Educational screen & audio-visual guide (c1956-1971])

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

miiiiimiffliiiiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiH^^^^^^ LIGHT CONTROL II UUFOBIU (USSKOOinS by CHARLES W. BURSCH and FRANCIS W. NOEL iiiniiiiiiiMiiiiiimiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii^ This is an official statement of the California State Department of Education. Author Bursch is Assistant Division Chief, School Planning, California State Department of Education. Co-author Noel is Chief, Califorina State Bureau of Audio-Visual Education. The report was originally titled, "Current Status of Projection in High • Level Day lighted Classrooms." It is reprinted here, with permission, from the January, 1955 issue of the California Education Department publication, California Schools, in the hope that it will throw some needed light on the national problem of classroorn light control {see editorial comments on page 64). THIS ARTICLE is an attempt to eliminate the confusion existing regarding classroom light controls necessary for the use of instructional films and other projected materials in classrooms. The problem will be set forth as it exists in California and in conclusion current operating policies of the Office of School Planning and the Bureau of Audio-Visual Education regarding the subject will be stated. Re]3orts from many parts of the state indicate that claims have been made that, due to continued improvements in projectors and screens, light control devices are no longer needed in highlevel daylighted classrooms. Regardless of the sources of such statements, it is to be observed that neither the Office of School Planning nor the Bureau of .\udio-\'isual Education has sufficient evidence to warrant such a recommen dation and that initil evidence is verified of the success of projection without light controls, protection of the audiovisual education program in high-level daylighted classrooms requires provision for room darkening. Great advances have been made in the efficiency of light sources, the optical systems of projectors, and the reHective characteristics of screen surfaces. Due to these developments, in some situations fairly satisfactory projection may now be obtained without light controls, especially in low-level daylighted rooms during some periods of the year or day. These results, however, should not be interpreted as evidence that the same success is possible in high-level daylighted classroom construction sucli as is recommended by tlie Office of School Planning. For this reason the inclusion of such devices is authorized in the plans for schools constructed with State School Building Aid Funds. These improvements in projectors and screen surfaces now make satisfactory ])rojcction possible in light conditions in which projection was impossible a few years ago. It is desirable for instructional purposes, for visual comfort of the classes, and for economy that the projection of a clear image become possible in classrooms having high daylight light levels. .Screen and ])rojector manufacturers are seeking ways and means to make this possible, and the State Department of Education is liopeful that a satisfactory screen will ultimately be perfected which will make light controls unnecessary. Considering the instructional and economic im|)ortance of such a development, it is understandable that some vendors may claim to have such a product for sale. .Also considering the great variety of light conditions to be found at various times of the day in classrooms, it is likewise possible for such vendors to conduct apparently successful demonstrations of their screens and to encourage the inference from such demonstrations that their screen is the answer to the projection problem under all daylight conditions. Where such claims are made for screens, and school authorities wish to consider such screens in lieu of room darkening facilities, it is recommended that careful tests be made of the success of the product under light conditions which will be prevalent in the classroom situation in which the screen is to be used. To assist school authorities in making their own decisions regarding the merit of screens which purport to provide successful projection under highlevel daylighted classroom conditions, the offices of School Planning and • Vudio-Visual Education will in the near future co-operate in testing screens and will subsequently release joint re]«)rts covering such tests. The screens will be tested under conditions which are believed to be comparable to the conditions under which they would be used in high-level daylighted classrooms. (.At this point in tin original report statistics are included to show the extent and investment of the California audio-visual program — omitted here for lack of space.) In view of the facts concerning the magnitude and status of the problem of using projected instructional material in California classrooms, the following policies have been adopted by the Office of School Planning and the Bureau of .Audio-Visual Education: (1) That considering the importance of the long-range instructional, economic, and visual comfort value of i)iing able to use projection materials ill the classroom without light controls, the two offices concerned will continuously encourage and seek ways and means of accomplishing it. (2) That as new devices purporting to accomplish projection without light tontrols are made available, the two offices will co-operatively arrange for testing such devices in high-level daylighted classrooms and will jointly release reports regarding the same in the Department publication California Schools. (3) That until such time as evidence and experience indicate beyond a doubt that successful projection in high-level daylighted classrooms without light controls is an accomplished fact, .school authorities should consider (arefully the adverse con.sequences to their audio-visual education program when they do not include light control tlevices in new classroom construction. 72 Educational Screen