to identify

whether the two groups differ in role characteristics, kinds of experiences with Channel One, and positions on the values. It also seeks to describe the nature of

those value differences and whether the institutional values can account for the

Channel One value assessments. The following research questions will be

investigated:

RQ1: D o teachers working in schools using Channel One differ

significantly in role characteristics from teachers working in schools not using

Channel One?

RQ2: D o teachers working in schools using Channel One differ

significantly in perceptions of individuals involved in the process of making a decision about Channel One from teachers working in schools where Channel One

was not used?

RQ3: Do teachers working in schools using Channel One differ

significantly in the sources of information they accessed regarding Channel One from teachers working in schools where Channel One was not used? RQ4: Do teachers working in schools using Channel One differ significantly in the level of involvement with the Channel One issue from teachers working in schools where Channel One was not used?

RQ5: Do teachers working in schools using Channel One differ significantly in value assessments about Channel One from teachers working in schools where Channel One was not used?

RQ6: Do teachers working in schools using Channel One differ significandy in commercial media and public education domain values from teachers working in schools where Channel One was not used?

RQ7: How do teachers working in schools using Channel One differ in values and value assessments from teachers working in schools where Channel One was not used?

RQ8: Do institutional domain values account for differences in Channel One value assessments? CHAPTER II

METHOD

Introduction

This chapter describes the method used to test the eight research questions developed in chapter one. Sampling decisions and procedures for data collection highlight the difficulties involved in gathering data about the issue. The design of the survey instrument is detailed and indicates the way value items were constructed. Finally, the procedures used to prepare and analyze the data are outlined. Sample High school teachers in the state of Ohio were the population sampled.

The factors taken into consideration when choosing Ohio as the state from which to sample related to Channel One's status in Ohio, the nature of the state and its education system, and convenience. Among the sue original Channel One pilot schools, Withrow High in Cincinnati became the center of controversy and

77 78 ultimately decided to reject the project Additionally, Bishop Ready, a Catholic high school in Columbus, was one of the first to use Channel One. The Ohio State Board of Education did not debate the question of Channel One's constitutionality until March, 1990 and did not rule on it until December. Contracts had already been signed and several hundred schools were on-line with Channel One by this time. Thus, it was clear by August, 1990 that Channel One would be a part of Ohio public education. It had received both positive and negative press within the state, particularly since national education organizations which opposed Channel One and local education interest groups which refused comment on Channel One, were covered. 10

The organization of public education in the state of Ohio constrained sampling decisions somewhat Schools are divided into three types of districts, cities, exempted villages and locals. Decision making differs slighdy among the district types. City and exempted village districts are governed by independent superintendents and boards of education at the local level. Local districts have autonomous boards of education and superintendents but must obtain approval for some decisions, such as personnel, from the county office.

The diffuse decisional structures which characterize Ohio's education system provide a partial explanation as to why the Channel One project recovered from the initial conflict which originated during the Gncinnati pilot test Whittle began marketing Channel One to private schools and to districts surrounding the other major cities in Ohio. Private schools operate autonomously in setting curriculum and school schedules, reducing the volume of people and interests involved. Consistent with this strategy of downplaying efforts to cultivate the market, Whittle maintained strict control of information about which districts were 79 offered the service. When questioned, Whittle representatives responded that all information about Channel One contracts was proprietary. Staff for the State Board of Education indicated that Channel One was a local district decision and the only way to obtain information about its status was to call each of the 750 Ohio districts.

Each of the approximately 32,000 high school teachers in Ohio are responsible for specific subject areas. For example, approximately 8,000 teachers work in the social studies area which includes such specializations as government,

American history, political science, and geography. Teachers also handle a multitude of other duties related to maintaining the smooth flow of the school day and supervising study halls and extra-curricular activities. While teachers have some control over their schedule, ultimately they must work within the organization of the school system. During class time they must teach within curricular guidelines and remain accountable to the education administration for outcomes.

According to the terms of the Channel One contract, students had to view the program at the same time during the school day. Many schools aired the program during the first class in the morningcm - on a rotating schedule throughout the day.

Thus, regardless of whether one taught civics or algebra, most teachers had to plan around Channel One. Since all teachers had to deal with Channel One in some way or another, all high school teachers were used as the population for the study.

Locating survey respondents proved a difficult task. The mail survey required a list of all high school teachers in the state of Ohio. The State Department of Education maintains a record of all certified public school teachers with their school addresses. The sample size was determined by considering three factors

(Frankel, 1983). First, mail samples often generate notoriously low response rates and the level of information and interest in the issue could not be estimated a priori. Second, the study design required that teachers in schools which had accepted, had rejected and had not been offered Channel One be sampled. Third, information about the specifics of the situation was minimal due to the large number of variables involved. Given these constraints, a systematic random sample of4500 certified public high school teachers was obtained.

Procedures for Data Collection

Data collection and analysis was supported with a grant from the Ohio State

University Office of Research, the Graduate School of the Ohio State University and The Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications (CAST). An outer cover bound the survey booklet and included the respondent's school address and the CAST return address. The survey questions and a frequency distribution of responses are included in Appendix A. The inside page of the booklet contained a business reply address for CAST. Teachers were instructed to tear off the outer cover with their address label on it so that all responses would remain anonymous.

The respondent then completed the survey, stapled it shut, and returned it through the mail.

The initial mailing of 4500 surveys occurred on October 31,1990. Return was requested by November 15,1991. A postcard reminder was mailed in January

10 and indicated the Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications phone number where respondents could obtain a duplicate survey. A total of 561 teachers returned the survey. This represents a response rate of 12.5%. Among the factors which may have influenced this relatively low rate were familiarity with the topic and length of the survey. Also, a requested date of return was specified since the data were collected for a presentation in the fall of 1990. The subjects may have assumed that returning the survey after that date was unnecessary. The followup 81 postcard was mailed to all subjects and generated 57 additional responses. After each survey was returned, several processing steps were completed. The surveys were opened and assigned a case number. Three individuals were trained to enter completed survey responses into the computer. The researcher then checked each coded survey to determine accuracy of initial coding and to check qualitative responses.

Instrumentation

The instrument was designed to achieve three objectives, including a measure of teachers values regarding the issues surrounding Channel One, information about the status of the project and their experience with it, and background about their roles as teachers. Constructing the mail survey according to the tenets discussed by (Dillman, 1983) resulted in an eighteen page booklet A detachable outer cover with the teacher’s school mailing address insured anonymity of the respondent The inside contained an attention getting title page and a letter stating the purposes of the survey.

The questionnaire design moved from general to specific. The first 50

Likert scales provided a measure of the communication technology, content, funding and control values related to the media and education domains. Questions about experience with Channel One constituted the next section of the survey to stimulate thinking about the specifics of the Channel One project The twenty remaining value items focused on the technology, content, funding and control issues as they pertained to Channel One, specifically. The final section of the survey obtained information about the teacher’s professional role. The following provides details regarding question design. 82

Measuring Values Four values, communication technology, content, funding, and control resonated through the commercial media, the public education and the Channel One domains. To the extent possible, items for each construct in the three contexts were written with parallel structure. To avoid response patterns half of the items for each construct were reversed. Where possible, items written for other instruments were used as the basis for designing the items for this instrument. The origination of each item will be described throughout the following section.

Communication Technology Value Assessments

Debating the value of communication technologies is an ongoing theme in human history. These value orientations are illuminated in current arguments about public education, especially. As a possible state of affairs, the elimination of video images is inconceivable. A more fruitful approach is to consider value assessments about the differences between the two communication technologies of print and broadcast. Thus, the domain of meaning involved considering television in relation to print and the perceived benefits/detriments of each communication technology. These items were based on literature reviews and research conducted in the area of educational technology (Ibe-Bassey, 1983). The items which represented this domain were: 1) Television does little to clarify concepts for people.

2) Generally, print media holds one's attention more than television.

3) Adults understand ideas better if they can see examples of them on television.

4) Watching television is often more interesting than reading. 83

5) Average Americans see communication technologies, such as

television, more as entertainment than as learning devices.

6) Television functions as a diversion more than it functions to

educate.

A related value involved the ways in which people assume that communication technologies impact society. This was an issue of value distinctions between work and leisure. The following items reflected these values:

1) American adults watch too much television.

2) New communication technologies will replace a large number of

workers in the U.S.

3) Many people will lose their jobs due to technological

development in society.

4) Most individuals are careful consumers of the media.

These values operated in the education domain as well. Television had a problematic history in public schools, in part, because it is perceived as antithetical to the learning process. On the other hand, educators recognize that the medium involves students more easily and often than print forms. These contradictions in assumptions were stated as:

1) Instructional television holds the attention of students more than

print media.

2) Using print media in the classroom is more interesting than using television.

3) High school students understand ideas better if they can see examples of them on education television.

4) Television does not help students grasp the meaning of concepts. 84

5) Television in the classroom is as much a diversion for students

as a learning resource. 6) Communication technologies are seen by high school students

more as entertainment than as learning devices.

Communication technologies are also an issue in the classroom because of their perceived impact on teachers' roles and duties. The value of television in the classroom statements were as follows:

1) The use of communication technologies in the classroom

demands too much time from the teacher.

2) Communication technologies such as television will replace

many teachers.

3) The benefits derived from educational television are worth the

time involved in using i t

4) Many teachers will lose their jobs due to technological

development in society.

Similar value assessments were made in relation to Channel One, also:

1) Channel One, and projects like it, are better at holding students'

attention than reading about current events in news magazines.

2) Projects such as Channel One entertain students more than they

teach them.

3) Televised news projects such as Channel One help students

understand current events ideas.

4) Teachers' traditional role in teaching cuirent events is challenged

in a positive way by projects such as Channel One. 5) Projects such as Channel One take too much time from other

equally important things done during the school day.

Public Affairs Content Value Assessments

News and public affair? content has been an issue in the broadcast media since it began. Items related to content values were culled from scholarly arguments about the nature and extent of objectivity in public affairs reporting

(Denis & Merrill, 1990): 1) Television in the U.S. usually provides high quality news and

public affairs programming.

2) American television news and public affairs programming lacks

diversity in its presentation of viewpoints.

3) Television news and public affairs programming in the U.S. upholds the value of a free press.

4) Television news and public affairs programming is not often

influenced by the business sector.

5) Television news is often biased in its presentation of public

affairs programming.

As another primary source for news and information about the current events and public affairs, schools have been a center of controversy about how content is presented. The same issues of influence which were of concern in commercial media content were also reflected in the public school curricula. Thus, these value items were stated as:

1) Public education systems do a good job of providing high quality

news and public affairs curriculum. 86

2) Secondary schools' public affairs curriculum is often biased in

its presentation of news.

3) Public schools' news and public affairs curriculum uphold the

value of a free press. 4) Secondary school news and public affairs curricula is properly

insulated from business interests.

5) Secondary education news and public affairs curricula lack

diversity in the presentation of viewpoints.

Another point raised in the early critiques of Channel One related to concerns about private sector influences on the content Items related to the

Channel One content value were:

1) Channel One has the potential to provide students with a diversity of views about news and current events. 2) The Channel One news programs couldn't possibly cover current

events in a meaningful way.

3) Projects such as Channel One help students understand the value

of a free press.

4) It is unlikely that Channel One's presentation of news and public

affairs contains any significant biases.

5) The Channel One current events coverage is quite likely

influenced by business interests.

Funding Effects Value Assessments

The financial base of the broadcast media is advertising. While it is possible to impute values to teachers regarding whether or not the media should be advertising supported, the likelihood of people understanding the concept of a non­ commercial private media system and choosing to reject the commercial system for an alternative possibility is unlikely. The notion of commercial media is so deeply embedded in the American consciousness that seeing beyond it becomes quite difficult. A more comprehensible approach was to sample the domain of meaning related to critiques and defenses of advertising. Items about the consequences of advertising allowed respondents to focus on a specific aspect of the issue and make value assessments. While it was not the same as asking whether a commercially supported system was valued, more specific judgments about the value of the system were possible. These scales were constructed from questionnaires designed to measure parents' and children's attitudes toward advertising and consumer socialization habits (Ward, et al, 1977; Roper, 1975). The following statements were used to sample value assessments about the effects of funding for the commercial media: 1) Television commercials are not very helpful to consumers.

2) Advertising often persuades consumers to buy things they

shouldn't buy.

3) Commercials on television often mislead individuals in important

ways.

4) Americans generally understand what commercials are trying to

do.

5) Having commercial sponsorship on television is a fair price to

pay for being able to watch it

The nature of the problem with values in the commercial media was mirrored in the public education domain. The assessment of values about the 88 effects of advertising were more useful at this level, also. The items which reflected these ideas were:

1) Advertising often persuades teenagers to buy things they

shouldn't buy.

2) Teens understand what commercials are trying to do.

3) Using commercial sponsorship in public schools is a fair price to

pay for the projects it funds.

4) Commercials on television often mislead teens in important

ways.

3) The commercials used to sponsor school projects are not often

helpful to students.

Specific to the Channel One domain were questions of about the values related to commercial funding and its potential effects on students. These items were:

1) Most students understand what the commercials in current events

materials such as Channel One are trying to do.

2) The commercials on private media services like Channel One are

not helpful to students.

3) Using commercial sponsorship on televised current events

programs such as Channel One is a fair price to pay for being able to

use the services in public high schools.

4) Commercials on Channel One are likely to mislead students in

important ways.

5) The advertisements on projects such as Channel One persuade

students to buy things they shouldn't buy. 89

Taken as a whole, the above items defined the ways values relating to the effects of advertising were assessed. Control Values

Another value magnified in the Channel One case involved the rationale for allocating control over the commercial media domain. Each of these items related to the aspects of the media which could be controlled through either a public or a private system of operation and reflected values apparent in the commercial media domain. The five value items about control the media included: 1) Private media companies, rather than government agencies

should regulate the uses of news and public affairs programming in

society.

2) Government agencies, rather than private media companies,

should determine the target audience for news and public affairs

programming. 3) Government agencies, rather than private media companies,

should control commercial sponsorship of news and public affairs

programming.

4) Private media companies, rather than government agencies,

should determine the content of news and public affairs

programming. 5) Private media companies, rather than government agencies,

should determine the days and times when news and public affairs

programming is aired.

The issue of control in the public education domain involved a slightly different question because it is a public institution. The control value manifested 90 itself as conflict between the the professional educator establishment and the market system which perceived a direct interest in the quality and cost of the education system. Items which reflected these values were as follows:

1) The local school systems, rather than corporate sponsors, should

determine how news and public affairs are integrated into the curriculum. 2) Corporate sponsors, rather than educators, should determine the

content of news and public affairs curriculum.

3) Business leaders, rather than educators, should decide how to

present news and public affairs issues in schools.

4) School officials, rather than private businesses, should control

commercial sponsorship of school projects.

5) Professional educators, rather than business should determine

the curricular needs of high school students.

The same types of items assessed teacher's values toward control of

Channel One. These items were: 1) The schools not Whittle Communication should determine which students see Channel One.

2) Individual high schools, not Whittle communications, should

decide how to use Channel One.

3) Whittle Communications should decide when and where students

see Channel One rather than having principals and teachers decide.

4) Whittle Communications, rather than public schools, should regulate the commercials on Channel One. 5) Whittle Communications, rather than local school districts should

select the content of Channel One newscasts.

By marking the extent of their agreement/disagreement with these items, teachers assessed the value of communication technology, public affairs content, funding and control in the domains of commercial media, public education and Channel

One.

Summary of Instrumentation Scales Section Each of these items was designed to sample from the domain of meaning for the four value related constructs. The control construct concerned choices between possible states of affairs so that a value could be imputed to individuals regarding which state of affairs, bureaucratic or private media control, was preferable. The advertising, content and technology constructs were more meaningful for respondents when defined as issues of value assessment rather than as preferable states of affairs. Thus, these items reflected the evaluative judgments made by teachers about the value implications of the possibilities. Differences in these value positions were expected to account for variance in teachers' views about Channel One and projects similar to it.

Channel Qng Experience The next section of the survey was designed to gather information about the status of Channel One and the teachers' experience with it These questions asked if and when Channel One had been adopted, who participated in the adoption decisions and how much it had actually been used by the teacher. A second set of questions asked teachers from whom and where they had obtained information about the project and how much information they had. Five more questions asked about use of current events packages and Whittle's wall posters. All of these items 92 provided some indication of the amount and types of information teachers had about

Channel One and Whittle Communications. Professional Role

The final category of information concerned the teachers' role.

Demographic items asked about age and gender of the respondent Other questions considered aspects of the teachers' professional status which influence attitudes toward and experience with media services. These items included school enrollment years as a teacher, school district and subject taught

Pilot Test

Two Columbus area schools were chosen to pilot test the survey. Neither of the schools had been offered Channel One at the time. The surveys were distributed in one hundred teachers' mail boxes and notices were placed in the daily memo to teachers requesting their cooperation in completing the survey. A box where teachers could return the survey was located in the office. Despite a reminder memo four days after the survey was distributed, the response rate was low (n=17).

Descriptive statistics on the scales gave some indication of the reliability of the scales. While n was too small too obtain confidence regarding the reliability of the instrument, it was apparent that the scales correlated together as expected, except for the technology value dimension. Because these items split into a two part structure it seemed that two aspects of the technology value dimension were being used. Thus, five additional societal and educational technology items were constructed These reflected the properties of the medium and perceptions about the impact of television in both contexts. 93

During visits to one of the pilot schools, the researcher noticed that

Connections magazine posters hung on the hallway walls. Connections, produced and distributed by Whittle, provides brief articles on studying techniques and material of interest to teens as well as advertisements sponsored by major corporations. These large posters distributed to middle and high schools are periodically updated by Whittle representatives. The logic of this media property is similar to Channel One, the only difference is that the former is a print medium and the latter is an electronic medium. After inquiring with the assistant principal, it was determined that those working in the school had little background about these posters. Therefore, additional questions were designed regarding teachers' experience with and types of information about Connections.

Procedures for Data Analysis

The procedures for gathering evidence to support the eight research questions listed in chapter one are described below. A frequency distribution of responses to the entire questionnaire is presented in Appendix A. The frequency data for all items not discussed specifically in the results section is presented in that table. The results of all the other data analysis procedures are described in chapter three.

Channel One Status

The first decision made in relation to data analysis concerned the lack of available information about differences in the status of Channel One at the schools where respondents taught The frequency distribution for the item "Which of the following statements describes the use of Channel One at your school?" indicated that 32 respondents had used Channel One since March, 1990; 176 had used it since September, 1990; 83 worked in schools which had decided not to use Channel One; 57 worked in schools where Channel One had not been offered; 176 were unaware of Channel One’s status; and, 25 respondents taught in schools that were in the process of making a decision about whether to use Channel One. A test of mean differences was run on the groups which revealed no significant differences between those who had been using Channel One since March, 1990 and

September, 1990. Differences were not found between those in schools which decided not to use Channel One, those which had not been offered Channel One and those who did not know the status of Channel One. Therefore, the original six categories were collapsed into two in order to reduce the complexity of the analysis and increase certainty about the groups being compared. Respondents which had used Channel One since March or September, 1990 were combined into a single category of "teachers working in schools which had used Channel One." All of the other responses were combined into the category of "teachers working in schools which had not used Channel One." The primary concern of the present study was those working in schools where Channel One was being used as distinct from schools where it was not in use, for whatever reason. Thus, the two categories of

"Channel One" and "Non-Channel One" were retained for the remaining analyses.

A total of 208 respondents, or 37 percent, worked in schools where

Channel One was used. A total of 342 respondents, or 61 percent, were classified as working in schools where Channel One was not used. Two percent of the teachers did not respond to the question. As was discussed in the section on sampling procedures, information on how many schools were using Channel One in October, 1991 was unavailable so it is difficult to speculate as to how closely this sample represents the distribution of Whittle users and non-users in the larger population. 95

Differences in Role Characteristics

The next task in the data analysis process was to determine whether there were differences between the teachers working in schools with and without

Channel One based on their role characteristics, as stated in research question one.

The items regarding number of years as a teacher, school enrollment, subject taught, age and sex were inspected to check for apparent patterns in the open ended responses so that the respondents could be grouped accordingly. Five year increments were used to classify the number of years each respondent had been a teacher. Age was categorized in ten year increments. Enrollment was divided into four broad categories of schools with student populations of 0-600; 601-1200;

1201-1800 and more than 1800. Respondents indicated that they taught in areas as diverse as social studies, language arts, science, math, foreign languages, art, special education, physical education and vocational technical arts. Comparisons were made to determine whether each of these role characteristics accounted for any significant differences between teachers in schools with and without Channel One. Differences in Experience with Channel One

The data about experience with Channel One required some preparation before comparisions could be made to determine whether there were significant differences among the two groups of teachers. Those teachers who responded that

Channel One had not been offered to their school were instructed to skip the four items about specific experiences during the process of making a decision about

Channel One. All others were asked to indicate the date a decision was made about

Channel One, the people who played a role in the decision making process, whether or not Channel One had been used in their classroom and the time of day Channel

One was shown in their school. 96

Responses regarding date of decision making ranged from January, 1989

through September, 1990. Others responded to this question by indicating the semester a decision was made. Each response was coded according to the

following three month periods; winter (December, January, and February); spring

(March, April, and May); summer (June, July and August); and, autumn

(September, October, and November) of 1989 and 1990. The frequency

distribution for date of adoption is included in Appendix A but this item was not

retained for further analysis.

The item which requested information to answer research question two

about who was involved in the Channel One decision included response choices of

school board members, parents, principals, teachers, students and other. Some

teachers wrote superintendents in the other category. Each of these response choices was treated as a separate variable for purposes of analysis. Only those

teachers which marked any of the six responses were included, all others were

treated as missing data and excluded from the analysis. Each response the teacher checked was treated as a "yes" and each blank was assigned a "no." The

frequency distribution for these items is included in Appendix A and results of the comparisons for differences between decision participants are presented in chapter

three.

The next question asked whether teachers had used Channel One in their classroom. A total of 144 respondents indicated that they had. Apparently, some

teachers who admitted that their school had adopted Channel One either had not had it installed or did not have it in their particular classroom. Teachers were also

asked, in an open ended fashion, the time of day Channel One was used. These responses were classified as: before school; during homeroom; during lunch; or, on 97 a rotating schedule throughout the week. For example, one teacher explained the rotating schedule worked as follows: "(period 1 = Monday), (period 2 = Tuesday),

(period 3 = Wednesday), (period 4 = Thursday), (period 5 = Friday)." Another teacher indicated that: "This year we are alternating periods each week. Example,

First period one week, second the next week, etc." Frequencies for "use in the classroom" and "time o f day" items are presented in Appendix A but were not used in the remaining analyses.

The next two questions, in answer to research questions three and four, were designed to find out the sources from which teachers obtained information about Channel One and the amount and types of information they had. Teachers who checked any of the blanks were treated as having answered either "yes" or

"no" to the entire set of response choices and were coded accordingly. A number of teachers responded in the other category by noting that they had received information from teachers working at other schools. Frequency distributions for these items are presented in Appendix A. The results of the comparison of sources and kinds of information among the two groups of teachers are presented in chapter three.

Survey questions 58 and 59 obtained information about whether teachers had used current events materials other than Channel One in their classrooms.

These comparisons are reported in chapter three with the data regarding kinds of experience with Channel One. Teachers were also asked to list the kinds of current events materials they used. While a number of the teachers responded that they did use other kinds of current events, relatively few of them indicated the kinds of packlages used. Among the responses were newspapers, news magazines, PBS 98 and CNN: Newsroom programming. Frequency distributions for these items are included in Appendix A.

Questions 60 through 64 asked for information about the use of framed media posters in the hallways and 231 teachers indicated that the posters were used in schools where they taught. They were also asked about the date when the posters were first used, the individuals involved in making the decision and if they knew which company provided the posters. Responses to this set of questions are tabulated in Appendix A. Yake Assessments Another step in preparing the data few analysis involved determining whether the communication technology, content, funding and control items in the commercial media, public education and Channel One domains were reliable measures of the values reviewed in chapter one. This required a three step process.

First, a principal components factor analysis using the Statistical Package for the

Social Sciences (SPSSx) was performed on the items designed for each of the three domains. Each factor with at least two items loading at .6 or greater and an eigenvalue greater than 1 was considered a stable factor. Four factor, six factor and three factor solutions were retained for the commercial media, public education and

Whittle Communications domains, respectively. Each factor was thought to represent one of the values described earlier and was labelled accordingly. The second step was to create an index of the values represented by each factor. This allowed a more conservative estimate of the strength of the values because it did not rely on any single item as an indicator of the value. Scores for items that loaded on a factor at .6 or greater were summed together and divided by the total number of items on the factor as an index of each value construct. Third, the reliability of each 99 value was established through Cronbach's alpha. These indices were used for all further analyses of the Likert scale items.

Value Differences Among Teachers

The fifth research question asked whether teachers in schools where

Channel One was used differed on the values from teachers in schools where

Channel One was not used. Discriminant analysis was chosen as the technique for determining whether and on which values the teachers differed because it could be used to classify each group according to the value items which best represented it.

As described by Klecka (1980), the purpose of discriminant analysis is as follows:

By considering the groups to be defined as a single nominal level variable, we see discriminant analysis as a technique which relates one nominal level variable to several interval level variables (P- 11). Teachers working in schools with Channel One and without Channel One were used as the two nominal groups and the values were the interval level variables on which the teachers were expected to differ. The first discriminant analysis included all of the values as possible discriminators. The specific Channel

One value assessments were best at differentiating among the teachers, as expected in research question five. A second discriminant analysis was performed to discover whether the teachers also differed on the public education and commercial media values, as stated in research question six. Results of both these analyses are presented in chapter three.

Kinds of Value Differences Among Teachers

The discriminant analyses revealed that the Channel One and the institutional values did discriminate among the teachers. For example, the teachers could be discriminated by their response to the value assessment that advertising effects students negatively. The next step was to perform analysis of variance tests on 100 each of the values to determine the direction and significance of these differences in order to gather evidence for the seventh research question. This procedure tested whether the means for the two groups of teachers on each of the values were the same. For example, how and how much did teachers differ on the value assessment that advertising effects students negatively.

Media and Education Values which Accounted for ChanneLQne ValueAssessments

Analyses to discover which institutional values accounted for differences in the Channel One values were needed after determining that the institutional values did discriminate between the teachers. Given that differences between teachers did exist on the advertising value assessment, the next question became whether teachers' institutional domain value reponses could account for their value assessments about Channel One. For example, did the way teachers responded to the value educators should control classroom television use account for the way teachers responded to the value assessment Channel One should control classroom television use? Regression analysis is a statistical technique designed to determine whether variance in one variable can be explained by variance in a second variable.

All of the institution level values were regressed on each of the three Channel One value indices to obtain evidence regarding research question eight. Results are presented in chapter three.

Summary of Data Analysis Procedures

Five steps were followed to test the eight research questions. First, the data were coded and entered into the computer, frequency distributions for each item were obtained and checked for accuracy and possible mistakes and teachers were grouped according to whether or not teachers used Channel One in their school.

Second, comparisons were made on role characteristics and experiences with Channel One to determine whether and how teachers working in schools using

Channel One differed from teachers working in schools not using Channel One in answer to research questions one through four. Third, the value items were factor analyzed and an index was built from each factor to represent the value construct indicated by the factor. Research questions five and six were tested through two discriminant analyses performed to determine which values best differentiated between the groups of teachers in schools with and without Channel One. Fourth, analyses of variance were performed to discover the nature of the differences between the teachers as asked in research question seven. The fifth step used regression analysis to see which institutional values accounted for the variance in

Channel One values and to gather evidence regarding research question eight The results of these analyses are presented and described in chapter three and their implications discussed in chapter four. CHAPTER IE

RESULTS

Introduction The results of the data analyses used to explore the eight research questions are presented in this chapter. First, the results of the comparisions between the teachers on the role characteristics and Channel One experience variables are presented in order to set a context for understanding the value analyses. The factor analyses on items relevant to the commercial media, public education and Channel

One domains confirmed the relationships within each set of items, for the most part.

The results of these factor analyses will be described in some detail so that the reader can gain a clear understanding of the nature of these values since they formed the basis for the investigation of research questions five through eight The

102 103

discriminant analyses indicated that the two groups of teachers differed on the

values, as queried in research question five and six, and the analyses of variance

indicated the nature of those differences, the concern of research question seven.

Finally, the regression analyses suggest that the abstract media and education

institution values did account for variance in the specific Channel One values

assessments.

Differences in Teachers' Role Characteristics

Research question one asked whether there were significant differences in

the role characteristics of teachers working in schools with Channel One and

teachers working in schools without Channel One. Comparisons were made to test

whether differences existed in subject taught, school enrollment, teaching

experience, age and sex. As indicated in table one, the only significant difference

was in student enrollment. This suggests that teachers in a variety of professional role situations were interested in the Channel One debate whether or not their school

was using the service and that differences in the two groups cannot be attributed to

the different professional characteristics of teachers responding to the survey.

The only significant difference found among teachers in schools with and

without Channel One was the number of students enrolled in the schools. Channel

One was used in schools with enrollments of between 600 to 1200 students more

than in schools with less than 600 or more than 1200 students (x^ = 12.57; df = 3; p = .006). This result may have occurred due to the marketing strategy of Whittle

Communications. First, Whittle Communications originally planned to market

Channel One in largo* schools and pay less attention to those schools with enrollments under 500. Second, Whittle Communications decided to target

suburban and rural areas before going into the larger city schools where they feared 104 the kind of controversy which had occurred at Cincinnati’s Withrow High School.

Thus, it was not surprising that differences in enrollments were found and that

Channel One was accepted in medium size schools more than in small or large schools.

Table 1 Characteristics of Teachers in the Sample

Users Non-Users n-204 n=326*

Subjects Taught Social Studies 18.1 17.1 Language Arts 18.1 22.4 Science 17.2 16.0 Math 21.1 14.4 Foreign Language 6.9 6.4 Arts 4.9 7.1 Special Education 0.0 .3 Vocational Technical 8.8 12.3 Physical Education 4.9 3.4 School Enrollment^ 600 students or less 17.8 18.7 601-1200 students 50.0 35.2 1201-1800 students 24.9 29.9 1801 or more 8.3 16.2 Teaching Experience 5 years or less 2.5 2.1 6-10 years 20.8 19.8 11-14 years 20.8 21.2 15 or more years 55.9 56.7 Age 39 or younger 32.8 35.3 40-49 49.8 45.9 50-59 16.9 18.9 Sex Female 48.3 36.8 Male 51.7 63.2

’‘‘Results are presented as percentages of frequency distribution except as noted.

1 x2 = 12.57, df. = 3, p = .006 105

Participation in the Channel One Decision

Research question two was concerned with teachers' perceptions about who had participated in the process of making a decision about whether or not to use

Channel One. The teachers working in schools which were using Channel One indicated participation from more groups than teachers working in schools not using Channel One, as indicated in table two. Significant differences were found on perceptions of the role of school board members (x = 33.5; df. = 1; p = .05), parents (x2 = 4.7; df. = 1; p = .05), and principals (x2 = 15.9; df. = 1; p = .05).

Ninety percent of school board members and principals were thought to have participated in the "Channel One schools" and sixty-two and seventy-three percent of school board members and principals in the "non-Channel One schools" were thought to have participated in those decisions. This is intriguing since much of the opposition to Channel One was voiced by professional administration organizations. Also interesting is the finding that respondents in both types of schools felt that teachers were included in the decision sixty percent of the time.

Table 2 Participants in Channel One Decision

Users Non-Users n=202 n=94

School Board ^ 91.0 61.7 Parents2 20.3 9.5 Teachers 60.4 60.6 Principals^ 91.6 73.4 Students 10.4 7.4 Other (superintendent) 18.3 16.8

1 x2 = 33.5; df = 1; p = .05 2 x2 = 4.66; df = 1; p = .05 3 x2 = 15.9; df= l ; p = .05 106

Sources of Information about Channel One

The third research question wondered whether differences existed among teachers working in schools with and without Channel One in the sources from which they received information about Channel One. These results are presented in table three. More teachers in schools using Channel One received information from their principals (x^ = 137.7; df = 1; p = .05) and from direct communication with the Whittle company (x^ = 23.5; df = 1; p = .05) than those in schools where

Channel One was not used. These teachers used interpersonal sources of information and were less dependent on mediated sources. Teachers working in schools that were not using Channel One relied on their professional affiliations (x^

= 6.4; df = 1; p = .05), professional journals (x^ = 4.9; df = 1; p = .05), and colleagues from other schools (x^ = 7.3; df = 1; p = .05) for information more than teachers in schools using Channel One. Teachers in schools not using Channel One also consulted more local (x^ = 4.2; df = 1; p = .05) and national (x^ = 27.9; df =

1; p = .05) mediated sources of information than teachers working where Channel

One was not used. No significant differences were found between the groups with respect to colleagues in the same school or parents as sources of information.

These findings demonstrate significant differences in the sources teachers accessed to learn about Channel One and its implications. 107

Table 3 Sources of Information for Ohio Teachers Regarding Channel One

Users Non-Users n=205 n=198

Principal* 91.2 34.3

Other teachers at school 28.8 30.5

Parents 1.6 .5

Educational Organization2 31.9 44.7

Professional Journal3 9.3 17.3

Whittle release s^ 39.0 16.8

National Press3 29.8 66.3

Local Press^ 32.2 42.6

Other (teachers from other schools)2 7.8 17.3

1 x2 = 137.7; df = 1; p = .05

2 x2 = 6.4; df = 1; p = .05

3 x2 = 4.9; df = 1; p = .05

4 x2 = 23.5; df = 1; p = .05

5 x2 = 27.9; df = 1; p = .05

6 x2 = 4.2; df = 1; p = .05

2 x2 = 7.3; df = 1; p = .05 108

Teacher Knowledge and Activity Regarding Channel One

Research question four was concerned with comparisons of teachers' perceptions of the amount and kinds of information they had regarding Channel

One. The contingency tables generated for this analysis indicated some signficant differences in frequencies expected and frequencies observed in levels of information among the groups. Only half of the teachers who worked in schools where Channel One was used indicated that they had attended a demonstration of the program prior to its adoption. This seems a relatively low figure even though it is significantly more than those in schools which were not using Channel One

(x^ = 57.4; df = 1; p = .05). Fifteen percent of the teachers in schools without

Channel One indicated that they had seen a demonstration. Although this appears to be a relatively low figure, it should be remembered that the "non-user" category included teachers who did not know about the status of Channel One or whether it had been offered to their school. Obviously, these teachers would have been less likely to have seen a demonstration of Channel One.

One quarter of the teachers in schools with Channel One indicated they played an active role in making the decision to use it at their school. This was significantly more than teachers in schools which were not using Channel One

(x^ = 13.6; df = 1; p = .05). Again, however, the pool of teachers working at schools which had actually rejected Channel One was only thirty percent of the total of those working in schools without Channel One. Differences were also found among the teachers in the amount of attention they perceived having paid to the

Channel One debate. Seventy-eight percent of the teachers in "Channel One schools" paid close attention while half of those in "non-Channel One schools" paid attention (x^ = 38.3; df = 1; p = .05). Overall, the salience of the Channel One 109 issue to the respondents seems to have been quite high, not a surprising conclusion given that they took the time to complete a survey about it.

Table 4

Level of Teacher Knowledge and Activity Regarding Channel One

Users Non-Users n=202* n=247

Read articles about Channel One^ 55.1 41.3

Attended Channel One demonstration2 47.3 14.2

Followed press coverage 32.7 26.7

Played active role in school decision3 23.4 10.1

Paid close attention to Channel One debate4 78.5 49.8

Used other current events materials 37.9 42.0

Used Whittle Connections posters 56.0 54.8

*N for current events item was Channel One = 203; Non-Channel One = 262. N for poster item was Channel One = 168; Non-Channel One = 241.

1 x2 = 8 ;d f= 1; p = .05

2 x2 = 57.4; df = 1; p = .05

3 x2 = 13.6; df = 1; p = .05

4 x2 = 38.3; df = 1; p = .05 110

Reliability of Sirasy-instmmgnt A principal components factor analysis was performed on each of the three levels of items to obtain reliability of the value items on the survey instrument. A correlation matrix was produced in order to determine the appropriate type of factor analysis to run. Since the correlations were low, thr e principal components, orthoginal rotation factor analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The criteria used to select the most appropriate solution were that at least two items loaded on a factor with an eigenvalue of 1.0 or greater and that each item retained loaded on the factor at .5 or above. Negative loadings are indicative of those items which were reversed to avoid response patterns. The extracted factors are discussed below and their use as indices of the values described in chapter one are explained in the summary of reliability issues.

Commercial Media Domain Factor Analysis

The items which assessed values in the commercial media domain formed the based the basis for one of the three factor analyses. The four extracted factors accounted for 17.8%; 11.4%; 8.6% and 5.7% of the variance, respectively, for a total of 43.5% of the variance explained in the commercial media domain. This analysis is summarized in table five.

Television Should Be Privately Controlled

Four items related to the regulation of the commercial broadcast system in the United States loaded on this factor. The items pertained to the regulation of the uses of public affairs content, audiences for such content, the nature of the public affairs content and the commercial funding which pays for this content. The only item designed to represent this value which did not load on the factor was "Private media companies, rather than government agencies, should determine the days and times when news and public affairs programming is aired." Perhaps this item was less related to concerns about audience and content relationships, the basis for the other four items. Programming was either seen as unrelated to the general value or as inconsequential. Otherwise, this value held together as expected and was summarized as: Television should be privately controlled.

Televised Public Affairs Content Lacks Diversity

The second factor consisted of five items which assessed values about public affairs content available through commercial television. These items reflected values toward the quality of content, its relationship with free press values, the extent of diverse views represented in the content, and the degree of bias perceived in the content. One item which was created as a part of the technology construct rather than the content construct loaded(hi this factor, "Television does little to clarify concepts for people." Apparently respondents focused on the word

"concept" and not on the phrase "television does." The item was viewed as a question of content rather than how the medium presented its substance. When read in this way, the item does relate to issues of content quality. The item which did not hold on this factor was "television news and public affairs programming is not often influenced by the business sector." This suggested that the relationship between the private sector and media industries was either not understood or was seen as indirect As a whole, this construct was labelled: Televised public affairs content lacks diversity.

Television Advertising Effects People Negatively

Values associated with perceived negative aspects of commercial television formed the third factor. The items loading on this factor were constructed as value assessments of the effects of commercial advertising funding in American society 112 and perceptions about the functions of the commercial media in society.

Interestingly, teachers' concerns about the negative effects of advertising correlated with the views that most people use television for diversion and entertainment.

Teachers believed that advertising is not very helpful, that advertising persuades people to buy things they shouldn't, that advertising is misleading, and that television, in general, is a diversionary and entertainment oriented medium. The advertising items which did not load on this factor were "Americans generally understand what commercials are trying to do" and "Having commercial sponsorship on television is a fair price to pay for being able to watch it" The perception of negative effects, clearly demonstrated in the correlations between the first three advertising items, was not related to the items about the intentionality and the underlying purposes for advertisements. While the data did not offer any direct evidence to support this notion, it is possible that this represents one of the central value imputation conflicts. Advertising is perceived as harmful but what other possibility is there to pay for television?

Two items intended to measure the characteristics of television as a medium loaded with the items relating to advertising effects. Again, it seems that in thinking about television in the context of this survey, teachers focused on the programming related aspects rather than the nature of the medium. Perhaps the meaningful phrases in these items related to educating and diverting as a function of content not the process or medium of delivery. This funding related factor was labelled: Television advertising effects people negatively. 113

Communication Technologies Do Not Impact Jobs

Views about the impact of communication technologies on employment comprise the last media domain factor. Teachers were not concerned that communication technologies would have a negative impact on employment trends in the U.S., as characterized by such items as television will replace workers and people will lose jobs because of them. Only two items loaded on this factor although four were expected to load. The construct was supposed to recognize societal level impacts of technologies by measuring value assessments related to employment trends and leisure time activity. However, the items related to television consumption patterns did not relate to the items about work. Thus, this factor represented the notion that: Communication technologies do not impact jobs. Summary of Table 5

Four reliable factors emerged from the commercial media domain value items. The two factors which represented control and content held together as expected when the items were designed. The third factor which was created to represent value assessments about the effects of advertising as a funding mechanism for public affairs content should be interpreted more broadly to mean assessments about television's effects, in general. The values which did not hold together related to technology. The items about technology's impact on the labor force related to each other but not to the items about television as a drain on time resources. Items which countetposed television and print as communication technologies did not load on any factor, either. Otherwise, the commercial media domain items seem to be a reliable measure of the value constructs discussed in chapter one. 114

TABLE5 Factor Loadings of the Commercial Media Domain Value Items

VALUE ITEMS FACTOR LOADINGS

TELEVISION SHOULD BE PRIVATELY CONTROLLED media regulate uses of public affairs programs 31 .03 .01 -.03 government determines audience for public affairs zJl .08 .00 .06 government controls commercial sponsorship zJl .08 .12 .08 media should determine public affairs content 31 -.08 .08 .02 TELEVISED PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONTENT LACKS DIVERSITY television provides high quality news programs .13 -.65 -.01 .02 television does little to clarify concepts for people -.05 M .26 -.01 television news lacks diversity in viewpoints .06 3 1 .21 .06 television news upholds the value of a free press .26 zM .15 .15 television news is biased in its news presentation .03 3 1 .30 .03 ADVERTISING EFFECTS PEOPLE NEGATIVELY television commercials are not helpful to consumers .03 .24 31 .08 ads persuade people to buy things they shouldn't -.02 -.04 3 1 .11 television is more diversionary than educational -.02 .25 31 .05 Americans see television as entertainment oriented .01 .24 31 .03 Commercials often mislead people -.04 .02 32. -.02 COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES DO NOT IMPACT JOBS new communication technologies replace workers -.06 -.04 .03 .88 people lose jobs due to technological developments -.08 .04 .09 .85

Eigenvalues 3.93 2.51 1.89 1.24 Percent of Variance Explained 17.8% 11.4% 8.6% 5.7%

*Exact wording of each item can be found in Appendix A.

1 Cronbach's alpha = .80 2 Cronbach's alpha = .69 3 Cronbach's alpha = .69 4 Cronbach's alpha = .71 115

Public Education.Pomain Eagtor. Analysis The analysis of the education institution environment produced six factors which accounted for 16.4%; 12%; 7.6%; 6.6%; 5.6%; and 4.5% respectively for a total of 52.7% of the variance explained. Results are presented in table six.

Classroom Television Interests Students

Unlike the commercial media domain, the strongest factor in the public education domain related to television as a communication technology. The items related to television's ability to hold attention, interest students, help them understand ideas, clarify concepts, and the benefits of the time involved in using it loaded on this factor. All of these items were designed to represent aspects of the technology value, and may be stated as: Classroom television interests students.

Classroom Television Use Should Be Controlled Bv Educators

The five items related to control formed the next factor. This value included the ideas that professional educators should determine the uses of news and public affairs, the content discussed, the ways this content is integrated into the school day, the approach used in teaching the issues, and the role of commercial sponsorship in schools. This construct indicates that: Classroom television use should be controlled bv educators.

Advertising Effects Students Negatively

The third factor represented value assessments of advertising's effects on students and its use in the education domain. All five funding items loaded including advertising persuades teens to buy things they shouldn't, that teens understand commercials, that commercials mislead teens, that commercial sponsorship is fair price for the projects funded, and that commercials are not 116 helpful to students. This construct was labeled: Advertising effects teens negatively, Curriculum Fairly Represents Public Affairs Content

The quality of the public affairs curriculum in high schools was assessed in the fourth factor. The items on this factor include bias in the curriculum, teaching of free press values, and business influence and diversity of views presented. The only content item which did not load on this factor was "public education systems do a good job of providing high quality news and public affairs curriculum."

Perhaps quality and influence are perceived as quite different issues in the education context. This factor was labeled: Curriculum fairly represents public affairs.

Classroom Television Does Not Impact Teachers’ Jobs

The relationship between teaching jobs and replacement of teachers due to communication technologies was represented by this two item factor. The items related to amount of time required by the technology in the classroom did not load on the factor. The connection between job possibility and conditions of working were not perceived as related issues. This value was represented by the statement: Classroom television does not impact teachers’ iobs.

Classroom Television is a Diversion

The final factor in the public education domain related to technology also.

These items described the function of communication technology as entertaining and diverting more than educational. They were originally conceptualized as part of the communication technology characteristics value. However, in the education domain, the nature of the communication technology, its relationship to work situation and its perceived functions are distinct values for teachers. This value dealt with the notion that: Classroom television is a diversion. TABLE6 Factor Loadings of the Education Domain Value Items

VALUE ITEMS* FACTOR LOADINGS 1 2 3 4 5 6 CLASSROOM TELEVISION INTERESTS STUDENTS television holds student attention JA -.04 .10 -.06 .02 .05 print media interests more than tv zM .03 .08 .08 .00 .07 students understand ideas on tv 33. .06 -.07 .11 -.02 -.01 tv helps students grasp concepts -.58 -.02 .02 -.16 .04 .26 benefits of tv are worth the time M .07 -.09 .17 -.02 -.18 CLASSROOM TV USE SHOULD BE CONTROLLED BY EDUCATORS schools integrate news in curriculum .03 M .00 .05 -.08 .03 sponsors determine news content .00 z3 1 -.13 .08 .06 .11 educators determine curricular needs .10 M .17 .03 .03 .12 business decides how to cover news .05 z3A -.09 .01 .08 .05 schools control commercial sponsors .00 *55 .11 .12 .04 .29 ADVERTISING EFFECTS STUDENTS NEGATIVELY ads persuade teens to buy .04 -.16 3 3 .11 -.01 .13 teens understand commercials .01 -.02 z31 .19 .08 .12 commercials mislead teens -.01 .07 3 1 -.01 -.03 .29 commercials are a fair price .34 -.28 -.55 .13 -.11 -.13 commercials don't help students -.12 .27 A1 -.09 .09 .31 CURRICULUM FAIRLY REPRESENTS PUBLIC AFFAIRS CONTENT news curriculum is biased .07 -.14 .03 .10 .29 news curriculum upholds free press.23 .12 -.06 *55 -.08 .03 news is insulated from businesses .00 -.05 -.29 *52 -.04 .08 news curricula lacks diversity .00 .04 .00 zM -.01 .25 CLASSROOM TELEVISION DOES NOT IMPACT TEACHERS' JOBS teachers lose jobs due to technology -.03 -.04 -.01 .02 M -.04 l *—» television replaces teachers .00 © 00 o -.01 M .03 CLASSROOM TELEVISION IS A DIVERSION classroom television is a diversion -.24 .10 .15 -.05 -.04 M. television is entertainment oriented -.09 .09 .26 -.05 -.08 3 1 Eigenvalue 4.10 3.00 1.90 1.66 1.41 1.13 Percent of Variance Explained 16.4% 12% 7.6% 6.6% 5.6% 4.5% *Exact wording of each item can be found in Appendix A. 1 Cronbach's alpha = .71 2 Cronbach's alpha = .75 3 Cronbach’s alpha = .75 4 Cronbach's alpha = .60 5 Cronbach's alpha = .79 6 Cronbach's alpha = .60 118

Summary of Table 6

Three of the education domain factors represented the value constructs of control of the curriculum, effect of funding mechanism and curricular content as conceptualized during the survey design. The communication technology construct broke into three separate factors in a logical but unforeseen manner. The characteristics of the medium represented one construct while the functions of the medium represented another. Perhaps this demonstrated the strength of the conflicting views on technology. Recognition that teens enjoyed and attended to a particular medium may have been the very issue that concerned educators. It was expected that the third communication technology value about impact on work would distinguish itself from those values related to the nature of the communication technology. However, the issue of time and leisure did not relate to its counterpart in work and employment. Generally, however, the interitem correlations of the six education domain factors support an argument for the reliability of this section of the instrument

Channel One Factor Analysis

The final 20 items specific to the Channel One project resulted in a three factor solution. As indicated in table 7, these factors accounted for 35.9%; 12.7% and 6.4% of the variance, respectively.

Channel-One Could Be a Positive Addition to the Classroom

Eight items loaded on this factor and represented a combination of the technological and content aspects of Channel One. The content items included

Channel One's potential to provide diverse views, the quality of its current events coverage, and the extent of business influence in the project's programming choices. The items related to bias and free press values did not load on this factor. 119

Perhaps they were less concrete than the other three items related to the construct.

All five of the technological value items related to the Channel One situation loaded on this factor also. They included the attention gaining properties of Channel One, and its ability to help students understand ideas, the time and professional role challenges that Channel One represented, and an assessment of its teaching functions. Given the specificity of the domain, teachers apparently considered their overall knowledge of Channel One without distinguishing between content issues and medium issues. This factor accounts for a large amount of variance, has a high reliability coefficient and includes eight items which suggests a strong construct It represented the idea that: Channel One could be a positive addition to the classroom.

Channel One Advertising Does Not Effect Teens Negatively

The next factor related to the role of commercial funding in public schools.

Seven items loaded on this value. The first five were specific to advertising and included student understanding of advertising, helpfulness of advertising to students, ability to persuade students to buy things they shouldn't and advertising misleads students and the tradeoff between commercial sponsorship and using it to pay for Channel One. The item about who should maintain responsibility for regulating commercials on Channel One loaded on this factor and must be considered an advertising rather than a control issue. The content selection issue was related to these items as well. The questions of controlling content related aspects of the service and its commercial basis of support were closely tied in teachers' views. This construct was labeled Channel One advertising does not effect teens negatively. 120

Educators Should Control the Classroom Uses of Channel One

Control of Channel One formed the third factor. Items related to deciding the student audience, scheduling and uses of the project represented this value. It involved the mechanics of incorporating the service into the school system and was stated as: Educators should control the uses of Channel One in the classroom. _____ Factor Loadings of the Channel One Domain Value Items

VALUE ITEMS FACTOR LOADINGS 1 2 3 EVALUATION OF CHANNEL ONE

Channel One has the potential to provide a diverse views 2 1 .27 .02 Channel One couldn't cover current events meaningfully -.66 -.21 -.13 Channel One takes too much time from other activities -.86 -.03 .27 Channel One holds students attention i i .19 -.01 Channel One helps students understand current events 2 1 .31 .09 Channel One coverage is influenced by business interests -.86 -.03 .27 teachers are challenged positively by Channel One h i .16 .04 Channel One entertains more than it teaches z i a . -.40 .10 CHANNEL ONE ADVERTISING DOES NOT EFFECT TEENS NEGATIVELY students understand Channel One commercials .28 M .00 Channel One commercials are not helpful to students -.30 z H .29 Channel One ads persuade students to buy things -.13 z J l .19 commercials on Channel One mislead students -.28 z2 A .11 Channel One commercials are a fair price to pay for it .42 M -.16 Whittle should regulate Channel One commercials .09 1 1 -.40 Whittle should select the content of Channel One newscasts .19 M -.22

EDUCATORS SHOULD CONTROL CLASSROOM USES OF CHANNEL ONE schools should determine which students see Channel One -.08 -.22 2 1 Whittle should decide when and where Channel One is seen -.11 .14 = 20. high schools should decide how to use Channel One -.07 -.23 2 1 Eigenvalue 7.18 2.53 1.27 Percent of Variance 35.9% 12.7% 6.4% ♦Exact wording of each item can be found in Appendix A. 1 Cronbach's alpha = .88 2 Cronbach's alpha = .84 3 Cronbach's alpha = .76 121

Summary of Table 7

The factors related to Channel One divided into three broad categories.

Value assessment of the communication technology as a whole formed one construct. Funding effects and control of the system formed the other two. With the exception of the Channel One evaluation construct, the factor analysis results were as expected when the questionnaire was designed.

Summary of Instrument Reliability Issues

The portion of the study designed to operationalize value imputations and assessments was exploratory. The intent was to create a method for constructing items about the underlying dimensions of policy issues in institutional contexts.

This constraint meant special problems for checking the reliability of the responses.

However, the interitem correlations for scales constructed to measure the constructs suggested a relatively reliable measure of the constructs. A scale combining each of the items which loaded on a factor was constructed. Thus, each of the factors represents one value pertaining to one of the three domains. Each factor resulted in a scale with a reliability of at least .60.

Differences Between Teachers on Media. Education and Whittle Values

Discriminant analysis was performed to determine whether differences between teachers at schools with Channel One and without Channel One existed, as evidence for research questions five and six. Use of the service was used as an a priori category because it was expected that teachers in different teaching environments had different values in relation to the Channel One issues. The values for commercial media, education and Channel One were used as possible discriminators among the teachers. Six values discriminated between teachers with and without the service.

Table 8 presents the structure coefficients for this discriminant function. These structure coefficients represent the degree to which each value was correlated with the overall discriminant function. The best discriminators occurred in the Whittle domain where all three Channel One values discriminated between teachers.

Teachers who had experience with Channel One and those who had not differed in their evaluation of Channel One as a positive addition to the classroom (-.721.

Teachers differed in their value assessment of the effects of Channel One advertising on teens (-.65), also. The third difference among teachers was in their value assessment of the educators controlling the classroom uses of Channel One

(.59).

The best education system discriminators related to commercial funding, control and communication technology functions. The value of advertising effects teens negatively (.55) received much attention during the Channel One debate and bled into general concerns over commercialism in the curriculum. The teachers differed on the value of educators controlling the uses of classroom television (.38).

The value assessment of classroom television as a diversion discriminated among teachers with and without Channel One (.26). The three education environment values which did not discriminate among teachers were value assessments of television interests students: curriculum fairly represents public affairs content: and communication technologies impact teaching jobs. The commercial media values did not discriminate among teachers well. 123

TABLE8

Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains Discriminant Analysis of Teachers in Schools With and Without Channel One

Values Structure Coefficients

Channel One could be a positive classroom addition -.72

Channel One advertising does not negatively effect teens -.65

Educators should control classroom uses of Channel One .59

Advertising effects teens negatively .55

Educators should control classroom uses of television .38

Classroom television is a diversion .26

Eigenvalue p .20 .05

Table 9 presents the correlations between discriminating values. Strong correlations were found between the advertising effects values in both the education and Channel One domains (-.71). Channel One advertising does not effect teens negatively also correlated with Channel One could be a positive addition to the classroom (.51), educators should control the classroom uses of Channel One

(.33), and communication technology entertainment functions (-.311. respectively.

Advertising effects teens negatively correlated with Channel One could be a positive addition to the classroom (.35), educators should control classroom uses of television (.32) and classroom television is a diversion (.39). Channel One as a positive addition to the classroom correlated with educators should control classroom uses of Channel One (.-.42) and classroom television is a diversion (-.34). Educators should control classroom uses of Channel One and educators should control uses of classroom television were also highly correlated (-.49). The funding effects and control issues in the education and Channel One domains are very much related in teachers value assessments.

TABLE9

Pooled Within-Groups Correlation Matrix for Media, Education and Whittle Communications Variables Discriminating Among Teachers in Schools With and Without Channel One*

1 2 3 4 5 6

1 Channel One as a positive addition

2 Educators control Channel One .14

3 Channel One ad effects .51 -.42

4 Ads effect students negatively .35 .29 -.71 5 Educators control classnom tv -.06 .49 -.33 .32

6 Classroom television is a diversion -.34 .08 -.31 .39 .19

Correlations were significant at p = .05.

Table 10 indicates the extent of correct classification of cases according to the discriminant function. Overall, 70% of the teachers could be separated according to the six values. Again, these results are not at all surprising when the data are considered according to the various domains where they pertain. The best discriminators are likely to be those which respondents can think about most specifically. 125

TABLE 10

Classification of Cases Using Commercial Media, Public Education Domain Discriminant Analysis of Teachers in Schools With and Without Channel One

Actual n Predicted Group Group Value Do Not Value

Channel One Users 189 115 74 60.8% 39.2%

Channel One Non-Users 239 51 188 21.3% 78.7%

Ungrouped Cases 22 12 10 54.5% 45.5%

Percent of cases correctly classified: 70.79%

Differences Between Teachers on Media and Education Domain Values

A second discriminant analysis using only the commercial media and public education values was performed since the values in these domains are more general than those in the Channel One domain. The summary statistics for this discriminant analysis are found in Table 11. The structure coefficients which best represented the discriminant function were the advertising effects teens negatively (.79) and educators should control classroom television uses(.57) values. Communication technologies do not impact jobs (.40),public affairs content lacks diversity (.371. and advertising effects people negatively (.331 in the commercial media domain 126 were next best at discriminating among teachers. Television is a diversion in the education domain (.33) and television does not impact on teachers' iobs (.24) in the public education domain discriminated among teachers, also.

TABLE 11

Summary Data for Media and Education Discriminant Analysis of Teachers in Schools With and Without Channel One

Values Structure Coefficients

Advertising effects teens negatively .79

Educators should control classroom television uses .57

Communication technologies do not impact jobs .40

Public affairs content lack diversity .37

Advertising effects people negatively .33

Classroom television is a diversion .33

Communication technologies do not impact teachers' jobs .24

Eigenvalue p

.10 .05 127

Correlations among the variables are presented in Table 12. Strong positive correlations exist among the advertising effects teens and people negatively values(.64) and the public affairs content lacks diversity and the curriculum fairly represents public affairs content values(.41) and (.40). These correlations lend support to the importance of the funding value. They also indicate the complexity of the issue due to interrelatedness of several categories of variables. Strong correlations were also found between the advertising effects teens and people negatively values and classroom television is a diversion value (.32) and (.40).

The issues of advertising appear to be related to both issues of media content and the perceived nature of television as an entertainment oriented communication technology.

TABLE 12

Pooled Within-Groups Correlation Matrix for Media and Education Values Discriminating Among Teachers in Schools With and Without Channel One

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Ad effects on students

2 Educators control tv -.32

3 Technology impact on jobs .12 .11

4 Public affairs lack diversity .40 .05 .01 5 Ad effects on people .64 .21 .14 .41

6 Television is a diversion .40 .19 .06 .28

7 Technology on teaching .02 -.14 .29 -.01

Correlations were significant at p = .05. The classification data are presented in Table 13. Overall, the discriminant function classified 66% of the teachers as expected according to whether or not they work in schools using the service. Two interesting results are apparent here. First, this function classified 84% of those without the service correctly suggesting a clarity of views at the two more abstract levels. Second, only 41% of the teachers with the service were classified as expected when only the media and education system levels were used in the analysis. This indicates a contradiction between the abstract value systems and the concrete experience with Channel One.

TABLE 13

Classification of Cases Using Media and Education Discriminant Analysis of Teachers in Schools With and Without Channel One

Actual N Predicted Gtoud : Media or Education Domain Group Media Domain Education Domain

Channel One Users 195 80 115 41% 59%

Channel One Non-Users 289 48 241 16.6% 83.4%

Ungrouped Cases 29 10 19 34.5% 65.5%

Percent of cases correctly classified: 66.3% 129

Nature of Differences Between Teachers Discriminated bv the Values

The results of the discriminant analysis indicate that the values did discriminate among the two groups of teachers. The next step was to investigate the nature and strength of those values which were effective discriminators in order to explore research question seven. Mean differences and their associated significance levels are presented in table 14. Significant differences were found for each of the Channel One values. As expected teachers working in schools where

Channel One was used were more favorable in their evaluation of Channel One and less concerned about the effects of the funding support on students and the control of Channel One's use than their counterparts in schools without Channel One. Both groups felt that Channel One could be a positive addition, that the negative effects of advertising. were not overly problematic and that educators should maintain control of the classroom use of Channel One.

Significant differences between the teachers were apparent on two of the education domain values. Teachers in schools without Channel One felt more strongly about the negative effects of commercial advertising on students and on maintaining the education's control of classroom television uses. All of the teachers agreed to some extent that: classroom television interests students: classroom television use should be controlled bv educators: advertising effects teens negatively: the curriculum fairly represents public affairs issues: classroom television does not impact teachers' jobs: and, classroom television is a diversion foLstudents- Differences were also found among the two groups of teachers regarding values in the commercial media domain. Both groups agreed that: television should be privately controlled and that advertising effects people negatively. However, teachers working in schools without Channel One felt that televised public affairs programming lacked diversity more than those working in schools which had

Channel One. They also felt that communication technolories did not impact on jobs.

Overall, these findings indicate that significant differences existed between the two groups and the most important of these were in relation to issues of funding and control. Also, teachers working in schools with Channel One responded more favorably toward the Channel One concept and the values underlying the model on which it was based. In general, they were less concerned about the negative effects of advertising, the educators' control of classroom use, and the impact of the technology than those in schools which did not have Channel One. Whether these differences were an artifact of the context within which the commercial media and public education domain values were placed or were accurate reflections of their views on the conflict between media and education will be explored more fully in chapter four. 131

TABLE 14 Mean Differences Between Teachers on the Commercial Media, Public Education and Channel One Domains

Value User Non-User n =230 n = 315 privately controlled media 6.2 6.1 .10 public affairs lacks diversity 4.8 5.1 6.80 advertising effects people negatively 6.8 7.0 4.60 * communication technology impacts jobs 4.8 5.2 2.70 classroom television interests students 6.7 6.6 1.20 educators should control classroom tv use 7.2 7.5 14.10 4c advertising effects students negatively 5.7 6.4 17.10 curriculum fairly represents public affairs 5.2 5.1 1.80 communication tech. impacts teachers' jobs 6.5 6.4 1.60 classroom television is a diversion* 5.8 6.0 2.60 4c Channel One as positive classroom addition 6.8 5.8 64.50 Channel One ads do not effect students negatively 5.4 4.4 38.80 Educators control classroom uses of Channel One 7.1 7.7 23.20

"'Indicates signficant difference between groups on values indices with 1 indicating strong disagreement and 9 indicating strong agreement

Media and Education Values Which Account for Channel One Assessments

Three stepwise regression analyses were performed to determine which of the commercial media and public education values accounted for the variance in the

Channel One values, as asked in research questions six and seven. The values which discriminated among teachers were those specific to Channel One. The next question was whether teachers invoked the values traditionally associated with communication technologies and public education or the values traditionally associated with commercial media when evaluating Channel One. Each of the 132 public education and commercial media values were regressed on the three Channel

One dependent variables, value assessments of Channel One as a positive addition to thg-glassroom; effects of Channel One advertising: and educators' control of classroom uses of Channel One.

Media and Education Values Which Account for Value Assessment of ChannelOne in the Classroom Channel One could be a positive classroom addition was the dependent variable and negative effects of advertising on teens and people, privately controlled television, educator control classroom television uses, public affairs content lacks diversity, curriculum represents public affairs, impact on jobs in both the education and media domains: classroom television interests students and classroom television is a diversion in the education domain were potential independent variables.

Results of the analysis are presented in table IS. The two values which accounted for most of the variance in the dependent variable were in the education domain.

Classroom television interests students, the value related to the attention and interest factors of television, accounted for thirty percent of the variance and advertising effects teens negatively accounted for ten percent. These two values accounted for a total of forty percent of the variance in the value assessments made by teachers regarding Channel One.

TABLE 15 Summary of Stepwise Regression Results for Value Assessment of Channel One

Predictor Variable Step R2 R2 Beta Entered Change

Classroom tv interests students 1 .30 .30 .55

Advertising effects teens negatively 2 .40 .10 -.33 133

Media and Education Values Which Account for Channel One Control Value

Results of the regression analysis for educators should control classroom uses of Channel One, presented in Table 16, are more clear cut. The purpose of this test was to determine which of the education and media domain values explained variance in the value related to whether educators or Whittle

Communications should have controlled the use of Channel One. One variable explained twenty-three percent of the variance. The value educators should control classroom uses of televion in the education domain accounts for twenty-three percent of the variance.

TABLE 16

Summary of Stepwise Regression Results for Channel One Control Value

Predictor Variable Step R2 Beta P Entered

Educators control classroom tv 1 .23 .48 .05

Media and Education Values Which Account for Channel One Advertising

A third regression analysis was performed to determine which of the media and education domain values accounted for variance in the value assessments about effects of Channel One advertising. Results are presented in Table 17. The advertising effects students negatively in the education domain accounted for fifty- four percent of the variance in the Channel One value assessments made by teachers. 134

TABLE 17

Summary of Stepwise Regression Results for Funding Effects of Channel One

Predictor Variable Step R2 R2 Beta Entered Change

Ads effect teens negatively 1 .54 .54 -.73

Summary of Results

The results of the data analyses used to explore the eight research questions were presented in this chapter and revealed some interesting Endings in relation to the communicative and value dimensions underlying the Channel One controversy.

Comparisons of the role characteristics of the teachers indicated that differences in school enrollments existed. There were no signficant differences in the subjects taught or years of teaching experience among the respondents. Comparisons among the teachers also uncovered signficant differences in their perceptions about sources and types of information about Channel One. The three factor analyses suggested that the questionnaire items were, for the most part, representative of media and education values and Channel One value assessment issues. The value indices were then used to determine whether teachers in schools using Channel One and schools not using Channel One differed on the values and value assessments.

These findings indicate that the most consistent differences between the two groups of teachers were on the control and funding values. Teachers in schools using

Channel One were more willing to use advertising as a funding mechanism, allow 135 external control and use commercial media services in the classroom than teachers working in schools where Channel One was not used. Possible explanations and implications of these results are offered in chapter four. CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

Introduction

The present study points to three areas about which further exploration is necessary. The first of these is related to the issues of communication technology, content, funding and control which surfaced in the Channel One case and the ways these issues will arise in future policy options. Second, theoretical conclusions about values add to our understanding of interinstitutional conflict and warrant further analysis. Third, methodological progress in articulating and studying institutional values is needed. The following chapter takes up each of these issues.

Information Accessed bv Teachers in Relation to Channel One

Several findings relevant to research questions two through four deserve further consideration. Teachers in schools using Channel One had different perceptions about it than teachers in schools where Channel One was not being used. The teachers in the Channel One schools felt that more parties had been

136 137

active in making the Channel One decision, especially the school board members

and the principals. Interestingly, about the same amount of respondents in both

groups, a little over half, felt that teachers had been involved in the decision making process. Perhaps part of the reason teachers using Channel One felt more favorably toward its various aspects because they felt more groups had been involved in the process of decision making.

With respect to research question three, differences were also found in the sources from which teachers received information. Those in schools where

Channel One was used primarily relied on information from their principal and from

Whittle Communications. Perhaps since they had direct information about the specifics of the offer they felt less compelled to seek other sources of information. The teachers in schools not using Channel One also accessed direct information but obtained it from their professional affiliations and colleagues. Perhaps because this group did not have direct access to Whittle Communication they sought more sources of information to understand the debate. A fairly high proportion of these teachers consulted articles in local and national media sources. Also, the Channel

One value assessments made by the two categories of teachers were consistent with the positions taken by the sources of information each group accessed.

The fourth research question was concerned with the amount of information teachers sought and their level of activity regarding the issue. More teachers in schools where Channel One was used had an opportunity to attend a demonstration of it and indicated they played an active role in the decision made about Channel

One. Perhaps one of the problems throughout the debate was differences in ability to access accurate and similar information about the project These data suggest that both groups of teachers relied on sources of information with unidimensional 138 perspectives on Channel One. Whittle Communications was trying to get schools to use Channel One while many education organizations were trying to keep schools from using it There was much description of Channel One and the issues surrounding it and there was much positioning on those issues throughout the

Channel One controversy. However, few of the sources of information on Channel

One, including the media coverage of it engaged in a dialogue about the issues.

The resulting problems may have been exacerbated by the dissimilar access to information and activity regarding Channel One.

Teachers’ Values and Value Assessments in the Commercial Media. Public Education and Channel One Domains Several conclusions can be drawn with respect to research questions five through eight Teachers in schools where Channel One was used were more favorable than teachers where Channel One was not used on the value assessments about Channel One specifically. When the two institutional domains were the only values included in the analysis, teachers differed on the issues of funding and control in education, primarily. Those in schools not using Channel One indicated that they were more concerned with the negative effects of allowing external control of education and commercial funding of the curriculum. The education and media values which accounted for the value assessments made by teachers about Channel

One related to funding, control, and communication technology characteristics in the education domain. These results are discussed more fully in the following section. 139

Value Differences among Teachers in the Commercial Media. Public Education and Channel QneJPomains The largest differences among teachers working in schools with and without

Channel One were found in the Channel One could be a positive addition to the classroom value assessment, with teachers in schools using Channel One viewing it more favorably than teachers in schools not using it This value assessment included items related to both content and technology. It seems logical that those who have used a specific communication technology in the classroom would not judge it in the same way as those who had read about it or seen demonstrations of it. Teachers may differ because of variations in the conditions of adoption of

Channel One and its perceived success in the school setting. Two other factors, however, should be considered. No project exactly like Channel One had been offered to schools. Teachers had little else to use as a comparison and this might have been a factor in evaluations of it Additionally, these assessments were likely related to the concerns raised during the debate about Channel One. Teachers may have differed because of assumptions about the underlying motives of Whittle

Communications. Some viewed the company as taking a positive interest in schools and the problems teachers face while others saw Whittle as using schools to push its own agenda.

The second Channel One value assessment on which teachers differed was

Channel One advertising does not effect teens negatively. Teachers in schools not using Channel One felt less strongly about the perceived negative effects of commercial sponsorship on teens. The products and companies advertised on

Channel One were similar to those seen in the commercial media. For example, a

Skittles candy and a Pert shampoo advertisement shown on Channel One were part 140 of an ad campaign developed for commercial television. Teachers who differed on this value may have done so because of their general evaluations about the effects of advertising, especially since these differences were found in relation to both the more general domains in advertising effects teens negatively and advertising effects people negatively. It would seem that teachers who differed on this value based their conclusion on how they valued advertising as a funding mechanism in public education, generally. An alternative explanation is that some of the advertising messages on Channel One were designed specifically for it For example, the spots on the problems of teen runaways were similar to public service announcements and were underwritten by Burger King. The Nike shoe company ran the David

Robinson's Neighborhood ad campaign on Channel One. These spots were anti­ drug messages designed to appeal to teens which were developed for commercial television. Teachers may have had these prosocial messages in mind when assessing the effects of Channel One advertising.

A third difference among teachers was in their value assessment that educators should control the classmom uses of Channel One. This value generated much of the early concern over Channel One and teachers in schools using Channel

One remained more troubled by the notion of external control of the curriculum.

The issue of control may have been perceived differently depending on the experiences with Whittle Communications and Channel One in each school.

Teachers involved in the decision making process may not have felt that control was a problem. Other teachers, especially those in Cincinnati where the controversy was heated and quite negative, probably experienced Channel One as an issue of top-down external influence which encroached on their working conditions. 141

Education domain values also discriminated among teachers. The value assessments that advertising effects teens negatively funding and that educators should control classroom uses of television were among the most controversial issues brought out by Channel One. Again, teachers in schools using Channel One disagreed with these assessments more than those in schools not using Channel

One. Additionally, these value issues received much attention during the 1980s in related debates about the future direction of education. It would be interesting to leam how these teachers viewed the school-business partnership movement which gained support in many of the state of education reports released during the mid-

1980s. The most notable example of this trend was found in the Nation at Risk report which recommended greater involvement horn the private sector (National

Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). This would also give an indication of whether teachers accepted Whittle's position that Channel One was a school-business partnership or whether they viewed it as an isolated case.

The teachers differed on the value assessment that classroom television is a diversion, also. This value related to the way teachers perceived the role of communication technologies in their classrooms. Teachers in schools where

Channel One was not used felt that television was more for diversion than for learning than those in schools where Channel One was used. Perhaps teachers had different exemplars in mind when responding about this value. Some could have been thinking about Channel One specifically and others about communication technology programs they had used previously. This difference does support, however, the need to continue exploring attributions made about communication technologies. 142

Three education environment values did not discriminate among teachers. These were value assessments that: classroom television interests students: communication technologies do not impact teachers' jobs: and value assessments that curriculum fairly represents public affairs cumculum content. Perhaps teachers judged the characteristics of a communication technology in a similar fashion and only differ in the effects assumed to result from use of them. For example, teachers did not differ in their assessments about the attention getting properties of television. However, they did differ on whether television was more learning or diversion oriented. The lack of differences in value assessments regarding technology's effect on teaching jobs lends credence to the notion that teachers, whether supportive or unsupportive of communication technologies, did not feel threatened by them. That teachers had some uniformity in assessments of the public affairs curriculum may have been due to their specific knowledge about the general curriculum and how decisions are made about it This explanation, however, calls into question the need for televised current affairs to make students more aware of the world around them.

The differences found in the media domain were on the value assessments that public affairs content lacks diversity and that advertising effects people negatively. Teachers in schools not using Channel One agreed with these assessments more than teachers in schools using Channel One. This value included items related to the effects of advertising and the entertaining nature of commercial television. It seems that survey respondents had value orientations toward certain aspects of the commercial media. Those cany through to the value assessments made about the education domain. Although the functions of communication technologies in education are supposed to be learning oriented, some teachers 143 perceive the functions as similar to the entertaining functions of commercial media.

Again, this explanation relates to general perceptions about different types of communication technology. Value Differences among Teachers in the Media and Education Domains

The greatest difference between teachers in schools with and without

Channel One were concrete experience with the service. It seems logical that the most clear differences were found in value assessments made about the specific example available to respondents. Interestingly, the four education and media domain values which discriminated among teachers when assessments of Channel

One were removed were control and funding. These issues were related to the institutional/organizational environment rather than classroom related concerns.

One other intriguing result from the discriminant analysis was that in the education environment the value which discriminated was related to value assessments of the technology while the commercial media value on which teachers differed was content

Institutional Values and Assessments of Channel One Value

The education domain values which accounted for the most variance in teachers'value assessment that Channel One could be a positive addition to the classroom was classroom television interests students, the value related to the attention and interest factors of television. This suggests that the main value consideration made by teachers when evaluating the project's potential was factors related to how the medium of television compares with print materials in gaining the interest of students. This finding is important given that the dependent variable included items related to both the technology and the content The notion that comparisons between print and television were considered important factors by 144 teachers can be interpreted in two ways. Teachers may have seen the television and its characteristics as unique and capable of engaging students in ways that other communication technologies cannot Or teachers may have engaged in a kind of cost/benefit analysis to determine the importance of television and assumed that it would only be worthwhile if the communication technology really did a better job of explaining some things than other communication technologies.

The value assessment that advertising effects students negatively also accounted for variance in teachers' value assessment that Channel One could be a positive addition to the classroom. Just as the medium characteristics are important in evaluating content and technological design so are the potential impacts made possible in that design. Perhaps a bit of cost benefit analysis was operating on the part of the teachers here, also. The evaluation of the service and what it can do must be considered in light of its curricular dimensions and the tradeoff between those dimensions and the insidious costs inherent in the use of advertising as a funding mechanism.

It was not surprising that the other values accounted for a very small portion of variance given the nature of those constructs. All of them dealt with issues much less related to actual judgments about a specific project In fact, this may be considered somewhat heartening given the amount of controversy generated about the funding and control issues. It seems that teachers were able to separate out their assumptions about Channel One from their distaste for the way it was brought to them. It should also be noted that the value related to the quality of public affairs curriculum did not explain any of the variance in the evaluation of Channel One.

Perhaps this is due to the fact that the curriculum is created internal to the education 145 system and the programming offered in Channel One comes from a source external to the system.

The value assessment that educators should control the uses of classroom televison accounted for the most variance in the educators should control the classroom uses of Channel One value assessment. For example, teachers who felt that educators should control the days and times communication technologies were used in the classroom also felt that educators should make these decisions in relation to Channel One. It is somewhat surprising that more of the variance was not explained by this value. Perhaps this relates to the degree of specificity involved. Teachers may have perceived the Channel One system as a self contained project and thus, values that hold in general were bracketed out when judgments were made about the provisions of the Whittle package. Another possibility is that the issues of control in Channel One were less central to teachers' general concerns about the autonomy of the professional education establishment since administrators were more vocal about the control issue than teachers during the

Channel One debate.

The value assessment that advertising effects teens negatively in the education domain explained much of the variance in the Channel One advertising does not effect teens negatively value assessment This speaks to the degree of concern people have about advertising and its effects. Commercial sponsorship was the primary cause for alarm over Channel One. Importantly, the advertising effects people negatively value assessment in the commercial media domain did not account for a significant portion of the variance. This indicates the extent to which teachers separate values about the institution of commercial media and values about the institution of public education. Education, as an environment which protects 146 students from larger forces, remains a concern of many educators regardless of whether they accept or reject commercial sponsorship as a mechanism for funding school activities.

Discussion ofTheoretical Issues This study suggests that value dialectics contribute to understanding inter- institutional conflict. The difficult work of bringing the oppositional forces together to encourage change rather than just a switch in power forces remains. A first step lies in finding ways to help individuals working within both institutions, education and media, to recognize the underlying causes of conflict so that a baseline common understanding develops. The following section ties together some conceptual issues in the study of the policy process to produce a tentative model of interinstitutional conflict Communication Technology. Content. Funding and Control Values

The Channel One conflict can be understood using the concept of dialectics where opposing forces met to bring about some degree of change. The dialectical tensions in Channel One related to the communication technology, content, funding and control values.

CommunicationJechnologv

The first dialectic involved value assessments about communication technology and transmission. Much of the academic activity in public education is based on print communication technologies. One of the purposes of common schools was to create a citizenry with a broad base of knowledge and the literacy skills to participate in public affairs. Visual communication technologies became a competing medium through which public ideas and information were passed.

Early in the development of broadcast, regulators encouraged the educational and 147

informational possibilities of broadcast, although network and station owners often

programmed entertaining content Further, some welcomed the power of the

communication technology and its potential as a conduit to encourage social change

while others feared its power. Regardless of the side taken, the arguments usually

turned on the audio and visual components. However, efforts to introduce and

integrate film, radio and television into schools were not as successful as the

diffusion of commercial media in the larger society. For example, some educators

were opposed to Channel One and called it a series of 30 second sound bites.

Others accepted the television based Channel One by arguing that students

understood sound bites and were capable of working with ideas presented through

this type of communication technology. Thus, the tension over appropriate

communication technologies in the domain of public education remains a value dialectic.

Public Affairs C r ^ n t

The second dialectic apparent in the Channel One conflict was over the

public affairs content provided through the service. The stated mission of

electronic media channels is to provide balanced and diverse views on issues of

public importance, with a special focus on local concerns. The public school

curricula vary widely in detail but arc quite similar in the broader context of what

subjects are appropriate for students. Both commercial media and public education

institutional domains value objective presentation of content The tension lies in the

model assumed to achieve these goals. For example, commercial media assume that diversity and pluralism can be accomplished through a competitive system. It is assumed that media owners must present competing ideas in order to maintain their competitive advantage in reaching audiences. Public education, however, 148 assumed that eliminating conflicting interests from the curriculum would result in a more fair representation of civic life. The Channel One discourse illustrates this point. Whittle Communications, because it was a profit driven, competitive company felt it could provide quality current events information to students through Channel One. Many educators felt that such information would be biased toward the interests of the business sector. The dialectical tension over how best to represent issues of public importance continues to concern individuals in both the public education and commercial media domain.

Funding and Funding Effects A third value conflict was over the funding model used to pay for Channel

One and the effects assumed to result from that model. Rather than receiver fees, subscriptions or public tax support, advertising became the mechanism for funding the media. It was adopted cm the grounds that advertising provides for the fair exchange of information between producers and consumers. However, some argue that advertising is an inherently strategic exercise designed to pressure consumers rather than provide information. This concern about the effects of commercial sponsorship is especially evident in public education where tax support is valued as the funding mechanism rather than corporate or philanthropic voluntarism or a for- profit business structure. Many assume that a public support model reduces the role of private interests and is more fair to students. This value tension surfaced immediately in relation to Channel One. Many parent and education groups opposed Channel One because it "sold students, as a captive audience, to the highest bidder." Others, however, viewed the advertising as an exchange of information and resources which benefited schools, students, corporate advertisers 149 and Whittle Communications. Value differences over how best to fund public services are among the most divisive issues which face public institutions.

Control

A fourth value highlighted in the Channel One case was who controlled and directed services provided through public institutions. The U.S. favors a privately owned communication infrastructure minimally regulated by a federal agency as opposed to a government operated media system. A combination of public bodies and professional administrators control public education. Again, the issue turns on whether a private, competitive model or a public, bureaucratic model works best to serve the needs of individuals and society. This conflict was magnified in the

Channel One controversy. Whittle Communications felt that they had designed and marketed a service in a manner similar to other commercial media companies.

Many educators, however, felt that in doing so Whittle Communication had intervened in the business of education and education administration. The value tensions over institutional and organizational control become increasingly important as the boundaries between public and private continue to blur in the 1990s. Ohio teachers reflected this in their values and value assessments regarding Channel One.

Toward a Model of Inter-Institutional Conflict over Communication Technologies

The value dialectics brought to the fore in the Channel One case underlie the structure and functions of social institutions. The core-periphery concept suggested by Mejone (1989) and the system legitimation crisis theory of Habeimas (1967) offer the rudiments of a model which represents inter-institutional conflict over value debates in relation to communication technologies. The core consists of social values which have solidified into a seemingly objective truth over time.

Policies created to reflect those values cluster around the core values to form a 150 periphery. For example, the education system in the United States is based on a public service model. Education policies which reflect this value include compulsory attendance and tax supported schools. The Channel One case is an example of this interplay between different core values and policy peripheries.

Invoking the concept of dialectical tensions aids in understanding the nature of these core value and policy periphery conflicts between the institutions of commercial media and public education. The values and policy issues relevant in the Channel

One case are counterposed as core/periphery models for both public education and commercial media in Figure 2.

As Mejone discussed, core values are more stable than policies designed to achieve those values. However, it may be the case that incremental changes in the policy periphery lead to adjustments in the core values rather than the other way around. For example, private businesses have become more and more active in public schools over the years. This continuous involvement, although on a relatively small scale, chips away at the notion that education professionals are the best and most suited to maintain full control over curricular decisions. Educators did not decide to welcome businesses into school operation and then create policies to allow them in.H Businesses approached educators with resources which were accepted and eventually some educators began to value external sources of help. broadcasts. programming

electronic technology objective content private funds v private control /

advertising private \ support owners |

standard textbooks content .

print technology objectfve content public support bureaucratic control

taxes professional e d u c a to rs /

Figure 2. Commercial Media andPublic Education Values and Policy Issues Involved in the Channel One Debate Displayed Using Mejone's (1989) Core and Periphery Conceptualization of Stability and Change in Public Policies. 152

Placing the institutional values and policies in relation to each other, as in

Figure 2, illustrates some of the reasons conflict about Channel One occurred. The technology, content, funding and control values and policies acceptable within commercial media are very different from those acceptable within public education.

Whittle Communications' introduction of a new set of policy arrangements violated the core of the education institution in a very concrete way, as demonstrated in

Figure 3. Educators were compelled to respond and protect those values which had maintained the stability of the institution of public education in the past.

Current events broadcast programming television A sianaard textbooks content

print technology objective content public support bureaucratic control/

taxes idvertising professional educatorj/hittie Communications!

Figure 3. Channel One’s Encroachment on Public Education Core Values and Periphery Policies. The Channel One case is an example of what is happening throughout infrastructures built on public institutions. The U.S. was modeled on a number of different systems operating with some degree of autonomy. The private sector, the government sector and the community sectors all propel a larger system. Habermas

(1975) labels these the economic, political and sociocultural spheres and they are modeled in Figure 4. Public education is a part of the political sphere from which it receives funds and autonomy. Its purpose is to provide a service to students and the society at large. To maintain its autonomy, however, public education must provide this service in a manner satisfactory to both the sociocultural and the economic spheres. Once students have received the services provided by public education they obtain jobs and careers in the economic sector. During the last forty years the economic and sociocultural sphere have accused the institution of public education of not being able to provide its service in a manner satisfactory to the economic and sociocultural sphere (Brimelow, 1983). Businesses complain that students are unprepared to enter the job world. Individuals complain that the schools did not prepare them to enter the job world.

Econoaic Politic*! AA&mstnJtivt Sociocult uni

f — ■> f > f -- ■ -v jrivftU enterprise govtrnaent citizens industry legal systea u ts coaaereikl mtiin social services leisure juilie education v ______^ v______/ V^------y' \ T t

Figure 4. Economic, Political Administrative and Sociocultural Systems which Propel Society. 154

These complaints are motivated by an economic sector experiencing difficulty in achieving its goals of competitiveness and continued stability and by individuals in the sociocultural sphere who are effected by the resulting instability of the system (Schor, 1985). These arguments about how well schools function, regardless of the underlying reasons public education has difficulty in achieving its purpose, allow the business sector to claim that it has a right to become involved in schools and to make sure that education services are provided adequately. The economic sphere is then capable of building a rationale that it should be allowed to dictate the terms of its involvement in schools, as was the case with Channel One.

This outcome is problematic insofar as it encroaches on the cultural sphere, as prescribed in Figure 5. The goal becomes one of replacing the public model with the economic model so that competitive, economic interests dominate to the exclusion of cooperative or collaborative models (Stedman & Smith, pp. 83-105,

1983). In effect, the competitive model has nothing with which to compete and leaves no basis from which its logic can be challenged. This opens the possibility of more centralized control over social and cultural habits not just business practices. This possibility, based on the value of schools modeled on economic competition, could result in at least two different policy outcomes. The first would be a career and vocational oriented curriculum. Schor (1985) argues that the Nixon administration promoted this model during the 1970's in order to squelch the reform movements of the 1960's. The second model would be a common, traditional curriculum which stressed the academic subjects most valued by the private sector, such as science and technology. The Nation at Risk report, which generated more concern about technical illiteracy than study of the humanities, is one example (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). 155

Economic system tncovs^ts competion

wMci encourage? competion. in the

public eductfion system

Figure 5. System "crises" which encroach on political and sociocultural values. 156

Many of the concerns raised in the education reports issued in 1983-84

(Northwest Regional Exchange, 1985) were raised during the Channel One controversy which serves as one example of these value debates about funding and control, especially. The remaining question in these value dialectic conflicts is how they are worked through by the widely divergent institutions and interests.

Habermas states the problem as one of moving away from strategic discourse which pits the competitive, commercial media model against the public education model and moving toward discourse which allows the individuals and institutions to work through the conflict on equal grounds, suggesting a more collaborative model. This possibility seems likely to happen more quickly and easily on matters related to what communication technologies and content provided by them are incorporated into the curriculum than on matters of how the communication technologies and content are funded and controlled. Stedman & Smith (1985) make this point in relation to the Nation at Risk report by comparing the report recommendation with existing curriculum objectives in many school systems.

Thus, agreement about the importance of teaching current events can be reached more easily than how its dissemination is organized. Questions of communication technology and content appear to be more dynamic than questions of funding and control. More space for movement is available on the micro-operational level than on the macro-organizational level.

The results of the present study support this conclusion. The greatest differences among teachers involved the macro-organization issues of funding and control rather than the micro-organization issues of content and communication technology. The macro-organizational concents also accounted for value assessments about Channel One better than the micro-organizational ones. Perhaps 157 they believed that if the external conditions within which they worked were satisfactory then they could have adapted the internal issues of curriculum and method.

Finding a way out of the impasse on communication technology policy debates caused by values in dialectical conflict is the responsibility of both media industries and public education. The possibility of collaborative strategies which place the two institutions on equal footing needs further exploration. Competitive models for bringing communication technologies into schools have not worked in the past They resulted in acceptance at the implementation level and resistance or rejection at the use level. This continuous drain on institutional resources from the top and bottom damages both sectors. Some mechanism to bring the opposing forces to a common ground must be found if children are to ever benefit from resources with which they will eventually have to come to grips anyway.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

The limitations of this study are many, particularly due to the exploratory nature of the method. Four of these problems will be discussed in this section.

They relate to operationalization of the value constructs, the unit of analysis, sampling considerations and the timing of data collection. However, these limitations point to a number of issues which deserve further investigation.

The operational definitions fix' the value constructs need significant refinement. Some of these items became value assessment statements rather than value imputation statements in order to mate them meaningful for respondents.

Creating alternative value possibilities that respondents can understand was difficult One side on some of the dialectics have been so internalized that respondents are perhaps unable to conceive of any other possibilities. This may 158 account for the strength of the responses to the locus of control for commercial media value construct. Qualitative interviews are necessary to figure out how people understand the issues and extrapolate from those responses to more concrete and representative items. A second problem with this study was the timing of the data collection.

More clear conclusions would have been possible if teachers had been surveyed about the value items before the Channel One controversy became public and after more schools had decided on it. This would have given a better indication as to whether changes occurred in response to the value dialectics after Channel One came on the scene or whether teachers already differed in their value orientations.

A more well defined population of teachers from which to sample would have improved the quality of the study, also. The impossibility of gathering information about the status of the project in schools across Ohio prevented the use of a specialized sampling technique. Thus, responses came from teachers with very different Channel One experiences. As with most survey data, those who had some interest in the topic responded more than others. In this study, those most interested were teachers working in schools where Channel One was used or where teachers got involved in decision making about it The advantage of this is that those with familiarity on the issue are better able to respond to the issues. The disadvantage, of course, is that teachers using Channel One may have been over­ represented.

A fourth limitation to the study is the unit of analysis. Richer conclusions could have been drawn if all those involved in decision making had been surveyed instead of just teachers. Data from school board members, superintendents, principals and students would be important for a more comprehensive study. 159

Comparisons among value positions could have been made as well as conclusions as to the strength of values given the different roles each group fulfills for the institution. Information about relative power in the decision making process could have been gathered as an indicator of differences in concerns at the implementation and use levels, as well.

This exploratory study suggests four directions ripe for future research. Further investigation of communication technology projects in public education would increase understanding of the substantive value conflicts. This would provide a mechanism for delving further into the implications of value dialectics.

Better understanding of the above issues could then lead to creating collaborative models while incorporating the system level theoretical concerns raised by

Habermas's analysis of distorted communication. Such models might then be applied to communication conflicts in other inter-institutional policy debates.

The diffusion of textbooks, film, radio, television and computers into public education all share a checkered past in one way or another. The context within which communication technologies are introduced into classrooms needs further exploration. Often the problem has little to do with the hardware or software and more to do with misunderstandings about how the technology should function for schools. Such research could focus on the "mindware" each participant brings to the situation. This would provide insight as to how communication technologies other than books could be integrated into learning environments.

Better understanding of value dialectics would provide insight as to the basis from which people reason about policy questions. This study confirms that people do take value positions on communication technology projects. The resulting policy debates would be more fruitful if we understood how those 160 positions are formed and the underlying values which influence how people argue.

This would place policy study squarely in the realm of communication and practical reasoning research. Bringing the social meaning perspective into analyses of public policy disputes could move us beyond the seemingly irreconcilable assumptions of conflict and system theories. Recognizing the communicative dimensions of the value based conflict inherent in social systems has important implications for merging social theories into an overarching framework for analysis.

The rigid approach taken in designing, controlling, funding and using communication technologies stems, in part, from the way we value them. Our judgments and values are phrased in an either/or conception of dialectics. Either computers will make tremendous improvements in the quality of life or they will have a disastrous impact on us. The conflict model is assumed and conflict is made synonymous with competition. This leads to interchangeable winners and losers in a seesaw of stability. The situation remains relatively the same, only those filling a position at a particular point in time change. Thus, this dialectic view becomes as problematic as the homeostasis assumed in system theories. Theoretical moves toward recasting dialectics as collaborative might alleviate the problem. Thus, conflicting values dialect; would generate different alternatives not just different relations among the same alternatives. The work of Habermas' theory of distorted communication could guide these attempts to combine the useful aspects of dialectics and systems perspectives in questions of assigning meaning in policy dialogue.

The rapid pace of change in the 1990s suggests that communication technologies are likely fr continue highlighting conflict in inter-institutional 161

relations. This study has focused on the institutions of public education and the

media Libraries, social services, medicine, and religion are well entrenched

institutions faced with the need to evolve or self destruct Value conflict lies at the

heart of some of the impediments to change in these institutions. Debate about these issues is filtered through the media Future research could invoke value

dialectics to investigate inter-institutional conflicts.

Reflections and Interpretations

The checkered history of communication technologies in the classroom

suggests that they have been more of a hindrance than an aid to teachers. The two most frequently cited reasons for these problems are that teachers are incompetent

and/or resistent to using them and that the technology is inappropriate for educational purposes. These difficulties are magnified in situtions where a technology is introduced for very specific purposes to replace some functions of an older and well-entrenched technology. The tendancy is to expect instant transformation and then to lash out wherever possible when disappointed in those expectations.

Television can be used effectively for teaching purposes. It is most effective when used with other resources and for particular objectives. But this is true of all teaching media, including teachers, textbooks, and computers. Why, then, has television been singled out as the "lazy medium," to be used when teachers need a break or students need to settle down after lunch? Television has been associated with entertainment, diversion and pleasure and reading books with learning and labor. The equation goes something like, "schools equal work; work equal learning; learning equal reading and writing." The activity of reading has been institutionalized in schools in such a way that it is difficult for other forms of 162 communication technologies to find niches in the classroom. The activity of watching television has been so institutionalized into the home that it does not translate well for other purposes.

Another part of the problem involves issues of implementation. People who design communication technology for instructional purposes have very different concerns from the people who eventually use the communication technology.

Ability to integrate television projects into the flow of the day is as important as the project itself. Of course, this problem is not specific to educational television.

Designers and users think differendy. Rather than trying to change teachers so that they can deal with the technology, it seems more prudent to adapt the technology to enhance teachers' use of it Barring this, implementation should be considered a part of the design task. When a new project is adopted, teachers need to understand it fully and learn how to work with it to maximize its potential.

Both understandings of communication technologies and implementation problems stem from differences in values. As should be apparent from the above analysis, values tend toward stability much more than change. Trying to engineer value change seems an almost insurmountable task. Perhaps the more fruitful approach lies in demonstrating the value laden nature of the issues and the fundamental contradictions which produce conflicts over them. When television is understood as a force in society it will be dealt with on more reasonable terms.

Instead of ignoring television in the schooling context and making it a babysitter in the home context, it should be seen as a medium of communication. Thus, teaching with and about it, just as has always been done with books, will help place it in perspective. 163

Decisions about curriculum content and public affairs programming are enduring issues in the U.S., in part because of the social forces which came together in the 19th century. Both the institutions of public education and mass media questioned whether their position should be to reflect or to lead social thought. The leadership role eventually became the model for both institutions.

But at the time, leading the nation meant encouraging the scientific view which valued objectivty above all else. The mistake was in assuming that objectivity could translate directly to matters arising from the social. No matter how schools and the media attempt standards of objectivity, their sources and constituents have value laden agendas to promote. The result has been curricula and news reporting buffeted by the more powerful of the groups seeking to institute their version and vision of events into public life.

Both schools and the media do their best to encourage objectivity despite the futility of the task. Ultra-conservative community groups, communities bound by the history of oppression, and businesses seeking to build markets and train workers insinuate their views into the curriculum on a regular basis. The problem does not lie in the nature nor the strength of their convictions but in the way they are mediated. Each of the interested parties assumes their own truth. Rather than labeling those truths for what they are, parts of an ongoing whole, public institutions accept one truth at the expense of the others until some other truth gains the power to temporarily unseat the current dominant one. Culture institutions, such as education and the media, reflect these positions.

This fundamental value dialectic can only grow more divisive during the rapid social transformation of the 1990's. Some groups long for past social arrangements, others have a singleminded passion for progress, and still others are 164 caught between their recognition of a flawed past and their fear of an even more disturbing future. Somehow a way to escape this trap must be found. Perhaps a part of the solution is in teaching common themes in shared diversity. Current discussions either promote a focus on diverse histories and experiences or a focus on that which was made common to all through the dominant forces. Each view excludes the other, as though separate and unequal accurately summarizes the past and the future.

Perhaps another part of the solution is to preference process over product.

There is much talk of learning how to learn and learning how to critique rather than learning bodies of subject matter. However, the standard in public schools remains one of learning content, which negates the possibility of critiquing it. Either rational argument skills should be taught so that business interests can be recognized for what they are or professional educators should act to force out all other localist and corporatist involvement Since the latter strategy has not been successful perhaps we should try the former.

The question of funding is central to providing new communication technologies to school systems. Most communication companies are willing and able to help schools with these problems because the hardware and software components are integrated. However, schools are still caught in the middle. They recognize the need for resources but do not have the power to dictate the terms.

Schools are left with accepting what is given as its given or doing without The problem is exacerbated when television is the technology under consideration because the hardware and software industries are separate. Quality programming makes little difference to schools which have no way of affording the hardware to make the use of television convenient. 165

The commercial system surmounted this problem through the use of advertising. The problem with advertising as a method of funding is the underlying communicative intent Persausive messages occur in a relation of unequal power.

Where one places the preponderance of power depends on how the advertising process is understood and how one views source-receiver issues. Despite the position taken, this fundamental contradiction cannot be resolved. Either the receiver is affected by the persuasive message or the receiver is not affected by the persuasive message. If the receiver is affected then advertising should not be used to support projects in public education. Children are compelled to attend schools by the government and should not be subjected to advertising messages from private companies during that time. If the receiver is not affected then advertisers have no reason to sponsor programs.

New ways of funding education projects are crucial to preparing students for the current pace of technological change. Part of the problem lies in the way schools are valued. Until they are recognized as long term investments and treated accordingly, little improvement can be expected. The irresponsibility of private enterprise and individual communities will continue to produce an irresponsible education system. Learning time should not be sold out to advertisers, however, until new commitments are made schools have little else with which to barter.

One remedy for this incongruity would be schools willing to counter the advertisers' power by teaching critical media skills. Print is the medium through which most school learning takes place and the medium of business and law.

Students are taught how to use the medium first and then they are taught with the medium. Teaching objectives are organized such that a child must know how to read and write before she or he can learn about civics. This dominant logic has not 166 been followed when new technologies are introduced into the classroom. The assumption is that the symbols used in visual media are as they appear. Unlike print materials, which require understanding of the language symbol system, visual media, it is assumed, require no special abilities to be understood. Thus, many kids do not have a rudimentary knowledge of how television is encoded and can be decoded. All this despite the fact television is the primary medium through which they obtain entertainment and information, and through which businesses appeal to them as consumers.

The point is not that print literacy is necessary for learning but that it is made necessary for learning in academic settings. Students learn how to learn with textbooks before they learn from the textbooks. This is why literacy is currently of so much concern. Ability to read does not necessarily correlate with either intelligence or survival skills. Ability to read is required for ease of participation in mainstream activities. The same basic logic should apply to other media forms.

Skills in television viewing (or listening to the radio or using a computer, for that matter) enhance use and strengthen the user's power. If advertisers intentionally enter the school system to persuade students then students should be placed on equal footing with the advertisers. Accepting the benefits afforded by commercial funding of the curriculum mandates schools to teach students the nature of the economic and cultural relationships inherent in advertising sponsored programming. However, as discussed previously this possibility is almost as unlikely as more altruistic behavior on the part of the business sector. The lack of funding independence bleeds into perceptions about ability to control other aspects of the institution, also. When analysis turns to the values associated with system control we begin

to understand how intertwined all of the issues are. The conflicts over curriculum

content, instructional method and funding are ultimately debates about whose value

framework drives one of the most powerful socialization institutions available.

Given the present system, there is little hope that these conflicts will be dealt with in

a more collaborative manner. Public education is designed on a cooperative model and implemented as a competitive enterprise. While public education made an

enormous and mostly postive difference in American society, it could do so much

more if allowed. Some of the problem has to do with the status and role definition

of educators. They are set up as and set themselves up to be benevolent caretakers

and as professionals. The improvements made cm the professional front have had more to do with career goals and working conditions than with establishing education as a profession. Thus, educational policy is battered by external forces, each with an agenda and none with a view toward the whole.

Either the culture of professionalism needs to evolve from protection of roles to a transformation in the image of the institution or a new system needs to be adopted. The impulse to have it both ways is not working. Schools cannot continue to play victim in one arena and lament their lack of control in another. If the private enterprise sector wants to force schools into a more competitive model then that implies educators taking a tough stance when business tries to force an issue or when parents enter the fray. This does not mean educators should try to go it alone. It does seem, however, that since their position is one of mediating internal and external pressures, more could be done to control the pressure valve.

The strides made in gaining professional status demonstrate that greater 168 empowerment is possible, in spite of the powerful external forces. Such efforts should be transferred to other aspects of the education arena

Our development and use of communication technologies is changing the nature of social life more rapidly than can be comprehended. Analysis of the underlying approaches used to evaluate possibilities and approaches will help ease the disruption. The present research used Channel One as a case study to explore both theoretical and substantive issues in the diffusion of communication technologies into public institutions. Regardless of the future of this particular project it has allowed educators, media professionals, scholars and members of the public to recognize and reflect on future conflicts from which new relationships with technologies and institutions must flow. NOTES

^The plethora of terms invoked to refer to instruments of communication lead to some confusion about exactly what such an instrument is. Among the terms are media, medium, form, technology, communication technology, telecommunication technology, mass media, educational technology, and instructional technology. The term communication technology is often used to refer to the technical hardware through which messages are sent and received. The term mass media is often used to refer to aspects of the messages and content carried by communication technologies. Communication technology will be used throughout this study to refer to Channel One. It is both a delivery and distribution system and a carrier of message content. Mass media and commercial mass media will be used to refer to communication industries in general terms. Researchers who study the use of communication technologies for educational purposes are careful to distinguish between instructional and educational technologies. Instructional technology refers to technologies specifically developed for classroom purposes. Educational technology is a broad term which refers to the use of technologies for education in any context, not necessarily specific to the classroom situation. Rather than use both communication technology and educational technology and confuse the reader, communication technology is used throughout with the phrase "for instructional purposes" added where appropriate.

^This unconventionality can be recognized in the numerous newspaper and magazine interviews with Whittle. It becomes clear after reading a number of these articles that Whittle is deliberately promoting an image of himself as an innovator working toward redefining many assumptions about mass media in society. He is especially pushing the idea of target marketing outside the home. He assumes that breaking down the mass audience will eventually lead to the demise of in-home television and curtail the expansion of the cable industry.

169 170

^The following section describes the Whittle Educational Network in the terms used in the promotional literature distributed by the company. Thus, these details are provided in the most favorable light that the Whittle Communications staff could develop. This section, then, is biased toward the Whittle perspective on Channel One and the reader should take this into consideration. However, it also gives the reader a sense of what decision makers were presented with when evaluating Channel One. Decision makers also viewed sample tapes which helped in judging whether the standards set out in the promotional literature were achieved in the actual programming.

^This is one of the primary differences between the institutions of media and public education. Leaders in both arenas argued for an informed citizenry. But the intentions and policies adopted by education have always been much more focused and narrow than has been the case with the mass media where definitions of acceptable types and amounts of knowledge were much more diffuse.

^This concept has been around for over 20 years. Many metropolitan newspapers take part in a project known as Newspapers in Education. The objective is both to make students into lifelong newspaper readers and enhance their ability to participate as citizens and to insure the continued circulation of the newspaper by developing loyalty to the paper at an early age.

^The following section on the rise of mass advertising is primarily a summary of Benniger's main points in relation to control crimes in production and consumption.

^Berger and Luckmann combine the positions of a number of classic social theorists to develop their theory of knowledge as socially constructed. While others have written from this framework, the following discussion draws heavily from the Berger and Luckmann treatise. The work does an excellent job of drawing on theoretical constructs according to their heuristic value.

^For ease of comparison the McQuail's framework for media functions was used to describe functions of the public education institution. The result is an impressionistic synthesis designed to highlight the key differences between same types of functions in the two institutions.

^I'm not suggesting that evidence supports these assumptions, only that the two institutions are commonly thought of in these terms by average citizens.

^Almost all of the major national professional education organizations released statements opposing Channel One. Many Ohio branches of these national organizations refused to comment on the issue by stating that it was a matter of local district choice." 171

1 *0f course this relationship is not quite so clean as stated. Many educators have asked for the help of parents, the community and the private sector. The problem is that controlling the form of that participation becomes quite difficult once it has been requested. APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRE

1 7 2 173 CHANNEL ONE SURVEY

SECTION A

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. In this first set of questions, we are interested in your views regarding gneral aspects of media technology in society. Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, 1 represents strongly disagree and 9 indicates strongly agree. Mark your response by placing an "x" in the blank which represents your level of agreement For each of the questions please take you time and think carefully before responding.

1. Television in the U.S. usually provides high quality news and public affairs programming.

1 = 12; 2 = 22; 3 = 47; 4 = 57; 5 = 98; 6 = 110; 7 = 127; 8= 65; 9 = 18; 0 = 3

2. Having commercial sponsorship on television is a fair price pay for being able to watch it

1 = 17; 2 = 13; 3 = 32; 4 = 35; 5 = 93; 6 = 95; 7 = 136; 8= 86 ; 9 = 51; 0 =3

3. Television does little to clarify concepts for people.

1 = 24; 2 = 51; 3 = 89; 4 = 93; 5 = 100; 6 = 72; 7 = 53; 8= 54; 9 = 20; 0 = 5

4. Private media companies, rather than government agencies should regulate the uses of news and public affairs programming in society.

1 = 65; 2 = 60; 3 = 54; 4 = 42; 5 = 84; 6 = 52; 7 = 66 ; 8= 63; 9 = 67; 0 = 8 5. American adults watch too much television.

1 = 5; 2 = 2; 3 = 11; 4 = 12; 5 = 48; 6 = 42; 7 = 122; 8= 136; 9 = 181; 0 = 2

6 . American television news and public affairs programming lacks diversity in viewpoints.

1 = 9; 2 = 31; 3 = 59; 4 = 83; 5 = 75; 6 = 74; 7 = 100; 8= 67; 9 = 59; 0 = 4

7. Television commercials are not very helpful to consumers.

1 = 10; 2 = 17; 3 = 47; 4 = 55; 5 = 62; 6 = 63; 7 = 102; 8= 106; 9 = 97; 0 = 2

8. New communication technologies will replace a large number of workers in the U.S.

1 = 13; 2 = 39; 3 = 73 ; 4 = 71 ; 5 = 147 ; 6 = 84; 7 = 59; 8= 37 ; 9 = 25; 0 = 13 174 9. Government agencies, rather than private media companies, should determine the target audience for news and public affairs programming. = 136; 2 = 106; 3= 103; 4 = 64; 5 = 83; 6 = 28; 7 = 20; 8= 11; 9 = 5; 0 = 5

0. Generally, print media holds oris attention more than television.

= 97; 2 = 144; 3 = 120; 4 = 66 ; 5 = 48; 6 = 25; 7 = 28; 8= 14; 9 = 16; 0 = 3

1. Television news and public affairs programming in the U.S. upholds the value of a free press.

= 11; 2 = 18; 3 = 31; 4 = 42; 5 = 54; 6 = 101; 7 = 148; 8 = 101; 9 = 52; 0 = 3

2. Advertising often persuades consumers to buy things they shouldn't buy.

= 6 ; 2 = 12; 3 = 19; 4 = 34; 5 = 56; 6 = 79; 7 = 120; 8 = 114; 9 = 118; 0 = 3;

3. Television functions as a diversion more than it functions to educate.

= 3; 2 = 11; 3 = 21;4 = 28; 5 =41; 6 = 55;7 = 121; 8 = 153; 9 = 125; 0 = 3

4. Government agencies, rather than private media companies, should control commercial sponsorship of news and public affairs programming.

= 128; 2 = 109; 3 = 106; 4 = 55; 5 = 72; 6 = 32; 7 = 24; 8 = 20; 9 = 10; 0 = 5

5. Many people will lose their jobs due to technological development in society.

= 28; 2 = 48; 3 = 86 ; 4 = 56; 5 = 100; 6 = 82; 7 = 82; 8 = 42; 9 = 33; 0 = 4

6 . Television news and public affairs programming is not often influenced by the business sector.

= 107; 2 = 154; 3 = 129; 4 = 76; 5 = 36; 6 = 21; 7 = 17; 8 = 11; 9 = 5; 0 = 5

7. Americans generally understand what commercials are trying to do.

= 31; 2 = 55; 3 = 78; 4 = 73; 5 = 78; 6 = 93; 7 = 91; 8= 43; 9 = 17; 0 = 2

8. Watching television is often more interesting than reading.

= 76;2 = 53; 3 = 82; 4 = 61; 5 =63; 6 = 78; 7 = 88; 8 = 33; 9 = 24; 0= 3

9. Private media companies, rather than government agencies, should determine the content of news and public affairs programming.

= 21; 2 = 29; 3 = 43; 4 = 41; 5 = 99; 6 = 71 ; 7 = 109; 8 = 74 ; 9 = 69 ; 0 = 5 175 20. Average Americans see communication technologies, such as television, more as entertainment than as learning devices.

1 = 3; 2 = 1; 3 = 4; 4 = 6 ; 5 = 21; 6 = 47; 7 = 135; 8 = 189; 9 = 151; 0 = 4

21. Television news is often biased in its presentation of public affairs programming. 1= 4; 2 = 19; 3 = 34; 4 = 45; 5 = 81; 6 = 121; 7 =115; 8 = 78; 9 = 60; 0 = 4

22. Commercials on television often mislead individuals in important ways.

1 = 2; 2 = 7; 3 = 25; 4 = 20; 5 = 47; 6 = 98; 7 = 137; 8 = 119; 9 = 104; 0 = 2

23. Most individuals are careful consumers of the media.

1 = 88; 2 = 139; 3 =137; 4 = 91; 5 = 45; 6 = 26; 7 = 20; 8 = 8; 9 = 5; 0 = 2

24. Private media companies, rather than government agencies, should determine the days and times when news and public affairs programming is aired.

1 = 22; 2 = 40; 3 = 23; 4 = 42; 5 = 106; 6 = 82; 7 = 94; 8= 77; 9 = 69; 0 = 6

25. Adults understand ideas better if they can see examples of them on television.

1 = 7; 2 = 12; 3 = 30; 4 = 27; 5 = 89; 6 = 139; 7 = 136; 8= 77; 9 = 41; 0 = 3

You have just completed the first section of the survy. Thank you for your help. Please continue with section B.

Section B

This section of the survey is concerned with your opinions regarding the realtionship between various aspects of the media and public schools. Again, please indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements, 1 indicates strongly disagree and 9 indicates strongly agree. Mark you response by placing an x in the appropriate blank. For each of the questions please take your time and think carefully before responding.

26. Instructional television holds the attention of students more than print media.

1= 4; 2 = 3; 3= 12;4 = 20; 5 = 53; 6 = 109;7 =159; 8 = 119;9 = 79; 0 = 3

27. Public education systems do a good job of providing high quality news and public affairs curriculum.

1 = 24; 2 = 44; 3 = 74 ; 4 = 80; 5 = 95; 6 = 88; 7 = 81; 8 = 51; 9 = 18; 0 = 6 176 28. Advertising often persuades teens to buy things they shouldn't buy. 1 =0;2 = 2; 3 = 10;4= 15; 5 = 31; 6 = 75; 7 = 106; 8 = 136; 9 = 182; 0 = 4

29. Using print media in the classroom is more interesting than using television.

1 = 33; 2 = 56; 3 = 119; 4 = 132; 5 = 146; 6 = 35; 7 = 15; 8 = 9; 9 = 8; 0 = 8

30. The local school systems, rather than corporate sponsors, should determine how news and public affairs are integrated into the curriculum.

1 = 1; 2 = 2; 3 = 3; 4 = 9; 5 = 33; 6 = 43; 7 = 92; 8 = 152; 9 = 221; 0 = 5

31. Many teachers will lose their jobs due to technological development in society.

1 = 143; 2 = 150; 3 = 128; 4 = 74; 5 = 33; 6 = 14; 7 = 8; 8 = 5; 9 = 2; 0 = 4

32. Secondary schools' public affairs curriculum is often biased in the presentation of news.

1 = 21; 2 = 50; 3 = 56; 4 = 47; 5 = 161; 6 = 88; 7 = 75; 8 = 29; 9 = 15; 0 = 19

33. Teens understand what commercials are trying to do.

1 = 73; 2 = 69; 3 = 86 ; 4 = 82; 5 = 64; 6 = 95; 7 = 54; 8 = 23; 9 = 10; 0 = 5

34. The benefits derived from educational television are worth the time involved in using it.

1 = 4 ;2 = 8; 3 = 12;4 = 22; 5 = 77; 6 = 106; 7 = 137; 8 = 114;9 = 76; 0 = 5

35. Corporate sponsors, rather than educators, should determine the content of news and public affairs curriculum.

1 = 186; 2 = 141; 3 = 92; 4 = 61; 5 = 52; 6 = 16; 7 = 4; 8 = 4; 9 = 1; 0 = 4

36. High school students understand ideas better if they can see examples of them on educational television.

1 = 5; 2 = 1; 3 = 6 ; 4 = 11; 5 = 63; 6 =118; 7 = 160; 8 = 123; 9 = 70; 0 = 4

37. Public schools' news and public affairs curriculum uphold the value of a free press.

1 = 5; 2 = 13; 3 = 21; 4 = 33; 5 = 90; 6 = 99; 7 = 133; 8 = 93; 9 = 62; 0 = 12

38. Television does not help students grasp the meaning of concepts.

1 = 76 ; 2 = 126 ; 3 = 145; 4 = 100; 5 = 50; 6 = 22; 7 = 13; 8 = 13; 9 = 9; 0 = 4 Ill 39. Using commercial sponsorship in public schools is a fair price to pay for the projects they fund.

1 = 67; 2 = 41; 3 = 40; 4 = 43; 5 = 87; 6 = 68 ; 7 = 97; 8 = 75; 9 = 36; 0 = 7

40. Business leaders, rather than educaotrs, should decide how to present news and public affairs issues in schools.

1 = 195; 2 = 149; 3 = 96; 4 = 59; 5 = 39; 6 = 7; 7 = 10; 8 = 1; 9 = 2; 0 = 3

41. The use of communication technologies in the classroom demands too much time fen: the teacher.

1 = 62; 2 = 94; 3 = 116; 4= 108; 5 = 78; 6 = 52; 7 = 32; 8 = 11; 9 = 3; 0 = 5

42. Secondary school news and public affairs currciula is properly insulated from business interests.

1 = 31; 2 = 41; 3 = 86 ; 4 = 108; 5 = 170; 6 = 49; 7 = 38; 8 = 17; 9 = 6 ; 0= 15

43. Commercials on television often mislead teens in important ways.

1 = 7; 2 = 10; 3 = 15; 4 = 33; 5 = 44; 6 = 90; 7 = 125; 8 = 111; 9 = 123; 0 = 3 44. Television in the classroom is as much a diversion for students as a learning resource.

1 = 14; 2 = 31; 3 = 51; 4 = 64; 5 = 92; 6 = 110; 7 = 94; 8 = 64; 9 = 34; 0 = 7

45. School officials, rather than private businesses, should control commercial sponsorship of school projects.

1 = 11; 2 = 12; 3 = 24; 4 = 23; 5 =97; 6 = 93;7 = 104; 8 =97; 9 = 94; 0 = 6

46. Communication technologies are seen by high shool students more as entertainment than as learning devices.

1 = 4; 2 = 10; 3 = 28; 4 = 51; 5 = 76; 6 = 126; 7 = 139; 8 = 76; 9 = 47; 0 = 4

47. Secondary education news and public affairs curricula lacks diversity in its presentation of viewpoints.

1 = 7; 2 = 32; 3 = 51; 4 = 71; 5 = 145; 6 = 104; 7 = 80; 8 = 31; 9 = 19; 0 = 21

48. The commercials used to sponsor school projects are not often helpful to students.

1 = 7 ; 2 = 18; 3 = 38; 4 = 58; 5 = 161 ; 6 = 76 ; 7 = 81; 8 = 54; 9 = 47 ; 0 = 21 178 49. Communication technologies such as television will replace many teachers.

1 = 167; 2 = 178; 3 = 105; 4 = 52; 5 = 27; 6 =14; 7 = 4; 8 = 7; 9 = 2; 0 = 5

50. Professional educators, rather than business should determine the curricular needs of high school students.

1= 4 ; 2 =7; 3 =11; 4 = 11; 5 = 42; 6 = 45; 7 = 70; 8 = 133; 9 = 233; 0 = 5

We appreciate your help in conduting this survey. Your responses are very helpful. Please proceed to the next page.

SECTION C

The next set of questions asks about Channel One and whether your school is using it.

51. Which of the following statements describes the use of Channel One at your school.

32 A. Our school has been using Channel One since March, 1990. 176 B. Our school began using Channel One in September, 1990. 83 C. Our school was offered Channel One but we decided not to use it. 57 D. Our school has not been offered the Channel One package. 176 E. I am not aware of the status of Channel One at our school. 25 F. Now 0 G. Other (Please list______). 12 Missing

IF YOU ANSWERED D TO QUESTION 51 PLEASE SKIP TO QUESTION 56. 52. What was the approximate date your school made the decision to accept/reject Channel One?

6 winter 89 9 spring 89 2 summer 89 19 autumn 89 22 winter 90 142 spring 90 47 autumn 90 2 other 312 missing 179 53. The following is a list of people who may have particpated in the deicsion to accept or reject Channel One at your school. Please check any of the following which you believe participated in that decision.

257 school board members 56 parents 273 principal 195 teachers 33 students 57 other (please list)______

54. Have you ever used Channel One in your classroom? 144 Yes

55. At what time during the school schedule (such as homeroom in the morning or during lunch) is Channel One aired?

14 before school 119 homeroom 18 lunch 55 rotating schedule 355 missing

56. Below is a list of sources from which you may have obained information about the Whittle Communication’s Channel One project. Please place an "x" in the blanks next to the sources from which you heard about Channel One. Please check all that apply.

155 Your principal 127 Other teachers at your school 4 Parents of your students 161 Professional educators' organizations, such as NEA 54 Professional journals, such asSchool Library Journal 120 Direct communication from Whittle Communications 178 National media, such NBC Nightly News 156 Local media such as the Columbus Dispactch 54 Other (please list______)

57. Which of the following statements describes the information you have about Channel One. Please check all that apply.

228 I've read a number of articles about Channel One. 145 I atteneded a demonstration of Channel One. 138 I followed the press coverage of Channel One carefully. 77 I played an active role in my school’s Channel One decision. 173 I have not paid much attention to the Channel One issue. 58. Have you ever used any current events packages, either in print or television form, other than Channel One in your classroom?

198 Yes

IF YOU ANSWERED NOT QUESTION 58, PLEASE SKIP TO 50.

59. Please list all of the other packages you have used. 13 CNN: Newsroom

20 Television news

40 PBS

37 Newspapers in Education

8 Newspapers

74 Magazines

60. Does your school use any framed wall posters, such asConnections ?, in the school hallways?

231 Yes

IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO QUESTION 60, PLEASE SKIP TO QUESTION 64.

61. What was the approximate date your school began using these wall posters in the hallways?

5 1990 12 1989 18 1988 77 1987 59 1986 21 1985 369 missing

62. The following is a list of people who may have participated int he decision to use wall posters. Please check any of the following whicy you believe participated in that decision.

72 school board members 97 superintendent 203 prinicipal 42 teachers 28 other (Please list______) 181

63. Please list the company which provides these framed wall posters to your school.

34 Whitde Communications 32 anti-drug group 1 other 494 missing

Section D

Thank you for your time in completing this survey. We have one final set of questions concerning your oppinions about privately owned, commercially sponored, televised current events packages. Although yourschool may not be using Channel One, please answer the questions based on the information you do have, even though it may be limited. Please indicate the extent tot whicy you agree with the following statements, 1 represents strongly diagree and 9 indicates strongly agree. Mark your response by placing an "x" in the appropriate blank. For each of the questions please take your time and think carefully before responding.

64. Channel One has the potential to provide students with a diversity o f views about news and current events.

1=7; 2 = 16; 3 = 8; 4 = 8; 5 =85; 6 = 82; 7 = 96; 8 = 125; 9 = 81; 0 = 53

65. Whittle Communications, rather than public schools, should regulate the commercials on Channel One.

1=91; 2 = 76; 3 = 59;4 = 59; 5 = 109; 6 = 41;7 = 38; 8 =21;9 = 15; 0 = 52

66 . Teachers' traditional role in teaching current events is challenged in a positive way by projects such as Channel One.

1 = 21; 2 = 24; 3 = 22; 4 = 23; 5 =96; 6 = 83; 7 = 116; 8 = 86 ; 9 = 39; 0 = 51

67. Most students understand what the commercials in current events materials such as Channel One are trying to do.

1 = 34; 2 = 39; 3 = 53; 4 = 57; 5 = 105; 6 = 79; 7 = 82; 8 = 38; 9 = 18; 0 = 56

68 . The Channel One news programs couldn't possibly cover current events in a meaningful way.

1 = 83; 2 = 134; 3 = 98; 4 = 63; 5 = 67; 6 = 26; 7 = 18; 8 = 7; 9 = 8; 0 = 57 182

69. The schools not Whittle Communication should determine which students see Channel One.

1 = 10; 2 = 13; 3 = 16; 4= 19; 5 = 57; 6 = 57; 7 = 101; 8 = 103; 9 = 131; 0 = 34

70. Projects such as Channel One take too much time from other equally important things done during the school day.

1 = 63; 2 = 77; 3 = 80; 4 = 77; 5 = 98; 6 = 42; 7 = 26; 8 = 24; 9 = 22; 0 = 52

71. The commercials on private media services like Channel One are not helpful to students.

1 = 12; 2 = 24; 3 = 43; 4 = 67; 5 = 133; 6 = 49; 7 = 78; 8 =47; 9 = 48; 0 = 60

72. It is unlikely that Channel One's presentation of news and public affairs contains any signficant biases.

1 = 45; 2 = 52; 3 = 83; 4 = 82; 5 = 127; 6 = 50; 7 = 37; 8 = 17; 9 = 7; 0 = 61

73. Individual high schools, not Whittle communications, should decide how to use Channel One.

1= 4 ; 2 = 4; 3 = 9; 4 = 12; 5 = 51; 6 = 60; 7 = 78; 8 = 122; 9 = 167; 0 = 54

74. Channel One, and projects like it , are better at holding students' attention than reading about current events in news magazines.

1 = 10; 2 = 5; 3 = 20; 4 =17; 5 = 82; 6 = 203; 7 = 121; 8 = 92; 9 = 57; 0 = 55

75. The advertisements on projects such as Channel One persuade students to buy things they shouldn't buy.

1 = 12; 2 = 18; 3 = 28; 4 = 62; 5 = 131; 6 = 85; 7 = 70; 8 = 61; 9 = 36; 0 = 58

76. Projects scuh as Channel One hip students understand the value of a free press.

1 = 19; 2 = 13; 3 = 26; 4 = 41; 5 = 148; 6 = 118; 7 = 82; 8 = 35; 9 = 22; 0 = 57

77. Whittle Communications, rather than local school districts should select the content of Channel One newscasts.

1 = 59; 2 = 54; 3 = 50; 4 = 75 ; 5 = 103; 6 = 64 ; 7 = 46 ; 8 = 34; 9 = 21; 0 = 55 183 78. Projects such as Channel One entertain students more than they teach them.

1 = 13; 2 = 47; 3 = 78; 4 = 85; 5 = 127; 6 = 73; 7 = 49; 8 = 17; 9 = 19; 0 = 53

79. Using commercial sponsorship on televised current events programs such as Channel One is a fair price to pay for being able to use the services in public high schools.

1 = 49; 2 = 30; 3 = 39; 4 = 26; 5 = 79; 6 = 88; 7 = 85; 8 = 69; 9 = 43; 0 = 53

80. The Channel One current events coverage is quite likely influenced by business interests.

1 = 63; 2 = 77; 3 = 80; 4 = 77; 5 = 98; 6 = 42; 7 = 26; 8 = 24; 9 = 22; 0 = 52

81. Whittle Communications should decide when and where students see Channel One rather than having principals and teachers decide.

1 = 240; 2 = 137; 3 = 56; 4 = 34; 5 = 29; 6 = 2; 7 = 2; 8 = 3; 9 = 4; 0 = 54

82. Televised news projects such as Channel One help students understand current events ideas.

1 = 8; 2 = 2; 3 = 5; 4 = 13; 5 = 85; 6 = 111; 7 = 124; 8 = 103; 9 = 53; 0 = 57

83. Commercials on Channel One are likely to miselad students in important ways.

1 = 16; 2 = 36; 3 = 57; 4 = 88; 5 = 113; 6 = 69; 7 = 49; 8 = 34; 9 = 40; 0 = 59

SECTION E

Finally, we have just a few more brief questions. Would you please give us some information about your role as a teacher and the school where you teach. Remember, your responses are completely anonymous.

84. What is the student enrollment at your school?

96 0-600 198 601-1200 133 1201-1800 62 1801- and over 72 missing 85. What primary subject area - such as Art or History - do you currently teach?

95 social studies 113 language aits 87 science 91 math 36 foreign language 33 art 1 special education 21 physical education 59 vocational technical 25 missing

86 . How many years have you been a teacher?

12 0-2 36 3-5 37 6-8 35 9-11 43 12-14 68 15-17 114 18-20 189 21-23 5 24 and over 22 missing

87. How many years have you been taching at the school where you are presently employed?

31 2 84 5 62 8 61 11 56 14 60 17 77 20 106 23 3 24 21 missing

88. What is the name of your school district? Frequencies for this item are available upon request from the researcher. Tabulation indicated that the largest number of respondents from any single school district was 11. 185

89. Could you please tell us your age? Please check the following age category which best represents your age group.

40 20 to 29 years 142 30 to 39 years 256 40 to 49 years 90 50 to 59 years 11 More than 60 years 22 missing

90. What is your sex?

312 male 224 female

The Ohio State University and the Center for Advanced Study in Telecommunications (CAST) thank you for your assistance. You have given us very helpful information regarding this important education policy issues. This completes the survey.

Please detach the outer cover of this booklet. The new covers will be the Channel One survey title page and the business address for CAST. Please staple this booklet shut and drop it in the mail. No postage is necessary.

We are planning to report the results of this survey at a CAST symoposium on November 15, 1990. Please mril your completed survey as soon as poosible. Remember your responses are completely anonymous. Again, CAST thanks you. REFERENCES

AASA position on Whittle Communication's 'Channel One.' (1990, March). The School Administrator, p. 16.

Adler, M. (1983). Paideia: Problems and Possibilities. New York: Macmillan Publishing.

Bagdikian, B. (1990). The media monopoly. 3rd ed. Boston: Beacon Press.

Baier, K. (1969). What is value? An analysis of the concept. In K. Baier and N Rescher (Eds.). Values and the Future. New York: Free Press.

Barmash, I. (1988, September 30). A magazine with a profit at its debut. The New York Times, p. D21.

Barry, A. (1989). Advertising in the classroom: The controversy over Channel One. Journal of Visual Literacy.

Becker, S. (1987). Discovering mass communication. 2nd ed. Glenview, 111.: Scott, Forseman.

Beniger, J. (1986). The control revolution: Technological and economic origins of the information society. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press. Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Doubleday.

Blau, E. (1989, November 16). Whittle distributes books with ads to an elite list. The New York Times, p. C29.

Bloom, A. (1987). The Closing of the American Mind. New York. Simon & Schuster.

Bohmstedt, G. (1983). Measurement, in Handbook of Survey Research. Rossi, P., Wright, J., Anderson, A. (eds.). San Diego, Ca: Academic Press.

186 187

Book reviewers divided on Whittle move. (1989, November 21). The New York Times, p. D20. Bradley, C. (1986, April 5). Company founders divide to conquer. Knoxville Journal. Breed, W. (1955). Social Control in the newsroom: A functional analysis. Social Forces. 33, 326-335. Burke, L. (1986, August 24). Chris Whittle...one of publishing's bold types. Chattanooga News-Free Press. Burkman, E. (1987). "Factors Affecting Utilization." in Instructional Technology Foundations. Robert Gagne (ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.

Button, H. & Provenzo, E. (1983). History of education and culture in America. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Carmen, B. (1990, April 10). School-tax sharing proposal. The Columbus Dispatch.

Carmines, E. & Zeller, R. (1979). Reliability and Validity Assessment. Beverly Hills, Ca: Sage. Carmody, D. (1989, February la). Commercial tv plan for schools draws fire. The New York Times, p. 19.

Carmody, D. (1989, March 7b). News shows with ads are tested in 6 schools. The New York Times, p. 19.

Carter, B. (1989, April 27a). Turner plans to give schools an ad-free news program. The New York Times, p. D23.

Carter, B. (1989, June6 b). Whittle plans school news nationwide. The New York Times, p. 27, 40.

Carter, B. (1989, November 9c). Whittle plans tv service in doctors' waiting rooms. The New York Times, p. D22.

Cegala, D. (1987). Persuasive Communication: Theory and Practice. Edina, Mn: Bellweather Press.

Chira, S. (1990, March 6 ). Reading, writing and broadcast news. The New York Times, p. Bl-2. Christians, C., Rotzoll, K. & Fackler, M. (1987). Media Ethics: Cases and Moral Reasoning. 2nd Ed. Longman: New York. 188

Christiansen, B. (1989, March 22). There are better ways to use tv in schools. The New York Times. p .l8A. Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from the media. Review of educational research. 53(4).

Cohen, M. (1988). "Education technology and school organization." in Technology in education: Looking toward 2020. Nickerson, R. Zodhiates, P. (eds.). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.

Cooley, J. (1952). Vision in Television: The Origins and Potentialities of Educational Television. Cremin, L. (1988). American education: The metropolitan experience 1876-1980. New York: Harper & Row.

Cuban, L. (1984). How Teachers Taught: Constancy and Change in American Classrooms 1890-1980. New York: Longman.

Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use of Technology Since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.

Cuff, D. (1988, December 7). Rukeyser is shifting from Time to Whittle. The New York Times.

Daniels, L (1987, January 1). Hearst gets Esquire magazine. The New York Times.

D'Arcy and Whittle disagree on magazines. (1988, July 25). The New York Times.

David, M. (1975). School Rule. Cambridge, Ma: Ballentine.

Dennis, E. & Merrill, J. (1990). Media debates: Issues in mass communication. New York: Longman. DeFleur, M. & Dennis, E. (1991). Understanding mass communication. 4th ed. Boston, Ma: Houghton Mifflin.

Dillman, D. (1983). Mail and other self-administered questionnaires, in Handbook of Survey Research. Rossi, P., Wright, J., Anderson, A. (eds.). San Diego, Ca: Academic Press.

Donaton, S. (1989, October 2). Whittle eyes seniors. Advertising Age, p. 1.

Dougherty, P. (1986, Aprila). Uproar over the Whittle proposal. The New York limfiSt 189

Dougherty, P. (1986, November 20b). Esquire's revivifier moves on. The New York Times, p. 53. Dyer, G. (1982). Advertising as communication. London: Methuen.

Ehninger, D. & Brockriede, W. (1960). Toulmin on Argument: An interpretation and application. Quarterly Journal of Speech. 46. pp. 44-53.

Entman, R. (1989). Democracy without Citizens: Media and the Decay of American Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Evans, J. (1989, September). What's next with Whittle's Channel One? School and College, pp. 6-13.

Ewen, S. (1976). Captains of Consciousness: Advertising and the Social Roots of the Consumer Culture. New York: McGraw Hill.

Fabrikant, G. (Datea). Time and Whittle form alliance. The New York Times, p. 1,41.

Fabrikant, G. (1988, December 16b). Hearst is seen close to acquiring Esquire. The New York Times, p. D 25. Field, D. (1988, October 21). Time to buy half of publishing firm. Washington D.C.Times.

Filep, R. & Schramm, W. (1970). A study of the impact of research on utilization of media for educational purposes sponsored bv NDEA Title VII 1958- 1968. Final report: Overview. El Segundo, Ca: Institute for Educational Development Floating a new idea, immersibles. (1990, March 26). Fortune, p. 121.

Forester, J. (1983). What analysts do. In W. Dunn (Ed.), Values. Ethics and the Practice of policy analysis. Lexington, Ma: Lexington Books.

Frankel, M. (1983). Sampling theory, in Handbook of Survey Research. Rossi, P., Wright, J., Anderson, A. (eds.). San Diego, Ca: Academic Press.

Gans, H. (1979). Deciding what's news. New York: Pantheon Books.

Gathering of entrepreneurs. (1989, November). Inc. p. 33-54.

Gilbert, L. (1989, February 6 ). Youth marketing. Advertising Age, p. S-l.

Gitlin, T. (1983). Inside prime time. New York: Pantheon. 190

Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Berkeley: University of California Press. Goldstein, P. (1978). Changing the American Schoolbook. Lexington, Ma: Lexington Books.

Goodman, W. (1989, March 7a). Pilot news program for schools. The New York Times.

Goodman, W. (1989, June 18b). Are commercials in the classroom cause for alarm? The New York Times, p. H27.

Goodman, W. (1989, August 19c). Tv news in in schools: A missing alternative. The New York Times. Graber, D. (1987). Processing the news. New York: Longman.

Griesemer, J. L. & Butler, C. Education under studv: An analysis of recent maior reports on education. Chelmsford, Ma.: Northeast Regional Exchange. Gross, R. & Gross, B. (1985). The great school debate: Which wav for American education. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Gunter, B. (1987). Poor reception: Misunderstanding and forgetting broadcast news. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.

Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston, Ma: Beacon Press.

Habermas, J. (1975). Legitimation crisis, trans. Thomas McCarthy. Boston, Ma: Beacon Press. Hackett, R. (1984). Decline of a paradigm? Bias and objectivity in news media studies, Critical Studies in Mass Communication, v. 1.3. pp. 229-259.

Halberstam, D. (1979). The powers that be. New York: Knopf.

Hammer, J. (1990, February 19). A golden boy's toughest sell. Time, pp. 52- 53. Head, S & Sterling, C. (1991). Broadcasting in America: A survey of electronic media. Boston, Ma: Houghton Mifflin.

Hefzallah, I. (1990). The new learning and telecommunication technologies: Their potential applications in education. Springfield, II: Thomas.

Henry, W. (1983, November 21). Esquire at mid-century. Time, p. 54. 191

Hirsch, E. (1987). Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. Boston, Ma: Houghton Mifflin.

Hoover, F. (1990, April 9a). Television in the classroom is debated by state board. The Columbus Dispatch. Huesca, R. (1990, March6 ). Tv news sho debuts in class. The Columbus Dispatch, p. 1. Ibe-Bassey, G. (1983). An Analysis of Instructional Media Competency of the Nigeriean Certificate in Education Teachers. Ph.D. Ohio State University.

In school: Subsidized news is worth a test. (1989, March 12. The New York Times, p. E24. Jenkinson, E. (1979). Censors in the Classroom: the Mind Benders. Carbondale, II: Southern Illinois University Press. Jenkinson, E. (1986). The Schoolbook Protest Movement: 40 Questions and Answers. Bloomington, In. Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.

Johnstone, J. (1987). Electronic Learning from Audiotape to Videodisc. Hillsdale, NJ. Erlbaum. Kaplan, R. (1989, November). Some Whittle sponsors may not renew. Publishing News.

Katz, M. (1987). Reconstructing American education. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press.

Klecka, W. (1980). Discriminant analysis. Beverly Hills, Ca: Sage.

Kleinfield, N. (1989, March 19). In search of the next medium. The New York Times, p. 1.

Kantrowitz, B. (1988, March 21). Marketing the waiting room. Time, p. 78. Koch, N. & McCain, T. (1982). "Research on School Levy Issues: A Review of the Literature," Paper presented to the Midwest Association of Public Opinion Research Convention, Chicago Illinois.

Koening, A. & Hill, R. (1967). The farther vision: Educational television today. Madison, Wi: The University of Wisconsin Press.

Kohl, H. (1989, August 13). What's the price of commercials in classrooms? New York Times, p. H31. 192

Kozol, J. (1985). Illiterate America. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.

Kremar, M. (1991). Channel One: The effects on middle school students of commercials and news in a classroom context a heuristic analysis. Presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Chicago, Illinois.

Lail, J. (1990, November). What's a Whittle? Washington Journalism Review, p. 24-28.

LeDuc, D. (1987). Bevond Broadcasting: Patterns in Policy and Law. New York: Longman.

Lewis, K. (1989, April8 ). Adult jury still out on Channel One after first month. Cincinnati Enquirer.

Liebert, R., Sprafkin, J. Davidson, E. (1988). The early window: Effects of television on vouth. New York: Pergamon Press.

Lindblom, C. (1990). Inquiry and Change: The Troubled Attempt to Understand and Shape Society. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Linsky, M. (1988). The media and public deliberation. In R. Reich (Ed.). The Power of Public Ideas.

Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Sage. Lowery, S. & DeFleur, M. (1983). Milestones in mass communication research: Media effects. New York: Longman. Lumbye, B. (1986, April 25). 13-30 to stay if it can find site. Knoxville Journal.

McCain, T. & Lowe, G. (1990). Localism in western EuropeanTadio broadcasting: Untangling the wireless. Journal of Communication. 40. 1. pp. 86 -101.

McCombs, M. & Shaw, D. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly. 36. 176-187.

McDowell, E. (1989, April 19a). New Whittle experiment: Books. The New York Times, p. Dl, D26.

McDowell, E. (1989, April 24b). Whittle book plan rouses publishers. The New York Times, p. D9. 193

McDowell, E. (1989, June 13c). Author quits Whittle’s book project. The New York Times, p. D17.

McQuail, D. (1987). Mass communication theory: An introduction. Beverly Hills, Ca: Sage. Marchand, R. (1985). Advertising the American Dream: Making Wav for Modernity. 1920-1940. Berkeley: University of California Pres..

Mejone, G. (1989) Evidence, argument and persuasion in the policy process. New Haven, Ct:Yale University Press. Moffett, J. (1988). Storm in the mountains: A case study of censorship, conflict and consciousness. Carbondale, II.: Southern Illinois University Press.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Wasington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

National Parent Teachers Association. (1989). Partial list of groups and individuals opposing commercials in the classroom. Press packet.

New York Board of Regents Staff. (1989, June 16). Commercial in-school television report and staff recommendations. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

Ohio Department of Education. (1989). Ohio educational directory. Columbus, Oh: State of Ohio Department of Education. Pattison, R. (1982). On literacy: The politics of the word from Homer to the age of rock. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Perelman, L. (1987). Technology a n d transformation of schools. Viriginia: National School Boards Association.

Perry, N. (1988, February 28). Special report. Fortune, p. 113-114.

Pomice, E. (1989, February 20). Whittling the message into the medium. U.S. News & World Report, pp. 52-54.

Pope, D. (1983). The Making of Modem Advertising.

Postman, N. (1985). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York: Penguin. 194

Ravitch, D. (1983). The troubled crusade: American education 1945-1980. New York: Basic Books. Reilly, P. (1988, October 24a). Whittle joins Time's lair. Advertising Age, p. 3.

Reilly, P. (1989, August 14b). Whittle snatches Gannett's Gaulke. Advertising Age,, p. 50. Reilly, P. (1990, November 26c). Whittle's school television project racks up subscribers, defying critics. The Wall Street Journal, p. B4.

Rein, M. (1983). Value critical policy analysis. In D. Callahan & B. Jennings (Eds.) Ethics, the Social sciences and policy analysis. New York: Plenum.

Reiser, R. (1987). "Instructional technology: A history." in Instructional Technology Foundations. Robert Gagne (ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.

Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. New York: The Free Press.

Romiszowski, A. (1988). The selection and use of instructional media: for improved classroom teaching and interactive individualized instruction. New York: Nichols Publishing.

Roper Organization. (1977). Changing Public Attitudes Toward Television and Other Mass Media. 1959-1976. New York: Roper Organization, Inc.

Rothenberg, R. (1990, February 15a). Time Warner is marketing synergy. The New York Times.

Rothemberg, R. (1990, March 9b). Pair leads Whittle's school fight. The New York Times, p. 42. Rothenberg, R. (1990, March 19c). P.T.A. opposes school tv plan. The New York Times, p. C5.

Schiller, D. (1979). "An historical approach to objectivity and professionalism in American news reporting." Journal of Communication. Schor, I. (1986). Culture wars: School and society in the conservative restoration 1969-1984. Boston: Routledge, Kegan, Paul. Schudson, M. (1984). Advertising, the Uneasy Persuasion: Its Dubious Impact on American Society. New York: Basic Books.

Schudson, M. (1978). Discovering the news. New York: Basic Books. 195

Sears, A. The Role of the Media in Legitimizing Policy Conflict: The Channel One Case. Presented at the Speech Communication Annual Convention, Chicago, Illinois, November, 1990.

Sheets, K. (1988, March 7). War in the waiting room. U.S. News & World Reports, p. 59. Shoemaker P. & Reese, Stephen, D. (1991) Mediating the Messge: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content. New York: Longman.

Siepmann, C. (1958). TV and our school crisis. New York: Dodd, Mead, Co.

Singer, I. (1985). What's the real point of A Nation At Risk? B. Gross & R. Gross (eds.), in The great school debate: Which wav for American education. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Spring, J. (1988). Conflict of interests: The politics of American education. White Plains, NY: Longman. Starker, T. (19881. Evil influences. New Brunswick: Transactional Publishers.

State of California, Bill Honig, Superintendent of Public Instruction. (1989, August 1). State Department of Education policy on "Channel One" for in­ school audiences. State of California Department of Education Fiscal and Policy Planning Analysis. (1989, May 25). Revised cost of Channel One broadcast in schools.

State of California Department of Education Legal and Audits Branch. (1989, August 1). Memorandum: Legal opinion-requiring students to view Channel One and other similar television programs sponsored by commercial advertisers.

Stavitsky, A. (1990). From Pedagogic to Public: The Development of U.S- Public Radio's Audience-Centered Strategies. WOSU. WHA. and WNYC. 1930-1987. O.S.U. Ph.D.

Stedman, L. & Smith, M. (1985). Weak arguments, poor data, simplistic recommendations: Putting the reports under the microscope. B. Gross & R. Gross (eds.), in The great school debate: Which wav for American education. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Today official goes to Channel One. (1989, October 2). The New York Times, p. C17.

This chapter paid for by... (1989, May 1). Time, p. 59. 196

Tuchman, G. (1978). Making News. New York: The Free Press.

Tyson-Bemstein, H. (1988). A Conspiracy of Good Intentions: America's Textbook Fiasco. Washington. D.C.: Council for Basic Education.

Verhovek, S. (1989, June 17). New York state bans tv news with ads from public schools. The New York Times, p. 1,10.

Walley, W. (1989, September 25). Whittle hits reliance on traditional media. Advertising Age, p. 32. Wartella, E. (1979). Children Communicating: Media and Development of Thought. Speech. Understanding. Beverly Hills, Ca: Sage.

Weiss, C. (1983). Ideology, interests and information, in Ethics, the Social Sciences and Policy Analysis. Callahan, D. & Jennings, B. (Eds.). New York: Plenum.

White, D. (1950). The "gatekeeper": A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly. 27, 383-390. Whittle, C. (1989, March 1). Commercials, plus education. The New York Times, p. A18.

Whittle Communications Staffa. Whittle Communications history and background. Press packet.

Whittle Communications Staff. (1989b). Overview of Whittle Communication's education television network. Press packet.

Whittle CommunicationsStaff. (1989c). Standards and guidelines to govern the advertising that will appear in Channel One. Channel One press packet.

Whittle Communications Staff. (1989d). The Whittle Educational Network. Channel One press packet.

Whittle Communications Staff. (1989, June8 e). Whittle Communications launches three channel Educational Network. Whittle Communication press release.

Whittle Communications Staff. (1989, September 17f). Underwriting of Educational Network ahead of schedule. Whittle Communications press release. 197

Whittle Communications Staff. (1989, October 23g). Whittle's Channel One announces educators' advisory board. Whittle Communications press release.

Whittle Communications Staff. (1990, Novemberh). Channel One teachers' guide. Channel One support material.

Whittle CommunicationsStaff. (1990, Novemberi). The Classroom Channel teachers' guide news. Channel One support material.

Whittle seen in Time deal. (1988, October 20). The New York Times, p. 22.

Zuckerman, L. (1988, March 21). Targeting the waiting room. Time, p. 56.