- Email: [email protected]
Prepared for practice? Student perceptions about requirements and preparation for public relations practice
Public Relations Review 32 (2006) 188–190
Prepared for practice? Student perceptions about requirements and preparation for public relations practice Karla K. Gower a,∗ , Bryan H. Reber b,1 a
College of Communication and Information Sciences, University of Alabama, Box 870172, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0172, USA b Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA Received 8 July 2005; received in revised form 11 October 2005; accepted 22 February 2006
Abstract An online survey was administered to 209 junior and senior public relations majors at nine U.S. universities. Students affirmed skills and understandings identified in previous studies as important to the practice of public relations. When asked about their preparedness in the same areas, their responses differed significantly suggesting at least some feelings of lack of preparation for professional practice in some areas. Pedagogical implications, including an increased emphasis on business concepts and crisis planning, are discussed. © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: PR education; Undergraduate public relations; Professional practice; Tactics; Roles; Management
1. Introduction Pedagogical debates in academe are common, and public relations has not been immune to such debates. Those debates have included the integration of disciplines such as advertising, public relations and marketing, the importance of strategic as well as tactical emphases in public relations classrooms, and the value of managerial skills for public relations graduates. Journals have dedicated special issues to this discussion, and it has been a recent focus of the National Communication Association. Research regarding public relations curricula, by and large, have analyzed the questions from the perspectives of educators and practitioners. The studies reveal what educators and practitioners see as important to the practice of public relations and how educators are attempting to instill that knowledge in their students and prepare them for the future. But the studies have not analyzed the perspectives of students—the consumers of and investors in a public relations education. Educators believe that through their curricula and instruction they are transmitting to their students the necessary knowledge and skills for effective public relations practice. Have students been successfully educated regarding their understanding of what knowledge and skills are essential? Do students believe they have mastered these essentials and thereby are prepared for practice? In other words, are educators getting the message across to their students? ∗ 1
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 205 348 0132. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K.K. Gower), [email protected] (B.H. Reber). Tel.: +1 706 542 3178.
0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.02.017
K.K. Gower, B.H. Reber / Public Relations Review 32 (2006) 188–190
189
This study attempts to capture the attitudes of this stakeholder group—public relations students. Through a survey of students enrolled in some of the largest public relations programs in the United States, we are attempting to understand what students believe are essential proficiencies and how prepared they believe they are in those essential areas. By doing so, we believe that the strategies of educators and practitioners will be improved as they work to instill essential proficiencies in students before they enter the arena of practice. 2. Results The results revealed that students appear to have a slightly stronger sense of preparation in understandings and leadership than they do in several tactics. However, they do feel quite prepared in basic computer and writing areas. The items for which students indicated the strongest feelings of preparation (those with the highest means on a five-point scale) were credibility (4.74), basic computer skills (4.67), ethics (4.62), nature or role of public relations (4.57), duties of public relations practitioners (4.56), group process skills (4.50), leadership skills (4.49), basic software skills (4.49), written communication (4.47) and social responsibility (4.46). The items for which students indicated the weakest feelings of preparation (those with the lowest means) were revenue and expense profiles (3.13), new technologies (3.25), financial and budgeting skills (3.20), electronic communication (3.37), crisis planning (3.53), labor relations (3.49), design and layout (3.72), setting performance criteria (3.78), staff development (3.81) and understanding technology (3.82). Among the highest 10 means, only 3 are related to communication tactics—computer and software skills and written communication. Among the lowest 10 means are tactics such as crisis planning, design and layout, electronic communication and new technologies. Basic business skills rank among the 10 lowest means—revenue and expense profiles and financial and budgeting skills. A visual analysis of means shows substantial differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on five items—financial and budgeting skills, revenue and expense profiles, electronic communication, new technologies and crisis planning. Factor analysis was used to develop scales by which students’ perceptions could be statistically tested. The scales were grouped into three categories—technical skills, managerial skills and concepts. Of the 47 items on the survey, 26 loaded on meaningful scales. Technical skills (10 items) included: problem solving ability (problem solving and decision making, contingency/crisis/disaster planning and employee relations); computer skills (basic computer skills and basic computer software skills); strategic campaign design (campaigns, public relations research design and techniques, and financial and budgeting skills). Managerial skills were measured by 11 items that loaded on three scales: administrative skills (understanding technology developments, performance evaluation skills, understanding social responsibility, understanding roles in organizations and understanding revenue, expense profiles); supervising skills (delegating, supervising and negotiating); team building skills (team building skills, interpersonal and leadership skills and group process skills). Conceptual knowledge was measured by five items that loaded on a single scale as well as the single item measuring the concept of ethical issues. The scale is: grounding knowledge of public relations, which consisted of five items—labor relations, the societal forces affecting public relations, the nature and role of public relations, equal opportunity employment requirements and the duties of public relations practitioners. There were significant differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on all of the technical skills scales (problem solving ability, p < .000; computer skills, p < .036; and strategic campaign design, p < .000). In each instance, students rated their preparation as significantly less than the perceived importance. There were also significant differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on all of the managerial skill scales (administrative skills, p < .000; supervising skills, p < .000; and team building skills, p < .000). Again, students routinely rated their preparation significantly lower than they rated the importance of the skill. There were also significant differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on the conceptual scale (grounding knowledge of public relations, p < .000). A t-test of perceived importance and perceived preparation regarding ethical issues showed a significant difference (p < .000). In both the conceptual scale and the ethical issues item, students’ perceptions of preparation were significantly lower than their perception of importance.
190
K.K. Gower, B.H. Reber / Public Relations Review 32 (2006) 188–190
3. Analysis The findings suggest that students are getting the message that the items explored in this survey are important to practice. But the students also find these things roughly equally important. This might be explained by the nature of the survey instrument. Since the instrument was constructed by lifting items identified as important by educators and practitioners, student responses simply affirm these findings without the nuance made possible through experience. It might also be explained by their educational experience. Educators are communicating that these items are important, but the students are still at the metamorphosis stage of assimilation and have not yet come to terms with the nuances of the items. The good news is that students appear to understand the importance of items as diverse as written communication and group processing skills. While students generally agreed or were neutral in their attitudes about preparedness in these areas, their answers in the “important” and “prepared” battery were often significantly different. A visual comparison of means, however, suggests that students generally feel prepared. A few items – notably traditional business skills – drew more responses toward the unprepared end of the spectrum. For example, about 31% said they felt not very prepared or unprepared in the area of financial and budgeting skills. A similar number (26.5%) said they felt not very prepared or unprepared to work in crisis planning. About one-third (35.3%) said they were not very prepared or unprepared to work with new technologies; 33.3% said they were not very prepared or unprepared to work with electronic communication. And 38.3% said they were not very prepared or unprepared to work with revenue and expense profiles. These responses would suggest areas in which we could pay more attention to curricular needs, and they affirm previous criticism that public relations students do not have some of the basic business skills appropriate to practice. These findings provide several things for public relations educators to ponder. Students seem to agree that items vetted by practitioners and educators in previous studies are important to practice. Students generally feel prepared, but their answers regarding preparedness do differ significantly to their belief that the items are important to practice. There appears to be additional room for teaching business and managerial skills. Understanding of concepts seems to be strong. Educators should embrace the success of communicating essential skills and concepts to students while continuing to improve educational standards in teaching some business and technology skills and concepts.
Prepared for practice? Student perceptions about requirements and preparation for public relations practice Karla K. Gower a,∗ , Bryan H. Reber b,1 a
College of Communication and Information Sciences, University of Alabama, Box 870172, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0172, USA b Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA Received 8 July 2005; received in revised form 11 October 2005; accepted 22 February 2006
Abstract An online survey was administered to 209 junior and senior public relations majors at nine U.S. universities. Students affirmed skills and understandings identified in previous studies as important to the practice of public relations. When asked about their preparedness in the same areas, their responses differed significantly suggesting at least some feelings of lack of preparation for professional practice in some areas. Pedagogical implications, including an increased emphasis on business concepts and crisis planning, are discussed. © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: PR education; Undergraduate public relations; Professional practice; Tactics; Roles; Management
1. Introduction Pedagogical debates in academe are common, and public relations has not been immune to such debates. Those debates have included the integration of disciplines such as advertising, public relations and marketing, the importance of strategic as well as tactical emphases in public relations classrooms, and the value of managerial skills for public relations graduates. Journals have dedicated special issues to this discussion, and it has been a recent focus of the National Communication Association. Research regarding public relations curricula, by and large, have analyzed the questions from the perspectives of educators and practitioners. The studies reveal what educators and practitioners see as important to the practice of public relations and how educators are attempting to instill that knowledge in their students and prepare them for the future. But the studies have not analyzed the perspectives of students—the consumers of and investors in a public relations education. Educators believe that through their curricula and instruction they are transmitting to their students the necessary knowledge and skills for effective public relations practice. Have students been successfully educated regarding their understanding of what knowledge and skills are essential? Do students believe they have mastered these essentials and thereby are prepared for practice? In other words, are educators getting the message across to their students? ∗ 1
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 205 348 0132. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K.K. Gower), [email protected] (B.H. Reber). Tel.: +1 706 542 3178.
0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2006.02.017
K.K. Gower, B.H. Reber / Public Relations Review 32 (2006) 188–190
189
This study attempts to capture the attitudes of this stakeholder group—public relations students. Through a survey of students enrolled in some of the largest public relations programs in the United States, we are attempting to understand what students believe are essential proficiencies and how prepared they believe they are in those essential areas. By doing so, we believe that the strategies of educators and practitioners will be improved as they work to instill essential proficiencies in students before they enter the arena of practice. 2. Results The results revealed that students appear to have a slightly stronger sense of preparation in understandings and leadership than they do in several tactics. However, they do feel quite prepared in basic computer and writing areas. The items for which students indicated the strongest feelings of preparation (those with the highest means on a five-point scale) were credibility (4.74), basic computer skills (4.67), ethics (4.62), nature or role of public relations (4.57), duties of public relations practitioners (4.56), group process skills (4.50), leadership skills (4.49), basic software skills (4.49), written communication (4.47) and social responsibility (4.46). The items for which students indicated the weakest feelings of preparation (those with the lowest means) were revenue and expense profiles (3.13), new technologies (3.25), financial and budgeting skills (3.20), electronic communication (3.37), crisis planning (3.53), labor relations (3.49), design and layout (3.72), setting performance criteria (3.78), staff development (3.81) and understanding technology (3.82). Among the highest 10 means, only 3 are related to communication tactics—computer and software skills and written communication. Among the lowest 10 means are tactics such as crisis planning, design and layout, electronic communication and new technologies. Basic business skills rank among the 10 lowest means—revenue and expense profiles and financial and budgeting skills. A visual analysis of means shows substantial differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on five items—financial and budgeting skills, revenue and expense profiles, electronic communication, new technologies and crisis planning. Factor analysis was used to develop scales by which students’ perceptions could be statistically tested. The scales were grouped into three categories—technical skills, managerial skills and concepts. Of the 47 items on the survey, 26 loaded on meaningful scales. Technical skills (10 items) included: problem solving ability (problem solving and decision making, contingency/crisis/disaster planning and employee relations); computer skills (basic computer skills and basic computer software skills); strategic campaign design (campaigns, public relations research design and techniques, and financial and budgeting skills). Managerial skills were measured by 11 items that loaded on three scales: administrative skills (understanding technology developments, performance evaluation skills, understanding social responsibility, understanding roles in organizations and understanding revenue, expense profiles); supervising skills (delegating, supervising and negotiating); team building skills (team building skills, interpersonal and leadership skills and group process skills). Conceptual knowledge was measured by five items that loaded on a single scale as well as the single item measuring the concept of ethical issues. The scale is: grounding knowledge of public relations, which consisted of five items—labor relations, the societal forces affecting public relations, the nature and role of public relations, equal opportunity employment requirements and the duties of public relations practitioners. There were significant differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on all of the technical skills scales (problem solving ability, p < .000; computer skills, p < .036; and strategic campaign design, p < .000). In each instance, students rated their preparation as significantly less than the perceived importance. There were also significant differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on all of the managerial skill scales (administrative skills, p < .000; supervising skills, p < .000; and team building skills, p < .000). Again, students routinely rated their preparation significantly lower than they rated the importance of the skill. There were also significant differences between perceived importance and perceived preparation on the conceptual scale (grounding knowledge of public relations, p < .000). A t-test of perceived importance and perceived preparation regarding ethical issues showed a significant difference (p < .000). In both the conceptual scale and the ethical issues item, students’ perceptions of preparation were significantly lower than their perception of importance.
190
K.K. Gower, B.H. Reber / Public Relations Review 32 (2006) 188–190
3. Analysis The findings suggest that students are getting the message that the items explored in this survey are important to practice. But the students also find these things roughly equally important. This might be explained by the nature of the survey instrument. Since the instrument was constructed by lifting items identified as important by educators and practitioners, student responses simply affirm these findings without the nuance made possible through experience. It might also be explained by their educational experience. Educators are communicating that these items are important, but the students are still at the metamorphosis stage of assimilation and have not yet come to terms with the nuances of the items. The good news is that students appear to understand the importance of items as diverse as written communication and group processing skills. While students generally agreed or were neutral in their attitudes about preparedness in these areas, their answers in the “important” and “prepared” battery were often significantly different. A visual comparison of means, however, suggests that students generally feel prepared. A few items – notably traditional business skills – drew more responses toward the unprepared end of the spectrum. For example, about 31% said they felt not very prepared or unprepared in the area of financial and budgeting skills. A similar number (26.5%) said they felt not very prepared or unprepared to work in crisis planning. About one-third (35.3%) said they were not very prepared or unprepared to work with new technologies; 33.3% said they were not very prepared or unprepared to work with electronic communication. And 38.3% said they were not very prepared or unprepared to work with revenue and expense profiles. These responses would suggest areas in which we could pay more attention to curricular needs, and they affirm previous criticism that public relations students do not have some of the basic business skills appropriate to practice. These findings provide several things for public relations educators to ponder. Students seem to agree that items vetted by practitioners and educators in previous studies are important to practice. Students generally feel prepared, but their answers regarding preparedness do differ significantly to their belief that the items are important to practice. There appears to be additional room for teaching business and managerial skills. Understanding of concepts seems to be strong. Educators should embrace the success of communicating essential skills and concepts to students while continuing to improve educational standards in teaching some business and technology skills and concepts.