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