American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences
(AAFCS)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position, but recommends following SOCAP guidelines.

Has no formal position.

According to Ann Chadwick, Executive Director, group may explore the issue at an upcoming leadership meeting. However, group believes it would be "inappropriate for the AAFCS to issue any statement regarding classroom products, considering the vast number of products our teachers [home ec] purchase. Better in this case to leave these decisions to school districts."

American Association of School Administrators
(AASA)

Is not opposed, with reservations.

Opposes for the following reasons: 1) it requires students to view commercials,
2) commercials are sold with the understanding that they will be viewed by students in classrooms and are therefore a captive audience, and 3) the commercial time is paid for by
the taxpayer.

Is not opposed if they meet school needs and standards. Sponsor recognition and corporate logos should be for identification rather than commercial purposes and logos be appropriate in size, placement, and content.

Opposes programs that require students to observe, listen to, or read commercial advertising (unless students are studying advertising).

Was one of several educational groups that endorsed the eight national principles for corporate involvement in schools developed at the Conference on Corporate Involvement in Schools, hosted by the School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, in November 1990. Believes school-business partnerships are important but opposes commercialism in schools. Has been involved in the battles in California and New York to ban Channel One.

American Federation of Teachers
(AFT)

Has no formal position.

Is opposed to television commercials in
the classroom and districts being forced to obtain equipment "with...learning time."

Has no formal position but
as a general philosophy does
not endorse for classroom use.

Has no formal position but is not inclined toward it.

Many AFT locals have been vigorous opponents of Channel One. AFT does not endorse sponsored educational materials for use in the classroom considering the implicit, and often explicit, commercial and political targeting of children involved. AFT resolved at its 1990 convention that it "opposes television commercials in the classroom and condemns the lack of economic resources that puts school districts in the position of buying television and other electronic equipment with the valuable learning time of children. AFT understands the decisions regarding such arrangements some locals might nevertheless make out of a pragmatic need for television and other electronic equipment." It endorses the guidelines developed at the Milwaukee Conference in 1990.

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)

Is opposed.

Has no specific position regarding Channel One beyond its position on commercialism.

Is opposed mainly because they represent "the corporate view of issues..." and "portray special-interest opinion as objective analysis."

Is opposed.

ASCD recommends that schools develop clear guidelines for use of commercial materials supplied by outside groups. It "urges districts to develop policies to ensure that any commercial materials that are used: 1) are consistent with the values, goals, and objectives of the educational program, 2) respond to a clearly understood educational need, 3) support existing curriculum and instruction, 4) have been considered and assessed by groups with different views, 5) do not infringe on instructional time, and 6) do not promote a brand-named product."

International Reading Association
(IRA)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Maintains neutrality and objectivity concerning commercial products, but recognizes the problems inherent in sponsored educational materials.

Has no formal position.

Terry Salinger, Director of Research, recommends that educators making selections consider many different variables besides cost and who is sponsoring a piece of material. Advocates their looking at things critically in terms of utility for students. Trusts individual teachers to be "informed consumers" and "critical consumers" and to use their best judgment in selecting materials.

National Association for Gifted Children
(NAGC)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

"At this point, our Board has taken no position on it," said NAGC's Peter Rosenstein.

National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

National Alliance of Black School Educators
(NABSE)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Past Executive Director William J. Saunders embraced the use of Channel One. However, the group has not taken a position on Channel One.

National Association of Elementary School Principals
(NAESP)

Is not opposed.

Leaves it up to individual districts and principals to decide, but also recognizes it as "an improper intrusion into valuable instructional
time and is an unwarranted and potentially harmful trend."

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position beyond its position on commercialism.

June Million, Director of Public Information, says NAESP. "Firmly supports the concept of partnerships between private-sector business and public schools." Recognizes that there's a fine line schools need to walk between getting materials they need and don't have the money for and the corporate need to advertise. Calls upon school principals nationwide to use extreme caution and discretion in maintaining a clear and distinct separation between commercial advertising, in any medium, and the learning programs in their schools. Recommends "school districts and principals assume a clearance role in assuring [this]."

National Association of Secondary School Principals
(NASSP)

Has no "broad" formal position on in-school commercialism.

Opposes Channel One, specifically the idea of forcing students to watch commercials.

Has no formal position. Advises teachers and principals to review SEMs on a case-by-case basis.

Has no formal position.

Dr. Tom Koerner, Deputy Executive Director, states that NAASP's criteria for opposing Channel One is that "it forces students to watch commercials" as opposed to ad-bearing materials, which are more passive. "Scoreboards, billboards...no one is forcing students to view these." Regarding SEMs, it is NASSP's position that while there are some good and many poor ones, they are best handled by a teacher and principal on a case-by-case basis.

National Association of State Boards of Education
(NASBE)

Has no formal position.

Opposes Channel One on the basis of its opposition to commercialized instructional time.

Has no formal position, but advocates school-business partner-ships provided
there is no commercialization of instructional time.

Has no formal position.

Brenda Walburn, Executive Director, reports that while they have not taken up the Channel One fight for several years, they do "advise and back-up local and state school boards with their position and reasoning." Besides their formal policy against commercialism of instruction time, the Association cites a report "confirming a link between decreased academic performance and poor school-day management" and goes on to say "adding a mandated viewing of a 12-minute broadcast to an already overloaded day...the result is more instructional time lost."

National Business Education Association
(NBEA)

Calls for caution and discretion.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position

Has no formal position.

National Council for the Social Studies
(NCSS)

Is not opposed, with reservations.

Opposes programming such as Channel One.

Is not opposed if they meet school needs and standards.

Has no formal position.

Channel One does not meet two of NCSS's criteria for TV in the classroom: "...should not include commercials" and "teacher should be able to use only segments, if desired." It endorses the guidelines developed at the Milwaukee Conference in 1990.

National Council of Teachers of English
(NCTE)

Has no formal position.

Opposes commercial television advertising, such as Channel One, in the classroom.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Urges schools not to adopt programs or renew contracts involving use of materials "that include mandatory exposure of students to commercial TV advertising in the classroom"; passed resolution in 1992 opposing "intrusions of commercial television advertising, such as Channel One, in the classroom"; is seeking alliances with other education and consumer groups who feel the same way. Endorses the guidelines developed at the Milwaukee Conference in 1990.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
(NCTM)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

In its "Position Statement on Professional Standards for Selection and Implementation of Instructional Materials," suggests that all materials should be evaluated by a selection committee composed of teachers and supervisors
with expertise and responsibility in mathematics education and that cost of the materials should not be a factor. Has endorsed a number of corporate sponsored materials, including Count On Domino's from Domino's Pizza (page 50).

National Education Association
(NEA)

Opposes commercialism which forces students to observe, listen to, or read advertising. However, encourages meaningful and non-commercial partnerships between business and education.

Is opposed to and willing to support legal actions against if necessary (though has not been called upon to do so).

Has no formal position, but has developed ten guidelines for endorsing commercial "educational" programs, one of which states "program does not require teachers, students or parents to promote a commercial product."

Is opposed to any programs that require students to observe, listen to, or read commercial advertising.

NEA endorses the guidelines developed at the 1990 Milwaukee Conference. It believes that business-education partnerships can be mutually beneficial. In 1991 its Board of Directors adopted two principles to govern such partnerships: 1) that public education employees be involved as equal partners with business, and 2) that the partnership arrangements do not result in programs that stress the marketing and/or promotion of products with students.
In 1993 NEA issued a public statement strengthening its opposition to commercialism. While the statement relates primarily to Channel One, it "also covers all programs that include commercials which students are mandated to view." In 1994 it called for local NEA teacher pension funds to divest themselves of companies that sponsor Channel One.

National Middle School Association (NMSA)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

National Parent Teacher Association
(National PTA)

Strongly opposes required viewing/ usage of commercial materials; will seek and support legislation to protect children from required usage.

Is opposed and would support government limitations; opposes "any provision which requires children
to watch TV commercials as a condition of their instruction."

Has no specific position on classroom materials outside of its general position on commercialism.

Is opposed to
the concept
of requiring students to "read advertising
as a condition
of corporate donations to schools."

Opposes "any provision which requires children to watch TV commercials as a condition of their instruction." Suggests that corporations with the same concern for enhancing the education of children as PTA has could serve students better if they'd "provide technology and high quality programs without demanding direct commercial return on the investment" and that "as a marketplace for ideas, the school should offer a balance...of views, not free access for those who pay entrance." It endorses the guidelines developed at the 1990 Milwaukee Conference.

National School Boards Association
(NSBA)

Has no formal position.

Opposes Channel One.

Is not opposed to materials that have educational value but recommends that all such materials be approved by a principal.

Is opposed; feels that "advertising materials...should not be displayed or distributed in the schools or on school grounds."

Recommends that commercial material
be approved by principal before used
in school, and that approval be given
to materials "which are of obvious educational quality, which supplement and enrich text and reference materials for definite school courses, and are timely and up-to-date." A number of individual member school districts have taken
formal positions, but most of these follow the NSBA guidelines.

National Science Teachers Association
(NSTA)

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position.

Has no formal position. Believes that it is up to the teacher to make decisions about what sponsored materials to use as well as how to use them.

Has no formal position.

According to Bill Aldridge, Executive Director, the organization has no official policy on Channel One, sponsored educational materials, or other forms of in-school commercialism. However, he believes that if teachers were polled or in a position to set policy, most would oppose Channel One and outright advertising, but not oppose sponsored materials if they had some educational value. He doesn't see commercialism in school as a big problem. In fact, the organization has endorsed a number of corporate sponsored materials, including Sugar Science from the Sugar Association (page 52) and Science Screen Report from Allegro Productions (page 18).

State Departments
of Education

See comments.

See comments.

See comments.

See comments.

Generally, action at the state level falls into three categories: 1) states that have taken legislative and/or judicial action, 2) states that have endorsed the guidelines developed at the 1990 Milwaukee Conference, and 3) states that have taken no action at this level. States that have taken legislative action and/or judicial action to date are: CA, HI, MA, NY, RI, TX. States that have endorsed the 1990 Milwaukee Conference are the states above and GA, IA, LA, ME, MN, NV, SC, PA. The difference is significant, for while the guidelines developed at Milwaukee are effective, they are not enforceable. States taking legislative/judicial action are trying to correct this and give the guidelines the rule of law.