The Educational screen (c1922-c1956])

Page 260 The Educational Screen who makes 51 in American history without the films could be brought up to 70 (that is, 51 plus 19) by the use of the films? Or does it mean that a pupil who makes 59 by the usual methods of instruction could be brought to 70 (since 59 plus 19% of 59=70) by filmenriched instruction? ■ Apparently, it means neither ; in fact, the statistics seem to indicate that the non-film grade must be at least 66.5 in order that it may be brought up to 70 by means of the films. This seemingly slight grade increment may be disappointing to those who are relying on "objective" testing in its present state of perfection for evidence of superiority of visually-aided presentation. But it may be justified by the following simple mathematical demonstration: If the initial information-culture status of the pupils in American history was 0, then a pupil who had gained a degree of excellence measured by a grade of 59 (from 0 up) by good instruction without the Chronicles of America might be expected to make a gain 19% greater (19% of 59=11; 59 plus 11=70), that is, a final grade of 70, if the instruction were enhanced by the Chronicles. But the Knowlton tests showed an initial stock of history information-culture represented by average scores of 32.2 and 32.3, respectively, for the two groups. Hence a gain of 12.6 points represents a gain of but 39% for the experimental group and a gain of 10.6 points represents but 33% gain for the control group. Of course, it still remains true that the experimental group gained 19% more than did the control group, since 39% is 19% greater than 33%. It becomes apparent, however, that the final attainment of the experimental group is but 139% of the initial level ; while the corresponding figure for the control group is 133%. Accordingly, a grade of 70, with films, represents an original wealth of history conception (informa 70 tion-culture status) of =50. If 50 represents 139% the original body of information or original level, then 50-1(33% of 50) =66.5 represents the final average grade which might be expected (in the light of the experiment) without the use of the photoplays. Therefore, the average chid whose notions of history (temporal, spatial, biographical, and inter-relational) have been enriched by good teaching, without the Chronicles of America photoplays, to the extent indicated by a school mark (grade) of 66.5, would have gained an enrichment measured by a school mark of 70 if these photoplays had been used along with the other good teaching procedures. Here again the 19% gain in enrichment produced by the films still holds good. (70—50) — (66—50) Enrichment by us Enrichment by usual teaching plus ual teaching films alone (Approximate i^yo mals have been dropped) 66 — 50 Enrichment by usual teaching alone Of course, it must not be forgotten that all school grades may be raised by the use of the photoplays and not merely those in the danger zone. For example, a child who receives 90 for results accomplished with the photoplays would likely have merited but 90(|||-)=86, without the use of the photoplays. Likewise, a grade of 90 without films might be raised to 90 (|||-) =94, if films are used. In general, G=f(J||-) and F=G (j||-), where G is the usual grade (mark) without films and F is the grade with films. Several comments are pertinent here. It must not be assumed that results duplicating these would be obtained in other history classes, unless the following conditions obtain : (1) The films used to enrich the history teaching are the Chronicles of America photoplays (or other history films of equal merit.) (2) The teaching to be enriched by the photoplays is already superior teaching. (3) This superior teaching is under the direction of a specialist of the ability and experience of Dr. Knowlton (another quest for Diogenes). (4) The children being taught have approximately the same capacity for history assimilation as those who were subjects of the Yale experiment. (5) The extent and organization of the instruction are similar to those of the Yale experiment. More specifically the same units of instruction and the same ten accompanying films, or materials carefully equated to these, are used, with equivalent time periods. The writer does not even suggest that the results under less favorable conditions would be less gratifying. On the other hand, if the ordinary teaching is of less superior quality or if the capacity of the pupils is less, there is good reason to suppose that the contribution of the history films would be proportionately even greater than in the Yale experiment. In conclusion, we are minded to say — Let the good work of measurement go on, but let us not forget that we are probably measuring but a fraction of the total permanent gain. That "objectivity," with the present scope and method of measurement, may tend to be synonomous with "superficiality" even with the most scholarly experimentation.