No.58, Winter 2003
Service-Learning Integration in a Public Relations Program
Pedagogy for Enhanced Learning
Emma Daugherty
California State University, Long Beach
M ovements in the academy are much like waves in the ocean. Some crash and go nowhere while others swell up slowly, making a splash that resonates through all of academe. Certain issues in higher education have created strong currents of debate: the paradigm shift from teaching to learning, revitalization of general education, diversity, assessment, and service learning. Many of these concepts become part of mission statements as they make their way through administrative bodies and faculty-governance committees. Nowhere is service learning seemingly more important to curricular outcomes than in professional programs. Most professional programs, like public relations, focus on societal needs. Equally important is the skill attainment of students in such programs. Therefore, experiential learning, particularly service learning, appears to be an ideal pedagogy for professionally oriented programs. Students gain a deeper understanding of their power to influence and contribute to society, and they are better able to perfect their classroom-taught skills.
Service learning could also have a major impact on public relations education. The 1999 Port of Entry Report by the Commission on Public Relations Education cited the importance of experiential learning – applying course concepts in a real-life setting – in the form of an internship or practicum experience. Of course, professionals expect public relations graduates to have a broad-based liberal arts background; knowledge of concepts like strategic planning and issues management; and the ability to research, communicate effectively and think critically. But professionals want much more. They want public relations graduates who can write releases, develop media lists, construct questionnaires, create publications, and compose backgrounders with little or no instruction. They want graduates with well-developed portfolios and practical experience that will shorten the learning curve in their new positions.
Many public relations programs have opportunities for students to acquire practical experience. Most encourage internships and offer campaigns courses in which students develop work for a client. Nevertheless, many public relations students still enter the workforce with limited skills and practical know-how. Service learning, however, can strengthen public relations education from a critical perspective. This pedagogy can help students enrich their appreciation and understanding of the interests of stakeholders and the importance of social responsibility – key concepts in public relations education.
Social responsibility is the development of processes to evaluate stakeholder and environmental demands and the implementation of programs to manage social issues (Thomas and Simerly, 1994). Corporate social responsibility deals with ethical codes, corporate philanthropy, community relations programs, and law-abiding actions (Woods, 1991). Corporations are responsible for effectively producing and distributing goods and services for consumer consumption and generating profits for stakeholders. However, society also feels that corporations should contribute to worthy social causes (Cavanagh and McGovern, 1988; Kruckeberg and Starck, 1988). Corporations became viewed as both economic and social institutions. As social institutions, corporations have responsibilities to society (Bick, 1988). In fact, some scholars argue that all organizations – profit-making and nonprofit-making – have an obligation to society. Organizations exist at the pleasure of society, and society expects organizations to anticipate and resolve social problems (Drucker, 1974).
Since social responsibility is a key concept in public relations education, service learning is an ideal teaching strategy. As future public relations practitioners in business and nonprofit organizations, students must realize their responsibility to society as they make decisions about the policies affecting their stakeholders (e.g., employees, residents of the local community, and government agencies).
Confusion about the meaning of service learning abounds among public relations and other mass communication educators. Service learning is often mistaken for other forms of community-based, experiential-learning methods. Community-based learning encompasses many different activities: working as a volunteer for a charitable institution; conducting field work or developing a thesis through independent study; taking an internship to gain on-the-job experience; enrolling in cooperative education to work in a paid, off-campus environment; participating in a short-term course-related activity; developing a community-based assignment for a course, such as conducting research or shadowing a professional for a day; and being a service-learning, which combines meaningful community service and in-class learning through a process of structured, regular reflections. (Office of Community Collaboration, California State University-Sacramento, 1997).
Service learning is a teaching method that blends community service and academic instruction through reflective, critical thinking. Student learning is promoted through community service experiences that meet the needs of a particular group, include structured activities for students to reflect on their experiences, and enhance students' academic studies. Service learning involves using course concepts and applying them in a real-life setting for the good of society.
Some scholars strongly assert that service learning requires a reflection component where students think critically about their experiences (Olney and Grande, 1995; Rhoads, 1997). Commonly used methods of reflection include journals, writing assignments (Cooper, 1998), and group discussions (Silcox, 1993). The result of service learning is experience for students – honing their abilities and perfecting their skills – and an appreciation of good citizenship. The organization benefiting from the efforts of the service-learner receives much-needed skills and volunteer time. Thus, service-learning can be seen as a win-win situation for both the service-learning and the organization benefiting from a student's work.
Many researchers have documented the benefits of service learning. Simply put, service learning promotes social and moral responsibility (McElhaney, 1997), helps students become more involved in their communities, and impacts students' belief in the importance of social justice and the need for public policy change (Eyler and Giles, 1999). For students, service learning helps then learn the course material (Eyler and Giles, 1999), enables students to better identify issues in their community and act on them (Melchior and Bailis, 2002), and heightens their sense of citizenship (Corbett and Kendall, 1999). Plus, it introduces them to the complexity of the world (Miller, 1997). Undergraduates develop a stronger sense of competence, are more likely to graduate, get better grades, be more favorably predisposed and connected to the educational institution, and feel as though they are living up to their potential (Bringle and Hatcher, 1996; Eyler, Giles and Braxton, 1997; Giles and Eyler, 1994). Bourland and Fall (1997) found that students saw service learning as lasting learning, an effective form of pedagogy. Students develop academically and cognitively by increasing their ability to write, read and calculate; subject matter knowledge; and critical-thinking skills and by becoming engaged learners (Schuman, 1994).
Students also like service learning. They report that service learning increases their self-knowledge and spiritual growth, and it offers them opportunities to develop close personal relationships with fellow students. Students believe their learning is richer and more applicable to real-world contexts than traditional classroom experiences (Eyler and Giles, 1999). Faculty who embrace service learning tend to value the meaning and purpose of their endeavors and enjoy positive feedback from students and colleagues; yet they struggle with varying student skill level, an increased time factor, and challenges in evaluating student work (Hammond, 1994). Service learning can renew an instructor's love of teaching (Weigart, 1998). Most faculty reward systems fail to acknowledge the contributions of faculty engaged in service-learning pedagogy. Rather, other traditional forms of teaching and scholarship are given more consideration and weight in matters of retention, tenure and promotion.
In both experiential-learning courses, students refine their skills and produce work that can be displayed in their portfolios. But, as most professors realize, the more experience and opportunities to apply course concepts in real-life settings, the more demonstration of higher-order learning processes and mastery.
Therefore, the public relations program at Cal State-Long Beach looked seriously at the possibilities offered through service learning. Not only did service learning give students more opportunities to refine their skills, it provided a way to enrich their appreciation of the importance of social responsibility – a key public relations concept.
A natural place to integrate service learning into the public relations curriculum came easily in the skills courses – three required courses in the major after students completed their foundation courses. The skills courses are "Internal Communication for Public Relations," "External Communication for Public Relations" and "Publications for Public Relations." In these skills courses, students create public relations tools – a crisis communication plan, press kit, brochure and newsletter – for a nonprofit organization in need of such materials. In the "Public Relations Agency" course, students work in teams to create a comprehensive public relations plan for a nonprofit organization and also pair with another community partner on an individual basis to develop a plan tailored to the unique needs of that organization.
In each course, students approach a nonprofit of their choice. Once the organization is approved by the instructor, the contact at the nonprofit institution, usually the agency's director, and student sign a service-learning contract, outlining expectations for both parties.
Likewise, a one-page questionnaire was developed for community partners. The questionnaire was sent with a letter and postage-paid return envelope. Questionnaires were coded to track non-respondents, and non-respondents were mailed a follow-up questionnaire. The instrument contained 19 questions regarding the nature of the relationship and number of contact hours. A Likert-type scale was used to determine attitudes toward students and their work. Of the 243 mailed questionnaires, 161 were returned for a response rate of 66%. Of those questionnaires returned, 138 were usable (57%). The average ratings reported are from those respondents who answered the questions. The means and percentages reported do not include missing cases. FINDINGS
When asked to check the reasons students selected a specific nonprofit organization, they most often responded that they wanted to do something important by helping the nonprofit, the nonprofit needed their help, they had a contact whoworked there, and they were interested in the nonprofit's programs. About 20% indicated they selected the nonprofit organization because their admire its work. Students found their nonprofit organizations to be cooperative (80%), accessible (85%) and receptive (82%). The average amount of time spent at the nonprofit was 10 hours, ranging from two hurs to 48 hours. The average amount of time spent developing the project, excluding the hours spent at the nonprofit organization, was 24, ranging from four to 80. The median number of hours students spent on the crisis communication plan was 15 hours, while the median for the comprehensive public relations plan was 50 hours.
About 77% reported the nonprofit was appreciative of their work. Interestingly, 83% said they may continue to volunteer their services at the same nonprofit organization, and 70% said the service-learning experience made them more willing to help other nonprofit organizations; 83% reported the experience made them better understand the importance of social responsibility in public relations and the need for good citizenship in society. About 67% said the experience helped them explore their career options, but only 53% said the experience encouraged them to consider a career in nonprofit public relations.
In response to an open-ended question asking students how they could have improved their own learning, 40% said they would have spent more time at the nonprofit organization observing, researching, probing and strategizing. Another 40% reported they would have started their projects earlier or better managed their time. When asked what advice they would give community partners to improve the experience for students, 82% said nonprofit organizations should be cooperative, available, accessible, open to ideas, and willing to offer strategic guidance.
In an exploratory data analysis using chi square, it was found that students experienced an increased understanding of the importance of social responsibility if they felt the nonprofit organization appreciated their work. As expected, the hours spent at the nonprofit organization were also positively correlated with the number of meetings held with the community partner (r=.395, p=.001, n=238).
Community partners reported formally meeting with students an average of four times and spent more than seven hours with them personally advising them about the development of the project. More than 86% reported that students followed their direction when establishing goals and objectives for the work; 81% said the student became fully acquainted with the organization, and 74% said the work produced by the student met their expectations. Almost 88% said students produced quality work for their organization. Respondents who said students were fully acquainted with their organization were more likely to say students produced quality work (r=.649, p-.000, n=119). Ninety percent reported they would work with the student again on another project, and 91% said they would welcome more opportunities to work with students on service-learning projects. Only 54% said they were able to use the work produced by the student, and 29% said they may be able to use the work. Of the 17% who reported they would not be able to use the work, 46% said the work contained writing or content errors. When asked in an open-ended question how the service-learning experience could be improved for the organization and student, community partners most often mentioned the need for early student contact and increased communication between the institution and the organization.
The problems students encounter with the press kit assignment usually deal with the scope of the project – that is, the event or newsworthy topic originally discussed does not evolve into a subject matter that warrants a press kit, but rather a news release instead. In addition, community partners sometimes do not understand the nature of journalistic writing and want students to produce work with little substance (fluff information and quotes, exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims, subjective writing instead of objective).
In addition, students find educating their community partners challenging in the publications course. Most community partners want brochures that speak to the masses and are not targeted at a particular audience, overlooking the importance of understanding the needs and wants of a key public. Again, students must educate community partners about the need to speak directly to the reader using the reader's language and visuals that attract the attention of the target audience. More importantly, many community partners want to produce a newsletter, without a legitimate justification for such a vehicle. After discussing the goals of the newsletter, students, with the help of the instructor, may discover that it may not be the best channel to use. In these cases, a flyer or even a meeting with volunteers may be a more effective method of communication. The message may be best relayed in a simpler form – opposed to the time, energy and cost of a newsletter that is generally cyclical.
Overall, the development of a comprehensive public relations plan appears to be the most successful. Students report community partners are extremely appreciative of the research collected; the development of the goals, objectives and strategies; and the creative materials produced by the student. Even if some of the tactics created by the student are not appropriate for the organization, community partners report they use the work for many different purposes, such as using the material in grant proposals and discovering problems and resources available to them.
Instructors of this course say they find assessment of learning objectives more reliable. Some students can contribute little to the group project, and most students tend to be generous in peer evaluations, wanting to retain a positive relationship with a classmate. Therefore, instructors are better able to assess knowledge of course concepts in an individual campaign proposal produced solely by one student rather than a group. Students, of course, complain about the excessive workload, but a majority report that the course is the most valuable in the program despite its difficulty.
On the other hand, students need to be closely monitored and continuously assessed to ensure quality education and output. Reflection is an important aspect of the service-learning process to help students cope with the unknown – variables that seem like obstacles. In turn, faculty are challenged by their students' needs – the need to understand and relate to real-world experiences. Instructor must take advantage of teachable moments through frequent reflection activities that encourage discussion of these important issues.
Bourland-Davis, P. G., and Fall, L. (1997). Evaluation and assessment of a service learning component in academia: A case study. Paper presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. Chicago.
Bringle, R. G., and Hatcher, J. A. (1996, March-April). Implementing service learning in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 221-239.
Buchholz, R. A. (1982). Business environment and public policy: Implications for management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cavanagh, G. F., and McGovern, A. F. (1988). Ethical dilemmas in the modern corporation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Chrisman, J. J., and Carroll, A. B. (1984, Winter). SMR Forum: Corporate responsibility–reconciling economic and social goals. Sloan Management Review, 25(2), 59-65.
Corbett, J. B., and Kendall, A. R. (1999, Winter). Evaluating service learning in the communication discipline. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 53(4), 66-76.
Cutlip, S. M., and Center, A. H. (1971). Effective public relations. 4th edition. Englewood, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., and Broom, G. M. (1985). Effective public relations. 6th edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., and Broom, G. M. (1994). Effective public relations. 7th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Drucker, P. F. (1974). Management: Tasks, responsibilities, practices. New York: Harper & Row.
Eyler, J., and Giles, Jr., D. E. (1999). Where's the learning in service-learning? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Eyler, J., Giles, Jr., D. E., and Braxton, J. (1997, Fall). The impact of service-learning on college students. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 4, 5-15.
Giles, Jr., D. E., and Eyler, J. (1994, Fall). The theoretical roots of service-learning in John Dewey: Toward a theory of service-learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service-learning, 1(1), 77-85.
Grunig, J. E. (1993, Summer). Public relations and international affairs: Effects, ethics and responsibility. Journal of International Affairs, 47(1), 137-162.
Hammond, C. (1994, Fall). Integrating service and academic study: Faculty motivation and satisfaction in Michigan higher education. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 1(1), 21-28.
Howard, J. P. F. (1998). Academic service learning: A counternormative pedagogy. In Academic service learning: A pedagogy of action and reflection. R. A. Rhoads and J. P. F. Howard (Eds.), 21-29. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kruckeberg, D., and Starck, K. (1988). Public relations and community: A reconstructed theory. New York: Praeger.
Mau, R. R., and Dennis, L. B. (1994, May). Companies ignore shadow constituencies at their peril. Public Relations Journal, 50(5), 10-11.
McElhaney, K. A. (1997). Outcomes of service learning: A comparative analysis of curricular-based and non-curricular-based alternative spring breaks. Paper presented to National Society for Experiential Education Conference. Kansas City, MO.
Melchior, A., and Bailis, L. N. (2002). Impact of service-learning on civic attitudes and behaviors of middle and high school youth: Findings from three national evaluations. In Service-learning: The essence of the pedagogy. A. Furco and S. H. Billig (Eds.), 201-222. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Miller, J. (1997, Fall). The impact of service-learning experiences on students' sense of power. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 4, 16-21.
Olney, C., and Grande, S. (1995, Fall). Validation of a scale to measure development of social responsibility. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2, 45-53.
Rhoads, R. A. (1997). Community service and higher learning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Rhoads, R. A., and Howard, J. P. F. (1998). Academic service-learning: A pedagogy of action and reflection. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schmiede, A. E. (1995, Fall). Using focus groups in service-learning: Implications for practice and research. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2, 63-71.
Silcox, H. C. (1993). A how to guide to reflection: Adding cognitive learning to community service programs. Philadelphia: Brighton Press.
Thomas A. S., and Simerly, R. L. (1994, December). The chief executive officer and corporate social performance: An interdisciplinary examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(12), 959-968.
Weigart, K. M. (1998). Academic service learning: Its meaning and relevance. In Academic service learning: A pedagogy of action and reflection. R. A. Rhoads and J. P. F. Howard (Eds.), 3-10. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wilcox, D. L., Ault, P. H., amd Agee, W. K. (1998). Public relations: Strategies and tactics. New York: Longman.
Wood, D. J. (1991, July-August). Toward improving corporate social performance. Business Horizons, 34(4), 66-73.
![]()
[Return to PRD Home Page] [Return to Teaching Public Relations Index] [Continue with next Teaching Tip]