IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. E-21, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1978

TABLE 1TV-LECTURING TERMINAL EQUIPMENT

Estimated cost (XlOOO $)

Equipment Content Sequential Concurrenttrans. s3ys. trans. Sys.

Video ,Color and monochrometerminals TV-camieras etc. 35 35

Video *Video switchers 20 30*switching .Video amps. etc.equipmentFramememory 0 15Audio 'IMixer amps.equipment *Anti singing 25 25

circuit_ *Mike and speakers

Totalcost

* This includes frame multiplexers.

system was very convenient.

80 105

More than 70% ofteachers said that they would utilize the system in alecture which would require more than 30 minutes oftravelling to go to the audience room.

6 CONCLUSIONThis paper has presented a new idea of frame multiplexing

transmission technique and its application to TV-lecturingsystem. A remote lecture service in the future will be requiredto be natural to receive and low in cost. In order to meetthese requirements, the TV-lecturing system considered hereis based on the following concepts;

1) Various kinds of pictures, such as a teacher image, ablackboard image, an OHP image etc. are transmittedconcurrently and displayed simultaneously.

2) In order to reduce the transmission cost, various kindsof picture signals mentioned in 1) are compressed intoone video channel with the use of frame multiplexingtransmission techniques.

Through laboratory tests, it has been shown that the systempresented here is one possible method for furnishing remotelecture capabilities at low service cost.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to thank Dr. T. Morinaga, Dr. T. Omori,Mr. K. Yamagishi and Dr. T. Kamae for their helpful sugges-tions in the course of the research. The authors also thankMr. K. Aizawa and Mr. H. Takahashi for their cooperationwith the authors in manufacturing the experimental system.

REFERENCES

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

J. M. Pettit and D. J. Grace, "The Stanford instructional televisionnetwork," IEEE Spectrum pp. 73-80, May 1970.D. C. Coll, et al. "Multidisciplinary Applications of Communica-tion System in Teleconferencing and Education," IEEE Trans.Commun., vol. COM-23, No. 10, pp. 1104-1118, October 1975.T. Kamae, et al. "Considerations on Still-Picture CommunicationSystems," in Proc. National Telecom. Conf., pp. 97-101, 1974.H. Ando, et al, "Still-Picture Broadcasting-A New Informationaland Instructional Broadcasting System," IEEE Trans. Broad-casting, vol. BC-19, No. 3, pp. 68-76, Sept. 1973.

Educational Objectives for Science, Technology,Society, and Values Programs

J. C. MATHES, MEMBER, IEEE, AND KAN CHEN, FELLOW, IEEE

Abstract-Because science, technology, society, and values coursesand programs are interdisciplinary, directly address social change, andmust be future oriented, new guidelines for defming educational objec-tives must be developed. Five categories of specific objectives that canhelp a teacher design a unique course or groups of courses are: 1) edu-cational objectives concerned with cultural attitudes toward socialchange; 2) educational objectives concerned with the ability to analyzefuture developments; 3) educational objectives concerned with basic

Manuscript received April 25, 1977. This work was supported inpart by the National Endowment for the Humanities under GrantAV-23912-75-5888 and the National Science Foundation underGrant EPP-7518407.

J.C. Mathes is with the Department of Humanities, College ofEngineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.

K. Chen is with the Department of Electrical and ComputerEngineering, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, AnnArbor, MI 48109.

and applied problem-solving skills; 4) educational objectives concernedwith analytical and synthesizing skills; 5) educational objectives con-cerned with values considerations. The educator should determinewhich categories of objectives to focus on and which specific objectiveswithin these categories to emphasize. These categories and specificobjectives are presented as a heuristic aid-rather than a constraint-forcourse and program design.

THE NEED TO CLARIFY EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVESDURING the past five years many college courses and

programs addressing the interactions between science,technology, society, and values have been developed. Thesehave arisen, of course, in response to societal problems, suchas the degradation of the urban environment, familiar to us all.The programs are designed to educate engineers about the

0018-9359/78/0200-0027$00.75 © 1978 IEEE

27

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. E-21, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1978

societal implications of technological problem solving, scien-tists about the ethical implications and societal impacts ofscientific discovery, and liberal arts students about the intri-cacies of the technological society in which they participate ascitizens and about the cultural relevance of scientific rationality.Development of these courses and programs poses unique

educational problems because the subject matter is cross-disciplinary or interdisciplinary and because most programsare designed to address societal problems and future societalneeds that are ill-defined. Traditional programs based on tra-ditional modes of education are inadequate or inappropriatebecause they have not been designed to address interactionsof science and technology with society and individuals. Thesenew programs attempt to respond to the societal problems atthe interfaces between scientific, technological, sociological,and humanistic concerns. Thus they address interdisciplinarysubject areas not easily defined by the perspectives and meth-odologies of any single discipline or group of related disciplines(e.g., social sciences, humanities, etc.).These new courses and programs on science, technology,

society, and values usually assume a social problem-solvinggoal. This implies a set of educational objectives not intrinsicto the usual disciplines and areas of study. The programs dealdirectly with societal change, and must delineate their roles infacilitating such change. The programs incorporate some formof problem solving approach and skills. The programs shoulddirectly consider value implications. Finally, the programs arefuture oriented as a result of increasing social awareness of theeffects of science and technology on society and of the increas-ing demand for considering the long range impacts of near-termsocial actions.To help educators define and clarify educational objectives

for these interdisciplinary programs, in this paper we presentcategories of specific objectives that can be used as a guide tostimulate thinking about appropriate course and programobjectives. We present five categories of objectives to suggestthe types of objectives these courses are likely to address.Within each category we suggest several different and some-times conflicting specific objectives. We hope that thesecategories and specific objectives will provide a means bywhich a teacher can define alternatives and thus design acourse or group of courses with an integrated and perhapsunique set of specific educational objectives.

In the discussion that follows by the term "educationalobjective," we mean a statement of performance or outcomeobjective that can be used to design a course. A performanceobjective defines one particular change in a student's substan-tive knowledge, conceptual skills, or attitudes that a course inpart is intended to produce and that can be observed and eval-uated to help determine the success of the course. Engineeringeducators are quite at ease with educational objectives definedin performance terms, although as all teachers they may havesome difficulty with objectives that address attitudes and values.

FIVE CATEGORIES OF EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVESOur categories ofeducational objectives in general are derived

from our assumption that science, technology, society andvalues courses and programs have been developed in response

to the social concerns of the past decade and from an awarenessof the problems and opportunities of a transition to a post-industrial society. The particular educational objectives pre-sented here were defined in a research project addressing theneed to clarify objectives for these courses and programs [1],and thus represent suggestions of educators who have developedprograms in this area.We present five categories of educational objectives:1. Educational objectives concerned with cultural attitudes

toward social change.2. Educational objectives concemed with the ability to

analyze future developments.3. Educational objectives concerned with basic and applied

problem solving skills.4. Educational objectives concerned with analytical and

synthesizing skills.5. Educational objectives concerned with values considera-

tions.These categories are meant to be suggestive rather than pre-scriptive, and for any particular course and program any ofthese could well be complemented by other types of objectives.

1. Educational Objectives Concerned With Cultural AttitudesToward Social ChangeWhat attitude toward social change is adopted by the program

and inculcated in the student? This category primarily ad-dresses attitudes rather than skills. Given the dynamic natureof the societal problems addressed, these programs explicitlyor implicitly must establish particular attitudinal and valueobjectives along a spectrum with advocacy of change at oneextreme and facilitation of change at the other. Advocacy ofchange implies manipulation of societal structures and dy-namics, and facilitation of change implies an accommodationto societal structures and dynamics. Specific educationalobjectives would be generated within this dichotomy. Someof the possible objectives in this category would be:To develop in the student an awareness of the importance of

inducing significant change in social goals.To develop in the student a critical attitude toward current

institutions, policies, attitudes, values, and ideologies.To develop in the student an awareness of the importance of

social continuity and orderly development.To develop in the student an awareness that significant

change in social institutions and public policies is needed.To develop in the student an awareness that significant

change in individual values and attitudes is necessary.To develop in the student an awareness of the importance of

arbitrating and facilitating necessary change.To teach students to challenge Western paradigms.To teach students to accept Western paradigms.

In terms familiar to many students, a program in general willeither encourage them to change the system or to work withinthe system, or else a program will attempt to have studentsstrive for some resolution between these two alternatives.Teachers and students alike will benefit from explicit defini-tion of affective instrumental educational objectives in thiscategory.

28

MATHES AND CHEN: EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES

2. Educational Objectives Concerned With The Ability ToAnalyze Future DevelopmentsWhat skills and perspectives are stressed to enable students

to cope with the future? This category involves relationshipsbetween skills and attitudes. It derives from a unique concern

introduced by the societal problems addressed-a concern forthe future. The programs have an element of "futurism"usually not present explicitly in other types of educationalprograms. These programs must establish specific educationalobjectives along a spectrum with normative futures at one

extreme and extrapolative futures at the other. A normativefuture is an image of the future derived from desired valuesand goals, whereas an extrapolative future is an image of thefuture projected from present values and goals as well as pres-

ent societal tendencies. Specific educational objectives wouldbe generated within this dichotomy. Some of the possibleobjectives in this category would be:To develop in the student an acceptance of a prescriptive

approach to social planning.To predispose the student to construct an image of the

future by projecting from the present.To make the student aware of the cultural contexts of

scientific and technological development.To increase the student's skills at long-range forecasting.To increase the student's skills at short-range forecasting.To increase the student's skills of extrapolation from the

present.To develop the student's attitudes and abilities for inventing

alternative futures.To develop the student's skills at historical interpretation of

the present.To develop the student's abilities to view the present from

normative images of the future.To develop the student's ability to model societal trends

descriptively.To develop the student's attitudes and ability for coping

with uncertainty.Donald N. Michael has coined a very apt term for this cate-

gory of educational objectives: "future-responsive" [2] . Pro-grams must determine which skills and attitudes should betaught in order to make students effectively "future-responsive."This in tum requires teachers to clarify for themselves thecharacteristics they would consider as being adaptive as wellas responsible in the broad context of educating studentswho will be professionals and citizens in the 21st century.

3. Educational Objectives Concerned With Basic and AppliedProblem Solving SkillsWhat parts of the problem solving spectrum do the students

master? This category is in the skills domain. It derives fromthe problematic aspects of the societal goal of the programs.In particular, it derives from the illl-defined aspects of theseproblematic situations. These ill-defined aspects require thatsome attention be devoted to problem definition; at the same

time societal goals require that some attention be devoted toapplied problem solving. These programs and especially in-dividual courses must allocate their resources to establishspecific educational objectives along a spectrum from problem

definition to solutions of particular problems. Specific educa-tional objectives would be generated within this dichotomy.Some of the possible objectives in this category would be:To develop the student's ability to identify root causes and

to formulate problems.To develop the student's ability to solve problems defined

by others.To develop the student's ability to define the specific issues

of a specific societal problem in such a way as to specify alterna-tive solutions.To develop the student's ability to examine issues and al-

ternative solutions and determine the underlying premises.To develop the student's ability to define and solve any

specific problem of a given generic type.To develop the student's ability to explore a problematic

situation and formulate the basic problem.Programs addressing the same subject matter can differ

significantly. Some are theory oriented; others are problemoriented. Some programs explore hypothetical problem solv-ing with a concern for methodology; others attempt real prob-lem solving. In designing a specific course the teacher must setthe boundaries so that students understand the focus and thelimit of the course within this context.

4. Educational Objectives Concerned With Analytical andSynthesizing SkillsWhich type of skill forms the ends and which the means for

the student? This is another category in the skills domain. Itderives from the systems nature of the science, technology,society, and values subject area. Within this area, it specificallyaddresses the controversy among societal planners between themacro-approach and the incremental approach to planning.Programs will differ in specific educational objectives foranalytic skills and synthetic skills. Analysis involves taking aproblematic situation and analyzing its constituent factors andtheir relationships. Synthesis involves formulation of new andbasic patterns from disassociated elements and phenomena.Specific educational objectives would be generated within thisdichotomy. Some of the possible objectives in this categorywould be:To develop the student's ability to explain how the inter-

relation of components defines a system.To develop the student's ability to break a system down into

a hierarchical relationship of components.To develop the student's ability to observe phenomena and

define a system.To develop the student's ability to relate a system to the

context within which the system is defined.To develop the student's ability to generate new alternatives

for decision making or problem solving.To develop the student's ability to analyze and evaluate a set

of given altematives for decision making.This category is particularly important because programs can

differ significantly depending on their concerns. In particular,programs can assume synthetic objectives and devote most oftheir resources to the more easily achieved analytic objectives.Some programs are primarily concerned with systems, andadopt a holistic approach, explore system environments, orga-

29

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. E-21, NO. 1, FEBRUARY 1978

nizing principles, paradigms, etc. More often, however, pro-grams and courses are concerned primarily with components,and adopt a reductionist approach. While some programsteach the students to synthesize from a problematic situationand establish a framework of goals, most teach the student toanalyze a problematic situation within a given framework ofgoals. Given the professed objectives of many of these pro-grams, teachers must ensure that emphasis on analytical ob-jectives do not beg some of the basic questions the programsaddress.

5. Educational Objectives Concerned With ValuesConsiderationsWhat posture is the student taught to take toward values

considerations? This category primarily involves attitudes,especially those related to professional skills. A societalproblem exists only because some value system is invokedthat elicits the judgment, "this is wrong and should be im-proved." Although a solution to the problem requires ap-plication of skills, a prior consideration must be whether ornot the application of these skills calls into question thevalue system itself. Programs will differ significantly in thedegree to which their specific educational objectives facilitatevalue-aware societal engagement. Specific educational objec-tives would be generated within this dichotomy. Possibleobjectives in this category would be:To sensitize the student to value awareness and commitment.To teach skills requiring the student to introduce or quantify

values objectively.To encourage students to develop their own hierarchies of

values.To teach skills that require the student to appreciate and

accept a societal role.To teach skills contributing to the student's sensitivity and

appreciation of values and cultures other than his or her own.To teach skills that sensitize the student to the affective

consequences of his or her actions.To teach the student to identify and resolve moral issues

within professional activity.To teach the student to establish a new framework of values

for scientific and engineering activity.To enable the student to appreciate the contributions of

science and technology to societal development.To teach and emphasize commitment to particular values.

In this category we also would include those cognitive objec-tives involving the identification and analysis of values andvalue systems. These objectives can contribute to sensitiza-tion and self-actualization goals, or they can contribute tothe acquisition of descriptive skills. This fifth category hassome summative implication, because specific objectives inthis category complement some of those in the categoriesdealing with societal change, the future, and problem solving.

A HEURISTIC AID FOR EFFECTIVE COURSE DESIGNThese categories of educational objectives should be used as

a heuristic aid for course and program design rather than used

to delineate boundaries for any particular course or program.The categories are not exclusive, and will complement othersets of educational objectives. For example, these categoriescan complement objectives in courses with an historical orcultural emphasis. They also can complement those in courseswithin a particular discipline such as electrical (e.g., powersystems) or civil (transportation systems) engineering.Each educator must generate his or her own set of specific

educational objectives. The specific objectives we present canbe used as a guide for doing this. A limited set of objectivescan be selected from those we itemize, and then defined inparticular terms appropriate for the subject matter of thecourse or program. This procedure will also suggest othereducational objectives that could well be more appropriatethan those we present [3].Use of these categories as a heuristic aid should be particu-

larly valuable for truly interdisciplinary courses and programs.The interdisciplinary aspects of programs in the area of science,technology, society and values require educators from differentdisciplines to interact. The interaction can be challenging andstimulating because it forces them out of habitual modes ofperceiving and thinking. The interaction, however, can befrustrating when specific goals and methods of interactionmust be agreed upon in order to design specific courses andcope with individual groups of students [4]. Our hope is thatdiscussion of the educational objectives we present will enableeducators from different disciplines to cooperate and effec-tively meet the need for science, technology, society andvalues courses and programs.

NOTES1] Our discussion of educational objectives and in particular of

defimitions of specificobjectives is significantly indebted to thesuggestions and contributions of our colleagues who participatedwith us in this research project:

Donald A. Geffen, University of Minnesota0. Allan Gianniny, University of VirginiaEdwin M. Good, Stanford UniversityLaura Klem, The University of MichiganJohn Koller, Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteMelvin Kranzberg, Georgia Institute of TechnologyRobert E. McGinn, Stanford UniversityDonald N. Michael, The University of MichiganMilton Rokeach, Washington State UniversityWilliam Scott, University of NevadaThomas Sheridan, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyDavid D. Starks, The University of Michigan

We are also indebted to Dr. Richard Hedrich of the NationalEndowment for the Humanities and Dr. Robert Baum of theNational Science Foundation for their support of this researchproject and their critiques of our original proposal.

[21 Donald N. Michael, On Learning to Plan-and Planning to Learn:The Social Psychology of Changing Toward Future-ResponsiveSocietal Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1973, pp. 37ff.

[31 This procedure for defming objectives also can be used in con-junction with other methodologies, such as preparation of "ob-jective graphs," as discussed in John N. Warfield, "Intent Struc-tures," IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics,vol. SMC-3, pp. 133-140, March 1973.

[41 Some basic obstacles to interdisciplinary cooperation are discussedin H. William Welch, "Dualities and Dilemmas in Social SystemsEngineering," in Proceedings of the 1974 International Confer-ence on Systems,Man and Cybernetics, 1974, pp. 234-241, esp.235-236.

30