Letter from the Special Issue Editors& Table of Contents
Emily S. Kinsky West Texas A&M University Professor Past Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Public Relations Education Email: ekinsky@wtamu.edu
Chuck Lubbers University of South Dakota Professor Past Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Public Relations Education Email: chuck.lubbers@usd.edu
Adrienne A. Wallace Grand Valley State University Editor-in-Chief Journal of Public Relations Education Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
Editors’ Note: “Elevating PR: Insights and Trends in Graduate Education”
It is with tremendous honor and deep gratification that we introduce this special issue of the Journal of Public Relations Education, a collection of scholarly work that addresses a critical and timely gap in our field: the state of graduate education in public relations. This issue comes at a pivotal moment in our discipline, when the landscape of higher education is shifting, our industry is navigating technological disruption, and questions about the value and structure of advanced degrees are being asked with unprecedented urgency.
The Impetus for this Special Issue
Since 1975, the Commission on Public Relations Education (CPRE) has maintained a steadfast commitment to studying and improving public relations education standards and practices. However, much of that effort has focused on undergraduate education and the crucial transition from the academy to the profession at the entry level. In 1999, the CPRE “Port of Entry” report established the university as the official pathway for those seeking to establish careers in public relations, recognizing both undergraduate and graduate education as essential “tooling and retooling centers” for the profession. Yet, despite the substantial growth in master’s-level public relations programs over the past decade, the last comprehensive CPRE report dedicated exclusively to graduate education was published in 2012, well over a decade ago.
The intervening years have witnessed profound transformations. The global pandemic reshaped how we work and learn, fundamentally altering the pedagogy of graduate education. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged not merely as a technological tool but as a force reshaping job functions and competencies. The profession itself has fragmented and rebranded across multiple disciplines and specializations, such as strategic communication, integrated marketing communication, corporate communication, and beyond. Master’s programs have proliferated, diversified, and dispersed across various academic units and delivery models. In the face of this complexity and growth, the need for scholarly attention to graduate public relations education became undeniable.
This special issue, titled “Elevating PR: Insights and Trends in Graduate Education,” was conceived to further bridge this pedagogical gap in tandem with the 2025 CPRE report and to spark contemporary dialogue about the future of graduate education in our field. We sought to invite research articles, teaching briefs, scholarly essays, and case studies that would explore both the challenges and opportunities inherent in graduate-level public relations education. The call extended an open invitation to examine how practitioner expectations align with graduate curricula, how best practices in internships and applied learning can be designed, how research and data analytical abilities are cultivated, and how graduate programs connect, or fail to connect, with the demands of contemporary professional practice.
What This Issue Reveals
The manuscripts brought together in this collection offer a multifaceted portrait of graduate public relations education in the United States, which expands upon the work recently published by the CPRE research committee in the Graduate Education in Public Relations: 2025 Report, released in November. Collectively, they represent the work of educators, researchers, and practitioners committed to understanding and improving the graduate student experience and, ultimately, the competency of the professionals our programs produce.
Several critical themes emerge from this collection. First, the issue addresses the persistent challenge of curricular inconsistency and lack of standardization across graduate programs. Despite decades of recommendations from the Commission on Public Relations Education, programs continue to vary significantly in their structure, titles, course offerings, and culminating experiences. Some programs house themselves within journalism schools; others reside in business colleges, communication departments, or interdisciplinary centers. This fragmentation raises important questions about what prospective students can expect, what employers should anticipate, and how our field can signal its credibility and value.
Second, this special issue grapples with the critical question of alignment—the alignment between what the industry needs and what our programs teach. The gap between employer expectations and graduate preparation surfaces repeatedly across these manuscripts. Practitioners emphasize the importance of writing proficiency, interpersonal communication, strategic thinking, and professional maturity in their graduate interns, yet many find these competencies underdeveloped. This disconnect demands our attention and our response.
Third, these articles illuminate the reality of contemporary graduate student diversity—not only in terms of students’ demographic characteristics, but also in their goals, backgrounds, and contexts. Graduate programs now serve students pursuing doctoral degrees, career advancement in practice, and specialization in niche sectors. They serve full-time and part-time students, residential and online learners, career-changers and industry veterans. The “one-size-fits-all” approach to graduate education is no longer viable…if it ever was.
Fourth, these research endeavors document important efforts to innovate pedagogically. From service-learning models that bridge community engagement with research methods training to intentional curriculum design informed by industry input, this issue captures creative and thoughtful responses to the challenges of contemporary graduate education. These examples demonstrate that excellence in graduate public relations education is not only achievable but is already taking place in pockets across our discipline.
The Articles in This Issue
The collection opens with research examining curriculum and standards insights provided by educators, followed by an audit of graduate program websites analyzing curricular offerings and assessing alignment with existing recommendations. These first two articles provide valuable empirical documentation of the current master’s-degree landscape and inform ongoing efforts by the Commission on Public Relations Education to revise and update standards.
We are also pleased to feature an examination of practitioners’ expectations for graduate education, a timely survey that captures the voices of industry leaders and updates prior research in light of seismic shifts in practice brought about by the pandemic, technological advancement, and changing social dynamics. This research provides empirical grounding for conversations about what skills and knowledge matter most in contemporary professional contexts.
This issue includes scholarship focused on inclusion, equity, and representation in graduate education, a critical imperative for our discipline. Research exploring the lived experiences of Black graduate students and faculty in public relations illuminates systemic challenges in recruitment, retention, and support. These insights are essential reading for all who work in graduate education and aspire to create more welcoming, affirming, and equitable learning environments.
Additionally, we include research examining what industry professionals expect from graduate interns, the skills, competencies, and dispositions they value, and the gaps they perceive in graduate preparation. This work provides actionable guidance for program directors and faculty committed to strengthening the professional readiness of their graduates.
The last full article shares how public relations is presented, or absent, in sport management master’s programs. This work challenges us to consider whether our field maintains visibility and voice in related disciplines, and whether professionals in adjacent fields are being adequately prepared to leverage public relations expertise.
Finally, this issue includes two teaching briefs. The first demonstrates the pedagogical value of service-learning in graduate research methods instruction, offering a practical model for educators who seek to bridge theory and application while fostering meaningful community partnerships. The second explores the creation of thought leadership articles by graduate students on LinkedIn. Such examples of class-tested project ideas are invaluable for faculty considering pedagogical innovation.
Looking Forward
As we reflect on this collection and consider its significance, we are struck by several observations. First, there is genuine consensus in these articles about what matters: graduate education must be intentional, theory-grounded, professionally relevant, and equitable. There is, however, less certainty about how to achieve these goals within the constraints of institutional structures, resource limitations, and competing pedagogical philosophies. That uncertainty reflects the genuine complexity of graduate education in an applied discipline.
Second, the research findings within this issue reveal that graduate public relations education is not in crisis. It is in transition. Our programs are responding creatively and thoughtfully to changing contexts and emerging needs. Yet they would benefit from greater alignment, more explicit communication of their value propositions, and renewed commitment to standards that ensure quality and consistency without stifling innovation and specialization.
Third, we are grateful that these articles attend carefully to issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion. As of late, and way too often, discussions of curriculum and standards abstract away from the human experiences of students, particularly students from historically marginalized communities. This issue reminds us that excellent graduate education is not only intellectually rigorous but also humane and affirming.
We would be remiss if we did not mention the role our dear friend Pamela Bourland-Davis had in this issue – she aided in dreaming and scheming this idea. She was so enthusiastic about the potential of an entire issue of JPRE dedicated to *just* graduate education. Dr. Bourland-Davis, we dedicate this issue to you. We are certain your heart guided our work.
We are also grateful to the authors who contributed their scholarship, the peer reviewers who provided constructive feedback, and the practitioner-partners who participated in the research and shared their insights. Finally, we thank the CPRE research committee and leadership team, as well as the JPRE editorial team, for their commitment to supporting this issue and advancing scholarship in public relations education.
This special issue on graduate public relations education is offered in the spirit of generative dialogue. We hope this issue will spark conversations on campuses, in professional organizations, and in industry settings about what excellent graduate education in public relations looks like and how we, collectively, can ensure that our programs prepare the next generation of public relations leaders to navigate complexity, lead with integrity, and serve the public interest with wisdom and skill.
As we move forward, may we do so together, committed to elevating the quality, relevance, equity, and impact of graduate public relations education.
With warm regard and deep appreciation for our scholarly community,
Drs. Kinsky, Lubbers, Wallace, & Bourland-Davis (in memoriam)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter from the Editors Emily S. Kinsky, Chuck Lubbers, & Adrienne A. Wallace
Using theoretical frameworks of psychological distance and science literacy, this study introduces the construct of “closeness to numbers” conceptualized as: (i) practical numeracy – an understanding of how to use numbers, (ii) civic numeracy – a sense of comfort and confidence in discussing numerical data, and (iii) cultural numeracy – an appreciation for numerical data in the field. Using semi-structured in-depth interviews with public relations/communication students (n=15) and professionals (n=20), this study found that practical numeracy can be developed even if some struggled with it early on, civic numeracy nurtured at home and school can become integral at work, and cultural numeracy can be nurtured even if one is struggling with other numeracies. Experiential factors mattered significantly in developing closeness. Use of concrete contexts, establishing a supportive community, and inoculating against number trauma and negative self-talk contributed to building closeness to numbers.
Adrienne A. Wallace Grand Valley State University Editor-in-Chief Journal of Public Relations Education Email: wallacad@gvsu.edu
Thank you for engaging with the Journal of Public Relations Education (JPRE) and with this final issue of 2025 (11-3). In this issue, once again, we showcase the vibrancy, innovation, and care that public relations educators bring to their classrooms and curricula. The manuscripts collected here reflect a shared commitment to preparing students for a profession that is increasingly data-driven, AI-mediated, and equity-focused, while remaining grounded in ethical practice and human-centered communication.
This issue features pedagogical work that helps students navigate emerging technologies with critical insight and practical skill. One teaching brief immerses undergraduates in a high-pressure simulation of an AI-triggered crisis, asking them to apply crisis communication theories in real time, collaborate across stakeholder roles, and reflect on the ethical use of generative AI in organizational communication. Another contribution uses AI-generated, arts-based audience personas to deepen students’ audience analysis, integrating diversity, equity, and inclusion principles so that students practice ethical prompt design, realistic representation of identities, and research-informed segmentation for strategic campaigns.
Alongside these technology-focused innovations, this issue also advances the conversation about quantitative literacy in public relations. One study introduces the construct of “closeness to numbers,” illuminating how practical, civic, and cultural numeracies can be nurtured over time, through concrete contexts, supportive learning communities, and intentional efforts to counter math anxiety and negative self-talk. Together, these pieces underscore that preparing students for contemporary practice means helping them both interpret data and understand the human stories, identities, and power structures that those data represent.
Across the manuscripts in 11-3, several themes emerge: the value of experiential learning, the importance of safe and inclusive learning environments, and the need to integrate data, technology, and IDEA throughout the curriculum rather than confining them to isolated modules or single courses. The authors in this issue offer concrete models, simulation designs, assignment structures, and conceptual frameworks that colleagues can adapt to their own institutional contexts and student populations.
JPRE continues to depend on an army of volunteers, comprising a vibrant community of reviewers, authors, and readers who share a vision of public relations education that is evidence-based, ethically grounded, globally engaged, and, dare I even say it… fun! Gratitude is extended to the authors, reviewers, and production team whose volunteer labor and scholarly generosity make this issue possible, and to the educators who will carry these ideas into their classrooms and programs. We appreciate your support, encouragement, love, and trust in our humble journal.
Editorial Record: Submitted June 9, 2023. Revised October 1, and November 20, 2023. Accepted November 21, 2023. Published March 2024.
Author
Jasmine Gray Assistant Professor Communication Division Pepperdine University California, USA Email: jaz.gray@pepperdine.edu
Jacob Thompson Hussman School of Journalism and Media UNC-Chapel Hill North Carolina, USA Email: jacobthompson@unc.edu
ABSTRACT
In the last few years, the US social climate has been shaped by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as social unrest due to racial injustice. As instructors of a research methods course that traditionally focused on the needs of corporate clients, we wondered how these developments could inspire a new learning experience for students that encourages them to develop research skills through responding more directly to major life disruptions and the inequities revealed. We aimed to avoid compounding challenges our students faced while also giving them knowledge and skills that would empower them to address diversity and ethics in their future work as public relations professionals (CPRE, 2018). The result is a semester-long project that asks students to critically engage with questions of ethics and inequalities in research methods.
Our classrooms are spaces where students can practice using research skills to navigate the realities of our social world rather than reify false notions of neutrality, whether in research and strategic communication or in education as a whole (Freire, 2018). This GIFT asks students to spend their time and effort addressing significant social issues, including issues that coincide with current events and those that reflect a prior interest or passion for the student. The project increases student engagement by helping them see the research methods they learn as relevant to current challenges, and students build self-efficacy as they apply course objectives in reframing a societal obstacle as an opportunity for a positive impact (Anderson, 2004; Ineson et al., 2013; Leston-Bandiera, 2013; Chowdhury, n.d.). Students leave the course understanding how research methods are relevant to issues they care about and confident in their ability to conduct ethical, inclusive public relations research in their careers.
Assignment Rationale
Our primary objective in designing this assignment is to improve student engagement in public relations research methods courses. Although we were initially driven by the need to engage students during the shift to remote learning during COVID, improving engagement is always especially desirable in methods courses, which our students frequently cite as the most challenging. Our primary intervention is asking students to choose an organization and PR issue they find personally relevant for their semester-long project. By giving students a greater say in developing their project and the ability to choose a topic relevant to their career goals, we expect to see increased engagement and self- efficacy (Anderson, 2004; Leston-Bandiera, 2013). This increased sense of ownership will lead them to develop better research skills and feel confident applying those skills in professional settings as well as help them build ethics knowledge with an eye to real-world effects.
A second, and complementary, goal in designing this assignment is to better students’ ability to apply their research skills beyond the classroom as they move into careers as communication professionals. We hope that asking students to work on projects that they see as aligned with their personal interests and career goals will lead them to think critically about the potential strengths and weaknesses of each method as it might be employed in the real-world contexts they will eventually face. We ask students to go beyond designing and executing the most ideal version of a study and to instead grapple with the challenges of applying those research methods to more realistic business cases.
Finally, we considered what the increased social unrest due to racial injustice meant for our students, both as they completed coursework and as they prepared to enter the world as early career communicators. At a minimum, we felt that all students needed to consider ethics with an eye toward diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and we updated our research ethics accordingly. We also encouraged – but did not require – students to take on DEI questions in their project selection. Pushing or requiring students to choose DEI topics would have risked undermining our first two goals. But for students who chose to pursue these questions, the semester- long assignment provided an opportunity for deeper engagement.
Future instructors could choose to implement one of these interventions without committing to both of them. Project choice in itself can improve student agency, even if it is not explicitly connected to future career goals, social issues or questions of DEI. And of course, giving students the opportunity to work on projects that emulate real-world campaigns helps students build confidence applying research methods in practice, regardless of whether they are invested in the particular topic.
Bringing these three elements together, however, has the added benefit of encouraging students to think about ethics and equity in terms of their own goals and aspirations, hopefully preparing them to take those ideas to a career of their choice. Further, the interventions that allow for all three elements are synergistic rather than in conflict; each has the potential to improve the others’ effects.
Assignment Learning Objectives
Learning Objective 1 (abbreviated as LO 1):
Students increase their capacity to connect coursework to professional success in future careers.
Learning Objective 2 (abbreviated as LO 2):
Students develop research and analytic skills.
Learning Objective 3 (abbreviated as LO 3):
Students develop ethics and diversity/inclusion knowledge.
Learning Objective 4 (abbreviated as LO 4):
Students increase confidence in their ability to employ new skills and knowledge in their future careers.
Connection to Public Relations Practice or Theory
Research and analytic skills, ethics knowledge, and diversity and inclusion knowledge are three of the qualities employers most desire in entry-level public relations professionals, yet many college graduates enter the workforce without a strong understanding of relevant research methods or how they relate to ethics and inclusion (CPRE, 2018). Investigations find that, in particular, communication practitioners do not consistently employ research methods to measure and evaluate the success of their messaging (Thorson et al., 2015). These disconnects, however, are not because public relations curricula lack research methods training; in fact, more than 90 percent of undergraduate programs require a research methods course (CPRE, 2018).
Instead, research suggests that students frequently struggle to actually learn the research skills covered in these courses, in part because they do not understand how the material relates to their existing knowledge or future goals (Markle, 2017; see Early, 2014 for meta- analysis). As a result, it is difficult for students to integrate new concepts into their worldview, and they are less motivated to engage with course materials.
Additionally, when students enter the working world, they may not see these research tools as ways to improve their messaging but as potentially undermining their contributions (Nothhaft & Stennson, 2019). We posit that teaching research methods in a vacuum, disconnected from students’ goals and interests, may exacerbate this problem.
By asking students to choose an organization and topic that feel relevant to them, we improve student learning, connecting research and analytic skills and ethics knowledge developed in the course to their existing knowledge, real-world experience, and future goals (Anderson, 2004; Leston-Bandeira, 2013). Students more clearly recognize how the information they are learning might apply directly to their future careers, and they build confidence in their ability to apply those skills in the workplace.
Employers increasingly feel that DEI training must be embedded in all aspects of business and communication education rather than treated as a separate topic (Ragas, 2023). This GIFT addresses this need by incorporating questions of diversity and inclusion into the study of research ethics and, in many cases, as a core component of the issue students choose to address for their semester topic.
How the Assignment was Class-Tested
The activity consists of reshaping a semester-long, client-based project, providing opportunities for students to rethink the values that usually underlie research courses in strategic communication. It was class tested in two 30-person undergraduate Advertising/Public Relations Research Methods classes.
In the traditional course, over sixteen weeks, lectures on research methods including focus groups, interviews, ethnography, surveys, and experiments were each followed by a graded assignment conducted individually or in a group. Due to COVID-19, we reimagined the class as an asynchronous remote course, as many other instructors had. Our new design aimed to increase online engagement and make the course feel relevant by giving students opportunity to think deeply about real-world issues across two core course elements that encompassed the GIFT:
Choosing a client and issue related to a current social issue,
Learning about research ethics issues that have involved BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) communities,
Each group was required to select a client engaged with a relevant social issue that they would like to address throughout the semester. A relevant social issue was defined as an important problem for discussion that is closely connected to the current time and affects human society (Dictionary.com, n.d.a; Dictionary.com, n.d.b; Dictionary.com, n.d.c). The social issue could but did not have to be related to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion).
Once clients and issues were approved, each group refined a research problem to address on behalf of their client over the course of the semester. As we covered each method, students posed research questions which could be best answered with that method and which deepened their understanding and built on their previous work. There were three phases of research assignments: Secondary Data (background research project), Qualitative Primary Data (focus group, in-depth interview, participant observation/ethnography), and Quantitative Primary Data (survey, experiment). These assignments led to a reflection assignment that allowed students to speak to the value of the unique aspects of the course (i.e. social issue and diverse research ethics) and a final project (presentation and paper) that synthesized the previous assignments and provided recommendations for their clients’ advertising or PR effort.
Maintaining the advocacy focus, the reframed project was complemented by content highlighting the perspectives of marginalized or minoritized communities. Each week, in addition to working toward graded assignments, students were prepared to engage fully in discussion activities including contributing written or video recorded posts in the internal message forum for the class. We reworked the section of the course examining research ethics to include socially relevant aspects. For example, previous ethics modules centered studies involving white researchers and participants (e.g., the Milgram and Stanford Prison Experiments). We added the “Tuskegee Experiment” to our case studies and included new sections on “Black Women & Medicinal Experimentation” and “Research Ethics and Exploitation in Developing Countries” (see sample assignment titled Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences). We also provided an assignment that allowed students to reflect on the knowledge they gained over the semester including what was most valuable, what outstanding questions they had, and what was most relevant to their personal and professional life. These opportunities allowed students to further consider their professional futures as well as discuss ethical considerations addressed during the semester.
Evidence of Learning Outcomes/Assessment
Evidence of learning outcomes was demonstrated through qualitative student feedback that aligned with key learning objectives. Students said the course felt especially relevant compared to other courses they had taken. They emphasized that focusing on real-world issues (in this case, DEI related) was important to them and made understanding concepts easier (LO 1, LO 3). Students indicated that having a topic that was meaningful to them and relevant to current events made it easier for them to engage with course topics.
Notably, the GIFT served as the bridge between course content taught by us as instructors and the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) that public relations practitioners value (specifically, research skills and ethics knowledge). Students believed that choosing the social issue related topic made their explorations of the various research methods especially engaging (LO 2, LO 4). Furthermore, the topics covered in the ethics section worked to deepen their appreciation for the related discussion activities. Students said that the expanded ethics section was especially engaging and made them think more seriously about the importance of ethics in research.
The perceived relevance of the GIFT provided the glue of engagement and self-efficacy needed to bring about the intended outcomes. Additionally, the ethics section provided food for thought about diversity, equity, and inclusion that could guide subsequent research.
Importantly, the students also said that the GIFT better prepared them for entry-level positions in their field. Students felt that they could use the project as an example on their resume and in job applications. Some also indicated that it made them stronger candidates as they entered the job market, with one noting that the project prepared them for an interview, allowing them to speak about hands-on work employing multiple research methods that they would need to use over the course of a campaign if hired.
The feedback students provided suggests that they found this approach meaningful and exciting, even at a time when they faced more remote classwork that could make staying engaged difficult.
Template Assignment Guides
There are three template assignments:
Client/Issue Choice Opportunity
Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity
Reflection Assignment
Client/Issue Choice Opportunity
Learning Outcomes
Define team goals and expectations for group work
Collaborate toward the selection of an organization/client
Create research topic based on a social issue impacting an organization/client
Assignment Description
This semester you will have the opportunity to focus on a client’s engagement with a major social movement or current event. Each group will be required to select a client engaged with a relevant social issue that you would like to address throughout the semester.
A relevant social issue will be defined as an important problem for discussion that is closely connected to the current time and affects human society (Dictionary.com, n.d.a; Dictionary,com n.d.b, Dictionary.com, n.d.c).
Assignment Requirements
First, you will fill out a survey that will assess your personal project preferences including your skills, interests, and the social issues which you are most passionate about. After being assigned to groups based on your preferences and completing a team charter, your group will decide on and submit your top three clients and potential research topics for my final approval.
Once confirmed, your group will further refine a research problem to address throughout the semester. With each assignment, you will pose research questions that can be addressed using the research methods covered in the course. The research you conduct will involve how your client is responding to a social issue (as defined above).
Each potential client that your group identifies should fall under one of the following categories:
This client should consider addressing [relevant social issue] through strategic communication research,
This client is currently addressing [relevant social issue] and should assess their effectiveness through strategic communication research, or
This client is involved in a corporate crisis/situation related to [relevant social issue] that should be addressed through strategic communication research.
The client can be a for-profit or nonprofit organization. It should be an organization that is big enough to have a media footprint. The social issue can but does not have to be related to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). It can be any social issue (e.g. anti-Black racism, climate change, disability justice, animal rights, bullying etc.). However, it should be a problem that requires strategic communication research to solve.
Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity
Learning Outcomes
Increase understanding of ethical considerations involved in research through diverse perspectives/examples.
Connect ethical considerations to the professional world.
Connect ethical considerations to your research project.
Assignment Description
You will discuss the ways in which learning about these unethical studies inform your understanding of communication research ethics.
Assignment Requirements
Please read and/or watch at least two videos or articles from the subsections below. Afterward, use the discussion questions listed below for this week’s forum post.
Discussion Questions (Post answers in forum discussion)
What is the importance of discussing ethics in research?
Describe some historical instances of unethical research practices. Include any important takeaways.
What are the risks of participating in research?
Now that you have engaged with these case studies and seen the potential for harm related to conducting research, what can you take from this to ensure that you are being ethical in the research you design for your project?
How does the general topic of ethics relate to the client organization your group chose for this semester?
How could the general topic of ethics inform your future professional goals?
Reflection Assignment
Due by [DATE] at [TIME]
This assignment will provide you an opportunity to reflect on the knowledge you have gained this semester – what has been valuable to you, what you have questions about, and what is relevant to your personal and professional life. Please write at least one single-spaced page total (note, bullet point indents and the questions below do not count toward the page count). You can feel free to write more than one-page.
Reflecting on the readings, summary guide, engagement activities, slide notes, instructor videos, and additional content provided and discussed through the semester:
Please discuss knowledge you have gained in each of the following areas:
Understanding of secondary research
Understanding of qualitative analysis
Understanding and quantitative analysis
The uses and benefits of using research to answer advertising and/or PR questions.
Please discuss how examining ethics from a range of diverse perspectives impacted the execution of your research assignments. For example, you can discuss the impact it had on the overall direction of your research (e.g. what your group decided to address). You could also discuss the impact it had on how you approached specific research aspects (e.g. designing research questions, interacting with research participants, etc.).
Please discuss any outstanding questions you have or points of confusion regarding any topic discussed in the course so far. I will provide additional feedback. If you have no outstanding questions, discuss how you have been able to gain clarity and better understand the meaning of the topics or texts discussed so far this semester.
Please discuss the aspects of the course that have been most valuable to you so far this semester, including how any of the topics or materials covered so far relate to your life, the communities to which you belong, and/or your career aspirations.
Assignment Grading Criteria or Rubric
Client/Issue Choice Opportunity
This client preference activity accounts for 2.5% of the student’s total grade (pass/fail). To receive credit for the client/issue choice, students must submit three potential clients (falling under one of the three listed categories) and the corresponding social issue to be researched for each. Alternatively, the assignment can be viewed as a low stakes engagement opportunity used to develop a graded assignment.
Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity
This research ethics forum response activity is one of ten responses that accounts for 5% of the student’s total grade. Students receive full credit for each one as long as they address each part of the prompt and respond to a classmate. Alternatively, the assignment can be viewed as a low stakes engagement opportunity used to develop a graded assignment.
Reflection Assignment
This Reflection Assignment accounts for 10% of the student’s total grade. Grading will be based on the accuracy of the information provided in question one and the substantiveness of the responses to questions two through four.
Teaching Note
Intended Courses
Advertising/Public Relations research methods; Undergraduate communication research methods
Best Practices of Implementing the Assignment
We made a decision to require that each student engage with a social issue, rather than to “strongly suggest” or to allow opting out. We took this stance because we felt strongly that engaging successfully in the professional field (and in society in general) will increasingly require young adults to step outside of the comfortable and agreeable. However, we balanced this decision with a variety of student choice moments that allowed students to maintain agency and equity in the course. For example, groups were assigned based on students’ responses to a survey about project preferences, including issues about which they were most passionate. Student groups were provided autonomy in selecting clients, which could be any for-profit or nonprofit organizations with a significant media footprint. The activity design asked each group to work together to decide on three client/issue ideas with justifications for each. The instructors then selected one of the three ideas for the students to continue to develop.
Notably, the social issue could be but did not have to be related to DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). Setting tight parameters around the type of client and issue the students chose could have resulted in students feeling pressure to choose issues perceived as important to the instructors. Instead, we welcomed a range of social issues as long as they could be addressed with strategic communication research. Broad parameters ensured students chose issues engaging for them (e.g., climate change, disability justice, animal rights, bullying etc.). Yet, our approach allowed for students to explore DEI by choice. For example, one student in a group researching diversity in NASCAR shared:
I want to say that I already valued diversity in research, but this course has furthered my appreciation for it. Especially when finding that a great deal of research associated with our client has been focused on the white feminist perspective in branding and social change, rather than further inclusion of factors like race and ethnicity.
Furthermore, the way we framed our approach—as an “opportunity” for students to “choose” to delve into social issues paired with “understanding” the unethical research experiences of people from minoritized communities (as well as completing a team charter detailing an approach for working well together)—seemed to prepare students to be inclusive and ethical themselves. Because of our approach, students– including our underrepresented students–felt not only accommodated but empowered. For example, after discussing her group’s decision to choose a DEI related social issue, the Black student mentioned earlier continued by expressing her gratitude for our approach–while bridging key aspects of the GIFT in her response (i.e. student engagement toward addressing PR, exploring a social issue and practicing ethics and inclusion):
I enjoyed our focus group because we asked sensitive questions that are generally avoided. In our focus groups, [the] majority of our participants strayed away from questions of diversity and race, but it started a conversation. Another factor is that there were no persons of color in our focus group which is an important part of providing solutions. Research participants should come from diverse backgrounds because one opinion and point of view does not speak for all. Thank you for allowing our research topics to be centered around the current racial climate that we live in today.
We opted for open-ended ethics discussion questions that allowed students to engage in deep reflection beyond a regurgitation of course concepts (see Research Ethics through Diverse Experiences Activity).
However, the original discussion questions did not directly ask about relevance specifically to the research project/client and career goals. We also opted for reflection questions that allowed students to engage in contemplation about knowledge they gained over the semester without being primed by the instructor (see Reflection Assignment). The original reflection prompts did not explicitly ask students to address ethics and diverse perspectives. However, students’ responses organically included references to ethics and inclusion. For example, a student mentioned their group contemplating whether or not to ask women at a shelter about their abuse experiences (ultimately, going a different route after further reflection on their research goals). Another student discussed their group grappling with not having the proper survey sample for questions meant to address size-inclusive clothing for a popular women’s athleisure brand (and their decision to acknowledge this limitation in the write up of their data). Going forward, we would consider including a specific prompt to further allow for reflection related to DEI and ethics. Questions in this document were revised to support the aim of balancing reflectiveness and learning objectives (without leading the students to specific conclusions).
Recommended Resources Related to the Assignment
Watch
Crash Course [CrashCourse] (2018, April 18). Henrietta Lacks,the Tuskegee experiment, and ethical data collection: Crash course statistics #12 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzNANZnoiRs
Read
Scharff, D. P., Mathews, K. J., Jackson, P., Hoffsuemmer, J., Martin, E., & Edwards, D. (2010). More than Tuskegee: understanding mistrust about research participation. Journal of health care for the poor and underserved, 21(3), 879–897. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.0.0323
Limitations/Challenges of Implementing the Assignment
The COVID-19 pandemic allowed for an innovative spirit that led to the development of this GIFT but also presented certain challenges. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, the exploration of certain methods was curtailed. For example, there were workarounds needed for methods like ethnography or interviewing. Because the information needed to be delivered asynchronously due to COVID-19 parameters, the ethics additions to the course, which were significant, still felt insufficient in depth. This was due to the sensitive nature of the topics and the lack of rich, in person, real-time discussion.
However, in a traditional or asynchronous class, it may be a challenge for instructors teaching our GIFT to create the conducive social/physical environment students need to engage with these topics. Instructors should work to manage emotional responses, nonverbal cues, etc. toward enriched (even vulnerable) depths of conversation. For both the diverse ethics examples as well as the social issues related to each client, robust interpersonal discussion should be encouraged among students where communication aspects like tone of voice, reflection on previous commenters etc. can add to the weight of the discussion. Furthermore, there may be additional limitations for this GIFT in a summer course where there may be less time to select groups, a client and a social issue, all of which require larger portions of class time.
Instructors teaching smaller courses may find that it is more challenging to sort students into groups with similar interests based on their survey responses. In larger course sections, we were easily able to assign groups where students had at least some evident shared interest. When there are less students in total, it can be more challenging to identify clear areas of overlap. It is important to take care in this step to ensure that a student does not feel excluded or unenthusiastic as someone without as much direct interest in the project.
Finally, it is important to make sure that students continue to view the project from the perspective of their client, operating in an ethical manner that serves the best interest of the organization. Because students have selected social issues about which they are passionate, some may at first be inclined to focus on solving the challenge itself, rather than what it means to represent a client engaging with the issue. This is both a limitation – in that it requires additional attention from the instructor – and an opportunity for students to engage critically with what it means to operate ethically as a public relations professional.
References
Anderson, R. C. (2004). Role of the reader’s schema in comprehension, learning, and memory. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 594–606). International Reading Association.
Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury.
Ineson, E., Jung, T, Haines, C, & Kim, M. (2012).The influence of prior subject knowledge, prior ability and work experience on self- efficacy. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 12(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2012.11.002
Leston-Bandeira, C. (2013). Methods teaching through a discipline research-oriented approach. Politics, 33(3), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.12013
Markle, G. (2017). Factors influencing achievement in undergraduate social science research methods courses: A mixed methods analysis. Teaching Sociology, 45(2), 105–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X16676302
Murtonen, M., Olkinuora, E., Tynjälä, P. et al. (2008). “Do I need research skills in working life?”: University students’ motivation and difficulties in quantitative methods courses. High Education, 56, 599–612. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9113-9
Nothhaft, H. & Stensson, H. (2019). Explaining the measurement and evaluation stasis: A thought experiment and a note on functional stupidity. Journal of Communication Management, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/JCOM-12-2018-0135
Thorson, K., Michaelson, D., Gee, E., Jiang, J., Lu, Z.,, Luan, G., Weatherly, K., Pung, S., Qin, Y. & Xu, J. (2015). Joining the Movement? Investigating Standardization of Measurement and Evaluation Within Public Relations. Research Journal of the Institute of Public Relations, 2(1), 1-25. https://instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/MichaelsonEtcArticle.pdf
To cite this article: Gray, J., and Thompson, J. (2024). Infusing real-world social issues and ethics into research methods instruction. Journal of Public Relations Education, 9(3), 101-120. https://journalofpreducation.com/?p=4294
Editorial Record: Submitted June 8, 2021. Revised December 3, 2021. Accepted March 25, 2022.
Author
Arien Rozelle Assistant Professor Department of Media and Communication St. John Fisher University Rochester, New York Email: arozelle@sjfc.edu
Abstract
The social and political tensions of 2020 exposed an increased threat by hate groups attempting to spread extremist ideologies. Today, words have become weapons on social media and across all corners of the internet to persuade, recruit, mobilize and motivate. As undergraduate college students may seek to participate in activist work to combat hate and extremism, public relations research and theory can provide a roadmap for strategy.
Activism as a broad topic may pique the interest of many students and can be used to demonstrate the application of strategies, tactics, messaging and more. This activity attempts to situate activism into an existing introductory public relations course, by using it as the lens through which students examine the application of research and theory.
In this activity, students are given a fictional scenario: they have joined an anti-hate group on campus called Vaccinate Against Hate, which seeks to educate campuses across the country about hate groups and ways to fight the threat of extremist propaganda, conspiracy theories and calls to action. As a public relations student, they’ve been asked to work on developing a recruitment campaign, as well as an educational and awareness campaign for Vaccinate Against Hate.
Students will identify the research methods needed to craft Vaccinate Against Hate’s first campaigns. Then, they draw on public relations theories to guide their strategy. Through this activity, students are introduced to and apply a myriad of research methods and public relations theories, as well as the role of public relations in an activist context.
Keywords: teaching brief, in-class activity, activism, research, theory, public relations
The social and political tensions of 2020 exposed an increased threat by hate groups attempting to spread extremist ideologies. Today, words have become weapons on social media and across all corners of the internet to persuade, recruit, mobilize and motivate. As undergraduate college students may seek to participate in activist work to combat hate and extremism, public relations research and theory can provide a roadmap for strategy.
As noted by scholars like Mules (2021), there is increased discussion about the relationship between public relations practice and activism. But this discussion has not made its way into public relations curricula, other than in reference to activists being seen as oppositional to the objectives of an organization (Coombs & Holladay, 2013). Given that activists have successfully applied public relations strategies and tactics to achieve their objectives for at least 100 years (Ciszek, 2015), the study of their work can make a positive contribution to public relations curricula (Mules, 2021).
And, as Coombs and Holladay (2012) see the incorporation of activism studies into the curriculum “as central to broadening students’ education, it also holds promise for re-imagining the field and legitimizing the works of activists as an important component in public relations theory and research.” (p. 347)
While the addition of activism studies to public relations curricula may take time, or simply not be possible for many programs, one step that can be taken now is to incorporate assignments or activities with a focus on activism into existing courses.
Activism as a broad topic may pique the interest of many students and can be used to demonstrate the application of strategies, tactics, messaging and more. This activity attempts to situate activism into an existing introductory public relations course, by using it as the lens through which students examine the application of research and theory. As noted in the 2017 Commission on Public Relations Education report Fast Forward: Foundations and Future State. Educators and Practitioners, “Theory can get a bad rap because it sounds like all the stuff that never changes. In fact, public relations and public relations education, with our core commitment to research, are a master class in continually observing, questioning and adapting the theoretical drivers of what we do in practice. The world, the profession and education never stand still; our theory is in a similar state of adaptation.” (p. 16)
In this activity, students are given a fictional scenario: they have joined an anti-hate group on campus called Vaccinate Against Hate, which seeks to educate campuses across the country about hate groups and ways to fight the threat of extremist propaganda, conspiracy theories and calls to action. As a public relations student, they’ve been asked to work on developing a recruitment campaign, as well as an educational and awareness campaign for Vaccinate Against Hate.
Using Kathleen Kelly’s (2001) ROPES planning process (research, objectives, programming, evaluation, stewardship) as a starting point, students will identify the research methods needed to craft Vaccinate Against Hate’s first campaigns. Then, they draw on public relations theories to guide their strategy. Through this activity, students are introduced to and apply a myriad of research methods and public relations theories, as well as the role of public relations in an activist context.
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES: This activity was used in Introduction to Public Relations and was created to align with the learning outcomes stated below. The student learning outcomes for this activity also correspond with selected student learning outcomes for the course:
Develop an awareness of the role that public relations plays within an organization and its key publics
Understand communication terms, theories, concepts and issues as they relate to public relations
Explore a range of real-life public relations scenarios through readings, discussions and assignments
Enhance communication skills as well as the ability to work individually and as part of a team
Demonstrate learning through discussions and assignments
EVIDENCE OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES:
This activity was created to align with the learning outcomes stated above. Here is a brief sampling of responses to a post-activity survey:
Did this activity help you to develop an awareness of the role that public relations plays within an organization and its key publics? Response: 100% YES (26 responses)
Did this activity help you understand communication/public relations terms, theories and models? Response: 100% YES (26 responses)
Did this activity help you better understand how theory applies to public relations? 100% YES (26 responses)
What did you learn about public relations from this activity?
“One thing that I learned about public relations from this activity was how different qualitative and quantitative research methods might be used to help inform a campaign.”
“I learned more in-depth about the theories behind the practice of PR and how they are utilized.”
“That research is really important before starting any type of PR campaign.”
“I learned about the specific research methods in a more in-depth way. Terms like two-step flow were introduced in a deeper way as well.”
“A better understanding of applied theory.”
As part of the assignment, students were also asked to identify a key takeaway, which they delivered at the end of their group presentations. Comments ranged from noting increased knowledge about public relations overall to a better understanding of the theories they had read about. Students also reported a more in-depth understanding of the importance of research to inform public relations campaigns, and that they developed a better understanding of how different qualitative and quantitative research methods might be used in practice.
Finally, students reported that this activity introduced them to the role of public relations in activism – something many stated they had not considered.
CONCLUSION: The introduction and application of research and theory in an ungraded assignment may have helped students to think critically and creatively about the content and assuaged fear about “getting a bad grade.” Theory tends to be a tough pill for many students to swallow but students were generally enthusiastic about participating in this activity.
Most groups had an easy time applying appropriate research methods and could quickly distinguish between qualitative and quantitative methods. Persuasion models were applied mostly accurately with most groups identifying inoculation theory as one of the most applicable theories to the assignment. Given the relevance and prevalence of social media influencers today, it came as little surprise that students were interested in the two-step flow theory. Other media and mass communication models were applied with varying degrees of understanding. Management theories proved confusing, which was expected, given that this assignment was deployed in an introductory course.
Overall, students dove into this assignment with energy and enthusiasm despite any challenges due to participating via Zoom. Using Google Slides, they created presentations that were well organized and demonstrated curiosity, critical thinking, and creativity. Ample time was provided for students to collaborate in class, which allowed them to adequately articulate their findings and present them to the class. As a result, most presentations exceeded expectations.
Future recommendations include providing students with an opportunity to conduct secondary research about activism prior to class in order to better prepare them for the assignment. Additional recommendations include adding details about the intended audience to the written directions, and revising the menu of theories provided to students, which notably did not include theories directly related to activism. Consideration may be given to remove the management models from the menu and replace them with activist theories. The addition of theories surrounding race, including Logan’s (2021) Corporate Responsibility to Race (CRR), may also be added as appropriate to the course.
ASSIGNMENT: Vaccinate Against Hate: Applying Research and Theory to the Fight Against Extremist Ideologies
This activity was created for an Introduction to Public Relations course in an online setting (Zoom) but can be adapted for upper-level research and theory classes, and/or to a course related to public relations and activism. It can also be easily adapted for use as an in-classroom activity.
Prior to class, students are asked to prepare for the activity by reading Page & Parnell chapter 4, and by listening to the segment “Neutralizing Hateful Propaganda,” from “No Silver Bullets,” an episode from WNYC’s On the Media podcast (2021). The episode features Kurt Braddock, author and professor of communications at American University, in a discussion about strategies and tactics to prevent radicalization before it happens.
In class, students are given the following fictional scenario:
Following a series of racist incidents involving members of the campus community, a student group has formed to combat hate and the proliferation of hate groups on college campuses across the country. The group, Vaccinate Against Hate, seeks to educate students about hate groups and works to find ways to combat the threat of extremism.
Vaccinate Against Hate needs communicators to help them recruit new members. As a student studying public relations, you have joined Vaccinate Against Hate to provide your expertise. You have been assigned two very important projects:
Develop a recruitment campaign in order to increase membership for the organization.
Research, plan and execute Vaccinate Against Hate’s first educational and awareness campaign to combat extremist ideologies. Your campaign will involve strategic messaging, media outreach, and elements of media literacy training.
Using the ROPES planning process as a starting point, you will identify the research needed in order to craft these campaigns, drawing on public relations theories to guide your strategy. Once you have identified the research and theories needed, you will present your findings to the class to make connections between research, theory, and practice.
Students are then placed in breakout groups of 4-5 students per group (40 minutes):
Step 1: In your group, discuss the fictional scenario and apply the podcast and fictional scenario to your readings.
Step 2: Discuss what strategies and tactics might be involved in the two campaigns for Vaccinate Against Hate.
Step 3: Create a slide deck that you will present to class. Required slides:
Slide 1: Identify the primary research methods that you would use in order to inform your initial recruitment campaign. Using the “Common Public Relations Research Methods” table (Page & Parnell, 2019, pg. 85) as a starting point, you will first consider the two type of research most appropriate: quantitative and/or qualitative. Then you will determine the appropriate method(s), which many include surveys, content analysis, digital analytics, focus groups, in-depth interviews and/or participant observation. Be specific in your responses and provide a rationale for using each method.
Media and mass communication models include: Agenda Setting/Framing, Two-Step Flow, Spiral of Silence, Diffusion of Innovations, Uses & Gratifications. Persuasion models include: Elaboration Likelihood Model, Inoculation, and Cialdini’s Principles of Influence. Management Models include: Excellence and Image Restoration Theory.
Slide 3: Identify the primary researchmethods that you would use in order to inform your educational and awareness campaign. Using the “Common Public Relations Research Methods” table (Page & Parnell, 2019, p. 85) as a starting point, be specific in your responses and provide a rationale for using each method.
Slide 4: Identify public relations theories that will guide the strategy for your educational and awareness campaign. Using the table “Ten Theories for Public Relations” (Page & Parnell, 2019, p. 91), as a starting point, be specific in your responses and provide a rationale for using each theory.
Slide 5: Each team member will identify one key takeaway. What did you learn about the role of public relations in activism?
Step 4: Present your slide deck. Each team member must present one slide to the class. Each team has five minutes to present.
Additional Teaching Notes:
Suggested time allotment for an 80-minute class:
Activity introduction: 5 minutes
Group work: 40 minutes
Presentations: 30 minutes
Final remarks: 5 minutes
Suggestions for further reading for upper-level courses: These readings may provide useful for upper-level students and classes seeking to dive deeper into the application of attitudinal inoculation as well as the applied use of persuasion in radicalization and counter-radicalization.
References
Braddock, K. (2019). Vaccinating against hate: Using attitudinal Inoculation to confer resistance to persuasion by extremist propaganda. Terrorism and Political Violence. 33(7), 1-24. http://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2019.1693370
Braddock, K. (2020). Weaponized words: The strategic role of persuasion in violent radicalization and counter-radicalization. Cambridge University Press.
Ciszek, E. (2015). Bridging the gap: Mapping the relationship between activism and public relations. Public Relations Review, 41(4), 447-455. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.05.016
Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (2012) Privileging an activist vs. a corporate view of public relations history in the US.Public Relations Review. 38(3), 347-353. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.11.010
Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (2013) It’s not just PR: Public relations in society. John Wiley & Sons.
Kelly, K. S. (2001). Stewardship: The fifth step in the public relations process. In R. L. Heath (Ed.) Handbook of Public Relations (pp. 279-290). http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452220727.n21
Logan, N. (2021). A theory of corporate responsibility to race (CRR): Communication and racial justice in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research. 33(1), 6-22. http://doi.org/10.1080/1062726x.2021.1881898
Page, J. T., & Parnell, L. J. (2019). Foundations of public relations: Research and Theory. Introduction to public relations: Strategic, digital, and socially responsible communication (pp. 80-106). Sage.
To cite this article: Rozelle, A. (2022). Vaccinate against hate: Using activism to teach applied PR research and theory. Journal of Public Relations Education, 8(2), 147-157. https://aejmc.us/jpre/?p=3096
Emily S. Kinsky, Ph.D. Associate Professor West Texas A&M University Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Public Relations Education Email: jpre@wtamu.edu
Note from the Editor-in-Chief:
Below you will find the table of contents for our latest issue, which includes four research articles, six teaching briefs (top ranking Great Ideas For Teaching from the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication-PR Division competition this year), and three book reviews. This issue is filled with valuable information for public relations educators.
We are pleased to welcome several new JPRE board members this summer, who are listed on the Editorial Board and Staff page along with the entire board. We thank all our board members for their service as reviewers, supporters, and problem solvers.
The editorial team, which gained a new member in Dr. Eaddy, donated countless hours of effort into this issue. Their assistance is priceless, and I am grateful for their brilliant minds, their willingness to serve, and their incredible work ethic.
Thank you to those of you who have reviewed manuscripts for JPRE this year. You each completed a valuable service to the field, and it is appreciated.
Thank you to Gini Dietrich, author of Spin Sucks, for allowing us to use her PESO model graphic in this issue. We are appreciative of that permission. I gain so much from her podcasts, so I was pleased to see her work featured in a GIFT teaching brief in this issue.
A publication of the Public Relations Division of AEJMC Copyright 2020 AEJMC Public Relations Division
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).
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.
Editorial Record: Submitted to AEJMC-PRD GIFT Competition by Feb. 22, 2019. A blind copy was peer reviewed by the PRD Teaching Committee, led by Chair Brigitta Brunner, and selected as a Top GIFT. First published online on August 17, 2019.
Author
Janis Teruggi Page, University of Illinois at Chicago
Rationale
CSR communications have become an increasing responsibility for PR practitioners, as corporations have now recognized CSR as essential to their operations and their reputations. This lesson is designed to prepare students for this growing, essential practice in corporate public relations through analyzing industry research to find gaps between the “good works” companies perform and their “good works” reputation among the general population—gaps that can be filled through the use of strategic communication. According to the Reputation Institute:
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a highly important driver of reputation. Although companies are increasingly becoming more sustainable, the public often does not know or recognize a company’s CSR commitment. Consequently, a company’s actual and perceived CSR is frequently misaligned. Aligning CSR minimizes reputational risks and can improve reputation significantly. (Verheij, 2017, p. 1)
Student Learning Goals
By engaging in this assignment, students will understand that a strategic CSR program is only as strong as a company’s ability to communicate its strengths, values, and impacts to a wide array of internal and external stakeholders. They will diagnose the need for a CSR communication strategy by evaluating gaps between performance and reputation. They will also gain insight on excellence in CSR communication by evaluating communication tactics of high-performing companies with high-perceived reputations. Guided by this research process, they will recommend a strategic communication plan to support CSR engagement to close the reputation gap between public reception and reality.
Connection to Public Relations Theory
This lesson connects to relationship management theory. An organization’s survival depends on mutually beneficial relationships between the organization and its publics. According to Ledingham (2003), “Successful organization-public relationships develop around common interests and shared solutions to common problems” (p. 188). Among the relational factors is trust that the organization lives its values. Consumers consider CSR efforts when judging the reputation of a company, and CSR is a key public relations tool for communicating norms and gaining legitimacy (Aksak, Ferguson, & Duman, 2016). CSR engagement, when done correctly, is tied to the purpose and values of the corporation and should be communicated accordingly. Recognizing and addressing a misalignment of actual and perceived CSR is one means for corporations to build a sustained and authentic relationship with its publics.
Evidence of Learning Outcomes
This lesson has been successfully taught multiple times in an online graduate program using data from two respected industry sources: an annual ranking of U.S. corporations’ CSR activity conducted by Corporate Responsibility magazine (CR Magazine, 2019) and an annual ranking of U.S. corporations’ CSR reputation conducted by the Reputation Institute (2019). Positive achievement of outcomes has been measured by students’ engagement with industry data that reveals a company’s “gap”—and students’ subsequent written justifications for selecting a company in need of a CSR communications plan. Student analysis also has determined the company’s strongest CSR programs most worthy of better messaging. Finally, student communications plans are influenced by the strategy and tactics of companies ranking high in both performance and reputation, as well as by best practices in CSR communication.
Ledingham, J. (2003).Explicating relationship management as a general theory of public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 15(2), 181-198.
Aksak, E. O., Ferguson, M. A, & Duman, S. A. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and CSR fit as predictors of corporate reputation: A global perspective. Public Relations Review, 42(1), 79-81.
Mining the Gap: Research to Guide CSR Communications Strategy
This lesson is designed to prepare you for a growing, essential practice in public relations: managing communication of corporate social responsibility (CSR) engagement. You will analyze industry research to find reality/perception gaps: Companies that are performing excellent CSR but are lacking the reputation they deserve. Through industry data, you will identify one company with a reality/perception gap and recommend how its reputation can be enhanced with a strategic communication plan.
Reality
Corporate Responsibility magazine annually recognizes companies that are good corporate citizens, excelling through their performance in multiple dimensions. Its 100 Best Corporate Citizens 2019 ranking is derived from the Russell 1000 stock market index, which measures the largest U.S.-based companies. It uses a database that tracks publicly available data in seven categories: environmental, climate change, human rights, employee relations, corporate governance, philanthropy, and financials. Beyond an overall company ranking, these categories are also ranked within each company.
Perception
The Reputation Institute annually recognizes companies perceived by the public as good corporate citizens due to their reputation. Its 2019 ranking, US RepTrak100,presents results from a survey based on more than 167,000 ratings from the general public of 390 eligible companies (the largest U.S.-based survey in this area). The survey quantifies the public’s perception of citizenship(supports good causes, positive societal influence, environmentally responsible), governance(open and transparent, behaves ethically, fair in the way it does business), and workplace(fair employee rewards, employee well-being, equal opportunities), as well as leadership, products/services, innovation, and performance.
Examples of the Gap
In Corporate Reputation magazine’s 100 Best Corporate Citizens 2019 ranking, companies that ranked relatively high in actual CSR engagement were ranked in the Reputation Institute’s 2019US RepTrak100 asrelatively low (or not at all) in CSR perception. Here are just a few examples:
Company
100 Best Corporate Citizens ranking “CSR Engagement”
US RepTrak 100 ranking “CSR Perception”
General Mills
#3
#29
Campbell Soup
#4
#26
HP
#5
#67
Microsoft
#6
#31
Instructions
Part 1:
Based on these two reports, explore and choose a company ranked high as a good corporate citizen but ranked low in reputation.
Justify your choice. What is the disparity between good citizenship and reputation?
In the 100 Best Corporate Citizens report, explore the detailed summary showing which type of CSR engagement ranks highest for that company.
On the company’s corporate website, find the CSR initiatives in the high-ranking category you identified in step 3. Choose one initiative for which you will recommend a communication plan. Provide a URL.
Explain your choice – why did you choose this initiative to help improve the company’s overall CSR perception and reputation?
To help inform your recommendations, identify companies ranking high in both performance and reputation, and then explore their CSR communication strategies.
Other considerations for your communications plan:
Beware empty boasting and greenwashing; focus on authenticity
Be transparent; simple, direct communication is more authentic
Know the audiences and the likely impact on each
Create an ongoing dialogue
Collaborate with friends and foes
Partner with an NGO for credibility
Focus on employee engagement and enhancing morale, image and loyalty
Be consistently credible
Part 2:
Based on completion of Part One, prepare a CSR communications plan that you will recommend to the company. Follow the steps in the “Key Elements of a Strategic Communications Plan” template provided below. For this deliverable, you will play the role of a consultant assigned to analyze the CSR initiative and make recommendations in a presentation to the chief executives of the company.
Deliver your plan (as if you were presenting and speaking to the executives) in a professional PowerPoint presentation with recorded voice narration. For guidance, search online for Microsoft’s instructions, “Record a slide show with narration and slide timings.” Your PPT should have no more than 12 slides and be approximately 5-7 minutes in length. Regarding slide appearance, use type no smaller than 30 points and incorporate good slide design: visually pleasing, clean, and concise (don’t put all your speaking points onto the slides).
Submit your plan as a voice-narrated PPT or export it to a video file (with the PPT opened, select File/Export/Create Video). If exported to a video, you may submit the video or upload it to a YouTube account and simply provide the URL.
You will be assessed based on the quality and depth of your analysis and recommendations as well as the overall quality of the presentation itself.
[Teaching note: This assignment was developed for an online class. As an alternative to a voice-narrated PPT, the plan can be presented in a classroom setting to fellow students acting as board members, providing follow-up questions for discussion. Also, as an alternative to a PPT, the assignment’s end deliverable could be a detailed memo to the CEO.]
Key Elements of a Strategic Communication Plan
Executive Summary
Overview of the entire plan.
Situation Analysis
Succinct breakdown of the issue addressed by the plan (high performance, low reputation, need for CSR communications).
Target Audiences
Concerned stakeholders addressed by the communications.
Goal
Overarching end purpose of your plan.
Objectives
Building blocks to meet your goal: informational, attitudinal, behavioral.
Strategy
Plan of action designed to achieve objectives.
Tactics
Steps to be taken to achieve objectives.
Theme and Key Message(s)
Theme: Broad statement of the vision guiding all communication. Message(s): Concise and value based.
[Budget and Timeline are optional]
Evaluation
Methods to measure how effectively tactics met objectives.
References
The last slide in your presentation must display all of your sources.
