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

Closed-Circuit Conference by Wm. F. Kruse A nationwide conference on prospects and practices of closed-circuit television for instructional purposes was held June 19-22 in Evanston, Illinois. All but the opening and closing sessions were held in giant Evanston Township High School where, under direction of Miss Wanda Mitchell, an extensive foundation-supported CCTV program has been in operation for several years. The National Education Association's Division of Audiovisual Instructional Services sponsored the conference; 150 invitations were issued, approximately 135 accepted, some 85 attended, all professionallv interested in this specific segment of the AV field. Lee A. Campion, NEA's consultant on ETV matters, explained informally that this type of conference was precisely what was needed to serve the special interests of the educator-specialists who now work in a sort of professional "no man's land" midway between DAVI and NAEB (Department of Audiovisual Instruction; National Association of Educational Broadcasters). They are closer to DAVI, he felt, because most CCTV programming has classroom instruction as its end. But while NAEB primary interest is in mass communication its technical practices and resources are very similar to those of the CCTV specialist. The conference program was very well planned. Three groups rotated in three sections— on Program Origination, Production and Distribution respectively— with each participant getting a full session in each of the sections. The preliminary program had also called for a section on "receiving" CCTV. An effort was made to form homogeneous interest groups. Thus there was one comprised mainly of college and university people, the second predominantly participants from secondary schools and city systems, and the third most everyone else. The general opening dinner session was addressed by Lloyd Michael, superintendent of the host high school; another evening session featured William Brish, county school superintendent at Hagerstown, Maryland, on "'Four Years of Experimentation in CCTV." Afternoon general sessions were conducted by Miss Mitchell and by Dr. Sherman Swarthout and John R. Manley. The closing general session, conducted by Lee Campion and Neal Balanoff, chairman of the TVRadio-Film department, Stephens College, summarized some of the findings and gave everyone a final chance to talk. At another general session six representatives of the AV-TV industry presented a joint program on equipment resources and prospects. Alan Finstad (Dage) was moderator; William Sadler (Miratel), Glenn Hoxie (Ampex), Louie Lewis (RCA), Dan Meadows ( Sarks-Tarzian ) and Lloyd Matter (Dage) each presented a specific phase of technology and economics. It was noteworthy that the questions raised were not so much on technology as on professional status, philosophy and utilization. They boiled down to just four major concerns : ( I ) relative "status" between the CCTV production specialist and the TV teacher; (2) just how mucli production "quality" should be required in intraschool program production and transmission; (3) should the modern school aim at giving the student his "entire" education via TV; and (4) how to condition the classroom teacher to accept and where designated, effectively help create CCTV programs. These four questions were found tc be interrelated. Status differentials and qualitytolerance may be viewed as facets of the "content versus communication" controversy. Food for the mind, as for the body, should first of all be nutritious, but lots of good vittles have beer known to be ruined by bad cooks and sloppy service. There was quite a contrast between a coloi slide presentation of the CCT\' facilities and staff at Penn State and those actually demonstrated at Evanston High, where one studeni crew sets up the studio and an entirely different one, unrehearsed, shoots the program. Undei such an arrangement considerable unevenness ir end result is inevitable. In one case a "live" program (stage make-up for male actors) camt through as smoothly finished as anything on the networks, but another, through faulty lighting oi training or both, had the poor librarian-teachei painfully blinking into the lights in a way thai must have detracted from the material she soughl to present. There was room for improvement also in the presenting of visuals— printed matter too small t( be read, violation of the 4x3 dimension ratio anc of contrast range for projected visuals, and still; covering so little of the screen that they became the picture of a picture rather than a presentation of action or situation described. Nor were the 'pros' free e)f these faults in their demonstra tions, indicating a need for upgrading of CCT\ technical ceimmunication skills on all levels. One of the speakers defined CCTV as "a mean; of transmitting an image for a purpose." Undei the conditions in which it operates, the Evanstor High School production staff is doing a com mendable job that, in the main, achieves its pur pose. Allowing for some rationalizing in the snubbing of network "spit and polish," there wa; fairly general agreement that a school's owr CCTV production quality ought to be at leasadequate to hold students' attention and to puacross its lessem effectively. Technical guidance literature such as put ou by Hagerstown, Stephens College and other cen ters was in lively demand. A series of N.E.T films on production techniques, distributed b) 428 Educational Screen and Audiovisual Guide — August, 196t