There has been increasing debate over the merits and demerits of various techniques of teaching, par ticularly as it is becoming increasingly obvious that tra ditional methods of instruction are incapable of handling the sharp increases in university enrolment. That tele vision can be used to serve large numbers of students is clear, that it can make an effective contribution to higher learning is far from unanimously accepted. As a tool of instruction it has strong supporters and violent opponents. It has by some been seen as the only answer to improve the quality of education, by others rejected without any serious consideration. If television is to be used effectively at the university level, it obviously needs to be accepted by students and faculty. The image that these groups have of televised lectures is undoubtedly a significant factor in determin ing how television can be used. Although students do generally agree that television can be a good means of handling large classes, research findings generally report less favourable attitudes to ward courses taught by television as compared with conventional classes. Polls of student opinion at Miami, Penn State, and San Francisco State have shown that students usually prefer a conventional class, and usually think they learn more in such a class.1 They may object to television because of no contact with the instructor, because of lack of opportunity to ask questions, be cause they become bored and sleepy watching the tele vision screen, or in some courses because the camera man has too much control over what they are able to see. But others prefer television because the novelty of it makes the class more interesting, or because they feel that the professors are better, or better prepared. Students seem to use the conventional classroom as the criterion for evaluating educational television, imply ing that the conventional classroom is the desirable norm. This results in emphasis upon some of the more traditional aspects in the teaching situation with less concern for the innovations possible through television. A number of factors tend to modify students' preferences for conventional or television classes. Under certain conditions students willingly volunteer for ad ditional television courses. One of these is liking the instructor. Students prefer certain instructors and will An Assistant Professor at the Uni versity of Guelph (B.A.,M.A.,Man itoba; Ph.D., Iowa State) reports on changing student and faculty atti tudes toward TV instruction. take them whether their courses are live or televised. Lepore and Wilson4 reported that if assured of a su perior instructor in a hypothetical television course, the range of student preference for televised instruction was from a low of 64% in one group to a high of 87% in another. In another study, well over one-half of the subjects who were favourable to educational television reported that their findings about the television instruc tor were important in determining their attitudes.3 Undoubtedly, the effectiveness of a teaching method depends on the competence and enthusiasm of the teacher in using that method. This presents difficulty in determining the effectiveness of a particular method be cause it is often difficult to determine how much the instructor's own personality and skills have influenced the outcome. Another variable influencing student attitude to ward television is class size. Schramm6 states that when the face to face class is very large many students prefer the television section. At Penn State, when students were given some experience with both television and live classes of 150 or more, then told to choose one or the other for the rest of the semester, they chose tele vision, six to four.1 Another variable is the time that the class is sched uled. In an Oregon study, 68% of the respondents said they would take a television class scheduled at a con venient time rather than wait for a conventional class at a later time.4 Students are more willing to take some courses by television than others. Students in five Oregon colleges and universities felt that their televised chemistry course was in general better than classroom teaching in stimu lating their learning, but that a course in literature was about the same in that respect as classroom learning teaching ; however, a course in English composition was if anything less effective than classroom teaching. Stu dents appear more willing to take their physical sciences by television than their social sciences and are more willing to take their social sciences than their humanities by television.6 It appears that viewing room assistants and seminar leaders can influence student reaction to televised in