SCREEN-L Archives

January 2005, Week 4

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Stephen Tropiano <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 22 Jan 2005 13:46:28 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (34 lines)
I want to thank everyone for their comments, suggestions, etc. 
regarding "Teaching TV."

I would also like to clarify--
I appreciate Warren's comments, though I just wanted to explain
that my reason for inquring about TV shows/episodes that your
students have responded to in conjunction with CHANNELS OF
DISCOURSE was not to find "a TV program that best 'fits' the
theory" (Buckland's phrase). I also agree that "Teaching TV isn't
just about content ("what TV programs to analyze") or theories
(what theories best match up to what programs?) (Buckland's
words)."

The main goal of my course is to teach undergraduates (video
production majors and future image makers) is to get them
thinking critically about the power and limitations of the medium
and foster their analytical skills. I tell my students on the first day
of class that I consider their experience as television viewers to
be "the primary textbook" for this class.
I want to get them thinking about their own philosophy, approach,
etc. as image maker.

Stephen Tropiano
Ithaca College Los Angeles Prpgra,

P.S. "Yours in the struggle" was not referring to the teaching of
television. I understand why it might be applicable--but I believe at
the time I was writing it, I was thinking about how I am going to
make it through four more years of George W.

----
For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2