University Microfilms International 300 N
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University Microfilms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR, Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ, ENGLAND 8009321 M y e r s , R o g e r A l le n THE TRAINING OF SCIENCE NEWS REPORTERS The Ohio State University PH.D. 1979 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 18 Bedford Row, London WC1R 4EJ, England Copyright 1980 by Myers, Roger Allen All Rights Reserved PLEASE NOTE: In all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark . 1. Glossy photographs __ 2. Colored illustrations_______ 3. Photographs with dark background________ ‘4. Illustrations are poor copy _______ 5. Drint shows through as there is text on both sides of page _ 6. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pagesl/ throughout 7. Tightly bound copy with print lost in________ spine 8. Computer printout pages with indistinct________ print 9. Page(s) _____ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author________ 10. Page(s) ________seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows________ 11. Poor carbon copy________ 12. Not original copy, several pages with blurred_________ type 13. Appendix pages are poor________ copy 14. Original copy with light ________type 15. Curling and wrinkled pages________ 16. Other University M icnSilm s International 300 N Z = = = RD.. ANN AR30R Ml 48106‘313) 761-4700 THE TRAINING OF SCIENCE NEWS REPORTERS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University by Roger Allen Myers, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1979 Reading Committee: Approved by Professor I. Keith Tyler Professor Alfred C. Clarke Professor Robert W. Wagner Adviser Faculty of Educational Foundations and Research ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges the advice and assistance of his adviser, Professor I. Keith Tyler, and committee members, Professors Alfred C. Clarke and Robert W. Wagner; the cooperation of the science writers, journalism educators, scientists and medical researchers, and newspaper editors who participated in the study's surveys; and the assistance of Hovey Cowles and the other staff members of the Ohio State Research and Evaluation Consulting Service. ii VITA September 26, 1942 ............... Born, Melmore, Ohio 1961-1964 ........................Service in U.S. Army 1969 .............................. B.A. in Journalism, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1970 .............................. M.A. in Journalism, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1970-1972 ........................ Instructor, Journalism Department, Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas 1971 (Summer) ................... Reporter-Photographer, Globe-News (Newspaper) Publishing Company, Amarillo, Texas 1972-1976 ........................Odd jobs in Columbus, Ohio, and work at Ohio State University to help pay for graduate study costs 1974 (January to June) ........... Visiting Instructor, Journalism Department, Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas 1976-197 7 ........................ Visiting Instructor of Journalism and Photojournalism, Speech and Theatre Department, Southern Oregon State College, Ashland, Oregon 1977- ........................ Assistant Professor of Journalism, Communication Arts Department, Calumet College, Whiting, Indiana FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Educational Communication Studies in Educational Communication. Professor I. Keith Tyler Studies in Photography and Cinema. Professor Robert W. Wagner Studies in Sociology. Professor Alfred C. Clarke iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................................. ii VITA ............................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES .................................................... vii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................... 1 Introduction: Background of the Study ............... 1 Need for This S t u d y ..................................... 2 Review of the L i t e r a t u r e .............................. 5 S u m m a r y .................................................. 48 II. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND METHODOLOGY ........................ 53 Nature of the S t u d y ..................................... 53 H y p o t h e s e s ............................................. 54 Methodology............................................. 55 1. S o u r c e s ............................................ 55 2. The Samples ............................... 57 3. The Questionnaires ............................. 59 4. Stages I and I I .................................... 63 5. The Curriculum M o d e l ............................ 64 6. Conclusions............... 65 S u m m a r y .................................................. 65 III. CARRYING OUT THE STUDY .................................... 66 The First Stage ........................................ 66 The Questionnaire..................................... 67 The S a m p l e ........................................... 70 Administering the Questionnaire ..................... 71 First Stage Results .................................. 72 Conclusions Concerning the First Stage Survey .... 85 The Second S t a g e ....................................... 89 Introduction ......................................... 89 The Questionnaire..................................... 90 The S a m p l e ........................................... 94 The Mailings ......................................... 97 Second Stage Results ................................ 97 iv Page Demographic D a t a ..................................... 99 A Composite Picture of Second Stage Respond ents Based on Demographic D a t a ................... 107 Answers to Survey Questions .......................... 108 (i) Background Education ..................... 109 (ii) Background Experiences ................... 115 (iii) Supervised or Other Experiences .......... 120 (iv) Competencies Useful to Potential Science Reporters ........................ 125 (v) Competencies Important to Teachers of Potential Science Reporters ............. 132 (vi) Best Teachers of Science W r i t e r s ........ 139 (vii) Best Courses of Action for Supplying the Media with Science Reporters ............. 144 (viii) College Level for Science News Writing and Reporting Instruction ............... 146 (ix) Recommended Science Writing Workshops Length . ; ................. 150 (x) Recommended Time Length for Science Writing Internship or Apprenticeship . 150 (xi) Ranked Importance of Teaching Science News Reporting ............................ 153 Second Stage Summary ................................... 156 Computer Statistical Analyses of Responses to the Second Stage Survey .............................. 157 Homogeneity of Groups by Occupation ................... 157 General Reliability of Survey Questions and Options . 160 Differences between Occupational Groups for Second Stage Questionnaire Sections ........................ 162 Analysis of Time of Return of the Second Stage Questionnaires ....................................... 164 Conclusions from the Computer Analyses ............... 165 Second Stage Inferences, Interpretations and Conclusions........................................... 166 (i) Background Education ..................... 167 (ii) Background (Work) Experiences ............. 168 (iii) Supervised or Other Experiences ........... 170 (iv) Competencies Useful to Potential Science Reporters ........................ 172 (v) Competencies Important to Teachers of Potential Science News Reporters ........