March 26, 1996
Professor Don Heider
Internship and Placement Interest Group
1368 Elm Street
Denver, CO 80220
Feedback That Fits:
How Experienced and Naive Mass Communication Students View
Internships
David D. Perlmutter
Assistant Professor
Manship School of Mass Communication
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, LA 70803-7202
tel.-- 504-388-2053
fax -- 504-388-2125
e-mail -- [log in to unmask]
Alan D. Fletcher
Professor
Manship School of Mass Communication
Louisiana State University
Baton Rouge, LA 70803-7202
tel.-- 504-388-2237
fax -- 504-388-2125
[Submitted to the Internship and Placement Interest Group, AEJMC, 1996
Conference]
Feedback That Fits:
How Experienced and Naive Mass Communication Students View
Internships
abstract
To many mass communication faculty members and employers, the
internship experience is an important component of a student's preparation for a
career in one of the fields of mass communication. Yet compared with individual
courses in the major, the internship is often the source of confusion and
misperception by students. Understandably, students do not always recognize
precisely what an internship is; they don't understand the culture of the
workplace, and they don't know how to prepare fully for an internship. The
logical outcome is a student who may be less than fully prepared for a full time
job after graduation.
This study is an exploratory survey of four categories of students:
(1) those who have completed an internship, (2) those in process of completing
an internship, (3) those who have not had an internship but plan to have one,
and (4) those who have not had an internship and do not plan to have one.
The purpose of the study is to learn student perceptions of what an
internship is and how it can lead into full time employment in the field. In
particular, the study addresses differences and similarities between students
with internship experience and those with no such experience.
The study showed that although experienced and inexperienced students
express diverse perceptions of the need for certain skills, such as the ability
to use computer software, they express similar perceptions about their personal
preparation and human relations abilities.
"FEEDBACK THAT FITS..." --
________________________________________________________________________________
_____________
Feedback That Fits:
How Experienced and Naive Mass Communication Students View
Internships
"Wow, they really want me to work!" said the recent alumnus about
his new employers.
"You knew that before, didn't you? You had an internship there
two years ago," I responded.
He shook his head, "Somehow that was different. Maybe they
expected less of me, or maybe I wasn't paying attention."
Social scientists have long noted that "sophomores are not
people."[1] Much social and psychological laboratory experimentation is
conducted on the available and reasonably docile population of college
students. Many sweeping conclusions about human cognition and behavior,
thus, are premised upon the responses to stimuli by a narrow and
perhaps
unrepresentative segment of the human population. On the other hand,
sophomores, as well as freshmen, juniors and seniors at colleges and
universities are people, and thus probably select, sift, sort and act
upon
information in ways not unlike the rest of the human family. Moreover,
those
of us concerned about our college and university students' behavior
certainly have a rich body of explanatory theory and results to draw
upon.
It follows that to understand the way that college students view and
organize the world and their place within it, we must turn to theories
of
social psychology. This premise applies to understanding all major
behaviors
of Homo Universitatis, including, as we propose here, the important
decisions on internship selection and behavior.
This paper is an investigation of the social psychological
component of the internship. It is a pilot study of the attitudes and
behaviors of students who have had an internship through the auspices
of our
School of Mass Communication and students who have not had an
internship.
It represents an attempt to gauge the sets of expectations about media
work
in the various professional areas of mass communication including those
about salary, preparation for the internship and acceptable workplace
behavior and demeanor. We premise this on an observation made by many
mass
media employers and university faculty: students undergoing an
internship,
contrary to expectations, often don't develop radically new
perspectives on
the work world, but retain many of their optimistic assessments
including
that of starting salary.
The interchange that introduces this paper occurred recently.
Other variations are common; many students don't seem to "get it," even
after an internship. Applying a cognitive perspective to the problem of
mass
communication related internships is not far-fetched. As human beings,
college students do not randomly process data; the decision to try to
obtain
an internship, the expectations held of the internship, and the lessons
learned from the internship process are governed by the experience
itself as
well as by psychological processes that researchers say affect all
human
attitude formation and behavior modification.
This paper represents an effort to tap into such psychological
processes. By bringing in a theoretical as well as an applied
perspective we
also believe, that an internship program is not simply an extension of
public service but may also constitute a source of data for scholarly
research. In this study, we use one set of social psychological theory,
that
of self-schematization; other theories both from within and without
mass
communication studies may be equally applicable.
This study is based on a survey of 250 students who (1) have
experienced an internship, (2) intend to obtain an internship, (3) have
never had an internship but intend to do so in a mass communication
related
field or (4) have never had an internship and do not want one. The
fields
include: advertising, broadcasting, print journalism, public relations,
and
public affairs/political communication. The central research question
is the
degree to which, if at all, students understand the nature of the work
world
they will soon enter. What perceptions do students hold about the
rewards
and responsibilities for the work, types of skills they should acquire
and
the type of mental outlook they should develop? These questions are
worth
asking; the under-25 generation has been stereotyped as unmotivated
slackers, unwilling to learn, and unable to practice the job skills of
the
present and the future. We also hear many horror stories of students
who
seem unprepared in practical skills and in demeanor for the modern work
place, at least during their first internship process.
The social psychological perspective is useful for three reasons.
First, on a purely scientific level, the internship is a rich
experience for
analysis. It constitutes a crucial transitional stage for many young
people,
leaving the world of home and world of school and entering the world of
work
(within their chosen field). Like any migration, the internship
experience
and its social psychological parameters are worthy of inspection.
Second,
the internship process is an important and interesting aspect of human
behavior. As will be noted below, the internship and the internship
coordinator are often not given enough support or respect within the
academic setting. In contrast, internships are ripe with possibilities
for
study, experimentation and reflection, which we think will help
establish
the scholarly worth of internship coordinator or supervision. Finally,
practical benefits can result from research on internships. Precisely
because sophomores are people, social psychology can contribute to an
understanding of why interns succeed or fail.
Internships, the Academy and the Workplace
A great many researchers and commentators within the academy and
in the workplace assert that the internship has become almost a sine
qua non
for future employment in a media profession.[2] This is the culmination
of a
long tradition, for as Joan Pedro and others have noted, "Studies of
the
criteria used by recruiters in the hiring of new graduates have long
shown
past experience of some kind, including internships to be high on the
list."[3]
Moreover, cognitive benefits of the research that spell out practical
improvements have not escaped notice. Researcher have observed that the
internship experience seems to help students focus on their career
path.[4]
This changed outlook seems to affect the way that students view their
schoolwork as well, pushing the students to uncover "greater relevance
in
the course work required of them and to feel more positive about their
major."[5]
That there should be such cognitive adaptation that affects
behavior is no surprise, and it is a hopeful sign. According to Peter
Drucker, the employee of the future will not be a solitary,
single-skilled
craftsperson, but rather a jack-of-all-information trades: a knowledge
worker. Changing careers frequently during a lifetime will be common.
Because technology and markets evolve so rapidly, no applied skill with
one
set of tools is adequate by itself, and many different skills will
apply to
the formation or dissemination of media products. The knowledge worker
attempting to produce a mass media message, be it an advertising spot,
a
public relations campaign, a news broadcast, or a feature magazine
article,
will need to acquire a host of complementary skills as well as the
energy
and mental flexibility to adapt to new developments.
Mass Communication studies, with its broad scope and attunement to
new developments in technology seems well poised to be the best
discipline
to both practically and cognitive prepare students for the world of
being a
knowledge workers. Yet a dilemma is also evident the views of
communication
fields by industrial professionals. Many news professionals accord
little
respect to the journalism school educational process.[6] Some
advertising
executives, to take another example, value more highly a business
school
degree than an advertising education.[7] It is a persistent debate
within
advertising education to what extent academic learning can serve the
needs
of the advertising industry in light of their different approaches to
the
acquisition and distribution of knowledge.[8] Basically this dichotomy
can be
seen as the natural caution of academics with not becoming a trade
school,
but also providing a practical education.[9] The actual work of making
and
maintaining a connection between academy and industry is not considered
a
position of prestige; internship coordinators report little respect or
reward for their efforts by their colleagues or administrations.[10]
Even a
survey of newspaper editors found that the j-school degree was not
considered a particularly impressive credential for first time
employment,
and certainly not worth a premium salary.[11] Some companies seem to
consider
journalism and mass communication programs as simply the providers of
"a
steady supply of inexpensive or free labor."[12]
In sum, the great irony of higher education in communication
related fields is we are not successfully communicating our value to
the
potential employers of our students precisely at a time in human
technological development when our place in the sun seems assured. That
such
goals may be contradictory is far from self-evident. Media professions,
above all others, reward more than rote craftsmanship in technical
construction skills. The liberal arts and sciences, the study of which
is
central to mass communication education, are meant to provide media
practitioners with a broad view of the nature of knowledge and its
place in
society.[13] Students need to do more than specialize, especially
considering
the variability of future knowledge work. Indeed, the general
approaches to
media work are best taught within the wider scope of a sustained
curriculum,
while the specific of technical skills are often best ingested
"on-the-job."[14]
Unlike, for example, architecture, the analysis of media is a practice
that
all citizens should understand even if they never engage in the
practice of
mass communication. To be a citizen of an electronic democracy,
bombarded
hourly with many messages, selling everything from presidents to
perfume,
one must be trained to be a good "crap detector."[15] Only the study of
how and
why media operate in society can provide such an insight. We need to
make
the case strongly that human cognitive adaptation to new technology is
rightly the domain of the discipline of communication.
Self-Schemas: The Perspective of Social Psychology
Given the importance of the internship for the student's
development and as an indicator of our achievements, we are left with
important questions: Why do so many fail? Why do horror stories abound?
In
this light, contact with media industries can be informative and can
serve
students in both a critical and practical way. Journalism educators
should
know what they, their students and future employers expect the world of
work
is and will be and how these expectations coincide and conflict. The
current
study responds to this question through a survey of samples of (1)
students
who have completed or are working in an internship while still in
school
and (2) students with no media industry work experience.
The internship should be taken as an important area of
observation, research and analysis by communication scholars, both as
revealing flaws and benefits within the system, but also as a rich
testing
ground for communication and related theories. The survey reported on
here
should be considered a preliminary step in attempting to raise the
status of
internship research.
That the internship provides an important social laboratory for
study is self-evident. That the expectations for work may differ is not
surprising. Human beings embrace and adapt to technological change much
faster than to cognitive change. Evolutionary biologists suggest that
much
of the way human beings process data they encounter in the world stems
from
mental patterns rooted in the stone age.[16] To organize the world's
data,
people hold schemas about others and about themselves -- "general
cognitive
mental plans, that are abstract and...serve as guides for action, as
structures for interpreting information, as organized frameworks for
solving
problems."[17] For example, a student may hold a schema of "public
relations
job;" for new data to be classified as "related to my category public
relations job" they must have some set of characteristics that are part
of
the schema. In addition, the schema may contain attitudes toward the
thing
schematized: for example, "public relations jobs are dull." In general,
people seem to pay little attention to information that does not fit
into
their existing schemas.[18]
Information that does not match the expectations of one's existing
schemas is not processed as quickly as information that confirms
them.[19] The
stronger the schema, the more a person is convinced of its correctness
and
utility, the less likely that person is to seek out and pay attention
to
information that undermines it.[20] Indeed, when a schema is held
strongly and
its assumptions are self-evident to the perceiver, the response to it
is
typically automatic.[21] Finally, in many cases the examples a person
stores in
memory and recalls are those that tend to confirm that person's
schemas.[22] The
question for media educators is, in the new world of information
management,
when a profession is at the center of technological change, what
schemas do
students, employers and educators hold about the job markets of the
present
and the future?
The key to this survey, the aspect that takes it beyond a list of
job skill categories, is that the student respondents were asked about
their
own expectations. This will be, thus, an attempt to tap into
self-perception
or self-schemas, as well as schemas of the outside world. Self-schemas
top
the hierarchy of schema; information affecting oneself is deemed more
important than information affecting others. People try to find
information
that confirms their already-held impressions of what it means to be th
emselves. They most often seek "feedback that fits"[23]in attempting to
maintain
consistency in their self- impression which is generally
optimistic.[24] Indeed,
humans, especially the young, seem to hold an optimistic bias that
their
efforts will be most likely lead to success.[25] Research suggests that
such
attempts fit into the generally restrictive way in which humans seek
information.[26] For example, a person content with his or her
self-image will
tend to seek confirmation from people who agree (or say they do) with
the
self-appraisal and may even become friends with them. In looking at the
world, they tend to detect more information that confirms their
impressions
of self than actually exists.[27] Having once received information,
they process
it so that it confirms the image they hold of themselves and reduces
non-congruency.[28]
Research on the social laboratory of internship process, among its
many options, can first focus on what schemas students hold of (a)
their
self-assessment of their own skills, (b) the value of the university
education, and (c) the workworld they are considered encountering or
have
encountered. The results of such a study should be of use to students,
employers and educators as well. The results should help students to
assess
the expectations held from them by those in control of the work futures
and
their academic present. They should help employers understand the
expectations that students hold of the work experience and thus tailor
debriefings or training to deal with these ideas. Finally, the results
of
such a survey should help educators build a curriculum that
addresses pedagogical and industrial concerns.
Method
The survey was conducted with 250 students enrolled in a variety
of courses in mass communication: an introductory research course, an
introductory mass media course, and introduction to media writing
course,
two editorial and investigative journalism courses, two
advertising/public
relations courses, two broadcast journalism courses, a political
communication and public affairs course and an advanced public
relations
course. Each course consisted of students interested in one or more of
the
major areas of study of mass communication. In each course were
students
who had completed an internship, some who were in process of taking an
internship, some who had not had an internship but planned to have one,
and
a few who had not had an internship and did not plan to have one. The
sample is described in Appendix A.
Each student completed a three-page questionnaire that addressed
three major issues: (1) personal qualities and abilities necessary for
success in an internship, (2) academic preparation for an internship
and a
full-time job after graduation, and (3) the means by which a student
prepares for a specific internship and for a full-time job after
graduation.
In addition, (4) an extensive set of questions addressed the
demographic and
psychographic profiles of the students.
Personal Qualities and Abilities. Preparing for an internship is
a new experience for many young persons. To what extent is the student
aware of qualities necessary for success, such as the presentation of
oneself in a professional workplace, acceptable office behavior,
professional dress, awareness of the importance of deadlines, and other
day-to-day considerations? How well does the student understand the
culture
of the workplace?
Academic Preparation for an Internship. Most academic programs
specify that the student meet certain course requirements before being
enrolled as an intern. How important does the student believe the
academic
requirements are for an internship? Does the student see the need for
the
liberal arts background that typifies a mass communication program?
Does
the student believe the mass communication course requirements provide
a
solid foundation for taking an internship?
Preparation for Acquiring an Internship. Is the student aware of
how to go about finding an internship? Even in a program that brings
together individual students with individual employers, a preliminary
interview is common. Does the student know how to prepare for that
interview? Does the student know how to behave during an interview? To
a
great extent, this set of questions addresses the motivation and
initiative
that the student demonstrates, but it also addresses the naivete of
some
students.
A single version of the questionnaire was used for all
respondents. Some questions were posed in two ways: one way for
students
who had completed or were completing an internship, and hypothetically,
for
students who had not had an internship. Responses from the two major
categories of respondent were then compared.
Hypotheses
As noted, previous research on social cognition suggests that
definite schemas for most conceptual conditions and situations exist.
Furthermore, as noted above, in relation to self-perception, such
schemas
are often overly optimistic. Finally, in seeking "feedback that fits,"
even
experience may not be teacher, we prefer to stick to the comfortable
schema.
These optimistic schemas are more likely to applied to self-assessments
that
relate to ego, i.e. character, than less ego-involved practical skills.
In
other words, I am more likely to admit I can't type fast, then to admit
I'm
a bad person. Experience may be most likely to be a teacher in
practical
areas, such as how best to conduct research for taking an
internship. Several hypotheses, thus, are suggested, having to do
with differences in perceptions of students who have had an internship
and
those who have not.
H1: Students who have had an internship will consider an
internship as more important than students who have not had an
internship.
H2a: Students who have had an internship and students who have not
had an internship have equivalent estimates of future earning
potential.
H2b: Students who have had an internship and students who have not
had an internship will both have optimistic estimates of future earning
potential.
H3: Students who have had internship and students who have not had
an internship will both identify the same sources of information about
internships to be valuable at the same rates.
H4: Students who have had internship experience will state that
their preparation for the internship was greater in practical,
experimentally derived areas than students who have not had an
internship
project what they will do to prepare for an internship.
H5a: Students who have had internship experience and students who
have not had an internship will concur in their self - assessments of
the
cognitive, ego-related personal character skills they have employed or
will
need to employ for an internship.
H5b: Both students' self-assessments of the cognitive, ego-related
personal character skills they
have employed or will need to employ for an internship will heavily
lean toward an optimistic self-assessment.
Results:
Each hypothesis was confirmed, with some interesting variations.
Several questions attempted to tap into the constructs that the
hypotheses
addressed.
First, (H1) posited that internship veterans would more likely
think the internship important than those who had not had an
internship. To
the question, "How important do you believe an internship would be for
your
preparation to take a full time job?" most students affirmed it to be
either
very important or important. The students who had an internship,
however,
were more likely (89.9% vs. 66.9%) to rank it "very important." Such a
difference suggests that the internship process may clarify an already
held
impression.
Second, in the subsequent hypotheses (H2a, H2b) we hypothesized
that predictions of future income would be the same between internship
veterans and students without an internship history. We asked two
questions
of the respondent students: (1) What income do you believe you will
receive
for the first year of full time professional employment? and (2) What
income
do you believe you will receive after five years of full time
professional
employment? Several salary ranges, from "Less than $10,000" to "$40,000
or
more" were provided. Also included was a "not intending to work
outside"
option.
In both questions, students who had had internships and those
who had not made similar
projections, as shown in Tables 1 and 2.
Expected First Year Income
Internship
Experience (n=69)
No Internship
Experience (n=181)
less than $10,000
.0% n= 0
2.8% n=5
$10,000-$14,999
14.5% n=10
9.4% n=17
$15,000-$19,999
24.6% n=17
22.7% n=41
$20,000-$24,999
26.1% n=18
24.9% n=45
$25,000-$29,999
14.5% n=10
21.0% n=38
$30,000-$34,999
8.7% n= 6
11.6% n=21
$35,000-$39,999
2.9% n= 2
2.8% n= 5
$40,000 or more
5.8% n= 4
4.4% n= 8
no plans to work outside the home
2.9% n= 2
.6% n= 1
Table 1. Student Estimates of First-Year Income.
Expected Fifth Year Income
Internship Experience (n=69)
No Internship Experience (n=181)
$10,000-$14,999
.0% n= 0
.6% n= 1
$15,000-$19,999
2.9% n= 2
.6% n= 1
$20,000-$24,999
11.6% n= 8
8.8% n=16
$25,000-$29,999
15.9% n=11
18.8% n=34
$30,000-$34,999
21.7% n=15
21.0% n=38
$35,000-$39,999
14.5% n=10
19.9% n=10
$40,000 or more
31.9% n=22
28.7% n=22
no plans to work outside the home
1.4% n= 1
1.1% n= 1
Table 2. Student Estimates of Fifth-Year Income.
Within the current sample, internship experience does not markedly
affect schemas of personal income potential as suggested in H2a.
In short, internship experience, at least with the current sample,
does not markedly affect schemas of personal income potential as suggested in
H1a.
In H3, we projected that students who have had internship and students
who have not had an internship will both identify the same sources of
information about internships to be valuable at the same rates. The finding to a
question that asked them to name the best source generally supported this
hypothesis.
The results are shown in Table 3.
Source of Information
Internship Experience (n=69)
No Internship Experience (n=181)
counselors
15.9% n=11
23.8% n=43
professors
24.6% n=17
17.1% n=31
other students
13.0% n= 9
7.7% n=14
the company itself
20.3% n=14
21.5% n=39
classified ads
.0% n= 0
1.1% n= 2
friends
4.3% n= 3
2.2% n= 4
other
5.8% n= 4
2.8% n= 5
no response
15.9% n=11
23.8% n=43
Table 3. Student Evaluation of Best Sources of Information About
Internships.
Next we come to the self-assessment and program assessment Questions.
In H4, we projected that students who have had internship experience will state
that their preparation for the internship was greater in practical areas than
students who have not had an internship project what they will do to prepare for
an internship. In the questions, we asked them to list what they had done to
prepare for an internship. Three categories of activities were: a) talking to a
professor about possible jobs or the companies which they wished to work for, b)
reviewing and preparing their resume with the help of professor, c) consulting
with the Office of Career Placement, d) researching the companies history,
market and reputation, and e) researching what responsibilities they would have
at the companies before the internship began, and finally talking with other
students. In each case, differences were found between students who had
internships and those who had not, with the latter much less likely to report
thinking such activities were necessary. In short, in this domain it was shown
that the internship experience seemed to affect perception.
The results are shown in Table 4.
Method of Preparation for an Internship
Internship Experience (n=69)
No Internship Experience (n=181)
take instruction from Office of Career Planning on how to interview
13.0% n= 9
31.5% n=57
participate in Career Planning event offered by Office of Career
Planning
15.9% n=11
19.9% n=36
talk with professors about internships and jobs in my field of interest
40.6% n=28
61.3% n=111
research the company, to learn about its products and services
37.7% n=26
71.3% n=129
ask one or more professors to review my resume
15.9% n=11
39.8% n=72
find out what my responsibilities will be and prepare for them
40.6% n=28
69.6% n=126
talk with other students
47.8% n=33
69.1% n=125
Table 4. Forms of Preparation for an Internship.
Furthermore, students who had internships were less likely to lack
certain applied skills rather than students who had not had one. Among other
skills, these included uses of spreadsheets, word processing and other software.
The results are shown in Table 5.
Applied Skill Thought to be Lacking
Internship Experience (n=69)
No Internship Experience (n=181)
knowledge of certain software
60.9% n=42
61.3% n=111
knowledge of word processing software
10.1% n= 7
17.7% n=32
knowledge of spreadsheet software
30.4% n=21
45.9% n=83
knowledge of desktop publishing software
34.8% n=24
48.1% n=87
knowledge of the type of business in which the internship is located
37.7% n=26
29.8% n=54
Table 5. Student Perceptions of Deficiencies in Their Own Applied
Skills.
The final set of results deal with ego-related self-assessments. These
were measured by asking students if they thought they lacked certain cognitive
skills before the internship, or could imagine lacking them in the case of
students who had not had one yet. Among the list of "lacks" were: a) politeness,
b) appropriate office demeanor and behavior, c) knowledge about type of
business, d) knowledge about the business environment, e) the importance of
deadlines, f) how to dress correctly for the business, g) speaking in standard
English, and e) being on time to work.
Again the hypotheses were confirmed. Students who have had internship
experience and students who have not had an internship concurred in their self -
assessments of the cognitive, ego-related personal character skills they have
employed or will need to employ for an internship. Moreover, most students
believed they did not lack any of these skills -- this despite many employers,
counselors and employers testifying to the contrary.
The results are displayed in Table 6.
Personal Skill Thought to be Lacking
Internship Experience (n=69)
No Internship Experience (n=181)
knowledge of proper office behavior
2.9% n= 2
7.2% n=13
knowledge of the business environment
24.6% n=17
29.8% n=54
knowledge of the importance of deadlines
2.9 n= 2
3.3% n= 6
knowledge of how to dress appropriately
2.9% n= 2
5.5% n=10
knowledge of how to interview for the internship
13.0% n= 9
37.0% n=67
knowledge of importance of being polite
1.4% n= 1
2.2% n= 4
importance of speaking well in standard English
4.3% n= 3
6.6% n=12
importance of being on time for work
4.3% n= 3
4.4% n= 8
Table 6. Student Perceptions of Deficiencies in Their Own Personal
Skills.
Summary
This study showed that students with internship experience generally
hold more realistic views of their practical, applied skills after internships,
but the internship process itself may not be conducive to altering schemas of
personal self-assessment. Students were more willing to admit that the
internship taught them what they didn't know about manipulating things; they
would not admit to learning anything about themselves. Such findings support the
feedback that fits perspective. We, as ego-holding animals, are more likely to
admit that something might be lacking in our ability to manipulate inanimate
objects, than in our personal characteristics. This is obviously an insight
worthy of further observation and analysis among those trying to supervise or
encourage internships.
Limitations and Future Research
This exploratory study had limited objectives. First, the
questionnaire did not address deeper cognitive questions of types of thinking
skills that students seek, develop or need within and without the internship
process. This was not done because of the close-ended survey nature of the
instruments. In addition, many students volunteered information about concerns,
frustration, observation, benefits -- many types of observation -- that did not
apply within any of the established categories of our survey. These included
remarks about being frustrated by rude treatment by bosses in the workplace, or
that they felt that often coursework did have relevance to workplace practices
but professors did not make those connections clear and unambiguous or relevant.
Such observations are obviously worth pursuing.
Another set of limitations involved the tracking of information flow
among students. Some questions did ask them about sources of information they
considered best for internship information, and what they did to prepare
themselves for the internship. But, in retrospect these were not fully able to
tap into the qualitative. What kinds of information were rated by different
sources, e.g. counselors vs. professors, vs. other students? Are other students
good sources of information on how well the prospective intern would be treated?
Are friends and family the best sources of actual positions? Do professors tend
to overemphasize the learning opportunities but be out of touch with the work
regimen of the internship location? How does information about internships and
jobs flow throughout a school? These questions are worth probing; we only
touched the surface here. Another question not asked which may have influenced
the findings is some form of "how tough" was your internship?
Finally, and most important, do these attitudes and expectations
correspond to any extent with the expectations of alumni who have been in the
job market for a longer period, say five years, media employers and media
educators? Our study examined one corner of a triangle -- the students. Although
we achieved some comparability by looking at students who have had an internship
and those that have not, the study did not include the other points of the
internship triangle: school personel and mass media employers. It is of great
interest to examine their attitudes and expectations, not only to compare them
with those of the students, but to see what other suggestions or observations
they may make about the students, others within the triangle, and perhaps,
themselves.
Accordingly, we plan to undertake two more steps in this program of
research. We will survey
school personnel, including both counselors and professors. We will
conduct similar surveys of internship employers.
In sum, we hope to compare and contrast the views of all three
segments of the internship triangle. We hope that through presentation of these
preliminary observations at AEJMC we will prompt discussion with colleagues
about how best to achieve these goals and, as we have suggested in this paper,
better establish the internship process itself as one which deserves respect as
an important extension of the educational process and as a potentially fruitful
sources of research opportunities. We hope this study is modest beginning toward
such program of research, and we hope that with AEJMC and other professional
organization we can proclaim that internships are not extraneous to the mission
of the university but can be central foci of practical results of
education. APPENDIX A: Sample Characteristics
Variable
Value
Frequency
Percent
gender
male
100
40.0
female
150
60.0
major
broadcast
51
20.4
print
33
13.2
advert.
62
24.4
public relations
38
15.2
political comm.
6
2.4
other/NA
61
24.4
race
white
207
82.8
black
17
6.8
Asian
9
3.6
other
17
6.8
status
mass comm.
major
161
64.4
mass comm. minor
19
7.6
intended major
22
8.8
not intended major
48
19.2
internship history
internship experience
69
27.6
no internship experience
181
72.4
Endnotes
[1] Hovland, Carl I. 1971[1959]. Reconciling Conflicting
Results Derived from
Experimental and Survey Studies of Attitude Change. In
Wilbur Schramm & Donald F. Roberts (Eds.),
The Process and Effects of Mass Communication (pp. 495-515).
Urbana, IL: University of Illinois
Press.
[2] Pedro, Joan Daniels. 1984. Induction into the workplace: The
Impact of
internships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 25: 80-95;
Watson, Bibi S. The Intern Turnaround.
Management Review, June 84(6), June 1995, pp. 9-12.Becker,
Lee B., Gerald M. Kosicki, Thomas
Engleman, & K. Viswanath. 1991. Finding Work and Getting
Paid: Predictors of Success in the Mass
Communications job Market. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication, Boston, Mass., August
7-10. Fulmer, Hal W. 1993. "Public
Relations Internships: Bridging the Classroom-Boardroom
Gap." Paper presented at the Joint Meeting
of the Southern States Communication Association and the
Central States Communication Association,
Lexington, KY, April 14-18.Oldman, Mark., & Samer Hamadeh.
1995. Great internships! National
Business Employment Weekly. pp. 6-10; Fitzgerald, Maureen.
1991. Entry-level blues; finding a job as
a journalist; Special Report: Journalism vs. the Economy;
Cover Story. The Quill, April, p. 28;
Londre, Larry. 1988. Summer interns: Pay now, reap later.
Advertising Age, August 1, p. 36S
[3] Pedro, Joan Daniels. 1984. Induction into the workplace: The
Impact of
internships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 25: 80-95. See
also: Hudson, J. 1978. What should be
emphasized in retail education? Journal of Retailing, 54(3):
67-70*; Marcus, S. 1978. Deficiencies
in retail education? Journal of Retailing, 54(3): 77-80*;
Swerdlow, R. 1978. Retail education in
four-year institutions: What does the future hold? Journal
of Retailing, 54(2): 37-42.*
[4] Pedro, Joan Daniels. 1984. Induction into the workplace: The
Impact of
internships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 25: 80-95;
Ginn, R. 1979. Off-campus learning. Journal
of College Placement, Spring 65-67.; McHugo, G., & G.
Jernstedt. 1979. The affective impact of field
experience education on college students. Alternative Higher
Education, 3(3): 188-203.
[5] Pedro, Joan Daniels. 1984. Induction into the workplace: The
Impact of
internships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 25: 80-95;
McHugo, G., & G. Jernstedt. 1979. The
affective impact of field experience education on college
students. Alternative Higher Education,
3(3): 188-203.
[6] Schweitzer, J.C. 1985. Practical research can bring respect to
J-schools.
Journalism Educator, 40(2): 38-41.
[7] Applegate, Edd. Winter 1995. Graduate Study in Advertising
and the Core
Curriculum. Journalism Educator, Winter: 62-68. See also:
Richards, Jef I. & Patricia A. Stout.
1992. Advertising agency views on graduate education in
advertising. In Leonard N. Reid, (Ed.), The
Proceedings of the 1992 Conference of the American Academy
of Advertising (pp. 236-238). Athens, GA:
Henry W. Grady College of JMC.*; Donnelly, William J. 1992.
Correlating top agency success with
educational background. Journalism Educator, Spring: 67-73.
[8] Lancaster, K.M., H.E. Katz, & J. Cho. 1990. Advertising faculty
describes
theory vs. practice debate. Journalism Educator, 45(1): 9-
21.*; Rotzoll, K. 1985. Future
advertising education: Ideas on a tentative discipline.
Journalism Educator, 40(3): 37-41. p. 37.
[9] Schweitzer, J.C. 1988. Who are these advertising majors and
what do they want?
Journalism Quarterly, 65(3): 733-739.
[10] Spann, Tom. 1994. The Internship Coordinator: Problems and Perils.
Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication
Association, New Orleans, LA, November
19-22, 1994.
[11] Fitzgerald, Mark. 1994. Looking For Cheap Hires; Survey
shows small
dailies are seeking high quality j-school graduates but
looking to pay them under $16,000 a year.
Editor & Publisher, July 9, p. 17.
[12] Medoff, Norman J. 1993. Experiential Learning in the New
Professionalism.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech
Communication Association, Miami Beach, FL,
November 18-21.
[13] Blanchard, Robert O. and William G. Christ. 1993. Media education
and the
liberal arts: A blueprint for a new professionalism. H
illsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[14] Gomery, D. 1986. Media Economics. Feedback, 27(5): 3-6.
[15] Postman, Neil & C. Weingartner. 1969. Teaching as a subversive
activity. New
York: Dell.
[16] Calvin, William H., 1991. The ascent of mind: ice age climates and
the
evolution of intelligence. New York: Bantam.
[17] Fiske, Susan T. & Shelley E. Taylor. 1991. Social cognition. 2nd
ed. New
York: Random House. p. 665; For discussions of what schemas
are see: Brewer, W. F. & G. V. Nakamua.
1984. The nature and functions of schemas. In R. S. Wyer,
Jr. & T. K. Srull, (Eds.), Handbook of
social cognition, vol. 1. (pp. 119-160). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum; Fiske, S. T. & P. W.
Linville. 1980. What does the concept schema buy us?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6:
543-557; Hastie, R. 1981. Schematic principles in memory. In
E. Tory Higgins, C. Peter H erman, Mark
P. Zanna, (Eds.). Social cognition: the Ontario Symposium,
vol. 1 (pp. 39-88). Hillsdale, N. J: L.
Erlbaum Associates; Tayler, S. E., & J. Crocker. Schematic
bases of social information processing.
1981. In E. Tory Higgins, C. Peter Herman, Mark P. Zanna,
(Eds.). Social cognition: the Ontario
Symposium, vol. 1 (pp. 89-134). Hillsdale, N. J: L. Erlbaum
Associates.
[18] White, J. D. & D. E. Carlston. 1983. Consequences of schemata
for
attention, impressions, and recalls in complex social
interactions. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 45: 538-549.
[19] Belmore, S. M. 1987. Determinants of attention during
impression formation.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 13: 480-489; Brewer, M. B. V.
Dull & L. Lui. 1981. Perceptions of the elderly: Stereotypes
as prototypes. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 41: 656-670; B urnstein, E. & Y.
Schul. 1982. The informational basis of
social judgments: Operation in forming impressions of other
persons. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 18: 217-234; Burnstein, E. & Y. Schul. 1983. The
informational basis of social
judgments: Memory for integrated and non integrated trait
descriptions. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 19: 49-57; Fiske, S. T. & S. L. Neuberg.
1990. A continuum of impression
formation, from category-based to individuating processes:
Influences of information and motivation
on attention and interpretation. In Mark P. Zanna, (Ed.),
Advances in experimental psychology, 23
(pp. 1-74). New York: Academic Press; Fiske, S. T. & M. A.
Pavelchak. 1986. Category-based versus
piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in
schema-triggered affect. In Richard M.
Sorrentino & E. Tory Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation
and cognition: Foundations of social
behavior (pp. 167-203). New York: Guilford Press; H elmsley,
G. D. & H. H. C. Marmurek. 1982. Person
memory: The processing of consistent and inconsistent person
information. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 8: 433-438; Jamieson, D. W. & M. P.
Zanna. 1989. Need for structure in attitude
formation and expression. In A. R. Pratkanis & S. J.
Breckler, & A. G. Greenwald, (Eds.), Attitude
structure and function (pp. 383-406). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum; Stern, L. D., et al. . 1984.
Processing time and the recall of inconsistent and
consistent behaviors of groups. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 47: 253-262.
[20] Fiske, S. T. & S. L. Neuberg. 1990. A continuum of impression
formation,
from category-based to individuating processes: Influences
of information and motivation on
attention and interpretation. In Mark P. Zanna, (Ed.),
Advances in experimental psychology, 23 (pp.
1-74). New York: Academic Press; Higgins, E. T. & J. A.
Bargh. 1987. Social cognition and social
perception. Annual Review of Psychology, 38: 369-425; Ruble,
D. N. & C. Stangor. 1986. Stalking the
elusive schema: Insights from developmental and
social-psychological analyses of gender schemas.
Social Cognition, 4: 227-261.
[21] Fiske, S. T. & S. L. Neuberg. 1990. A continuum of impression
formation,
from category-based to individuating processes: Influences
of information and motivation on
attention and interpretation. In Mark P. Zanna, (Ed.),
Advances in experimental psychology, 23 (pp.
1-74). New York: Academic Press. See also: Fiske, S. T.
1982. Schema-triggered affect: Applications
to social perception. In M. S. Clark & S. T. Fiske, (Eds.),
Affect and Cognition: The 17th Annual
Carnegie Symposium on Cognition (pp. 55-78). H illsdale, NJ;
Erlbaum; Fiske, S. T., et al. . 1987.
Category-based and attribute-based reactions to others: Some
informational conditions of
stereotyping and individuating processes. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 23: 399-427;
Fiske, S. T. & M. A. Pavelchak. 1986. Category-based versus
piecemeal-based affective responses:
Developments in schema-triggered affect. In R. M. S
orrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of
motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior
(pp. 167-203). New York: Guilford Press;
Neuberg, S. L. & S. T. Fiske. 1987. Motivational influences
on impression formation: Outcome
dependency, accuracy-driven attention, and individuating
processes. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 53: 431-444; Pavelchak, M. A. 1989.
Piecemeal and category-based evaluation: An
ideographic analysis. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 27: 120-128.
[22] Hastie, R. 1981. Schematic principles in human memory. In
E. T. Higgins, C. P.
Herman, & M. P. Zanna, (Eds.), Social Cognition: The Ontario
Symposium, vol. 1 (pp. 39-88).
Hillsdale, NJ; Erlbaum.
[23] Swann, W. B., Jr. & S. J. Read. 1981. Acquiring self knowledge:
The search
for feedback that fits. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 41: 1119-1128; Swann, W. B.,
Jr. & S. J. Read. 1981. Self-verification processes: How we
sustain our self-conceptions. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 17: 351-370.
[24] Backman, C. W. 1988. The self: A dialectical approach. In.
Berkowitz,
(Ed.)., Advances in experimental social psychology., vol. 21
(pp. 229-260). New York: Academic
Press; Swann, W. B., Jr. 1983. Self-verification: Bringing
social reality into harmony with the
self. In J. Suls & A. G. Greenwald, (Eds.), Psychological
perspectives on the self, vol. 2 (pp.
33-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[25] Weinstein, N.D. 1989. Perceptions of personality
susectptability to harm. In
V.M. Mays, G.W. Albee, & S.F. Schneider, (Eds), Primary
prevention behavior (pp. 23-39). New York:
Plenum.
[26] Pelam, B. W., & W. B. Swann, Jr. 1989. From self-conceptions
to self-worth: On
the sources and structure of global self esteem. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 57:
672-680; Swann, W. B., Jr. & Brown, J. D. 1990. From self to
health: Self-verification and identity
disruption. In B. Sarason, I. Sarason, & G. Pierce, (Eds.),
Social Support: An interactional view
(pp. 150-172). New York: Wiley.
[27] Swann, W. B., Jr. 1987. Identity negotiation: Where the two
roads meet.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53: 1038-
1051.
[28] 28 Crary, W. G. 1966. Reactions to incongruent self-experiences.
Journal of
Consulting Psychology, 30: 246-252; Silverman, I. 1964.
Self-esteem and differential responsiveness
to success and failure. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 69: 115-119; Swann, W. B., Jr. &
S. J. Read. 1981. Self-verification processes: How we
sustain our self-conceptions. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 17: 351-370.
|
