Journal of Public Relations Education, Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018 [complete issue]

Public Relations Education
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Journal of
JPRE
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018
A publication of the Public Relations Division of AEJMC
ISSN 2573-1742

Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018
A publication of the Public Relations Division of AEJMC
ISSN 2573-1742
© Copyright 2018 AEJMC Public Relations Division
Journal of Public Relations Education
Editorial Staff
Emily S. Kinsky, West Texas A&M University, editor-in-chief
Tiffany Gallicano, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
senior associate editor
Lucinda Austin, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
associate editor
Chuck Lubbers, University of South Dakota, associate editor of reviews
Kathleen Stansberry, Elon University, web manager
Note from the Editor-in-Chief:
In this issue, you will find three research articles, all five of the top
AEJMC PR Division’s Great Ideas For Teaching presented in Washington,
D.C., and two reviews by Matt Kushin, which relate to one another on the
topic of teaching social media.
Volume 4, Issue 2 reflects an incredible amount of work done prior to
my editorship. The previous editor-in-chief, Chuck Lubbers, handled the
review assignments for each of the research articles for this issue prior to
me moving into this role on Jan. 1, 2018, and two of them were accepted
for publication under his tenure in 2017. The first acceptance letter I was
honored to send as the editor went to Drs. Brunner, Zarkin and Yates. A
special thanks to Chuck for his work with authors and reviewers to get us
ready for Volume 4.
Thank you to Tiffany, Lucinda, Chuck and Katie, who have invested
countless unpaid hours proofreading, editing and formatting this issue.
Without your service, this issue would not exist. Special thanks go to
Rebekah Grome, who also came to our aid with proofreading.

Table of Contents
Research Articles
1-20

21-50 What do Employers Want? What Should Faculty Teach? A
Content Analysis of Entry-Level Employment Ads in Public
Relations
Brigitta R. Brunner, Kim Zarkin, & Bradford L. Yates
51-86 Teaching Digital and Social Media Analytics: Exploring Best

Teaching Briefs
PRD GIFT Winners from AEJMC 2018
87-98 Building a Social Learning Flock: Using Twitter Chats to
Enhance Experiential Learning Across Universities
Amanda J. Weed, Karen Freberg, Emily S. Kinsky,
& Amber L. Hutchins
99-106 Diagnosing Health Campaigns: A Campaign Evaluation
Assignment
Laura E. Willis

Teaching Briefs (continued)
PRD GIFT Winners from AEJMC 2018
107-114 Teaching Trolling: Management and Strategy
Leslie Rasmussen
115-122 Sparking Creativity Through Purpose-Driven Storytelling
Chris Cooney
123-127 Looking in to see out: An Introspective Approach to Teaching
Ethics in PR
Regina Luttrell & Jamie Ward
Reviews
128-133 Social Media Campaigns: Strategies for Public Relations and
Marketing
Matthew J. Kushin
134-145 Meltwater Media Intelligence Software
Matthew J. Kushin

2018, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1-20
Millennial Learners and Faculty Credibility:
Exploring the Mediating Role of
Out-of-Class Communication
Carolyn Mae Kim, Biola University
Every generation experiences distinct events and develops unique
values. As Millennial learners enter classrooms, they bring with
them new views about education, learning and faculty/student
communication. This study explores the mediating role of out-of-
class communication (OCC) in relation to the historical dimensions
known to compose faculty credibility. Findings indicate that OCC
has a positive, mediating influence that enhances two of the three
key dimensions of credibility for faculty members: trustworthiness
and perceived caring. In addition, this study suggests that there
is a fourth potential dimension that composes the construct
of faculty credibility in the perspectives of Millennial learners:
sociability, which should be included alongside the three historical
dimensions scholars have used in previous studies.
Keywords: credibility; Millennial learners; out-of-class
communication; pedagogy; faculty communication
The landscape of higher education constantly shifts. Shaping
influences include increased faculty loads, diminished budgets, and limited
resources (Kim, 2015; Swanson, 2008). A lesser-examined element,
however, is the generational influence from Millennial learners. According
to Pew Research Center, Millennials were born between 1981 and 1997
(Fry, 2016). As these students have filled classrooms, the educational
environment and pedagogical approaches of faculty have pivoted to
address the unique needs of Millennials (Kim, 2017b). One particular area
of change is the emphasis on out-of-class communication (OCC) between
faculty members and students. Scholars suggest OCC is a significant
element for students, as it leads to increased learning and immediacy with
faculty (Jaasma & Koper, 2002). Formerly faculty were viewed as the
“sage on the stage” and espoused wisdom for students to gain. Now they

2
are viewed as a “guide on the side” and encouraged to facilitate a process
where students co-create a learning environment (Jaasma & Koper, 2002;
Kim, 2017a). These changes have resulted in a new paradigm for learners.
Due to these changes, re-examining the construct of faculty credibility in
light of Millennial learners, as well as examining the mediating influence
of OCC on faculty credibility, is significant.
Literature Review
In order to fully explore this issue, there are three significant
bodies of scholarship to examine: 1) generational identity; 2) faculty
credibility; 3) out-of-class communication.
Generational Identity
A growing focus among scholars has been the concept of how
individuals self-subscribe into social groups within organizational settings.
Scholars suggest social identities are self-designated by individuals “to
impose order on the social environment and make sense of who they are”
(Urick, 2012, p. 103). While there is significant focus in social identity
theory that looks at classifications related to constructs such as in-groups
and out-groups, race, and gender (Urick, 2012), there is an increasing
need to understand generational identities, which can be defined as “an
individual’s awareness of his or her membership in a generational group
and the significance of this group to the individual” (Urick, 2012, p. 103).
Each generation has distinct values and attitudes that manifest via
their interactions with others in organizational settings (Smola & Sutton,
2002). Kowske, Rasch, and Wiley (2010) suggest that Millennial learners
are connected due to the fact that they shared key common experiences at
significant development points which led to unique characteristics:
Millennials embody an age-based generational identity that has
grown through strong formative influences, including parental
styles that allowed them a strong voice in family decisions,
Kim

Vol. 4(2), 2018 Journal of Public Relations Education 3
nurtured their egos and self esteem, and encouraged cooperation
and team oriented behavior. (Gerhardt, 2016, p. 3)
Faculty have recognized these shaping influences in Millennial
learners and suggest that a shift is required to provide “nuanced
pedagogies” that will provide the strongest learning environment possible
(Miller-Ott, 2016; Wilson & Gerber, 2008, p. 29).
Sociability and Millennial learners. With this shift in pedagogies,
faculty now are tasked with creating learning environments that Millennial
learners will feel comfortable contributing to and voicing opinions in,
rather than approaching education as lecture-based experiences with
an instructor providing content for students to absorb (Gerhardt, 2016).
In short, this kind of engaged learning environment is “essential to a
successful experience for Millennials in the classroom, and this generation
has a strong need to be heard, recognized and included” (Gerhardt, 2016,
p. 4). Additionally, Millennial learners expect “more frequent, affirming
communication with supervisors compared to previous generations”
(Gerhardt, 2016, p. 4; Hill, 2002; Jokisaari & Nurmi, 2009; Martin, 2005).
In other words, Millennial learners place a high value on sociability, or the
opportunity to interact, connect, and engage with leaders. This value of
sociability is higher than previous generations and drastically influences
their satisfaction, motivation and commitment to environments (Gerhardt,
2016; Kim, 2017b). In some ways, the concept of sociability is closely
aligned with the idea of immediacy.
Immediacy. Immediacy has been defined as “those communication
behaviors that reduce perceived distance between people” (Thweatt
& McCroskey, 1996, p. 198). A number of scholars have explored the
influence of immediacy within the context of faculty/student relationships
(e.g., Christensen & Menzel, 1998). In the context of Millennial learners,
however, immediacy seems to incorporate concepts that were not as
prevalent for earlier generations. Thus, sociability, or the desire to have a
voice, receive feedback and interact, are key components for Millennial
learners’ perspective of immediacy. In the context of this paper, sociability
is used to represent immediacy viewed through the lens of Millennial

4
learners’ expectation of two-way communication, which includes gaining
a voice in decision making.
In summary, Millennial learners represent an age-based
generational identity that is prevalent in higher education today. Millennial
learners have a high focus on participatory culture, having their voice
heard, and developing immediacy with those who are leading them,
which are more distinct traits from previous generations of learners. It
is reasonable, therefore, to expect that these values would influence the
overall perspective of a faculty person’s credibility.
Faculty Credibility
Research indicates that faculty credibility plays a significant part
in the educational process (Kim, 2017b). For example, student perceptions
of faculty credibility influence evaluations of courses (Tindall & Waters,
2017). With the new wave of technology, scholars have also examined
how faculty use of social media within a course influences perceptions of
the faculty member’s credibility (DeGroot, Young, & VanSlette, 2015).
Examining the role of faculty credibility becomes more salient when
placed in the larger context of a theoretical framework for credibility.
The construct of credibility has a rich history in communication
scholarship. This construct is a composite of perspectives held by
receivers of communication toward a particular source, message or
medium (Newell & Goldsmith, 2001, p. 236). Credibility is a fluid
construct, as it is based on perceptions held by individuals instead of a set
state of being. Thus, scholars use dimensions that contribute to individuals
perceiving something as credible in order to understand the specific
components that enhance or diminish credibility (Kim & Brown, 2015).
Scholars examine the construct of credibility through specific categories
such as source credibility (Berlo, Lemert, & Mertz, 1969; Hovland, Janis,
& Kelley, 1953; McCroskey, 1966), media or medium credibility (Gaziano
& McGrath, 1986; Kiousis, 2001; Meyer, 1998; West, 1994) and message
credibility (Appelman & Sundar, 2016; Kim & Brown, 2015). Scholars
Kim

focusing on faculty credibility do so using the dimensions from source
credibility.
Historically, scholars suggested that the two primary dimensions
present in source credibility were trustworthiness and expertise
(Hovland & Weiss, 1951; Teven & McCroskey, 1997). Trustworthiness
is a dimension where receivers perceive that a source will keep
promises, fulfill obligations, and act in a manner consistent with what
is communicated. Expertise deals with competencies, qualifications,
and skills. While these two dimensions have consistently shown to be
significant in a receiver’s perceptions of a source’s credibility, there is a
third dimension that has recently been measured as a distinct dimension
for faculty credibility: perceived caring.
Perceived caring. The concept of goodwill has been present in the
construct of source credibility since its inception with Aristotle’s rhetoric
and discussion of ethos (Teven & McCroskey, 1997). Scholars suggest that
goodwill, caring, or affinity (all terms applied to the same concept) is the
perception of whether someone genuinely cares about an individual, which
is decidedly different from trustworthiness as an overall source (Kim,
2017a). Initially, scholars suggested that the reliability of measurements
related to goodwill were too highly correlated to the dimensions of
trustworthiness to truly be distinctly measurable. However, in 1997, Teven
and McCroskey created a scale that successfully measured “perceived
caring” as a distinct dimension, and thus they argued for the inclusion
of this as a third piece to consider in faculty credibility. The concept of
“perceived caring” (McCroskey, 1992; McCroskey & Teven 1999; Teven
& McCroskey, 1997) for this study is defined as immediacy, or the feeling
of closeness due to the perception of personal care.
While McCroskey and Teven (1999) argued for “perceived
caring” to represent the third and final dimension of source credibility,
this construct does not fully capture the new value Millennial learners
place on interaction. While perceived caring is based on perceptions of
the faculty member toward the student, sociability focuses on the two-
way communication and role of student voice within interactions. This

6
distinction is important to the overall construct of faculty credibility. Thus,
sociability is used to represent a fourth dimension to perceived source
credibility that will be unique to Millennial learners.
Lastly, in recent years, perceptions of faculty members’ credibility
and their interest in students has been a growing focus among scholars.
The concept of OCC is regularly identified as an influence in faculty/
student relationships and may provide a powerful mediating influence for
Millennial learners’ perspectives of credibility, particularly in relation to
out-of-class communication.
Out-of-Class Communication
What takes place inside of a classroom is only a partial view of
what influences student learning. Over the last several years, scholars have
increasingly focused on understanding out-of-class communication and
its impact to areas such as student motivation, student retention, student/
faculty trust, and immediacy (Jaasma & Koper, 2002; Kim, 2017a; Kim,
2017b; Terenzini, Pascarella, & Blimling, 1996).
Dimensions of OCC. Like many constructs that deal with
humans, OCC is multi-faceted and cannot be understood simply as a one-
dimensional activity. For example, OCC can be either formal or informal
communication between a student and faculty member that occurs outside
of the classroom. An example of formal OCC would be a student attending
office hours, whereas an example of informal OCC would be a student
sending a text to a professor (Furlich, 2016). Beyond classifying OCC
into formal or informal communication patterns, it is also evaluated on
criteria such as frequency of occurrences, length, content, and student
satisfaction (Jaasma & Koper, 1999). Building on these dimensions
are also the perspectives, values and ideals of the individuals involved,
including both faculty members and students.
Faculty behaviors and OCC. The role of an individual instructor
also has an impact to the theory of OCC. Teacher behaviors in a classroom
have been shown to influence students’ perceptions of quality, trust,
Kim

and immediacy, and, ultimately, a student’s decision to engage in OCC
with a specific faculty member (Faranda, 2015; Kim, 2017b). Just as
faculty behaviors can enhance learning, Thweatt and McCroskey (1996)
identified that faculty “misbehaviors” are those activities that faculty do
which result in interference to learning. Misbehaviors do not have to be
overtly intentional actions that interfere with students but rather may also
encompass more subtle activities, such as actions that communicate a
sense of distance or disinterest in student interaction (p. 199).
Understanding the multi-faceted nature of OCC theory, it is
logical to expect a connection between the perceptions students hold of
OCC and the perceptions they hold of faculty credibility. Scholars have
explored these two constructs and verified that they seem to be correlated
in some manner (Gerhardt, 2016; Kim, 2017a; Myers, 2004). In light of
this connection, examining the construct in light of Millennial learner
expectations is also important.
In light of the existing body of research, as well as the gap in
understanding Millennial learners’ perceptions of faculty credibility and
the mediating role of OCC, the following research questions guided this
study:
RQ1: In what ways does OCC influence Millennial learners’
perspectives of faculty credibility?
RQ2: In what ways does OCC enhance the perceived sociability
between Millennial learners and their faculty?
H1: The more students believe that faculty are A) more
trustworthy, B) more of an expert, and C) have a greater affinity for
students because of OCC, the more likely they are to rate faculty
higher on final evaluations.
H2: The more students believe that faculty are genuinely interested
in their lives because of OCC, the more likely they are to rate
faculty higher on final evaluations.
H3: The more students believe that faculty are A) more
trustworthy, B) more of an expert, C) have a greater affinity for
students, and D) possess a genuine interest in their individual life

8
because of OCC, the more likely they are to rate faculty higher on
final evaluations.
Method
To address these research questions, an online survey was
employed using Survey Monkey, a well-known survey platform.
With approval from the Institutional Review Board, participants were
recruited via email from a private university in the spring 2017 semester.
Participants were recruited from all majors and class ranks and were not
compensated for participation in the survey. In addition, participants could
opt out at any point or skip questions on the survey instrument.
Participant Demographics
A total of 289 qualified responses were collected. Of those who
reported gender, 29.9% (n = 86) were male and 69.9% (n = 201) were
female. Of those who identified class rank, 13.1% were freshmen (n =
38); 22.1% were sophomores (n = 81); 34.9% were juniors (n = 81); and
34.9% were seniors (n = 101). Participants represented all seven schools
at the university and 30 majors, including Public Relations, Journalism
and Integrated Media, Business Administration, Communication Studies,
Nursing, Intercultural Studies, Education, Cinema and Media Arts,
Biological Sciences, Anthropology, and others. By sampling a variety
of majors, participants were able to represent the diversity in degree
programs and student personalities, allowing for the results to be more
representative of an entire student body.
Instrument Design
In addition to the demographic information collected, participants
also responded to Likert-scale items related to credibility and OCC.
Three scale items related to previously identified dimensions of faculty
Kim

credibility (trust, expertise, and perceived caring) were used in the
survey instrument. Since scholars have previously identified that these
three dimensions are present and distinct within the construct of faculty
credibility, it was important to include them each as a scale item (Teven &
McCroskey, 1997). Each item asked participants to evaluate whether OCC
resulted in an increased perception of the particular dimension.
In addition, this study sought to measure the way in which OCC
would influence all three of these dimensions as a unified construct.
In order to evaluate the combined influence, a fourth scale item asked
students to respond to whether OCC would likely lead them to rate faculty
higher on evaluations. This is an important measurement as previous
research has shown that credibility is “positively correlated with students’
overall rating of the level of excellence of the course and instructor”
(Beatty & Zahn, 2009, p. 275). Knowing that previously scholars found
credibility to influence faculty evaluations, it was significant to measure
whether OCC had a positive, mediating impact on the evaluation as well.
Finally, in light of the new findings related to Millennial learners
(Gerhardt, 2016), this study incorporated a scale item related to sociability.
Participants rated whether they felt that faculty who engaged with them
through OCC “genuinely cared about their lives” more than faculty who
did not engage in OCC.
Analysis
RQ1: In what ways does OCC influence Millennial learners’
perspectives of faculty credibility?
In order to address the first research question, three Likert-scale
questions were used, based on the three commonly identified dimensions
of faculty credibility: trustworthiness, expertise and perceived caring.
These questions were posed to assess whether students who experienced
OCC were likely to have increased perceptions of specific dimensions
related to faculty credibility. Each scale question specifically asked

10
whether, in light of out-of-class communication, the participant perceived
trustworthiness, expertise, or perceived caring to be greater.
Trust
Out of the 287 participants who responded, 78.4% (n = 225) either
agreed or strongly agreed that they trust faculty who are willing to meet
with students outside of class more than faculty who do not meet with
students outside of class. The mean for this scale item was 4.02.
Expertise
Out of the 288 participants who responded, only 18.8% (n = 54)
either agreed or strongly agreed that faculty who are willing to meet with
students outside of class are more of an expert in their field than faculty
who do not meet with students outside of class. The mean for this scale
item was 2.54.
Perceived Caring
Out of the 288 participants who responded, 68.8% (n = 198)
either agreed or strongly agreed that faculty who are willing to meet with
students outside of class care more about students than faculty who do not
meet with students outside of class. The mean for this scale item was 3.72.
Internal Reliability of Scale
While these three dimensions have previously been shown to
influence faculty credibility within the classroom, it was important to
verify the internal consistency or reliability of these dimensions in relation
to the credibility scale and OCC. The Cronbach alpha for the scale was
.68, indicating a moderate internal reliability. In addition, none of the scale
items had a high correlation (> 0.60), indicating that they did, in fact,
Kim

measure distinct dimensions.
RQ2: In what ways does OCC enhance the perceived sociability
between Millennial learners and their faculty?
A majority of students (84.75%; n = 239) agreed or strongly agreed
with the statement that when a professor interacts with them outside of
class, it indicates faculty are genuinely interested in individual students’
lives. The mean for this Likert-scale item was 4.12.
H1: The more students believe that faculty are A) more trustworthy,
b) more of an expert, and C) have a greater affinity for students
because of OCC, the more likely they are to rate faculty higher on
final evaluations.
While 69.3% (n = 194) of the participants either agreed or
strongly agreed that they rate faculty higher on course evaluations if they
interact outside of class, it is useful to also examine the influence of the
dimensions of credibility on this scale item. This hypothesis was used
to examine the influence of OCC and credibility on perceived faculty
excellence.
This hypothesis was supported: F = 19.92, df = 3, p = .000. The
factor with the greatest influence on whether students were likely to rate
faculty higher on evaluations due to OCC was the belief that faculty who
are willing to meet outside of class care more about students (affinity).
H2: The more students believe that faculty are genuinely interested
in their lives because of OCC, the more likely they are to rate faculty
higher on final evaluations.
Hypothesis 2 was also was supported, F = 50.54, df = 1, p = .000.
H3: The more students believe that faculty are A) more trustworthy,

12
B) more of an expert, C) have a greater affinity for students, and D)
possess a genuine interest in their individual life because of OCC, the
more likely they are to rate faculty higher on final evaluations.
The third hypothesis was supported, as well, F = 22.94, df = 4, p =
.000.
Discussion
OCC and Faculty Credibility
While OCC has previously been shown to have a strong connection
with faculty credibility and student learning (Jaasma & Koper, 2002;
Kim, 2017a), this study leads to a more precise understanding of the way
OCC enhances credibility. Participants indicated that they are much more
likely to perceive faculty members as trustworthy and to perceive care
from faculty who engage in OCC. However, expertise is not a dimension
that seems to be particularly influenced through OCC. So, while OCC
does enhance students’ perceptions of credibility, it does so by increasing
perceptions of two of the three dimensions. While participants indicated
that OCC would have the greatest influence on trust, when it comes to
evaluating a professor, the perception that faculty who engage in OCC
care more about students seems to play the greatest role in evaluations.
This indicates that, while trust is built through OCC, when students
determine the overall excellence of a faculty person, perceived care plays
the most significant part. This study supports the idea that, while faculty
credibility is a fluid set of perceptions that is heavily influenced by in-
class behaviors, faculty who choose to engage in OCC have a significant
opportunity to build trust and illustrate care for students.
OCC and Faculty Sociability
In addition to previously identified measures, faculty sociability
Kim

seems to be a particularly poignant component to an educational
experience for Millennials (Gerhardt, 2016). In light of this, it was
important to understand how OCC may influence the perception of
sociability. Participants reported not only that OCC would significantly
influence their perception of a faculty person genuinely caring about their
lives, but also that this would result in higher evaluations of that faculty
member. This seems to indicate that, beyond simply perceived caring,
which is an existing dimension, the concept of being genuinely interested
in the individual student’s life is a shaping factor for student perceptions
of faculty. Recognizing that source credibility is a construct that evaluates
whether the perceptions of a receiver toward a source will result in
changed attitudes, opinions, or behaviors, it seems like there is strong
theoretical support to consider whether sociability should be a fourth
dimension in faculty credibility (Hovland et al., 1953). Findings indicate
that incorporating sociability alongside of the three existing dimensions
did not result in highly correlated variables and, as a unified construct,
provided a model that led to higher evaluations of a faculty person.
Theoretical Contributions
This study provides two significant theoretical contributions. First,
it expands the construct of faculty credibility in the context of Millennial
learners to suggest the inclusion of a fourth dimension: sociability.
Second, it advances the understanding of OCC as a pedagogical approach
by identifying it as a positive, mediating influence on the perception of
faculty credibility.
Faculty credibility theory. Historically, faculty seem to have a
larger focus on establishing expertise and trust with students. However,
recently, faculty have begun focusing on the dimension of perceived
caring. With Millennials filling classrooms, it is more important than ever
to understand what dimensions truly build their perceptions of credibility.
Beyond simply goodwill or affinity for students, Millennials are looking
for personalized interest and connection. They want a voice in their

14
educational process and to know their contributions are heard. In addition,
they want to have leaders, or, in this case, faculty, who are authentically
interested in their personhood. This study goes beyond calling for
sociability as something that Millennial learners value and instead
identifies it as something at the heart of their perspective toward faculty.
If faculty fail to illustrate sociability or a genuine interest and engagement
with Millennial learners, their credibility will be diminished. Furthermore,
this may result in misbehaviors (Thweatt & McCroskey, 1996) that
ultimately diminish learning and reduce the impact of what faculty set out
to do in the first place.
OCC mediating faculty credibility. A further contribution of
this study is the finding that not only are OCC and faculty credibility
interconnected, OCC actually mediates the perceptions of faculty
credibility in Millennial learners. Participants identified that they view
the trustworthiness, perceived care, and sociability of faculty members to
be greater when they engage in OCC compared to those who do not. In
other words, this study confirms that OCC is a direct mediator of increased
perceptions of credibility. Moving forward, faculty may benefit from
recognizing that OCC can play a pivotal role in pedagogical practices.
Those who do not purposefully engage in OCC may end up experiencing
students who perceive them as less credible, particularly when compared
against other faculty who have adopted this pedagogical approach.
Future Research and Limitations
This study has made two significant contributions to theoretical
frameworks. First, it has suggested that for Millennial learners, sociability
is a key dimension in faculty credibility. Second, it suggests that OCC is a
positive, mediating factor in developing faculty credibility. Future research
should explore these two constructs by examining it on a variety of college
campuses, as well as incorporating additional scale components that may
measure the validity of each of these elements in relation to the existing
concept of faculty credibility.
Kim

There were several limitations within this study. First, the study
took place at a private institution. It would be beneficial to expand the
participants and include a variety of institutional types to validate the
findings. Additionally, this study did not control for factors such as
previous interactions with highly social (or not social) faculty members
and the way those interactions might have influenced participants’
perceptions within this study. Finally, self-reported measures on behavioral
outcomes have the potential to differ from ways people might actually
respond. In light of this, while students reported certain behavioral
intentions, it would be beneficial to conduct additional research to see if
those self-reported concepts align with real-world application.
Conclusion
While source credibility has a rich history of scholarship, the
presence of Millennial learners suggests that the current approach to
faculty credibility needs to be adjusted. Their values are distinct compared
to other generations and, thus, their perspectives on what makes faculty
members credible are equally distinct. While trustworthiness, expertise,
and perceived caring continue to be important, the addition of sociability
is something that changes the current model. Additionally, OCC is more
than simply an enhancement to student motivation or learning. It, in
fact, enhances perceptions of credibility by bolstering the dimensions of
trustworthiness, perceived care, and sociability. Thus, engaging in OCC
seems to be more than a pedagogical approach; this study indicates it may
be a crucial component to faculty that hope to have a meaningful influence
on Millennial learners.
References
Appelman, A., & Sundar, S. S. (2016). Measuring message credibility:
Construction and validation of an exclusive scale. Journalism
& Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(1), 59-79. https://doi.

16
org/10.1177/1077699015606057
Beatty, M. J., & Zahn, C. J. (1990). Are student ratings of communication
instructors due to “easy” grading practices?: An analysis
of teacher credibility and student-reported performance
levels. Communication Education, 39, 275-282. https://doi.
org/10.1080/03634529009378809
Berlo, D. K., Lemert, J. B., & Mertz, R. J. (1969). Dimensions for
evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 33, 563- 576. https://doi.org/10.1086/267745
Christensen, L. J., & Menzel, K. E. (1998). The linear relationship
between student reports of teacher immediacy behaviors and
perceptions of state motivations, and of cognitive, affective, and
behavioral learning. Communication Education, 4, 82-90. https://
doi.org/10.1080/03634529809379112
DeGroot, J. M., Young, V. J., & VanSlette, S. H. (2015). Twitter use
and its effect on student perception of instructor credibility.
Communication Education, 64, 419-437. https://doi.org/10.1080/0
3634523.2015.1014386
Faranda, W. T. (2015). The effects of instructor service performance,
immediacy, and trust on student–faculty out-of-class
communication. Marketing Education Review, 25, 83-97. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2015.1029853
Fry, R. (2016, April, 25). Millennials overtake Baby Boomers as
America’s largest generation. Pew Research Center. Retrieved
from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/25/
millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/
Furlich, S. (2016). Understanding instructor nonverbal immediacy,
verbal immediacy, and student motivation at a small liberal arts
university. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
16(3), 11-22. doi: 10.14434/josotl.v16i3.19284
Gaziano, C. & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the concept of
credibility. Journalism Quarterly, 63, 451-462. https://doi.
org/10.1177/107769908606300301
Kim

Gerhardt, M. W. (2016). The importance of being…social? Instructor
credibility and the Millennials. Studies in Higher Education, 41,
1533-1547. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.981516
Hill, R. P. (2002). Managing across generations in the 21st century:
Important lessons from the ivory trenches. Journal of Management
Inquiry, 11(1), 60-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492602111020
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communications and
persuasion: Psychological studies in opinion change. New Haven,
CT: Yale University.
Hovland, C. & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on
communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-
650. https://doi.org/10.1086/266350
Jaasma, M. & Koper, R. (2002). Out-of-Class communication between
female and male students and faculty: The relationship to
student perceptions of instructor immediacy. Women’s Studies in
Communication, 25, 119-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.20
02.10162443
Jokisaari, M., & Nurmi, J. E. (2009). Change in newcomers’ supervisor
support and socialization outcomes after organizational entry.
Academy of Management Journal, 52, 527-544. https://doi.
org/10.5465/amj.2009.41330971
Kim, C. (2017a). Out-of-class communication and personal learning
environments via social media: Students’ perceptions and
implications for faculty social media use. Teaching Journalism &
Mass Communication, 7(1), 62-76. Retrieved from http://aejmc.us/
spig/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2017/01/tjmc-w17-kim.pdf
Kim, C. (2017b). Millennial learners and out-of-class communication:
Expectations and perceptions. Teaching Journalism and Mass
Communication, 7(2), 23-31. Retrieved from http://aejmc.us/spig/
wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2017/11/tjmc-2017-7-2-kim.pdf
Kim, C. (2015). Pedagogical approaches to student-run PR firms using
service learning: A case study. Teaching Journalism & Mass
Communication, 5(1), 57-68. Retrieved from http://aejmc.us/wp-

18
content/uploads/sites/9/2015/07/tjmc-s15-kim.pdf
Kim, C., & Brown, W. (2015). Conceptualizing credibility in social
media spaces of public relations. Public Relations Journal, 9(4).
Retrieved from https://prjournal.instituteforpr.org/wp-content/
uploads/2016v09n04KimBrown.pdf
Kiousis, S. (2001). Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media
credibility in the information age. Mass Communication
and Society, 4, 381-403. https://doi.org/10.1207/
S15327825MCS0404_4
Kowske, B. J., Rasch, R., & Wiley, J. (2010). Millennials’ (lack of)
attitude problem: An empirical examination of generational effects
on work attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 265-
279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9171-8
Martin, C. A. (2005). From high maintenance to high productivity:
What managers need to know about Generation Y.
Industrial and Commercial Training, 37, 39-44. https://doi.
org/10.1108/00197850510699965
McCroskey, J. C. (1992). Reliability and validity of the willingness to
communicate scale. Communication Quarterly, 40, 16-25. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01463379209369817
McCroskey, J. C. (1966). Scales for the measurement of
ethos. Speech Monographs, 33, 65-72. https://doi.
org/10.1080/03637756609375482
McCroskey, J. C., & Teven, J. J. (1999). Goodwill: A reexamination of the
construct and its measurement. Communications Monographs, 66,
90-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759909376464
Meyer, P. (1988). Defining and measuring credibility of newspapers:
Developing an index. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 567-572. https://
doi.org/10.1177/107769908806500301
Miller-Ott, A. E. (2016). Helicopter parenting, family communication
patterns, and out-of-class communication with college instructors.
Communication Research Reports, 33, 173-176. https://doi.org/10.
1080/08824096.2016.1154836
Kim

Myers, S. A. (2004). The relationship between perceived instructor
credibility and college student in-class and out-of-class
communication. Communication Reports, 17, 129-137. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08934210409389382
Newell, S. J., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2001). The development of a
scale to measure perceived corporate credibility. Journal of
Business Research, 52, 235-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-
2963(99)00104-6
Smola, K. W., & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational differences: Revisiting
generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 23, 363-382. https://doi.org/10.1002/
job.147
Swanson, J. (2008). Training future PR practitioners and serving the
community through a “learn by doing” undergraduate university
curriculum. Public Relations Quarterly, 52(3), 15-20.
Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E. T., & Blimling, G. S. (1996). Students’ out-
of-class experiences and their influence on learning and cognitive
development: A literature review. Journal of College Student
Development, 37, 149-162.
Teven, J. J., & McCroskey, J. C. (1997). The relationship of
perceived teacher caring with student learning and teacher
evaluation. Communication Education, 46, 1-9. https://doi.
org/10.1080/03634529709379069
Thweatt, K. S., & McCroskey, J. C. (1996). Teacher nonimmediacy
and misbehavior: Unintentional negative communication.
Communication Research Reports, 13, 198–204. https://doi.
org/10.1080/08824099609362087
Tindall, N. T., & Waters, R. D. (2017). Does gender and professional
experience influence students’ perceptions of professors?
Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 72, 52-67. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1077695815613932
Urick, M. J. (2012). Exploring generational identity: A multiparadigm
approach. Journal of Business Diversity, 12, 103-115.

20
West, M. D. (1994). Validating a scale of the measurement of credibility: A
covariance structure modeling approach. Journalism Quarterly, 71,
159-168. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909407100115
Wilson, M., & Gerber, L. E. (2008). How generational theory can improve
teaching: Strategies for working with the “millennials.” Currents
in Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 29-44. Retrieved from https://pdfs.
semanticscholar.org/4aec/
f98b4cd5c7dad19e27f1bd85d5befd3e3121.pdf
Kim
Editorial Record: Original draft submitted to the AEJMC-PRD Paper Competition by
April 1, 2017. Selected as a Top Teaching Paper. Submitted to JPRE November 27, 2017.
Final edits completed July 13, 2018. First published online August 17, 2018.

What do Employers Want? What Should
Faculty Teach? A Content Analysis of
Entry-Level Employment Ads
in Public Relations
Brigitta R. Brunner
1
, Auburn University
Kim Zarkin, Westminster College
Bradford L. Yates, University of West Georgia
Abstract
Publicrelationsremainsapopularmajorattheundergraduatelevel;
faculty want to provide the best educational experience for their
students to help them secure jobs. This research explores entry-
level employment ads in public relations as a way to understand
what skills employers want and expect new graduates to have. A
content analysis of 199 entry-level employment ads posted to the
Public Relations Society of America Job Center was conducted.
Major findings include the need for graduates to possess not
only hard skills such as writing but also soft skill abilities, such
as time management, deadline orientation, and collaboration. In
addition, it was found that few job ads specifically request that
future employees have a public relations degree. Finally, although
many of the ads that were examined call for a future employee to
have the skills traditionally associated with the technician role, the
authors suggest a new practitioner role has come into existence.
This role, which bridges the technician and manager, is called
the manager’s apprentice, and it requires knowledge of tactics
and writing, as well as familiarity with measurement, social media
strategy, and data collection.
Keywords: competition; public relations; employment ads; hard
skills; soft skills; manager’s apprentice
Public relations programs educate students with specific careers
in mind and often make curricular decisions according to perceptions of
industry best practices. To stay informed about best practices, programs
2018, Vol. 4, No. 2, 21-50
1
We would like to thank our research assistants, Stephanie Held and
Natalie Sands, for their help with this project.

22
often form professional advisory boards and urge faculty to be active in
professional networking organizations, read trade publications, and follow
industry blogs. Students are encouraged, if not required, to complete
internships, and assessment reports may include employment data as a
marker of meeting learning goals. Regardless of methods, staying current
with what students will need to be successful is often a high priority
for programs large and small. As the industry rapidly changes due to
technology and other factors, not only are practitioners hard at work to
develop ways to implement these changes into their strategies and tactics,
but educators, too, are working to redevelop course content and topics
(Commission on Public Relations Education, 2015).
Graduates entering the field of public relations come from a wide
range of programs. Some have entire majors devoted specifically to public
relations (e.g., Syracuse University, University of Florida, University of
Georgia); some have tracks or emphases focused on public relations (e.g.,
Austin Peay State University, East Tennessee State University, Fisher
College). Still, others have just a few course options within a broad-
based communication degree (e.g., Mercer University, Southern Arkansas
University, Troy University).
Graduates from all of these types of programs commonly seek
the same entry-level positions in public relations. Despite program
size or accreditation status, it is important for all to understand what
employers want and expect in new employees. This research explores
entry-level employment ads in public relations as a way to understand
which skills employers want and expect new graduates to have. A content
analysis of entry-level employment ads can provide insight into what the
industry desires in a new employee, which could be useful as programs
contemplate curriculum for public relations classes and programs.
Employee Roles
When the topics of employment and job opportunities are
introduced to students, discussions of the roles of technician and manager
Brunner, Zarkin, & Yates

often ensue based upon the content of introductory public relations texts
(e.g., Wilcox, Cameron, & Reber, 2015). Research about public relations
roles was first conducted by Broom and Smith (1979) and was refined and
expanded with the work of Broom (1982), Dozier (1983), and Dozier and
Broom (2006). Broom and Smith (1979) examined the tasks undertaken by
practitioners, and they developed five common roles: the technical service
provider, the expert prescriber, the communication process facilitator, the
problem solving/task facilitator, and acceptant legitimizer. Broom (1982)
simplified these concepts, reducing the roles to four and renaming them
the expert prescriber, the communication facilitator, the problem-solving
process facilitator, and the communication technician. Dozier (1983) and
Dozier and Broom (1995) further refined this work, noting how closely
connected the expert prescriber, the communication facilitator, and the
problem-solving process facilitator roles were. Because of this interrelated
nature, Dozier collapsed the three roles into one, simply calling it the
manager role.
Managers are part of the decision-making process and use research
and measurement to develop strategies (Dozier, 1981; 1984; 1992). In
contrast, technicians perform tasks, such as writing press releases, and
work to complete tasks assigned by managers and clients; their work does
not include strategy or problem solving (Broom & Smith, 1979; Dozier,
1992). While the manager and technician roles have been the standard
since their inception more than 30 years ago, there is some research that
suggests there could be new roles emerging (Diga & Kelleher, 2009; Neill
& Lee, 2016; Vieira & Grantham, 2014). However, current textbooks
rely on the dichotomy of the manager and the technician when explaining
public relations roles.
Employee Skills, Knowledge, and Abilities
In conjunction with a discussion of the manager and technician
roles, many textbooks also spell out the skills and abilities that are
desirable in entry-level and advanced employees (e.g., Wilcox, Cameron,

24
& Reber, 2015). Public relations educators and practitioners have worked
together in summits, in meetings, and in the writing of reports in order to
develop students’ key skills and abilities through curricula that will endure
for decades (Commission on Public Relations Education, 2018). The first
comprehensive report of the Commission on Public Relations Education
was published in 1975; updates were made in 1987, 1999, 2006, 2010,
2012, and 2018 (Commission on Public Relations Education, 2018).
The latest report of the Commission, Fast Forward: Foundations
and Future State. Educators and Practitioners, was released in April
2018. Like the reports before it, the report states that one of the major
skills entry-level employees need is the ability to write. The new report,
however, goes beyond suggesting that today’s public relations graduates
be proficient writers by stating that they also need to be versatile and
adaptable writers. The authors also note the importance of research,
theory, ethics, and technology as necessary knowledge for today’s public
relations practitioner.
The discussion of what makes for the ideal public relations
program (i.e., one that provides students with the skills necessary for
employment) has been ongoing. Historically, many practitioners have
cautioned that public relations educators ignore the input of those hiring
graduates in order to meet the demands of students and administrators
(Wright & VanSlyke Turk, 1990). The authors of the 2015 Summit of the
Commission on Public Relations suggested that educators need to do a
better job of helping practitioners to understand the way universities work,
resource limitations, and the intricacies of accreditation, certification, and
core coursework requirements.
Some practitioners may believe recent graduates are not ready
for the workforce. For example, Todd (2009) found PRSSA professional
advisors did not believe educators were adequately preparing students
for current industry and practice standards. In fact, these professionals
suggested public relations curricula were out of touch and needed to put
more emphasis on new technologies, technician skills, and entry-level
positions. Further, they stated entry-level employees still lacked good

writing skills and suggested more practitioners should be involved in
assessing student work. Todd called for more engagement of academics
and professionals to ensure students were gaining the knowledge and skills
required in the workforce.
Similarly, the most recent Commission on Public Relations
Education (2018) report suggests, “There are gaps, often significant,
between what employers want, what they think new hires have – and
educators often tend to rate students higher than do practitioners” (p. 15).
Other research has also compared and contrasted what academics and
practitioners believe about public relations education. DiStaso, Stacks,
and Botan (2009) surveyed professionals and academics via PRSA, the
Association of Women in Communication, Page Society, Association
for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, International
Communication Association and National Communication Association
to better understand the current state of public relations education. While
both academics and professionals agreed that writing skills, especially
those necessary to write press releases, are essential for entry-level
employees, such skills often were not possessed by applicants. Both
groups also believed it was important for entry-level employees to possess
soft skills.
Hard skills can be thought of as those linked to the technical
abilities and knowledge of the field (Robles, 2012; Woodward, Sendall,
& Ceccucci, 2010). In PR, hard skills would include knowledge of
writing, data analysis, social media, and measurement. Soft skills are
characteristics, outlooks, and actions that help one to be proficient when
working with people, communication, and projects (Robles, 2012;
Woodward, Sendall, & Ceccucci, 2010). Robles (2012) suggested that
“soft skills are the intangible, nontechnical, personality-specific skills that
determine one’s strengths as a leader, facilitator, mediator, and negotiator”
(p. 457). In public relations, soft skills are needed for improved
communication, effective project management, and collaborative work
relationships.
DiStaso et al. (2009) found professionals and academics agreed

26
that entry-level employees should have skills, both hard and soft,
including good attitudes, initiative, critical thinking and problem-solving
skills, organization skills, interpersonal skills, flexibility, knowledge of
media, knowledge of current events, creativity, the ability to take criticism,
and understanding of basic business practices. Again, the findings showed
that entry-level employees are sorely lacking in all the above skills,
but they were rated especially low for knowledge of current events and
business practices. Similarly, Auger and Cho (2016) found public relations
programs are still lacking in requirements for business courses in the
curriculum. These findings suggest that educators need to place greater
emphasis on these areas and types of knowledge.
In 2010, PRSA leaders wrote a white paper based on the thoughts
of delegates of the Leadership Assembly. This work identified what
industry and educational leaders believed would be the most important
skills and knowledge for future practitioners (Barber et al., 2012). Again
in the white paper, leaders called for knowledge of business practice
and literacy such as an understanding of financials, management, and
international experience. While noting a decline in writing skills, these
leaders said the core skills and competencies or hard skills of the field
were still relevant and necessary. Among other skills, the group noted
the need for technologic understanding, as well as emotional intelligence
and knowledge of social sciences such as psychology, sociology, and
anthropology. Adaptability, creativity, and understanding of design
principles were also mentioned as necessary skills, especially when
technology is involved (Jacques, 2015). Similarly, some stated that
students should be skilled in public speaking and interpersonal relationship
skills because executives will expect them to have those abilities (Jacques,
2012).
In May 2015, the Commission on Public Relations Education held
a summit with leading public relations practitioners to better determine
what the ideal public relations education standards should look like
(Commission on Public Relations Education, 2015). Practitioners at the
Summit helped to develop a description of the ideal entry-level public

relations practitioner. While the description included knowledge derived
from experience and classroom knowledge, it also included soft skills.
For example, certain personal traits, integrity, accountability, and a sense
of ethics were deemed necessary. In addition, these participants said
entry-level practitioners need to be driven and have intellectual curiosity,
making them lifelong learners. Being able to collaborate, to listen well, to
adapt, and to be sensitive to cultural and individual differences were noted
as important interpersonal skills for entry-level practitioners. Additionally,
the Summit participants also said self-awareness and assertiveness
were key. The practitioners also listed essential skills for entry-level
practitioners, many of which seemed managerial in origin. For example,
solving problems, conducting and analyzing data, and making connections
between how the world works and how those things affect the clients were
among this list of essential skills.
Finally, the group also identified essential knowledge for entry-
level public relations practitioners. Among the items mentioned were
knowing the role and value of public relations and being able to explain
this information to a client or employer; understanding how to measure
public relations outputs; interpreting data and understanding analytics;
knowing communication and public relations theories; understanding
cross cultural and global communication and sensitivities; understanding
how business works and how business acumen affects public relations,
as well as knowing “the skills that are new to the PR professional, the
things older professionals don’t even know yet” (Commission on Public
Relations Education, 2015, p. 8.) To sum it up, one COO of a global
corporation said the entry-level practitioner should: “Know how to write
and speak. Know how to run a project and work as part of a team. Think
globally” (Commission on Public Relations Education, 2015, p. 9). These
recommendations are a tall order for both educators and students.
Research in Public Relations Using Employment Ads
Little research has examined job descriptions and the offerings

28
of public relations programs. Auger and Cho (2016) conducted a content
analysis comparing the courses taught within public relations curricula
to descriptions for entry- and advanced-level public relations jobs. Their
findings suggest that employers wanted to hire graduates with the ability
to compose and author materials, the ability to speak in front of people,
the ability to work with journalists, the ability to use emerging channels of
communication, and the ability to develop tactics and strategies. Positions
for people more advanced in their careers were more likely to require
interpersonal, fundraising, research/measurement, and crisis knowledge,
while entry-level ones had more emphasis on knowledge of visual
communication.
Auger and Cho (2016) concluded that generally speaking, the
current public relations course offerings were not only meeting industry
needs for entry-level positions but also giving students the foundation
they needed for advanced positions by including ethics, law, research,
and globalization in course content. These findings suggest that a strong
relationship has been built between public relations educators and
practitioners (Auger & Cho, 2016). However, their analysis also stated that
while educators are adequately preparing students for crisis, fundraising,
and basic public relations skills, they still fall short when it comes to social
and new media.
Auger and Cho (2016) stated some students are aware of this
shortcoming, as evidenced by Di Staso et al. (2009), who found that public
relations students feel least prepared for working with new technology,
design, and layout upon graduation. However, Auger and Cho argued that
this perceived knowledge gap regarding new and social media may be
temporary because course curricula are evolving, and many professors
are incorporating social media into existing course content even if stand-
alone social media courses are not listed on curriculum sheets. Due to
this shifting landscape, it seems there is still room for improving public
relations curricula when considering industry requirements, and it is
appropriate to investigate it further. This study will expand upon the
work of Auger and Cho by further investigating the skill sets sought by

entry-level employers. While Auger and Cho investigated a similar area
of research, they looked at both curricula and employment ads; however,
we looked only from the practitioner standpoint of what skills are being
sought from our graduates.
Research Questions
When faculty approach curriculum planning, there are always
questions about what new skills public relations professionals will need
to be competitive. Professional advisory boards and trade publications
provide some insight. However, a systematic approach to examining entry-
level employment ads in public relations may answer questions about
specific skills that are being requested of new graduates, which furthers
the work of Auger and Cho (2016), and is needed to better understand
how and if the PR curriculum is keeping up with the needs of the
practice. Based on the literature and foundational framework examined,
the researchers developed the following research questions to gain more
insight into what entry-level public relations employment ads requested of
applicants in terms of education and skills.
RQ1: What degrees are sought in entry-level employment ads in
public relations?
RQ2: What knowledge/skills related to writing formats are sought
in entry-level employment ads in public relations?
RQ3: What knowledge/skills related to social media platforms are
sought in entry-level employment ads in public relations?
RQ4: What knowledge/skills related to design tools are sought in
entry-level employment ads in public relations?
RQ5: What managerial knowledge/skills are sought in entry-level
employment ads in public relations?
RQ6: What soft skills are sought in entry-level employment ads in
public relations?

30

Methods
Sampling
For a sampling frame of job skills and requirements, job
postings from the Public Relations Society of America Job Center were
gathered via a convenience sample. The sample included 199 entry-
level employment ads posted between October 28 and November 18,
2015. Entry-level is defined here as requiring fewer than three years of
experience. The unit of analysis was the job description of the PRSA Job
Center website.
The PRSA Job Center website allows users to search its job
postings based on “Organizational Setting.” The settings include the
following: 1) corporation, 2) educational institution, 3) government/
military, 4) independent practitioner, 5) nonprofit/association, 6)
professional services, 7) public relations agency/consultancy, 8) recruiter,
and 9) other. Our sample had the following distribution: corporation
(n = 78), educational institution (n = 18), government/military (n =
3), independent practitioner (n = 0), nonprofit/association (n = 33),
professional services (n = 13), public relations agency/consultancy (n =
28), recruiter (n = 9), and other (n = 16).
Measures and Coding Procedure
The coding sheet was developed based on the literature
surrounding public relations education, practitioner wants/needs for entry-
level employees, and soft skills. The coding sheet was used to assess the
educational level, fields of study, the types of writing experience desired,
soft skills, social media platforms, and design programs requested in
each of the ads. The instrument consisted of 58 questions and was broken
into sections to help guide the coders. For example, one section asked
the coders to look for and code basic information about the job such as
organization type and degree type. The other sections of the instrument

asked the coders to inventory information about writing formats and skills,
social media platforms and skills, design tools and skills, managerial
skills, and soft skills listed in each ad.
Intercoder Reliability
The authors held two training sessions with two research assistants
(one undergraduate and one graduate student) to review the coding
instrument and code book. After these sessions, the two trained research
assistants coded independently. At first, the research assistants conducted
a pretest of 10% of the research sample to test the coding instrument for
reliability. Discussion was used as a means to clarify inconsistencies.
Using Holsti’s formula, the initial intercoder reliability was found to be
80.68%. Although this intercoder reliability falls within an acceptable
range, the researchers refined the coding sheet and with these changes,
the intercoder reliability rose to 89.2% (Stacks, 2016). One significant
change between the pretest instrument and final coding sheet involved
the structure of the skill lists. The first draft of the coding sheet presented
the skill sections as long checklists, and because of that length, the coders
were missing key terms. In response to that issue, the coding tool was
revised, so the coders had to state whether each skill was listed in the ad
with a simple yes or no format. By forcing the coders to look through the
ad for each individual term, intercoder reliability was increased.
Results
RQ1: What degrees are sought in entry-level employment ads in
public relations?
Nearly three-quarters of the employment ads listed the bachelor’s
degree as preferred or required (see Table 1). The ads were fairly open
as to the specific majors requested. Forty percent of the ads made no
mention of majors, with another six percent just saying “related field.”

32
Communication (42%), journalism (27%), and marketing (34%) were the
most commonly mentioned degrees. Public relations (17%) and English
(14%) also appeared occasionally.
Degree N Percentage
Master’s degree
required/preferred
4 3%
Bachelor’s degree
required/preferred
131 74%
Associate’s
degree required/
preferred
8 5%
Some college
required
11 6%
No reference
to educational
requirements
18 10%
Specifically says
no education
needed
5 3%
Table 1
Degrees Sought in Entry-Level Employment Ads
R2: What knowledge/skills related to writing formats are sought in
Writing skills are consistently valued highly across many
professions. Public relations is a writing-centric profession. Thus, it is no
surprise that 70% of the ads listed writing well as a key to success. It is
probably more surprising that 30% of the ads didn’t mention writing.
Public relations is not the same profession it was years ago.
Therefore, the authors wanted to pay particular attention to any specific

Writing
Skill
N % Writing Skill N %
General
written skills
124 70% Proposals 10 6%
Web
content
94 53% Speeches 10 6%
Promotional
materials
(including
brochures)
89 50% Ad copy 8 5%
Social
media
83 47% Crisis plans 7 4%
Strategic
plans
67 38% Media kits 7 4%
Press/news
releases
48 27% Fact sheets 6 3%
Newsletters 40 23% Surveys 5 3%
Feature
stories/
releases
39 22% Media
advisories
3 2%
Blogs 27 15% Video news
releases
3 2%
Annual
reports
26 15% Memos 2 1%
Business
plans
23 13% Backgrounders 1 .06%
Scripts 15 9% Broadcast copy 1 .06%
Table 2
Writing Formats and Skills Sought in Entry-Level Employment Ads

34
forms of writing mentioned in the ads as a way to understand what
types of assignments might best position graduates for the job market.
Table 2 shows how often 22 writing pieces appeared in the entry-level
employment ads.
There were far fewer specific writing forms mentioned in the
ads than might be expected. Only promotional materials (including
brochures) and web content were found at least 50% of the time. Social
media appeared in 47% of the ads. Strategic plans (38%) and press
releases (27%) were also among those items more frequently mentioned.
A common writing form that was not coded for originally, but seemed to
come up frequently in the “other” category, was the newsletter. Through
additional coding, the authors found newsletters mentioned in 23% of the
ads.
RQ3: What knowledge/skills related to social media platforms are
sought in entry-level employment ads in public relations?
Social media appeared in about half the entry-level employment
ads, but Table 3 shows that specific platforms were not often mentioned;
however, Facebook and Twitter were noted in 14% of the ads. Social
media management tools such as Hootsuite or TweetDeck rarely appear,
with 93% of the ads making no mention of social media management tools
at all. Similarly, social media analytic tools such as Google Analytics were
also not common, with 84% of the ads making no mentions. Therefore,
it is clear that while social media is a common expectation for new
graduates, the specific tools are not being mentioned all that much.
Although Microsoft Office tools are not social media, this research
did code for whether they appeared in the ads after the coders mentioned
how frequently they were seeing it in the test batch. About half the ads
mention Office and the specific tools of Word, PowerPoint, and Excel.
RQ4: What knowledge/skills related to design tools are sought in


The Adobe Creative Cloud and the specific tools included were
mentioned in 28% of the ads. Photoshop (18%), InDesign (13%) and
Illustrator (10%) were the most commonly mentioned tools. The research
also looked at web design tools and platforms. Only 20% of the ads made
any mention of either content management systems, such as WordPress, or
HTML or other coding.
RQ5: What managerial knowledge/skills are sought in entry-level
employment ads in public relations?
This research also looked at a wide array of managerial skills.
Social Media N Percentage
Social media mentioned broadly 57 32%
Facebook 25 14%
Twitter 22 12%
LinkedIn 12 7%
YouTube 12 7%
Instagram 4 2%
Pinterest 3 2%
Snapchat 0 0%
Tumblr 0 0%
Vimeo 0 0%
No social media mentioned 95 54%
Table 3
Social Media Platform Experience Sought in Entry-Level Employment Ads

36 Brunner, Zarkin, & Yates
Skill N Percentage
Project management 118 67%
Budgeting &
scheduling
48 27%
Event planning 34 19%
Office management 3 2%
Table 4
Management Skills Sought in Entry-Level Employment Ads
Table 4 shows specific skills mentioned in the ads, including budgeting
(27%) and event planning (19%). Project management appeared in
67% of the ads, speaking to the importance of developing that skill in
undergraduates. Office management skills were only mentioned in 2% of
the ads examined.
RQ6: What soft skills are sought in entry-level employment ads in
public relations?
Table 5 shows a wide variety of soft skills coded. Being
collaborative and collegial topped the list, appearing in 67% of the ads.
Organizational skills such as being able to multitask appeared in 59% of
the ads. The other two most commonly mentioned skills are closely related
to the first two. Thirty-nine percent of the ads specifically mentioned
relationship-building and/or time management/managing deadlines. Other
frequently mentioned soft skills in the “other” category were editing and
proofreading, customer service, and analytical skills. Oral communication
skills also showed up with similar regularity, suggesting the need for
students to work on oral presentations of all kinds.
Discussion
While it is not surprising that entry-level positions require a college

Soft Skills N %
Collaborative, collegial, enthusiasm, friendly,
interpersonal skills, personable, positive attitude,
team player, teamwork
118 67%
Communication skills/oral - including public
speaking, presentations
117 66%
Organization skills, fast-paced environment (able
to handle), juggling multiple projects, multi-tasker,
prioritize (able to)
104 59%
Deadlines (able to meet) or time management 69 39%
Relationship building and maintaining 69 39%
Goal oriented, sets goals, accomplishes goals,
self-starter, self-motivated
62 35%
Detail-oriented 51 29%
Creativity 47 27%
Knowledge of the particular industry 47 27%
Problem solver, solutions (able to find) 24 14%
Independent thinker, intellectual curiosity 17 10%
News judgment or understanding of journalism 12 7%
Stress (able to deal with) 12 7%
Ethical behavior 7 4%
Constructive criticism (able to handle) 5 3%
Table 5
Soft Skills Sought in Entry-Level Employment Ads
degree, it might seem odd to some that the ads in this sample were more
likely to request a communication, journalism, or marketing degree than
one in public relations. These findings support curricula that encourage
students to enroll in a variety of courses across disciplines and to seek

38
minors that will complement the knowledge and skills of their chosen
major. These findings also raise questions about how well PR educators
are communicating the value of the PR-specific degree. Public relations
industry leaders have been cautioning academics and practitioners about
the dangers of having people not trained in public relations working in the
field since 1973 (Commission on Public Relations Education, 2018).
As has been noted, practitioners are concerned with entry-level
graduates’ writing abilities. Perhaps this frustration is exacerbated by
practitioners not insisting that job ads specifically require a degree in
public relations, as well as by the employment of people who do not have
classwork or degrees in public relations. According to DiStaso, Cornish,
Sheffer, and Dodd (2018), “Many practitioners do not require a degree
in public relations when hiring for entry-level positions. This means that
the field is flooded with students who went to programs lacking a strong
writing focus, no or a low barrier to entry to major, and students who did
not get a public relations degree but want to work in the field” (p. 42).
Perhaps inviting practitioners to be more involved in education
through guest speaking engagements, student-run firm advising, and
advisory boards would help change this situation (Commission on Public
Relations Education, 2018). If practitioners are more involved with
public relations educators, they would better understand what is taught
in the curriculum, and misconceptions about what is being taught could
be cleared up more readily (Commission on Public Relations Education,
2015). Perhaps with greater practitioner involvement and knowledge
of what the PR curriculum includes, we will see more ads specifically
requesting applicants who have an undergraduate degree in PR, which
ultimately helps not only academics but the profession as well.
The examination of the ads in this sample demonstrate that entry-
level jobs are still written with a technician in mind. Technicians are
employees who typically do not make decisions on the management level,
but instead develop communication tactics and carry out the decisions and
policies made by others (Broom & Dozier, 1986; Dozier, 1984). Similar
to what other researchers have found, this research also finds writing is

still the most highly desired skill for entry-level practitioners (Auger &
Cho, 2016; DiStaso et al., 2009; Jacques, 2012; Jacques, 2015); however,
the lesson from RQ2 is that the ads are far less specific about the types
of writing needed in these entry-level jobs than might be expected. One
possibility is public relations formats are perceived to change so rapidly
that specific forms of writing may quickly become obsolete. Yet other
possibilities are that the ads are written with the skill set of the person who
last held the position in mind, or the ads are written by human resources
personnel who may not be as familiar with the field.
The advent of social media as a significant part of an entry-level
technician’s day puts practitioners and academics in a unique situation not
only to need to be constantly on top of the latest trends but also to find
interesting ways to use the latest platforms to engage publics. Although
most of the ads reviewed for this study did not mention specific social
media platforms, management software, or analytic tools by name, they
did call for social media skills and knowledge. The need for social media
knowledge among public relations students and practitioners is obvious.
For example, a 2017 study by Wright and Hinson found many public
relations practitioners reported spending up to a quarter of their working
day using social media. Students would likely be well-served if they had
a command of both social media platforms and social media analytic tools
(Kinsky, Freberg, Kim, Kushin, & Ward, 2016; Meng, Jin, Lee, & Kim,
2017).
Despite the ads’ adherence to the traditional technician role, there
also seems to be a trend to request management skills of entry-level
practitioners. For example, 67% of the ads examined requested applicants
have project management skills. Similarly, the list of essential skills
put together by participants of the 2015 Summit of the Commission on
Public Relations also mentions the need for managerial skills. Perhaps
as more employers come to recognize the importance of employees
with measurement skills, more entry-level positions will evolve from
purely technician to that of a manager’s apprentice. This new role might
still require the writing skills and familiarity with tactics of the current

40
technician role, but add to it knowledge of measurement and social media
strategy and analytics, data collection, and the development of preliminary
reports. In this bridging role, a manager’s apprentice might be responsible
for some decision-making, problem solving and policy related to social
media and/or other areas. Even with this suggested additional role, the
public relations manager would still be responsible for the public relations
program, its outcomes, and problem solving; the public relations manager
would still be the expert in the field who negotiates, plans, and strategizes
the communication between organizational leaders and publics (Broom &
Dozier, 1986; Dozier, 1984).
Another area students may need to be familiar with is design,
including design programs. The need for design can probably be tied to
the type of public relations the students see themselves pursuing. Those
students aiming for agencies and larger corporations will likely work
with graphic and web designers. However, students interested in smaller
nonprofits and independent consultancies will likely need to rely on
themselves for basic design tasks such as brochures, posters, and simple
websites. Educators and practitioners alike believe knowledge of design
is helpful (Gallicano, Ekachai, & Freberg, 2014); however, they rate
this knowledge as less necessary than skills such as writing and research
(Commission on Public Relations Education, 2018). “While these skills
may still be important in smaller organizations that do not have their own
production facilities or can’t afford to outsource production, the ability
to communicate using appropriate messages and channels appears to be
more important than the packaging of those messages” (O’Neil, Moreno,
Rawlins, & Valentini, 2018, p. 55). Perhaps in the future, educators will
find more ways to infuse design within the existing curriculum or build
relationships across their respective campuses, so students can take
supporting classes in areas such as graphic design.
Other qualities desired in entry-level public relations practitioners
include soft skills such as the ability to meet deadlines, collaborate,
speak in public, and build relationships. Soft skills have moved from
knowledge that is “nice-to-have” to a “must-have” for employers (Bancino

& Zevalkink, 2007, p. 22). In 2010, Klaus reported that approximately
three-quarters of continuing employment accomplishment is contingent
upon malleable abilities, whereas merely one-quarter of long-term job
success was attributed to hard skills. While hard skills are already part
of university curricula, soft skills need more emphasis to better prepare
students for the workforce (Wellington, 2005). Going forward, a challenge
for faculty will be helping students identify ways in which they can
document soft skills on their resumes, especially if job ads specifically call
for such skills. In addition, it seems students with proficiency in Microsoft
Office programs should include them on their resumes based on the
findings of this study.
Recommendations for the Classroom
From a curricular standpoint, public relations faculty can stand
by the idea that good writing is good writing, regardless of the particular
form (Jacques, 2015). New modes of writing can be learned, if the basic
skills are already there. Therefore, it seems appropriate for educators
to continue to teach AP Style, grammar, and sentence structure, but
they need to balance assignments requiring students to write traditional
pieces such as promotional materials, press releases, and features with
assignments focusing purely on writing for social media platforms, such
as Facebook, blogs, Twitter, and general web content. Faculty need to
continue to develop social media classes (Kim & Freberg, 2016; Zhang &
Freberg, 2018), as well as find ways to introduce such content across all
current courses (Auger & Cho, 2016). By including lectures and projects
related to analytics, proper use of social media, and the writing, design,
and presentation of social media content, any shortcomings in these areas
would be addressed.
Faculty need to find ways to integrate both hard and soft skills into
assignments, assessment, and classwork in order to create a more well-
rounded graduate (Robles, 2012). Getting students out of the comfort zone
of lecture can help them to practice and develop soft skills (Bancino &

42
Zevalkink, 2007; Dalley, 2014; Schulz, 2008). Soft skills are best taught
using experiential, authentic, and integrated learning, such as when the
faculty member takes on the role of a coach rather than a lecturer and
guides students through assignments that require teamwork, writing, and
oral presentations (Elmuti, 2004; Gordon, 1998; Navarro, 2008; Noll &
Wilkins, 2002; Tuleja & Greenhalgh, 2008).
To encourage students to develop the soft skills and other qualities
most wanted by industry leaders, faculty could also use techniques
associated with the flipped classroom (Gibson & Sodeman, 2014;
Hutchings & Quinney, 2015). In the flipped classroom, class time is
used mainly for application and analysis rather than lecture. By building
motivation among students, they come to class prepared by having
completed assignments, and the classroom can more closely resemble
a functioning workplace where faculty take on the role of a facilitator
who guides students through active learning experiences that help them
to build their professional talents (Bristol, 2014). Additionally, the
flipped classroom helps students to develop skills such as leadership,
collaboration, communication, and problem solving (Chen, Wang,
Kinshuk, & Chen, 2014; James, Chin, & Williams, 2014). Faculty could
task students with assignments and projects focused on measurement,
making connections among the global context and their respective
assignments, conducting and analyzing data, developing goals and
objectives, and refining their storytelling skills to better prepare them for
the workplace (Commission on Public Relations Education, 2015).
By developing such assignments, students would not only have
the safety of the classroom while making mistakes and learning, but also
would take part in peer-to-peer education while being guided by a faculty
member. Students could be asked to participate in gallery walks in which
they reflect upon and offer constructive criticism to their peers. Gallery
walks help students to synthesize and evaluate the work of their peers
through movement, reflection, analysis, group discussion, and writing
(Honeycutt, n.d.). This activity can mirror the team dynamic common to
many workplaces.


Students could also conduct micro-teaching assignments on topics
such as professionalism or globalism to further reinforce public speaking
skills and adherence to deadlines. Students could also be tasked with
reflecting upon the ethics and responsibilities surrounding their own work
to further develop them as professionals. Finally, students could be asked
to help develop rubrics and other assessment tools for assignments, so they
can learn more about what quality work is and how to judge it. Therefore,
the flipped classroom might be a key to developing the entry-level
employee that industry leaders dream of hiring while helping students to
be ready for the manager’s apprentice role they could encounter in the
workforce.
Some final suggestions are for faculty, with the help of
practitioners, to develop soft skills seminars for students to take before
interning. By eliciting the help of internship supervisors, faculty could find
ways to build students’ knowledge of and confidence in their soft skills.
Internship supervisors could also be called upon to help assess soft skills
as part of their feedback about interns (Daugherty, 2011). Community
partners and clients working with students on long-term projects could
also help assess these areas (Steimel, 2013). Similarly, student-run
agencies under the guidance of faculty and/or practitioners could also be
a place where students learn about and further develop their soft skills
with assessments specific to this skill set built into any feedback materials
(Bush & Miller, 2011; Swanson, 2011). Finally, practitioners could assist
faculty with building soft skills knowledge in students by providing
workshops, talks, and/or webinars on the topic through professional
organizations such as PRSSA.
Limitations and Future Research
Although these data are interesting, they are only based on a
convenience sample of online ads posted on PRSA’s website. This sample
not only excludes ads found in other media, but it could also exclude
those organizations unable to pay posting fees such as small organizations,

44
particularly represented by the nonprofit sector. In order to answer the
research questions posed by the authors, only entry-level ads were
reviewed; therefore, little information has been gained about the skills and
knowledge necessary to move to the next level of employment. A follow-
up study should examine job ads targeted to middle- and senior-level
practitioners in order to complete the picture of what skills and knowledge
public relations practitioners need throughout the life of their careers.
Finally, this research vein could be further explored using
qualitative methods, such as focus groups or in-depth interviews. Focus
groups and/or interviews could be conducted with those people who are
hiring entry-level public relations practitioners. This step would help
public relations educators to better understand not only what employers
want in entry-level public relations practitioners, but also why they
desire such skills and qualities. Similarly, qualitative and quantitative
methods could be used to gain insight into the experiences of newly hired
entry-level practitioners to understand their interview and job search
experiences, as well as to determine what skills and knowledge they
draw upon to complete their daily work. These lines of research could
help educators when developing courses, course content, and curricula
to prepare students for the workforce they will encounter, thereby
strengthening the relationship between educators and practitioners.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it seems that faculty can best meet the needs of
their students and their future employers by being aware of the knowledge
and skills that are called for in entry-level employment ads. In addition,
faculty should build strong alliances with their local practitioners to further
gain insight into this aspect of their work. Perhaps a final suggestion is
for faculty and students to closely examine entry-level job ads in the
classroom and determine ways to take students from undergraduate to
employed public relations practitioners.

References
Auger, G. A., & Cho, M. (2016). A comprehensive analysis of public
relations curricula: Does it matter where you go to school, and
is academia meeting the needs of the practice? Journalism
& Mass Communication Educator, 71, 50-68. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1077695814551830
Bancino, R., & Zevalkink, C. (2007, May). Soft skills: Technical
professions increasingly require a broader skill set, but career and
technical educators can help their students add soft skills to their
hard-core technical skills. Techniques: Connecting Education and
Careers, 82, 20-22.
Barber, M. D., Couch, G., Darnowski, C., Johnson, T. L., Kazoleas, D.,
Kruckeberg, D. … Walton, S. (2012, March). The PR professional
of 2015: Analyzing the future of public relations (2012, March).
Public Relations Tactics, 19, 14-15. Retrieved from https://apps.
prsa.org/Intelligence/Tactics/Articles/view/9652/1045/The_PR_
professional_of_2015_Analyzing_the_future_o
Bristol, T. (2014). Flipping the classroom. Teaching and Learning in
Nursing, 9, 43-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2013.11.002
Broom, G. M. (1982). A comparison of sex roles in public relations. Public
Relations Review, 8(3), 17-22.
Broom, G. M., & Dozier, D. M. (1986). Advancement for public relations
role models. Public Relations Review, 12, 37-56. https://doi.
org/10.1016/s0363-8111(82)80028-3
Broom, G. M., & Smith, G. D. (1979, August). Toward an understanding
of public relations roles: An empirical test of five role models’
impact on clients. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Association for Education in Journalism, Seattle, WA.
Bush, L., & Miller, B. M. (2011). U.S. student-run agencies: Organization,
attributes and adviser perceptions of student learning outcomes.
Public Relations Review, 37, 485-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pubrev.2011.09.019

46
Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Kinshuk, J., & Chen, N. (2014). Is FLIP
enough? Or should we use the FLIPPED Model instead?
Computers & Education, 79, 16-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compedu.2014.07.004
Commission on Public Relations Education. (2015, May). Industry-
educator summit on public relations education Summary Report.
Retrieved from http://www.instituteforpr.org/wp-content/uploads/
CPRE20Summit20Summary20Report20July202015.pdf
Commission on Public Relations Education (2018, April). Fast forward:
Foundations + future states. Educators + practitioners. New York:
NY. Commission on Public Relations Education. Retrieved from
http://www.commissionpred.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/
report6-full.pdf
Dalley, S. L. (2014). Let’s take a trip: Exploring the effect of listening
styles. Communication Teacher, 28, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/17
404622.2013.839046
Daugherty, E. L. (2011). The public relations internship experience:
A comparison of student and site supervisor perspectives.
Public Relations Review, 37, 470-477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pubrev.2011.09.010
Diga, M., & Kelleher, T. (2009). Social media use, perceptions of
decision-making power and public relations roles. Public Relations
Review, 35, 440-442. https://doi.org/10.1016/pubrev.2009.07.003
DiStaso, M. W., Cornish, N., Sheffer, G., & Dodd, M. (2018, April).
Introduction: Development of the Commission on Public Relations
Education report and the 2016 omnibus survey. In Commission
for Public Relations Education (Ed.), Fast forward: Foundations
+ future state. Educators + practitioners. (pp. 37-43). New York,
NY: Commission on Public Relations Education.
DiStaso, M. W., Stacks, D. W., & Botan, C. H. (2009). State of public
relations education in the United States: 2006 report on a national
study of executives and academics. Public Relations Review, 35,
254-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/jpubrev.2009.03.006

Dozier, D. M. (1981, August). The diffusion of evaluation methods among
public relations practitioners. Paper presented to the Association
for Education in Journalism & Mass Communication, East
Lansing, MI.
Dozier, D. M. (1983, November). Toward a reconciliation of “role
conflict” in public relations research. Paper presented at the
meeting of the Western Communication Educators Conference,
Fullerton, CA.
Dozier, D. M. (1984). Program evaluation and roles of practitioners.
Public Relations Review, 10, 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-
8111(84)80002-8
Dozier, D. M. (1992). The organizational roles of communications and
public relations practitioners. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in
public relations and communication management (pp. 327-356).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dozier, D. M., & Broom, G. M. (1995). Evolution of the manager role in
public relations practice. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7,
3-26. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15332754xjprr0701_02
Dozier, D. M., & Broom, G. M. (2006). The centrality of practitioner roles
to public relations theory. In C. H. Botan & V. Hazleton (Eds.),
Public relations theory II (pp.137-170). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Elmuti, D. (2004). Can management be taught? Management Decision, 42,
439-453. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740410523240
Gallicano, T. D., Ekachai, D., & Freberg, K. (2014). The infographics
assignment: A qualitative study of students’ and professionals’
perspectives. Public Relations Journal, 8, 1–23.
Gibson, L. A., & Sodeman, W. A. (2014). Millennials and technology:
Addressing the communication gap in education and practice.
Organization Development Journal, 32, 63-75.
Gordon, R. (1998). Balancing real-world programs with real-world results.
Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 390-394.
Honeycutt, B. (n.d.) Looking for a flipped strategy? Try the gallery walk.
Retrieved from http://barbihoneycutt.com/gallery_walk/

Hutchings, M., & Quinney, A. (2015). The flipped classroom, disruptive
pedagogies, enabling technologies and wicked problems:
Responding to “the Bomb in the Basement.” The Electronic
Journal of e-Learning, 13, 106-119.
Jacques, A. (2012, October). The PR classroom of the future: 5 educators
share advice on teaching the millennial generation. Public
Relations Tactics, 19, 12-14.
Jacques, A. (2015, October). School of thought: 3 pros on the state of PR
education. Public Relations Tactics, 22, 16.
James, A. J., Chin, C. K. H., & Williams, B. R. (2014). Using the flipped
classroom to improve student engagement and to prepare graduates
to meet maritime industry requirements: A focus on maritime
education. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 13, 331-343. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s13437-014-0070-0
Kim, C., & Freberg, K. (2016). The state of social media curriculum:
Exploring professional expectations of pedagogy and practices
to equip the next generation of professionals. Journal of Public
Relations Education, 2(2), 68-82. Retrieved from http://aejmc.us/
jpre/2016/12/14/the-state-of-social-media-curriculum-exploring-
professional-expectations-of-pedagogy-and-practices-to-equip-the-
next-generation-of-professionals/
Kinsky, E. S., Freberg, K., Kim, C., Kushin, M., & Ward, W. (2016).
Hootsuite University: Equipping academics and future PR
professionals for social media success. Journal of Public Relations
Education, 2, 1-18. http://aejmc.us/jpre/2016/02/15/hootsuite-
university-equipping-academics-and-future-pr-professionals-for-
social-media-success/
Klaus, P. (2010). Communication breakdown. California Job Journal, 28,
1-9.
Meng, J., Jin, Y., Lee, Y.-I., & Kim, S. (2017, August). Integrating
web and social analytics into public relations research course
design: A longitudinal pedagogical research on Google Analytics
Certification. Paper presented to the Association for Education in

Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago, IL.
Navarro, P. (2008). The MBA core curricula of top-ranked U.S. schools: A
study in failure? Academy of Management Learning & Education,
7, 108-123. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.31413868
Neill, M. S., & Lee, N. M. (2016, August). Roles in social media: How the
practice of public relation is evolving. Public Relations Journal,
10, 1-25.
Noll, C. L., & Wilkins, M. (2002). Critical skills of IS professionals:
A model for curriculum development. Journal of Information
Technology Education, 1, 143-154. https://doi.org/10.28945/352
O’Neil, J., Moreno, A., Rawlins, B., & Valentini, C. (2018, April).
Learning objectives: What do students need to know and be
able to do for entry-level positions? In Commission for Public
Relations Education (Ed.), Fast forward: Foundations + future
state. Educators + practitioners (pp. 45-57). New York, NY:
Commission on Public Relations Education.
Robles, M. M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills
needed in today’s workplace. Business Communication Quarterly,
75, 453-465. https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569912460400
Schulz, B. (2008). The importance of soft skills: Education beyond
academic knowledge. NAWA Journal of Language and
Communication, 2, 146-154.
Stacks, D. W. (2016). Primer of public relations research (3rd ed.). New
York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Steimel, S. J. (2013). Community partners’ assessment of service learning
in an interpersonal and small group communication course.
Communication Teacher, 27, 241-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/1740
4622.2013.798017
Swanson, D. J. (2011). The student-run public relations firm in an
undergraduate program: Reaching learning and professional
development goals through “real world” experience. Public
Relations Review, 37, 499-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pubrev.2011.09.012

Todd, V. (2009). PRSSA faculty and professional advisors’ perceptions
of public relations curriculum, assessment of students’ learning,
and faculty performance. Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator, 64, 71-90. https://doi.org/10/1177/107769580906400106
Tuleja, E. A., & Greenhalgh, A. M. (2008). Communicating across
the curriculum in an undergraduate business program:
Management 101 – leadership and communication in groups.
Business Communication Quarterly, 71, 27-43. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1080569907312934
Vieira, Jr., E. T., & Grantham, S. (2014). Defining public relations roles in
the U.S.A. using cluster analysis. Public Relations Review, 40, 60-
68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.11.021
Wellington, J. K. (2005, August 1). The “soft skills” of success: Be it high
tech, low tech, or no tech. Vital Speeches of the Day, 71, 628.
Wilcox, D. L., Cameron, G. T., & Reber, B. H. (2015). Public relations:
Strategies and tactics (11th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
Woodward, B. S., Sendall, P., & Ceccucci, W. (2010). Integrating soft
skill competencies through project-based learning across the
information systems curriculum. Information Systems Education
Journal, 8, 1-15.
Wright. D. K., & Hinson, M. D. (2017). Tracking how social and other
digital media are being used in public relations practice: A twelve-
year study. Public Relations Journal, 11, 1-30.
Wright, D. K., & VanSlyke Turk, J. (1990). Public relations: The
unpleasant realities. New York, NY: The Institute for Public
Relations Research and Education.
Zhang, A., & Freberg, K. (2018). Developing a blueprint for social media
pedagogy: Trials, tribulations, and best practices. Journal of Public
Relations Education, 4(1), 1-24. Retrieved from http://aejmc.
us/jpre/2018/05/21/developing-a-blueprint-for-social-media-
pedagogy-trials-tribulations-and-best-practices/
Editorial Record: Original draft submitted to JPRE July 6, 2016. First revision
went under review July 24, 2017; second revision went under review Sept. 26, 2017.
Manuscript accepted for publication February 5, 2018. Final edits completed July 19,
2018. First published online August 17, 2018.

Journal of Public Relations Education, Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018 [complete issue]

Journal of Public Relations Education, Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018 [complete issue]

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Journal of Public Relations Education, Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018 [complete issue]

Similar to Journal of Public Relations Education, Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018 [complete issue] (20)

More from AEJMC Journal of Public Relations Education (JPRE)

More from AEJMC Journal of Public Relations Education (JPRE) (8)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Journal of Public Relations Education, Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018 [complete issue]