Summary and conclusions
Semantic Differential data were obtained from 234 ninth graders who had just completed an algebra course which included a televised lecture presenting a new approach to the subject matter, and from 269 pupils who had had algebra taught in the usual way.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Holmes, Presley D.Television in the Teaching-Learning Process. Detroit: Wayne State University Division of Broadcasting, July 1959. (Mimeo.)
Kumata, Hideya.Attitude Change and Learning as a Function of Presentation and Prestige of Instructor. East Lansing: Michigan State University Communications Research Center, 1958. (Mimeo.)
McNemar, Quinn.Psychological Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1949.
Osgood, Charles E.; Suci, George J.; and Tannenbaum, Percy.The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1957.
Schramm, WilburThe Impact of Educational Television. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1960.
Schramm, Wilbur.EducationalTelevision: The Next Ten Years. Stanford, Calif.: Institute for Communications Research, 1962.
Siegel, Sidney.Nonparametric Statistics.New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1956.
Westley, Bruce H., and Jacobson, Harvey K. “Dimensions of Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Instructional Television.”AV Communication Review 10: 179–185; May-June 1962.
Westley, Bruce H., and Jacobson, Harvey K.“Teacher Participation and Attitudes Toward Instructional Television.”AV Communication Review 10: 328–333; November-December 1962.
Westley , Bruce H., and Jacobson, Harvey K. ModernMath on TV: Its Impact on Pupils and Teachers. Research Bulletin No. 15. Madison: University of Wisconsin Television Laboratory. (In press)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Westley, B.H., Jacobson, H.K. Instructional television and student attitudes toward teacher, course, and medium. AVCR 11, 47–60 (1963). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02768406
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02768406