Educational screen & audio-visual guide (c1956-1971])

AV in the Church Field by William S. Hockman Way We Comment When does mass evaluation amount o something? Put it another way: if ve want to know how 'good' a film s, do we ask people who know films ind who also happen to know some hing of the content involved and the ilility presupposed? Just what do you ;et when you ask the customer? Hotc lo you ask the customer? When do ou ask him? These questions come to mind when look over some data wliich was re ealed by the evaluation forms which ^ere turned in at certain workshops n premarital counseling. These forms ought reactions to the two films, not |ealt with very kindly by this depart lent several months ago, / Do and efore They Say I Do. While we might read these evalua on statements and get some comfort ir our position from them, I am in ined to discount these evaluations etty heavily both ways. Naturally would throw out some of them as a^Ievant. Others would go out be use they were totally non-critical; t much wood gets chopped with e back of the ax. More to the point, any of them were of the type that aised weaknesses and discounted engths. How would we know? Be use we, too, have seen the films. )t only that, we have been seeing ms of all kinds critically for close i1 four decades. (Yes, for that long, •] ving cut our eye-teeth on theatricals fljiich were selected and then booked use in a church!) e would like to comment that the nions harvested on these films at marital workshops (63 attending d 53 turning in evaluation forms) y be more reliable on 'content' than technical qualities or inherent film e-ellence. Again, we gather from tements of the reactors that one of workshop leaders had done a ig-up job of introducing these two ns to an audience (motivated )ugh to come to the workshop, ex •ting to receive much, and with a b It-in bias toward appreciating and 'i ii(» these two films). I'w utilization situations will have w a nationally-known subject matter specialist to set these films in a utilization context. They are designed for small group use, for use by ministers and others who do pre-marital counseling couple by couple or very small groups. In the hands of these users they will not get the professional treatment. How reliable, then, can the reactions of this group be, either pro or con? (Let me hasten to say right here that the makers and sponsors of these films have not exploited the reactions to which we refer. ) Again, how valid are such evaluations when given at the end of an intensive all-day workshop? How can a sharp, objective reaction and evaluation hold its critical edge across a whole day which is crammed with other interesting, excellent and highly useful information and point of view in a given field of human interest? That is like asking a man who had just eaten a nine course dinner for a critical judgment on the plink, plank, plink Who can't play the piano? It's easy! Just pounding on the keyboard sounds like celestial music when you're small. These simple joys fade fast. But, fortunately, life has its compensations. For the more discriminating ears of adults, there's Audiotape. Use Audiotape in your music classes. Audiotape has greater clarity and range, less distortion and background noise than other tapes. Try it. There are eight types . . . one exactly suited to the next recording you make. For language c/asses and wherever the spoken word must be reproduced clearly and realistically, try economical Language Arts Recording Tape . . . developed to meet the special needs of today's educators. AUDIO DEVICES INC., «4< Madison A«> . NY. 12. N.Y. Hollywocd. 840 N.Faiilax Ave, Chicago: &428 N. Milwaukee Avt. I "/■/ speaks for itself" cATioNAL Screen and Audiovisual Guide — September, 1961 499