Capital intensive education policy issues and problems

Socro-Econ Plan Scr Vol Prmted m Great Britam

17. No

4. pp

CAPITAL

165-172.

00384121/83 Pergamon

1983

INTENSIVE EDUCATION AND PROBLEMS AUSTIN

POLICY

$3.00+ 00 Press Ltd

ISSUES

D. SWANSON

Department of Educational Organization, Administration and Policy, State University of New York at Buffalo, 466 Christopher Baldy Hall, Amherst, NY 14260, U.S.A. EDWARD J. WILLETT Houghton College

ROBERT E. LAMITIE Connecticut State Education Department

and EUGENE

A. NELSON

Virginia State Education Department (Received 24 November 1982)

Abstract-This paper describes some of the problems of today’s mass schools and suggests that the technology is already available to replace them with more effective and efficient ones using capital intensive man-machine methods of instruction. It discusses some of the political and labor problems that may impede implementation and makes suggestions how these may be overcome. Research findings on the development of such schools are examined. A generalized model of such schools is presented based on a number of studies suggesting it will be substantially more cost-effective than its contemporary counterparts. The politics of change is discussed and specific strategies for implementation are suggested, the most immediate of which is the provision of federal or state funds for development of operatmg models of capital intensive schools. The key role of teacher union negotiations in facilitating or impeding changes is considered along with the present teacher union posture of opposition. It is suggested that teacher unions can best serve their own interests by cooperating in the development of capital intensive schools while bargaining to assure that their members share appropriately in the benefits of the improvements they bring.

One of the major challenges

learning to enhance muscle power by converting and controlling the energy in fossil fuels through machinery. In integrating the machine into an agrarian society, that society was transformed as the term “industrial revolution” implies. To make most effective use of machines, a substantial degree of centralization was necessary resulting first in cities and then in metropolises/megapolises, in large factories and multi-national corporations, in mass production, mass media, mass markets, mass schools, mass culture and in big government. Now, the computer and related paraphernalia are doing for the mind what the machine did for the muscle. In integrating the computer into an industrial society, that society is also being transformed. The sources of information of the industrial age were few and the imagery used was standardized; but in:reasingly our stimuli are becoming more complex md diverse because of the greater number and sophistication of potential sources. Communication s now discontinuous.

facing society today is the redesign of its educational system. The U.S. is well advanced into what has been characterized as a “post-industrial society”, yet the schools, true to their conservative nature, continue to prepare pupils for a receding industrial era. Schools today use the same organizational structure and instructional methods they used at the turn of this century. The primary difference is that they have become much more labor intensive and thus much more costly. Current crises

in education stem from the discrepancy between social needs and expectations and the actual services rendered by schools. Today’s schools are products of the industrial era. They are unabashedly called “mass schools”. They are designed to prepare people to live in a mass culture and work in facilities of mass-production producing goods for a mass-market. There is little wonder that HusCn ([l], pp. 13-18) found that youth in Western Europe and North America are becoming increasingly alienated from school and that alientation increases the longer youth are in school. Interestingly, this phenomenon is characteristic only of technologically advanced countries and not of the industrializing third world nations where the mass school is compatible with emerging social and economic needs. The industrial revolution resulted from mankind’s

Instead of merely receiving our mental model of reality, we are now compelled to invent it and continually reinvent it. This places an enormous burden on us. But it also leads toward greater individuality, a demassification of personality as well as culture ([2], p. 182). 165

A. D. SWANKIN et al.

166

The thinking of the industrial era that was most valued was analytical. Things, ideas and concepts had to be taken apart in order to learn their essence. But with the increase of information and its fragmentation, the kind of thought process that will be most valued in the future according to Toffler[2] is synthetic-piecing knowledge together into integrated wholes. For most of this century, schools have operated on the premises of behaviorist psychology. That is, the schools were needed as social agents to shape and mold young people. The newly-born human was viewed as a “blank page” on which society would write its message. The mass school was a primary vehicle for doing this. But in the emerging era, skills in individual decision-making are the greater need. Increasingly, employment opportunities will require intellectual skills in workers rather than simple manual skills or musclepower. The post-industrial society has little use for the unskilled and the unthinking. Rather than create self-directed continuing leaners who can function independently and interpret change, the mass school continues to create teacherdependent role players. Rather than instill the love of learning as a vehicle of human growth, schools have effectively stiffled the desire to learn in many. Educators do recognize that there are problems and have acted to solve them. As yet, however, there is little evidence that they have accurately diagnosed the problems and their attempted solutions have been ineffective. In a typical bureaucratic remedy, policymakers have thrown money at the problems in the form of more people and more gadgets used in an “add-on fashion”. For example, between 1954 and 1979, the average number of teachers per thousand pupils enrolled in American public schools has increased from 36.2 to 52.4, an increase of 75%[3]. As a result costs per pupil served have increased at an alarming rate to a point of taxpayer rebellion. What is required is a systematic redesign of the whole schooling enterprise, in keeping with the increasing capital intensity that has so improved productivity in other sections of the economy. Such a strategy holds the promise of better meeting changing needs of students and society at affordable costs. REEXAMINATION PRODUCTION

OF EDUCATIONAL FUNCTIONS

In an increasingly literate and sophisticated society, ways must be found to meet the unique needs of individual students. At the same time, there must be a stabilization of, and if possible, a reduction in, the share of real resources allocated to formal education. No longer are these two goals mutually exclusive. They are attainable if educators (1) restructure the ratio of human and capital inputs in the schooling process, and (2) take advantage of the present technology of information transmission. The strategy is to be found in an examination of education production functions, a technical term for the various ways in which capital, labor and other inputs can be arranged to carry on the process known as schooling. In shorter form, a production function can be expressed as: Output =f(Inputs).

In a market-oriented society, production function decisions are based upon the total amount which must be paid for the inputs. This sum is referred to as cost. Since profit is always ultimately included in cost, the form of a production function can be rewritten: PRICE of product = COST of Input(s). In this post-industrial society, the education production function(s) of the past must be re-evaluated. Fortunately, existing research already provides the data necessary to make valid cost comparisons between: (1) the procedures of traditional instruction (including its audio-visual add-ons), and (2) completely integrated man-machine systems which can incorporate the appropriate “mix” of human and nonhuman media in a framework of individualized instruction. Productivity in any enterprise is inversely related to unit costs. In relation to elementary and secondary education, changes in productivity are difficult to measure, whether positive or negative, because of continuing changes in other variables which can affect cost, such as, nature and size of enrollment, qualifications of teachers, societal composition, and the ways in which knowledge is disseminated through both human and nonhuman media. The identifiable inputs in an education production function are natural resources (students), human resources (staff), and capital resources (equipment). The output of this process is viewed both as educational services rendered, or behavioral changes in students, or a combination of the two. On the output side of the equation, education is a means through which society improves human resources. A number of production possibilities exist in any educational situation. The most economical use of these inputs (students, staff, and capital) will be the optimal (or most efficient) alternative, given the budget constraint. It is a rare situation where some improvement in resource allocation cannot occur with a resulting positive effect on both unit cost and productivity. Just as the move from the 19th century American Common School to “mass education” in the 20th century appears to have been at least partly dictated by new least-cost combinations of inputs which made larger schools economically viable, so present technological changes in information processing and transmission are making necessary a re-examination of the relative prices of educational inputs, and a re-consideration of the scale of education production functions. Willett [4] found that educational research already shows that capital-intensive production of education (i.e. man-machine systems) is economically superior to present labor-intensive schooling. He also concluded that such new education systems would be smaller in scale of operation and would yield the additional benefits of (1) individualizing instruction, (2) harnessing much now-wasted student energy into a learning situation which would minimize student alienation, and (3) permitting greater community control of, and interaction with, the education process. Capital-intensive (or man-machine) systems also make it possible to deal with the known fact that

Capital intensive education policy issues and problems “time in school” and actual learning are not highly correlated. Ideational background, natural ability, and socioeconomic level appear to be much more important in student achievement. These can be incorporated into the diagnostic and prescriptive process through the individualized learning approach that capital-intensive systems make economically feasible. It should be clearly understood that a multimedia (i.e. human media plus nonhuman media) approach to learning does not remove traditional teaching. Now, however, it becomes only one of many methods. The new focus is on learning. Various content areas will be comprehended best by the learner through some “mix” of media (human and nonhuman). The emphasis is upon continuous rather than discontinuous learning which is individualized to capitalize on student strengths and remedy student weaknesses as these are diagnosed. The learning experience becomes a function of all life experiences, not just those in a learning center (school). This makes community resources much more useful since “time in schooi” is no longer the prime objective. Student-teacher ratios are understood to be relevant only where they can be shown to contribute to greater efficiency in the learning process. While professionals will be ultimately responsible and accountable for learning accomplishment, their role activities will consist primarily of diagnosis, prescription, motivation, and evaluation. The facilitation of learning, including ancillary activities, will be done by paraprofessionals, and student assistants. By providing each student with an individualized program of subject-matter training, complete with the necessary machine aids for the pure transmission of information and record keeping, much of the time now consumed in keeping order, clerical tasks, and other duties only indirectly related to instruction, can be more productively used to encourage the learning process as an integrated whole. A MANAGEMENT INDIVIDUALIZED

SYSTEM FOR INSTRUCTION

Figure 1 illustrates how the concept of growth and development may be used as a foundation for an entire instructional management system. Each of the subcomponents of the system parallels the essential functions which the teacher must perform as an instructional manager. The first tasks are needs assessment and accounting for the progress of the student. Both are combined in one system, for they deal with protrayal of student growth before and after learning. Whether one emphasizes this portrayal as a process of needs assessment or evaluation is relatively unimportant.. The important concept is that educational planning requires a comprehensive picture of the student’s “growth status” with sufficient information regarding his/her strengths and weaknesses. Given this information, the second function of instructional management is to identify the types of instructional resources and/or learning experiences available for accomplishing the developmental tasks. The related computer support system may be called an “Instructional Resource Management System”. Again, the cqncept is a simple one. For each task or objective in the needs assessment system, the resource

167

management system would list the “lessons”, instructional packages, or structured learning experiences which the school has at its disposal for providing instruction (shown in the figure as the Instructional Media System). It could include videotapes of outstanding lectures or presentations made by teachers, hlms, individualized instructional packages, programs for computer-assisted instruction, or a variety of other media that may be developed. The important trend toward using community resources outside the school could also be accommodated. Employers willing to participate in cooperative work experience could be listed, as could available internships or opportunities for youth participation in community projects. One can conceive of the merit badge counselor program, as it operates in the Boy Scouts, being extended to education in general. As the need for affective and experiential learning is recognized in education, it is likely that the limitations of schools as they are presently conceived will become more apparent. The result of combining input from the needs assessment and resource management system is to make possible the development of an individualized education plan for each student. But, simultaneously, the individualization of instruction increases the problems of scheduling and control. In existing high school systems, it is typically the task of the guidance counselor to assist the student in the selection and scheduling of the courses to be taken. When the teacher assumes the role of instructional manager, as has been more typical of the primary and intermediate levels, these functions of counseling are assumed as well. Means must be devised to build into the system a capability for handling the far greater complexities of scheduling resulting from the use of a variety of resources on an individual basis. The existence of on-line reservation systems for airlines, hotels, and entertainment events suggests that the problem is not insurmountable. An important aspect of control is to know that activities are being pursued according to a plan. In this sense, the planning capability provided by the needs assessment and resource management systems contribute to the school’s control capability. Nevertheless, even greater control capability is necessary; a means must be provided to insure that students actually engage in the learning activities that were scheduled. Whether the unit of study is an individualized learning project which can be completed in one hour, or a two-week program of instruction of operating a lathe, controls can easily be built into the student progress accounting system. End-of-unit tests or other performance measures are implicit in every unit of instruction. The test results (or other evidence of completion) can be entered by the student aide or teacher as evidence that the activity was completed. A computerized system for comparing projected completion dates with end-of-unit notifications can easily alert instructional managers to difficulties and the need for modifications in the individualized education plan. In such a design, planned reliance is placed on the machine for its complete range of capabilities, but subject to human direction, planning and control. People are still absolutely essential, but their roles are changed from director, leader, final authority, to diagnostician, prescriber, motivator, facilitator and evaluator. Human resources are seen as multi-

II

Task N

Task N 1

_.

Stage II

Task 2

I

Task 2a

Stage

1

Analysis of strengths and weaknesses compared to adopted standdrds and ubiectives

1

Student Needs Assessment and Progress Acctruntmr: System

Task Nn

Task2n

Stage N

I

I

I

System Evaluation

Evaluation

i

I3 A

H 0 0 L

D

1 T Y

I3 A s E

M M U N

0

C

SYSTEM

Work

etc.

Family Experience

Volunteer

lnternshipr

Work Experience

MEDlA

Cfdsa~m

~~stfuct~on

Centtrr

Ljbrary

Audio-Visual

Library

Microfilm

~omputer.A5~isted ln~~~~c~~ona~(Terminafj

Discussion Groups

Youth Groups

1

JNSTRUC lIONAL

Capital intensive education policy issues and problems dimensional leading to specialization and division of labor. Tasks requiring professional judgment would be separated from those which are routine. High cost professionally trained persons would be assigned to the former and lower cost paraprofessionals would be assigned to the latter. Through using existing technology to enhance the educational productivity and effectiveness of humans and through division of control tasks into those which require professional training and those which do not, an overall design is permitted which is not only capable of meeting the schooling needs of a post-industrial society but which is also less expensive than the labor intensive mass school. Willett et al. [5], based on studies by McCusker-Sorensen[6] determine that this can be done with an adult/pupil ratio of only 33 per 1000 (12 professionals and 18 paraprofessionals). This compares to a nationally prevailing professional/pupil ratio of 60 per 1000[7]. Even allowing a generous provision for support equipment, the estimated cost of an integrated manmachine schooling system averaged less than 60% of its contemporary counterpart. POLITICS

OF EDUCATIONAL

CHANGE

The arguments which have been presented in support of restructuring elementary and secondary schooling through the use of available technology are derived from economic and pedagogical considerations; but the decisions to modernize (or not to modernize) are political in that 90% of elementary and secondary schooling is provided through the public sector. Because of the highly decentralized structure for policy-making in education and because of the incremental nature of democratic policy development, modernization will come about as a series of decisions over an extended period of time made in a variety of legislative forums. A single assault on the entrenched establishment is doomed to failure. A development period extended over at least a generation is required if the envisioned changes are to occur. Any strategy for change will have to take into account two factors which tend to perpetuate the status quo. The first is the strong atriculate constituency of professional and auxiliary employees of public schools who have a vested interest in maintaining things pretty much as they are. The second is that, even with their recognized shortcomings, elementary and secondary schools as presently constituted are familiar; that which is proposed is unknown. A new system could be better; but then, it could be worse. Under such circumstances, the prudent person is likely to opt for the known until there is convincing evidence of the merit of the proposed. Machiavelli[8] shrewdly noted over 400 yr ago that: There is no more delicate matter to take in hand, nor more dangerous to conduct, nor more doubtful in its success, than to set up as a leader in the introduction of changes. For he who innovates will have for his enemies all those who are well off under the existing order of things, and only lukewarm supporters in those who might be better off under the new (pp. 2&21).

169

The concept of capital intensive learning has no constituency other than a few persons (primarily university professors) who sit in “ivory towers” and think great thoughts about the future of educationas persons whom Stephen Bailey[7] dubbed “scribblers” in his pioneering treatise on the politics of education. Scribblers are important in shaping thinking and in pointing toward idealized goals; but they don’t pass laws; they don’t levy taxes; and they command very few resources. In essence, a strategy for change must involve the development of operating models of capital-intensive schools, the gradual dissemination of those models and information about them, and the building of a constituency of support. At the same time, concerns of the profession about job security need to be dealt with and personnel possessing skills appropriate for the new mode of instruction need to be recruited and prepared. Most of the pieces for capital intensive learning centers already exist, but not in one place, and no attempt has been made to organize them into an integrated learning system. Such a developmental effort is beyond the capacity of most school districts. Because the benefit would be national in scope, it would seem that the National Institute of Education would be a most appropriate funding source; but the benefit to states is sufficient to justify their providing the costs on their own. Developmental costs would be reltively small. The primary expense is for assembling a staff of curricular, media, psychological, sociological, and subject-matter evaluation specialists to design a working plan as opposed to the “architectural sketches” set forth herein. While the planing phase might well take place in an actual school, it need not do so, and would probably be more efficient if it were not. Instead, a relatively small staff of specialists funded from a federal or state source could develop such a plan on a generalized basis, somewhat the way architectural firms develop standardized building plans which can then be adapted by an individual builder or purchaser to particular needs. In the pilot or implementation phase, after standard plans have been developed, it is neither necessary nor desirable for an entire district to shift immediately to a capital-intensive mode of instruction; but at the school level, there is no middle ground. The philosophy, organization, staffing and scheduling of the proposed innovation is not compatible with the “mass-school”. Because of the perceived experimental nature of capital intensive learning centers, it would be ill-advised to require attendance within a given attendance area, as is typical practice today with “neighborhood” schools. Capital-intensive learning centers should be open to those preferring this mode of education from the entire district or region as special high schools have been for years in large cities and as “magnet” schools have been more recently. There is already a sizeable pool of teachers who are qualified and would welcome the opportunity to function in educational settings such as those envisioned. Scattered throughout the nation, there is a reading program here, a social studies program there, a science, or mathematics program, etc. designed in keeping with the proposed philosophy. Interestingly, capital-intensive individualized instruction is be-

170

A. D.

SWANSON et al.

coming almost the rule rather than the exception in some classes for exceptional children. Here the individual differences are so apparent that it is difficult to ignore them in prescribing instructional activities. Also, the attention span of such children tends to be short requiring a variety of experiences with high interest levels. A district of 10,000 or more pupils should be able to operate one or two capital-intensive schools by drawing sympathetic professionals from existing staff. Smaller districts may have to cooperate at first, perhaps through an intermediate unit. State subsidy of startup costs would greatly facilitate the spread of the innovation until general public acceptance is established and its cost saving and educational potentials are thoroughly documented. Once a significant number of pilot programs are in place, pre-service teacher preparation programs would have to be modified substantially and, to the extent possible, student teaching experiences should be shifted from conventional to pilot schools. The responsibilities of paraprofesssionals would be upgraded to the point where increased formal training would be desirable. Such training would require the creation of new programs, probably at the junior college level. For persons already in service, retraining the reorientation programs would be necessary. These should be provided at no cost to the teacher by the district or intermediate unit. OVERCOMING

PROFESSIONAL

OPPOSITION

The above will be accomplished most quickly if it can be done with a minimum of opposition from professional organizations. It could be done most effectively with their collaboration. To obtain collaboration will require a strategy in itself since the innovations pose potential threats to the economic security of professional employees and their associations. Fear of change appears to be functionally related to uncertainty, which is also often associated with lack of knowledge concerning the reality of the change proposed and the effects which will1 result. An incremental strategy of implementation allows time for alleviating fear derived from such ignorance. Despite substantial numbers of individual teachers interested in developing capital intensive educational methods, the position of most teacher organizations on such methods is clearly one of vigorous opposition based on the belief that capital intensive methods would result in fewer future jobs in the teaching profession and the loss of jobs of many of its present members. When this attitude, commonest among local teacher union leadership and some of the more militant union-oriented members, is combined with the genuine skepticism of many other teachers as to whether such methods can be effective, the result has been that the organized profession has been able very effectively to oppose and block experimentation concerning the introduction of capital intensive methods. One example of such opposition was the successful effort by the teacher unions in New York State to bring to an end in 1976 a project in which the State had invested millions of dollars with promising results. This was the “Improving Zest-Effectiveness in Education Through Technology (ICETT) Project”, a program that enabled a portion of the regular class-

room instruction in the subjects other than the basic skills in grade 4 to be taught without the direct involvement of a professional teacher [ lo]. Developmental work began on this project in 1969 and the first operational materials were available in 1971. These consisted of forty hours of instruction to take place over a period of 20 days in the fourth grade. The instruction followed certain portions of the New York State curriculum in health, social studies and science. Groups of pupils were assigned to a classroom or portion of a classroom supervised by a teacher aide while other groups from the same class were receiving more intensive small group instruction in the basic skill subjects from the regular teacher. The program provided video taped materials, workbooks, tests, etc. that together comprised a self-contained teaching package, requiring the aide only to distribute materials, operate the video-tape records, and keep order (a job that turned out to be an easy one due to the high level of pupil interest and: participation). Episodes of watching television were limited to a maximum of 6min. Following each episode the students would be involved in individual work through workbook assignments, pop quizzes and other seat work. Students had options in regard to part of the work and were not all rquired to do the same work at the same time. The program was tested on 7000 pupils in 67 schools throughout the state, which were a representative sample of urban, suburban and rural schools comprising a variety of different student populations. A total of $3.2 m of state and federal funds was spent on the project including development and production of the materials, training of the teachers and aides, development and application of tests and the research design. Evaluations were extremely encouraging. Two developmental centers were in place in Nassau and Albany counties where work was actively underway to produce additional materials, which were in demand from participating schools. The Education Department had requested a budget of $2.5 m to accelerate developmental work on the project in 1973-74 and the Governor had included this amount in his proposed budget. However, during the previous year opposition by the teacher unions to the project had grown progressively intense. This opposition was not based on the effectiveness of the programs but was clearly focused on the charge that the project would endanger the job security of teachers. The teacher opposition was successful. The appropriation was not made and the project was terminated. The above incident provides an example of the present reaction of the organized teaching profession to even such modest efforts to integrate technology into the instructional process as a labor saving and, thus, cost saving device. A similar recognition of the power of the profession to prevent or to slow the introduction of capital intensive methods is reflected in the public stance taken by manufacturers and distributors of instructional equipment. The possibility of accomplishing teaching comparable to present program elements but using fewer teachers by the use of the technology being demonstrated is denied publicly but admitted to privately. The public statements suggest

Capital intensive education policy issues and problems

that the purpose of their materials is to improve and enhance the effectiveness of teachers by providing methods which can supplement their teaching efforts. When one looks at the historical position of labor unions concerning the introduction of capital intensive methods in American industries, one finds a number of individual cases, some of them spectacular, where unions have gone to the wall to prevent the use of technological improvements and force the continuation of inefficient processes in order to maintain the number of jobs then in existence to perform the functions then required by the market. Often this has resulted in short-run gains for their members followed by disastrous results for their industries and often for the unions themselves. More often, however, especially when graced with enlightened leadership, Fitch [ 111 found that American unions generally accept technological change but bargain for protection against loss of the jobs and benefits of present members and for a share of the fruits of the improvements achieved. This is a union attitude which is fully compatible with the development of capital-intensive schools. Job security is one of the most emotional appeals a union can use with its members. Is there any truth to the widespread fear of long-run, technologicallyinduced unemployment? The assumption follows only when one assumes that there is a fixed amount of work to be accomplished and that macroeconomic policies to maintain effective aggregate demand are non-existent. The function of technology is truly to free human resources for work that rising expectations demand be done in order to improve the quality of life. For education, as for all fields, problems litter the landscape because there are simply not enough material and human resources available to attend to them. Looking ahead at the projected demands and needs for educational services, it would be a serious error to assume that technology will result in a need for fewer educators. This is true even though it would result in a need for fewer teachers to achieve the results now being accomplished. The work that needs doing but can’t be done within the constraints of present resources should limit unemployment in the ranks of professional educators. Undeniably, a shift in functions would occur as more resources were directed toward problems that are now accepted rather than solved. But if improved technology in education produces results comparable to what it has brought in other industries, opportunities would arise to use the freed-up resources to deal with many unsolved problems that are not now addressed because of a perceived lack of resources and methods to deal with them. In order fully to implement capital-intensive education, there would.be major needs for training and retraining which could create substantial trauma for some of those involved and for their professional organizations. Movements of labor are essential if society is to improve its productivity through technological change, but it does not follow that such change needs to be a financial burden to those concerned. Much of the initial saving from a capitalintensive mode would have to be used to offset any economic loss due to voluntary early retirements, or to cover costs of retraining and relocating educational personnel. Also, the professionals in the new

171

centers would likely receive higher levels of pay than most present teachers, reflecting their higher levels of skill and training. The classic case of dealing with such a problem in modern labor history is a unique pact signed in 1961 between the Pacific Maritime Association and the International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union. It allowed shipowners to automate as necessary and, over a 5:-yr period, the shipowners gave the Union $29 m for employee retraining, early retirement at no economic loss to the worker, and other purposes as its share of savings. In addition, a new approach to job security was developed. Besides the welfare of their individual members, professional associations and unions will be concerned about their organizational futures which depend upon membership and dues. If membership remains as currently defined, the potential membership would be smaller. This may happen in any event (but to a lesser degree) because of the decline in school age population, but salaries under traditional education delivery systems can only be pushed so high, thus limiting income from dues assessments. Unions can counter this, and the movement is already begun, by including the growing numbers of support personnel in their rank and file. Capital-intensive education will also result in wholly new jobs which might be either in school systems or in private industry. These would involve such work as development of software and providing training. Professional associations and unions can develop strategies to recruit membership in these areas also. Also, the professional specialists stalling capital-intensive learning centers would tend to be more highly trained and work under twelve month contracts; therefore they would be more highly paid. This will enable professional organizations to levy higher membership dues as they insure adequate compensation and working conditions for these new professional roles. If one were to look for an ideal place in which to find minimum professional opposition to capitalintensive education, it might be in a location where school enrollments are expanding and there is a teacher shortage. There are presently few such places, although some are emerging in southwestern U.S. and this is projected to be the characteristic pattern throughout the country during the latter part of this decade and into the 1990s. But as we look at the history of the development of technology in the past, innovations are often introduced in other than ideal places. Instead, they often occur in those places where the social needs and economic stresses are the greatest, resulting in situations where change to more efficient methods represent the only feasible option available. Changes now going on in the American automobile industry represent such a case. Declining markets, or in the case of a public service, declining resources, provide one of the strongest incentives to labor-management cooperation in the interests of greater productivity. Development of capital-intensive education is almost sure to take place in the future although the teacher unions and professional associations have considerable power to slow its development and introduction. Finding ways to facilitate rather than impede such growth while providing fair guarantees of economic security to present teachers represents a

172

A. D SWANSONet al.

major challenge both to teacher organizations, local school leadership and the state and federal governments. Now it is the time for all those concerned with the change to begin planning how it can best be accomplished. Meanwhile, the key next step needed is the development, using state and federal funds, of working models of capital-intensive learning centers. When such models are available, the process of local planning and bargaining can begin in earnest.

REFERENCES 1. T. Husen, The School in Question: A Comparative Study of the School and its Future in Western Society. Oxford University Press, New York (1979). 2. A. Toffler, The Third Wave. William Morrow, New York (1980). 3. National Center for Education Statistics, Education in the United States: Statistical Highlights through 1979-80. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington

(1980). 4. E. J. Willett, Designs for structuring capital-intensive (rather than labor-intensive) education production functions for the promotion of individualized learning

below college level. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo (1973). 5. E. J. Will&t, A. D. Swanson and E. A. Nelson, Modernizing the Little Red Schoolhouse: The Economics of Improved Education. Educational Technology, En-

glewood Cliffs, New York (1979). 6. H. F. McCusker and P. H. Sorensen, The economics of education. In The New Media and Education: Their Impact on Society (Edited by P. H. Rossi and B. J.

Biddle). Aldine, New York, Garden City, New York (1966). (Reprint edition, Doubleday and Company, Inc., Anchor Books Edition, 1967.) 7. Educational Research Service, Inc., School Stafing Ratios, 1979-80. Washington (1981). 8. N. Machiavelli, The Prznce (N. H. Thomson, trans.) In The Harvard Classics (Edited by C. W. Eliot). P. F. Collier and Son Corporation, New York 1956. (Originally published, 1513.) 9. S. K. Bailey, R. T. Frost, P. E. March and R. C. Wood, Schoolmen and Politics: A Study of State Aid to Education in the Northeast. Syracuse University Press,

Syracuse, New York (1962). 10. Bureau of Educational Communications Staff, Whither the dinosaur. In Systems Approach to Instructional Design. Baywood, Farmingdale, New York (1973). 11. J. A. Fitch, Social Responsibility of Organized Labor. Harper, New York (1957).