Framework for film education in Europe pdf

Film Education Framework brochure 2015

Initial Screening Literacy Report (2013) can be found here:


Berlin Meeting – Vision Kino – October 2014

Thanks to everyone for contributing to a lively and focussed meeting and to an enjoyable social experience. Notes on approaches to the film education framework will be posted on Google docs in due course and memories of the Monbijou Hotel breakfast and backroom bar live on.

EFAD seminar notes from Scott – Creative Scotland

EFAD seminar notes from Scott – Creative Scotland

Scott Donaldson from Creative Scotland very helpfully took some notes on the key questions last week, published here to augment that doc published on Friday.

1/Parental attitudes

  • Sample parents whose children are about to begin a film education programme located in mother tongue/wider literacy context (in order to compare like with like across Europe)
  • Get baseline data of their attitudes (and conceptions and…?) to film education before commencement
  • Repeat midway and on completion
  • Aim: find out how parents’ attitudes towards and understanding of film education following their children’s actual experience of it.
  • Aim: use the findings to inform programmes, pedagogy and advocacy as appropriate.
  • Audience for the research: 1/schools and local authorities; 2/Government, education agencies and any other relevant decision makers/purse holders; 3/parents

2/Does film education lead to ‘audience development’?

  • Before and after film education programmes take place, sample film consumption/watching habits of children and parents.
  • Aim: to discover if it is actually true that exposure to a wider diet of films in a learning context leads to wider consumption of films – in particular European and home country films.
  • Audience: European film industries: to help persuade them to support film education more vigorously. Risky study – what if the answer is no!
  • Variables: if you did the study across different types of film education (mother tongue, in the humanities, in media studies, filmmaking projects) and interventions of different lengths, you might be able to identify which types of intervention made a difference (suggestion offered by Dag)

3/What are the outcomes of film education that are specific and unique to film education?

  • What are the contributions of film education to learners’ development that nothing else can provide (to the same extent…?)?
  • Areas of examination might be: 1/literacy/mother tongue context 2/history, geography, other humanities etc 3/sciences 4/other curricular areas 5/soft skills, affective domain etc 6/hard skills, tech skills etc (this needs further thought obv…)
  • Variables: what element of film education – making, watching, etc?
  • Aim: to identify unique affordances of film education
  • Audience: film education community, to sharpen up our own pedagogies, programmes, targeting,advocacy etc
  • Audience: education gatekeepers and purse-holders as above.

4/European Survey of Film Literacy

  • Repeat the Scottish Survey of Literacy across Europe.
  • NB: although we don’t know yet what the survey will tell us, we have an in-principle agreement that we can have the data and do some work on it, so we will can find out what use it might be.
  • However, even if the data is inconclusive, the fact of film clips going into every school in Scotland as part of the Literacy survey, performs a valuable advocacy function in itself.

5/This didn’t come up (except once, in your pictures) but what about older people? Not just 60+, but there’s also 25-60, and there’s also HE and FE type ages/provision. It would be interesting to look at (supposedly) vocational film ed in FE-type locations and look at the actual learning outcomes; and to look at actual learning outcomes in the more expressive-arts type HE provision. These add to what we learn from (3) above. And of course more quantitative data for these various adult sectors would be valuable, as would typologies etc.

Film Ed framework – holistic view

At the end of the seminar in Berlin, it was felt that many of the ideas and discussion topics could be re-assembled in a less linear way and represented graphically. The following isn’t meant to be the final word on how film education should look, but it may spur some possibility thinking and help us to identify relationships between its many dimensions. Dotted lines indicate how many of these perceived divisions are interdependent and perhaps should inform each other.

A version of this graphic could also help organise/generate working group activities. The first is a simple version, the other a bit busier; both are up for debate, comments and no doubt more explanation. For example, I add Documentary along side Art / Popular / World, but from memory, this wasn’t discussed at the meeting. Should it take its place as a separate dimension? I think it’s important to include non-fiction, just as we do with print literacy. I also suggest some meta-contextual elements as I think more attention should be given to the settings and contexts in which film is made and consumed… over to you…

film ed graphic.001

Possible dimensions of film education 1: post-Berlin January 2014 seminar
M. Cannon

film ed graphic.002

Possible dimensions of film education 2: post-Berlin January 2014 seminar
M. Cannon

Berlin seminar – Jan 2014 – prep for film ed framework

More information will be posted about the content of the day but in the meantime, here are some photos of our time in Berlin including some night shots…

We came up with a circular preparatory framework and will post a version of it for comments in the next few days.

[Please feel free to post your own material / photos and contact Michelle if you’re not sure how to go about this.]