See and hear : the journal on audio-visual learning (1945)

state Leadership in Audio-Visual Education b)' Floyde E. Brooker Ciliicl, \isii;il Aids to Kiliuatioii, I'liitcd States Ofluc of Kdiicatioii FEW DEVEI.OI'NfEX IS in ilic field of audio\isiial cdiitation ha\c been more rapid or of more far-reacliing importance than the growth in state a-v leadership during the jiast two decades. Coupled with the growth of leadership in our city and county school systems, this development of state leadership is an extension of the rapid development of local leadership. In the field of education, this dc\elopment of local leadership and its extension is a most importam one, and indeed the only one which marks true and effective progress. For if there is inadequate audiovisual leadership on the local level, or if it is lacking entirely, all other leadership can mean but little. There follows the state reports of the development of state-wide leadership in the field of audio-visual education. Some of these reports are official ones compiled by state officials in state offices of education, others are reports of observers gathered from other sources. Unequal as these reports are, and incomplete as they are in terms of providing national coverage, they still represent the most recent and authoritative statement that is generally available regarding the status of the development of positions, on the state level, charged with responsibility of audio-visual education. State Leadership Trend Has Accelerated The development of state officers of audio-visual education has been phenomenal during the past few years. As far as we can ascertain, 21 states now have such officers. Of these 21, we have official reports on 14. Of these 14, two were established prior to 1930, five date from the period of 1941-45; and seven were established during the three-year period of 1946-48. In other words, as many were established during the past three years as were established in all the previous years. It is likely that were the full facts known of the other inireported se\en states, the rise would be even more rapid. It should be noted, however, that the existence of state leadership cannot be stated solely in terms of the establishment of state officers responsible for audio-visual education. In many instances state leadership has existed in the state imiversities, or in other state institutions. In addition to the 21 states with state officers, we must include at least ten more in which we have leadership in this field on a state-wide basis. In terms of the sound advancement of the total field, state leadership is the important thing. Whether it comes from a state upiversity or from the state office of education is of secondary importance. We can say very roughly, therefore, that some twothirds of the states have an effective state level of leadership in the field of audio-visual education. The functions of the various chief state officers of \isual education vary considciahly in terms of the history, the beliefs of the individual, the general policies of the state department of education, and the conditions which exist in terms of budget and statiuory limitations. Some state officers have, as their chief finution, the distribution of films. Others have no distribution facilities and devote most of their time to the general problems of utilization. Practically all of the dci)artments have some res|jonsibiIity in the education of teachers; the utili/.ation of inaterials in the classroom; the promoting of further interest in the use and development of these materials; the advising with local educational administrators in the problems of space, personnel and budget requirements; and otherwise assisting and working with other specialists in the state office. The wide variety in functions is to be expected in a field with so many ramifications and in terms of the actual needs of the several states. It is also a typical feature of education in this country. Many of the chief state officers are concerned with quite similar problems such as: to what extent should courses in audio-visual education be made legally a requirement for the certification of courses? What kind of requirements should be set up for the certification of specialists in the field? What specifications in terms of audio-visual education are desirable for new buildings? How can the problem of teacher education be tackled most effectively? What should be the role of the state office in seeming of funds and in the establishment of a state library of materials? How can statistics be gathered in the field? What kind shoidd they be? Growth Follows a Grass Roots Pattern In any analysis of the state departments of audiovisual education, it should be noted that in the inain they have developed later than have strong city school departments. One of the unique characteristics of the field of audio-visual education has been the grass roots nature of its growth. Usually, within a state an outstanding leader developed an audio-visual education program in some city; and a city department of audio\isual education was formed. In most cases, although not always, this local development preceded the development of leadership on a statewide, basis. This is indeed one of the strengths of the total field. The reports are incomplete. Within the next six months, it is hoped that more detailed reports can be received from all the states so that a basis for statistical comparison can become more generally available. Certainly one of the signs of maturity will be the development of a body of comparable statistics, and just as certainly no such body of data exists at the present time in the total field of audio-visual education. SEE & HEAR PRESENTS 21 STATE REPORTS ON AUDIO-VISUAL PROGRESS » A Mid-Century Review 17