Herbertz Far 2017 18 Final

Faculty Activity Report
Name: Matthew Herbertz

School: Florida Southern College
Rank: Assistant Professor
Division: Communication
Section I: Teaching
Describe your teaching over the past calendar year in the following way. For examples of
excellence in teaching, see Section III. F. 2.a. in the Faculty Handbook.
A. List courses taught by semester, course number, title, and the number of students in each
class.
Courses: Fall 2017
Contact
Course Number Course Title Credit hours
hours
COM 2500 Desktop Publishing (Visual 4 4

Communication)
COM 2240 Film History 4 4
COM 2210 Storytelling for the Screen 4 4
Courses: Spring 2018
Contact
Course Number Course Title Credit hours
hours
COM 1101 001 Media Foundations 4 4
COM 1101 002 Media Foundations 4 4
COM 3367 Video Short Form 4 4
COM 3900 Gender in Film 4 4
COM 3961 Communication Field Experience 1 2

B. Engaged Learning:
Describe some of the more common types of engaged learning that take place in your
classroom. What are your most prevalent types of engaged learning?
I attempt to emulate a “real-world” workplace environment in all of my classes from day

one. The expectations required of my students in my courses are communicated and
iterated at the beginning and multiple times throughout the semester. I challenge
students to learn how to pose difficult questions, embrace skepticism, and critically think. I
encourage students to learn how to become self-sufficient individuals who hopefully
embrace the creative and critical freedom I give them on each assignment.
The majority, if not all, of my courses require some form of software integration. In COMM
2500 and 1100 students work with and learn adobe software such as InDesign,
Photoshop, Illustrator, Premiere, Muse, and Lightroom. In addition, these students work
with other platforms such as Content Management Systems like WorksPress, Weebly, Wix
as well as prototyping software like InVision. As important as using “software” in the
classroom is, I make it VERY clear that we do NOT teach software. I teach the very basics
of these programs and then through engaged in class and out of class assignments, push
students to explore and become familiar with the programs on their own while still making
myself available for any questions they might have. I find that this is extremely effective in
getting students to learn the basic yet essential skill of learning how to “self-teach”
themselves. Something that becomes invaluable in the everchanging and fast paced
media industry. What I teach them one week can sometimes become obsolete the next
week.
Multiple projects in all of my courses all work towards students building a diverse and
strong portfolio of work they will be able to use to land an internship or their first job. In
COMM 2500 students end up creating a complete concept deck for branding an original
company. COMM 1100 has students work toward creating TWO final portfolios: One “print-
ready” portfolio and one “digital”. COMM 2210 incorporates rigorous weekly writing
assignments that work toward creating a final short screenplay that would be ready to
submit to competitions. I may even have students be required to submit next time the
course is offered. COMM 3367 has students create THREE full short films throughout the
semester and COMM 3900 Gender in Film had students post formal responses to films on
a blog dedicated to the course itself: fscgenderinfilm.wordpress.com as well as present
research in a conference panel discussion style to get them real experience in a practical
situation.
At the root of all of my courses is the implementation of professionalism, passion, and

dedication to work. I want every student to see the value of what they are learning and
DOING in the classroom. Whether that be producing creative design work or developing
their oral, pitch, and presentation skills that they will use when they interview for potential
positions. I hope that they will approach the work they day as more than just “class work”
and understand that everything they do can be used in the “real world”.
Section II: Service:
Maintaining a community of teaching and learning requires the existence of a significant support
structure. Faculty members invest substantial amounts of time, talent, and energy in faculty
governance, committee work, academic program work, and the like. In addition, faculty support is
critical to the availability and success of academically enriching events that occur outside the
classroom. Therefore, all members of the faculty are expected to contribute to this necessary
aspect of College life. Further, faculty members may be involved in significant discipline-related
activities in the greater civic community, and those activities are valued by the College.
Describe your service activities over the past three semesters. For examples of service, see
Section III. F. 2.c. in the Faculty Handbook.
You may wish to divide your activities into:
A. Service to the department

B. Service to the College
C. Service to the discipline and profession
D. Discipline-related service to the civic community
A. DEPARTMENT
I feel as if I went above and beyond the expectations of service in the department for
my first year as a member of the Florida Southern faculty. Some of the standard
expectations communicated to me would be:
-Attending departmental and college wide faculty meetings and contributing.
-Attended campus wide freshman move in day.
-Reorganized and cleaned up Film Studies/Digital Media equipment room. A
significant labor job.
-Contributed to one Day on Campus event representing our department.
-Held a seat on the Library Committee.
-Helped promote and contribute to the Film/Digital Media concentrations.
-Attended study sessions during finals.
In addition to the expectations communicated to me I:
-Made significant curriculum changes:
Desktop Publishing name changed to Visual Communication
Hard lined a new Film Studies Course: Film Aesthetics
-Started and manage the Communication Department Facebook page.
-Developed Alumni Spotlights.
-Started a new Passport program: Cinematheque which is a weekly film
screening/discussion event through communication.
-Held optional film screenings for Film History
-Co-organized a film workshop with Nfocus on Day on Campus.
-Organized and brought Film Director Annie Howell to campus.
-Co-organized the new Art of Film series at the museum as the first official
program since the college took ownership of the museum.
-Organized the first ever Southern Reel Film Showcase.
-I helped advise video and design projects within Lux 12.
-I was loosely involved with other student media such as The Cado Show.
B. COLLEGE
On the college level I:

-Co-organized a film workshop with Nfocus on Day on Campus.
-Attended Move in Day
-Traveled to Connecticut and Massachusetts for College recruitment events.
-Gave a guest lecture in Cat Eskins Feminist Humor class.
-Organized and brought Film Director Annie Howell to campus.
(Department/College)
-Co-organized the new Art of Film series at the museum as the first official
program since the college took ownership of the museum.
-Will be co-teaching a new Dance on Camera course in the fall.
-Co-organized and developed the first ever Southern Reel Film Showcase.
-Was lead videographer/creative on Day of Giving video campaign. Total reach of
videos: 17,600 views and counting. Link to the NINE videos produced:
Hype Video
Dr. Kerr Message Video
John Coultas
Cassidy Cheshire
Maggie McGill
Jensen Blassage
Keith Dyer
Derrick Jean-Baptiste
John Bryant
-Held a seat on the Library Committee.
-Helped Florida Southern get Kanopy video streaming service on campus.
-Help develop more stable relationships with the Marketing and Public Relations
department.
-Was the faculty advisor and lead creative videographer for a new School of
Education promotional video. LINK TO WORK IN PROGRESS:
First Draft of SOE Video
C. PROFESSION
I am an active member of the local, regional, and national filmmaking and film
academic community. I have relationships with film companies as well as other
institutions and faculty across the country. I actively attend Film Festivals to present
my work (the equivalent of attending and presenting at academic conferences) or to
network and meet members of the film community to help benefit the college and the
department. For example, I:
-Active member of Film Independent, University Film and Video Association, and
now a member of Film Florida.
-Senior Programmer for the Los Angeles Chinese Film Festival.
-Independent Spirit Award Voter.
-Member of the Lakeland Creative Makers and attend meetings every month.
-Actively develop relationships with local and regional agencies and production
companies along with independent filmmakers.
-Working relationship with Indie Atlantic Films and Nfocus Studio.
-Was a “loose” creative advisor at All Saints Academy. Although that relationship
fell through.
Section III: Scholarly and Creative Activity
Scholarly and creative activity deepens personal and professional development, brings
recognition to the College, and most importantly, enlivens the classroom and campus
academically. Therefore, because FSC emphasizes excellent teaching, scholarly and/or creative
activity is expected of all members of the faculty.
Describe your scholarly and creative activities over the past three semesters. For examples of
scholarly and creative activities see Section III.F.2.b. in the Faculty Handbook.
This past year has been an exciting and fruitful year for me as a creative/academic. As an
extremely active independent filmmaker I came into Florida Southern having just wrapped
production for my latest short film as writer/director; Relax. In addition, a film I was
producer and cinematographer on, A Peculiar Thud, was finishing its festival run and I had
the pleasure of attending a couple festivals to represent that work.
During the fall semester I was completing the first draft of a feature film I plan to produce
here in Lakeland. It took over a year to complete an eighty-page draft of a feature film. I
have been submitting this script to possible fellowships, contests, workshops, etc. This
spring I was named a Semi-Finalist for a renowned national screenwriting competition: the
ScreenCraft Production Fund. I was also editing and doing finishing work for my film,
Relax, as well as developing a film festival marketing and submission strategy. (Can be
equivalent of a full-time job) So far, my film Relax has screened at ten festivals and
counting. I’ve had the opportunity to attend the screening at four of those including the
world premiere at the DC Independent Film Festival (a festival with a 2% selection rate)
I have also been active in the local film community. I came on as a Producer for a locally
produced short film with Indie Atlantic Films called: Shed. My role was to manage and
organize a strategic festival master plan for them. So far, this film has screened at five film
festivals including the world-renowned Nashville Independent Film Festival.
Throughout the entire school year, I have been writing and developing the short version
(proof of concept) for my feature film. I was able to finish the screenplay and be awarded
the Faculty/Student Collaboration grant this summer to produce the film.
A film that I made in 2016 received distribution and made its television premiere on May
5th on ShortsTV, a channel on DirectTV: www.hewespictures.com/a-man-of-god
Lastly, I have been researching and compiling texts for a in depth analysis and paper that
I will present at the 2018 UFVA Conference (National Conference) entitled: Sex, Violence,
Pornography and the Culture of Offense.
I have attached the University Film and Video Association statement on creative work so
that you may partially begin to understand the “scholarly” equivalent of my work this past
year.
Section IV: Goals for the upcoming calendar year
Provide a narrative identifying your goals for teaching, service, and scholarly activity for the
upcoming calendar year.
Teaching
- Improve the way in which I get students to engage and participate.

- Continue to increase the level of expectations, rigor, and professionalism in the
classroom.
- Continue to raise the level of academic expectations for film studies students as well as
the communication students as a whole!
- Increase the number of guest speakers in the classroom.
-Continue to promote the Film Studies concentrations.
-Implement more co-taught film courses across departments.
Service
-Continue to develop marketing strategies for Communication Department and for Film.
Work with Admissions in order to better tell our story.
-Develop a more organized video platform to showcase video content on our webpage.
-Bring more Filmmakers on campus to showcase their work.
-Become active in Film Florida community.
-Develop a Lakeland Film Florida Chapter.
-Develop a film related Junior Journey.
-Develop a working relationship with Harrison.
-Create new relationships with the Lakeland Community and the Polk Theatre.
-Develop and strategize a Lakeland based international Film festival.
Creative/Scholarly
-Present my paper: TITLE at the UFVA conference in Las Cruces, New Mexico.
-Present my film RELAX at the UFVA conference in Las Cruces, New Mexico.
-Present research at FCA and other conferences.
-Attend the BEA.
-Continue to attend and present work at film festivals on an international scale.
-Go into post production and begin submitting my next project to film festivals around the
world.
-Continue development on my feature-length narrative film.
-Attend Sundance to learn/meet/network.
-Submit to the Sundance Writers Lab.
-Submit to Film Independent director’s lab.
Course Evals Spring Day 2017-18 Survey Florida Southern College
2017 DS (2018) FSC
Course: COM 1101 001 - MEDIA FOUNDATIONS Department: Com

Responsible Faculty: Matthew Herbertz Responses / Expected: 11 / 18 (61.11%)
Focus: Overall Results
COM 1101 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
M F N
Q1 Gender 1 10 11
Responses: [M] Male=1 [F] Female=2
COM 1101 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
F S J S O N
Q2 Class Standing 3 3 1 4 0 11
Responses: [F] Freshman=1 [S] Sophomore=2 [J] Junior=3 [S] Senior=4 [O] Other=5
COM 1101 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
MR MR GER BR SC EI GR N
Q3 Reasons for enrollment: (Select most appropriate) 7 1 0 0 0 3 0 11
Responses: [MR] Major Requirement=1 [MR] Minor Requirement=2 [GER] General Ed Requirement=3 [BR] BA/BS Requirement=4 [SC] Schedule Convenience=5 [EI] Elective/ Interest=6 [GR] Grade
Redemption=7
COM 1101 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
A B C D F N
Q4 Expected Grade 8 3 0 0 0 11
Responses: [A] A=5 [B] B=4 [C] C=3 [D] D=2 [F] F=1
COM 1101 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
LT2 2HA 3HA 4HA 5HA 6HA O7H N
Q5 I would describe my level of effort/preparation outside this course (e.g., papers, laboratory preparation, study time, project 1 7 1 1 1 0 0 11
development, etc.) as:
Responses: [LT2] Less than 2 hours a week=1 [2HA] 2-3 hours a week=2 [3HA] 3-4 hours a week=3 [4HA] 4-5 hours a week=4 [5HA] 5-6 hours a week=5 [6HA] 6-7 hours a week=6 [O7H] Over 7 hours a
week=7
COM 1101 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8OM N
Q6 How many times have you been absent? 1 5 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 11
Responses: [0] 0=1 [1] 1=2 [2] 2=3 [3] 3=4 [4] 4=5 [5] 5=6 [6] 6=7 [7] 7=8 [8OM] 8 or More=9
2017 DS (2018) FSC

Matthew Herbertz
Course Evaluations - The Professor Responses Individual
AA MA SA N SD MD AD N Mean Med. Mode Std
Dev
Q1 The professor demonstrated clear understanding of the subject matter. 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.91 7 7 .29
Q2 The professor was well prepared for class. 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7.00 7 7 0
Q3 The professor effectively facilitated engaged learning in the course. 8 1 2 0 0 0 0 11 6.55 7 7 .78
Q4 The professor clearly communicated student learning outcomes or course objectives (as seen in my syllabus) that 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.91 7 7 .29
were expected of me.
Q5 The professor’s standards for evaluating my work were clearly communicated. 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 11 6.73 7 7 .62
Q6 The professor’s standards for evaluating my work were consistently applied. 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.82 7 7 .39
Q7 The professor provided feedback on course assignments and other evaluations (e.g., exams) in a timely manner. 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.64 7 7 .48
Q8 The professor challenged me to think critically and/or creatively about material in the course. 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.91 7 7 .29
Q9 The professor enabled my understanding of applying material Beyond the classroom. 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.91 7 7 .29
Q10 The professor encouraged me to improve throughout the course. 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7.00 7 7 0
Q11 The professor was receptive to student opinions (outside his/her own) throughout the course. 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.73 7 7 .45
Q12 The professor made an effort to be available outside of class. 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7.00 7 7 0
Q13 Based on available technology for this course, the professor effectively applied technology to the course material. 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7.00 7 7 0
Q14 The course significantly increased my knowledge of the subject. 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 6.91 7 7 .29
Q15 Based on the course experience, I would take another course with this professor. 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 11 6.73 7 7 .62
Q16 Based on the quality of teaching, I would recommend this professor to other students. 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 11 6.73 7 7 .62
Responses: [AA] Absolutely Agree=7 [MA] Mostly Agree=6 [SA] Slightly Agree=5 [N] Neutral=4 [SD] Slightly Disagree=3 [MD] Mostly Disagree=2 [AD] Absolutely Disagree=1
Faculty: Matthew Herbertz

Question: Is there anything you would like to add?
Response Rate: 72.73% (8 of 11)
This was probably my favorite class this semester. I learned a lot and I will definitely be able to apply everything I learned in this course to what I do in the future. This class
1 helped me prepare for the different types of projects I will have in future courses. I also thoroughly enjoyed having Professor Herbertz, he was able to keep the class fun while
teaching. He was also really great with communicating in a timely manner and providing feedback on different projects. 10/10 recommend. 
2 This is my 2nd class with Prof. Herbertz, and I enjoyed it as much as I enjoyed it the first time I took a class with him 
Professor Herbertz is hands-down the best professor I've had at FSC. He has been nothing but helpful and willing to meet with students any time, even for things outside of the
classroom.
3
He shows professionalism and constructive feedback on all assignments. I wish I would've taken a class with him sooner, because I might've minored in COM due to my
discovered interest in the subject. 
Professor Herbertz is a new professor here at FSC! I am a senior in the Communications Department and I believe that he is the best professor I have ever had. I have never had
4 a professor engage students, test our creativity, push us for success, able to meet outside of class, give helpful feedback, and prepare us for exams and assignments, until I
had Professor Herbertz. I wanted a class that reviews everything I needed to know for the creative field and this was perfect. 
Prof. Herbertz was very professional and it was the most organized and efficient class I have taken so far at FSC. He did a great job of engaging us in class and allowing us to
5 build skills to complete the projects. It was a perfect amount of work for this class, enough that I was learning the material but not an overwhelming amount. 10/10 class,
would take another class with Herbertz! 
Prior to this course I had no experience with any of the programs we used. Herbertz did an awesome job of breaking things down for those of us who didn't know anything while
still engaging with students who were more advanced. We had a lot of projects and they were very time consuming because there are only a few computers on campus where
6 the software is installed. I personally can't afford to buy the programs for my personal computer but I think it would be beneficial to have a Communication sign in for students
to use on their own computers. I might suggest spreading out some of the projects because some weeks it was difficult to find the time to go to the library or the com lab.
Overall, I learned a LOT in this class and I have a lot of tangible projects that I can use in the future 
I think that Professor Herbertz is very knowledgeable, however I think he expects lower level students to be more experienced coming in to the course. He breezes by material
7 during class, however he is always available to help during and outside of class. One thing I did not enjoy was the fact that we had in class workshops as well as weekly
projects. I think his grading is also a little harsh. All in all, this course helped develop my knowledge of design programs. His lectures are slightly boring, he needs to find a way
to engage students during lectures. 
8 I had no idea how applicable the subject matter of this course was to my other courses and to my projects outside of class. I'm glad I took this course. Prof. Herbertz is great 
2017 DS (2018) FSC

Responsible Faculty: Matthew Herbertz Responses / Expected: 13 / 20 (65%)
COM 1101 - 002

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
M F N
Q1 Gender 4 9 13
COM 1101 - 002

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
F S J S O N
COM 1101 - 002

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
Redemption=7
COM 1101 - 002

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
A B C D F N
COM 1101 - 002

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
week=7
COM 1101 - 002

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8OM N
2017 DS (2018) FSC

Matthew Herbertz
Dev
Q1 The professor demonstrated clear understanding of the subject matter. 7 2 2 2 0 0 0 13 6.08 7 7 1.14
Q2 The professor was well prepared for class. 7 3 2 1 0 0 0 13 6.23 7 7 .97
Q3 The professor effectively facilitated engaged learning in the course. 4 5 2 1 1 0 0 13 5.77 6 6 1.19
Q5 The professor’s standards for evaluating my work were clearly communicated. 6 2 0 1 1 1 1 12 5.33 6.5 7 2.13
Q6 The professor’s standards for evaluating my work were consistently applied. 7 2 0 2 1 1 0 13 5.69 7 7 1.73
Q7 The professor provided feedback on course assignments and other evaluations (e.g., exams) in a timely manner. 7 3 1 1 1 0 0 13 6.08 7 7 1.27
Q8 The professor challenged me to think critically and/or creatively about material in the course. 8 3 0 2 0 0 0 13 6.31 7 7 1.07
Q9 The professor enabled my understanding of applying material Beyond the classroom. 6 5 0 2 0 0 0 13 6.15 6 7 1.03
Q10 The professor encouraged me to improve throughout the course. 6 3 1 3 0 0 0 13 5.92 6 7 1.21
Q11 The professor was receptive to student opinions (outside his/her own) throughout the course. 4 3 1 3 0 0 1 12 5.33 6 7 1.75
Q12 The professor made an effort to be available outside of class. 9 3 0 1 0 0 0 13 6.54 7 7 .84
Q13 Based on available technology for this course, the professor effectively applied technology to the course material. 10 2 0 1 0 0 0 13 6.62 7 7 .84
Q15 Based on the course experience, I would take another course with this professor. 6 3 0 2 0 1 1 13 5.46 6 7 1.99
Q16 Based on the quality of teaching, I would recommend this professor to other students. 5 4 1 1 1 0 1 13 5.54 6 7 1.78

1 Learned a lot from this class 

It's clear from the beginning of class what his expectations of his students are. The assignments are laid out for us with plenty of time and opportunity to complete them. If
you show up to class, follow the rules, and take advantage of the resources he provides then there is no reason that you wouldn't get a good grade. He is easy to get a hold of if
2 you need him to answer questions and is always willing to help if you ask. I had an advantage in this course specifically because I already knew how to use the programs he
was teaching in class, so I don't know what it would be like learning those things for the first time with him. That being said, whenever I needed help or couldn't figure
something out, he was able to show me how to do whatever I was struggling with in a way that was easy to understand. 
I think Professor Herbertz did a great job of teaching the course material to a room full of half-awake students at 8am. Although class participation tended to lack, Professor
Herbertz did his best to engage students and that can be seen through the different projects that we did. I think doing smaller projects helped us get familiar with each
3 program which led up to the final portfolios in which we were able to demonstrate all the skills that we acquired throughout the course. I loved the final projects because they
are something that we will be able to use after this course is over and that will benefit us in our professional lives. The textbook was a bit unnecessary because most of it was
able to be uploaded to Portal. 
I found this professor to be unreasonably strict with certain aspects of the course requirements; such as attendance. Yes, attendance to the course is extremely important, but
4 as a student who made sure to follow up in person regarding absences, handed in work on time, and handed in consistent, quality work; I find that taking 15% off of a final grade
based on attendance is unfair. I was able to apply everything that I learned in this class to my current internship, future internship, personal life, and my job. It would not be
productive for me to fail this course due to lack of attendance. I have achieved a lot being in this course and have learned the course material well. 
I enjoyed Professor Herbertz's professionalism and directness regarding the course. I would have learned more from hands-on in-class experiences that would take the entire
5 class through a certain software's capabilities (instead of setting us loose on new programs, work together as a class to create a design using Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator,
etc.). Professor Herbertz's feedback challenged me to improve and learn, and his class is fair in its assessment of the student. 
I came in with a lot of knowledge of Adobe programs so I really enjoyed the class and the assignments. The section on cameras was also very helpful and I've applied what I've
learned multiple times since that class. Overall really enjoyed the class minus the fact it was an 8am. I know you're new to being a professor so you're still trying to figure out
6 what works but I think you're off to a great start. My only real complaint would be that your students convinced you to also give us a final to even out their midterm grade when
we weren't supposed to have one in the beginning. Next time I'd at least have it written on the syllabus as a possibility depending on circumstance or something so it's not out
of the blue. 
2017 DS (2018) FSC
Course: COM 3367 001 - VIDEO SHORT FORM Department: Com

COM 3367 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
M F N
Q1 Gender 2 1 3
COM 3367 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
F S J S O N
COM 3367 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
Redemption=7
COM 3367 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
A B C D F N
COM 3367 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
week=7
COM 3367 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8OM N
2017 DS (2018) FSC
Course: COM 3367 001 - VIDEO SHORT FORM Department: Com

Matthew Herbertz

Dev
Q1 The professor demonstrated clear understanding of the subject matter. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q4 The professor clearly communicated student learning outcomes or course objectives (as seen in my syllabus) that were 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 6.67 7 7 .47
expected of me.
Q6 The professor’s standards for evaluating my work were consistently applied. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q7 The professor provided feedback on course assignments and other evaluations (e.g., exams) in a timely manner. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q8 The professor challenged me to think critically and/or creatively about material in the course. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q10 The professor encouraged me to improve throughout the course. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q12 The professor made an effort to be available outside of class. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q14 The course significantly increased my knowledge of the subject. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q15 Based on the course experience, I would take another course with this professor. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0
Q16 Based on the quality of teaching, I would recommend this professor to other students. 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.00 7 7 0

1 assign final groups earlier in the semester and encourage student to start early 
2 This course was the most applicable to my career aspirations. Working on the final group project has been a tiring yet extremely rewarding experience. The only thing that I
would change would be to start preparing for the final project at the beginning of the semester. 
3 Of all the classes I've taken, this is the one where I'm the most proud of my work. 
2017 DS (2018) FSC
Course: COM 3900 001 - GENDER IN FILM Department: Com

COM 3900 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
M F N
Q1 Gender 1 5 6
COM 3900 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
F S J S O N
COM 3900 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
Redemption=7
COM 3900 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
A B C D F N
COM 3900 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
week=7
COM 3900 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8OM N
2017 DS (2018) FSC
Course: COM 3900 001 - GENDER IN FILM Department: Com

Matthew Herbertz

Dev
Q2 The professor was well prepared for class. 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7.00 7 7 0
Q4 The professor clearly communicated student learning outcomes or course objectives (as seen in my syllabus) that 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 6.50 6.5 6,7 .50
Q10 The professor encouraged me to improve throughout the course. 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 6.67 7 7 .75
Q13 Based on available technology for this course, the professor effectively applied technology to the course material. 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 6.67 7 7 .75

This was a very interesting and enjoyable course! I appreciated how passionate Professor Herbertz was about this course's subject, as well as how receptive he was to every
student's opinions during discussions. In addition, his criticisms on assignments were really fair and constructive. My only critique would be to have further discussions
1 surrounding the readings assigned throughout the semester. I think they all had great content and were necessary in relation to each week's topic, but sometimes the
vocabulary made it difficult to understand sections of certain texts. I think review/ further discussions surrounding the readings would benefit both class discussion and
further able the class to apply the material learned outside of the classroom. 
2 This course tested a lot with students, but in ways that were needed. Conversations that need to occur more often, happened in this class. I've never felt so comfortable in the
class, no judgments and very educational. 
3 The material discussed in this class was very difficult. But Professor Herbertz did a great job presenting it and facilitating discussions. I learned about a lot of abstract things
in the course that I wouldn't have had the motivation to research in my free time. 
4 The class discussions were always fun. I enjoyed the content that was covered. Great class I recommend it to everyone. 
Prof. Herbertz created an atmosphere that allowed for honest, candid discussion about art and social taboos that normally wouldn't have a place in the dialogue of a traditional
5 course. Considering the importance of the subject matter, this was an essential aspect of the course, and Prof. Herbertz wove it into the class from day one. I would
recommend that everyone take this course, and I would also recommend that everyone take it with Prof. Herbertz. 
Course Evals Fall Day 2017-18 Survey Florida Southern College
2017 DF FSC
Course: COM 2210 001 - STORYTELLING FOR THE SCREEN Department: Com
COM 2210 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
M F N
Q1 Gender 5 7 12
COM 2210 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
F S J S O N
COM 2210 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
Redemption=7
COM 2210 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
A B C D F N
COM 2210 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
week=7
COM 2210 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8OM N
2017 DF FSC
Course: COM 2210 001 - STORYTELLING FOR THE SCREEN Department: Com
Herbertz, Matthew
Dev
Q13 Based on available technology for this course, the professor effectively applied technology to the course material. 10 1 0 0 1 0 0 12 6.58 7 7 1.11
Faculty: Herbertz, Matthew

1 Very enthusiastic about short films and has a real passion for it. Great teacher. 10/10 would reccomend 
This is by far the best writing class I've taken at FSC, and, as an English minor, I've taken several. This was the first one that actually felt practical- hey, look at this, here's how
you can write and still eat. I like that we actually got to write instead of just reading other writing and then writing about that like you do in an English creative writing class. I
2 have become, not only a more skillful writer, but a more confident one as well. This class was also one of the first times I've shared my writing in an open setting, and even
though it was scary, it really helped me grow and put more confidence in my own abilities. I would take this class again if I could. I loved everything about it except for that
partner project. In the future, you should assign partners so that no one else has to struggle to find someone to work with. That was rough. 
3 The workload was very intense for a 2000-level COM class. 
Prof Herbertz is a super knowledgable about the content that he is teaching. I would definitely recommend for students to take film classes with him because of the info that
4 he can potentially share with them. I think that he needs to work on being more consistent throughout the course instead of going hard in the beginning and sloughing off
towards the end. 
I really liked this class. I know some people complained of it being a lot of work. However as a film studies major, I kind of expected it to be a lot considering this is was I want
5 to learn about. I think not only was this a great creative learning class but there were also good points of learning things for outside the classroom. Such as when we would talk
about different social controversies amongst the class. One thing I wish was more implemented into the class was peer review. I really liked being able to read one another's
screenplays to the class and received feedback, plus I got to hear other people's ideas. It's cool to see all the different approaches. 
6 BRING MONDAY PLEASE 
2017 DF FSC
Course: COM 2240 001 - FILM HISTORY Department: Com

COM 2240 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
M F N
Q1 Gender 3 8 11
COM 2240 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
F S J S O N
COM 2240 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
Redemption=7
COM 2240 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
A B C D F N
COM 2240 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
week=7
COM 2240 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8OM N
2017 DF FSC
Course: COM 2240 001 - FILM HISTORY Department: Com

Herbertz, Matthew
Dev
Q5 The professor’s standards for evaluating my work were clearly communicated. 4 2 3 0 1 1 0 11 5.45 6 7 1.62
Q7 The professor provided feedback on course assignments and other evaluations (e.g., exams) in a timely manner. 6 3 1 0 0 1 0 11 6.09 7 7 1.44
Q11 The professor was receptive to student opinions (outside his/her own) throughout the course. 6 3 0 1 1 0 0 11 6.09 7 7 1.31
Q13 Based on available technology for this course, the professor effectively applied technology to the course material. 6 0 3 0 1 0 1 11 5.55 7 7 1.92
Q16 Based on the quality of teaching, I would recommend this professor to other students. 5 2 1 1 1 0 1 11 5.45 6 7 1.92

Throughout the semester I felt like the lectures got better because we stopped using powerpoint, which I thought worked better for our classroom environment. We were able
to talk more openly and discuss the subject matter. I do not like the text book chosen because I feel like it is hard to process if you are not a film oriented student. The quizzes
1 are also so vague, it was really hard to get a good grade even when I read all the chapters. When it comes to the papers, maybe you can give a workshop in the beginning of the
semester so we know what you are expecting. I fell into a rut with a B, which is fine, but I have no idea what to do to get an A. I even came to your office and sent you the papers
every week, so I needed one more thing to help me get out of the B range. I really wanted an A in your class and tried hard to get there, but I do not now if that is possible with
the way you grade. 
2 The workload was very intense for a 2000-level COM class. 
3 The things we were graded on had nothing to do with what we learned. I mean we learned Film History but we were graded on Film Analysis. 
The class was great, Professor Herbertz made it an engaging course because students could tell how much he enjoyed the material he was teaching. Since he is younger, in
the beginning it felt as though he wanted to be strict to make it known that he was the professor, but as the class continued everyone seemed to warm up to each other and we
4 could all discuss things in a fun environment.
It was a great class overall 

5 The class was well organized and structured. I enjoyed the class, but felt there were certain areas that were very highlighted than others. This might be based off personal
interest rather than that of structure. 
Professor Herbertz is absolutely amazing, not just as a professor, but as a person. He makes his students feel welcome and comfortable enough to openly engage in
discussions about everything from the course material to more difficult topics like sexism in the film industry. I learned so much, not just about film history, but about the film
6 industry, writing strong argumentative papers, and critical thinking. Honestly, though, you may want to restructure the way you assign the papers a bit, because my secret is
that I only watched like two of the films all the way through and still got A's on all but one paper. I wish the assigned papers had applied more specifically to the lecture
material. Maybe focus the papers more on applying what we learn in the classroom to certain important films? 
7 Professor Herbertz was very attentive and helpful throughout the course. The curriculum and requirements are tough for a sophomore level course in the department. 
I thoroughly enjoyed taking this class and am glad that I didn't miss the opportunity. The workload wasn't as bad as I initially anticipated with have one paper every week. The
8 reading, while not difficult to comprehend, there was a lot of it. The chapters were WAY too long, to have read by the next class period with all the other work I have for other
classes. That may have been a personal thing, but then not knowing exactly what information from those 60 pages to focus in on for the quizzes was also stressful. Maybe
creating a short guide of important topics to note for each chapter would help the next class. 
I did not like his teaching style whatsoever!!! This was more of a writing class than a film class! None of the material we learned in class took part in any sort of grade,
9 meaning that taking notes seemed unnecessary and a waste of energy. All grades were papers based on outside of class work. If it weren't for the attendance grade, I would
have gotten the same grade in this class if I never showed up. Definitely the WORST comm class I have ever taken. 
2017 DF FSC
Course: COM 2500 001 - DESKTOP PUBLISHING Department: Com

COM 2500 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
M F N
Q1 Gender 2 9 11
COM 2500 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
F S J S O N
COM 2500 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
Redemption=7
COM 2500 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
A B C D F N
COM 2500 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
week=7
COM 2500 - 001

Course Evaluations
Responses Course
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8OM N
2017 DF FSC
Course: COM 2500 001 - DESKTOP PUBLISHING Department: Com

Herbertz, Matthew

Dev
Q5 The professor’s standards for evaluating my work were clearly communicated. 7 3 0 0 1 0 0 11 6.36 7 7 1.15

1 This course should be taken after COM 1100. The 1100 course should teach the software, while 2500 should teach concepts and build the portfolio that is created in 1100. I
believe that Dr. Herbertz is a great teacher with a fresh take on everything learned in the class, and will be an asset to the FSC Com Dept. 
2 The beginning of the class was difficult, but our professor started off as fair and throughout the course we eventually made progress and started working more hands on with
the applications then the class became more easier to learn and grow in 
3 Professor Herbertz was an amazing teacher, especially in desktop, and I would absolutely recommend him to anyone. He made desktop much easier than any other teacher and
enjoyable. 
4 Mr. Herbertz is a great professor. I really enjoyed working on adobe and learning everything about that. I wish we would take out all the readings and spend more time working
on photoshop and indesign! 
5 For a beginning Communications course, the work load per week was too much in my opinion from reading, projects, and required videos, assigned every day. The work load was
all relevant but too much for a beginning class. 
The Evaluation of Faculty in Creative Specialties for Promotion and
Tenure
An official policy statement of the University Film and Video Association
Consideration for academic promotion and tenure traditionally involves an evaluation of a faculty
member’s contribution in each of three areas: teaching, research/creative activity, and service. Since
procedures and standards for evaluation of teaching and service are generally well-established at
most institutions, the focus of this statement is on the procedures and standards for evaluation of
research/creative activity.
Introduction
Creative work should be fully accepted as part of the faculty evaluation process when such work is
appropriate to both faculty specialization and teaching load. Just as the primary professional
contributions of a faculty member teaching media history should be expected to be in the form of
published scholarship, so the primary professional contributions of a faculty member specializing in a
creative area should be expected to be in one or more of the areas of creative production.
The fine arts have clearly established a precedent for the consideration of creative work as a part of
the evaluation process for promotion and tenure. Exhibitions of paintings, drawings, sculptures,
photographs, etc. are accepted as evidence of professional contributions in the visual arts. Musical
compositions and reviews of recitals and solo performances are accepted in the field of music.
Creative writing, direction and design of plays, choreography, and dance performances are likewise
accepted as evidence of faculty contributions in other creative fields. The same should be true of
creative work by a film or video faculty member.
Comparison between Criteria for Evaluating Creative Work and Criteria for
Evaluating Traditional Scholarship
In order for traditional scholarship to be acceptable evidence in support of promotion and tenure, that
scholarship must be disseminated and evaluated by experts in the field. The same is true of creative
work in film and video.
Dissemination and evaluation of traditional scholarship is usually accomplished by means of

publication. Over the years a fairly clear set of criteria have evolved for the evaluation of
publications, which are ordinarily books or articles. The value and importance of a particular book
can be determined by the prestige of the publisher, the prepublication comments of peer reviewers,
and post-publication reviews in scholarly journals.
Articles are often judged on the basis of the reputation of the journal in which they appear. Articles in
refereed journals are given more weight than articles in non-refereed journals. Journals, refereed or
not, are rated on the basis of their reputations, the reputations of their editors and peer evaluators,
and their acceptance rate. Invitations to a faculty member to write particular pieces for a journal can
be viewed as recognition of that faculty member’s status within a specialization.
Creative work in film and video can be disseminated and evaluated in a similar way, although the
process of dissemination and evaluation is less well-developed and less well-understood by some
within the academic community.
Review of Film and Video: Initial Considerations

Dissemination of scholarly work typically is accomplished by means of publication in articles, books,
and, less frequently, monographs. Completed creative work in film and video consists of products
whose forms have a greater variety in length than is found in printed materials. A faculty member
might be involved in the production of a feature-length dramatic film, a half-hour documentary, a
three-minute animated work, or a work of some other type and length; many possibilities exist. The
length of a finished work is significant but not indicative of the effort required to complete it. A short
experimental video piece or a multi-media production might require even more time and effort to
create than a relatively straightforward hour-long documentary. When peers evaluate film or video
work, it is important that they determine the probable difficulty of particular projects. Their task is
analogous to that of judging the importance of a multi-year horizontal study in the social sciences;
such a study might require many years of effort, yet result in an article of only modest length.
Instances of joint authorship occur in traditional scholarship. In such cases it is necessary to

establish the contribution made by each author, if the work is included in a promotion or tenure
dossier. Film and video works are frequently, although not always, collaborative endeavors. Thus, it
is extremely important to know what role a faculty member played on a particular production. In
many cases, the faculty member will have had total responsibility for the production. In other cases,
his/her role might have been that of writer, editor, etc. It is appropriate to give varying levels of credit
for varying levels of responsibility. In cases of shared responsibility, it is best to rely on experts in the
field to determine the relative importance of each individual’s contribution.
Dissemination of Film and Video Works

Public showings of a film or video work to informed audiences should be considered dissemination
of the work, equivalent to that of scholarly publication. This is similar to the traditional acceptance of
a music recital performed for a knowledgeable audience as the equivalent of publication.
Certain forms of film and video can be adjudicated in festival competitions. Many festivals have
rigorous selection procedures for inclusion of films and tapes within their programs. Selection of a
faculty member’s creative work for showing at a festival that has a good reputation can be
considered indicative of the quality of the work. Festivals can be of local, regional, national, or
international importance. Because the reputation of festivals is not static, it is important for the
current reputation of a pertinent festival to be specified in any promotion and tenure dossier.
The quality of a film or video work may be partially indicated by any festival awards or prizes that
have been bestowed upon it. Festival awards and prizes are evidence of a positive competitive
judgment about the quality of the work. In evaluating the importance of a festival award or prize, it is
important to consider the current reputation of a festival at which it was received.
Some academic associations schedule screenings based on a preconvention evaluation of

submitted works. Selection for screening can be considered an indicator of quality, provided the
current reputation and procedures of the association are known.
The merit of a film or video work may be indicated by its having been televised. It might be shown on
commercial and/or public television, and might be aired on cable systems. Greater weight is often
given to works selected for network presentation than to those carried only locally. In all cases, it is
important to consider the level at which the work has had public exposure. It must be acknowledged
that television showings are not equally accessible to all types of work.
Sometimes museums, media arts centers, and universities schedule invited presentations, often
including oral presentations by the filmmakers or videomakers. The prestige of such invitational
showings varies, of course, depending upon the importance of the institution and the rigor of the
selection process.
It should be noted that multiple showings of the same film are not the equivalent of reprints of a
scholarly work. In the case of reprints of books or articles, the original printing is often still available
through libraries. Reprinting of an article is primarily for the convenience of the readers of a
particular periodical. There is generally no such easy access to media works; thus, in most
circumstances each showing of a media work makes the production available to a new, previously
inaccessible audience.
Film and video works may be disseminated through distribution agencies and companies, although
this system is considerably less comprehensive than the equivalent dissemination of published
scholarly works. Some distributors are highly selective, and the inclusion of a faculty member’s work
within their inventories can be considered an indication of quality. However, most film and video
distributors are commercial, and the exclusion of a faculty member’s work from such distribution is
not necessarily an indication that it has little or no artistic or social value. It must be remembered that
faculty works must compete for distribution with works produced by individuals whose careers are
exclusively dedicated to creative film and video production.
Sources of Written Evaluations of Film and Video Works

Meaningful reviews of faculty creative work appear in scholarly and professional publications, library
media publications, and even, in some cases, newspapers. In evaluating such reviews, the status of
the reviewer and the reputation of the periodical are important.
Some professional associations, including the University Film and Video Association, regularly
provide written evaluations of works selected for showing at their conventions. The judges of some
festivals also will provide written critiques, if requested.
Letters evaluating a faculty member’s work can be requested from responsible individuals at
museums, media centers, colleges and universities, and other institutions at which the work has
been shown. As in the case of scholarly reviews, it is important to consider the reputation of the
individual or institution contributing the evaluation.
The Evaluation of Professors of Screenwriting (1)

At the outset, it must be recognized that screenwriting is a worthy artistic and academic endeavor in
and of itself, and that scripts have intrinsic value whether or not they are produced as films, for
television, or for other media form. Scripts selected for production might be chosen for their own
merit, but it is equally possible for a script to be chosen based on its perceived target audience,
availability of funding, or support of a well-known celebrity, among many possible factors. A script
might be re-written by someone other than the original writer before it is produced. Or an optioned
script may not ever get made. Thus, the fate of a screenplay is not necessarily a reflection of its
quality or the skill with which it is written.
Further, the timelines of commercial productions are seldom aligned with schedules of the academic
world. There are famous anecdotes about scripts being made into successful films ten, fifteen, and
even twenty years after they were originally written. This is far in excess of the length of time
professors of screenwriting have available in order to prove the value of their work before being
subjected to the tenure and promotion process.
As with all creative projects, scripts must be disseminated and evaluated as part of the promotion
and tenure process.
Though less visible in the world of commercial film, short film scripts also merit inclusion here,
provided they are disseminated and evaluated as described below.
Dissemination of Screenwriting
The possibilities for the dissemination of faculty screenwriting projects include the following:
• Distribution of scripts to peer screenwriting professors at other universities for reading and
evaluation
• Distribution of scripts to professional organizations that include script evaluation sessions and/or
partial or complete script readings among their activities
• Distribution of scripts to organizations for possible production
• Readings by local and regional groups, provided selection of material is based on a jury or panel
decision rather than mere proximity to the writer
• Publication of scripts in whole or in part. Publication possibilities might include the following:
o Selection for existing or future print publications of the University Film and Video Association
o Selection for other print publications
o Selection for media publications of professional organizations
o Internet publication where allowed by institutional regulations
It must be noted that the possibilities for publication of scripts are extremely limited relative to the
number of scripts completed each year. In no case should a college or university require that a script
be published in order to validate its use as an accomplishment in promotion and tenure cases.
Evaluation of Screenwriting
Sources for the evaluation of the work of screenwriting professors include the following:
• Peer reviews written by screenwriting professors at other colleges and universities: This might be
completed for individual works or a body of writing.
• Peer review of scripts by the University Film and Video Association: The Association uses a blind
selection process to select the scripts chosen for review at each annual conference. A peer reviewer
produces a written review, and, in addition, the public discussion that follows the formal review can
be recorded and/or transcribed.
• Screenwriting awards of merit by professional organizations: Using a blind review process, expert
judges would normally select a limited number of scripts for recognition
• Reviews by industry professionals in situations in which institutions allow such reviews, and in the
event that the industry professionals are sufficiently aware of the goals of the promotion and tenure
process in academe.
• Optioning or actual production of scripts by recognized professional production companies; optioning
indicates sufficient merit in a script to warrant a commitment.
• Published reviews in print or media format: These might include but would not be limited to print
reviews that appear in the Journal of Film and Video, and reviews that appear in the DVD issues of
the same periodical.
• Screenplay competitions that screenwriting professors are eligible to enter: In many instances,
individuals who have already earned income as a professional writer may be ineligible to compete.
• Selection for competitive writing residencies, writing fellowships, and/or screenwriting awards or
grants.
Quality vs. Quantity in Screenwriting

The number of scripts a professor produces may be an irrelevant consideration. The number of
scripts often is not indicative of the effort, care, and talent needed to produce them. Of far greater
importance is the challenge posed to the writer by the project, the degree of originality
demonstrated, the depth of the work, and the skill with which it is executed. As with any artistic
creative endeavor, a scriptwriter produces multiple drafts before arriving at a manuscript ready for
submission and dissemination; thus "one” screenplay is the result of numerous versions.
Screenwriting Conclusions
Because of the complexities of the process of dissemination and evaluation of screenwriting, the
University Film and Video Association recommends that a panel of three to five faculty experts be
used in all cases involving the promotion or tenure of screenwriting professors. In some cases, an
industry professional might also be included on such a panel.
Additional Considerations
Media production is inherently expensive. Thus it is not infrequent for a faculty member to be
involved in seeking in support for creative work. This can be a time-consuming process, which
requires clear written articulation of creative goals and methods. Credit should be given in the
promotion and tenure process for the seeking of grants as well as for any grants received.
When a faculty member’s creative work is presented at a university, a festival, or an association

conference, it is usual for the faculty member to introduce the work and to respond to any
subsequent questions, comments, and criticisms. Although such a presentation is difficult to
document, it should be considered the equivalent of the presentation of scholarly papers for peer
critique in academic settings.
It must be noted that there are certain types of creative works for which appropriate means of
dissemination and evaluation have not yet been devised. Multi-image pieces and some types of
experimental work fall into this category. In such cases, it is necessary to rely on peer evaluations to
establish the value and importance of faculty creative work.
Peer Evaluations
It is fairly usual for faculty members within a department to evaluate the creative output of their
colleagues as part of the promotion and tenure process. It is increasingly common, and indeed
essential in a relatively new field such as film and video, for a panel of outside evaluators to be
established for the purpose of examining creative work. It is important that the evaluators should be
knowledgeable about, and sympathetic toward the type of creative work completed by the faculty
member who is being considered for promotion and tenure. For instance, an evaluator whose sole
interest is narrative film should not be asked to evaluate an experimental video work. In some cases
an institution might wish to include professionals from the media industry on an outside evaluation
panel. It must be remembered, however, that media professionals may not be attuned to the
requirements of the promotion and tenure process.
Matthew Herbertz
Herbertzfilm@gmail.com 1609 Pineberry St
(317) 525-2218 Lakeland, FL 33803
matthewherbertzfilm.com
EDUCATION
MFA, Film and Video Production, 2016 Ohio University
BA, TV/Film, 2013 DeSales University
Cum Laude
TEACHING EXPERIENCE
Florida Southern College, Communication – Film Studies 2017 -
Assistant Professor
Indiana University-Bloomington, SPEA, Arts Management Spring 2017
Adjunct Faculty
DePauw University, Film Studies Fall 2016
Assistant Professor
Ohio University, Film Division/Ohio University Media Arts and Studies 2014 - 2016
Graduate Instructor of Record
COURSES TAUGHT
Advanced Film Production: Creating the Short Film Visual Communication
Gender in Film Dance on Camera
Intro to Film Studies Video Short Form
Intro to Digital Filmmaking Terrorism and Masculinity in Film
Film Techniques: 16mm Film Production The Film Industry
Audio and Video Field Production Desktop Publishing
Media Foundations Film History
Photojournalism Storytelling for the Screen
COMPLETED FILMS – Juried Exhibitions and Screenings

Relax. 2018. Writer, Director, Editor
(Under review at film festivals)
DC Independent Film Festival, Washington, DC 2018
Athens International Film & Video Festival, Athens, OH 2018
NewFilmmakers NY, New York, NY 2018
New Haven International Film Festival, New Haven, CT 2018
Sunscreen Film Festival, St. Petersburg, FL 2018
Riverbend Film Festival, Goshen, IN 2018
University Film and Video Association Conference, Las Cruces, NM 2018
Ocean Coast Film Festival, Lavra, Matosinhos, Portugal 2018
Magnolia Independent Film Festival, Starkville, MS 2018
Beeston Film Festival, Nottingham, UK 2018
Watchdog Film Festival, Brisbane, AS 2018
Los Angeles CineFest, Los Angeles, CA (online festival) – Semi-Finalist 2018
Shed. 2018. Producer (Dir. Matt Burch and Andy McEntire)
(under review at film festivals)
Nashville Film Festival, Nashville, TN 2018
Tallahassee Film Festival, Tallahassee, FL 2018
DeadCENTER Film Festival, Oklahoma City, OK 2018
Sarasota Film Festival, Sarasota, FL 2018
ME Film festival, Milledgeville, GA 2018
The Turn Out. Gaffer (Dir. Pearl Gluck)

Feature Film
Columbus International Film and Animation Festival, Columbus, OH 2018
Athens International Film and Video Festival, Athens, OH 2018
Doll. 2017. Director of Photography (Dir. Cory Pratt)

Dances with Films, Los Angeles, CA 2017
Nightmares Film Festival, Columbus, OH – Winner, Best Midnight Short 2017
Teadance LGBT Film Festival, Greenville, NC 2017
Ohio Short Film Showcase, Columbus, OH 2017
Deadpoint. 2016. Co-Writer, Director

Fort Worth Indie Film Showcase, Fort Worth, TX – Nominated, Best “Foreign” Short 2017
River Bend Film Festival, Goshen, IN 2017
Princeton Independent Film Festival, Princeton, NJ 2016
Southwest Indiana Film Festival, Jasper, IN 2016
A Peculiar Thud. 2016. Producer, Director of Photography (Dir. Ross Morin)

San Antonio Film Festival, San Antonio, TX 2017
Orlando Film Festival, Orlando, FL 2017
Emerge Film Festival, Auburn, ME 2017
Fargo Fantastic Film Festival, Fargo, ND 2017
NewFilmmakers New York, New York, NY 2017
East Lansing Film Festival, East Landing, MI 2017
Grimmfest, Manchester, UK 2017
Atlanta Horror Film Festival, Atlanta, GA 2017
Terror in the Bay Film Festival, Ontario, Canada 2017
Cornwall Film Festival, Cornwall, UK 2017
Great Lakes International Film Festival, Erie, PA 2017
Coney Island Film Festival, Brooklyn, NY 2017
DC Independent Film Festival, Washington, D.C. 2017
Atlanta Shortsfest, Atlanta, GA – Nominated, Best Short Thriller 2017
Kansas City International Film Festival, Kansas City, MO 2017
Halloween Picture Show, Tampa, FL 2017
Grimmfest Horror Festival, Manchester, UK 2017
Wreak Havoc Horror Film Festival, Greensboro, NC 2017
Pennine Film Festival, Lancashire, UK 2017
Long Island Film Expo, Bellmore, NY 2017
Cape Fear Independent Film Festival, Wilmington, NC 2017
New Haven International Film Festival, New Haven, CT 2017
Film Festival of Columbus, Columbus, OH 2017
Liberty Massacre Horror Short Film Fest, Philadelphia, PA – Winner Best Actor: Malcolm Mills 2017
Motor City Nightmares International Film Festival, Detroit, MI 2017
International Horror Hotel Film Festival, Cleveland, OH – Honorable Mention 2017
Unrestricted View Film Festival, London, England 2017
SENE Film Festival, Providence, RI – Winner, Best Short Horror Film 2017
Short to the Point, Bucharest, Romania 2017
Riverside International Film Festival, Riverside, CA 2017
Apple Cinemas, Cambridge, MA 2016
Nickelodeon Cinema, Portland, ME 2016
Leavitt Theater, Ogunquit, ME 2016
Frontier Cafe, Brunswick, ME 2016
The Gem, Bethel, ME 2016
Gracie Theater, Bangor, ME 2016
Magic Lantern, Bridgton, ME 2016
Nickelodeon Cinema, Portland, ME 2016
State Theater, Portland, ME 2016
Claire in Motion. 2016. Gaffer. Stedicam Operator (Dir. Annie Howell/Lisa Robinson)
Feature Film
South by Southwest Film Festival, Austin, TX 2016
Cinema Village, New York, NY 2017
Laemmle Music Hall, Los Angeles, CA 2017
Plaza Theater, Atlanta, GA 2017
Sie FilmCenter, Denver, CO 2017
Facets, Chicago, IL 2017
Cinema Paradiso, Miami, FL 2017
The Roxy, San Francisco, CA 2017
Cedar Lee Theater, Cleveland, OH 2017
PFS Roxy, Philadelphia, PA 2017
Leeds International Film Festival, Leeds, UK 2016
The Voice of a Woman Festival, New York, NY 2016
The Athena, Athens, OH 2016
Bogota International Film Festival, Bogota, CO 2016
La Costa Film Festival, San Diego, CA 2016
Wexner Center for the Arts, Columbus, OH 2016
Hell’s Half Mile Film Festival, Bay City, MI 2016
Flixx Fest, Jefferson State, CA 2016
Twin Cities Film Fest, St. Paul, MN 2016
Wexner Center for the Arts, Columbus, OH 2016
Sidewalk Film Festival, Birmingham, AL 2016
Portland Film Festival, Portland, OR 2016
South Bay Film and Music Festival, Hermosa Beach, CA 2016
Seattle International Film Festival, Seattle, WA 2016
Stony Brook Film Festival, Stony Brook, NY 2016
Nantucket Film Festival, Nantucket, MA 2016
Greenwich International Film Festival, Greenwich, CT 2016
A Man of God. 2015. Writer, Director

Film Forum on the Lake, Geneva, OH 2017
BLOW-UP Chicago International Arthouse Film Festival, Chicago, IL 2016
Fort Worth Indie Film Showcase, Fort Worth, TX – Award Nominee 2016
Moving Media Film Festival, Detroit, MI – Winner 2nd place Best Narrative Short 2016
The Wild Rose Independent Film Festival, Des Moines, IA – Distinguished Filmmaker Award 2016
Distinguished Cinematography Award
Catalina Film Festival, Los Angeles, CA 2016
I Filmmaker International Film Festival 2016
Southway Film Festival, Mykolaiyv, Ukraine 2016
Sydney Independent Film Festival, Sydney, Australia (online festival) 2016
Film Fest 52, Bethel, CT 2016
University Film and Video Association Conference, Las Vegas, NV 2016
The Blackbird Film Festival, Cortland, NY 2016
Los Angeles CineFest, Los Angeles, CA (online festival) 2016
Middle Coast Film Festival, Bloomington, IN 2016
The Ukrainian International Short Film Festival, Kiev, Ukraine 2016
River Bend Film Festival, Goshen, IN 2016
Green Mountain Film Festival, Montpelier, VT 2016
Silk Road Film Festival, Dublin, Ireland 2016
Artfools Video Festival, Larissa, Greece 2016
Union City International Film Festival, Union City, NJ/Bogota, Columbia 2016
Miami Independent Film Festival, Miami, FL (online festival) 2016
Palm Springs International ShortFest (Film Market), Palm Springs, CA 2016
Pune Short Film Festival, Pune, India 2015
Cincinnati Film Festival, Cincinnati, OH 2015
A Wheel out of Kilter. 2015. Director of Photography (Dir. Ross Morin)

Feature Film
International Horror Hotel, Hudson, OH – 3rd Place Feature Films 2016
Spotlight Horror Film Awards, Atlanta, GA – Bronze Award Winner 2016
Macabre Faire Film Festival, Long Island, NY 2016
Broken Knuckle Film Festival (online festival) 2016
Little Rock Picture Show, Little Rock, AR 2016
University Film and Video Association Conference, Las Vegas, NV 2016
Unrestricted View Film Festival, London, England 2016
Emerge Film Festival of Maine, Auburn, ME 2016
Mountain Film Festival – Sir Edmund Hillary Award 2016
Blowup – Chicago International Arthouse Film Festival, Chicago, IL 2015
Princeton Film Festival, Princeton, NJ– Indie Spirit Award 2015
St Cloud Film Festival, Saint Cloud, MN 2015
Santa Monica Independent Film Festival, Santa Monica, CA – Honorable Mention 2015
Unprincipled. 2015. Director of Photography (Dir. John Kerfoot)

Reality Bytes Independent Film Festival, DeKalb, IL – Best Narrative 2016
North by Midwest Film Festival, Kalamazoo, MI – 2nd place short film 2016
Middle Coast Film Festival, Bloomington, IN 2016
College Film Festival, State College, PA 2016
Moving Media Film Festival, Detroit, MI 2016
Hollywood Verge Film Awards, Hollywood, CA 2016
Mother. 2014. Producer (Dir. Iryna Zhygaliuk)

Russian Diaspora: Israeli Russian Film Festival 2016
I Filmmaker International Film Festival, Marbella, Spain 2016
Columbus International Film & Video Festival, Columbus, OH 2015
Warsaw Jewish Film Festival, Warsaw, Poland 2015
First Step Film Festival, Albania 2015
Kin International Women’s Film Festival, Yerevan, Armenia 2015
Underground FilmFest, Munich, Germany 2015
Female Eye Film Festival, Toronto, Canada 2015
Ohio Shorts Screening and Reception, Columbus, OH 2015
Newark FAMFEST, Newark, OH 2015
Cannes Film Festival Short Film Corner, Cannes, France 2015
Suction. 2014. Writer, Director, Editor

Philadelphia Independent Film Festival, Philadelphia, PA – Honorable Mention 2015
New Orleans Film Festival, New Orleans, LA 2015
Ivy Film Festival, Providence, RI 2015
Student Art Festival, Orlando, FL 2015
University Film and Video Association Conference, Washington, DC 2015
Palm Springs International ShortFest (Film Market), Palm Springs, CA 2015
SCREENPLAYS – Juried Competitions

My Florida Home. 2018. Writer
Feature Screenplay
ScreenCraft Production Fund – Quarterfinalist 2018
ScreenCraft Production Fund – Semifinalist 2018
AWARDS
My Florida Home. 2018. Writer
Quarterfinalist – ScreenCraft Production Fund (2018)
Semifinalist – ScreenCraft Production Fund (2018)
A Peculiar Thud. 2016. Director of Photography/ Producer

Winner, Best Actor - Liberty Massacre Horror Short Film Fest (2017)
Winner, Best Short Horror Film – SENE Film Festival (2017)
Audience Award – SENE Film Festival (2017)
Honorable Mention – International Horror Hotel Film Festival (2017)
Doll. 2016. Director of Photography

Winner, Best Midnight Short – Nightmares Film Festival (2017)
A Man of God. 2015. Writer, Director.

Distinguished Filmmaking Award – Wild Rose Film Festival (2016)
Distinguished Cinematography Award – Wild Rose Film Festival (2016)
2nd Place Best Narrative Short – Moving Media Film Festival (2016)
Award Nominee – Fort Worth Indie Film Showcase (2016)
A Wheel Out of Kilter. 2015. Director of Photography, Assistant Editor, Actor.

Best Feature Film – Macabre Faire Film Festival (2017)
3rd Place Feature Films – International Horror Hotel (2016)
2nd Place Short Film – North by Midwest Film Festival (2016)
Indie Spirit Award – Princeton Film Festival (2015)
Sir. Edmund Hillary Award – Mountain Film Festival (2016)
Honorable Mention – Santa Monica Independent Film Festival (2015)
Unprincipled. 2015. Director of Photography.

Best Narrative – Reality Bytes Independent Film Festival (2016)
Suction. 2014. Writer, Director, Editor.

Honorable Mention – Philadelphia Independent Film Festival (2015)
GRANTS
Faculty/Student Collaborative Research Grant (2018) Florida Southern College
Student Enhancement Award Grant (2015) Ohio University
CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS
Herbertz, M. (2016) Modern Rural Horror and Male Anxiety: The Fear of Losing Power.
University Film and Video Association Conference, Las Vegas, NV.
Herbertz, M. (2015) Imperial Patriarchy: Terrorism, The Fear of the “other”, and the Struggle for Masculinity in Taken.
University Film and Video Association Conference, Washington, DC.
Herbertz, M. (2013) The Struggle to Grow Up: Male Representation in Hollywood Comedies.
Social Research Social Justice Conference at Muhlenberg College, Allentown, PA.
VISITING ARTIST/INVITED LECTURES

Visiting Artist, Ohio University, Film Division
Herbertz, M. (2017) Art of Steadicam. Workshop and Lecture.
Visiting Artist, Geneva-on-the-Lake, OH

Herbertz, M. (2017) A Man of God. Screening and Q and A.
Visiting Artist, Connecticut College, Film Studies

Herbertz, M. (2016) Cinematography and True Independent Cinema. Workshop and Lecture.
ACADEMIC SERVICE
Cinematheque. (2017-) Head of Film Studies Weekly Film Screenings/Discussion, Florida Southern College
‘Southern Reel Film Showcase’. (2018) Co-organizer and curator. Student Film Showcase, Florida Southern College.
‘Art of Film’ Screening and Talk Back. City of Lost Children. (2018) Polk Museum of Art at Florida Southern College.
‘Art of Film’ Screening and Talk Back. Claire in Motion. (2018) Polk Museum of Art at Florida Southern College.
‘Art of Film’ Screening and Talk Back. Old Joy. (2018) Polk Museum of Art at Florida Southern College.
Hartford and Boston Florida Southern College Admissions Reception. (2018) Faculty Representation at Admissions
Reception, Florida Southern College.
Gender Roles in Dystopian Film. (2016) Featured Lecture, ArtsFest, DePauw University
Cinematheque. (2016) Head of Film Studies Weekly Film Screenings/Discussion, DePauw University
Hyper-Masculinity in “Everybody Want’s Some”. (2016) Featured Lecture, Film Studies Film Series, DePauw University
SERVICE TO THE PROFESSION

Herbertz, M (2016) Formal Response. Everything’s Fine. Dir. Michael Mulcahy.
University Film and Video Association Conference
Herbertz, M (2015) Formal Response. You Try Living Here. Dir. Karen Dee Carpenter.
University Film and Video Association Conference
ORGANIZATIONS AND MEMBERSHIPS

2017- Los Angeles Chinese Film Festival, Senior Programmer
2017- Independent Spirit Awards, Screener
2016- Film Independent, Member
2016- Kiltered Productions, Co-Founder
2014- University Film and Video Association, Member
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPERIENCE
Head of Film Production, DePauw University (Fall 2016)
RELEVANT PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

ESPN, Freelance Production Assistant November 2016 – July 2017
Indiana University, Videographer and Media Producer February 2017 – July 2017
Indiana University, Freelance Web Content Manager June 2016 – June 2017
PRODUCTION SKILLS
Camera: Arri ALEXA Cinema Camera series, RED Scarlet/Epic Cinema Camera series, Canon Digital Cinema Camera series,
Black Magic Cinema Camera series, Canon DSLR series, Canon XF series, GoPro Hero series, Panasonic Digital Camera
series, Sony HVR series, Sony FS series, Arri S/SR 16mm Film Cameras, Bolex film Cameras.
Post Production: Adobe Premiere Pro, Avid, Final Cut Pro X, Final Cut Pro 7, Quantel, Pro Tools, DaVinci Resolve, Adobe
Photoshop.
Lighting/Grip: Steadicam Operation, Cinema Generator Operation, Butterfly Operation, Car Mount Operation, Lowel Open
Face, Mole Richardson, Various Fluorescents, LED’s, Various HMI’s, Various Kino Flo lights, Various LED lights.
Pre-Production: Movie Magic Budgeting, Movie Magic Scheduling.
Miscellaneous: Adobe Dreamweaver, Adobe Illustrator, Adobe InDesign, Adobe Muse.

Herbertz Far 2017 18 Final

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Herbertz Far 2017 18 Final

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Faculty Activity Report

Name: Matthew Herbertz

Courses: Fall 2017

COM 2500 Desktop Publishing (Visual 4 4

COM 2240 Film History 4 4

COM 2210 Storytelling for the Screen 4 4

Courses: Spring 2018

COM 1101 001 Media Foundations 4 4

COM 1101 002 Media Foundations 4 4

COM 3367 Video Short Form 4 4

COM 3900 Gender in Film 4 4

COM 3961 Communication Field Experience 1 2

I attempt to emulate a “real-world” workplace environment in all of my classes from day

At the root of all of my courses is the implementation of professionalism, passion, and

Section II: Service:

You may wish to divide your activities into:

A. Service to the department

On the college level I:

Section III: Scholarly and Creative Activity

Section IV: Goals for the upcoming calendar year

- Improve the way in which I get students to engage and participate.

Course: COM 1101 001 - MEDIA FOUNDATIONS Department: Com

COM 1101 - 001

Responses: [M] Male=1 [F] Female=2

COM 1101 - 001

COM 1101 - 001

COM 1101 - 001

COM 1101 - 001

COM 1101 - 001

Course: COM 1101 001 - MEDIA FOUNDATIONS Department: Com

Faculty: Matthew Herbertz

Course: COM 1101 002 - MEDIA FOUNDATIONS Department: Com

COM 1101 - 002

Responses: [M] Male=1 [F] Female=2

COM 1101 - 002

COM 1101 - 002

COM 1101 - 002

COM 1101 - 002

COM 1101 - 002

Course: COM 1101 002 - MEDIA FOUNDATIONS Department: Com

Faculty: Matthew Herbertz

1 Learned a lot from this class 

Course: COM 3367 001 - VIDEO SHORT FORM Department: Com

COM 3367 - 001

Responses: [M] Male=1 [F] Female=2

COM 3367 - 001

COM 3367 - 001

COM 3367 - 001

COM 3367 - 001

COM 3367 - 001

Course: COM 3367 001 - VIDEO SHORT FORM Department: Com

AA MA SA N SD MD AD N Mean Med. Mode Std

Faculty: Matthew Herbertz

Course: COM 3900 001 - GENDER IN FILM Department: Com

COM 3900 - 001

Responses: [M] Male=1 [F] Female=2

COM 3900 - 001

COM 3900 - 001

COM 3900 - 001

COM 3900 - 001

COM 3900 - 001

Course: COM 3900 001 - GENDER IN FILM Department: Com

AA MA SA N SD MD AD N Mean Med. Mode Std

Faculty: Matthew Herbertz