Manuscript Due Date: 08/07/2025 Anticipated Publication: January 2026 JPRE 12(1)
Guest Editors
Emily S. Kinsky, West Texas A&M University Charles Lubbers, University of South Dakota Adrienne A. Wallace, Grand Valley State University Pamela G. Bourland-Davis, Georgia Southern University (posthumously)
Since 1975, the Commission on Public Relations Education (CPRE) has studied undergraduate and graduate public relations education standards and practices, with the bulk of its effort being to lessen the gap between the profession and the academy at the undergraduate level. In 1999, the CPRE “Port of Entry” report addressed the university as the official “port of entry” for those who seek to make public relations a career, citing both undergraduate and graduate education as the tooling and retooling centers of the public relations profession. Then, the last official CPRE report on graduate education was released in 2012, “Standards for a Master’s Degree in Public Relations: Educating for Complexity.” With the growth of master’s-level public relations education in recent years and the splintering of methods, modes of delivery, theory, and practice, this special issue attempts to bridge the gap that exists in pedagogy related to PR graduate education with an issue solely dedicated to graduate education in public relations.
The purpose of this special issue call is to invite research articles, teaching briefs, scholarly and critical essays, and case studies, and we are especially interested in articles that explore BOTH the challenges and opportunities for public relations pedagogy focusing on graduate-level education in the public relations classroom. Submissions that offer practical knowledge and guidance for ONLY graduate public relations education are encouraged. We invite original submissions, and areas of focus could include but are not limited to:
How practitioner expectations align with graduate education
Best practices for internships in applied master’s programs
Applied theory at the graduate level
International approaches to graduate education
Developing research and data analytical abilities for practice
How graduate programs connect with the demands of the profession
Innovative approaches to graduate education (e.g., unique course offerings, new ideas for projects and assignments)
Submission Guidelines Submissions should follow the Author Guidelines on the JPRE website. Authors should include the special call name (SIGradPR) in parentheses after their manuscript title to indicate the submission is for this particular special call. Authors should submit their manuscript through Scholastica, the online submission system for JPRE. All submissions will be anonymously reviewed, following the guidelines of JPRE. Authors must use APA style for citations, references, tables, figures, and captions, plus follow the JPRE Styleguide. All identifying information must be deleted before full paper submissions.
Timeline with Key Dates Deadline for full manuscript submission to JPRE’s Scholastica submission portal: https://jpre.scholasticahq.com/ – 08/07/2025 Notification of review results, including invitations for revision and resubmission (R&R): August 2025 Deadline for R&R submission: 09/30/2025 Scheduled Publication: January 2026 12(1)
If you have any questions, please contact the guest editors for additional information. Dr. Emily S. Kinsky, West Texas A&M University, ekinsky@wtamu.edu Dr. Chuck Lubbers, University of South Dakota, chuck.lubbers@usd.edu Dr. Adrienne A. Wallace, Grand Valley State University, wallacad@gvsu.edu
Editorial Record: Submitted May 15, 2023. Revised November 29, 2023. Accepted December 18, 2023 by past Editor-in Chief Pamela Bourland-Davis.
Amanda J. Weed Associate Professor Kennesaw State University Georgia, USA Email: aweed2@kennesaw.edu
Adrienne A. Wallace Associate Professor Grand Valley State University Michigan, USA Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
Betsy Emmons Associate Professor University of Nebraska-Lincoln Nebraska, USA Email: eemmons3@unl.edu
Alisa Agozzino Associate Professor Ohio Northern University Ohio, USA Email: a-agozzino@onu.edu
ABSTRACT
This mixed-method study provides the first known scholarly research specifically about the PRSSA Bateman Case Study Competition. Through triangulation of data from a survey, focus groups, and public data analysis, the authors explored the benefits and challenges of Bateman as an experiential learning program in public relations education. While promoted by the PRSSA organization as “the premier national case study competition for public relations students” (PRSSA, n.d.), research insights indicate that Bateman falls short in meeting students’ educational needs, which is reflected in a 41.7% decrease in competition entries since 2018. Study findings provide support for several research-based recommendations to improve competition practices related to the competition timeline, experiential learning outcomes, organizational communication, judging practices, and support for diversity, equity, and inclusion of Bateman student teams.
Editorial Record: Submitted May 19, 2023. Revised December 12, 2023. Accepted December 14, 2023.
Authors
Amanda J. Weed Associate Professor School of Communication & Media Kennesaw State University Georgia, USA Email: aweed2@kennesaw.edu
Lauren Nye School of Communication & Media Kennesaw State University Georgia, USA
ABSTRACT
Pre-professional student organizations are known to complement undergraduate university studies and propel students into their professional careers. The mission of the Public Relations Student Society of America (PRSSA) is to support students by enhancing education, broadening networks, and launching careers of students in the public relations industry. While PRSSA membership peaked at more than 10,000 members in 2018, membership has declined 41.6%, or more than 4,000 members, to a little more than 6,000 members in 2022. PRSSA student leaders can serve as the “canary in the coal mine” to pinpoint critical challenges in chapter recruitment, engagement, and day-to-day management. This study, through the theoretical lens of Self Determination Theory, aims to measure how PRSSA student leadership satisfies needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness; and explores intrinsic and extrinsic motivations to serve as chapter leaders. From the study findings, the authors propose a PRSSA leadership strategy that integrates extrinsic motivation in the form of a class credit model that better aligns the PRSSA mission to the evolving needs of students.
Adrienne A. Wallace Associate Professor Grand Valley State University Editor-in-Chief Journal of Public Relations Education Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
The 10-2 issue is all about the student experience. Following the Commission of Public Relations Education (CPRE) issue in 10-1, wherein we examined expectations of a complicated and growing field, we look at not just how students will succeed in the industry but rather their experience and perspective in getting to the finish line of the undergrad experience, using the classroom as a laboratory.
This issue addresses courageous methods with Madden & Guastaferro lending brave insight into the emotional toll that students endure when working with sensitive topics. In fact, their findings show us that students found this topic motivating and meaningful in providing support to victims. I’m grateful for Madden & Guastaferro bringing these issues and advice to light so as to help other PR professors understand how to more effectively integrate trauma-informed practices into campaign courses. We can’t avoid commonly stigmatized issues for the sake of our own comfort in classrooms, we must remain vigilant and maybe even, comfortably uncomfortable in order to improve outcomes related to all matters of communication with all people. I hope you find this article as moving and helpful as I did.
Then, Weed & Nye reveal an additional aspect of student satisfaction using extracurricular activities through PRSSA as a model for maximizing leadership potential and their knowledge, skills, abilities, and traits (KSATs) – building upon the last two CPRE reports. They recommend to maximize these KSATs that PRSSA should be structured within a for-credit curricular design to enhance career preparedness in the student experience. This left me thinking about the potential that exists for high-impact practices and experiential learning crossovers in my own curriculum and asking the question, am I advocating enough for my own PRSSA chapter?
This takes us to the role of technology in this experience discussion, which Lim and Place address in the use of technological tools and responsible use in public relations with our final article and GIFT. In these final pieces, Lim reveals, that college students anticipate professors to incorporate ChatGPT into many course materials rather than prohibiting its use. This study highlights that ChatGPT is a powerful PR tool that can be used by colleges to improve their public relations efforts in a number of ways, from classroom to campus-wide innovation. I appreciated this article and timing as my own university and unit wrestle with policymaking and educational practices surrounding emerging tech in the classroom and campus.
As luck would have it, Place provides us with a solution to the implementation of this looming issue in our classrooms in her award-winning GIFT from the PRSA Educators Academy Summit in 2022. This assignment has miraculously stood the test of tech time and is structured to empower, enable, and embolden students to apply ethical and legal theory in PR to practice by way of a policy writing assignment. Really turning the student into an expert to engage as counsel and “ethical guardians” in the field; furthering a confident student through this classroom experience. Our educators in this issue have effectively transformed wicked problems into practical and professional solutions. I’m so proud of the work we do at JPRE, and I hope our scholars inspire your own practice.
The Journal of Public Relations Education (JPRE) is devoted to the presentation of research and commentary that advance the field of public relations education. JPRE invites submissions in the following three categories:
Research Articles
Teaching Briefs
Book/Software Reviews
Learn more by visiting the About JPRE page and the Authors/Contributors page for submission guidelines. All submissions should follow the guidelines of the most recent edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA).
Adrienne A. Wallace Associate Professor Grand Valley State University Editor in Chief, Journal of Public Relations Education Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
Elizabeth L. Toth Professor Emerita University of Maryland Co-Editor, CPRE 2023 Report Email: eltoth@umd.edu
Pamela Bourland-Davis Professor Georgia Southern University Co-Editor, CPRE 2023 Report Email: pamelagb@georgiasouthern.edu
As the incoming editor of the Journal of Public Relations Education, I’ve been absolutely blown away and, frankly, dazzled by the dedication and talents of an all-volunteer team. Where else in the academy does one find an open-access journal run 100% on the time, talent, and treasure of volunteers? Are we crazy? Passionate? Both? Maybe. Anyway, I’m here for it and so are you! If you are so inclined to drop a note of thanks to our esteemed volunteers, you can find a listing of the full executive editorial board and editorial review board at this link.
JPRE welcomes the following members to the executive editorial board of directors:
Senior Associate Editor – Christopher McCollough, Ph.D., Jacksonville State University Associate Editor – Style – Luke Capizzo, Ph.D., APR, University of Missouri Associate Editor – Style – LaShonda L. Eaddy, Ph.D., APR, Penn State University Associate Editor – Layout Design & Web – Amanda J. Weed, Ph.D., APR, Kennesaw State University Assistant Editor – Layout Design – Haley Higgs, Ph.D., Georgia Southern University Associate Editor – Book/Resource Reviews – Jiun-Yi (Jenny) Tsai, Ph.D., Northern Arizona University Assistant Editor – Digital Media – Kate Stewart., Jacksonville State University
It’s my pleasure to thank Dr. Pamela Bourland-Davis for her endless support and enthusiasm for the growth and forward progress of this journal. As just the fourth editor in the journal’s history, it’s not lost on me that JPRE would not be the success it is without the legacy support of the past editors Pamela Bourland-Davis, Emily Kinsky, and Chuck Lubbers and critical support from Tiffany Gallicano. These esteemed scholars form the past editors’ council of JPRE – the foundation and backbone of the journal.
With each new editor, great strides have been made throughout JPRE’s history. As such, I’m pleased to announce the first marks that the incoming executive editorial board has made on the journal, starting with this issue:
We have updated each publication entry to simplify the process and improve website navigation, page loading time, and search. This will allow us to capitalize on precious volunteer hours as well as end keyword cannibalization and “keyword stuffing” of articles published as both a “blog style” post and a PDF on the same site. The appearance might change over time as we find out what is working and what is not working for the journal for search.
Sponsorship from the Moody College of Communication at the University of Texas at Austin will create the Moody College of Communication Quality Reviewer Award with a cash prize to be awarded in August.
Sponsorship from The Arthur W. Page Center establishes the Page Center Ethics in PR Pedagogy Award with a cash prize – to be awarded in August.
Due to generous sponsorships from Moody College and the Page Center, JPRE will pursue CrossRef/DOI supplier registration and SCOPUS database participation to expand the journal’s footprint and impact.
As you can see, this good work cannot be maintained without donor aid. If you are interested in supporting JPRE financially, please message me (jpre@gvsu.edu) for a specialized sponsorship package.
Finally, those of you who attended the November event celebrating 50 years of the Commission on Public Relations Education (CPRE) understand the blood, sweat, and tears that went into the 2023 CPRE report, Navigating Change. It’s my pleasure to present the guest editor commentary for special issue 10-1 below. This issue is a dynamic partner in implementing the report findings into our classrooms. Thank you to Pamela Bourland-Davis and Elizabeth Toth for their insight and lift in bringing this special issue to publication so swiftly.
Adrienne A. Wallace Editor in Chief Journal of Public Relations Education
The 2023 Commission on Public Relations Education report, Navigating Change: Recommendations for Advancing Undergraduate Public Relations Education, was published in conjunction with the 50th anniversary of the Commission. An 18-month process, the report emerged from crowdsourcing what practitioners and educators felt were the most critical topics for public relations, especially as we emerged from a global pandemic, and a myriad of other social and political issues. The result was a report focused on key elements related to the status of education, repeating key items from previous CPRE studies; the future of the workplace; critical strategic thinking; data insights and strategy; ethics; DEI; and, PR as a driver of social change.
Each of these topics was addressed via questions on an omnibus-style quantitative survey, “Page Conversations,” and through secondary research. The key findings are detailed in the report, along with recommendations – largely focused on educators. This issue of the Journal of Public Relations Education provides a deeper dive into some of the data, which was largely descriptive in the report. It also provides teaching suggestions to integrate the findings in the classroom.
Specifically, in this issue you’ll find additional information on the KSAs and hiring preferences as seen by practitioners versus educators, along with the differences between U.S. and international curriculum based on the respondents. Future of the workplace team members considered whether current job ads reflect the interests of Gen Z, the primary future employee workforce. Additional data insight and application in the classroom are offered through reports on critical strategic thinking and ethics. And finally, a classroom assignment based on one of the DEI recommendations is offered.
Because of the richness of the data, and the reported importance of these topics, we anticipate you’ll see additional publications and presentations emerging from the CPRE report in the future. The 2023 Report, Navigating Change, gives the most current thinking by experts. It also has a wealth of additional resources to learn how the seven-chapter topics are refining public relations knowledge. Here’s the link to the full report, the executive summary, and a student guide: https://www.commissionpred.org/navigating-change-report/
We walked away from this project concluding that undergraduate public relations education has made significant progress in establishing the educational foundations. At the same time, it would appear that we are seeing higher-than-ever expectations of our graduates from the public relations industry. The choice of topics included in the report implies that what is needed from future employees will be to think wholistically about how to create effective relationships for their employers within rapidly changing social and global expectations.
Elizabeth L. Toth, Ph.D., APR, Fellow PRSA Professor Emerita, CPRE 2023 Report Co-Editor
Pamela Bourland-Davis, Ph.D. Professor, CPRE 2023 Report Co-Editor
Table of Contents
Editor’s Note Adrienne A. Wallace, Elizabeth L. Toth, and Pamela Bourland-Davis
The Journal of Public Relations Education (JPRE) is devoted to the presentation of research and commentary that advance the field of public relations education. JPRE invites submissions in the following three categories:
Research Articles
Teaching Briefs
Book/Software Reviews
Learn more by visiting the About JPRE page and the Authors/Contributors page for submission guidelines. All submissions should follow the guidelines of the most recent edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA).
Editorial Record: Submitted February 12, 2024. Revised March 5, 2024. Accepted April 11, 2024. Published June 2024.
Author
Charles A. Lubbers Professor University of South Dakota South Dakota, USA Email: chuck.lubbers@usd.edu
Debbie Davis Associate Professor of Practice Texas Tech University Texas, USA Email: debbie.davis@ttu.edu
Amiso George Professor Texas Christian University Texas, USA Email: a.george2@tcu.edu
Morgan Still Master’s Student Texas Tech University Texas, USA
Victoria Bacon Master’s Student Texas Tech University Texas, USA
ABSTRACT
The recent Commission on Public Relations (2023) report contains a chapter recommendation calling on PR educators to help students understand their priorities and values that might impact job searches and career plans. However, knowledge of their priorities and values is only helpful if the job information discusses them. Numerous studies have investigated employer expectations of PR job applicant’s skills based on analysis of the advertisement content. Few, if any, have examined the subject from the job candidate’s perspective, in this case, Generation (Gen) Z, those born from the mid-1990s to 2010. Employers need to understand the characteristics of Gen Z that differentiate them from previous generations if they are to effectively recruit and retain them in an increasingly competitive job market. This study examines the content of 102 employment advertisements being used by organizations to fill entry-level public relations positions to ascertain if they effectively communicate organizational values, priorities, and culture that would attract Gen Z candidates, such as the organization’s commitment to society and to the employees. Content analysis found that out of ten expectations and priorities important to Gen Z, only a mean of 2.7 were included in each ad. The four most common expectations and priorities included were doing meaningful/impactful work, commitment to diversity, inclusion, equity and belonging, providing modern technology, and workplace flexibility. Surprisingly, only seven ads mentioned the organization’s commitment to the environment.
Keywords: Generation Z, PR job advertisement, work-life balance, CPRE-Commission on Public Relations Education, DEIB, workplace expectations
To cite this article: Lubbers, C.A., Davis, D., George, A., Still, M., & Bacon, V. (2024). Are we speaking their language: The presence of content important to Gen Z in entry-level PR job advertisements. Journal of Public Relations Education, 10(1), 47-78. https://journalofpreducation.com/?p=4632
Editorial Record: Special issue deadline June 15, 2020. Revision submitted October 7, 2020. First published online December 22, 2020.
Authors
Teri Del Rosso, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Journalism and Strategic Media University of Memphis Memphis, TN Email: t.l.d@memphis.edu
Matthew J. Haught, Ph.D. Assistant Chair, Associate Professor Journalism and Strategic Media University of Memphis Memphis,TN Email: mjhaught@memphis.edu
Kimberly S. Marks Malone, APR, Fellow PRSA Instructor, Online Coordinator Journalism and Strategic Media University of Memphis Memphis,TN Email: ksmarks@memphis.edu
Abstract
The Commission for Public Relations Education issued a report in 2018 recommending that public relations ethics be a required course, in addition to the incorporation of ethics into all public relations courses. To understand the implications of this recommendation, this study explores the nature of public relations ethics education in 15 PR programs accredited by Accrediting Council for Education in Journalism and Mass Communications and certified by Public Relations Society of America via the Certification in Education for Public Relations program. Through an analysis of 2020 academic catalogs, findings suggest that although programs have general ethics courses (e.g., media ethics or law and ethics), few programs offer—and fewer require—public relations ethics courses. The research concludes that in conjunction with previous research on ethics in the classroom, programs implement an experiential learning approach to ethics instruction.
More and more, public relations professionals are finding that ethics in PR go beyond communication. Stakeholders and publics want companies to not only post on social media, but also to allocate resources, diversify leadership, and donate to social justice causes (Meyers, 2020; Mull, 2020). As PR professionals navigate these issues for their organizations, the need for ethics training is evident. A Commission on Public Relations Education (CPRE) report found that employers rate knowledge regarding ethical issues as one of the top three skills they seek in hiring employees (CPRE, 2018). The report recommended that a course focusing specifically on public relations ethics be required for undergraduate PR students (Bortree et al., 2018). In 2019, the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) prescribed a PR Ethics course for all programs seeking certification in its Certification in Education for Public Relations (CEPR) program. This coalescence of factors means that public relations programs need to revisit the ethical training they provide and explore a new path forward. This need was laid out in the CPRE report where it was recommended that all PR courses incorporate ethics into the curriculum and lessons center on “moral philosophy, case studies, and simulations” (Bortree et al., 2018, p. 68).
Ethics training is not new to journalism and mass communication programs, where public relations programs are often housed. The Accrediting Council for Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC) positions ethics training as one of its professional values and competencies that programs must teach students, writing that students must “demonstrate an understanding of professional ethical principles and work ethically in pursuit of truth, accuracy, fairness and diversity” (ACEJMC, n.d.-b, para. 18). However, training in most programs tends to be broad and built on the ethics of journalism. As public relations operates differently than journalism, more specific ethics training for public relations is needed.
The purpose of this study is to explore how public relations programs both accredited by ACEJMC and certified by PRSA through the CEPR program address ethics in their curricula. Given the renewed emphasis on ethics education (CPRE, 2018), this research seeks to understand the state of ethics teaching in this specific subset of programs. As ACEJMC and CEPR represent some of the highest expectations and standards for teaching in journalism, mass communication, and public relations, schools that subject themselves to both reviews should reasonably be expected to have higher standards for ethical education.
Literature Review
Public Relations Ethics: Industry Perspectives
Most definitions and conceptualizations of ethics involve “systematic analysis, distinguishing right from wrong, and determining what should be valued” (Bowen, 2007, para. 2). In public relations, that manifests into a practice of valuing “honesty, openness, fair-mindedness, respect, integrity, and forthright communication” (Bowen, 2007, para. 2). Historically, PR was viewed as void of ethics and as a profession that put too much energy into spinning and sensationalizing stories and not focusing on truth and relationship building (Bowen, 2007).
As the profession further embraces its role in the corporate suite, many PR professionals are serving as ethical compasses for their organization’s leadership (Bowen, 2007). The PRSA Code of Ethics guides members and the profession as a whole on the ethical responsibilities of public relations professionals. The core professional values of advocacy, honesty, expertise, independence, loyalty, and fairness help PR professionals serve the public good and achieve “excellence with powerful standards of performance, professionalism, and ethical conduct” (PRSA, n.d., para. 3).
Globally, the International Public Relations Association (IPRA) adopted the Code of Athens in 1965, which was amended in 1968 and again in 2009 (IPRA, 2009). The code’s ethical recommendations to public relations professionals around the world encourage PR practitioners to work in three ethical realms: endeavoring, undertaking, and refraining. These codes center the need to establish and circulate the free flow of information, uphold human dignity, center the truth, avoid manipulation, and balance the concerns of publics and organizations (IPRA, 2009). Similarly, the Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management (GA) offers a code of ethics that includes a declaration of principles and resources for ethics education and enforcement. GA argues in favor of working in the public interest; obeying laws and respecting diversity of local customs; freedom of speech; freedom of assembly; freedom of media; honesty, truth, and fact-based communication; integrity; transparency and disclosure; and privacy (GA, 2018).
Public Relations Ethics: Classroom Perspectives
Before public relations professionals enter the industry, their understanding of ethics often comes from their experiences within higher education. At the 2019 PRSA International Conference in San Diego, Elizabeth Toth moderated a conversation with public relations educators at the Educators Academy about how programs can begin to implement the CPRE’s recommendations for ethics education. This presentation explored research around ethics, common ethical issues, core ethical competencies, implementation models, trends in ethics syllabi, creating a PR-specific ethics course, and increasing ethical lessons across the curriculum (Toth et al., 2019).
Accreditation
Administrators and professors often struggle with finding the right balance between skills-based courses, theory and conceptual classes, course requirements, electives, minors, and supplementary classes outside of the major or department (Blom et al., 2012). If a unit opts to seek accreditation for its program, that decision often brings more considerations and requirements with how schools present the course catalog and descriptions to its students. Although the process of accrediting a program can limit and direct how a school builds its programs (e.g., the amount of credits a student can take within the major, see Blom et al., 2012), as of June 2020, 118 programs have earned accreditation by ACEJMC (ACEJMC, n.d.-a). Seamon (2010) argued that the limits imposed by accreditation make a broader curriculum more difficult, and highlighted a study noting that international public relations courses were stymied by accreditation limits (Hatzios & Lariscy, 2008). However, it should be noted that ACEJMC requirements have changed significantly since Seamon’s work to be more open to curricular change, thus, an examination of how ethics training has been implemented in light of those changes is appropriate. Becoming an accredited program provides administrators and professors the opportunity to reflect on the program’s successes and failures, compare itself to other programs, and assess whether its students are prepared for industry work (Blom et al., 2012). In addition to the internal evaluation, a school or department’s accreditation status may influence students’ decisions when they weigh options that include rankings, athletics, and extracurricular activities (Blom et al., 2012; Pellegrini, 2017). These internal and external opportunities provide an incentive for schools and departments with public relations programs to pursue the accreditation with ACEJMC or certification through PRSA.
ACEJMC
Although ACEJMC does not define exactly how units design their programs, the organization outlines nine core standards for accreditation: 1. Mission, governance, and administration; 2. Curriculum and instruction; 3. Diversity and inclusiveness; 4. Full-time and part-time faculty; 5. Scholarship, which includes research, creative, and professional service; 6. Student services; 7. Resources, facilities, and equipment; 8. Professional and public service; 9. Assessment of learning outcomes (ACEJMC, n.d.-b). With each standard there is a basic principle and an outline of key indicators and evidence. These standards provide the rubric for how the programs are evaluated during the accreditation process. The process of accreditation happens every six years and programs complete a self-study before an accreditation team conducts a site visit. After the self-study and site visit, the national accrediting committee reviews the materials and votes, and then the national accrediting council takes final action (ACEJMC, n.d.-c).
PRSA Certification in Education for Public Relations (CEPR)
In 1989, the Public Relations Society of America established a certification for public relations programs through its educational affairs committee (PRSSA, 2020). Similar to the ACEJMC process, the CEPR requires programs to submit a self-assessment, followed by a site visit with two PRSA members. CEPR identifies eight standards, which include an analysis of the curriculum; faculty; resources, equipment, and facilities; students; assessment; professional affiliations; relationship with the unit and university; and perspectives on diversity and global public relations (PRSSA, 2020).
Value of Accreditation
Research suggests that most journalism and mass communication programs see accreditation as a path to reputation enhancement (Blom et al., 2012). There is no evidence to suggest that accredited schools are “better” than unaccredited schools, especially when it comes to social justice issues (e.g., human rights) (Blom et al., 2012; Reilly, 2018; Seamon, 2010). However, ethics is a key component attributed to professional and public service (ACEJMC) and curriculum and diversity and global perspectives (CEPR).
Pedagogy and Curricula
The previous standards review and research into accreditation suggests that incorporating ethics more robustly will be initiated by the professor or the school. In 1999, in one of the earliest PR pedagogy articles, Coombs and Rybacki synthesized survey results and conversations that emerged from a pedagogy task force team at the National Communication Association (NCA) summer conference on public relations education. Coombs and Rybacki (1999) concluded the public relations pedagogy was “steeped in active learning” (p. 55). At the time, PR professors placed an emphasis on bridging theory and practice through dynamic assignments, lessons, and outside-of-the-classroom opportunities (Coombs & Rybacki, 1999). Since this trailblazing article on public relations pedagogy, scholars have explored pedagogy through the lens of writing (e.g., Hardin & Pompper, 2004; Waymer, 2014), social media (e.g., Kim & Freberg, 2016), and international perspectives (e.g., Thompson, 2018).
Public Relations Curricula
Public relations scholars who study PR curriculum note that there has been a transition toward a more skills-based, professional focus (Auger & Cho, 2016). For some, the shift to a more professionally minded profession can erode what some believe is the purpose of higher education, which is to pursue knowledge for the sake of pursuing knowledge (Auger & Cho, 2016; Brint et al., 2005). Attempting to focus on skills-based lessons can result in the exclusion of topics such as race, globalization, and interdisciplinary perspectives (Auger & Cho, 2016).
A powerful indicator of curricula decisions and priorities can result from the organization in which a public relations program is housed. Public relations programs are sometimes housed in journalism and mass communication schools but are found equally in speech, liberal arts, and business departments and schools (Kruckeberg, 1998). In their study of 234 public relations programs, Auger and Cho (2016) found that more than half (57%) of PR programs were affiliated with the liberal arts and humanities and almost one-third (38%) were housed in communication and journalism schools.
For course offerings, Auger and Cho (2016) found that the liberal arts (53%) and journalism schools (57%) were more likely to offer ethics courses than the public relations programs housed in business schools (31%). The most common type of classes across the curricula were principles/introductory classes, mass communication theory, law, writing, campaigns, and research (Auger & Cho, 2016). Only 51% of programs offered a media ethics class in their curricula, while only 3% offered a specific public relations ethics course (Auger & Cho, 2016).
Public Relations Skills
As previously discussed, public relations curricula programs are often labeled as a practical field, meaning students can expect to encounter applicable hard and soft skills that they can transfer to their internships and professional careers. As McCleneghan (2006) suggests, “No other profession requires greater knowledge of ‘how to’ communicate than public relations” (p. 42). Almost every year some think-piece pitches a list of the most important skills PR students need to know once they graduate. For example, in 2013, The Guardian listed those skills as communication, research, writing, international mindset, and creativity (Turner, 2013). Seven years later in 2020, the media monitoring and social listening platform Meltwater identified the top 10 skills as: social media, copyrighting, management, multimedia and new media skills, analytics, visual branding, writing, virtual team management, and influencer collaboration (Garrett, 2020).
Public relations scholars have explored the topics of how relevant skills translate from the classroom into the professional world. For example, in 2014, Todd surveyed PRSA members on 24 quantitative categories divided into two subgroups, job skills and professional characteristics, to determine how prepared entry-level workers were for the workforce. The goal of this survey was to determine how Millennial (born between 1982-2002), entry-level workers rate themselves compared to their supervisors, and the survey’s 165 participants were asked to rank themselves or their entry-level employees on the following skills: writing, technology, research, social media, computer, job task preparation, and overall quality of work and performance (Todd, 2014). In addition to these practical skills, Todd (2014) identified professional characteristics (i.e., soft skills) that were key performance indicators in the public relations profession (e.g., awareness of ethics, creativity, cooperation, and time management). The “pressure to teach students the most relevant knowledge and skills to be industry-ready” is one that educators are familiar with, and assessments like these can illuminate how recent graduates are performing (Todd, 2014, p. 790).
The Commission on Public Relations Education (2018) found that writing is a core skill for future public relations professionals and should be included in every public relations class. In addition to writing, the report suggests that research remains a foundational skill with particular attention paid to data, analytics, and big data (CPRE, 2018). Finally, technology is seen as a “triple threat challenge” (i.e., educators must teach it, study it, and do it) (CPRE, 2018, p. 14). Along with these tangible skills, the report also stressed the need for the incorporation of ethics (CPRE, 2018).
Ethics as a Skill
Research suggests that educators, professionals, mentors, and advisers agree that ethics is a key skill for graduates (Eschenfelder, 2011). In public relations programs, ethics is often covered in principles, writing, campaigns, and case studies in the classroom and in textbooks (Hutchinson, 2002). These more traditional, static forms of learning ethics, however, might contribute to entry-level public relations professionals overestimating their ability to practice and understand ethical principles and their decision-making skills (Eschenfelder, 2011). Conway and Groshek (2009) suggest that students might gain more from interactive experiences through student media and internships, and Curtin et al. (2011) found that mentors (e.g., PRSA industry advisers and PRSSA faculty advisers) can influence younger workers as they consider ethical dilemmas (also see Todd, 2009). Furthermore, ethics competency is a skill that employers seek from new hires and one that educators feel compelled to teach (DiStaso et al., 2009). Unfortunately, employers rated their employees low on ethics skills (Todd, 2014). These studies suggest that the key to students gaining these skills outside of the classroom in meaningful ways is through dynamic coursework, such as service and project-based learning (e.g., McCollough, 2018), student-run agencies (e.g., Haley et al., 2016), and internships. According to experiential learning theory, this type of learning environment is vital for students as they understand and process experiences into knowledge.
Experiential Learning Theory
According to Dewey (1938) and other scholars of experiential learning theory (ELT), the theory is best understood as a “theory of experience” (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, p. 193). This work draws on learning as the “process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” and learning is the result of “grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, 1984, p. 41). ELT focuses on the process rather than the outcome, and scholars of experiential learning theory identify six pillars that facilitate experience as a key component to human learning and development. These pillars can be summarized as: learning as a holistic process that creates knowledge; learning as relearning; and learning as a process that involves transactions between a person and their environment, which are primarily driven by finding solutions for conflict, difference, and disagreements (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Using ELT as a foundation in understanding knowledge acquisition, students can grasp experiences through concrete experience (apprehension) and abstract conceptualization (comprehension) and can transform through reflective observation (intension) and active experimentation (extension) (Baker et al., 2002; Fraustino et al., 2015; Kolb, 1984). These tactics work together and provide students with the experience of process: they can engage, internalize, observe and analyze, and then experiment with conclusions (Fraustino et al., 2015).
ELT and the Strategic Communication Classroom
Scholarship suggests that public relations professors and instructors are looking to incorporate ELT-driven lessons, assignments, and projects into the public relations classroom. For example, Fraustino et al. (2015) studied the relationship between Twitter chats and digital case studies (i.e., using the now defunct app Storify) and whether students apply public relations concepts to those practices. Other scholars have explored how students engage in teleworking in a cross-institutional setting (Madden et al., 2016), service learning and empathy (Everhart et al., 2016), public relations writing (Meganck & Smith, 2019), and learning about journalism storytelling through Instagram Stories (Byrd & Denney, 2018).
Research Questions
To understand the present state of ethics education at ACEJMC-accredited and CEPR-certified schools, the present study examines the following research questions:
RQ1: How do programs following both the ACEJMC and CEPR guidelines address ethics writ large in their curricula?
RQ2: How are ethics addressed in public-relations-specific courses in ACEJMC and CEPR accredited programs?
Method
To answer the research questions, we compiled a list of ACEJMC accredited programs (n = 112), PRSA CEPR programs (n = 40), and determined which programs were listed in both (n = 15). After we identified the 15 schools with ACEJMC accreditation and PRSA CEPR certification, we analyzed the 2020 programs of study and course catalogs to determine what kind of public relations program each school offered (e.g., major, concentration, or emphasis area), number of credit hours required inside and outside of the unit, if there were ethics-specific courses available and/or required, if there was a PR-ethics-specific course available and/or required, and which courses specifically mentioned ethics in their course descriptions. To achieve internal validity, the research team first coded three universities collectively and then each of the three researchers individually coded the four remaining schools.
The method of content analysis was chosen for multiple reasons. First, it provided an evidence-based analysis of the offerings and requirements of the programs. While previous studies regarding public relations education used a survey approach (DiStaso et al., 2009; Neill, 2017; Silverman et al., 2014), curriculum studies from other disciplines in mass communication found course descriptions to be a fruitful avenue for analysis (Spillman et al., 2017; Tanner et al., 2012). Second, as course names and descriptions are used as indicators of course content and catalogs as indicators of program requirements, their use here is congruent. Finally, content analysis proved to be an expeditious way to collect data, as some previous studies saw low response rates and used content analysis to supplement their data (e.g., Tanner et al., 2012).
Findings
To address RQ1, we examined the listings of required courses for the public relations programs at each school. Of the 15 schools, 10 offered public relations as a major, two as an emphasis area, two as a concentration, and one as a specialization. Most schools required students to complete 34-48 credit hours (with three schools requiring 48, and six schools requiring 36-39 credit hours) in public relations and related classes. Programs required as few as three and as many as 27 credit hours be taken outside of the major (e.g., business or statistics classes). Six schools required zero credit hours outside of the program.
Most schools taught elective ethics overall in the form of mass communication ethics, ethics and law, and/or media ethics courses (87%). Thirteen of the 15 schools offered one of these courses—tending to approach ethics similar to the University of Florida (n.d.-a), which described them as a cross-disciplinary introduction to study and practice. Fewer schools required students to take a general mass communication ethics class (67%). Thus, it is possible for a third of these public relations students to graduate without any department ethics training. Furthermore, 13% of students appeared to have no or limited access to ethics training within their major.
To answer RQ2, we analyzed the course descriptions for each of the programs. Only five universities offered an elective in PR-specific ethics (33%) and fewer schools required a public-relations-specific ethics course (20%). Drake University (n.d.-a) had an elective course called Cases in Ethical PR Practice that prepared students through “instruction and practice to execute professional-level thinking, analysis, writing and presentation skills needed for successful public relations campaign management” (Drake University, n.d.-b, para. 1). The University of Florida (n.d.-b) offered an Ethics and Professional Responsibility in Public Relations course, which focused on “ethical responsibilities of the public relations professional” (para. 1). This course provided knowledge and skills for study to “reach and justify ethical decisions,” which elicits “a sense of personal and professional responsibility” (para. 1).
The findings suggest that most students receive their ethics training through interdisciplinary study, focusing on the intersection of law, ethics, and mass communication professions (e.g., journalism, advertising, media studies). Public relations ethics, on the other hand, are more likely to be a learning objective or talking point in courses such as principles of/introduction to public relations, campaigns, and some case studies courses. Five programs addressed ethics in the course description for their Principles of Public Relations classes. These classes indicated topics will cover “ethics and social responsibility” (Syracuse University, n.d., para. 1) or “persuasion, media relations, crisis communication, reputation management, and ethics” (Indiana University, n.d., para. 2), many of which explored different ethical approaches and introduced students to codes of ethics (e.g., PRSA). This positioning indicates that schools recognize the need to introduce ethics early.
Some schools engaged with ethics instruction and scholarship through journalism, multimedia, or advertising classes. The University of Memphis (n.d.), for example, offered an elective class for public relations students in multimedia storytelling in which students could expect to learn and understand “legal and ethical issues in photography” (para. 1). The University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh (n.d.) offered a course in Special Topics in Writing/Editing, which addressed several topics, including media ethics.
These findings indicate that although ethics is an important part of a public relations student’s curricula, there is an opportunity to expand this offering of public-relations-specific ethics courses.
Discussion
After analyzing the programs at 15 ACEJMC and PRSA CEPR schools, this study’s findings suggest there is room for growth regarding public relations ethics education. Through our analysis of selected public relations programs, we have concluded that public relations programs need to revisit their PR ethics requirements. Given ACEJMC accredited and PRSA certified schools have chosen to hold themselves to higher standards, they must be leaders in adopting the CPRE and PRSA recommendations for PR ethics training. Based on their accreditation and certification and the standards of both, the 15 programs in our study should be leading the way on teaching ethics and providing students with the dynamic opportunities to engage the subject matter. The fact that 80% of students might graduate without a PR ethics course and a third of students can graduate without an ethics course at all, sets students up for difficulty in the industry upon graduation. As employers expect ethical knowledge in their hires, universities need to respond by providing ethics training to students.
Experiential Learning Theory in the Ethics Classroom
The CPRE (2018) report outlines a new course proposal summary for faculty and administrators wishing to build a new PR ethics class based on the recommendations from the undergraduate education report. The report outlines key outcomes and assessment metrics, which include written assignments, class discussions, quizzes, exams, presentations, and projects (Bortree et al., 2019). The provided catalog descriptions focus on students engaging in “discussions and case studies” and being able to “apply learning from the course to an original case study paper” (Bortree et al., 2019, p. 3). In addition, courses should “bridge cultural applications and offer practical insights on how communicators . . . might develop communication strategies that uphold ethical principles” (Bortree et al., 2019, p. 3).
The active language used in these course and catalog descriptions and the proposed assignments suggest that an experiential learning approach would be best suited for the instruction of PR ethics. Research suggests that lectures on ethics are not as valuable as case studies (Canary, 2007; Todd, 2009), and many students are receiving their ethical training through internships and mentors (Conway & Groshek, 2009; Curtin et al., 2011; Todd, 2014). Although internships and real-world opportunities are wonderful learning tools for students, there is little guarantee that ethics will be practiced in a consistent manner, which makes these environments a challenge.
For many internships and mentor-driven relationships, the outcome might outweigh the process. Given that experiential learning is process-driven and, as Kolb and Kolb (2005) describe, “a theory of experience” (p. 193), students must be exposed to ethics through a number of different processes and experiences. Our findings indicate that most conversations around ethics are happening in siloed spaces, such as in relationships with the law or as a dedicated week during an introduction to a public relations class. For students to grasp and transform experiences around ethical dilemmas and cases, approaching the subject manner in a way that lets them work together and experience the process is key for entry-level public relations professionals developing the critical thinking needed for this important skill (Eschenfelder, 2011). A standalone ethics course would be a major step toward resolving these issues and would answer the call for greater ethics education from previous research (DiStaso et al., 2009; Neill, 2017; Silverman et al., 2014).
Conclusion
Based on the previous research presented in this study and our own findings, we recommend that public relations programs implement and require a case-study-based public relations ethics course for their advanced-level students. This class should be completed at a level greater than foundational public relations courses and should draw on real work to provide students with the opportunity to grasp and transform the experience of an ethical situation. In this course, students can process the dilemma, engage, internalize, observe and analyze, and experiment with different conclusions (see Fraustino et al., 2015).
In addition to a case study class, professors and administrators should consider including the word ethics in course descriptions for experiential learning courses, client work, and capstone classes (e.g., internships, student-run agencies, research, and campaigns). Addressing ethics in all facets of a student’s education and creating a specific public-relations-centered ethics course would help students graduate with a more robust understanding of what it means to be an ethical public relations professional.
The present study is limited in its scope by only examining ACEJMC and CEPR programs. Although the population of universities utilized in this study makes sense for examining those at the highest standards, further investigation across both review bodies would present a clearer picture of the state of public relations education. Future studies should examine these schools as well as public relations programs without certification or accreditation.
Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. (n.d.-c). The process of accreditation. Retrieved on June 5, 2020, from http://www.acejmc.org/policies-process/
Auger, G. A., & Cho, M. (2016). A comparative analysis of public relations curricula: Does it matter where you go to school, and is academia meeting the needs of the practice? Journalism & Mass Communications Educator, 7(1), 50-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695814551830
Baker, A. C., Jensen, P. J., Kolb, D. A. (2002). Conversational learning: An experiential approach to knowledge creation. Quorum Book.
Blom, R., Davenport, L. D., & Bowe, B. J. (2012). Reputation cycles: The value of accreditation for undergraduate journalism programs. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 67(4), 392-406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695812462349
Bortree, D., Bowen, S., Silverman, D., & Sriramesh, K. (2018). Ethics: The distinctive commitment that defines public relations as a respected profession. In Fast Forward: Foundations + future state. Educators + practitioners: The Commission on Public Relations Education 2017 Report on undergraduate education. (pp, 65-70). Commission on Public Relations Education. http://www.commissionpred.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/report6-full.pdf
Brint, S. G., Riddle, M., Turk-Bicakci, L., & Levy, C. S. (2005). From the liberal to the practice arts in American colleges and universities: Organizational analysis and curricular change. Journal of Higher Education, 76(2), 151-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2005.11778909
Canary, H. E. (2007). Teaching ethics in communication courses: An investigation of instructional methods, course foci, and student outcomes. Communication Education, 56(2), 193-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520601113660
Conway, M., & Groshek, J. (2009). Forgive me now, fire me later: Mass communication students’ ethics gap concerning school and journalism. Communication Education, 58(4), 461-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903095839
Curtin, P. A., Gallicano, T., & Matthews, K. (2011). Millennials’ approaches to ethical decision making: A survey of young public relations agency employees. Public Relations Journal, 5(2), 1-22.
Dewey, J. (1938). Education and experience. Simon and Schuster.
DiStaso, M., Stacks, D. W., & Botan, C. H. (2009). State of public relations education in the United States: 2006 report on a national survey of executives and academics. Public Relations Review, 35(3), 254–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.03.006
Hardin, M. C., & Pompper, D. (2004). Writing in the public relations curriculum: Practitioner perceptions versus pedagogy. Public Relations Review, 30(3), 357-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2004.05.007
Hatzios, A., & Lariscy, R. W. (2008). Perceptions of utility and importance of international public relations education among educators and practitioners. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 63(3), 241-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769580806300304
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning space: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2005.17268566
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
Madden, S., Winkler R. B., Fraustino, J. D., & Janoske, M. (2016). Teaching, tweeting, and teleworking: Experiential and cross-institutional learning through social media. Communication Teacher, 30(4), 195-205. https://doi.org/10.1080/17404622.2016.1219040
McCleneghan, J. S. (2006). PR executives rank 11 communication skills. Public Relations Quarterly, 41(4), 42-46.
Neill, M. S. (2017). Ethics education in public relations: Differences between stand-alone ethics courses and an integrated approach. Journal of Media Ethics, 32(2), 118-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/23736992.2017.1294019
Pellegrini, S. (2017). Journalism education in Chile: Navigating historically diverse views and goals. In R. S. Goodman & E. Steyn (Eds.), Global journalism education: Challenges and innovations (pp. 41-64). Knight Center for Journalism in the Americas.
Reilly, J. E. (2018). Reporting without knowledge: The absence of human rights in US journalism education. Human Rights Review, 19, 249-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-018-0493-7
Seamon, M. C. (2010). The value of accreditation: An overview of three decades of research comparing accredited and unaccredited journalism and mass communication programs. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 65(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769581006500103
Spillman, M., Kuban, A. J., & Smith, S. J. (2017). Words du jour: An analysis of traditional and transitional course descriptors at select J-schools. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 72(2), 198-211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695816650118
Tanner, A., Forde, K. R., Besley, J. C., & Weir, T. (2012). Broadcast journalism education and the capstone experience. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 67(3), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695812444097
Thompson, E. E. (2018). Public relations education in emerging democracy: The case of Ghana. Journal of Communication Management, 22(4), 476-489. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-04-2018-0038
Todd, V. (2009). PRSSA faculty and professional advisors’ perceptions of public relations curriculum, assessment of students’ learning, and faculty performance. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 64(1), 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769580906400106
Todd, V. (2014). Public relations supervisors and Millennial entry-level practitioners’ rate entry-level job skills and professional characteristics. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 789-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.05.002
Toth, E. L., Bortree, D. S., Neill, M., & Silverman, D. A. (2019, October 19). A menu of options… How to meet CEPR ethics course guidelines [Presentation]. PRSA 2019 Educators Academy, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, United States.
Waymer, D. (2014). Shouldering the load: An analysis of gender-based differences in the undergraduate PR writing classes and advising undergraduate PRSSA chapters. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 69(4), 404-414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695814538824
As history books document, the field
of public relations dates back to the early 20th century. Since then, society
and public relations have evolved. This evolution has led to multiple
definitions of public relations over the years, and, in fact, the term still
continues to evolve today. Currently, the Public Relations Society of America
(PRSA) defines public relations as, “A strategic communication process that
builds mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their
publics” (PRSA, n.d., para. 3). In October 2019, the International Public
Relations Association (IPRA) announced its new definition of public relations
as, “A decision-making management practice tasked with building relationships
and interests between organisations and their publics based on the delivery of
information through trusted and ethical communication methods” (IPRA, 2019,
para. 2).
As the public relations profession
has evolved, so has education. Edward Bernays is credited with writing the first
public relations textbook and teaching the first class in 1923 (Broom &
Sha, 2013). Fifty years later, in 1973, the Commission on Public Relations
Education (CPRE) was founded. Since then, this group has combined insight from
academics and practitioners to provide recommendations on public relations
education around the globe. These recommendations have impacted both graduate
and undergraduate education as many academic programs have aligned their course
offerings as a result of CPRE recommendations. Plus, CPRE recommendations serve
as the foundation for the criteria for the Public Relations Student Society of
America’s chapter standards (PRSSA, 2019) and the Certification in Education
for Public Relations (CPRE, 2006).
Following the recommendations from
the 1999 CPRE report, “A Port of Entry,”
academic public relations programs commonly included courses in the following
topics:
Introduction to public
relations
Public relations
research, measurement and evaluation
Public relations writing
and production
Supervised work
experience in public relations (internship)
In 2006, the CPRE recommended that public relations programs should include these four core courses plus the following addition: a public relations course in law and ethics, planning and management, case studies, or campaigns.
The purpose of this article is to present the combined findings from the CPRE omnibus survey that is spread across the 17 chapters in the report Fast Forward: Foundations + Future State. Educators + Practitioners. Many of the chapters include the results from educators and practitioners from outside of the United States for a global perspective. This article, however, is delimited to the results for U.S. respondents to highlight the current state of undergraduate public relations education in the United States.
METHOD
This research built onto past CPRE
reports on undergraduate education, mainly A
Port of Entry: Public Relations Education for the 21st Century (1999) and The Professional Bond (2006).Similar to those reports, an extensive
omnibus survey was also conducted. Where appropriate, the questionnaire
remained the same; however, given the vast changes in the public relations
field over the last decade, few specifics were retained.
Survey Distribution
While past CPRE surveys were
distributed to a stratified random sample of members in public relations
associations, that approach in 2016 was not preferred due to typically low
survey responses and difficulty obtaining membership lists. Therefore, the 2016
omnibus survey was distributed by email to CPRE members. The individual
representatives for these associations invited their members and colleagues to
participate in the survey. These members represented the following
organizations:
Arthur W. Page Center
Arthur W. Page Society
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication (AEJMC) Public Relations Division
Canadian Public
Relations Society
European Public
Relations Education and Research Association
Global Alliance for
Public Relations
Institute for Public Relations
(IPR)
International
Communication Association (ICA) Public Relations Division
National Black Public
Relations Society
National Communication
Association (NCA) Public Relations Division
Plank Center for
Leadership in Public Relations
PR Council
Public Relations Society
of America (PRSA) Educators Academy
Public Relations Society
of America (PRSA) Educational Affairs Committee
PRSA Foundation
Public Relations Society
of America (PRSA)
The Corporate
Board/Society of New Communications Research (SNCR)
Universal Accreditation
Board (UAB)
The survey was open for
participation from October 10 to December 19, 2016. Given that the survey
distribution was through CPRE member associations, using their own recruitment
process, it is not possible to calculate the number of people who actually
received the survey.
Overall, a total of 1,601
questionnaires were started. Respondents who indicated they were not in public
relations (or a related field) were removed (n = 48), along with anyone who took fewer than 10 minutes on the
survey. This survey had a high drop-out rate given that it took an average of
25 minutes to complete (n = 738). The
focus of this article is on undergraduate public relations education in the
United States, so all respondents from other countries were removed (n = 124).
The questionnaire began with a
filter question that asked respondents to identify as an educator, as a
practitioner, or as someone not in public relations (or a related field). Based
on responses to this question, participants were filtered to either an educator
or a practitioner survey. If they were not in public relations, they were
thanked for their time, and the survey concluded. The questionnaire contained
eight sections. The final sample included in this article was 690, comprised of
231 educators and 459 practitioners.
RESULTS
Demographics
The demographic information for this
study is included in Table 1. Overall, 33% of respondents were educators (n = 231), and 67% were practitioners (n = 459). The percentage of female
practitioners in this study matched the approximate percentage in the profession
(74%, n = 291). The age distribution
was skewed slightly younger in the practitioner sample than the educator
sample; however, that is also consistent with both populations. The educator
sample was predominantly white (94%, n
= 156), and the practitioner sample was 77% white (n = 354), consistent with the lack of diversity in the field. Most
educators had a Ph.D. (72%, n = 134),
and most practitioners had a bachelor’s degree (54%, n = 209). Only 38% of educators (n = 92) and 28% of practitioners (n = 111) had their Accreditation in Public Relations, and 1% of
practitioners were Accredited Business Communicators (n = 4). The practitioners were from a variety of organizational
settings and sizes. The educator sample included 70% tenured or tenure-track
faculty (n = 121).
The practitioner sample had some academic experience, with 18% of the practitioners having taught as an adjunct (n = 71) and 58% having guest lectured in a public relations course (n = 223). On the job, 52% of practitioner respondents directly supervised entry-level practitioners (n = 203), while 61% had supervised an intern in the last five years (n = 240).
Knowledge,
Skills and Abilities
The KSAs (knowledge, skills, and abilities) from the 2006 survey were updated to better align with current public relations education and practice. As a result, only a few KSAs were assessed in both 2006 and 2016, resulting in minimal comparisons (see Table 2). Writing was one skill that was measured in both years. In 2016, the mean scores for desired writing skills increased for both educators (0.19 increase) and practitioners (0.41 increase). The mean scores for delivered or found writing skills also increased (0.77 increase for educators and 0.02 increase for practitioners). Research and analytics was another item measured in both surveys. Educators and practitioners had a decrease in mean scores for research and analytics as a desired skill (0.03 decrease each), while educators believed that the delivery of these skills increased (0.86 increase), and practitioners felt the amount the skill was found had decreased (0.32 decrease).
In 2016, educators indicated a high
desirability for 15 KSAs, while practitioners identified 11 as highly desirable
(mean ratings of a 4.0 or higher). On the other hand, educators indicated only
three KSAs as frequently delivered, and practitioners did not believe any KSAs
were frequently found.
The top three knowledge topics
desired by educators were: ethics (M =
4.44, SD = 0.95), business acumen (M = 4.09, SD = 0.92), and cultural perspective (M = 4.02, SD = 0.89). The
top three desired knowledge topics by practitioners were: ethics (M = 4.57, SD = 0.78), diversity and inclusion (M = 3.95, SD = 1.06), and
social issues (M = 3.67, SD = 1.00).
The top three skills desired by
educators were: writing (M = 4.90, SD = 0.37), communication (M = 4.78, SD = 0.50), and social media management (M = 4.52, SD = 0.64). The
top three desired skills by practitioners were the same: writing (M = 4.88, SD = 0.41), communication (M =
4.76, SD = 0.57), and social media
management (M = 4.33, SD = 0.82).
The top three abilities desired by
educators were: problem solving (M =
4.55, SD = 0.65), critical thinking (M = 4.53, SD = 0.75), and creative thinking (M = 4.52, SD = 0.71). The
top three abilities desired by practitioners were: creative thinking (M = 4.57, SD = 0.70), problem solving (M
= 4.52, SD = 0.77), and critical
thinking (M = 4.44, SD = 0.82).
Overall, there was a 40%
inconsistency in agreement between educators and practitioners about the
desirability of the KSAs (12 out of 30). Significant differences in desired
KSAs for educators and practitioners included business acumen, crisis
management, cultural perspective, ethics, internal communication, PR history,
PR laws and regulations, public speaking, social media management, website
development, problem solving, and strategic planning. In each of these, the
educators in the survey rated the KSA more desired than the practitioners,
except for ethics where the practitioners indicated a higher level of desire
than the educators.
The top three knowledge topics
educators believed their programs delivered were: ethics (M = 4.11, SD = 0.95), PR
theory (M = 3.77, SD = 1.03), and social issues (M = 3.43, SD = 1.06). The top three knowledge topics found by practitioners
were: ethics (M = 3.37, SD = 0.96), diversity and inclusion (M = 3.30, SD = 1.02), and social issues (M
= 3.20, SD = 0.96).
The top three skills educators
believed their programs delivered were: communication (M = 4.44, SD = 0.78),
writing (M = 4.32, SD = 0.83), and research and analytics (M = 3.83, SD = 1.04). The top three skills found by practitioners were:
social media management (M = 3.84, SD = 0.91), communication (M = 3.31, SD = 0.88), and writing (M =
3.08, SD = 0.94).
The top three abilities educators
believed their programs delivered were: critical thinking (M = 3.91, SD = 0.97),
strategic planning (M = 3.90, SD = 1.04), and problem solving (M = 3.85, SD = 0.96). The top three abilities found by practitioners were:
creative thinking (M = 3.38, SD = 0.94), problem solving (M = 2.75, SD = 0.89), and critical thinking (M = 2.65, SD = 0.89).
There was a 43% inconsistency in
agreement between educators and practitioners about recent graduates having
these KSAs (13 out of 30). There were significant differences in KSAs delivered
by educators and found by practitioners for business acumen, crisis management,
cultural perspective, diversity and inclusion, management, social issues,
audio/video development, graphic design, media relations, social media
management, speechwriting, website development, and strategic planning. In each
of these, educators rated the KSA delivered more frequently than the
practitioners indicated finding them.
Hiring Characteristics/Experience
Practitioners were given a list of “possible hiring characteristics” of recent college graduates and were asked to consider what they look for in entry-level new hires (see Table 3).
Practitioners rated the top five
desired characteristics/experiences they look for when hiring (all are desired
more than found):
Writing performance (M = 4.88, SD = 0.40); 1.98 gap in what is found
Internship or work experience (M = 4.67, SD = 0.71); 0.84 gap in what is found
Public relations coursework (M = 4.47, SD = 0.83); 0.50 gap in what is found
Strong references (M = 4.22, SD = 0.92); 0.86 gap in what is found
Up-to-date with current professional trends and issues (M = 4.10, SD = 0.92); 1.30 gap in what is found
Practitioners’ scores resulted in
this list of five least desired characteristics/experiences:
Certificate in public relations (M = 2.38, SD = 1.18)
Participation in an on-campus student PR agency (M = 2.46, SD = 0.98)
Public Relations Curriculum
This study sought to identify the implementation of the 2006 CPRE five-course recommendation and determine any needed changes to this standard. Overall, 90% of academic respondents (n = 178) and 95% of practitioner respondents (n = 395) were in favor of retaining the five-course standard. As Table 4 shows, the 2016 study found that practitioner respondents favored programs requiring all five courses.
Importantly, 99% of academic
respondents said they have an Introduction to Public Relations or principles
class (n = 198), 93% said this course
is required (n = 185), and 87% said
what they offer is a public relations specific class (n = 173). Most academics also indicated that a research methods
course is taught (97.0%, n = 196) and
required (89.9%, n = 178), but many
indicated that it is not a public relations specific course that is offered in
their program (47.0%, n = 93).
Writing was also a course that most respondents said is included (97.0%, n = 195), required (93.4%, n = 184), and public relations specific
(82.7%, n = 163). Campaigns and case
studies courses are also taught (92.5%, n
= 186), required (80.1%, n =
157), and public relations specific (82.2%, n
= 162). A course for internships was also offered at universities for 91%
of respondents (n = 183), but only
45% said it was a required course (n =
89); 58% said the internship course is public relations specific (n = 113).
Curriculum Topics
In addition to the five-course standard, many public relations programs offer courses on additional topics and/or include topics within existing courses. Over the years, the list of possible curriculum topics has changed, resulting in two new topics in the 2006 study and 32 new topics in the 2016 study (see Table 5). Unfortunately, comparisons between the years is made complex due to a change from the 7-point scale used in 1998 and 2006 to the 5-point response metric used in this study; therefore, only the 2016 findings for the individual outcomes are discussed. For the 2016 mean responses, the curriculum topics rated as a 4.00 or higher are highlighted, indicating an essential topic. Educators indicated a high importance for 15 curriculum topics while practitioners identified 13 (mean ratings of a 4.0 or higher). Eleven highly essential curriculum topics were the same for educators and practitioners.
When it came to the most important
curriculum topics, educators most often selected: (1) measurement
and evaluation (M = 4.60, SD = 0.75); (2) social media (M = 4.58, SD = 0.80); (3) campaign
management (M = 4.54, SD = 0.76); (4) strategic communications (M = 4.52, SD = 0.80);
and (5) audience segmentation (M = 4.26, SD = 0.97).
Practitioners believed the top five curriculum topics to be: (1) content creation (M =
4.52, SD = 0.69); (2) strategic communications (M = 4.48, SD = 0.78); (3)
social media (M = 4.47, SD = 0.77); (4)
measurement and evaluation (M = 4.41, SD = 0.79); and (5) publicity/media
relations (M = 4.40, SD = 0.79).
Most of the items in Table 5 did not
have significant differences between the educator and practitioner rankings for
the essentialness of each topic. However, educators believed audience
segmentation, campaign management, CSR, crisis management, fundraising, issues
management, measurement and evaluation, and political communication were all
more essential than practitioners did. The practitioners felt that
business-to-consumer PR and content creation were more essential than educators
thought.
Online Education
Overall, 53% of educators who participated in this survey indicated that their program offers online public relations courses (n = 102). Six percent of the educators said their program had a completely online undergraduate degree (n = 11). Both educators and practitioners indicated they felt an online degree was not equal to a face-to-face degree (M = 2.27 and M = 2.35) (see Table 6). Furthermore, both educators and practitioners believed job applicants should disclose if all or part of a degree was taken online.
Internships
Of the educators who participated in this study and knew how their program handled internships, 42% said they required an internship (n = 80), 51% had programs that allowed elective credits for an internship (n = 97), and 6% just encouraged internships (n = 12) (see Table 7). Most programs had an internship coordinator (82.1%, n = 156) and 69% of respondents said that coordinator was a faculty member (n = 121).
Only 35% of educators said their
program had a training program to prepare students for internships (n = 66), and the most common assessment
of internships was a performance review by the supervisor (63.6%, n = 147). Plus, 45% said that to
complete an internship for credit, their program required a prerequisite course
(n = 103), 46% have minimum credit
hours required (n = 107), and 36%
have a minimum GPA (n = 83). Many
required all three. Overall, 32% of practitioners said their interns were not
paid (n = 124). The average pay
reported for those who were paid was $13.54 an hour.
The Department of Labor’s Federal
Guidelines on Internships based on the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) provides
important guidance on internships; however, 36% of educators (n = 66) and 29% of practitioners (n = 111) were not familiar with the
guidelines. Overall, of those who were familiar with the guidelines and knew
how internships were handled in their area, only 67% of educators (n = 62) and 93% of practitioners (n = 2 44) said these guidelines are
always followed.
There were significant differences between educator and practitioner views about interns having a valuable experience (see Table 8). Educators felt more positive about the experience; however, practitioners indicated higher agreement that interns were given meaningful work and that they receive clear and routine instructions.
Membership in Student Associations
Both educators and practitioners found high value in student involvement in associations such as Public Relations Student Society of America and International Association of Business Communicators (see Table 9). They each identified networking as the number one reason for participating in student associations.
Faculty Qualifications
As Table 10 shows, educators and practitioners ranked staying up-to-date on technology as the top faculty qualification (M = 4.51, SD = 0.69 and M = 4.63, SD = 0.65). Educators preferred more than 5 years of professional PR experience (M = 4.15, SD = 1.03), while practitioners ranked more than 10 years of professional PR experience as more important (M = 4.61, SD = 0.69). Similarly, educators rated presenting at academic conferences (M = 3.77, SD = 1.04) as more important than professional conferences (M = 3.47, SD = 0.99), whereas practitioners found the opposite to be more important.
IMPLICATIONS
Taking a
good look at public relations undergraduate education on a periodic basis is an
extremely valuable, though daunting, task. The value that academics and
practitioners can derive from the CPRE reports highlight consistencies, gaps,
and opportunities.
Consistencies and Gaps
The secret
to the success of undergraduate education is collaboration between educators
and practitioners. Together they can provide the foundation for a cohesive
focus on knowledge, skills, and abilities to prepare undergraduate students for
their future careers. While both educators and practitioners identified ethics
as the top knowledge topic, there were inconsistencies on the other top
knowledge topic areas. Educators identified business acumen and cultural
perspective to aid students in having a well-rounded business grounding.
Practitioners, on the other hand, identified diversity and inclusion and social
issues as core knowledge areas likely to aid graduates to assimilate into the
current work environment. Importantly, practitioners identified ethics,
diversity and inclusion, and social issues as their top found areas, but none
were found at what would be considered a high level; this indicates more work
needs to be done to prepare students for all three knowledge areas.
When
assessing the desired skills, practitioners and educators were aligned. Writing
is still the most valued skill. In fact, the desire for writing skills has
increased since 2006, but the good news is that writing ability has also
slightly increased. The other skills both groups identified were communication
and social media management. Fortunately, all three of these skills were the
highest ranked skills found, but none were frequently found, so there is still
a need for continued and increased focus. Unfortunately, there was a gap
between the perception of educators delivering writing and communication skills
and practitioners identifying the skills as found.
Both groups
included strategic communications, social media, and measurement and evaluation
as top curriculum topics, but the practitioners identified content creation as
their most important addition to the curriculum.
Practitioners
and educators identified creative thinking, problem solving, and critical
thinking as the top desired and found abilities (while in slightly different
order for the groups). Analytical thinking was not as highly rated by either,
and there was a big gap with educators identifying higher levels of delivery of
abilities than indications of the abilities being found by practitioners.
Opportunities
While the overwhelming majority of
educators and practitioners in this study was in favor of retaining the CPRE
five-course standard, some programs do not have these five courses specific to
public relations. This is a missed opportunity; for example, 17% of educator
respondents said their writing course is not a public relations writing course.
Given how important writing continues to be, having a public relations writing
course along with multiple other grammar and writing courses would be ideal.
This is especially true considering this research found that writing remains
the core entry-level skill and hiring characteristic.
In 2018, the CPRE published the
global data from the 2016 omnibus survey reported in Fast forward: Foundations + Future state. Educators + Practitioners. In
this report, the Commission recommended adding ethics as a sixth course to the
standard. By recommending ethics as a required course, programs will be able to
improve their focus on ethics and better meet the needs of this dynamic field.
As the profession becomes more
integrated and entry-level positions continue to advertise positions looking
for a bachelor’s degree in a “relevant field,” seeing public relations
coursework as the third desired hiring characteristic is telling. The core
competencies students learn in public relations programs are valuable and
sought after. This should lead academic programs to question the value of
combining advertising and public relations. Consistently, this research found
support for core public relations competencies.
It is concerning to see the
percentage of paid internships remains low, yet internship or work experience
is highly regarded. There has been a strong call to action from academics and
practitioners across the United States to pay student interns. Additionally,
internships should be supervised and considered a learning opportunity for the
student.
In addition to the content shared in
this article, the full 2017 CPRE report Fast
forward: Foundations + Future state. Educators + Practitioners contains 17
chapters with global recommendations.
REFERENCES
Broom, G. M., & Sha, B. L. (2013). Cutlip and Center’s effective public relations (11th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice–Hall.