| Previous | Contents References |
Next |
The Meaning Of Video ProductionDespite the abundance of interest in video production for secondary schools, little research has examined existing programs. This study contributes to an understanding of video production as a high school course. As such, it can contribute to the design and redesign of programs. This, however, has not been an objective, and a comprehensive evaluation of the programs is not presented. Nevertheless, in an effort to summarize, some evaluation is warranted. An important conclusion to bear in mind is that an evaluation of programs or student work should examine the broader contexts to establish parameters that are particular to that program and to that student (or group of students). Evaluations that attempt to be context-free will fail to appreciate the successes and failures that student projects represent for both individuals and the programs. Suburban High, for example, had the strongest program in terms of the quality and quantity of products: It resulted in approximately 50 videos among beginning students and more than 100 broadcasts of the student news program. Projects tended to be technically superior to the videos from the other schools and were frequently better in numerous other qualities. Technical proficiency was the priority, which was reflected in most projects. The program’s weaknesses were visible in the unevenness across projects and in the unevenness in participation. The evidence suggests that not all students adopted a focus on technical proficiency and that students of color were less likely to identify with the “Tech” community. As a vocational program, it was successful in preparing students for the kind of jobs that might be available to them, but there was little room for creativity, self-expression, or broader involvement in projects. The program at Urban High, on the other hand, was intended to inspire students while promoting literacy, being modeled after successful programs. It’s design was the opposite of Suburban High’s design: It sought to engage students in projects and to facilitate the acquisition of skills only as needed. This strategy is one that may have enhance the Suburban High program, encouraging a critique of it’s more traditional model. In it’s application at Urban High, however, it failed in numerous ways but most visibly in its stress on “planning” activities that required more standard academic work, which students both rejected and frequently lacked the skills for. The sheer lack of activity in all observed courses was clearly a pattern for students but may have been altered if teachers had sought more engagement with students and less academic beginnings. Still, videos were produced, reflecting personal victories for both students and teachers. The program at Boarding High had the least demanding objective: The leading activity was simply to introduce digital art by having students create their own projects. Nevertheless, many of the interns expressed a sense of failure because of the difficulty in promoting student interest. They were hampered by a lack of time, occasionally by a lack of equipment, and by confusion over their roles. Their lack of preparation for working with adolescents who had poor relationships with school and who were Native American may have contributed. Boarding High students were similarly confused about what was expected because program goals and “digital art”were novel to them. But when on their own, these students showed creativity and assertiveness that never arose in the classroom, and they explored what it is to “do video” in ways not seen in the other programs. The ways in which Boarding High students used their greater freedom demonstrates difference but does not clarify which course activities will best promote development. The best activities for a particular program would depend primarily on the program’s orientation, but the question of what students do with different assignments should also be considered. The freedom students at Boarding High experienced during production resulted in more play and more creativity. They tended to explore their schools through the lens of a camera in much the same way that students did in the pilot study. The potential of a camera to alter social relations was manifest most often in this program. By contrast, the greater constraints on production activity that was imposed by standard assignments resulted in few changes in social relations. These constraints, however, were creatively and enthusiastically fulfilled when students introduced satire. In these cases, the genre constraints became a challenge to students to make their projects fun and personal anyway, but it was a challenge to which only some students responded. In sum, students found many meanings—many purposes—in their video productions, and these meanings were particular to contexts and particular to students. Assignments like commercials provoke a predictable range of projects: from uncreative imitations of standard television commercials to creative satires, with many in between. The greater freedom in projects at Boarding High and in Suburban High’s final project led many students to try something ambitious, sometimes too ambitious, but always with interesting results. What made an assignment come to “life” for students or not—to cohere into a finished project or fall apart at the edges—had everything to do with other aspects of the context, which was always influenced by the student-school relationship. Vocational programs serve a clear and needed function, but as is discussed in the following sections, video has a potential to do more. It can promote development in youth—a development that is not likely to become visible on standardized tests but that will show in a student’s ability to communicate and reflect. Many programs with this type of goal are relegated to the after-school hours. The obstacles to conducting courses that are not studio-based in traditional schools are frequently too numerous. After-school programs are important and meaningful, but in these, the potential for making school itself more meaningful to students is lost. |
||
| Previous Contents |
Next References |