children now (tv programming for kids citing pbs as leader) 2008 report_executives summary
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
1/18
childrennow.org i
Educationally/Insufcient?An Analysis o the Availability & Educational Quality o ChildrensE/I Programming
Executive Summary
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
2/18
In return or the ree use o publicly-owned television airwaves, broadcast
stations are required to air three hours per week o childrens educational/
inormational (E/I) programming. The guidelines that determine what
qualifes as an educational program do not address the quality o the
educational content. Thus, broadcasters have a great deal o discretion in
applying the E/I label to a wide range o programs designed or a young
audience. This study examines broadcasters commitments to serving the
needs o children by assessing the availability and educational quality o
their E/I programs.
Table o Contents
Introduction 1
The Childrens Television Act 2
The Issue o Quality in E/I Programming 3
Key Findings 4
The Educational Quality o E/I Programming 4
The Availability o E/I Programming 5
The Content o E/I Programming 7
A Comparison with Public Broadcasting 8
Spotlight on Quality 9
Conclusion 10
Methodology 11
Endnotes 12
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
3/18
Introduction
childrennow.org 1
any parents today have childhood memories o learning the letter o the dayrom Sesame Streetor how a bill becomes a law rom Schoolhouse Rock. For
those who grew up watching these classic educational programs, there is
little question about televisions ability to enrich young viewers minds. These parents
understand that, in addition to being entertaining, television can also support their
childrens educational development. The key is to fnd programs that contain high-
quality educational content.
Fortunately, television broadcasters are required to air three hours per week o
childrens educational programming and to label those programs with an educational/
inormational (E/I) icon so parents can identiy them. But how educational arebroadcasters E/I shows? Can parents eel confdent that programs designated by
broadcasters as educational do, in act, contain high-quality educational lessons?
What types o lessons do these E/I programs teach? And how likely are parents to fnd
E/I programming on broadcast television during the days and times their children
watch TV? Answering these questions is imperative to understanding the eectiveness
o childrens educational television.
M
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
4/18
2 Executive Summary: Educationally/Insufcient?
Such practices led the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)
to clariy its defnition o educational
programming, speciying that such showsmust (a) have education as a signifcant
purpose; (b) have a specifed learning goal
and target audience; (c) be aired on a regular
schedule between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00
p.m.; and (d) be labeled as E/I to identiy
the program to the public as educational/
inormational or children. In addition, the
FCC decided that stations would be expected
to air at least three hours per week o E/I
programming, a policy oten reerred to as
the Three-Hour Rule.
Research has frmly established that quality
educational television programming can
have signifcant positive eects on young
viewers cognitive and social development.1This evidence prompted Congress to enact
the Childrens Television Act o 1990 (CTA)
to ensure commercial broadcast television
stations provide programming specifcally
designed to serve the educational needs
o children in return or the ree use o
publicly-owned airwaves.
Congress passed the CTA with the intention
o increasing the availability o high-quality
educational programs, such as PBSs SesameStreetandMr. Rogers Neighborhood, oncommercial broadcast television. Since
its inception, however, broadcasters have
interpreted the CTA in various, and
sometimes disappointing, ways. For example,
some stations in the early 1990s inamously
claimed that broadcasts oThe Flintstonesand The Jetsonscounted as educational
programming because they taught children
about history and the uture, respectively.2
Congress passed the CTA with the
intention o increasing the availability o
high-quality educational programs, such
as PBSs Sesame Streetand Mr. Rogers
Neighborhood, on commercial broadcast
television.
The Childrens Television Act
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
5/18
childrennow.org 3
the Childrens Media Policy Coalition, the
FCC adopted additional rules in 2005 that
require broadcasters to include three hours
per week o E/I programming on each otheir digital television channels. This ruling
has the potential to increase the amount
o educational programming available to
children on ree, over-the-air television.
But this increase in quantity will beneft
children only i the educational quality o
the programs is high as well.
This study was undertaken to assess
broadcasters compliance with the CTA and
evaluate the industrys overall perormancein serving the needs o the child audience.
Conducted by leading media scholars Dr.
Barbara J. Wilson (University o Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign) and Dr. Dale Kunkel
(University o Arizona), this research
examines the quantity o E/I programming
oered on commercial broadcast stations
and evaluates the educational quality o the
30 most widely-aired childrens educational
programs. In order to provide a valuable
comparison to help judge the efcacy o theseshows, a small sub-sample o 10 childrens
programs on PBS was also evaluated. Three
randomly-selected episodes o each E/I series
were analyzed or their educational content.
We hope this study will serve as a new
benchmark o broadcasters compliance with
the CTA as we head into the era o digital
television and inspire ederal policy makers,
the media industry and parents to ensure that
all children have sufcient access to qualityeducational television programs.
Unortunately, this broad defnition o
educational does not address one actor
critical to the eectiveness o E/I programs:
the quality o the educational content.Without guidelines to ensure quality
standards, broadcasters have discretion
to apply the E/I label to a wide range o
programs designed or a young audience.
Shortly ater the Three-Hour Rule was
enacted in 1996, Dr. Amy Jordan and her
colleagues at the Annenberg Public Policy
Center at the University o Pennsylvania
began assessing the quantity and quality
o E/I programs on commercial broadcasttelevision.3 Their research revealed that
although most stations oered three hours
o E/I programming each week, the large
majority o shows had only moderate or
minimal educational quality. However, since
2000, no comparable research has been
conducted.
We are now entering a new age o
television. As analog television transitions
to a digital ormat, station owners will beable to broadcast up to six unique digital
channels rather than just one. At the urging
o Children Now and our colleagues in
We are now entering a new age
o television. As analog television
transitions to a digital ormat, station
owners will be able to broadcast up tosix unique digital channels rather than
just one.
The Issue o Quality in E/I Programming
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
6/18
4 Executive Summary: Educationally/Insufcient?
Key Findings
The Educational Quality
o E/I Programming
I the Childrens Television Act is to serve
its intended purpose, E/I programming
must achieve a reasonable standard o
educational quality. It takes more than a
story with a moral or an academic lesson or
a program to successully teach children.
Educational television must eature certain
characteristics in order to be eective (see
sidebar). Three hours per week is a relatively
small amount o time or broadcasters to
devote to enriching childrens educational
development. Thereore, we must insist
that those ew hours are flled with eective,
highly educational content.
63%23%
13%
Minimally
EducationalModerately
Educational
Highly
Educational
Educational Quality o E/I Episodes
on Commercial Channels
N= 90
Quality o E/I Episodes on Commercial Channels Over Time
Level o Educational Quality
Year Minimal Moderate High
1997-98 26% 46% 29%
1998-99 21% 46% 33%
1999-00 23% 57% 20%
2007-08 23% 63% 13%
The data prior to 2007 come rom Annenberg Public Policy Center reports on E/I programming conducted by Dr. Amy Jordan and
colleagues. (See endnote 3.)
Measuring Educational Quality
Six criteria were used to measure the educational quality o
each episode in the study.
ClarityHow directly or explicitly is the primary lesson
presented?
IntegrationHow oten is the primary lesson repeated or
incorporated in the program?
InvolvementHow engaging or absorbing is the primary
lesson?
ApplicabilityHow connected is the primary lesson to the
real world?
ImportanceHow valuable or useul is the primary lesson
to childrens development?
Positive ReinforcementTo what extent is learning,
including eort and mastery, rewarded?
Each criterion was judged on a 3-point scale rom low (0) to
medium (1) to high (2). Scores were then totaled, resulting in
a possible score o 0-12 or every episode.
Episodes that received a score o 0-6 were considered
minimally educational.
Episodes that received a score o 7-10 were considered
moderately educational.
Episodes that received a score o 11-12 were considered
highly educational.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
7/18
childrennow.org 5
Only one in eight E/I episodesearned a rating o highly educational.In contrast, nearly twice as many
were ound to have only minimaleducational value.
l O the 90 episodes analyzed, twelve (13%)
were ound to be highly educational,
meaning they achieved high scores on all
or nearly all o the six quality measures.
l Twenty-one episodes (23%) were judged
to be minimally educational, meaning that
they earned a low score on at least one
criterion and never had more than one
high score.l The largest share o episodes (63%) was
judged to be moderately educational.
There has been a substantial declinein high-quality educational programsover the years.
l The percentage o highly educational
episodes has decreased dramatically rom
previous years, during which highly
educational shows accounted or as muchas one-third o all E/I eorts.
l As the percentage o high-quality episodes
has declined, the percentage o moderately
educational episodes has increased rom
46% in 1997-98 to 57% in 1999-00 and
fnally to 63% in 2007-08.
l The proportion o minimally educational
episodes has remained airly constant with
previous years at nearly one out o every
our programs.
The Availability o
E/I Programming
Since 1996, broadcast stations have
consistently oered at least three hours
per week o E/I programming or children.
It is not surprising, then, that all but one
station in the study reported to the FCC
that they met this minimum requirement.
On average, however, children watch
three hours o televisionper day, every dayo the week.4 Recognizing this, the FCChas previously stated that broadcasters
must provide educational programming tochildren throughout the week, not just on
weekends alone.5
The majority o broadcast stationsappear to treat their three-hourrequirement as a three-hour limit.
l A large majority o stations (59%) provided
the least possible amount o programming
three hours per week, an average o
about 25 minutes per day.
Broadcasters Weekly Hours o
E/I Programming
Amount o
E/I Programming
Percent o
Stations
Less than 3.0 hours per week 1%
3.0 hours per week 59%
3.1 to 4.0 hours per week 37%
4.1 or more hours per week 3%
N= 135
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
8/18
Key Findings (continued)
l Only 3% o stations exceeded our hours
per week o E/I programming.
l Market size was negatively related with
the amount o E/I programs oered.
Stations in the largest markets delivered
the lowest average amount o childrens
educational shows, at three hours and 10
minutes per week, whereas stations in
the smallest markets averaged the most
programming, at roughly three and a hal
hours per week.
The vast majority o broadcasters
scheduled E/I programming exclusivelyon weekends.
lOnly one-quarter o stations oered
E/I programming on any weekday. The
remaining stations (75%) oered E/I
shows solely on Saturdays or Sundays.
lMarket size was negatively related with
better service to children. The largest
markets had the lowest percentage o
stations that aired weekday programming
(22%), whereas the smallest markets had
the highest percentage (32%).
6 Executive Summary: Educationally/Insufcient?
Market Size
Small Medium Large Major Overall
Average hours per
week3.49 3.41 3.23 3.18 3.32
Stations with any
weekday shows32% 26% 28% 22% 25%
n = 28 n = 35 n = 35 n = 37 N= 135
Amount and Scheduling o Childrens E/I Programming
The Range o Station Commitments to Children
KFVE (Honolulu)This station averaged 5.5 hours per week o childrens E/I
content during the ourth quarter o 2007, placing it near the top
industry-wide in overall amount o programming. It presented
highly-acclaimed shows or dierent age groups, including
Where on Earth is Carmen Sandiego?or younger children
and Beakmans Worldor older children and teens. The station
provided E/I programming every day o the week except Sunday.
KSAT (San Antonio)
This station averaged exactly 3.0 hours per week o core
E/I programming in the ourth quarter o 2007. Its oerings
included fve dierent hal-hour programs, one o which (Thats
So Raven) aired twice each week in back-to-back time slots.
All o the shows were provided by the parent network, so
the stations schedule looked identical to that o most ABC
afliates. Its entire slate o E/I shows appeared solely on
Saturday mornings. Only one o its series (The Suite Lie o
Zack and Cody) scored high in educational quality.
WZMY (Boston)
This station aired just one childrens educational program series,
Degrassi: The Next Generation, during the entire ourth quarter o
2007. Since the series targets children, ages 13-16 (the program
is rated TV-PG), the station provided no service to children, ages
12 and under. In its FCC fling, the station claimed it presented
the show 73 times during the period between October 1 and
December 31, averaging exactly three hours per week overall.
Because this series was in its seventh year o production in 2007,
and it delivered a total o only 24 new episodes that entire year,
the station had to re-run shows rom several previous seasons
in order to ulfll its weekly three-hour minimum requirement.
Programs were oered on weekends and weekdays, but the
schedule varied during the time period studied.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
9/18
The Content o
E/I Programming
Social-emotional programs aim to teach
the viewer lie lessons about personal
eelings and interpersonal relationships.
Cognitive-intellectual programs oer
more traditionally academic lessons and
inormation on acts, ideas and concepts
related to existing knowledge or ways o
thinking. A third type o lesson, ocusing
on health and nutrition messages, was also
identifed in the study. In 2005, the Institute
o Medicine called on the media industry
to include more health-related messages
in childrens programs in an eort to help
combat childhood obesity.6 All three types
o content can provide valuable inormation
or children o all ages. An ideal educational
media environment should oer an ample
amount o quality content o each type.
The large majority o E/I episodeseatured social-emotional lessonsrather than academically ocused
cognitive-intellectual lessons.
lTwo out o three episodes (67%) eatured
a social-emotional lesson as the primary
ocus.
lThe majority o lessons in social-emotional
episodes ocused on issues o positive
interaction with others (26%), sel-esteem
(18%) or sel-restraint (12%).
lLess than one in three episodes (30%)
contained a cognitive-intellectual lesson as
the primary message.
Health and nutrition messages wereextremely rare.
lThe remaining 3% o the episodes ocused
on health as the primary lesson. Each o
these health episodes (n = 3) came rom asingle TV series, The Adrenaline Project.
childrennow.org 7
Primary Lessons in Commercial Broadcast
E/I Episodes
67%
Social-emotional
30%
Cognitive-
intellectual
3% Health
N= 90
An ideal educational media environment
should oer an ample amount o quality
cognitive-intellectual, social-emotional
and health-related content.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
10/18
Key Findings (continued)
Hundreds o empirical studies have shown
that extensive exposure to television violence
can contribute to the learning o aggressive
attitudes and behaviors in children.7Furthermore, there is growing evidence that
the inclusion o physically violent content
may interere with childrens learning o
social-emotional or cognitive-intellectual
lessons.8 These negative eects o violent
material on childrens behavior and learning
undermine the purpose o E/I programming.
In addition, several recent studies have
documented that children can learn social
aggression rom viewing programs thatdepict and explicitly model such behavior.9
Social aggression reers to behavior
designed to harm another persons sel-
esteem or social status. Although some may
argue that social aggression is necessary
to teach social-emotional lessons about
appropriate interpersonal behavior, all too
oten such behavior is used gratuitously as a
comedic device rather than as a storytelling
device. For example, name-calling and
teasing are used to get a laugh, not to teachthat they are inappropriate behaviors.
Because E/I programs are intended to
teach positive behaviors and not model
inappropriate ones, episodes in this study
were examined or their inclusion o both
physical and social aggression.
A substantial proportion o E/Iprograms eatured high levels oaggression.
lMore than one-quarter o E/I episodes
(28%) was ound to be high in aggressive
content, meaning they contained numerous
instances o either physical or social
aggression throughout the program.
lA high level o aggressive behavior, especially
social aggression, was more likely to be ound
in programs that taught social-emotional
lessons (37%) than in programs that taught
cognitive-intellectual content (7%).
Social aggression was more commonlyeatured than physical violence.
lSocial aggression was ound in over hal
(57%) o all E/I episodes, with 21%
eaturing a lot and 36% containing
some social aggression. Less than hal
o the episodes (43%) contained no social
aggression at all.
lPhysical aggression appeared less requently
in E/I programs, although 40% includedone or more violent depictions.
A Comparison with
Public Broadcasting
To enhance the perspective o the assessment
o E/I programs on commercial broadcast
stations, the content and quality o 10
randomly-selected educational shows on
8 Executive Summary: Educationally/Insufcient?
Amount o Aggression Physical Aggression Social Aggression
A lot 8% 21%
Some 32% 36%
None 60% 43%
Aggression in E/I Episodes on Commercial Channels
Note. For this analysis, N= 90.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
11/18
Spotlight on Series Quality
This report has, until now, ocused on the
content and quality o individual E/I episodesthat air on commercial or public broadcast
television. Now we turn our attention to
a broader assessment o program series,
specifcally those that achieved a high level o
educational quality.
childrennow.org 9
Eight commercial and public broadcastseries earned an exemplary rating ortheir educational content.
Sesame Street(PBS)
Beakmans World(Commercial)
Between the Lions(PBS)
3-2-1 Penguins(Commercial)
Cyberchase (PBS)
The Suite Lie o Zack and Cody (Commercial)
Fetch! with Ru Ruman (PBS)
Teen Kids News(Commercial)
It is interesting to note that this is a very
diverse group o programs: they target allage groups, rom toddlers to teens; they deal
with both social-emotional and cognitive-
intellectual subject matter; they are animated
and live action; and they appear on both
commercial and public broadcast stations.
Furthermore, none o these exemplary
programs contained a high amount o
physical or social aggression, underscoring
that eective educational programming can
be accomplished without the use o violence.
Educational Quality o E/I Programming as a Function o
Channel Type
7.9
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Commercial PBS
QualityScore
(0-12)
9.1
PBS were also analyzed. The results reveal
that PBS oers some o the most highly
educational programs on broadcast television
and serves as a model o successul educationalprogramming or commercial broadcasters.
Educational programs on PBS weremore likely to contain high-qualitylessons that ocused on cognitive-intellectual content, and less likelyto contain aggression, than wereprograms on commercial stations.
l Public broadcast episodes scored, on
average, more than a ull point higher on
the quality assessment (9.1) than did thoseairing on commercial channels (7.9).
l The type o primary lesson diered
signifcantly by channel type, as public
broadcast episodes were more likely to
eature a cognitive-intellectual lesson
(55%) than were episodes airing on
commercial stations (31%).
l Commercial stations were more than
twice as likely to oer programs with
high levels o physical or social aggression(28%) compared to public television
stations (13%).
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
12/18
Recommendations
The FCC
We believe the FCC has a responsibility
to children and their amilies to make sure
that the Childrens Television Act ulflls its
promise. We thereore call on the FCC to
implement the ollowing policy changes:
lStrengthen the guidelines or what
constitutes an E/I program.
lActively monitor broadcasters
compliance with the CTA.
lRespond quickly to public complaintsabout the adequacy o broadcasters
CTA compliance.
Industry
We challenge broadcasters and childrens
television producers to take the ollowing
steps to improve the quality and availability
o their E/I programs:
lConsider the six criteria o highly
educational programs when developingnew productions.
lFind creative ways to teach educational
lessons without resorting to the use o
social or physical aggression.
lOer more programs that emphasize
cognitive-intellectual and health-related
lessons.
lOer more than the required
minimum o three hours per week o
E/I programs, and schedule shows onweekdays as well as on weekends.
10 Executive Summary: Educationally/Insufcient?
Conclusion
Television broadcasters in the United States
have been given a tremendous gitthe
opportunity to use the nations publicly-
owned airwaves ree-o-charge. But withthat opportunity comes the responsibility
to use the power o their resources to
oster the educational development o
young viewers. This research shows that
commercial broadcasters are currently
meeting the minimum time requirements o
the Childrens Television Act by consistently
providing three hours o E/I programming
each week.
We applaud the media companies or adheringto the letter o the CTA, but question whether
their eorts truly live up to the spirit o the
law. When only one in eight E/I episodes
is highly educational and nearly twice as
many are defcient in educational merits;
when ew broadcasters oer more than the
bare minimum o programming and confne
their entire E/I schedule to one or two days
o the week; when more than one-quarter
o E/I shows model harmul violent or
socially-aggressive behavior; and when thevast majority o programs contain no basic
academic or health-related lessons, it is
difcult to see how broadcasters eorts are
sufciently serving the educational needs o
the nations children.
This research illustrates ar too many
weaknesses in the broadcast industrys
eorts to provide childrens educational
programming. Creating the change
necessary to guarantee quality educationaltelevision programming will require
action rom everyone who plays a role in
this system, including policymakers, the
broadcast industry and parents. Following
are Children Nows recommendations
or steps that should be taken by all
stakeholders to ensure the Childrens
Television Act lives up to its promise.
We applaud the media companies or adhering
to the letter o the CTA, but question whether
their eorts truly live up to the spirit o the law.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
13/18
Parents
Parents are the gatekeepers o their childrens
media use and thereore have an important
role to play in providing them with high-
quality educational programming. Following
are some steps parents could take to improve
their childrens media environment:
lSeek out programs that display the E/I
symbol on screen.
lWatch television with your kids and
look or the six criteria o highly
educational shows to judge or yoursel
which programs are educational and
which are not (see back cover).
lContact the FCC and fle a complaint
against a station i you eel an E/I show
does not adequately meet educational
standards.
A nationally representative, stratifed sample
o 24 television markets was chosen or
inclusion in this study. The E/I program
oerings or all major commercial broadcastchannels in these markets were examined
during the ourth quarter o 2007, specifcally
ocusing on the amount o E/I programming
oered and the placement o E/I programs in
the stations weekly schedules.
Series that aired in more than one-third o
the sampled markets were identifed, and
three randomly-selected episodes rom
each o those series were recorded between
November 2007 and May 2008 or urtherinvestigation. The content o the episodes
was analyzed using a range o measures,
including the age o the target audience,
the type o educational message, and the
presence o physical and social aggression.
The quality o each episodes primary
educational message was evaluated using an
index o educational value based on six key
criteria: clarity, integration, involvement,
applicability, importance and positivereinorcement (see page 9). Each variable was
judged on a 0-2 scale (0 = low, 1 = medium,
2 = high). Scores or all six criteria were then
summed, resulting in a quality index score or
each episode that could range rom 0 to 12.
Episodes with scores o 6 or less were
classifed as minimally educational; episodes in
this group typically had a low rating (score
o 0) or at least one o the criteria and never
had more than one high rating across all six
criteria. Episodes with scores o 7 to 10 were
classifed as moderately educational. Episodeswith scores o 11 and 12 were rated as high
on at least fve o the six criteria and were
classifed as highly educational. In order toprovide a basis or comparison, three episodes
each o ten randomly selected E/I shows
on PBS were also examined using the same
childrennow.org 11
Methodology
Parents are the gatekeepers o their childrensmedia use and thereore have an important
role to play in providing them with high-quality
educational programming.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
14/18
criteria. In addition, quality scores or all three
episodes o each series were averaged. Series
that earned an average quality score o 10 or
above were given an exemplary rating.
For the assessment o physical and social
aggression, we defnedphysical aggression as theovert depiction o a credible threat o physical
orce or the actual use o such orce intended
to physically harm an animate being.10
Examples o physical aggression include
hand-to-hand fghting such as kicking and
punching, use o weapons such as guns and
bombs, and intentionally harmul acts such
as tying someone to railroad tracks. Physicalaggression does not include accidents, natural
disasters or animals attacking other animals in
their natural environment.
Social aggression was defned as any behaviordesigned to harm an animate beings sel-
esteem or social status.11 Examples o social
aggression include derisive name-calling,
socially ostracizing someone, gossiping and
spreading hurtul rumors. We coded the
amount o both physical and social aggressionin E/I episodes. Episodes were judged as
having no aggression (0), some aggression (1)
or a lot o aggression (2).
Complete inormation about all aspects
o the research methodology can be
ound in the ull report, available at www.
childrennow.org/eireport.
Endnotes
1. Kirkorian, H. L., & Anderson, D. R. (2008). Learningrom educational media. In S. L. Calvert & B. J. Wilson(Eds.), The handbook o children, media, and development(pp. 188-213). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Mares, M., & Woodard, E. H. (2005). Positive eectso television on childrens social interactions: A meta-analysis.Media Psychology, 7, 301-322.
2. Center or Media Education (1992). A report onstation compliance with the Childrens TelevisionAct. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University LawCenter, Institute or Public Representation.
Kunkel, D., & Canepa, J. (1994). Broadcasters licenserenewal claims regarding childrens educational program-ming.Journal o Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38,397- 416.
3. Jordan, A. B. (1998). The 1998 state o childrens televisionreport: Programming or children over broadcast and cabletelevision. Philadelphia, PA: The Annenberg Public PolicyCenter, University o Pennsylvania.
Schmitt, K. L. (1999). The three-hour rule: Is it living upto expectations? Philadelphia, PA: The Annenberg PublicPolicy Center o the University o Pennsylvania.
Jordan, A. B. (2000).Is the three-hour rule living up to itspotential? Philadelphia, PA: The Annenberg Public PolicyCenter o the University o Pennsylvania.
4. Kaiser Family Foundation (2005). Generation M: Media inthe lives o 8-18 year-olds.Menlo Park, CA: Author.
5. FCC, Childrens Television Report and Policy Statement,Nov. 6, 1974, at paragraphs 26-27.
6. Institute o Medicine. (2005)Food marketing to childrenand youth: Threat or opportunity? Washington, D.C.:National Academies Press.
7. Anderson, C.A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E.,Huesmann, L.R., Johnson, J.D., Linz, D., et al. (2003).The infuence o media violence on youth. Psychological Sciencein the Public Interest, 4, 81-110.
Bushman, B. J., & Huesmann, L. R. (2006). Short-termand long-term eects o violent media on aggressionin children and adults.Archives o Pediatric & AdolescentMedicine, 160, 348-352.
Paik, H., & Comstock, G. (1994). The eects otelevision violence on anti-social behavior: A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 21, 516-546.
8. Bushman, B. J., & Phillips, C. M. (2001). I the television
program bleeds, memory or the advertisement recedes.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 44-47.
Bushman, B. J., & Bonacci, A. M. (2002). Violence andsex impair memory or television ads.Journal o AppliedPsychology, 87, 557-564.
9. Coyne, S. M., Archer, J., & Elsea, M. (2004). Cruelintentions on television and in real lie: Can viewingindirect aggression increase viewers subsequent indirectaggression? Journal o Experimental Child Psychology,88, 234-253.
Martins, N. (2008). Social aggression on television andits relationship to childrens aggression in the classroom.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University o Illinoisat Urbana-Champaign
Ostrov, J. M., Gentile, D. A., & Crick, N.R. (2006).
Media exposure, aggression, and prosocial behaviorduring early childhood: A longitudinal study. SocialDevelopment, 15, 612-627.
10. Wilson, B., Kunkel, D., Linz, D., Potter, W.,Donnerstein, E., Smith, S., Blumenthal, E., & Gray,T. (1997). Violence in television programming overall:University o Caliornia Santa Barbara study. InNationalTelevision Violence Study, Volume 1.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.
11. Galen, B. R., & Underwood, M. K. (1997). Adevelopmental investigation o social aggression amongchildren. Developmental Psychology, 33, 589-600.
12 Executive Summary: Educationally/Insufcient?
Methodology (continued)
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
15/18
Credits
Research conducted by: Barbara J. Wilson, Ph.D.; Dale Kunkel, Ph.D.;and Kristin L. Drogos, M.A.
Executive Summary written by: Christina Romano Glaubke, M.A.; BarbaraJ. Wilson, Ph.D.; and Dale Kunkel, Ph.D.
Editorial Assistance: Eileen Espejo, Brian Kennedy, Ronald Pineda andKristi Schutjer-Mance.
Design by: Dennis Johnson Design
Acknowledgments
Children Now would like to thank The David B. Gold Foundation, TheGoldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund, and the Otto Haas Charitable Trustor their generous support o this research.
Children Now would also like to thank the ollowing individuals who made
important research and/or technical contributions in the conduct o thisstudy:
University o ArizonaVanessa Garrison and Stephen Whitney
University o Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignZachary Benkowski, Jacquelyn Grimes, Kelsie Hughes, Kylie Hughes,David Isaacson, Caitlin Kolkau, Erica Larivee, Susan Lester, Caroline Roth,Lee Ann Sangalang, Ashley Spinozzi and Ryan Wildy
Children Now Board o Directors
Jane Gardner, Board Chair Harbour Consulting
Peter D. Bewley, Vice Chair The Clorox Company (Retired)Neal Baer, M.D. Wol Films/Universal Television
Laura Casas Frier Foothill-De Anza Community College District
Georey Cowan USC, Annenberg School or Communication
Jim Cunneen Caliornia Strategies, LLC
John Garcia Kaiser Permanente
David G. Johnson Johnson-Roessler Company
Allan K. Jonas Jonas & Associates
Donald Kennedy Science Magazine
Gay Krause Foothill College, Krause Center or Innovation
Ted Lempert Children Now
Lenny Mendonca McKinsey & Company
Theodore R. Mitchell NewSchools Venture FundMolly Munger English, Munger & Rice
Craig A. Parsons Communications Consultant
Hon. Cruz Reynoso UC Davis, School o Law
Karen Schievelbein UnitedHealth Group
Katharine Schlosberg, Ed.D. Educational Consultant
James P. Steyer Common Sense Media
Michael Tollin Tollin/Robbins Productions
Gloria Tristani Spiegel & McDiarmid
Jennie Ward Robinson, Ph.D. Institute or Public Health and Water Research
Grace K. Won Farella Braun + Martel LLP
Parents: Detach this
reerence card to use while
watching television with
your kids. Be sure to look
or the six criteria o highly
educational programs to
judge or yoursel which
shows are educational and
which are not.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
16/18
Children Now is a nonpartisan research and
advocacy organization working to raise childrens
well-being to the top o the national policy agenda.
The organization ocuses on ensuring quality
health care, a solid education and a positive media
environment or all children. Children Nows
strategic approach creates awareness o childrens
needs, develops eective policy solutions and
engages those who can make change happen.
Children Now
1212 Broadway, 5th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
childrennow.org
Phone: 510.763.2444
Email: [email protected]
Printed on recycled paper.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
17/18
Parents: Judge or Yoursel!
1. Watch television with your kids.
2. Look or the inclusion o the six criteria o highly educational
programs listed below.
3. Judge or yoursel how educational they really are.
ClarityHow easily can you identify the primary lesson?
A lesson with good clarity is easy to understand, straightorward
and obvious.
A lesson with poor clarity is difcult to identiy and may be
hidden by distractions, unclear dialogue or other subplots within
the episode.
IntegrationHow often do you hear or see the
primary lesson?
A lesson with good integration is repeated or demonstrated
multiple times throughout the episode.
A lesson with poor integration is separated rom other program
content and may not seem related to the main plot or storyline.
InvolvementHow engaging and interesting is the
lesson for the viewer? An episode with good lesson involvement makes a strong and
consistent eort to get the viewers attention. Some techniques
can increase involvement, such as speaking directly to the
viewer, tying the lesson to emotionally involving content and/or
using popular characters.
An episode with poor involvement does not engage the viewer
in the primary lesson.
ApplicabilityIs the primary lesson connected to the
real world?
An episode with good applicability shows how the primary
lesson relates to the everyday experiences o a typical child.
An episode with poor lesson applicability does not demonstrate
how the inormation is relevant to the childs everyday world.
ImportanceHow valuable or useful is the primary
lesson to the viewer?
A lesson that is high in importance is one that is crucial or a child
to learn.
A lesson that is low in importance is one that holds little utility or
a childs development.
Positive reinforcementIs effort or successful learning
rewarded?
An episode that is high in positive reinorcement includes
eatures that support motivation or learning, such as cheering a
character on, rewarding a character or accomplishments, having
a character show pride in what is learned and/or verbally praising
a character. Positive reinorcement also can be delivered directly
to the viewer (e.g., Good job!).
An episode that is low in positive reinorcement does not show
characters receiving praise or rewards or their eort or success
at learning a lesson.
For more inormation visit, www.childrennow.org/eireport.
Parents: Detach this
reerence card to use while
watching television with
your kids. Be sure to look
or the six criteria o highly
educational programs to
judge or yoursel which
shows are educational and
which are not.
-
8/14/2019 Children Now (TV Programming for Kids Citing PBS as Leader) 2008 Report_Executives Summary
18/18
Children Now is a nonpartisan research and
advocacy organization working to raise childrens
well-being to the top o the national policy agenda.
The organization ocuses on ensuring quality
health care, a solid education and a positive media
environment or all children. Children Nows
strategic approach creates awareness o childrens
needs, develops eective policy solutions and
engages those who can make change happen.
Children Now
1212 Broadway, 5th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
childrennow.org
Phone: 510.763.2444
Email: [email protected]
The guidelines on the reverse are rom Children
Nows study, Educationally/Insufcient? An Analysis
o the Availability & Educational Quality o Childrens
E/I Programming, which is available to the public at
www.childrennow.org/eireport .