of academics and critics that promoted the canon are now faced with scholars, critics and students with the capacity to challenge the canon through self-‐
directed viewing and a more fluid connection to audiences and readerships which may see academia have to yield to new market and audience demands.
1.5.2 Bringing the film industry into the classroom
The film industry’s relationship with education is a paradoxical one: It needs graduates to fill its jobs yet it has never fully participated in the development of a coherent argument concerning what an ideal film education ought to include. It claims a lack of interest in what academia does, yet it has historically felt threatened by the advancement of appreciation and cultural awareness around the study of films, something addressed in chapter two (section 2.5.1) looking at the history of the British Film Institute (BFI). Despite an apparent disinterest in the approach of academia, the industry has sometimes sought involvement in the education sector, to guide the agenda towards skills and away from theory and analysis. In an interview conducted for this thesis, head of quality at the University of Bedfordshire, Tim Gregory discussed the relationship between higher education and industry in terms relevant to his experience that highlight some of the general issues or challenges.
Gregory (2013 Interview) comments that employers are involved and taken into account in course development ‘right from the overall aims of the approval process’ through to the final event panel. An employer or industry representative is on the final panel and this is where the rigour and appropriateness of the course for learners, including the industrial, professional engagement they will obtain is debated, confirmed and signed off. Throughout the process, employer and industry input ranges from quantitative analysis to questioning proposed content. Gregory (2013 Interview) says they may advise
‘this is what we want, but please stress this’ in reference to specific course content. Gregory was asked how employers and industry contacts were targeted, and if it was companies or industry bodies that were approached, to which he replied:
It is both. It varies […] whatever is appropriate to the subject area. From my experience somewhere like Computing has a base of companies they are working with all the time […] but they are also aware of what the overarching industry bodies are saying (Gregory, 2013 Interview).
When asked how he felt employers and companies responded to the process, whether they responded with their individual interests or the general requirements of their industry in mind, Gregory says, in his experience of course design, this is where one of the biggest challenges of the process emerges. The challenge of finding a balance between what the value of the course is for students entering industry, alongside the needs and desires of employers to recruit suitable graduates. He says:
It is variable again but there is a tendency of course for employers to see it from their own perspective. […] That can lead to challenges around course design […] you have to think about reconciling different views to form a general course […] Fundamentally what’s emerging […] are common skills that are required by employers (Gregory, 2013 Interview).
It is these common skills that film as an industry has yet to deliberate, confirm and announce in order for film courses to ensure all graduates have a basic, fundamental understanding. Gregory adds:
[Industry] would then argue that the ‘training’ they can give, but it’s the core stuff that they want, and you can begin to say […] is the backbone of
this course suitable as a grounding for people entering the profession?
(Gregory, 2013 Interview).
There is a need to retrain when graduates enter professional work, due to the disparity between professional production equipment and equipment used predominantly within higher education. However, within film education, it is these core skills that have not been consistently consolidated across the higher education sector. In closing, Gregory discussed how curriculum design can, presumably when in knowledge of specific and general industrial needs, be proactive and commercially savvy by developing short courses that can support employers by being ‘tailored to their individual needs’ and he encourages liaison with professionals to try and meet a diverse range of those needs (Gregory, 2013 Interview).
Elsewhere in the sector at one of the leading media practice institutions, Bournemouth University, the relationship between industry and the academy is integral. Subject leader for film and television Trevor Hearing (2009) comments that ‘students undertake compulsory work placements’ that are supported by a dedicated office to maximise the impact of the ‘the connections we have built up over the years’. The word compulsory is key here, highlighting how much the need for engagement with professional practice is ingrained within the institution.
Certain universities are being proactive with employer engagement in ways that are not tokenistic where the intention is to make a more ‘coherent ask’, to quote Bill Rammell (section 1.7.5), across the sector. Specifically with regard to film education the film industry needs to consider the role of higher education more thoughtfully and potentially work to develop an agreed list of the core skills that can become part of the central focus of teaching film production at all levels. Not
merely within universities and film schools, but to become part of the culture of film education.
1.6 Overcoming obstacles
1.6.1 Becoming proactive
There is an argument, presented here, for film education to create a new identity while simultaneously acknowledging its strengths as suppliers of graduates who constitute a significant part of the film industry workforce. There is potential for film education within higher education to create curricula that delivers to film industry a creative workforce that is skilled with technical and theoretical knowledge, and that shapes the commercial and artistic film production landscape. There is an opportunity to create a film education that celebrates collaboration, creative thinking and problem solving and which is devoted to key theoretical and production concepts. Film production education need not be restricted to skills development in what is a transient marketplace. The nexus is to change from being reactive to what industry is currently doing, to being proactive in shaping what the industry does in the future.
Film education has the potential to create a new base of practitioners as film production and exhibition moves forward into a new era. The objective here is to create a flexible curriculum structure rooted in key strategic components where specific content can change and be adapted based on emerging trends in areas such as film technology and film studies along with personal talent and knowledge in both staff and student arenas.