NO DECISION ON TV IN SCHOOLS

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30815, 29 July 1965, Page 7

NO DECISION ON TV IN SCHOOLS

Preoccupation with this week’s demonstration of closed-circuit educational television caused the Christchurch Secondary Schools’ Council to forget to deal with a Hillmorton High School recommendation that experimental school telecasts be tried by the New Zealand Broadcasting Corporation. Some months ago Hillmorton suggested trials so that the practicability of telecasts similar to radio broadcasts to schools could be assessed. The schools’ council referred the matter to member boards, and all schools discussed the topic, but reporting back was deferred until last evening. The whole question was

to be reviewed, but the council discussed only the closed-circuit demonstrations, and made no decisions.

The chairman (Mr W. J. Cartwright) said that most members had now seen the closed-circuit demonstrations and were in a better position to assess the possibilities. “Very interesting, very worth while in both the positive and negative senses,” was Mrs F. O. Bennett’s verdict. She said that in dissection, for instance, television had enormous advantages in giving all watchers a close-up view, whereas few would see when clustered round a bench. Some other lessons showed no advantages for television, and one poor lesson had its faults magnified. “I saw French and singing, and thought there were possibilities,” said Mr Cartwright. “Selected possibilities,” said Mrs Bennett.

Any advantages of television teaching were in open programmes rather than closed-circuit shows, said Mr W. 'H. Bowen. The big advantage was that a national programme could show material beyond the resources of individual schools and, better still, use teachers of international repute and pictures from all the world.

Mr A. F. Foley said the Burnside board had grave reservations because television lessons might be accepted as unchallenged authority without the give and take of the teacher and class.

Mr H. R. Peers said that television in schools seemed some years away, but he could see its value for teachers’ college instruction in observing classroom techniques and reactions. Mr A. Greenwood said it was an “eye-opener” to see what teacher trainees could gain, but regrettable that the cost of putting such lessons on videotape was prohibitive.

Mr E. R. Hounsell said he had not envisaged such an elaborate set-up. The best advantage would be teacheroperated television which could screen just the parts of a lesson needing close scrutiny.

Discussion lapsed with no formal decisions.