Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Over the airwaves: school radio broadcasts in British Columbia 1960-1982 Ion, Laurie E. 1992

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1993_spring_ion_laurie.pdf [ 3.49MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0064539.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0064539-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0064539-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0064539-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0064539-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0064539-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0064539-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

OVER THE AIRWAVES:SCHOOL RADIO BROADCASTS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 1960 -1982byLAURIE ELIZABETH IONBEd., University of British Columbia, 1985THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF ARTSinTHE FACULTY OF EDUCATIONDepartment of Social and Educational StudiesWe accept this thesis as conformingto the required standard COLUMBIA© Laurie Elizabeth Ion, 1992In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.(Signature) Department ofThe University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate^ g 3 ^)99DE-6 (2/88)ABSTRACTGenerations of Canadians are familiar with the CanadianBroadcasting Corporation's school radio broadcasts. Anagreement between the CBC and the Ministry of Educationensured that the CBC provided the necessary technicalarrangements required to air and distribute the broadcasts,while the Ministry of Education agreed to provide the creativecomponent for the programs - script writers, actors andactresses, musicians, and others. The broadcasts came toinclude music, art, social studies, science, and languagearts.This thesis examined the historical development ofBritish Columbia school radio, the shape of the broadcaststhemselves, and British Columbia teachers' experiencesassociated with school radio. This study also examined theexperiences of CBC and Ministry of Education personnel whowere involved in the production and distribution of BritishColumbia school radio.Interviews with British Columbia teachers who listened tothe broadcasts from 1960-1982, and Ministry of Education andCBC employees whose work brought them in contact with theschool radio broadcasts, provided the core evidence for thisstudy. Ministry of Education and CBC employees provided thecontext for the interviews. Interviews, combined with theMinistry of Education Reports, enabled the re-creation of theexperiences associated with British Columbia school radio.iiAlthough there were differences amongst classroomteachers' reactions to the programs, there were some strikingsimilarities. On the whole, British Columbia teachers foundschool radio interesting, informative, and purposeful. Schoolbroadcasts allowed teachers a moment to 'catch their breath'when preparation time was not the norm.Interviews with CBC employees revealed more similaritiesthan differences with respect to their experiences. Theyreported that the broadcasts provided British Columbia schoolswith educationally sound material. Although CBC personnel didnot find the broadcasts professionally challenging, they hadfond memories of their association with the programs.Ministry of Education employees interviewed reflectedvery different opinions relating to their experiences asscript writers, producers, directors, performers, and others.Nonetheless, they provided valuable information as to howschool broadcasts were put together for pupils and teachers.Changing instructional technology, which included theintroduction of a visually stimulating medium such astelevision, the introduction of audio-visual equipment such astape-recorders which enabled the delay of broadcasts, and theimplementation of a restrictive CBC budget brought the BritishColumbia school broadcasts to an end in 1982.iiiTABLE OF CONTENTS AbstractPreface^ 1Chapter 1: Let's Shake On It Chapter 2: We're On the Air^27Chapter 3: Tuned In!^40Chapter 4: From the Inside Out^56Chapter 5: Over and Out^65Appendix A^ 72Appendix B 73Appendix C^ 74Bibliography 76vOVER THE AIRWAVES: School Radio Broadcasts in British Columbia1950 - 1982PREFACE School radio broadcasts were a well-establishedinstitution throughout much of British Columbia from the mid-1940's to the early 1980's. Throughout Canada generations ofstudents and teachers were regular listeners to programs madepossible by an agreement between the Canadian BroadcastingCorporation and the individual province's Ministry ofEducation. Under the terms of this agreement the CBC agreedto provide the technical facilities and assistance and theMinistry of Education agreed to provide the creative componentnecessary for the broadcasts to be aired. In BritishColumbia, the agreement involved the Department of Educationin Victoria, later re-titled the Ministry of Education, andthe Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's regional headquartersin Vancouver.The content and length of the broadcasts varied. Overtime the broadcasts' scheduling came to include music, art,social studies, science, and language arts. The popular musicseries "Sing Out!" involved the presentation of new songs, areview of previously taught songs and some music theory eachweek.1 The art programs led students through a descriptive1111"..fratIVIUMUREIMMINVINIIIIMMIMMEISUSUMIUMUMa...WWWUTIZIMMIIISMIEiBritish Columbia Department of Education Report (Victoria: British Columbia Department of Education, 1946-1959), passim thereafter Report]. Throughout these years the1story which was designed to encourage the creation of mentalimages. The students' images, based on the story, were thenincorporated into a hands-on art project, outlined step-by-step in the broadcast and in the accompanying Teachers' Bulletin. The social studies and science programs ofteninvolved dramatizations of historical events or scientificinventions, explorations, or discoveries. Similarly, thelanguage arts programs incorporated poetry or readings,followed by questions and activities.Interviews with British Columbia teachers indicated thatalthough there were differences with respect to whichbroadcasts were used in the classroom, the preparatory andfollow-up activities carried out with students, and theperceived effectiveness of the school broadcasts, there werealso some striking similarities. Interviews with CanadianBroadcasting Corporation employees who were involved withschool radio programs revealed more similarities thandifferences with respect to their experiences. Ministry ofEducation employees interviewed reflected vastly differingopinions relating to their experience as script writer,producer, director, performer, or other roles. This researchinto British Columbia school radio is a unique addition to our:111:1MILUZIMILLIMMitlittlilitIMMUM■1100:111MMMUMBUM 33333 11:171 2771■2111M1.1Report  cited the music programs as the program with thegreatest audience. After 1959 the Report does not rank anybroadcasts in popularity. However, it is cited in the Report that the number of distributed booklets to accompany the musicprogram was maintained or increased from 1960 - 1982. Thisdistribution is significant as the booklets were printed ondemand.educational history and of particular interest to educators,those in the communications field, those who rememberlistening to the school broadcasts, and all who are interestedin classroom media.Much of what has been written about school broadcastinghas an international focus on programs in the United States,England, Australia, and various countries in Africa.2 Theseinternational experiences with educational broadcastingcontrast in varying degrees with the school broadcasts inBritish Columbia. Given the duration and exposure theCanadian school broadcasts enjoyed, it is surprising thatliterature in this area is scarce. However, two books, School Broadcasting In Canada  by Richard Lambert, published in 1963and Survey of Radio In Canadian Schools by The CanadianTeachers' Federation, published in 1956 provideaIMMULIMISSIMMIUtIMILSISMOMPtiltitettUlOsttlelltitagnitgylaMS411307/11.17t1S01.1031.111For those interested in a general discussion abouteducational broadcasting see A. W. Bates, Broadcasting inEducation: An Evaluation  (London: Constable, 1984); Dean T.Jamison, Radio for Education and Development (London: SagePublications, 1978). A discussion of educational broadcastingin Asia, Africa, Central, and South America can be found inDavid Hawkridge and John Robinson, Organizing Educational Broadcasting (London: Croom Helm, 1982). Albeit dated, adiscussion of British educational television and radio can befound in BBC, Educational Television and Radio in Britain (London: Billing & Sons, 1966). Information on radio-assisted education in developing countries can be found inRuth Eshgh et al., ed., Radio-Assisted Community Basic Education (Pittsburgh: Dugesne University Press, 1988). Adiscussion of the use of radio and television to improveilliteracy can be found in Central Treaty Organization,Conference of Executives from Radio and TV Organizations (Ankara: The Central Treaty Organization,1978). Thoseinterested in educational broadcasting in the United Statesshould see Robert J. Blakely, To Serve the Public Interest(Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1979).comprehensive base from which the Canadian school radiobroadcasting experience can be examined. The former focuseson the nature of the agreement between the CBC and variousprovinces' Ministry of Education, and the latter focuses ondetailed statistics of teacher preferences of schedulingtimes, voice presentation, radio reception, and programsuitability that were gathered from questionnairesadministered in 1953 to Canadian teachers using thebroadcasts. There has been no comprehensive study of Canadianschool radio broadcasting since Lambert's publication in 1963.In addition to these secondary sources, I utilized anumber of primary ones. First, I conducted interviews withteachers who remember using school broadcasts as part of theirclassroom program. In addition to word-of-mouth andreferrals, I contacted potential interviewees through a posterstyle advertisement which I designed and sent to everyVancouver elementary and high school requesting both teacherswilling to participate in my interview, and teachers willingto share any of the print material associated with the schoolradio broadcasts (see Appendix A). I reached employees ofthe CBC, many of whom are now retired, who were involved inthe technical production of the broadcasts, either directly atthe CBC office in Vancouver, or at their homes as referred to1.11111.1"1111.11MMIUMMS11111114.11M311114117.11111(11111.7IIMISIMMISMMLIOSOSOLVISISniRichard Lambert, School Broadcasting  (Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 1963); Survey of Radio inCanadian Schools, Kathleen Collins, chairman (Ottawa:Canadian Teachers' Federation, 1956).4by CBC personnel.^It was primarily through word of mouthcontact as one individual recommended I speak to another, thatI reached Ministry of Education employees. Several Ministryemployees were retired but had been involved in the creationand production of the school broadcasts. Second, I examinedthe annual reports for the CBC and the British ColumbiaMinistry of Education for the years. 1960 - 1982 in order toachieve a sense of what role the school radio broadcastsplayed within these organizations. Third, I located andexamined print material associated with the Canadian schoolradio broadcasts. It is unfortunate that the teachers'guides, wall schedules, and much of the printed materialpertaining to the school broadcasts has been either discardedor lost. However, a small collection of this print material,primarily that relating to the music program "Sing Out!," wasobtainable through acquaintances, referrals, and respondentsto my advertisement in the B.C. Teacher (see Appendix B), andmy poster style advertisement.Fourth, I listened extensively to a selection of theaudio-tapes of the broadcasts available in the ProvincialArchives in Victoria which relayed a sense of program contentand format.As stated earlier, there are differences and similaritiesbetween individuals' experiences with British Columbian schoolradio. However, there are enough significant similarities,especially among teachers, to generalize the findings, not tothe general population, but certainly to a wider group thanwas interviewed. I have organized my findings in fivechapters:1) Let's Shake On It - Historical background of the CBCRadio School Broadcasts including the nature of the agreementbetween the CBC and the individual province's Ministry ofEducation, and discussion of school radio's appeal andduration.2) We're On the Air - An examination of the tapedschool radio broadcasts in the Provincial Archives inVictoria, and Ministry of Education employees who wrote thescripts for the broadcasts. What were these radio programslike?3) Tuned In! - An exploration, based on interviews withteachers who remember listening to the broadcasts, of how theschool broadcasts were used within the classroom environment.4) From the Inside Out - Reflections and impressions ofBritish Columbia school radio based on interviews withindividuals who worked for the CBC in a technical oradministrative capacity.65) Over and Out  - An overview of what the broadcastscontained, how the broadcasts were used by the teachers withinthis study, and the ultimate effectiveness of the broadcastsfor participants.7Let's Shake On It Chapter One It is April 11, 1961 in "Mrs. Sanderson's" grade ssocial studies class.^Rustling papers, thumping books,squeaking chair backs, last minute whispers are tell-talesigns that desk tops are being cleared and the preparation forlistening has begun. Shhh...the broadcast is about to begin.We hear a man saying:If you have a map of Europe ready, look acrossthe Adriatic Sea from Italy and you can find exactlywhere we're going through a "Stamp to Yugoslavia."The other day while I was glancing through someof the odds and ends that I've collected in mytravels, I came across an old Yugoslav stamp. Now,I'm no stamp collector, so I can't give you muchinformation about the stamp except to say it's olivegreen and bears the picture of King Alexander ofYugoslavia. Friends of mine tell me it's worthabout five cents on the market today. The fact is,I wouldn't sell that stamp for five dollars andhere's the reason.I was on a ship bound for Egypt and the EastCoast of Africa. Why? Because I was collectinginformation about pirates for a series of magazinearticles. We had left Venice and were sailing downthe Adriatic just off the island of Hvar, H-V-A-R,when I asked the captain of the ship about pirates.He seized me by the coat front and said, 'Mr.Johnson. Go to Metkovic. Pirates! Ha! No betterplace for pirates than Yugoslavia.' He explainedthat all the islands here abouts had been theraiding grounds of the famous tenth century piratescalled the Narretna and that their hiding place hadbeen near the present town of Metkovic. I had tosee it.,WIMMIIISMIMUMWMIMMIMMUMMOUVITISIMMITSTMEW'CDC, "Stories In Our House," 11 April 1961, "A Stamp toYugoslavia." Tape is located in British Columbia ProvincialArchives, Victoria, British Columbia.Such was the scene in many classrooms around BritishColumbia on April 11, 1961.2 School radio broadcasts were well-established and very much routine by this date. In fact, BritishColumbia classrooms had been listening regularly to school radiovia the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's airwaves forseventeen years by this time. Although regularly scheduled dailyCBC school radio broadcasts began in 1944 in British Columbia,experimental work with school radio had begun as early as 1927 onprivate radio stations, and in 1938 on the CBC.Before the CBC had far-reaching coverage on repeatertransmitters, many rural schools had access to the school radiobroadcasts through the cooperation of local private stationswhich agreed to carry the broadcasts. From the 1920's onward,each Canadian provincial Department of Education began toexperiment with educational radio, produced jointly with privatestations, and later to schedule regular school broadcasts incooperation with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Thefollowing table outlines the date each province began bothexperimenting with school broadcasts with private stations, andregularly scheduling school broadcasts in cooperation with theCanadian Broadcasting Corporation:nuntssnatonssmannumattuttn.mmumunmatuaansammontstumnunassussunastatAccording to the 1960-1961 Report, 54.8 percent ofBritish Columbia schools reported listening to broadcasts inthis year.9Table I Dates When Provinces Began Experimenting With PrivateStations and Regularly Scheduling School BroadcastsProvince^Experimentingwith the CBCScheduledwith^RegularlyPrivate Stations Broadcasts with theC.B.C.British Columbia 1927 1941Alberta 1925 1941Saskatchewan 1931 1941Manitoba 1925 1938Ontario 1937 1943Quebec 1945(English speaking )Quebec 1941(French speaking)Nova Scotia 1923 1942Compiled from data found in:^Lambert, School Broadcasting, passim.; Collins, Survey of Radio, passim.The CBC initiated much of the contact with the individualprovincial Ministries of Education and took the lead inhandling the initial difficulties in organizing provincial orregional school radio broadcasts. From the outset of CBCregularly scheduled school radio broadcasts, there was anagreement that the CBC would assume the costs incurred in thetechnical production and distribution of the broadcasts, andthat departments of education would pay all costs associatedwith the creation of the content of the broadcasts. Theexception to this agreement were national broadcasts, airedonce a week, for which the CBC agreed to be responsible forall costs, including those otherwise assumed by the departmentof education. What this long-standing agreement came to meanis that the CBC paid the salaries of their technicians and10producer required during the broadcast and provided the dailythirty minutes of air-time free of charge. In exchange, thedepartments of education were responsible for the costsassociated with the development or acquisition of scripts,copyright and research fees, musicians, actors, sound effects,printing costs, and other costs related to contentdevelopment.Despite the fact that broadcasting falls under federaljurisdiction, and education under provincial jurisdiction,there appeared to be little, if any, disagreement between theCBC and the departments of education with respect to the costsharing arrangements associated with school radio broadcastingfor almost forty years. As Lambert observed, "Vague as thisformula may seem, it has stood the test of practice well."In fact, cooperation between the CPC and the departmentsof education existed on three levels. First, one-fifth ofschool radio broadcasts, produced in Toronto and airednationally, were planned by a National Advisory Councilcomposed of provincial Department of Education representativeswho offered suggestions as to program content and format.Second, two-fifths of school radio broadcasts, produced incooperation with several provinces and aired throughout thearea, were broadcast from different centers within the area ona rotating basis. Third, the final two-fifths of school radiobroadcasts were produced and aired within one province.toonnunsausurrammamansawassattnnuselostunquenummunturosnumuustettrugums:Lambert, School Broadcasting, p. 7.11The format and presentation style of the broadcast variedlittle between provincially, regionally, or nationallyproduced broadcasts. At a meeting designed to enlistcooperation on school radio broadcasts between the fourwestern provinces, on December 11, 1940, all provincial schoolradio representatives agreed...that the radio should encourage interest inconcerns of the communities and of the world outsidethe classroom, and foster in pupils that sense ofcivic and social responsibility on which rests thefuture of democracy.-*However, the representatives closely guarded theirprovincial jurisdiction over education and were worried thatprovincially produced broadcasts might be supplanted byregional or national programs. The four Western provincesadopted a safeguard proviso which stated that broadcasts prepared for local needs in theprovince and approval generally by the schools usingthem, should not be supplanted by others fromoutside the province.The resulting agreement, in which broadcasts wereprepared cooperatively and produced individually, was onewhich satisfied all four provinces. This cooperative approachto school radio broadcasts on two days each week allowed eachprovincial department of education to significantly lower itsoperating budget as the cost of these broadcasts was sharedbetween all four provinces. Although these cooperativeamlawartmuss"stsmspnwsnatntsutunantitsualuammtatutme-*Lambert, School Broadcasting, p. 55.Ibid.12broadcasts produced programs on many different topics, theprograms which featured dramatizations involving an aspect oflife in one specific province were unique. For example,Regina produced a dramatization in which a journalistinterviewed a potash miner who described life in the mine.British Columbia produced programs which dramatized the lifeof a fisherman and his family off the west coast of BritishColumbia.The national broadcasts, produced by the SchoolBroadcasts Department of the CBC and aired on Friday, were inplace before many provinces had established a provincialschool broadcasting program. In 1942 the CBC approached theCanadian Teachers' Federation and nine provincial departmentsof education regarding a series of national broadcasts. Thefirst series in 1942-1943, "Heroes of Canada," was successfulin attracting a wide audience and led to the establishment in1943 of the National Advisory Council which met each March todiscuss the following school year's program The NationalAdvisory Council was composed of...representatives of the departments of educationfrom all provinces, the Canadian Teachers'Federation, The Canadian Home and School and Parent-Teacher Federation, the National Conference ofCanadian Universities, the Canadian School Trustees'Association and the Canadian Education Association.The national school broadcasts did not strive directly to tie,1/1■111111.(11101.11.131.17,429111111211314971142■MMOIMM11112121211t1=111111111.18ISMIXIIIIWIIISsLambert, School Broadcasting, p. 123; Collins, Survey of Radio, p. 4.Collins, Survey of Radio, p. 4.12,all programs to curriculum as did the provincial broadcasts.The national broadcasts ranged in length from twenty to thirtyminutes and were created to...stress the unity of spirit among the peoples ofall parts of Canada, and will suggest to the boysand girls of today a challenge to attack their ownproblems in the same spirits as the pioneers ofold.eThe national broadcasts most often dramatized the story ofsignificant Canadian individuals, geographic features,historical and current events, and Canadian achievements andconcerns. The cost associated with both the content and thedistribution of the broadcasts was paid by the CBC.Although the 1944-1945 British Columbia Department ofEducation Report stated that "...first consideration is givento rural schools, which obviously stand to benefit much morefrom such a service than schools in more organized areas,""3the radio school broadcasts also enjoyed great popularity inBritish Columbia urban municipalities-10 in 1946-1947 aquestionnaire revealed "...that larger centers are making muchmore use of programmes than before. Of a total of sixty-oneVancouver schools for example, thirty-three were listeninganYIUSITLIM:1111111.11.11{11M112.1M111.11:1111M0.1121t111..1=11■11=111,1731111.t1.1IMMEMII9Lambert, School Broadcasting, p. 125.Philip 3. Kitley, Report, 1944-1945, p. 149.10From 1944-1932 the Report did not document statisticsfor urban and rural listening schools.^Therefore, it wasnot possible to determine a breakdown of rural and urbanlistening patterns.14regularly."" In fact, in 1947-1948, over twenty percent ofrural schools in British Columbia could not receive thebroadcasts due to lack of coverage, yet most Bellingham,Washington schools listened regularly to British Columbiaschool radio.1 Again in 1953-1954, it was evident that urbanschools made use of school radio as the Report for that yearstated that there were over 1200 radios " use in BritishColumbia schools. Unfortunately, the number is not evenlydistributed, over 350, for example, being in Vancouver CitySchools."1 Reception was difficult in many areas of theprovince until the early 1960's because...of its rugged, highly mineralized land-mass....Ifall possible radio stations were carrying schoolbroadcasts, this situation would be considerablyimproved.".According to Lars Eastholm, a CBC sound effects specialist,...eventually the local radio stations grumbled somuch over losing commercial air time that the CBCagreed to install many small remote transmitters sothe local radio stations' time was no longerneeded.1In both urban and rural settings the appeal of the schoolradio broadcasts was due in part to the otherwise lack of31181•4113.1intYllaittl•MONIMaRRPSUIS.,[1i3MM.NUOISISSWIttatUUSIStatIMISPPSUISUISAIllatta"Philip J. Kitley, Report, 1946-1947, p. 138.1Philip J. Kitley, Report, 1947-1948, p. 125.lPhilip J. Kitley, Report, 1953-1954, p. 119."-Philip J. Kitley, Report, 1957-1958, p. 68.'Interview with Lars Eastholm, retired CBC sound effectsspecialist, Vancouver, British Columbia, 14 April 1992.15audio-visual material available to teachers. 1E.^Althoughvarious forms of audio-visual equipment had been invented inthe 1920's little was commonplace in B.C. schools.17" GordonKilpatrick, Director of Visual Education "3 for the VancouverSchool Board from 1946-1982, stated that although school-basedprojection equipment was available in some schools in theprovince, such as Kitsilano High School, as early as the late1920's, it was certainly not the norm until well into the late1960's.1'9 Nonetheless, and for reasons noted above, from theinception of school radio broadcasting in British Columbia toMUltilti,...1111MrialtinUMMIIIMIMMIMMIsatISMUMMUUMMUMSUMIUMMIS.1Interview with Gordon Kilpatrick, retired Director ofVisual Education for the Vancouver School Board, Langley,British Columbia, 14 April 1992.17One of the first recorded indications of theavailability of educational audio equipment for BritishColumbia schools, is an advertisement for a Music Appreciationpackage by the Victor Talking Machine Company in the May, 1928edition of B.C. Teacher. Much later, one of the first writtenindicators of the availability of educational visual equipmentfor British Columbia schools, appeared in an 'advertisement fora 16 mm. projector by the Theatre Equipment Supply Co. in theSeptember, 1935 edition of B.C. Teacher.18The Division of Visual Education underwent severaltitle changes between 1960-1982. In 1969 the title changed to'Division of Audio-Visual Education' reflectingareorganization of Visual Education and School Broadcasts. In1970, the title became 'Audio-Visual Services Branch.' in1972, the Provincial Educational Media Centre was created andwas administered by the Audio-Visual Services Branch.19Kilpatrick was Acting-Director of the Visual EducationDepartment for the Vancouver School Board from 1941-1945 whilethe Director, J. Pollack, was in the Royal Canadian Air Force.When Pollack was discharged from service in 1945, he returnedto Vancouver, but was subsequently promoted to Director ofVisual Education for the provincial Department of Education.Kilpatrick was then promoted to Director of Visual Educationfor the Vancouver School Board.16the early 1960's, the school radio broadcasts did not enjoythe same audience as the provincial audio-visual loan service.In 1959-1960, 948 schools (78.1 percent of BritishColumbia schools) took advantage of the loan service offeredby the Provincial Visual Education Department and 651 schools(53.6 percent of British Columbia schools) reported listeningto the school radio broadcasts. In 1964-1965, 1250 schools(90.4 percent of all British Columbia schools) borrowed audio-visual materials from the Provincial Visual EducationDepartment and only 763 (55.2 percent of all British Columbiaschools) schools reported listening to the school radiobroadcasts. After this date, the Annual Reports do not listthe number of schools borrowing from the Provincial VisualEducation Department, but the numbers of motion pictures andfilmstrips borrowed never decreased signifcantly. Departmentof Education annual reports indicated that over one-half ofthe schools responding to year-end guestionaires were usingthe school radio broadcasts from 1950 to 1965. It is worthnoting that despite the increased service of the Division ofVisual Education from serving seventy schools in 1941-1942 to1186 schools in 1963-1964, the use of school radio broadcastswas maintained or increased until the 19707s when thepopularity of television increased.Prior to 1950, and after 1960, the Department ofEducation Reports presented listening statistics in terms of"Number of Reporting Schools Listening." I calculated the17percent of British Columbia schools listening by using thetable "Summary of Schools" which cited the total number ofBritish Columbia schools.The following table illustrates that it was not untilseveral years after televised school broadcasts had gained aregular audience, that the number of schools listening toschool radio broadcasts began to decrease significantly.2° Itwas unfortunate that provincial Ministry of Education Report statistics for other provinces did not enable a calculation ofeither the total number of schools listening or the percent ofschools within a province listening. It should be noted thatthe figures in Table II show the minumum number of schoolslistening as it is likely that many teachers did not reporttheir use of the broadcasts.:111t1(1111=IXT.IMMIPM11111131117M3.11124,1■MS1:1:1111MM■811.10:1111■1111,1.4■711:"1111111:4Alayne Groutage, retired Ministry of Education employee,defined a 'listening school' as a school in which at least oneteacher listened to at least one program. Therefore, theReport does not indicate a difference between a school withseveral teachers who listen faithfully, and a school where oneteacher tried a listening session once; both of these caseswould be recorded as a 'listening school.' Although Groutagebelieved that the Report listening statistics included schoolswhich taped their own broadcasts to be re-played at a moreconvenient time, the 1963-1964 Report stated that "schoolstaping radio broadcasts for use at more convenient times havein several known instances not included records of use."Report, 1963-1964, p. 62. Also important to note is that asof 1972 the Provincial Educational Media Centre (PEMC)distributed audio tapes on demand to schools throughoutBritish Columbia. Although many of the distributed tapes wereat one time school radio broadcasts, schools listening to pre-recorded tapes are not included as a 'listening school.'18Table II NUMBER OF SCHOOLS LISTENING TO SCHOOL RADIO AND TELEVISION BROADCASTS FROM 1961-1983 YEAR # OF SCHOOLS % OF # OF SCHOOLS % OFLISTENING TO B.C. WATCHING B.C.SCHOOL RADIO SCHOOLS SCHOOL TELEVISION SCHOOLS1960-1961 sco 53.91961-1962 712 54.8 62 4.01962-1963 787 58.7 118 8.81963-1964 760 55.6 168 12.31964-1965 763 .^-,.,J.J.,_ 181 13.11965-1966 870 63.4 340 24.81966-1967 833 58.3 446 31.21967-1968 309 55.7 530 36.51968-1969 834 57.4 668 46.01969-1970 795 53.6 731 49.31970-1971 703 46.6 791 .--. =,J.-.,)1971-1972 628 41.5 762 50.21972-1973 627 41.0 684 44.71973-1974 432 27.8 453 .21974-1975 411 26.1 494 31.41975-1976 522 33.0 609 38.51976-1977 560 .,,,.0 653 40.81977-1978 556 34.5 738 45.81978-1979 512 31.7 640 39.61979-1980 540 33.6 707 44.01980-1981 417 26.1 581 36.31981-1982 493 30.6 798 49.51982-1983 1302 80.7Data compiled from Report, 1960 - 1983, passim.2iBy 1972 the Provincial Educational Media Centre (PEMC)was created, administered by the Audio-Visual Services Branch,and handled not only radio and televised school broadcasts,but also all other audio-visual materials. Reorganization441,11.1aarallrinan9W11.11.1111.2.181MMUM.1311141V1.4.47.13=110=14=1121211111I-British Columbia schools include senior-high, junior-seniorhigh, junior high, superior, elementary-senior, elementary-junior,and elementary schools. Percent of British Columbia school totalswere rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent.19occured again in 1974 when the Division of Communications wascreated which absorbed PEMC. Wayne Groutage, Merrill Fearon,and Sheila Stone, former PEMC employees, were closely involvedwith the creation of program content and revealed the natureof their duties relating to school radio broadcasts.Groutage, Stone, and Fearon outlined how the responsibilitiesof PEMC employees began to change over time from the late1950's through to the end of the radio broadcasts. Initially,the Ministry of Education was responsible for the broadcastsfrom creation to production. Stone clearly believed that thiswas truly the happiest time as this was a period of greatcreativity. Groutage outlined a progression from anorganization with an extremely small operating budget of$25,000 per year and only three people responsible forcreating the programs to be aired across the province orentire Western region, to an organization responsible solelyfor the purchase, duplication, and distribution of audio andvideo tapes. Both Groutage and Fearon felt that thisexpansion from small scale production to large scale purchaseand distribution of recorded materials was a rewarding andexciting period in the history of PEMC. Groutage believedthat for program coordinators, such as Merrill Fearon and MaryBal den, ...these were exciting new times, with newnrnalMagOILISIMMOSullallutaSIZZlim.aulat.:InalmuntIttuatirlIniallItatunriparttlaluilInterview with Wayne Groutage, Image Media Services,Richmond, British Columbia, 25 November 1991.20opportunities. "2However, Stone regarded this shift as a decrease inresponsibility, and equated it with a tremendous decrease inmorale among PEMC employees, a lack of accountability of moneyand time as the organization grew in employees, but becamefractured in spirit. Sheila Stone traced some of theproblems PEMC encountered back to 1967 when the two branchesof the Ministry of Education amalgamated causing a forceddecision to lose one Director and one Assistant Director andtherefore causing much hard feelings between the personalitiesinvolved.^Barrie Black remained Director and Groutageremained Assistant Director.^Sheila Stone described thisunion as a "..clashing of bodies not a meeting of minds."2A personality Stone remembered vividly was the lateBarrie Black, the third radio school broadcast Directorfollowing Margaret Musselman and Philip Kitley. According toGroutage, Black's responsibilities as Director were that of asenior administrator; Black developed and managed the budget,managed the twenty to forty personnel in his department, andtook an active role in the day-to-day business which wouldinvolve decisions regarding which projects the departmentundertook. Groutage stated that although Black's position was1211:■107,1030.■11.31:17MMASOUUMPUISIGroutage interview, 25 November 1991.Interview with Sheila Stone, retired from the Ministryof Education, Vancouver, British Columbia, 26 November 1991.Ibid.essentially an administrative one, Black possessed thecreativity required to produce a broadrast. Lars Eastholmbelieved that the key to "...coordinating all of the sound,cast, music and bureaucracy [was) Barrie Black."27'Stone described Black as a man distrusted in general bythe Victoria Ministry of Education 'brass'...because he didn't fit the image of a high-rankingcivil servant and he didn't care. He was proud ofhis east side background - he went to the sameschool as Dave Barrett. He was a very ableadministrator, creative, intelligent, and fiscallyresponsible. We made that $25,000 go a very longway in the late '60's.9In Stone's opinion, it was the beginning of what was for themost part a very cooperative and productive workingrelationship. However, Stone alluded to a disintegratingworking place which began spiralling downhill at the timewhen, as she said, "Barrie Black got kicked out by theMinistry." Merrill Fearon also had fond memories of BarrieBlack whom she felthad real vision. He and Wayne (Groutage) workedout a tape distribution system that worked farbetter than broadcasting.. ..Our provincial systemwas the envy of the whole country. Barrie wase.Groutage interview, 25 November 1991.Eastholm interview, 14 April 1992.respected for that vision that he had.°c'Stone said that there had been rumours that the CBCwanted out of the arrangement which bound them to providingthe technical assistance to get the school broadcasts on theair and that slowly the CBC tried to cut back employees andfacilities to the point where the production of the schoolbroadcasts became so difficult even PEMC might have suggestedstopping the relationship. Stone remarked that office moraleat this time was at an all-time low. During this period, PEMCwas forced to switch from producing broadcasts, to simplybuying video and audio material from other suppliers,duplicating and distributing the material to educationalinstitutions all over Canada.Although Stone believed that she and others felt that alltheir creative energy had been ripped from them and it wouldonly be a matter of time before their positions would be gone,Merrill Fearon, who joined PEMC in 1975, felt this period ofexpansion was a very rewarding experience. Fearon stated thatfor British Columbia,...the best period was from 1973 - 1963 when ourproduction studio became active and we were incontrol of production. This is when we got realvalue for our dollar as this was produced for ourprovince...An example of this value was theproduction Salut!, which was created solely forBritish Columbia.°1gnsommosunmsonuratattuntlaumurnmottrtagnstmluttnatattrnmutmamrsz,anvasnoInterview with Merrill Fearon, Merrill FearonCommunications, Vancouver, British Columbia, 19 October 1992.1Ibid.Fearon added that although the format which requiredcommittees from the Western provinces to meet and determinemutually acceptable program topics "...sounded good, there wasa lot of 'let's see if we can find a series that nobody willobject to.'"2 According to Fearon, finding a topic aboutwhich all Western provinces would agree, often required acompromise of program and production quality as the otherprovinces' contributions were not always deemed appropriatefor a British Columbia audience. This compromise led toprovinces choosing to listen to their own productions's natural that people want to hear about themselvesfirst."^However, "...when production quality was high, theywould often listen to programs from other provinces anyway!"In addition, due to financial limitations, the quality wouldvary from province to province. Therefore, Fearon believedthat the expansion of PEMC's responsibilities to include thepurchasing, copying, and distributing, of taped material was ashift that^...gave real value" to British Columbia'seducational media.With admittedly wavering teacher and student loyalty, theBritish Columbia radio school broadcasts eventually did end intanmsanstarsunammemsarsettstrannammositsunumurststspususauntrittammuumarnF.-1.3aron interview, 19 October 1992.°Ibid.241982.E.^Bernie Hart, former Director of School Broadcasts inthe Maritimes, believed that CBC's responsibility to schoolradio broadcasts, provincially, regionally, and nationally,ended in 1982. He went on to say that some provinces chose towithdraw from the arrangement earlier, as the Maritimeprovinces did in 1974.2'7 A statement in Saskatchewan's Report announced that 1981-1982 was the final year for school radiobroadcasts in that province. m° In Manitoba's 1981-1982 Report there is an indication that formal school broadcasting incooperation with the CBC ended in 1982 as this...was a year of consolidation for 'Production andSchool Broadcasts.' In the previous year, a veryrapid transition was made from being an organizer ofprograms to be produced by the CBC to being a self-contained production unit.9Hart also mentioned that Newfoundland was able to locallynegotiate an agreement in which the CBC would continue toproduce school radio broadcasts for occasional specialprograms as requested by the Newfoundland Ministry ofEducation. 4-°tOCUMIUMMUUMUMMISIMMUMMUMMUMMUMMUMMUMIMUIMUMMUMMUM111The British Columbia televised school broadcastsenjoyed two more years production before ending in 1984.Interview with Bernie Hart, Nova Scotia Ministry ofEducation, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, 25 November 1992.°BSaskatchewan Annual Report^(Regina: SaskatchewanDepartment of Education, 1981-1982), p. 78.°'34Manitoba Department of Education Annual Report (Winnipeg:^Manitoba Department of Education, 1981-1982), p.4.°Hart interview, 25 November 1992.This outline of the working relationship between the CBCand the Ministry of Education provides the necessary backdropagainst which the broadcasts can be examined more closely.From this historical background, it is now time to examinedescriptions of the school radio broadcasts programs that wereavailable from 1960-1982.26Chapter Two We're On the Air The discussion in "Mr. Deane's" grade eight SocialStudies class for the last two weeks had centered around urbanpopulation growth patterns, pollution, and progress. For Mr.Deane and his students it may only be April 14, 1972, butthey're about to take a trip into the year 2010. Sc' sit backand listen...Can it be done? A look into the future toassess the pollution damage of today. The CanadianSchool Broadcasting Corporation and the Council ofMinisters of Education Canada in cooperation wth theJoint Programming Committee [present] today'sprogram which opens in the year 2010. Two futurestudents have taken a day away from their computerlessons and joined their teacher to visit theNational Science Museum in Ottawa.Inside the huge dome they're approaching thedisplay of the 1970 lifestyle. It's a house likethose found in the suburbs of any Canadian city atthat time."Turn the round handle and in we go.^Watchyour step, Kathy.""It's big.""And junky.""Well, it's finished in generic 1970 livingroom furniture.""Hey! An old telephone!""Yeah, but it doesn't have any pictures.""And it can't speak to computers, either.""How did they manage, Mr. McLean?""Oh, they thought the telephone system waspretty good in 1970.""Hey! What was that?""A jet plane.""I've never heard one that noisy before. "1MtlItE3: J^ Mr”.1.11:111,1:171:11A1M1^1.1.41410111111:“1111:103.101.1CBC, "Pollution,"^14 April, 1972. Tape is located inthe Provincial Archives of British Columbia, Victoria, BritishColumbia.27As illustrated in the above radio broadcast, the contentof many school radio broadcasts seldom fitted squarely intoone subject area. This 1972 broadcast had elements ofhistory, science, environmental education, and perhaps evenguidance content. However, it can be said that the schoolradio broadcasts covered a wide range of topics, some in amore specialized, or isolated, manner than others: music,art, social studies (history and geography), language arts,current events, science, health, guidance, holidays, and manyspecial events such as a visit to Canada by a member of theRoyal Family. Similar to the April 14, 1972 broadcast, manybroadcasts, particularly social studies and science, werewritten and performed in a narrative style. The dramatizationof a historical event., a scientific discovery, a topicalhealth issue, a holiday festival, or a current event was acommon method of delivery involving professional actors,actresses, musicians, and sound effects technicians.From the outset, the school radio broadcasts wereintended as a supplement to the classroom teachers' program.Producers hoped to provide entertainment, information, ormotivation that the teacher was unable to provide due to theunavailibility of resources in remote locations, or theteachers' lack of specialized training. The school radiobroadcasts were never intended to supplant the teacher andfollow a specific curriculum. In Canada, as Lambert argued,the "...sole purpose of broadcasts is to create a background28or to add to what the teacher is able to do - but not toreplace the teacher." The provincial director in BritishColumbia reiterated this point:In general, the aim of school broadcasts is toprovide programmes which will be acceptable to allschools as an enrichment of their daily work; but firstconsideration is given to rural schools, which obviouslystand to benefit much more from such a service thanschools in more organized areas. No attempt is made todo things which can easily be done by the teacher. Thismeans, for instance, that programmes will seldom beconcerned with tool subjects. Rather, school broadcastsaim at stimulating imagination and providing materialthat may be otherwise difficult to obtain or in generaltoo highly specialized for all teachers to handle withease.In considering students' attention span, The Division ofSchool Broadcasts experimented a great deal with programlength."4. As early as 1946, The Division organized the one-half hour allotted time so that " opposed to formeryears, the majority of programmes varied in length from ten totwenty minutes instead of a full half-hour.", Within thetotal daily time period, the distribution of ten, fifteen,twenty, and thirty minute programs continued to vary over thecourse of the school radio broadcasts. However, by 1960,budgetary concerns forced the broadcasts into more half-hournon=cannuittaintsrutusmansuma:mattnumntrustanitunarsoannumusumanntuttnunLambert, School Broadcasting, p. 41-Kitley, Report, 1944-1945, p. 149."Witley, Report, 1953-1954, p. 119.1-Citley, Report, 1946-1947, p. 137.29rather than fifteen- or twenty-minute broadcasts. °^Inaddition to financial constraints, there had been a successfulexperiment with the use of more definite classroomparticipation quiz sessions as part of the half-hour.7It was clear from the outset of British Columbia schoolradio broadcasting that there was an intent to serve a varietyof grade levels. The 1944-1945 Report documented thatin the past year two programmes a week were devotedto Music, one junior and one intermediate. Oneother programme a week was directed specifically tothe intermediate and lower grades, and one was moresuitable for upper grades.°British Columbia Report  did not consistently document abreakdown of the grades at which broadcasts were aimed in anygiven year. Although from 1950-1956 the Report cited thegrades at which programs were aimed, the statistics did nottotal 100 percent and there was no accompanying explanation.MIMMISIMIIIIMIS02(1118221710MMEM11.44121113411371102UPSIMMIttINUMMISUMMISMIS°According to Groutage, one-half hour programs were lessexpensive to air as they required the coordination of only onescript writer, one set of sound effects, and one cast, amongother components. Also, there was a great deal of time andeffort put into making a one-half hour program fit its time-slot exactly; trying to edit two or three programs to fitwithin a one-half hour time-slot would require considerablymore time and effort.tiusselman, Report, 1960-1961, p. 58. There is noelaboration within the Report  as to why classroomparticipation quiz sessions favour a one-half hour time slot.I speculated that a one-half hour block was unable to holdsome students' attention and therefore it was believed thatthe inclusion of a participation quiz would provide thenecessary variety of the program format to hold students'interest.°Philip J. Kitley, Report, 1944-1945, p. 149.30TABLE III PERCENT OF RADIO SCHOOL BROADCASTS AIMED AT SPECIFIC GRADE LEVELS FROM 1948-1956 YEAR PRIMARY INTERMEDIATE JUNIOR SENIOR1950-1951 1/5 2/5 1/4 1/101951-1952 1/4 2/3 2/5 1/101953-1954 1/4 3/4 1/31954-1955 25 7. 42 7. 18 7. 15 7.1955-1956 13 7. 50 7. 26 7. 11^7.Data compiled from Report, 1950 - 1956, passim. The datais displayed here as documented in Report.In the 1954-1955 Report, the justification for the abovebreakdown of broadcasts by grade was thatthis distribution seems appropriate, since lessvariety of material is possible in primary gradesand school time limitations impose heavier listeningrestrictions in senior grades.'9Again in the 1955-1956 Report, an explanation for that year'sbreakdown of programs by grade suggested that the coursecontent of the intermediate and junior-high level lent itselfto broadcasting more easily. In addition, this level hadfewer administrative problems than at the senior-high levelwhich had a structured timetable.1°The popularity of various programs, remarkably consistentthroughout the duration of the school radio broadcasts, wasevidenced in the longevity of such programs as "Sing Out,""Song Time," "Pictures in the Air," "Ecoutez," and others. Itwas significant that the most popular programs were thoseInomumrtmoutmmlansulantsmum.anuntruz.nealmantruspanansunususannsmPhilip J. Kitley, 1954-1955, p. 127.10Margaret A. Musselman, Report, 1955-1956, p. 142.31which dealt with highly specialized subjects such as music,art, and French as these were the subjects which teachers,without a specialty in that particular area, had the mostdifficulty in teaching. As early as the first regularlyscheduled broadcasts in 1944, the Report stated that "...musicprogrammes stand at the head of the list.u" Again in 1947,the annual reports cited thatfirst place in popularity goes, as usual, to themusic programmes.^In order, these were the nextmost popular programmes: "Pictures in the Air,""Science on the March"... Although by numbers theFrench programmes come last, results show that ahigh percentage of the French classes who couldlisten to the broadcasts made use of them.1By 1959, little had changed as "numerically most popular wasprimary music" 1° Although the Report from 1960-1982, thefinal twenty-two years of the school radio broadcasts, did notcite which broadcasts were the most popular, interviews withteachers clearly indicated that the music, art, and Frenchprograms continued to be favourites.Despite the continued popularity of music, art, andFrench programs, the Division of School Radio Broadcastsexplored varying the program schedule to include greater orfewer listening hours each week of different subject areabroadcasts. For example, in 1959 the Broadcasts Divisionuommsumusermuntramanunammannumuctnalranumituatrustsamonumsun"Kitley, Report, 1944-1945, p. 149.12Kitley, Report, 1947-1948, p. 126.1°Musselman, Report, 1959-1960, p. 58.on,"1.1af-determined that broadcasts for high-school grades were noteconomical in light of the inability of taped service andtherefore, with the exception of "Ecoutez," were notscheduled. By 1971, " programming stressed Music andArt for elementary schools and languages for secondarygrades."14.Programs produced at all three levels - provincial,regional, and national - won many awards at the University ofOhio's Institute for Education by Radio. In 1960-1961 anintermediate music program received an award in Ohio.' In1962-19631E' and again in 1965-19661 the very popular series,"Pictures in the Air," won awards. In 1976-1977 the program"Kids' Radio," written and produced in cooperation withchildren, won an award.19 In 1977-1978 a program oflistening skills, "Soundscape," won an award.1'9"Pictures in the Air," a popular art series which enjoyeda wide listenership, led students through an imagery activityand a subsequent art project.2°MMIS40771000.4.1.111MUMMUMIUMMIIMMISTMUMMIMMILMIAMMUMMIUM"-Black, Report,^1971-1972,Michael Foster, a Universityp.^39.lilusselman,le.Musselman,ivMusselman,Report,Report,1960-1961,1962-1963,1965-1966,p.p.p.59.58.68.Report,1A36routage, Report, 1976-1977, p. 25.19Groutage, Report, 1977-1978, p. 24.20The 1962-1963 Report indicates that the "Pictures inthe Air" programme won a first award from the Institute forEducation by Radio-Television, Ohio State University for in-of British Columbia faculty member who wrote scripts for"Pictures in the Air" from 1972 to 1982 aimed his program atgrades three, four, and five students. Foster admitted thatit...sounds quite unreasonable to have a radio programon art, but our objective was to have childrenlisten, visualize and use their imagination....[Theprogram] tried to increase students' imagination byexploring their own background and experience andlearning about the world in which they live.21The imagery activity put the listeners in the center of avivid visual picture - pirates landing on a beach andsearching for treasure, a polar bear sneaking up on a babyseal for a tasty meal, a butterfly's wings fluttering insilent movement in summer sunshine. During the program, thenarrator paused to direct students to choose an aspect of thestory to draw or paint. Throughout the program some directionwas given regarding colour choice, positioning the picture onthe page, and objects to be included. Foster stated that itwas "...crucial to achieve a balance of music, sound effects,and instruction. And we did a wonderful job of this."2 Atthe end of the broadcast a Vancouver CBC address was given towhich students could send finished pictures. Foster said helooked forward to receiving art work from school children andhad fond memories of this aspect of his responsibilities.131-171341.13311MaInItentaUnatianalUillni.NMSISUMSIUSU. educational radio.1Interview with Michael Foster, retired, NorthVancouver, British Columbia, 13 April 1992.2Ibid.34associated with being a script writer.I got to know people and got invited out to schools.People would send in pictures who weren't even inthe school system at remember somelighthouse people out in the middle of nowhere senttheir pictures in. And a little old lady inKamloops, who must have been eighty, always sent herpictures in. Oh! Among other gifts, I rememberreceiving a little clay figurine from Massett.The various music programs followed a slightly moreinstructional approach than "Pictures in the Air." "SingOut!," was a music program "...directed at teachers who had toteach music but had little music background themselves."2'4Mary Balden, assistant to the program's creator, performer,and teacher, Lloyd Arntzen, believed that "Sing Out!" wastrying to "...fill a gap in teachers' ability. [The program]definitely had a curriculum base and if we did our jobcorrectly, it would fit in the curriculum."2 "Sing Out!,"appropriate for the primary to early intermediate grades,introduced a new song each week line by line with pauses inwhich the listening audience was to echo. In addition toteaching a new song each week, the program reviewed songs fromthe previous week and taught one short rhythm activity.Arntzen described the format of the program as follows:1. Show's theme songVittNAV, ^ UUZIVAS371133Foster interview, 13 April 1992.Interview with Lloyd Arntzen, Hudson Elementary School,Vancouver, British Columbia, 2 December 1991.Interview with Mary Balden, retired, Vancouver, BritishColumbia, 24 November 1991.352. New song taught and practiced by singing the songthrough once and then again with pauses for the students torepeat words3. Reviewed other songs4. Taught two or three rhythmic exercises.^Taughtvocabulary of rhythm notes and used the KODALY method. Thebooklets that teachers had showed the KODALY signals to betaught.26.5. Closing of the show.7Mary Balden added that the program included...primarily folk stuff, simple songs. For example,we did 'Pick a Bale of Cotton' and the most modernwe got was 'Mary Poppins.' There were core songsthat were carried over from year to year andseasonal selections asFrank Bertram, a University of British Columbia facultymember, worked for the Ministry of Education from 196B-1971developing scripts for language school broadcasts aimed atintermediate students. Bertram developed three programs:1) How People Talk to Each Other - listening2) A Taste for Words - poetry3) Our Ever-Changing Language - history of languageEach of the programs had a balance of talk, music, and soundeffects. In addition to writing the scripts, Bertram was ableto narrate as he had been titled "teacher narrator" andtherefore met the requirements of the various unions involved.He felt his language programs wereMORMIUMMUM11617111MOOMMUMUMMUMMAMSUMIUMISIOMMUMSOM MUI41911.142sArntzen described the KODALY method as similar to theORF method which aims to bring the folk roots of music inelemental forms to music education. Rhythm is an example ofone such elemental form. KODALY is most noted in NorthAmerica as a method of teaching sight singing using handsignals.2'7Arntzen interview, 2 December 1991.28Balden interview, 24 November 1991.,36...a good way of introducing something that theteacher would not present otherwise. On the otherhand, the programs often augmented something theteacher was already doing. In any case, thebroadcasts gave another slant to whatever theteacher was doing. Students can learn fromindirection; it doesn't have to be heavy-handed.2'3The script writers I interviewed agreed that the work waschallenging but rewarding. Bertram commented thatto write the scripts, I had to do some reading andreally grope around. I found the first twentyminutes of writing was easy and it was the last tenminutes that was the hard part.3°He went on to say that "...writing a script was not likewriting a long essay. Writing for young people required thewriting to be broken up by skits and drama."31 Michael Fosteralso found that...every script required research....I felt I hadmet a real challenge to consistently provideprogramming with a fresh approach. It was verydifficult and time consuming-32Denis Rogers, who wrote history broadcasts for the Maritimesbroadcasts, related thatto prepare for a script, I would go to the libraryto find a general text first to get the actual wordsand scenes and then to a more contemporary text togive more balance, and an authentic voice. Eachbroadcast required about twelve hours of studyingand eight hours of writing.... At the beginning ofthe season, you started out ahead of your and by0.111.9011111103:'Interview with Frank Bertram, retired, Vancouver,British Columbia, 6 May 1992.30Bertram interview, 6 May 1992.31Ibid.32Foster interview, 13 April 1992.:37the end of the year you're scrambling.All of the script writers felt there was a very amiable andeffective relationship between the CBC technical personnel andthemselves. Michael Foster said that all the meetingsregarding the broadcast were "..carried out in the usualrelaxed fashion of the CBC."4 Frank Bertram said thatthe CBC personnel were always very indulgent if you misseda line.^Barrie Black [the Director] was always verysupportive."^However, Bertram was aware of the complexityof production resulting from the multitude of unions comingtogether. Bertram commented that he,...was amused by the fractioning of jobs.^Forexample, the narrator couldn't even move themicrophone a little to the left because that wassomeone else's job.E'Foster was aware of and a little disturbed at the CBC'slack of interest in archiving information as " the end ofa taping, I'd find scripts in the garbage can and I'd goaround and pick them out."The script writers chose to write and perform manybroadcasts in the present tense not only to give the studentsa sense that they are 'ear-witnesses' but also 'eye-witnesses'avammessulnumnssmssowsammatammwsmataumossmasamommsnInterview with Denis Rogers, retired, North Vancouver,British Columbia, 15 April 1992.°4-Foster interview, 13 April 1992.Bertram interview, 6 May 1992.°EbIbid.°-7Foster interview, 13 April 1992.38to events as they unfolded in the course of the broadcast.'On the spot' interviews with actors and actresses performingas well-known public figures, either historical or current,was a popular method of broadcast delivery, particularly forsocial studies and science. In such broadcasts the additionof sound effects brought the broadcast alive in the minds ofstudent listeners. The sound of waves crashing on the shore,a boat running up onto the rocks, the swishing sound of asword drawn swiftly from its sheath, etc. all aided increating a very vivid picture indeed. In addition torealistic sound effects, voice clarity, speed, accent, andpitch added to the professional quality of the broadcastswhich maintained student and teacher interest for many yearsand earned the broadcasts the numerous awards mentioned.Sound effects, voice clarity, speed, and others, areelements of school radio which British Columbia teachers mayhave considered when I asked them, "What do you remember aboutthe CRC school radio broadcasts?" With the background of thevarious programs in mind, it is time to examine teachers'experiences with British Columbia school radio between 1960-1982.39Chapter Three Tuned In! It is January 4, 1977 in "Mr. Lee's" grade seven scienceclass which has been studying the foundations of moleculartheory. Students are opening notebooks, sharpening pencils,and asking last minute questions. The musical opening of theprogram begins, a man's voice introduces the CBC broadcast,and then we hear:"Von, dee, da, dee, da, dum. Molecules and microscopes,test tubes and slides.""Uncle! Professor!""Hello! What's that?""Uncle!""Hmmm. Sounds like my niece, Janice. Hello!""Where are you, Uncle?""Where am I? Well, I'm in my laboratory.^I'm in mylaboratory!^Oh, well, where else where would I be at thistime of day?""Oh, here you are, Uncle. I've come to visit you.""Visit? But, why aren't you in school?""Oh, I've been ill. But I'm better now. The doctor saysI have to, what's the word? convall.."Convall? Oh! Convalesce!""Yes! That's it! So, I won't have to go to school forat least another week. Isn't that great?""Oh, dear me, yes. Yes, I, I suppose so.""I'm tired of sitting around at home. I want to get intosomething.""Get into something?""Yes. I want to get into science.""Get into sc...? What on earth do you mean?""Oh, you know.^Get into it.^Find out what it's allabout.""Oh, dear me. These modern expressions.""What are you working on, Uncle?""Well, just at the moment, I'm studying the activity ofcertain kinds of microrganisms.""Gosh! What are they?""Well, they're tiny forms of life."'umangamusurunmenstutonsurnnunsusstuttnastummtammuanousomusuosentraws.nu1CBC, "Getting Into Science," 4 January 1977, "MolecularTheory." Tape is located in the Provincial Archives ofBritish Columbia, Victoria, British Columbia.40The January 4, 1977 vignette is an example of the ?WaltDisney? approach favoured for some dramatizations.2 Suchdramatizations created an image in the listeners? mind whichcould be followed throughout the broadcast. Teachersappreciated this format for it disguised abstract sciencecontent, for example, within a realistic and engaging settingwhich would be difficult for many teachers to achieve withoutthe broadcast.Although it was not possible to widely generalize fromthe eleven classroom teachers interviewed to all BritishColumbia classroom teachers who used the broadcasts, therewere many similarities between respondents' comments whichindicated that my findings were representative, not perhaps ofall British Columbia teachers listening, but certainly of moreBritish Columbia teachers than those who participated in myinterviews. Predictably, there were also some markeddifferences between the experiences of the participants whichwill also be discussed. In this section, I will follow theorder of questions on the questionnaire used during theinterviews (See Appendix C).Initially, most of the interviewees felt that they hadlittle to tell me about their memories and experiencesrelating to the CBC Radio School Broadcasts. Many felt thattheir contact with the broadcasts ended quite some time agoand that this contact did not leave any significant impression... Innanstilt:3c111:mr.s■tu■sitntstuttvalovizatnelnaltritsz■i■ssncassantisse.ssmsnssuluststn.st2Eastholm interview, 14 April 1992.41upon them.^However, after the interview many participantsremarked that they were surprised at the amount of informationthey remembered about the broadcasts and that after thinkingabout the radio programs for a few days, they could rememberquite a bit of detail although usually their memories wereunfocused. Stephanie Robb, a Vancouver teacher-librarian,remembered such specifics as the "...narrator's prissy voice",but admitted that she "...couldn't remember the words or tuneto even one of the songs taught if her life depended on it."oA North Vancouver teacher, Robert Brown, vividly recalled the"Sing Out!" broadcasts when a certain little boy in hisclassroom always "...sat up on his seat and waved his armslike he was conducting. Just thoroughly enjoying it." 's Yetanother Vancouver teacher, Ruth Deshaies, remembered listeningto broadcasts during which a group of children were performingand her class was abuzz with whispers, "Where's that school?Where's that school?"Several of the teachers were unsure of the exact datesthey used the broadcasts unless a specific event marked thebeginning or ending of their use. For example, a Vancouveradministrator, Gwen Smith, remembered beginning to use theminumwmtauttuunmetnunnummtuownwsuntsputntanuanistmosoncrumstamnssiInterview with Stephanie Robb, retired, Vancouver,British Columbia, 20 November 1991.'*-Interview with Robert Brown, retired, North Vancouver,British Columbia, 6 July 1992.Interview with Ruth Deshaies, Graham Bruce Elementary,Vancouver, British Columbia, 3 June 1992.42broadcasts in her first year of teaching after beingintroduced to the programs by a mentor teacher. Smithrecalled that her appointment to an administrative positionwas the reason she stopped listening to the broadcasts.E. Robbremembered starting to use the broadcasts after moving toVancouver from the East Kootenays where the broadcasts couldnot be heard. Robb recalled that it was her move from being aclassroom teacher to a school teacher-librarian which markedthe end of her listening.7 Only one of the eleven teacherswho participated in an interview, Tom Brunker, stated that hestopped using the broadcasts because he felt his "...studentshad lost interest in the broadcasts.flaThe educators interviewed all taught in British Columbia:the East Kootenays, the Okanagan, Nanaimo, Vancouver, NorthVancouver, and West Vancouver at some time between 1960 and1982. The educators who participated in my study were allfamiliar with the televised school broadcasts and severalmentioned that they remembered using them, if only briefly.There was a wide range of grades listening to the broadcastsamong my interviewees: six teachers with primary grades,three teachers with intermediate grades, two teachers withsecondary school students.1.17/11n=8.4=1102A.SISIOIMIAMOVSPCUISgr...213.1.71Saiirt,t,tilittatatlit6Interview with Gwen Smith, Mount Pleasant ElementarySchool, Vancouver, British Columbia, 13 November 1991.Robb interview, 20 November 1991.einterview with Tom Brunker, Lord Kitchener Elementary,Vancouver, British Columbia, 17 November 1991.43Interviewees had become aware of the availability of thebroadcasts through various means. Al Paterson, a Vancouveradministrator, and Gloria Hovde, a Nanaimo teacher, becameaware of the programs solely because of the wall scheduleposted in the staffroom of his school. Tom Brunker, GwenSmith, Marilyn Jones, Neil Sutherland, and Ruth Deshaies wereintroduced to the availability of the broadcasts duringteacher training. Marilyn Jones, who was educated inManitoba, even remembered listening to an address at heruniversity by Gertrude McCance who was the equivalent ofBritish Columbia's Michael Foster, the scriptwriter for thelast ten years of the "Pictures in the Air" art program.Lydia James' (n6e Marchewicz) first experience with schoolbroadcasting occured when she was attending King Edward HighSchool in Vancouver and was approached by her high schoolFrench teacher who had been asked to help locate Frenchstudents willing to narrate the French school broadcastsentitled "Ecoutez." James went on to work for many years asboth an editor, and actress for the French school broadcasts.Neil Sutherland, who went on to teach at the University ofBritish Columbia, introduced the CBC Radio School Broadcaststo his teacher training students, and worked for the Ministryof Education as a consultant for possible radio broadcasttopics, and later as a script writer for one televised schoolbroadcast. Marilyn Jones also remembered hearing thebroadcasts as a student herself and Tom Brunker felt that his44personal relationship with Phil Kitley, the director of theschool broadcasts from 1944 - 1958, encouraged him to use thebroadcasts.When questioned about the possible reasons that the radiobroadcasts stopped, all of the teachers believed that theintroduction of visual media, particularly television, hadcreated a situation where the radio broadcasts were thenviewed, as Al Paterson said, "...passe for a learning tool atthat time." Stephanie Robb went so far as to say, "'s asmall miracle that they [the broadcasts] lasted as long asthat [1982]."10 All of the teachers interviewed had similarideas that the use of radio was beginning to be viewed as old-fashioned. Ruth Deshaies commented on the possible effect ofthematic teaching on the attractiveness of the broadcasts toteachers:There was a progressive change in the style ofteaching. Themes were what guided classroominstruction, so teachers were looking for things tofit their themes and the broadcasts couldn'tpossibly fit everybody's themes all the time."Marilyn Jones, Tom Brunker, Ruth Deshaies, Lois Paterson,and Stephanie Robb felt that the advent of television led to adecrease in students' listening attention and comprehension tothe point that the radio programs held little, if any,.,..111.1.ifinUMMUMMUMMIUMVIUMMULISMIUMMUMUNI01.184011141.1.1111.4.1=n1Interview with Al Paterson, David Livingstone ElementarySchool, Vancouver, British Columbia, 12 November 1991.2.0Robb interview, 20 November 1991."Deshaies interview, 3 June 1992.45interest for children.^Marilyn Jones commented that by theearly 1970's, "...children were less attentive to radiolistening because of the exposure to T.V."12 Ruth Deshaiesagreed, H ...children want to see something."12 Tom Brunkerfelt the radio school broadcasts were...fighting a losing battle competing with SesameStreet. Also, there were many specialists around by1982 who were coming into classrooms and doingthings. [The CBC radio school broadcasts] began toappear Mickey Mouse in comparison with Americantelevision. You have to use more gimmicks inteaching now than before and the CBC doesn't havethose gimmicks....The CBC broadcasts simply died ofold age and the radio was a technique that had hadits time.14.However, two teachers found that high studentinterest was maintained even in the very last years ofthe broadcasts. First, Gloria Hovde, a Nanaimo primaryteacher, used both the "Sing Out!" music programs and the"Pictures in the Air" art series which she foundextremely successful. Hovde's enthusiasm for thebroadcasts led her to tape the entire 1967/1968 series of"Pictures in the Air" series which she still uses todaywith her Nana i ma students. Hovde found that the..•children loved the sound effects and really liked thestory."^She also found that the suggested lesson formatlllll 11111111.1111.1.1711.11MM UTIMMIMMAMMUMISIMMUUSSAMIUM614111.114M162M"Interview with Marilyn Jones, David LivingstoneElementary School , Vancouver, British Col umbi a, 13 November 1991.2-Deshaies interview, 3 June 1992.1-*Brunker interview, 17 November 1991.46outlined in the teacher booklet for this art program sowell laid out that " lessons today follow the sameformat as they did when the broadcasts were firstaired. "1Second, Lydia James, a Vancouver French Immersionteacher who used the broadcasts when she was teachingsecondary French,...felt that the broadcasts developed goodvocabulary [and were] an opportunity to listen topeople with different accents. [The broadcasts]developed good listening skills, and anunderstanding of idiomatic expressions.i&Lydia James felt that the French broadcasts were an extensionto regular classroom teaching which enriched the language, andprovided another vehicle for instruction other than theteacher. She was very disappointed when the broadcastsstopped in 1982 and believed that the programs would still beeffective today in French Immersion and Second Languageclassrooms.In each of my interviews, I found it was solely theteachers' decision to employ the broadcasts in their classroomprogram and everyone agreed that the poster style wallschedule was an ideal way to check scheduling. Gwen Smithfelt that the programs could have been advertised more widely,but agreed that once you knew about the program, the schedule1.1.411.171:17130.1170171.01.=20113:1216111=1,013131.111111l117318■SMII17.717-1■1341R101410210311Interview with Gloria Hovde, Nanaimo, British Columbia,3 July 1992.1BInterview with Lydia James, L'Ecole Bilingue,Vancouver, British Columbia, 22 May 1992.47was very adequate.Many teachers stated that one of the advantages of thecomprehensive Teachers' Bulletin accompanyng the broadcasts,was that very little preparation was required. On average,the teachers felt that the lessons needed five to twentyminutes of preparation depending on the materials orbackground information that the students would need. Varyingwith the topic of a particular broadcast, vocabulary might beintroduced, specific questions discussed, art materialsdistributed, or songs practiced from the previous week. Theteachers interviewed felt that when a particular series was ofinterest, they listened once a week. Several admitted theirlistening may have been intermittent depending on the topicsaired at that time.The most memorable broadcasts, mentioned by ten of theeleven teachers, were the music ones. The teachers felt thesebroadcasts were very beneficial, particularly to teachers whowere not music specialists but were required to teach music.In Marilyn Jones' case, even though a piano was not available,her students were able to sing along with background music.Yet, Jones believed that even if there had been access to apiano, the broadcasts would still have been included in hermusic program. Robert Brown, called the music broadcasts a"Godsend" for teachers like himself who were required to teachmusic but did not have any music background. 1.7 Stephanietonnomunnumuumnsumm.stamtunsumosnammuassmungrnagasuommralmuirsautt'Brown interview, 6 July 1992.48Robb, who did not have music training, felt the biggestbenefit of the music broadcasts was the "...repertoire ofsongs" it brought her."' In Neil Sutherland's case, hebelieves that the music broadcasts were not used during one ofhis teaching assignments as soon as an arrangement could beworked out for a music specialist to take his class. Untilthe arrival of the specialist, Dr. Sutherland, like many non-music specialists, relied on the broadcasts.Several of the teachers relied heavily on the Teachers' Bulletin, which outlined each of the upcoming year'sbroadcasts and were distributed at the beginning of eachschool year. With little music background, the guide becameinvaluable for non-music specialists. Gwen Smith commentedthat, "I used the music broadcasts mostly because this was notmy specialty and the provision of the booklet gave clearinstructions."1"s The Teachers' Bulletin outlined suggestedlesson formats, including activities for both before and afterthe broadcast, for the provincially and regionally developedprograms. Lesson plan suggestions for the nationalbroadcasts, outlined in a booklet published by the CBCentitled Young Canada Listens, were made available to alllistening schools.Other programs used by the teachers in this study weresocial studies, art, science, and language arts.^Thesenint1MIUMMLInISMUUMWOMMKISMIUMUS1SIMMIIIMUSISIIII■taMINleRobb interview, 20 November 1991.1Smith interview, 13 November 1991.49programs' use was less dependent than the music programs onwhether or not the teacher was a specialist in a particulararea. With reference to the social studies broadcasts, a moreimportant factor for use was whether or not the theme of thebroadcast was appropriate for that class at that point in theschool year's curriculum. Sutherland stated that, "...thesocials programs would run in a series and you would choose atheme that you liked." Despite the fact that Tom Brunkerwas a social studies specialist, he still used the broadcastsbecause "...the variety of the program added somethingdifferent to the classroom."21 Four of the eleven teachersbelieved that the social studies broadcasts provided a gooddramatic supplement to their already established program.The science, art, and language arts programs were usedwhen there was a perceived need for an extension to thecurriculum. With reference to Manitoba's art program "Fun ToDraw," similar in format to British Columbia's art program"Pictures in the Air," Marilyn Jones felt that program had variety.^It wasn't just[putting] a piece of paper in front of them and[telling them] think about such and such anddraw....The art program was easy to extend andcontinue. The broadcast merely gave a beginning.2The "Pictures in the Air" series was one of Gloria Hovde'sImuutualpstmorsiummennammunantanostmunnumunnumammmutusustaasaman0Interview with Neil Sutherland, University of BritishColumbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, 23 November 1991.l-Brunker interview, 17 November 1991.-Jones. interview, 13 November 1991.50favourites. She cited specific program topics, "Magic Fish,""Dinosaurs," and "Doors" as memorable broadcasts. Ms. Hovdeappreciated that the art broadcast provided students with a11 ...chance to share their pictures, rand) talk about what thepicture was about. "2 The comments from the broadcast'screator, Michael Foster, on returned student work was aspecial thrill for her students.After listening, the follow-up activities depended on thetype of broadcasts taught. Gwen Smith recalled language artsprograms after which comprehension questions were answered.Tom Brunker and Neil Sutherland remembered pupils writingparagraphs and discussing questions as part of the follow-upto social studies and English language lessons. Marilyn Jonessaid that she used the art activities suggested in theTeachers' Bulletin, as the follow-up to many art and languagelessons. However, many of the teachers made reference to thefact that the broadcasts were self-contained and the programgave the teacher a chance to catch their breath in a very busyschedule during a time when preparation was an uncommonluxury. Al Paterson made the point that at his school classeswere combined and one teacher would supervise during thebroadcast while the other teacher(s) would take a break.Stephanie Robb related the same feeling when she said,"...there was no platooning, no specialists, no prep time andyou were all things to these kids and the broadcasts gave youHovde interview, 3 July 1992.51a chance to catch your breath-1.2'4 Neil Sutherland echoed thesame sentiment when he related that school inspectors expectedto see every student notebook marked every day. This createdan enormous amount of marking. Dr. Sutherland said,The beauty of [the broadcasts] was that they wereself-contained and allowed you to catch up on yourmarking and to catch your breath.While interviewing Ruth Deshaies, another teacher passed by,recognized our discussion topic, and interjected that "...thebroadcasts gave me a chance to slide a book out of my desk andread secretly."Most teachers interviewed felt that the student reactionsto the broadcasts were positive, particularly during the19607s. With the exception of Gwen Smith, Lydia James, andGloria Hovde, the teachers felt that interest waned in thelatter years due to the impact of television. Gwen Smithmaintained that the broadcasts "...were the kids' highlight ofthe week. They'd wait for this." Smith felt that thechildren worked productively and that there was little actingout Particularly in the late 1960's and 1970's, Tom Brunker,Marilyn Jones, and Lois Paterson felt that student interestcould not always be maintained and behaviour problems duringthe listening became an issue at times. Lois PatersonOtl39■317.11337.=11111.1171307a113331801111UMS1011713117:1111,1111417.311.0141.191l71111.111.41.24-Robb interview, 20 November 1991.Sutherland interview, 23 November 1991.2EGmith interview, 13 November 1991.commented, "Students sometimes enjoyed it, and sometimesthought it was a time to goof of f."2 However, StephanieRobb, like Gwen Smith, felt that enjoyed it because it was a different voice.The only voice they heard was yours. There was noELC [English Language Center], no LAC [LanguageAssistance Center], no librarian, etc. Every kidjust came through your door and you were left withthem. [The kids] enjoyed the broadcasts just likethey enjoyed going to the gym - a real change ofscene.E9The eleven teachers interviewed agreed upon many of theadvantages and disadvantages of using the CBC radio schoolbroadcasts. Among the advantages was that the broadcastsprovided material in a area in which a teacher may not be aspecialist, particularly the field of music. However, evenspecialists, such as Tom Brunker in social studies, found thatthe broadcasts brought variety to an already existingcurriculum. Also, the broadcasts provided a Canadian focusand voice as well as giving teachers a needed break frominstruction in the classroom. Gwen Smith also thought thatduring the broadcasts students were given the opportunity toparticipate in an activity without any judgement and agreedwith Lydia James that the broadcasts were responsible formaking children better listeners than perhaps they are today.There was one single common disadvantage cited by almostevery teacher interviewed. Teachers interviewed felt that theinterview with Lois Paterson, Cunningham Elementary,Vancouver, British Columbia, 22 May 1992.2eRobb interview, 20 November 1991.53broadcasts were inflexible; if a teacher wanted to listen to aparticular broadcasts he/she had to listen to it at a specifictime or miss it completely-2'3' Other disadvantages included AlPaterson's comment that the broadcasts were "WASP" orientedand lacked a multi-cultural basis. Marilyn Jones and LoisPaterson felt that the narration at times was not dramaticenough and Neil Sutherland found it frustrating at times thatthe broadcasts "...didn't coincide with the sequencing of howyour school had sequenced that grade's program for theyear. "c` Tom Brunker echoed similar concerns when hementioned that he felt the broadcasts did not always "...fitthe curriculum."1 Similarly, Ruth Deshaies had concerns thatthe broadcasts did not fit the endless range of themesavailable to teachers. However, the teachers interviewed feltthat the advantages to using the broadcasts outweighed thedisadvantages as most only stopped using the broadcasts whentheir teaching assignment changed and using the broadcasts wasno longer appropriate. It is important to note that theinterviewees' perceived advantages and disadvantages of theschool radio broadcasts corroborated by the survey results ofthe Canadian Teachers' Federation Survey of Radio. Theinterviewees' comments are also supported by notes throughoutrnarnamsnonenuossammulasusmagnmenuustamossaransusuous2Four of the eleven teachers mentioned that theirschools did not record the broadcasts to be re-played at amore convenient time.°Sutherland interview, 23 November 1991.l'Brunker interview, 17 November 1991.54the Report.Not only classroom teachers, but also CBC personnel,shared memories and experiences relating to the radio schoolbroadcasts. The individuals who created the sound effects,mixed the music, orchestrated the cast, and distributed theprograms daily, had a significant contribution to this study.55Chapter Four From The Inside Out It is February 15, 1977 in "Mr. Walsh's" grade nineEnglish class. The students are arriving and finding theirdesks while Mr. Walsh is busy at the front of the roomadjusting the radio. During last class, euphemisms and thesubtlety of language were discussed in preparation for today'sbroadcast. Mr. Walsh gives his last minute instruction tolisten for as many pairs of words as possible. We hear someopening music and a cut of a well-known pop song..."It's only words, and words are all I have to takeyour heart away..."Habitation?^Domicile? Residence? Dwelling?Abode? House? Home? Home? Home? Home? Pad?Pad? Pad? Pad? Pad? Home.Female, woman, lady, dame, housewife, career girl,socialite, blue stocking, femme fatale, broad, bird,chick, chick, chick,Pick your word! The show could change your life!And not "Pick Your Purse!" as was mistakenlyannounced earlier on this network but, "Pick YourWord!" Ladies and gentlemen, every one of you canplay this game right now! All you need is a pieceof paper and a pencil and when our gigantic computerscreen flashes words in pairs, pick your word! Allyou have to do is choose which of the two words youwould rather have applied to you. And these, ladiesand gentlemen, are the first two words. Which wouldyou rather be: Overweight or obese? Which wouldyou rather be:^Handicapped or inconvenienced?Scrawny or underweight?^Aging or decrepit?Vivacious or hyper? Meddling or interested?'IMIMUNIIRSIII.111.1■1121.113111MW.MWMPIIMPSIMInISIRSUM.■ISIRUI:'CBC, "Like, I Mean," 15 February 1977, "A Rose By AnyOther Name." Tape is located in British Columbia ProvincialArchives, Victoria, British Columbia.5E,Although it is not obvious to the reader, the February15, 1977 broadcast, "Like I Mean," was brought to life withsnipets of well-known pop-songs and simulated game-show soundeffects. The fun, participatory and very stimulating formatwas the result of not only the Ministry of Education employeesbut also the CBC personnel.When I interviewed seven CBC employees, a combination oftechnicians, announcers, and a director, I did not follow thesame type of questions which I asked the classroom teachers.Instead, I opened the discussion with the same question, "Whatdo you remember about the CBC radio school broadcasts?" Inall seven of the interviews this question provided anexcellent introduction and stimulated a lengthy discussion.Occasionally, I asked for clarification, but more often thannot, I simply scribbled down as much as possible and waiteduntil the interviewee truly felt he had nothing left to saybefore I would ask anything more.The CBC employees I interviewed felt that the schoolradio broadcasts were a worthwhile endeavour and rememberedthat their role very often required coordination between theactors, sound crew, and producer. Lars Eastholm, a soundeffects specialist, believed caused people to think and use their minds.Children who used school broadcasts developed theirimagination, created visual pictures. Otherwise, webecome like couch potatoes and let the image doeverything for us. If you'r e IiStEn 1r1c t osomething, you develop your creativity.Don Horne, a CBC technician, felt the school radio kids to pay attention to world affairs."By the early 1970's the school radio broadcasts usuallyonly required one sound effects technician, possibly amusician, and one or two actors or actresses. 4- With so fewindividuals to coordinate, unlike many other big productions,the school broadcasts were not considered " challengingas doing a symphony or outside broadcast because of the numberof people involved." Stan Peters elaborated on thisperception when he said,[There was] a great tendency in the CBC to think ofthe school broadcasts as 'also-rans'. You gave ityour all, but since you weren't heavily involved inthe preparation, the general feeling was that therewere grander and more exciting things to do. Theactors felt the same way. But you ate.E.Don Hardisty, a CBC technician, mentioned that due to theEastholm interview, 14 April 1992.Interview with Don Horne, retired CBC employee,Vancouver, British Columbia, 27 April 1992.4.According to Ken Davey, retired Director of Radio, inthe 1930's and 1940's school radio broadcasts were primarilydrama productions which appealed to not only student ofvarious ages, but also adults. These productions were veryhigh quality; they involved many cast members, realistic soundeffects, popular story lines. Later , in the 1950's and' 1960's, driven by budget constraints, the Ministry ofEducation went to a much smaller format.Interview with Alan MacMillan, retired CBC engineer,Vancouver, British Columbia, 27 April 1992.EInterview with Stan Peters, retired CBC announcer,Vancouver, British Columbia, 29 April 1992.58relative technical simplicity, the school broadcasts "...werea good way for people to learn 'mike' technique and how youshould set it up. [The broadcasts] were used as a trainingground for new technicians. " -7 Despite the logisticalsimplicity of the programs, the broadcasts were not withoutchallenge. Gordon Inglis, a retired CBC announcer, said,The school broadcasts were simple to work for. As aradio production, they were uncomplicated because[there were] so few people. The challenge was totalk to the kids - not down or up to them, but rightto them.'9Stan Peters, also aware of the challenge of relating to thelisteners, commented, "...broadcasting was so intimate. Youwere always talking to an audience of one. That's the essenceof broadcasting. You always have that one listener in mind."s'A challenge that some of the CBC employees had less thanfond memories of, was dealing with the myriad of unions,established in the early 1950's, represented in the CBCproduction of school radio broadcasts. There, Stan Petersnoted that, "To introduce and close a program would not be aunion problem for an announcer, but to speak within the broadcast would be against the union rules."1° Gordon Inglisconcurred when he stated that "Union conflicts did occur,ussittleilmnItiOnIumultuslintansmstinnImsrunms.nmuuttaatunmsnmutsunnumtu7Interview with Don Hardisty, CBC technician, Vancouver,British Columbia, 22 April 1992.°Interview with Gordon Inglis, retired CBC announcer,Vancouver, British Columbia, 4 May 1992.'Peters interview, 29 April 1992.laIbid.59usually because the Corporation had asked someone out of theunion to do something and this was forbidden."One challenge of school radio broadcasting which was rareby the 1960Ps, was the challenge of producing a show 'live,'opposed to 'live to tape' for a later broadcast. By 1960, fewshows were aired 'live' and by 1970 all school broadcasts weredone 'live to tape.' Despite the obvious stress, all of theCBC employees I interviewed had very fond memories of workingon live broadcasts. Don Horne commented,As soon as broadcasts went live to tape, mistakesstarted. In all the years that we did re-takes, Ibet all the people at home would never have noticedthe mistakes if they'd been left in the program.1Lars Eastholm echoed similar sentiment when he commented thathe...prefered the quality of live shows because theadrenalin would flow and the acting would be muchsharper. Once on tape and there was an error, therewas a feeling that, 'Oh, it can be edited out.' Therecording sessions became clinical and sterile.1°When discussing the excitement associated with livebroadcasts, the word 'adrenalin' was mentioned by many CBCemployees. As Alan MacMillan, a CBC engineer, said,Working on the school broadcasts live wasenergizing. The adrenalin was going. [There was a]great deal more positive excitement. If it wasnegative excitement, you didn't belong in thebusiness. 141.1.111...1111111"Inglis interview, 4 May 1992.12Horne interview, 27 April 1992.2.Eastholm interview, 14 April 1992.2411acMillan interview, 27 April 1992.50The excitement and adrenalin are understandable when atechnician was required to coordinate multiple sound effects,including music, with the actors' and actresses' lines, whilefollowing the script closely. Lars Eastholm, a sound effectsspecialist, commented that the importance of sound effects wasinherent in radio's non-visual format which requiredlisteners' imagination. He believed that the sound effects...planted just the seed of a sound and the mind would expandit." Eastholm quoted Stan Freberg, famous in the field ofradio drama, who said, ...[the] human mind is the greatesttheatre in the world. "1 Mr. Eastholm described the'cocktail bar,' the sound effects station behind which heworked, as having racks of sound effects discs (eventuallycopied onto cassette tapes) and a five deck player in whichyou could set up the sound effects ahead of time. Many of thesound effects used were standard across North America:crumpling cellophane to simulate the sound of fire, andsqueezing a package of cornstarch to simulate the sound ofwalking on snow, among others.The CBC personnel speculated on the possible reasons whythe school radio broadcasts came to an end in 1982. StanPeters believed that "...the school broadcasts lost theirrelevance because there were so many other ways of achievingwhat at one time could only be achieved by radio. "1 GordonsurtintmlumnInualumnot lllll 11:1.11■1111■711(MMOMIPMS111111111171111.11111110.331111M1111.1lEastholm interview, 14 April 1992.JE.Peters interview, 29 April 1992.61Inglis also felt that radio no longer had a monopoly on thedistribution of information and entertainment. He commentedthat " 1979 [the school broadcasts] were really fightingtelevision as radio listening dropped dramatically. The radiocouldn't compete with what they were doing on television."1-7As Director of Radio, Ken Davey was removed from thedaily production and offered the following reasons for thedemise of the school broadcasts:1. The arrival of television which changed radio's primetime from night to day which subsequently led to otherprograms wanting the time allotted to school broadcasting.2. The CBC's need to maintain a reasonable number oflisteners in both the mid-morning and afternoon time periods(school hours).3. The use of tape in productions, which not only madethe broadcast of programs for schools redundant, but alsoincreased studio and technician time as producers adoptedsegmented techniques (as in the making of motion pictures).4. The increasing demands on production facilities andair time by the Corporation's own program schedules.5. The development in the majority of provinces of theirown production facilities fully capable of taking overproducing school programming.Wayne Groutage, who was Assistant Director in thedepartment of the Ministry of Education responsible for schoolradio broadcasts suggested that "In some ways, theestablishment of the PEMC production facility was thebeginning of the end of the school brr.adcasts."18 In PEMr'smuommworrunsuantuanumountsmansalmnamostannstammuntratasm.ustruunt1-7Inglis interview, 4 May 1992.leGroutage interview, 25 November 1991.62attempt to meet the changing needs of schools, ". copyrightcleared video" was in demand for use in schools which recentlypurchased low cost video recorders for teachers who wanted theflexibility that video tape offered.' '3' Groutage explainedthatTo meet the demand, we began licencing the right tocopy films from all of the major film producers-BBC, NFB, Encyclopedia Brittanica and NationalGeographic. Local production could only produce asmall number of the programs teachers wanted.2°In four reasons Groutage summed up why he felt televisionschool broadcasts stopped and felt that the same reasons wouldapply to the radio broadcasts as well:1. The advent of the video tape recorder and playermeant that schools didn't have to rely on the restrictivescheduling of the school broadcasts.2. Throughout the 1970's, the CBC itself was becomingless cooperative and comments were beginning to be heard suchas, "Education is a provincial mandate, so why is a federalagency like the CBC responsible?"3. Budget restraints caused the CBC to end itsresponsibilities to the school radio broadcasts.4. PEMC had developed its own production facilities andthis development begged the question that if the CBC was notkeen on continuing in its role with the school broadcasts, andPEMC now had its own production and dubbing facilities, whynot just use the PEMC facilities and leave the CBCarrangementiMUS.113111=11.101WW=141.14:311.11Manatm.M.M.,111WW19Ibid.liGroutage interview, 25 November 1991.53Regardless of the reasons which led to the demise of theschool radio broadcasts, it is unfortunate that although theCBC technical and administerial crew and Ministry of Educationstaff and administerial crew associated with the broadcastshave fond memories of the programs and recognized value in thebroadcasts, no attempt was made by the CBC or the Ministry ofEducation to archive any of the print material associated withschool programs. Gordon Inglis mentioned, "The CBC has littlearchived material as they didn't take much stock in keepingmaterial."2However limited, archive material when combined withinterviews of teachers who used the broadcasts, CBC personnel,and Ministry of Education who worked on the programs, made itpossible to recreate the experiences associated with BritishColumbia school radio. It's now time to turn to a summary ofthese experiences.101111/11117111117111117M1111121111.11.11111111.111:111117110■111rt4M1.21111a1111111311.01mnsflalltMna=-- 2Ingles interview, 4 May 1992.64Over and Out Chapter Five It is January 3, 1977 in Mrs. Petrich's grade ninehistory class. The class is beginning its study of the Battleof Hastings and, in preparation for this topic, Mrs. Petrichhas tuned in to today's broadcast. As usual, the students area little late in arriving and Mrs. Petrich is trying to getthem settled quickly. The musical opening begins and we heara man saying:This is 'On the Scene.' Through the magic ofthe microphone, time has stopped for us, reverseditself, and taken us back into what to us was once adark and mysterious past. Through the magic of themicrophone we can stop at any point in time, go anyplace, talk to anyone, and see anything. We can'thope to change history, but rather we can be witnessto it, as it happens, on the scene."Good Day.^This is Jack Turnball along withour 'On the Scene' reporters Jack Bingham and LionelMoore. It's autumn in the year 1066. The settingis the south coast of England near Hastings. Anymoment now, a battle will take place here. Who winsthat battle rules this land. But there is more atstake today than the possible displacing of one kingby another king. What is at stake is the possibledisplacing of one people by another people.On the one side are the Normans from thenorthern coast. The Normans are led by Duke Williamwho has collected the most formidable army theWestern nations have ever seen. On the other sideare the English led by King Harold. If the Englishwin this battle, they'll continue to be master intheir own land.^But if the English lose, they'lllose more than a battle and a king.^They'll losetheir land, language.^They'll lose theirinstitutions .1"M■1■49PRISIZUry.0.11:01314141■4=111M-1111■1117ttlit1111.11111111M141111-111MINUINS34.11■131CBC, "Decisive Battles in History," 3 January 1978,"Battle • of Hastings." Tape located in British ColumbiaProvincial Archives, Victoria, British Columbia.65Throughout the duration of the CBC radio schoolbroadcasts,' a majority of the teachers interviewed found theprograms, like January 3, 1978's "Battle of Hastings," to beinformative, interesting, and purposeful. The agreementstruck between the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and theBritish Columbia Department of Education established anamiable and effective educational radio broadcastingpartnership which stood the test of both time and practice.It is intriguing that despite the fact that educational policyis jealously guarded by each province, both regional andnational broadcasts were agreed upon.While the initial appeal of school radio broadcasts toteachers was due in large part to a lack of alternativeaudio-visual resources, the school broadcast audiencecontinued to grow into the 1970's, even during the rapidgrowth in service available from the Visual EducationDepartment. Such continued growth in listenership indicatedthat teachers found educational value within the programs. Itwas not until the introduction of television that the numberof schools listening decreased significantly.Teachers found that the school radio broadcastsprovided a break in the school day when they 'could catchtheir breath.' Throughout much of the last twenty-two yearsof the school radio broadcasts, teacher preparation time wasuncommon and the broadcasts provided a few minutes when directinstruction was not required. In addition, the broadcasts66added variety to the curriculum often bringing something thatclassroom teachers could not otherwise provide. In the caseof specialty subjects, such as music, interviewed teachersrelied upon the broadcasts to supplement a curriculum withwhich they were not totally confident. Teachers also believedthat the inflexibile scheduling of the school radio programsand the inability of the broadcasts to fit every teachers'curriculum at a given time were the disadvantages of schoolradio. Broadcasts of music, French, social studies, art, andlanguage arts continued to be listened to from 1960 through tothe early 1980's with admittedly wavering teacher and studentloyalty. The teachers I interviewed agreed that the qualityof the broadcasts and that of the supporting print materialwas very satisfactory. .CBC personnel, including a director, technicians,producers, sound effects specialists, and others, agreed thatalthough they did not find the work associated with schoolradio professionally challenging, it was beneficial and thatradio was a viable means to supplement to classroom education.Ministry of Education personnel had varying opinionsabout their experiences relating to school radio in BritishColumbia. All Ministry employees inferred that school radiowas both dynamic and educationally sound. Their opinions wereclosely tied to personality conflicts within the departmentresponsible for school broadcasts.When comparing the time period of the study with current67educational practice, a significant feature emerged.Generalist teachers today need support resources to teachspecialist subjects such as music and art, just as they didduring the time period of this study. In addition,generalist teachers also appreciate support resources invarious forms to add both variety and information to thecurriculum. However, because of assigned preparation time,today's teachers are probably less in need of a break thantheir predecessors. Nonetheless, the issue of how tocommunicate with teachers about available resources is onewhich must be addressed. British Columbia teachers becameaware of school radio broadcasts through various means: acolleague within the school, the wall poster, visitations byMinistry of Education personnel, teacher traininginstitutions, or by hearing them as a student. Instructionregarding new philosophies, materials, and technologies atteaching training facilities will reach some teachers. Largescale in-service instruction is necessary to reach themajority of teachers. But what of the staggering costsassociated with schools keeping technologically current? Assome schools reported the inability to purchase radios duringthe early years of school radio in British Columbia, it isclear that the challenge of keeping technologically current isnot a new one.1111101U1IMISSULIMMUIRMIIIIMIASISSUMMUSUISSIMIIMIIPMIMILSYMM:11:112119212M711112Philip J. Kitley, Report, 1946-1950, passim.^Again in1955-1956 Reports it was noted that seventy-one schools inBritish Columbia still did not have radios.68The last decade of the CBC radio school broadcasts was aperiod of dramatic behind-the-scenes change which, as therequirements of the work changed, resulted in a significantamount of stress within PEMC. However, for much of theduration of British Columbia school radio, there was littleconflict between the CBC, a federal instituion, and theindividual provinces. In addition, there was little conflictbetween provinces during negotiations for regional andnational broadcasts. Today, as lines between provincial andfederal authority are becoming more sharply drawn, it isinteresting to reflect on an era when at least some dimensionsof these two levels of government were able to workcooperatively.I found it unusual that there was not an explanation ineither the Ministry of Education Report or the CBC Report justifying the demise of the school radio broadcasts.However, schools do not operate in isolation, but are adynamic part of society's fabric and must respond to changingphilosophies, methods, values, and technologies within thatfabric. From the beginning of regularly scheduled CBC radioschool broadcasts in the 1940's, to the 1970's, our societywitnessed a great deal of change with respect to technology.Therefore, it is not surprising that teachers believed thatstudents' enthusiasm waned as radio became a minority mediumin society. When I interviewed teachers, Ministry ofEducation employees, and CBC personnel, I found they had69similar speculations as to why the broadcasts ended. Theadvent of a visually stimulating medium such as televiion, theintroduction of audio-visual equipment such as tape-recorderswhich enabled teachers to delay the listening of the broadcastto a more convenient time, and the implementation of arestrictive CBC budget were the reasons most often cited forthe ending the school broadcasts in 1982. In fact, mostinterviewees agreed that there was little either the CBC orPEMC could have done to prevent the cessation of the CBC radioschool broadcasts given the tremendous excitement over newerand more flexible technology. As an element of their owntechnological time, the era of school radio broadcasts wasover.Certain other areas of possible research grow out of thisstudy. A provincial exploration of British Columbia ruralteachers who used the school radio broadcasts would addanother dimension to the experiences reported here. Theeffectiveness of programs within rural classrooms isespecially pertinent as these programs were initially intendedfor the rural audience. Examination of school radiothroughout the country would reveal how the agreement betweenthe CBC and each province was realized. Further researchcould explore global experiences with educational radio and70more specifically school radio. An ni stori cal exploration ofschool radio in the United States, England, and Australiawould provide an opportunity to determine the extent thesecountries served as a model for Canadian school broadcasts. Amore in-depth study involving more countries would enable oneto examine the Canadian, or even the British Columbia,experience within a more global perspective.71Appendix A72Appendix BC assiftedStiscellaneousDoublesome position or research paper?Complete editing services. Privacy guaranteed. Fax,phone, or write: M.E. Aitken & Associates, PO Box345, Malahat, Victoria, BC VOR 2L0, Bus./Fax (604)478-7534.Summer 1992 teachers home exchange.Exchange your home with a colleague in Canada orUSA. Membership is free. A small fee will becharged only when exchange is agreed upon by bothparties. Take advantage of this exciting vacationalternative. For more information, write or call Vaca-tion Home Exchange, 3420 W. 15th Ave., Vancou-ver, BC V6R 2Z1. Phone (604) 736-6124. Fax (604)736-6184.Project Raptor. Owls, hawks, and falcons. Educa-tional programs with live birds of prey 8 years expe-rience. For brochure contact, Project Raptor, S.S. 1,Site 19-A0, Cranbrook, BC VIC 4H4. 489-2841.Looking for a new career? Hobby? Photogra-phy or video course taught by a professional. StewSendecki 596-7412.Fellow teacher is looking for distributors of anew DBS (satellite) communication system that willdown load movies, cable TV, computer software, liveevents and digital stereo audio to your home orschool. For information phone (902) 742-4887 orFAX: (902) 742-6760, Attn: R. MacConnell, or writeRR #1 South Ohio, Yarmouth Co., NS, BOW 3E0.Art Therapy Workshop for the exploration ofsexual abuse in childhood. A two weekend art ther-apy workshop for women and men who have beensexually abused in childhood. June 13 & 14 andJune 27 St 28. $200. Vancouver Art Therapy Insti-tute, 335-1425 Marine Drive, West Vancouver, BCV7T 1B9, Phone (604) 926-9381.IF— HELP! I'm researching the CBC Radio School Broad-, casts. If you were teaching in B.C. between' 1960-1981 I'd like to talk to you about your broad-cast memories. If you or your school has any of theprint material (wall schedules or teachers' guides)that accompanied the broadcasts. I'd like to seethem. Please call Laurie Ion 261-0659 or 939-4518(evenings) or 874-1161 (school).Bamfield Reunion 1992. A Bamfield Reunionwill be held in Parksville, B.C. on Oct. 16-19, 1992.Any teacherstaving taught in Bamfield prior to1963 wishing to attend, contact Dorothy Anderson,5919 Schooner Way, Nanaimo, BC V9V 1E8, phone7r0 7,74Teachers wanted for Sunday morning secularJewish children's programs, Sept-June. VancouverPerertAnstitute 325-1812.Wanted self-managed, entrepreneurial salesand training person to join growing managementconsulting group. Expertise in team building, strate-gic planning, change management and/or computersoftware application would be beneficial. Call254-7386.Childcare Available for July and August. At UBCDaycares, 3-5 year olds. Gall Sandra 228-0309.We are WEATHERDEK and we are Canada'sleading supplier of sheet vinyls used in thewaterproofing of sundecks, balconies, roof decks etc... If you are in a small town or rural area and look-ing for a way to earn extra money we may haveyour answer. This irywhat Rkhani Fonfier ofGirouxville school in Father, AB had to say aboutus, "I would recommend a Weatherdek Dealershipfor an individual who enjoys working with highquality products and a reputable company:' Totalstart up investment is $3500. We train you plus sup-ply you with excellent back up support. Phone us,lets talk, we may be what each other is looking for.1-800-667-2596.Live in a Native Longhouse 3 -day culturalimmersion sessions starting July 6. North Vancou-ver Outdoor School, Brackendale, BC. 980-5116.Join us! For the key to "Quality Relationshipsattend this one-day seminar presented by Jeff Timmand Christa Campsa at the Executive Inn in !Rich-mond, Saturday, August 15, 1992. $40/person. Formore information contact Proactive Raining an&Consulting, Box 438, Ganges, BC VOS 1E0, 681-1859in Vancouver, or 537-1015 or FAX 537-1021Summer Institute on Self-esteem (Empower-ing You and Your Students) Back by Request!Teacher Friendly Interative Raining. Monday, August17 to Friday, August 21, 1992 at Executive Inn inRichmond. Find out why other educators have ravedabout the training. Presenters are Jeff Timm, authorand international trainer from Florida. and ChrismCampsall, a local educator and facilitator. For moreinformation contact Proactive Raining and Consult-ing, Box 438, Ganges, BC VOS 1E0, 681-1859 inVancouver, or 537-1015, or FAX 537-1021.Early Retirement? New Lifestyle? SupplementTeaching Income? Own and operate a successfulfishing camp in the beautiful Cariboo. Family opera-tion with 1000 feet lake frontage and paved high-way access. Cabins, campsites, mobile home park,73Appendix C Interview About The CBC School Radio Broadcasts - 1960-1982The intent of the following interview is to inquire intoteacher practices and perceived student reactions to the CBCSchool Broadcasts from 1960-1982. I wish to investigateteachers' recollections of the CBC Scshool Broadcasts. I amparticularly interested in how and why the teachers made useof these school radio broadcasts. The initial question isvery open-ended to allow the interviewee time to reflectwithout narrowing his/her memories. The remaining questionsmay or may not be needed depending on how much information theinitial question provides.Part I - Memories of the CBC school radio broadcasts 1) What do you remember about using the CBC school radiobroadcasts?Part II - Teacher Background 2) In what school district(s) were you teaching when you wereusing the CBC school radio broadcasts?3) During what years did you use the CBC school radiobroadcasts in the classroom?4) Did you use other CBC materials produced for educatorssuch as the television broadcasts?5) With what grades did you use the CBC school radiobroadcasts?6) How did you initially become aware of the availability ofthe CBC school radio broadcasts?7) As you may know, the CBC school radio broadcasts stoppedin 1982. What reasons do you think the CBC or the Ministry ofEducation may have had at that time to stop the broadcasts?8) With respect to your situation, whose decision was it touse the CBC school radio broadcasts?74Part III - Use of the CBC school radio broadcasts9) How did you know what programs would be broadcast and whenthey would be broadcast?10) What preparation did you do with your students or foryourself before listening to a particular broadcast?11) How often did you use the CBC school radio broadcasts?12) How many minutes (approx.) was each session of listening?13) What curricular areas do you feel were extended byvarious CBC school radio broadcasts?14) What sort of activities were done (if any) to follow upthe listening sessions?15) Describe the reactions of your students to various CBCschool radio broadcasts.16) As a classroom teacher, what do you feel were the majorbenefits of the CBC school radio broadcasts?17) As a classroom teacher, what do you feel were the majorproblems with the CBC school radio broadcasts?Bibliography Those Interviewed Arntzen, Lloyd. Hudson Elementary School, Vancouver, BritishColumbia. Interview, 2 December 1991.Balden, Mary.^Retired Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 24 November 1991.Bertram, Frank.^Retired, Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 6 May 1992.Brown, Robert. Retired, North Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 6 July 1992.Brunker, Tom. Lord Kitchener Elementary School, Vancouver,British Columbia. Interview, 17 November 1991.Davey, Ken. Retired, Richmond, British Columbia. Interview,5 May 1992.Deshaies, Ruth. Graham Bruce Elementary, Vancouver, BritishColumbia. Interview, 3 June 1992.Eastholme, Lars.^Retired, Richmond, British Columbia.Interview, 14 April 1992.Fearon, Merrill.^Merrill Fearon Communications, Vancouver,British Columbia. Interview, 19 October 1992.Foster, Michael. Retired, North Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 13 April 1992.Groutage, Wayne. INS, Richmond, British Columbia. Interview,25 November 1991.Hardisty, Don. CBC, Vancouver, British Columbia. Interview,22 April 1992.Hart, Bernie.^Nova Scotia Ministry of Education employee,Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. Interview, 25 November 1992.Haworth, Peter.^Freelance actor, North Vancouver, BritishColumbia. Interview, 2 May 1992.Hovde, Gloria.^Teacher^Nana i mo, British Columbia.Interview, 3 July 1992.Horne, Don. Retired, Vancouver, British Columbia. Interview,27 April 1992.76Ingles, Gordon.^Retired, West Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview,^May 1992.James (n6e Marchewicz), Lydia.^L'Ecole Bilingue Elementary,Vancouver, British Columbia. Interview 21 May 1992.Jones, Marilyn.^David Livingstone Elementary School,VancOuver, British Columbia.^Interview, 13 November1991.Kilpatrick, Gordon. Retired Director of the Vancouver SchoolBoard's Audio-Visual Department, Langley, BritishColumbia. Interview, 3 May 1992.MacMillan, Alan.^Retired, Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 27 April, 1992.Matsu, Beverly.^Retired, Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 23 October, 1991.Paterson, Al. David Livingstone Elementary School, Vancouver,British Columbia. Interview, 12 November 1991.Paterson, Lois.^Cunningham Elementary School, Vancouver,British Columbia. Interview, 22 May 1992.Peters, Stan.^Retired, North Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 29 April 1992.Robb, Stephanie.^Retired, Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 20 November 1991.Rodgers, Dennis. Retired, North Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 15 April 1992.Smith, Gwen.^Mount Pleasant Elementary School, Vancouver,British Columbia. Interview, 13 November 1991.Stone, Sheila.^Retired, Vancouver, British Columbia.Interview, 25 November 1991.Sutherland, Dr. Neil.^University of British Columbia,Vancouver, British Columbia.^Interview, 23 November_1991.:77Other Printed and Audio Sources Alberta Ministry of Education Report, 1981-1982.^Edmonton:Queen's Printer, 1981-1982."Announcing Victor School Courses in Music Appreciation,"Advertisement in B.C. Teacher. (Vancouver: B.C.Teachers' Federation), Vol. VII, No. 9, May 1928.BBC.^Educational Television and Radio in Britain.^London:Billing & Sons, 1966.Bates, A.W. Broadcasting in Education:^An Evaluation. London: Constable, 1984.Blakely, Robert J. To Serve the Public Interest. Syracuse:Syracuse University Press, 1979.British Columbia Ministry of Education Report, 1938 - 1984.(Victoria: Queen's Printer).CBC, "Decisive Battles in History," 3 January 1978, "Battle ofHastings." Tape is located in British ColumbiaProvincial Archives, Victoria, British Columbia.CBC, "Getting Into Science,"^4 January 1977, "MolecularTheory."^Tape is located in British ColumbiaProvincial Archives, Victoria, British Columbia.CBC, "Like I Mean," 15 February 1977, "A Rose By Any OtherName." Tape is located in British Columbia ProvincialArchives, Victoria, British Columbia.CBC, "Pollution," 14 April 1972. Tape is located in BritishColumbia Provincial Archives, Victoria, British Columbia.CBC, "Stories In Our House,"^11 April 1961, "A Stamp toYugoslavia."^Tape is located in British ColumbiaProvincial Archives, Victoria, British Columbia.CENTO.^Conference of Executives From Radio and TV Organizations.^Ankara:^The Central TreatyOrganization, 1978.Eshgh, Ruth; Hoxeng, James; Provenzano, Johanna; Casals,Beatriz, ed. Radio-Assisted Community Basic Education.Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1988.Hawkridge, David; Robinson, John.^Organizing Educational Broadcasting. London: Croom Helm, 1982.78Jamison, Dean T.; McAnany, Emile G. Radio for Education and Development. London: Sage Publications, 1978.Lambert, Richard.^School Broadcastind in Canada.^Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 1963.Manitoba Department of Education, Report, 1981-1982.Winnipeg:^Manitoba Department of Education, 1981-1982.Saskatchewan Department of Education, Report, 1981-1982.Regina: Saskatchewan Department of Education, 1981-1982.Scottish Education Department.^Broadcasting and School Education  in Scotland.^Edinburgh:^Her Majesty'sStationery Office, 1984.Survey of Radio in Canadian Schools, Kathleen E. Collins,chairman. Ottawa: Canadian Teachers' Federation, 1956."Vi sual  Education,"^Advertisement i n B.C. Teacher.(Vancouver: B.C. Teachers ' Federation), Vol. XV, No. 1,September 1935.79


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items