From Academic to Student: Reflections on the experience

I've just finished a Masters degree, nearly three years after I retired as a professor. I enjoyed much of my time as a student exploring a topic that had eluded me as an undergraduate student. The two years of part-time study also made me reflect on the nexus between academics and students and on the administration of university programmes.

I won't name the university I attended as I'm also including my time in academic management in the UK and Australia, and as an external examiner in England and Ireland in these reflections.

The Good Things

• It was a real pleasure on some modules (units/courses) to engage with academics who really love their subject and weave their research into teaching. Yes, that should always be the case but some folks do it better than others. The impact upon students was evident in seminar discussions and real academic communities were created.
• Libraries and librarians are under-recognised for their value they give to students. Library staff at all universities where I have worked or studied during the past 15 years have been very supportive and always went a "bit-extra" to add texts to the stack or get books and articles through inter-library loans. They have sometimes struggled with new software (VLEs and reading lists) but kept trying till it worked.
• Research group seminars and lectures were an important asset whereby students engaged with new research and different conceptualisations. They also give platforms for younger academics to present their work outside their home campus. Good universities have lots of them.
• Making set times for consultations between lecturers and students worked well. The trend to treat students as academic consumers has implied there should be instant responses by email and through short-notice meetings. This consumerism just leads to stress on staff and short-termism whereas a scheduled meeting leads to greater consideration issues by staff and students. My meetings with lecturing staff were scheduled and produced thoughtful results for both of us. It's a discipline to be maintained.

The So-So Things

• Wearing my recent student hat, I now realise how important the programme handbook is for students. Those who read them in detail, admittedly a minority, will find that they have often been slung together year-after-year with little thought other than meeting a production deadline. A recent example had conflicting information on the presentation of assignments and dissertations and an error-strewn guide to a specific referencing system. At least every two years or when there is a change of programme leader, handbooks should be prepared from scratch using, hopefully, a fresh perspective.
• It was a similar problem with module or unit guides. Some don't align with the programme handbook or with university policies. As all universities have grand QA schemes and processes, these gaps between the floorboards should not exist.
• As an academic manager, I defended the quality and consistency of marking by colleagues against student questions and criticism. As a student, I'm less certain as to whether criteria-based marking is as neutral and objective as is claimed. I found it very difficult to judge my progress when marks for similar, heavily researched-assignments varied by 10 marks when assessed against the same criteria. This was no crisis as I generally got good marks but other students had the same experience with marking that reflected the marker's theoretical preferences than the criteria. I'm not sure that, in the humanities, there's another route to use especially as the markers have barely 20 minutes to read and assess each assignment.
• Rigid pedagogy was the bane of some modules. At Masters level, students should have done their reading and be prepared to discuss the week's topic. The reality in a few modules was that the majority didn't do so and were quite happy to let a small group do much of the reading and lead discussion. However, lecturers were so trapped into seeking positive student scoring of their modules that little was said to the lazy ones and no change was made to the pedagogic module. That just left the keen students dispirited. If a pedagogy isn't working, it should be changed!

The Don't Do Things

• Many universities cut fees by 25% to 50% for Masters programmes in order to attract their graduates to stay on for another year or so. This chicanery boosts data for student employment, which includes staying on for further study, but at the end of their Masters studies, many younger graduates are no more ready for employment than 12 or 24 months before, and have increased their student loan borrowing. The discounting of degrees is a benefit for some students but hacks-off those who are paying full fees from their own pockets. It should be limited to those students with potential to progress to doctoral studies and be no more than 10-15% of normal fee levels.
• There is a regular farce called something like a Programme Committee Meeting at which teaching staff, administrators and student representatives meet to consider how the course/programme is progressing. My experience as an academic manager was that student representatives seldom consulted their colleagues and usually expressed untested and occasionally malicious personal opinions. As a student, I found the our supposed representatives might put a message asking for feedback on a closed Facebook group a day or so before the meeting, if at all. They didn't ever tell fellow students about the issues being presented, nor did they report on the meeting's outcomes. Having seen these farcical events in operation for at least a decade, it's time that they were overhauled with a wider range of methods to gather feedback from both staff and students, as they provide little value.

Overall, being a student again was stimulating and enjoyable. On my Masters programme, there were several "mature" students among the majority of 23-24 year olds. We tended to stick together as we had different experiences and learning styles but not exclusively. The harder-working younger students had mostly come straight on from undergraduate studies in the same field and had greater awareness of the basic material and theorisation. Whereas as we tended to read with greater depth and to bring in multi-disciplinary perspectives. So there was a lot of learning and discussion in the better seminars. I hope these reflections will be of assistance to both academics and students. If you're considering a return to study, the benefits and the enjoyment outweigh any gripes that I've expressed.

PR Evaluation Survey 1 – 80% do measurement; 43% use AVE

PR students at Bournemouth University were surveyed recently about their experiences of evaluation practices during their 2012/13 sandwich year placement. 55 students (85%) took part in the self-completion survey. As all but one of them (98.2%) had been on placement for nine months or more in a single organisation, they can be considered valid observers of practices taking place around them or in which they participated.

Headline news, using valid percentages, was that they reported

• 80% of placement organisations undertook formal or information evaluation of PR activity
• 79.2% of activity was measured in those organisations that undertook evaluation
• The main measurement was of media coverage, by 10 times (at least) ahead of measurement of KPIs, social media or organisational objectives (in that ranking)
• AVE was used in 43.2% of placement organisations; On the other hand, it was not used in 56.8% of placement organisations

Calculation of AVE

Students who reported that AVE was used were asked “How was AVE calculated at your main placement organisation?”

Their verbatim replies indicate that (1) AVE continues to be widely used and (2) some AMEC members are actively offering products and services to calculate the metric.

Got it from Precise; PR Value = AVE x 3 divided by 100

Based on rates from Gorkana

By media evaluation agency as percentage of editorial value

[Media coverage multiplied) X 3

Via Metrica and Cision's algorithms

We rang companies for the figures or used Precise or Gorkana

We used Mymarket Monitor to indicate AVE which they used page space to decide value

A piece of coverage that took up 1/4 of the page, for example, was divided by 4 and x (multiplied) by 3 or 5 depending on whether it was online or print coverage.

PR value x 3

PR Value = Advertising by 3

For press coverage a value was calculated at the end of the month

Depending on the size of coverage times x 3

Through Precise Media and AVE reports for each campaign

We would send coverage to an outside agency (Kantor) they would reply with AVE

By measuring coverage, working out the costs of this space by advertising rates and times value by 3

Calculated the published article against (an) advertising rate card. Also against viewers

Not sure: PR Value x 3 (divided by) 100%. Same strategy applied for all.

From Precise media cuttings package

Despite the Barcelona Principles, which were announced with very visible support from CIPR and PRCA in 2010, AVE is as widely used as it ever was. And AMEC members, who wrote and adopted the Barcelona Principles which barred use of AVE, are leading the way in its continued usage.

More research outcomes follow soon in PR Evaluation Survey 2.

Educating for Complexity - the best way forward for PR education?

The US-based Commission on Public Relations Education (Commpred) recently produced a report on standards for Master’s degrees in PR. Titled “Educating for Complexity”, it discusses two models of degrees – Professional Graduate and Academic Graduate - in terms of their outcomes and curricula. This post summarises the findings but detail can be found in the report: http://www.commpred.org/educatingforcomplexity/

1)    Professional Master’s program

“teaches the nuances of public relations and management techniques as well as leadership, business and communication skills … (it will provide)

·         An appreciation for the importance of globalization, entrepreneurship and technology in today’s business environment

·         An understanding of the interactions of the key functional aspects of an organization

·         An understanding of the role of communication in society and the ethical challenges of global public relations

·         Well-developed leadership skills and understanding of business

·         An understanding of, and the skills necessary to participate in, effective teamwork

·         Improved critical thinking and problem-solving skills

·         Social science research and evaluation knowledge and skills

·         Cutting edge communication management abilities

2)    Academic Master’s program

“build(s) on the same outcomes of a professional master’s program … (with) additional understanding of theory and social science methods so that (students) will be prepared to enter doctoral programs”. The additional outcomes would be:

·         Thorough knowledge of public relations theories and principles

·         Advanced critical thinking skills

·         Social science research skills to test new theories

·         Skills to work in applied public relations research

·         Skills to teach undergraduate public relations

·         Preparation to enter and succeed in public relations doctoral programs

However, the report found that employers:

·         Emphasized “characteristics of applicants” when hiring rather than knowledge or skills

·         Considered the Master’s degree was preparation for entry level jobs but expected professional experience (internships, etc) in addition to the degree

·         Tended to hire people who understand the management of public relations and not just its tactics

·         “Although they stress the need for writing skills, advanced positions on public relations involved setting strategy based on understanding of client needs, the client’s competition and the specific business settings. Because of this, they continued to express preferences for hiring people with degrees in the humanities and business and/or seeking people with “intellectual capabilities, leadership potential, that would make them ‘critical thinkers’ and ‘creative and innovative’.”

·         Called for a better brand for graduate PR education

Master’s degree core curriculum

Five curriculum areas should form the core of the two models of PR Master’s programs

·         Strategic public relations management

·         Basic business principles and processes

·         Communication/public relations theory and research methods

·         Global influences on the practice of public relations

·         Ethics

The Commpred report gives more detail on the content of each of these elements. After completing the core units, students would a make a “fork in the road” choice of either the Professional or Academic program.

For the Professional path, they would undertake

·         Courses in areas of PR specialization, e.g. healthcare promotion, sports PR, etc or units from other academic programs which align with PR and communications studies.

·         An internship or “co-operative education experience” for those without a UG degree or professional experience prior to study; or a more advanced experience for students who are already working professionals.

For the Academic path, in preparation for doctoral studies, they would undertake:

·         Additional research courses

·         A thesis

The report is soundly researched and written by experts but is it really what the PR industry wants and universities can provide?

What’s missing? My suggestion is that it is a very corporatist in its outlook and hasn’t taken on board the impact of social media and PR 2.0.

PR wedded to tactics

Every year when Bournemouth University PR undergraduate students come back from their year-long industry placements, they submit a report for assessment. And every year, it's the same old picture of a PR industry wedded to tactics, media relations, occasional stunts and no attempt at measurement and evaluation.

Sure there are some students who go to exceptional placements which believe in research, planning, strategy and measurement but they are few. So after analysing several placement reports and discussing the rest of the 65 reports with colleagues, what "state of play" emerges about PR in the UK?

The good news first:

• Students enjoy the placements and are usually very well supported by industry employers.
• They get responsibility quite early in the placement for delivery of media relations and events.
• There are many standing offers to come back to their jobs after graduation.
• Social media is increasingly used, although with doubts over its effectiveness.

The less good news:

• Students are still teaching some employers about social media. The CEO of one major services company asked the PR intern for advice on how the quoted company could "stop online criticism."
• There is little evidence of strategic thinking at account manager level. It's all busy, busy, busy.
• Far too many PR "campaigns" are essentially tactical and based on guesswork. Objectives are fluffy and unmeasurable. Outcomes are couched in terms of media coverage, not impact or creation of value.
• Even major international PR firms with trumpeted commitments to measurement and evaluation regularly sidestep them for volume coverage.

But the one common factor from the placements was that all but the smallest operations use Gorkana. That company must be making a bomb.

Top website for Creative Enterprise Bureau

Excellent work from Bournemouth University's Creative Enterprise Bureau where students and staff work together on consultancy projects, and support research and learning.

www.cmcstudentshowcase.co.uk