Congressional veto; (3) the establishment of an advisory council or, as recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee, a Federal study commission directed to keep the subject of copyright under consideration, study the problems as they appear, and report to a Joint Congressional Committee, with the Committee then making proposals to Congress. Any of these devices also would be useful for purposes beyond that of accommodating the copyright law to the changing panorama of the computer. For example, an internal correction mechanism could be used from time to time to promulgate definite rules for photocopying on the basis of actual experience. In any event, some type of statutory procedure is urgently needed for the periodic reassessment of the copyright questions generated by the computer. Senator BURDICK. We have a very complicated subject here and I am just wondering if our question, in the language of lawyers, is not a little moot. How many primary and secondary schools have computers or plans of computers?

Mr. MILLER. Plans for computers?

Senator BURDICK. The first question first: How many have computers?

Mr. MILLER. Here is our expert.

Mr. TAYLOR. I can speak for those in the New York area. There are several in the schools of New York State that are used mainly for business practices right now, but more and more are going into the curriculum use with the schools. So we are finding a number of these coming into use.

I would guess, offhand, that there would be at least 20 computers now in New York State which are in use in schools.

Senator BURDICK. But they are used for the business portion of the school?

Mr. TAYLOR. Some business, yes; and it is increasing now, I think, for use in curriculum also.

Senator BURDICK. How about colleges and universities?

Mr. MILLER. I was going to say that at the University of Michigan, we have a computer processing center with several computers, but they are used exclusively for data processing grades, billing, and things of that nature. Then we have a center for research on learning and teaching, where we have at least two computers, and perhaps a third time-share system. But these are being used for curriculum development and the development of computer-assisted instruction techniques. At the moment all of our computer uses are experimental. We are not using computers in the classroom as yet. I do not think that is planned for the next few years.

Senator BURDICK. Then we do have some plans?

Mr. MILLER. Yes; but these plans are quite primitive at this point. Mr. TAYLOR. Our use of computers in classrooms is mostly experimental, also, but they are being used more and more, and hopefully, within a short period of time, we will see the use of those in classrooms. Mr. MILLER. Senator, if I could add a footnote. In my prepared statement, I suggest that the statute itself should contain an internal corrective mechanism. Copyright legislation in this country is revised once every half century, and by the third decade of experience under an existing piece of legislation, it is obsolete. I do not think we can expect quicker congressional action in the future than we have gotten in the past.

This morning the ad hoc committee's witnesses talked to you about fair use, photocopying, academic and scholarly research. Senator

McClellan is so right when he suggests that it is almost impossible to articulate in statutory form all the potential uses that may or may not be fair. With an internal corrective mechanism in the new statute, it would be possible to deal not only with the study on computer technology, which we advocate, and the need for a constant rebalancing among computer users, publishers, and education, but also with a number of the problems discussed this morning, including the problem of fair use. Administrative regulation might be eminently more feasible and sensible than statutory language.

Senator BURDICK. As you know, we have some complaints that we legislate by regulation, too.

Mr. MILLER. Yes.

Dr. WIGREN. Next we have Dr. Anna Hyer, executive secretary of the Department of Audiovisual Instruction of the NEA, and Mr. Robert Taylor, director of the educational media center for the Bedford public schools, in New York, on the uses of new educational technology.

Dr. HYER. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I might say that we, too, would like to excerpt some from our testimony and would appreciate having it entered into record, although the middle portion will be read.

Senator BURDICK. Without objection, it will all be included in the record.

Dr. HYER. I would like to say that Mr. Taylor, who is with me, is with one of the most innovating schools in the United States, so we are happy to have him with us.

We are a department of several autonomous members related to the NEA. We are concerned with the improvement of education through the use of new media for teaching and learning. By this, is meant such items as pictures, slides, motion pictures, filmstrips, radio and television programs, recordings, and programed instruction.

Our members are drawn from both elementary and secondary schools, and from colleges and universities. They are usually in a supervisory capacity helping teachers and students select and use these materials, sometimes to produce materials, and to select and purchase materials and equipment.

Our association has also been a member of the Ad Hoc Committee on Copyright Law Revision since it was established. We support very heartily the testimony given this morning by the various groups that spoke.

I would like to say, too. that although I have some quarrel with the House report, I find the legislative history as reported in the House report satisfactory, for the most part. At a few points, the legislative history contained in the report is detrimental to the interests of education, and I will be pointing this out in my testimony.

What we thought we would do in our limited time is to show a few slides that would help us tell about newer ways that media are being used, newer ways that we are teaching, and contrast these with the older ways that are provided for in the legislation, and then to point out what part of the legislation or House report, as it is interpreted, we thought would adversely affect the learning situations that we portray.

I have broken down what I want to say into two parts. The first part will deal with performance and display not involving copying. This is just performance and display without copying.

Until quite recently, almost all uses of motion pictures, filmstrips, and the like in education took place in a classroom where the material, the projection equipment, the teacher, and the students were all present in a "face-to-face" teaching situation. This requires the moving into the classroom of the materials, the projection equipment, the projection screen, the darkening of the classroom for adequate reception, and the presence of a projectionist-sometimes the teacher. Sometimes projected materials were used with regular-sized classes and sometimes in large-group teaching.

Gradually a change has taken place in the use of projected materials. As a substitution for moving the materials, equipment, room-darkening facilities, screen, and the like into the classroom, it is frequently more convenient and equally satisfactory to bring the projected materials to the classroom situation electronically, such as over a closedcircuit transmission system.

In the next slide, it will show how this material that is being delivered to this classroom, in this case a motion picture, will be picked up and transmitted.

Mr. TAYLOR. If you are not familiar with the way a system like this works, the piece of machinery on the left is the motion picture projector. The blue box in the middle is essentially a mirror which directs the image into the television camera. This is then transmitted into one classroom or more than one classroom at a time.

We have found that by using systems like this the teachers are much more willing to use the materials, because we can get them to them much more rapidly and when they want them, when they need them in their instruction.

Dr. HYER. The proposed copyright bill would make such a transmission of such a picture and other audiovisual works illegal since face-to-face teaching activities have been interpreted in the House report on the bill as intending "to exclude broadcasting or other transmissions into a classroom whether radio or television and whether open or closed circuit."

Senator BURDICK. What section of the bill?

Dr. HYER. On page 10 of the bill, 110(2) (D)-no, that is at the bottom of page one; 110(1), performance or display of the work by instructors or pupils in a face-to-face teaching activity. It is the "face to face" there that gets us into trouble, unless you take a liberal interpretation of "face to face." Here in the slide we just showed, the material would be in one room in the school and the students and eachers would be in another. So this would not be a face-to-face ituation.

Mr. ROSENFIELD. May I break in for a moment?

Senator, the language that is referred to appears on page 70 of the report, which says that use of the phrase "in the course of faceto-face teaching activities," is intended to exclude broadcasts or other transmission into a classroom, whether radio or television and whether open or closed circuit.

This is the definition the House report gives to the language in 110(1).

Senator BURDICK. Does it interrupt your continuity if I ask questions?

Dr. HYER. No, that is very fine.

The requirement seems to be that the transmission not go beyond the place where the material being projected is located.

Senator BURDICK. I do not find much difficulty with this, but the problem I find is where the projection comes from 100 miles away to a couple of hundred schools.

Dr. HYER. I would say two things. Very few of our closed circuit television installations, and I think a thousand have been surveyed recently-1,100 actually-most of them are within a single classroom, some within a building. There is only one Hagerstown, for example, in the United States, so that you are not getting this kind of a situation. If you did, I would say that in teaching, it would be very, very seldom that teachers in all the fifth grade classes in a hundred schools would want to use this same picture at the same time, even if it were possible to show it to them.

Now, the department of audiovisual instruction feels that a distinction should be made between open and closed-circuit transmissions since the latter is being directed to a controlled and limited audience.

Closed-circuit television is often used for purposes of enlarging pictures, models, and the like which, if displayed in the classroom, could be seen by only a very small number of students at one time. So you would have to repeat the picture again and again.

Mr. TAYLOR. In this particular picture, an industrial arts teacher is demonstrating a process which only a few youngsters could normally see, but through the use of the television camera to the rear there, more youngsters, with a zoom or telescopic lens on it-more youngsters can then see the demonstration firsthand. This could also be, in the case, of a rather complicated experimental demonstration, used to send to other classrooms in the same school. The instructor might wear a microphone around his neck and the voice of the instructor would accompany the picture.

Dr. HYER. You will notice here again, we are not talking about making copies, but only of performing or displaying the very items that the school bought and paid for. So the question is, if we cannot show them this way, how can we show what we bought to be shown? We feel then, that closed-circuit television should be accorded equal status with face-to-face teaching, because in modern technology, they are almost the same.

In recent years increased emphasis has been given to the importance of individualizing instruction in order to improve the quality of learning. As a result, projected materials are being used more and more on an individual or small-group basis rather than with the entire class. Sometimes this use is in the classroom, sometimes in a learning resources center, or the student may even sign out the tabletop projector and take it and the slides and film strips or other materials home with him as home assignment work just as he would borrow a book from the school library. In other words, it is increasingly the student, not the teacher, who uses the material and the equipment.

Methods of using audio recorded materials are also changing. These, too, were formerly presented to the class as a whole via record players

or tape recorders. Most schools in the United States have public address systems, and many of these have the facility of directing, from one central location in the school, recorded material to any one classroom or group of classrooms.

The proposed copyright law, however, would seem to make it illegal to use a copyrighted recording over the public address system directed to a particular classroom although the same recording could be played in that classroom if equipment were transported to the classroom.

Individualized instruction is also making use of recorded materials. Record players and tape recorders with sets of earphones are becoming common in elementary, secondary, and college and university settings. The language laboratory, which teaches students to speak a foreign language by presenting tape-recorded speech patterns for them to imitate, is enjoying widespread use. Increasingly, however, students are not being moved so much to where the materials and equipment are, but rather the recorded messages are being moved to where the learners are. To this end, a very rapidly growing development is the audio-remote-access systems sometimes known as dial-access.

I think you have some being installed in your school system. Why do you not comment on this?

Mr. TAYLOR. Through the use of a dial-access system, it is possible to store our collection of films, tape recordings, slides, transcriptions, in one center in the school, one room, much as you store the books in a library, then have available units like this at various locations throughout the school buildings. It is possible for a student to come in, sit down, put the earphones on, turn the console on, and dial a program. At this point, we are using materials that we have used ourselves, or only those materials which we can get which are cleared for us on a system like this.

Many of the producers are willing to cooperate with us and help us in looking for solutions to the problem.

But as copyrights now stand, we are not very sure of how safe we are in using these materials, so we have been using very few of them. We would like to have more available.

Dr. HYER. I might say that I heard from one of our members the other day who had written to a number of places to get releases on materials to be used over a tape-recorded system. He found some companies quite a number of the companies were feeling schools could not use them in this way, but he found some companies would permit their materials to be used; so he told me they were putting almost all their business with the companies that allowed them to use the materials they purchased in the way they wanted to use them.

I think that is an interesting comment. The proposed copyright law seems to make the modern information delivery systems illegal. I suppose the basis for this is that the transmission is controlled by students rather than by the teachers on the basis that use by individual students substitutes for purchase of copies.

It is our contention that since no copying is done, such uses as we have cited do not result in reduced sales, but do result in improved teaching and learning. If bill 597 now goes through as it is, we feel we will be required to use horse-and-buggy methods of performance and display with new technological developments.