Journal of instructional development

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 24–32 | Cite as

Designing, producing, and evaluating an instructional telecourse: A model for involving the adult learner

  • Marietta Lynn Baba
  • Joy Schermer
  • Norma Shifrin


A new model for planning, producing, and evaluating instructional television for the adult learner is described. The core of the model is an instructional design process that involves the interaction of faculty, television professionals, and students in curricular content planning and the development of television scripts. Student input was obtained through the creation of a series of seminars and a practicum on instructional television that involved class members directly in telecourse content development. This instructional design process also created a telecourse format that generated programs capable of holding the attention of home viewers. A method of formative evaluation using student input is also described. Pilot programs were viewed, discussed, and evaluated by students experienced in telecourse learning. The results of the evaluation were used to improve scripts, program organization, and visual content before final studio production began. The finished product was a 50 1/2-hour program series entitledChanging Life on Earth, an interdisciplinary life sciences telecourse. “You took a giant step forward. No doubt about it,” said a male voice from the back of the room.“Sure did,” said a woman, amid nods from other students. These were the closing minutes of a product evaluation session of the new telecourseChanging Life on Earth. Perhaps the previous months of planning and working to develop a creative and innovative approach to an instructional telecourse had, at last, achieved a successful educational experience for the student. The data had now to be tabulated and analyzed.


Faculty Member Television Program Instructional Development Instructional Television Study Guide 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C.Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing, 1966.Google Scholar
  2. Carl, D. R. Instructional development in instructional television.Educational Technology, May 1976, pp. 10–24.Google Scholar
  3. Cavert, C. E.Approach to the design of mediated instruction. Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 1974.Google Scholar
  4. Forrester, T. C., & Zakia, R. D. Evalulation of televised instruction. In H. Hitchens (Ed.),Selecting media for learning. Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 1974.Google Scholar
  5. Gagne, R. M.Conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1977.Google Scholar
  6. Gagné, R. M., & Briggs, L. J.Instructional design. N.J.: Educational Technology Publications, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. Juskevice, J. Formative evaluation of instructional television. Paper presented at The National University Extension Association, Madison, Wisconsin, October 20,1978.Google Scholar
  8. Kanner, J. H. Teaching by TV in the Army: An overview.AV Communication Review, 1958,3, 285286.Google Scholar
  9. Komoski, P. K. An imbalance of product quantity and instructional quality: The imperative of empiricism.AV Communication Review, 1974,22 357–386.Google Scholar
  10. McBride, J. A working model for instructional television.Educational Technology, May 1976, pp. 30–34.Google Scholar
  11. Myers, L. C.An experimental study of influence of the experienced teacher on television. Syracuse: Syracuse University, 1961.Google Scholar
  12. Schramm, W. (Ed.).Quality in instructional television. Honolulu: East West Center Book, University Press of Hawaii, 1972.Google Scholar
  13. Wardwell, D. Which is the better presentor, an ITV instructor or a trained communicator?Educational and Industrial Television, May, 1976.Google Scholar
  14. Woodyard, J., & Anderson, J. Student evaluation of science and technology courses on energy, technology and society. Unpublished manuscript, 1977.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marietta Lynn Baba
    • 1
  • Joy Schermer
    • 2
  • Norma Shifrin
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Lifelong LearningWayne State UniversityDetroit
  2. 2.School of MedicineWayne State UniversityDetroit
  3. 3.University Studies/Weekend College ProgramWayne State UniversityDetroit

Personalised recommendations