| KOSICE TRAINING
In May we moved onto Kosice and nine days of television
journalism training immediately before the CIRCOM Conference.
The training was conducted at the Centrum Hotel with
a total of twenty-five participants from ten member countries, six
trainers, five technicians and a workshop administrator. Finance
was provided by Circom Regional member stations, the Council of
Europe Stability Pact Fund supported by the government of Luxembourg,
the Council of Europe Human Rights Media Division and the Thomson
Foundation. There would have been more participants but for five
cancellations immediately prior to the course. Budget restrictions
also limited the numbers. To balance this point, however, the trainers
felt that the course was able to provide more effective and relevant
training to the smaller number of participants.
THE TRAINERS
The trainers were Ian Masters, Controller Broadcasting
Thomson Foundation; Hans Jesson, ARD Berlin; Didier Desormeaux,
France 3; David Nelson, BBC Midlands; Karol Cioma, Project Manager,
Thomson Foundation. The trainers welcomed a first appearance of
Laurence Houot who was kindly released by France 3. Course administration
was provided by Kathy Nelson.
The technicians were Gerard Le Couedic, France 3; Ivan Ujhazi, RTL
Hungary; Roger Mulliner, UK; Malcolm Owen, BBC Wales; Julian Minkov,
Bulgaria.
THE CONTENT
The training was designed to appeal to television
journalists who wished to upgrade their reporting skills. In the
view of the organisers there are problems in some areas of European
journalism. Those areas centre on packaging, "thinking in pictures",
writing for television, presentation, interviewing, pieces to camera
(standuppers), ethics, working as a team, news selection, multi
skilling, use of graphics and planning. The course was designed
to cover these areas.
THE METHOD
The method of training concentrated largely on "hands
on " practical exercises, workshops, discussion groups and
lectures. Other than the first day all remaining eight days included
major hypothetical and real story telling operations. The main group
of twenty five participants was split into five teams of five journalists
thus providing maximum contact with each person. This was the first
time at the main annual training workshop that DV cameras and non
linear editing equipment had been used. A multi skilled technician
was assigned to each of the five groups.
Largely the technical operation worked smoothly but some lack of
operational experience with this new equipment caused occasional
delays - which was not entirely unexpected. All participants were
excited about the DV equipment and saw its future potential on their
own stations.
The latter stages of the course saw the participants
bristling with ideas for real stories. The five teams produced something
in the region of forty ideas which led to each group producing two
packages. These packages will be seen during the main conference.
Departing from the presentational style of previous
years the trainers decided that it was more important to concentrate
on good package production. Story telling using good pictures became
the theme of the course. Presentation, however, was covered in smaller
groups for those who found it relevant to their working practices.
RESULTS
The results of the course were pleasing to both participants
and trainers.
Ten programme items were produced ranging from a newsy
issue about supermarket and Sunday shop trading - to a splendid
account of the history of the Jewish minority of Kosice - to a day
in the life of a street singer.
As mentioned earlier the items were not strung together
in programme format but as a live presentation compared by one of
the trainees. Given little rehearsal time the items were adequately
presented although next year I would look for a more "show
business" style. There was a hundred percent turn out of participants
and trainers but it was hugely disappointing to members of the course
that only a handful of delegates bothered to attend the showing.
No sooner had the scheduled items been prepared than
trainees were back hard at work producing news items for the final
day of the conference. This certainly pressurised the participants.
Sadly the items were not shown to the delegates owing to an incompatibility
of digital technology at the conference centre.
Whilst the main training sessions were completed on
the Tuesday of the final week all five trainers held special "surgeries"
for participants with particular skills needs. These surgeries continued
until late on the final Friday afternoon.
TECHNOLOGY
There were problems with the editing technology at
some stages of the course which forced many editing sessions late
in to the night. The problems centred largely on inexplicable memory
loss of content loading and probably on lack of experience of operation
of some editors. The future, however, appears to be set on exactly
the kind of technology we were using. The learning curve is steep
and much was learned by course operators and participants.
FEEDBACK
Feedback forms were issued to all twenty-five participants.
The course scored agreeable points with almost every person grateful
that they were given the opportunity to take part. Expressed in
percentage terms the results were:
| 1. |
How well did you understand the course objectives |
94.2 |
| 2. |
Did the course meet your expectations |
90 |
| 3. |
Did the trainers understand your problems |
82.5 |
| 4. |
Satisfaction of course content |
89 |
| 5. |
Trainer coverage of course content |
83 |
| 6. |
Adequacy of interpretation |
85 |
| 7. |
Course duration (most participants wanted longer) |
56.4 |
| 8. |
Balance of theory and practical work |
70 |
| 9. |
Satisfaction with course technology |
62.5 |
Both items 8 and 9 would have been higher if we had
experienced fewer technical delays.
I was delighted with the standard of all trainers
and hope to gather the same team for 2003. Next year I will try
to persuade the trainers to give more time to individual group work.
Trying to teach best practice skills to a large group of twenty-five
people is not ideal. We must, however, be careful not to do the
work FOR the trainees - always a danger when working in smaller
groups.
I think we will also seek to give the participants
an extra day or two of core skills training. That, after all, is
what they come for.
Ian Masters. June 2002.
|