Content area
Full Text
The 1994 annual National Council on Family Relations (NCFR) Media Competition was hosted by the Department of Family and Child Ecology and the College of Human Ecology, Michigan State University, during April and May of 1994. The purpose of the annual competition is to evaluate the quality and conceptual content of videos; endorse excellence in the production of videotapes, filmstrips, and films with themes relevant to family issues; promote the effective use of these resources; encourage high standards in the development of creative learning opportunities; and disseminate media competition results.
Entries solicited were placed in one of the following 15 categories: Addiction/Substance Abuse; Aging; Contemporary Social Issues; Families with Special Needs; Family Violence/Abuse; Human Development Across the Life Span (no entries); Human Reproduction and Family Planning (no entries); Marital and Family Issues and Communications; Mental Health, Stress, Transition, and Crisis Management; Diverse Family Systems; Parenting Issues; Sexuality and Sex Role Development; Teenage Pregnancy and Sexuality; STD/AIDS; and Other (e.g., Public Service Announcements ).
Guidelines for submission required that all videos be first-time entries to the competition, carry a release date of no earlier than January 1, 1992, and be available for purchase, rental, or loan on a nationwide distribution basis. Each producer/distributor could submit only one entry per category. All entries, which were to be 1/2" videocassette recordings, were to be received by March 15, 1994.
A total of 104 entries were received (videotapes). No entries were received for two categories: Human Development Across the Life Span and Human Reproduction and Family Planning.
The judging panels included university faculty, graduate, and undergraduate students from several academic departments at Michigan State University, the Michigan State University Extension, faculty and students from the Department of Consumer Resources and Technology at Western Michigan University, and practicing professionals from the greater Lansing, Michigan community.
Following the viewing of each entry, each judge was asked to independently make both quantitative (79 possible points) and qualitative assessments. The evaluation form consisted of four major quantitative categories designed to measure the entries based on: (a) content (30 possible points); (b) general issues (9 possible points), which included length, pacing, and flow of media entry; (c) artistic quality (20 possible points); and (d) ability to meet stated goals (20 possible points). The form...
