Teaching broadcasting: Seven approaches

After graduating from college, I went to broadcasting school for a year.  The instructors, who all had professional broadcasting experience, encompassed a wide range of teaching styles and temperaments.  One or more instructors fell into at least one of the following categories:

• The actor: This instructor was consistently full of energy, always seeming to be on stage.  He once told an announcing class that hosting a radio show is like hosting a party.  The "Got enough ice?" approach you'd use at a party with your guests is similar, in his view, to the way you communicate with radio listeners.  I didn't agree completely with this approach to broadcasting, but his advice to end a sentence on an upward inflection is generally correct; your statements sound more positive that way, and you keep the momentum going.
• The generic advice dispenser: A few instructors fell into this category.  Although they presided over announcing critique sessions, their comments were often brief.  (i.e.  "Could use more energy," "Slow down the pace a little," "Sound more enthusiastic.")
• The hard-to-please instructor: The instructor who was most frequently in this category was the most rigid stickler about announcing and producing in a by-the-book, rigid manner.  Not surprisingly, this instructor was also the toughest grader.  This person once told me that my announcing delivery had a '70s California, soft rock style, and that I wouldn't get hired using it on the air.  When program directors at two radio stations hired me because of that very style, I was pleased to disprove the instructor's assertion.
• The laid-back, like-minded instructor: Two instructors were consistently in this category.  Their low-key announcing styles, similar to mine, meant that we were almost always on the same page during announcing critique sessions.
• The news veteran: One instructor had been a longtime newscaster and commercial voice-over artist.  He was particularly adept at sharpening the phrasing, timing, and inflections of a student's newscast.  Another younger instructor with radio news experience was also adept in these areas.
• The Socratic Method inquisitor: One instructor's approach to announcing critiques differed from everyone else's style.  Before offering his critique, he would play a student's mock radio shift tape and ask the group, "What are we hearing here?"  Sometimes, he would ask this after only playing the first sentence on the tape.  He would then ask question after question of each person in the session, getting us to pinpoint the tape's strengths and weaknesses.  (i.e. "What was most effective about the way (s)he delivered that intro?  How would you have phrased it?  What could (s)he have done differently to make it even more effective?")  As one student put it, "When he's here, we all shred each other."  He was one of two instructors who always asked if everyone had a notebook handy in which to write down his feedback.  Students also had to remember not to back announce any of the music during his sessions.  In his view, announcers should move their broadcasts forward, not pause to reflect on where they've been.  I don't agree with that approach, because a DJ's basic function, even in an age of online playlists, is to tell the listeners what they've heard and provide relevant, interesting facts about the music and/or artists, when appropriate.
• The value-for-the-money, everything-including-the-kitchen-sink evaluator: Two instructors consistently gave long, thorough evaluations of every tape, in a matter-of-fact delivery.  They would tell you, at length, about your tape's good and bad points and always have compliments and suggestions for improvement ready.

Looking back, it was mostly positive to learn from so many instructors with different announcing and teaching styles.  After all, no two radio listeners are exactly alike, so it's good for an aspiring announcer to remember this while listening for common threads among different instructors' critiques.