My approach varies according to the class and the level but follows three
 basicmodels: a)in my intro. level class, I show one film a week with a lecture
 in
front of it in addition to a more general lecture on the period and a class
 discussion to follow. The screening time counts as a lab, something MIT
 students
are used to dealing with; b)In my intermediate level courses, which tend to be
genre courses, I want students to be emershed in the genre and so I show 3-4
 hours of films per week in outside screenings. c)In my seminar on film
 analysis,
I tend to have a 4 hour time slot two days a week. We show a movie in the center
 two hours of the slot and discuss it before and after. In all of my classes, I
 show a lot of clips from films I am not showing. This helps to further broaden
 the student's background and to stimulate discussion of how films fit within
a larger context. The biggest benefit, however, is that in a age of video,
 students OFTEN, and I do mean, often rent the films over the weekend on their
 own, or watch them beyond the end of the term, so that you have planted seeds
 for a
future relationship with the cinema and maped some spaces they will want to
 explore as time allows. In my opinion, the most important function of
 undergraduate film education is to force students to confront the broadest
 possible range of films, to build a basic vocabulary which can either be a
 foundation for grad. work, which is rare for MIT students, or which will
 structure their future
relationship to video rentals, retro houses, etc. I always side with breadth
rather than depth, given that goal.
 
 
--Henry Jenkins, MIT