NER, Public Broadcasting Act, 1968-1969 (1968-1969)

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.

-3- keenly aware that in many instances students and educators are disappointed with television because of poor programming. Unfortunately, however, they blame the television medium rather than the educators or teachers who develop the various programs in the first instance. I am also aware of why NEA takes such a vigorous and negative attitude. They are concerned with protecting teachers of the trade union type of attitude. Many teachers are prone to regard television and radio in a negative fashion for several reasons: the most obvious is because they do not understand good teaching practices in the first instance and they fear the instrusion of televised instructional programs which have been prepared and taped with superior teachers. I could continue indefinitely but you know and the others who are receiving a copy of this memorandum know the pros and the cons of the entire situation. As I said in my other memorandum our major job is to see that the Commission receives every possible shred of evidence which will help them appreciate the value of teaching by television provided the programs are superior in every way--and that means not only contact, but the psychology used by the superior teacher in attracting and holding the interest of the students and making indelible impressions on his mind concerning the subject matter being taught. Our primary job is to persuade the Commission to recommend more than anything else that additional objective and responsible research be carried out before conclusions are reached about the value of teaching by television and/or radio. Unless we can prove and show the station managers what we did, what we said, then if there is a move away from televised instruction by public schools through ETV broadcast stations we will have to admit failure on our part for not having properly programmed our campaign to the Title III Commission. So far I have not read anything that we have sent to the Commission that I would rate as good. CSF/mah cc: Mr. William G. Harley Mr. James A. Fellows Mr. Robert Mott Mr. Robert Maull Attachment