Feedback May 2002 (Vol 43 No 2)

or grip contributes to the overall product quality and because television is so laborintensive, that only through group cohesion, will the production work. Television canbe produced with a bunch of independent-minded jerks, but it is not fun. If studentsfind themselves in a negative or hostile environment, they will quickly change majorsbecause television is not fun. The instructor must be sensitive to group cohesion andprovide vehicles for accomplishing a well-functioning team.Quality or QuantitySome broadcast programs pound out closed-circuit or taped productions and “classprojects” on a regular basis while others take an entire semester to produce a single halfhourshow designed for air on a local commercial station. Some produce regular shows,others may discuss or simulate broadcasting experience (Pauli, 1998), and othersproduce shows only as they are developed. Some of these productions require a greatdeal of creative input and others don’t. Some broadcast graduates suggest students shouldget as much professional contact and produce as much professional quality production aspossible (Barner, 1999). What the students learn is different depending on the approach.Learning how to produce a consistent show does not necessarily teach how toproduce a quality show. On the other hand, because of the technical expertise requiredto produce television, constant practice is good, but it may not teach creativity.Broadcast instructors should strive to develop an atmosphere that encourages creativity(Gullifor & Berman, 1998). The challenge for the instructor is to balance the process ofpreproduction, production and postproduction. By emphasizing the consistency ofproducing a daily newscast, students may not be able to concentrate on learning goodresearch, writing, interviewing, and producing skills acquired through preproductionprocesses. Taking time to produce a longer documentary allows a great deal of depthinstruction on the pre-production process (Oskam, 1998; Maynard, 1997). Regardless ofwhich method is used, students should have a good idea of the time commitment for theclass and projects so they may “calculate their total time obligation accordingly anddecide if they can accommodate it” (Orlik, 1999, p. 35)With the increasing pressure to include new technology in student productions(i.e.: Dupagne, 2000; Ferraro & Olsen, 2000), the question could be asked whetherstudents should continue traditional broadcast production or spend time learning thenew technologies. Budgets tend to encourage the status quo and continued learning andpracticing of traditional productions such as studio news and interview shows and multicameraevent production. But when opportunities for streaming video on the web arise,it may be time to back off the old methods that result in predictable, but qualityproductions in favor of more risky, lower production value shows, yet show that aremore technologically challenging that lead to more innovative approaches tobroadcasting.I have always had the attitude that there are enough activities and interesting eventsgoing on at the university and in the community that we don’t need to developcontent, we just need to produce existing content for television. For example, bynetworking on campus and building relationships with other departments, our studentshave opportunities to produce sporting events, theatrical and dance performances,consumer type video yearbooks for campus clubs and organizations in addition toregular news coverage.10Feedback May 2002 (Vol. 43, No. 2)