Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Screening Literacy: Executive Summary
Screening Literacy: Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
1
Contents
Foreword 3
1 Context 4
2 Terms of reference 7
2.1 Scope of the research 8
3 Methodology 9
3.1 Research team structure 10
3.2 Online Survey 10
3.3 Seminar on initial findings 11
3.4 Film Literacy Advisory Group 11
3.5 Supplementary Research 11
4 Main findings 12
4.1 Why film education? 13
4.2 What strategies are in place? 14
4.3 Where does film education happen? 15
4.4 Who provides film education? Who receives it? 17
4.5 What support is provided? 19
4.6 How is film education funded? 20
5 Recommendations 21
Appendix: list of survey respondents 23
Foreword
In July 2011, the European Commission
published an invitation to tender for a
European-scale Experts’ Study on film
literacy in Europe, covering all EU and EEA
nations, and asking for evidence-based
recommendations to inform policy making in
the forthcoming Creative Europe framework.
The tender was won by a consortium of UK
and wider European partners, led by the
British Film Institute. This report forms the
Executive Summary of a fuller report, to be
published in early 2013.
3
Station Next, Denmark
1
4
context
SCREENING LITERACY: CONTEXT
The context of film literacy in Europe is The ecologies of film culture are complex.
seen in this report from three perspectives: As has already been said, the various
the established practice of film educators film heritages of European countries are
across all sectors in the member states; the valued in certain ways, often supported by
wider arguments about film culture and its government or lottery funding, promoted
importance; and the relation between film in education where formal curricula exist
literacy and media literacy, especially in the (though as we shall see, national heritage
context of the EC’s media literacy initiative. is by no means the highest priority on
many film educators’ lists). However, the
Europe has a long tradition of moving concept of national heritage, while it still
image education. The abiding motivation has some purchase and will be respected
for this is the film cultures of Europe, and in the recommendations of this report, is
a longstanding desire in many countries to complex and contested, like any body of work
make this heritage accessible to children with canonical claims. All European states
and young people. As with other art-forms, have different language communities and
such as literature, music and art, this desire cultural traditions within them, often as a
is to some extent manifested in school result of historical inequalities of power or
curricula, in the work of independent economic status. Turkish films in Germany,
agencies, in institutes which are custodians Anglo-Hindi films in the UK, and Bosnian,
of national archives, and in a variety of Serbian and Croatian films exploring the
voluntary organisations. Balkans wars are all obvious examples of film
cultures whose representations of ethnicity,
In addition, the film industry itself has language, culture and nationhood resist any
supported educational work, motivated often easy attempts to homogenise national film
by the desire to develop future audiences, heritages. European culture is above all a
and we use this emphasis to draw attention culture of translation, and we aim in this
to two different conceptions of film report to make the cultural affordances of
education: as an entitlement for all, a social translation a core strength of European film
good (akin to the entitlement to universal education, rather than a potential obstacle.
literacy) and as an instrumental means to
developing film consumers, or audiences. Furthermore, it is often difficult to draw
We propose that a universal entitlement national boundaries around films. In an era
for all European citizens to be able to of global markets and production economies,
understand, appreciate, and participate films often involve international casts,
in the widest range of film cultures will crews, finance and location. By the same
have as one consequence among many token, the familiar distinction between
the development of more adventurous, independent and commercial cinema is
challenging, and informed audiences. But, difficult to maintain, either on aesthetic
like universal literacy, this entitlement to or economic grounds. In addition, in the
understand and enjoy a wide range of film, context of education, film educators must
and to master some of its language, is an grapple with the indisputable fact that young
important social and cultural end in itself. people’s experiences of and tastes in film are
often orientated to popular cinema. For all
Despite the best of intentions, it is fair to say these reasons, it makes no sense either in
that film education has always struggled to principle or practice to demonise Hollywood,
establish itself in school curricula. While the Bollywood or the commercial films of China
‘traditional’ arts, especially music, art and and Hong Kong. Rather, a tolerant approach
literature, have commonly been established to diverse tastes, genres and styles seems
as core elements of national curricula, film more likely to attract young people to less
(and media more generally) have typically familiar film traditions, including those of
been either absent or marginal. The findings their own country. For this reason, we asked
of this report will provide, for the first time, film educators in the EU member states
a confirmation of this picture in some detail. about the merits of including world cinema
and popular cinema alongside national
traditions; and the outcomes of these
questions will appear in the report.
5
SCREENING LITERACY: CONTEXT
The third context, the relationship between have the right for their media and film
film education/literacy and media education/ cultures to be respected, while also having
literacy raises several questions. One is the the right to be introduced to European films
relation between critical appreciation and they might be unaware of. It recognises
creative production, and the shift in recent that the aims of media education and film
years, with access to affordable filming education are virtually identical – to foster
and editing equipment, towards the latter. a wider literacy which incorporates broad
Another is the tension between film (often cultural experience, aesthetic appreciation,
conceived as an art form) and media more critical understanding and creative
generally (often conceived as entertainment production. And it recognises that, in an
and information). Yet another is the tension era of ‘convergence culture’, young people’s
between protectionist versions of both as engagement with powerful media fictions
opposed to more positive engagements with may range across books, comics, films,
young people’s cultural experience. While television dramas and videogames. In
media education has sometimes been seen this respect, film education is a subset of
as a protection against a range of social ills, media education, and the two work best
from meretricious content to misinformation hand-in-hand.
and moral debasement, film education has
sometimes been seen as a protection against In a more practical sense, film and media
Hollywood. Some of these questions are education are frequently connected in
directly addressed by those reporting from curriculum frameworks. This relationship
EU member states, and represented in the is, again, something we explored with the
report. In general, our position reflects recent member states, and the results can be found
versions of media education in Europe. in the report.
It recognises that children and young people
6
School visit to the cinema, Lithuania
Photo: J. P. Pastukas
2 TERMS OF
REFERENCE
2
terms of reference
7
SCREENING LITERACY: TERMS OF REFERENCE
The European Commission’s definition From 2014 the MEDIA programme will be
of film literacy from the original tender subsumed into Creative Europe, and the
specification was: ‘the level of understanding outcomes of this research project we hope
of a film, the ability to be conscious and will inform the shape of the media and film
curious in the choice of films and the literacy dimensions of Creative Europe.
competence to critically watch a film and
to analyse its content, cinematography and The Tender Specification requested ‘a report
technical aspects’. Following conversations mapping the current practices in film literacy
with the Steering Group, our revised in Europe…A European-scale experts’ study
definition is as follows: which identifies and analyses film literacy
provision in Europe – in formal and informal
‘The level of understanding of a film, the settings, and all age groups’:
ability to be conscious and curious in the
choice of films; the competence to critically + Film literacy and AV national policy;
watch a film and to analyse its content, film industry; broadcasters
cinematography and technical aspects;
and the ability to manipulate its language + National Curricula: single subject or
and technical resources in creative moving cross-curricular; learning objectives;
image production.’ film institutes and other organisations
The defined purpose behind film literacy + Informal sector: film institutes, NGOs,
is: ‘for young people, to provide awareness grassroots groups
and knowledge about our film heritage and
increasing interest in these films and in + Role of film industry and media
recent European films, the ultimate goal professionals in film literacy projects
being to build a long term audience for
European films.’ We would like to extend + Examples of good practice
this purpose to encompass a universal
entitlement on behalf of all citizens ‘to
be introduced to the fundamentals of the
moving image, and to be able to master
some of its language.’
8
School cinema screening, Slovenia
3
methodology
9
SCREENING LITERACY: METHODOLOGY
The core research team consisted of a (IOM, the Hellenic AudioVisual Institute),
consortium of BFI, London University Portugal (University of the Algarve), Germany
Institute of Education, and industry body Film (Vision Kino), Italy (University of Roma
Education. The three Research Directors were Tre), Ireland (Irish Film Institute), Denmark
Mark Reid (BFI), Professor Andrew Burn (IoE), (StationNext), Hungary (Hungarian Moving
and Ian Wall (Film Education). The research Image Media Education Association), Slovenia
programme was co-ordinated by Wendy (Slovenian Film Institute), Netherlands (EYE,
Earle, and the core researchers were Michelle the Dutch Film Institute), and the Czech
Cannon, Kate Domaille, and Caren Willig. We Republic (CR Film Education Board). We
were very ably assisted by MA students Alice created an Experts’ Group from this list:
Guilluy and Alejandra de Leiva. Vitor Reia-Batista; Simone Moraldi; Irene
Andriopoulou; Sara Duve; and Laszlo Hartai.
Our core research partners were drawn from The project had a Steering Group based in
Poland (PISF, the Polish Film Institute), Greece the MEDIA Unit of the European Commission.
Our major research instrument was a series The surveys were carried out in English, and
of questionnaires delivered by online survey we are grateful, as English people should
tool Survey Monkey, that were created, always be, for the patience and linguistic
trialled, and tested during January 2012. facility shown by partners in using their
We consulted our research partners on non-native tongue.
its suitability and ease of use, and on the
value of the data it produced. We invited the One logistical complication lay in the number
partners to look through the survey before of countries with federal political structures:
we asked them to fill it in, so that they could this makes it difficult to complete ‘national’,
familiarize themselves with it, and suggest as in ‘unified’, pictures of provision, and of
any last minute changes. educational and cultural structures. We were
able to complete ‘jigsaw’ national pictures for
The survey was structured into 5 parts: film some of these nations (Germany; Belgium;
literacy provision in formal education; in Spain; UK).
informal education; through the audio-visual
industries; through cultural organizations; The outcomes of each national survey
and professional development of film were compiled into a series of ‘national
educators. We had an additional section, pictures’ of film literacy, which are appended
inviting participants to create case studies, to this report. In addition, we compiled
one from each of the formal, informal, and a series of case studies of significant
audio-visual settings, with a set of questions practice, again drawn from the online
to structure the completion of each survey submissions. These include three
case study. significant ‘transnational’ programmes: the
Cinematheque Francaise programme Cinema
The surveys were completed by our 11 cent ans de jeunesse; Europa Cinemas;
partners, and 4 UK partners (one for each and the European Cultural Foundation’s
devolved nation), in February 2012, and DocNext programme.
by a further 20 partners, in June 2012. The
surveys for each nation were corroborated We commissioned specific reports on areas
by an additional correspondent. We received of film education that we felt merited more
no information from partners in Bulgaria or focused attention: the education activities of
Romania, but would be delighted to rectify film heritage organisations; cinema-based
that if we are approached following the education provision; and family-focused
publication of our full report. film education activity. We also listed film
festivals with youth or education dimensions.
All of these reports will be appended to the
main, full report.
10
3.3 Seminar on initial findings
On 26 and 27 March 2012, we hosted a to the creation of this ideal type; and to
seminar for the Phase 1 partners, in London. propose actions that might overcome
Our day followed an agenda: to respond to these barriers, with a special emphasis
our interim findings; to imagine an ‘ideal on actions that might be taken by the
model’ of film education; to discuss barriers European Commission.
Out of the March seminar, we constituted partners from Phase 2, by the European
the Experts’ Group and our Phase 1 research Commission. The group has established
partners as a Film Literacy Advisory Group, an internal blog at:
and we now propose the formal adoption filmliteracyadvisorygroup.wordpress.com
of this group, expanded to include other
Two MA placements based at BFI in May programmes, such as Europa Cinemas, the
and June worked on supplementary European Cultural Foundation’s DocNext
research outcomes – gathering and collating programme, and the Cinematheque Francaise
data on film festival education profiles, programme ‘le Cinema cent ans de jeunesse.’
specific national and regional film literacy
programmes, and some transnational
11
Film workshop, EYE / Netherlands Film Institute
Photo: Hans Boddeke
12
4 main findings
SCREENING LITERACY: MAIN FINDINGS
Recommendation 1:
Develop a series of models of film education for Europe, that include
appreciation of film as an art form, critical understanding, access to
national heritage, world cinema and popular film, and creative film-
making skills. We also recommend the adoption by EC of the revised
definition of film education we use in this report:
Recommendation 2:
The EC should support the institution of a Film Literacy Advisory
Group (FLAG) to draft and circulate these models, and to advise on
initiatives in the other recommendations.
The strongest models of provision are those strong. The Norwegian Film Institute (NFI –
with national strategies jointly devised/ Norsk Filminstitut) has been coordinating a
endorsed by both Culture and Education national film education strategy for several
ministries, with strong industry support, years and has published two online film
and we found few examples of this. Only websites around it. In Finland, although
Northern Ireland appears to have a fully there is no overall film strategy, there are
integrated national film education strategy. several agencies and non-governmental-
The Scandinavian countries are generally organisations highly active in the promotion
13
SCREENING LITERACY: MAIN FINDINGS
of film education. And in Denmark and competences’ in film literacy. Croatia: The
Sweden, each respective Film Institute has its Ministry of Science, Education and Sport of
own ‘national strategy.’ the Republic of Croatia, and also the Croatian
audiovisual Centre (HAVC) have a national
Elsewhere, France has strategies for national film education strategy.
delivery, while others were currently devising
strategies (UK, Czech Republic, Ireland). We found this question raised further ones:
Other nations have strategic approaches, what is the value of a national strategy? Who
without there being a national delivery plan: should own it? How should its impact be
The Netherlands and Poland have a high measured and evaluated? Members of the
degree of national co-ordination between Advisory Group were clear that where film
a range of agencies; Greece has statements education is under threat, or marginalized,
amounting to ‘national awareness’ of the a national strategy, owned by education as
value and opportunities around film literacy; well as cultural ministries, is a good way of
Germany has secured agreement amongst a protecting and promoting film literacy.
range of federal agencies to a ‘statement of
Recommendation 3:
We found a range of valuable strategic policies and instruments
which we believe member states would benefit from examining
and learning from. We propose a ‘Translation Fund’ which
supports national agencies in adapting strategic approaches from
other, similar nations and territories, and supports professional
development and exchange of key workers in those agencies in
meeting and learning from colleagues in other countries.
15
SCREENING LITERACY: MAIN FINDINGS
Recommendation 4:
Member states should be encouraged to provide core programmes
of film education, at both primary and secondary levels; to provide
annual figures of take-up in optional film education; and to provide
data on attainment and progression. EC might support individual
member states with research funding to determine levels and quality
of take up and engagement
Recommendation 5:
The EC should consider how to enable guidance on how to make
available effective curriculum models, levels of minimum provision,
and appropriate pedagogies, relating them to mother tongue
provision, arts education, and new media/ICT.
16
4.3.3 OUTSIDE SCHOOL
Only one country, France, has a formally Hungary). Film education in the informal
structured national programme of film sector would however benefit from more
education for young people outside school. substantial and sustained professional
Elsewhere, the organisations which provide development: for youth and community
film education outside school, and beyond workers, for freelance film professionals
school age, are fairly evenly spread across working in education; and for adult educators.
cinemas and film festivals, adult colleges, film We address this need in Recommendation 12.
societies, galleries and museums, film archive
centres and a variety of community spaces. The greatest challenges in film education
In the majority of countries, this provision is provision outside the formal curriculum seem
linked to national programmes (eg Cyprus, to be faced by the new member states. The
Poland, Italy, UK, the Netherlands, Finland, recommendations will reflect this finding.
Iceland). In others, it is more dependent on
local initiatives (eg Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia,
Recommendation 6:
The EC should consider ways of funding outreach schemes, on
a ‘translation’ model, in the new member states, modelled by
successful providers of informal film education in Europe.
4.4.1 PROVIDERS
17
SCREENING LITERACY: MAIN FINDINGS
PROVIDERS
In many countries, the film industry Film archives in Greece (National Film
supports film education initiatives such Archive, and Thessaloniki Film Museum),
as film museum work, study days, festival Poland (Filmoteka Szkolna), UK (Northern
programmes or free screenings. The majority Ireland, Scotland, BFI, regional archives) offer
of such support was directed at schools, education screenings and events. Those in
with some provision in some countries for France, UK and Hungary offer online access
children and families. The least provision to archive film and education resources. (See
was for adult learners, with the exception of the Appendix in the full report for a fuller
cinema screenings, and a couple of public picture of film education provision through
service broadcasters. film archive organisations.)
The major national cinema-based education A problem perceived by our expert panel was
programmes are in France, Germany the accessibility of film archives, both for
(VisionKino), UK (Film Education), and easy viewing by schools and other groups,
Denmark (organized by the DFI), and there and for more creative work such as
are smaller cinema education programmes re-editing, which raised considerable
around arthouse cinemas in Poland (but not copyright and IP questions.
nationally co-ordinated), and single cinemas
or Cinematheques in most countries.
Slovenia has a network of 25 arthouse
cinemas offering education programmes.
Recommendation 7:
Member states should promote partnerships between the film
industry, education agencies, and government departments. Such
partnerships should seek to ensure a return in educational benefit
from any investment of public money in film production. Support
should include the provision of materials to enhance learning, and
in particular: access to production materials (including production
rushes); involvement of industry talent at events; and waiving of
screening fees in a non-theatrical exhibition context.
Recommendation 8:
EC should provide guidelines on the use of material from national
and regional film archives’ clearance for classroom use, including
guidance on licensing and copyright clearance.
4.4.2 RECIPIENTS
Recommendation 9:
Consideration should be given to supporting education programmes
for both families, and for wider adult communities, focusing on
diverse, migrant, and older people, by funding ‘translations’ of such
programmes from one territory to another.
18
4.5 What support is provided?
4.5.1
FILM EDUCATION RESOURCES
Recommendation 10:
The EC should sponsor, in tandem with the industry, a European
bank of exemplar online resources, for a wide range of audiences and
education settings, translated from good practice across the EU.
Recommendation 11:
Member states should be encouraged to incorporate a film education
component within initial teacher education programmes.
Recommendation 12:
The EC should provide online guidance on best practice in in-service
training provision across the EU.
Recommendation 13:
The EC should investigate models for the collaborative provision of
accredited training at M-level, for the widest range of film educators,
using existing collaborative HE structures.
19
SCREENING LITERACY: MAIN FINDINGS
Recommendation 14:
The EC should sponsor research into levels of funding for film
education, and funding in relation to outcomes, in order to provide
guidance on minimum provision, models of joint funding, and
strategies for effective direction of financial resources.
20
Schul Kino Woche (Schools Film Week), Berlin
Photo: Kay Herschelmann
5
recommendations
21
SCREENING LITERACY: recommendations
Recommendation 1: Recommendation 7:
Draft a model of film education for Europe, Member states should promote partnerships
including appreciation of film as an art form, between the film industry, education
critical understanding, access to national agencies, and government departments.
heritage, world cinema and popular film, Such partnerships should seek to ensure
and creative film-making skills. We also a return in educational benefit from
recommend the adoption by EC of the any investment of public money in film
revised definition of film education we production. Support should include the
use in this report: provision of materials to enhance learning,
and in particular: access to production
‘The level of understanding of a film, the materials (including production rushes);
ability to be conscious and curious in the involvement of industry talent at events; and
choice of films; the competence to critically waiving of screening fees in a non-theatrical
watch a film and to analyse its content, exhibition context.
cinematography and technical aspects;
and the ability to manipulate its language Recommendation 8:
and technical resources in creative moving The EC should provide guidelines on the
image production’ use of material from national and regional
film archives’ clearance for classroom
Recommendation 2: use, including guidance on licensing and
The EC should support the institution of a copyright clearance.
film literacy advisory group (flag) to draft
such a model, and to advise on initiatives in Recommendation 9:
the other recommendations. Consideration should be given to supporting
education programmes for wider adult
Recommendation 3: communities, focusing on diverse, migrant,
We found a range of valuable strategic and older people, maybe by funding
policies and instruments which we ‘translations’ of such programmes from
believe member states would benefit from one territory to another
examining and learning from. We propose a
‘translation fund’ which supports national Recommendation 10:
agencies in adapting strategic approaches The EC should sponsor, in tandem with the
from other, similar nations and territories, industry, a European bank of exemplar online
and supports professional development of resources drawn from good practice across
key workers in those agencies in meeting and the EU.
learning from colleagues in other countries.
Recommendation 11:
Recommendation 4: Member states should incorporate media
Member states should ensure that core education, with a robust film education
programmes of media education, with a component, within initial teacher
robust film education element, are provided education programmes.
at both primary and secondary levels; to
provide annual figures of take-up in optional Recommendation 12:
film education; and to provide data on The EC should provide online guidance on best
attainment and progression. practice in in-service provision across the EU.
Austria Gerhardt Ordnung FilmABC Institut für angewandte Medienbildung und Filmvermittlung
(Institute for applied media literacy and film education)
Alejandro Bachmann Head of Education, Austrian Film Museum
Belgium Harveng Gérard Project leader, Conseil supérieur de l’Education aux médias,(Higher Council for Media Education),
Belgium (Brussels - Wallonia Federation);
Elise Van Beurden Co-ordination educational departement, Jekino Education and Distribution, Belgium
Croatia Ivana Jakobović Alpeza, Head of Education Film Programme, “Kids Meet Art”
Czech Republic Pavel Bednarik, Independent film professional, National Film Archive (Narodni filmovy archiv) Prague;
Additional comments and
endorsement: Petr Platenik Independent educator and journalist
Estonia Anu Krabo Project Manager, Tallinn University Baltic Film and Media School
France Loïc Joffredo CLEMI - Centre de liaison de l’enseignement et des médias d’information
Pierre Laporte / Patrick Laudet Ministère de l’éducation nationale, de la jeunesse et de la vie associative
Pierre Forni Centre national du cinéma et de l’Image animée (CNC), Chef du département de l’éducation artistique
Greece Irene Andriopoulou, Media Researcher – Media & Film Literacy Consultant
Additional comments:
Menis Theodoridis Film director and media education specialist
Hungary László Hartai Chairman of the Hungarian Moving Picture and Media Education Association
Anette Hilbert Lecturer, Department of Film, King Sigismund College and Foreign Relations Officer,
Hungarian Moving Picture and Media Education Association
Additional commentary:
Dr. Imre Szijártó Head of the MA on Film Pedagogy, Eszterházy Károly University
Iceland Guðni Olgeirsson & Advisors, Dept of Education, Ministry of Education, Science and Culture
Þórunn Jóna Hauksdottir
Laufey Guðjónsdóttir Director, Icelandic Film Centre
Italy Simone Moraldi Coordinamento Universitario per la Didattica del Cinema e dell’Audiovisivo nei Nuovi Licei Artistici, Di.Co.Spe. -
Dipartimento Comunicazione e Spettacolo, Università degli Studi, Roma Tre
Endorsed by: Alessandra Guarino Fondazione Centro Sperimentale di Cinematografia – Scuola Nazionale di Cinema, Roma
Lithuania Goda Sosnovskiene Head of Education Programmes at Cinema Center SKALVIJA (Vilnius) NGO Image Culture Studio (Vilnius)
Luxembourg Anne Schroeder Film Producer and Head of Educational department, Centre National de
l’audiovisuel (CAN). Union Luxembourgeoise des Producteurs de l’Audiovisuel (ULPA)
Malta Mario Azzapardi Director - Directorate for Lifelong Learning Ministry of Education and Employment
Poland Agata Sotomska, Education Project Co-ordinator, Polish Film Institute (PISF) ,
Endorsement: Arkadiusz Walczak Director of the Warsaw Centre for Educational and Social Innovations and Trainings (WCIES).
Slovak Republic Natasa Slavikova Independent expert, EU Media Literacy Working Group; Director General of Department of Media, Audiovisual
and Copyright, Slovak Republic Ministry of Culture from 2007 to 2012
Lubica Bizikova School Education Expert, National Institute for Education, EU Media Literacy Working Group
Sweden Per Eriksson Programme Officer Children & Youth, Swedish Film Institute
Switzerland Dr. Jan Sahli Lecturer Film Studies, University of Zurich – cineducation.ch
The Netherlands Victoria Breugem Head of Education, EYE Film Institute Netherlands;
Endorsed by: Eeke Wervers, Senior projectleider, Cultuurnetwerk Nederland
23
For the Final Report, Country Profiles
and Case Studies, go to:
bfi.org.uk/screeningliteracy
24