Content-Type: text/html
Experiential Learning
Experiential Learning
Student Evaluations of Experiential Learning:
Comparing Public Relations Internships
and Service-Learning Placements
Patricia A. Curtin, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
CD#3365 Carroll Hall
School of Journalism and Mass Communication
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3365
(919) 962-4091 phone
(919) 962-0620 fax
[log in to unmask]
and
Robert Kerr, M.A.
Park Doctoral Fellow
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
Running head: Experiential Learning
Introduction
Practitioners and educators alike have long recognized the value of experiential learning. In 1938 educator and philosopher John Dewey urged "do, do, do" as the most successful learning method, and educators, particularly those in professional fields, have heeded Dewey's call-so much so, in fact, that a recent article in Maclean's called experiential learning the "hot ticket in academic enrichment," a form of "value-added education" (Schofield & Caragata, 1999, p. 90).
Every major study of the public relations curricula has articulated the value of experiential learning. The 1975 Association for Education in Journalism and Public Relations Society of America joint study listed "Internship" as one criteria of a quality public relations program (Bateman & Cutlip, 1975), a criterion reiterated in the follow-up 1987 AEJMC/PRSA study (Fischer, 2000). In a 1992 special issue of the Public Relations Journal, practitioners recommended requiring two internships (Redecker, 1992), and they rated internships second only to writing as the course most necessary for a public relations education (Schwartz, Yarbrough, & Shakra, 1992).
More recently, the 1999 report of the Commission on Public Relations Education recommended that undergraduate programs include a supervised work experience:
It is imperative that public relations students have the opportunity to apply the skills and principles they learn to the professional arena. These practical experiences must be supervised by faculty and practitioners who cooperate to provide professional experience directed by learning objectives and assessed throughout to assure a quality practical educational experience. (Kruckeberg & Paluszek, 1999, p. 22)
Although the specific format of this practical work experience is not specified in the body of the report, the summary on page 4 labels it as an "internship."
These reports delineate internships as the preferred form of experiential learning for public relations students. Yet experiential learning can take many forms-such as using clients in the classroom, cooperative education programs, service-learning placements, and international exchanges-and the relative strengths and weaknesses of these various forms have not been empirically determined. This two-phase qualitative and quantitative research project based on a case study uses student data gathered from journals, reflection sessions, interviews, and surveys to examine student evaluations of two forms of experiential learning-internships and service-learning placements-to determine if students believe the two are essentially different experiences and, if so, which they view as more valuable and why.
Literature Review
Experiential learning has been defined as learning beyond that of the standard classroom that encourages personal and intellectual growth: "Such education can occur in a wide variety of settings, but it usually takes on a 'learn-by-doing' aspect that engages the student directly in the subject, work or service involved" (Northeastern University, 1997, in Katula & Threnhauser, 1999, p. 240)
Researchers have surmised the social activism and idealism of the 1960s led to more active learning formats conducted in professional and social settings, which has produced a growing emphasis on experiential learning in the last 30 years (Cannon & Arnold, 1998; Ciofalo, 1988).
Internships
Through the mid 1980s, the terms internship and experiential learning were often used synonymously in the literature, indicative of the dominance of internships during this time. As such, their benefits have been well documented. A survey of business alumni indicated significant early career advantages for undergraduates with internship experience, such as obtaining initial employment more quickly and earning higher salaries than those without internship experience (Gault, Redington, & Schlager, 2000). Other studies found interns better prepared to enter the job market (Hite & Bellizzi, 1986) and enjoying greater job satisfaction (Bales, 1979). Students surveyed after completing internships have reported greater feelings of personal and social efficacy (Beinstein, 1976); an increased sense of responsibility (Hursch & Borzak 1979); and a focusing of job interests and abilities (Hite & Bellizzi, 1986). Thiel and Hartley (1997) found that students who participated in internships attached greater meaning to academic programs; had increased opportunities to examine career po
ssibilities; explored potential employers; trained under both academic and practitioner supervision; and developed increased maturity, responsibility, confidence, and interpersonal skills.
The same researchers, however, noted the following barriers to successful internships: internships as electives; interns' perceptions of doing dead-end work; faculty not considering internships part of the educational program; employers not viewing internships as mentoring opportunities; and unequal commitments and expectations among the parties involved (Thiel & Hartley, 1997). Critical reviews of internships have produced similar lists of shortcomings (Katula & Threnhauser, 1999; Stahl, 1999). The Jane Pauley Task Force on Mass Communication Education reported similar findings: most mass communication internships lack supervision and mentoring, do not give interns real responsibility, and demean the intern through lack of pay (Case, 1996).
To remedy these shortcomings, researchers suggest careful site selection, a detailed learning agreement, attendance in a concurrent seminar, and a set of cumulative assignments or portfolio for evaluation (Katula & Threnhauser, 1999; Parilla & Hesser,1998). Without a strong academic link, Ciofalo (1989) found that without a strong academic link the popularity of internships may be related to grade inflation unless rigorous grading policies are enforced. Yet Cannon and Arnold's survey (1998) found that business students have begun to adopt a pragmatic orientation to college internship programs, seeing the internship more in terms of providing an edge in the job market than in educational terms-a finding in contrast with that of Hite and Bellizzi (1986), who 12 years earlier found that college students viewed internships as valuable learning experiences.
In the 30 years since internships first gained popularity, they have become at many schools less integrated into the academic curriculum and more of an 'outside, value-added extra.' While students, faculty, and practitioners value the experience an internship provides, the literature suggests that often little oversight is provided to ensure they result in a quality learning experience. This shift from academic integration may explain why service learning has regained popularity as an experiential learning method.
Service Learning
Although the origins of service learning can be traced back to John Dewey, Robert Park, and the Chicago School of Sociology in the 1930s, renewed interest in service-learning roughly paralleled an increased call for public accountability in higher education, the publication of Ernest Boyer's 1987 seminal overview of undergraduate education (i.e., College: The Undergraduate Experience in America), and a revival of Dewey's concerns that students be taught to become productive members of American democracy (Katula & Threnhauser, 1999), including Robert Putnam's concern over a loss of social capital (Bowling Alone, 1995). Service learning is perhaps the most widely practiced form of experiential education currently (Katula & Threnhauser, 1999); in 1997 more than 700 colleges and universities had formal service programs and 240 offered academic credit for service learning (Sellnow & Olster, 1997).
Service learning stresses the synergy between academic concepts and experiential learning; it is often defined as integrating community service with academic instruction through structured reflection (Bush-Barcelis, 1998; Easterling & Rudell, 1997). Although few empirical studies exist, the benefits of service learning are relatively well documented. Easterling and Rudell's humanistic essay (1997) concluded that service learning allows students to develop problem-solving skills, to integrate theory with practical concerns, to develop social and leadership skills, to work with people from diverse backgrounds, and to become engaged in social issues (see also Katula & Threnhauser, 1999). Drake (2000), based on classroom experience, believes service learning increases student attendance, fosters personal development and civic responsibility, and increases community relations. Tucker, McCarthy, Hoxmeier, and Lenk (1998), in a humanistic essay, list enriching students' skill base, rein
forcing classroom content, expanding students' frame of reference, putting students in touch with community needs, and giving students a competitive edge in the job market. In a qualitative study, Bourland-Davis and Fall (1997) found that service-learning increased students' self efficacy and willingness to learn through trial and error.
In one of the few empirical studies, Markus, Howard, and King (1993) used an experimental design to determine that students in service-learning sections of a large undergraduate course were significantly more likely than those in traditional sections to report they had performed up to their potential in the course, had learned to apply course principles to new situations, had changed personal values and orientation, and had developed a greater awareness of social problems. Corbett and Kendall (1999) found that a solid majority of surveyed students believed service learning helped them learn course content and that it enhanced their sense of citizenship (see also Cohen & Kinsey, 1994). Interestingly, they did not find that service learning was a motivating factor in and of itself, although students who had taken more than one service-learning class expressed an enhanced appreciation for the concept. It remains unclear whether students who enjoyed the service-learning experience wer
e more likely to take a second class, if over time students gained an appreciation for the experience, or if simple repetition had a cumulative motivating effect.
The main criticisms of service learning are whether a strong relationship exists between course material and the service activity, whether students resent working for free while paying course tuition, whether theoretical content gives way to service assignments, and whether teaching responsibilities are shifted to community personnel (Corbet & Kendall, 1999). Critical reviews of service-learning programs accuse them of fostering political activism and exploiting the community for the self-serving purpose of resume boosting (Katula & Threnhauser, 1999). From the student perspective, a comprehensive survey failed to find evidence that service learning helped students clarify their career goals (Gray, Ondaatje, & Zakaras, 1999). In a case study design, Taylor (2000) found that students' main criticism was of the time and energy needed to produce quality work for real-world assignments. To address the potential pitfalls of service learning she suggested emphasizing academic learning
over social responsibility, closely monitoring students' work and relating it to course theories and concepts, not allowing students to assume too much responsibility, and tutoring students outside of class to help them apply course principles to real-world situations.
Service learning, then, may address some of the shortcomings of internships as they are administered at many schools by closely integrating academic concepts with the service experience. In the case of both methods, however, empirical research suggests that a lack of trained teachers, administrative support, and faculty and professional oversight can undermine the goals of these experiential learning methods.
Experiential Learning Theory
In recognition of these potential difficulties, the National Society for Experiential Education has established 10 principles of good practice (i.e., intention, authenticity, planning clarity, training and mentoring, monitoring and assessment, continuous improvement, reflection, evaluation, and acknowledgment; see www.nsee.org), which have their basis in Kolb's experiential learning theory. Whereas Dewey believed that learning reinforced experience, Kolb (1984) suggested that experience comes first, defining learning as "the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience" (p. 38). Kolb (1976) described four adaptive learning modes or behaviors: concrete experiencing, which is in dialectical tension with abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation, in dialectical tension with reflective observation. As students resolve these tensions, learning takes place. Thus, experiential learning forces students to experience role conflict. By working
to reduce this conflict, students develop less dualistic thinking in favor of more multiplistic, relativistic thinking; they increase their tolerance for ambiguity and become more conceptual thinkers (Hursch & Borzak, 1979). Kolb's theory suggests that if students develop this capacity to identify and engage multiple perspectives they will integrate more readily into a diverse, multicultural society while accumulating shared knowledge (Katula & Threnhauser, 1999).
Based on Kolb's theory and NSEE's principles of good practice, any form of experiential learning will only be effective if it is carefully monitored and assessed, includes reflection and evaluation, and provides the opportunity for students to experience role conflict and work to resolve it. If held to these standards, however, it has the capability of providing students with conceptual skills and learning appropriate to a multicultural, diverse society.
Case Study and Research Questions
The focus of this study is a public relations sequence within a school of journalism and mass communication at a large, state university. All public relations majors are encouraged to have at least one, and preferably two or three, internships. Students often find their own, but a career planning and placement office within the School is available to assist students. Because the School is not in a major metropolitan area, many of these internships are in distant locales, and students often take them during the summer. Many of the internships are unpaid, and some students report financial barriers to completing an internship. Students may also sign up for an internship course, through which they are assigned to a local internship and receive course credit and some degree of academic oversight.
Because of the distance and financial barriers noted above, the required public relations writing course for majors has been run as a service-learning class since 1997 to ensure that all majors have an experiential-learning component before graduation. Typically, three or four class sections of 21 students each are offered in the fall and spring semesters, with one section offered most summers. Since the inception of the service-learning requirement, approximately 650 junior and senior public relations majors have taken the course.
Students are paired with a local nonprofit organization through a university-wide service-learning office. Students work 3 to 5 hours a week for 13 weeks outside of regular class hours to help their organizations produce communication plans and pieces to meet organizational goals and objectives. Instructors meet with site supervisors at the beginning of the semester but usually not again unless problems arise. Consistent with service-learning practices, students are required to actively reflect on the experience through structured sessions during regular class hours and journals.
Although the service-learning requirement was instituted to ensure students would have an internship-like experience, casual feedback indicated students viewed their service-learning placements somewhat differently from their internships. That observation was the impetus for this study, and from that and the literature reviewed earlier, the following research questions emerged.
RQ1 Do students believe that internships and service-learning placements are qualitatively different experiences?
RQ1a If so, what do they believe are the advantages and disadvantages of each?
RQ2 Do both approaches encourage Kolb's model of experiential learning and embody the principles of good practice for experiential learning?
Research Phase One: Qualitative
Method
Data were obtained from answers to an open-ended question on internship evaluation surveys conducted by the Career Planning and Placement Office from 1996 through 2000, from the service-learning class evaluations and reflection journals from 1997 though 2000, and from in-depth interviews with 11 students conducted in 2000 based on the richness of data in their reflection journals and their experience with multiple public relations internships. Students were interviewed in a location of their choosing, the interviews were taped and transcribed, and they averaged just over one hour.
The data were analyzed according to schema devised by Glaser and Strauss (1967) and as clarified by Strauss (1987) and Strauss and Corbin (1990). The coding comprised three steps: open, axial, and selective. During open coding, the text was fractured using the sentence as the unit of analysis, and the concepts in each were examined for themes and for their relevance to the research questions. During axial coding, the open coding themes were reconstructed in relational form into categories. During selective coding, the categories were collapsed around a major organizing concept. To ensure validity, the analysis was kept solidly grounded in the data, and member checks of the analysis were conducted with subjects.
A constant comparative approach was used to allow grounded concepts to emerge from the data: each year's evaluations were coded and analyzed fully before the next year's were examined. The next year's class evaluations were then coded, and adjustments were made to the emerging schema as necessary. In like manner, data from each year's reflection journals were coded and added to the developing schema. Finally, each interview was coded and added. With the last of the interviews, data saturation was reached, with no new data emerging and no further adjustments necessary (Strauss & Corbin, 1994).
Results
Two axial categories emerged from the data that captured student perspectives on the differences between internships and service-learning placements: (1) interaction with clients, comprising the student as educator and manager, and (2) personal development, comprising initiative, community involvement, and career exploration. In terms of client interaction, while most students interned with public relations agencies or with corporations with well-established public relations functions, most service-learning placements were with small nonprofits in which current personnel did not have public relations training. Many students in service-learning placements had to educate their organizations about public relations. As a student said of her placement site: "They really don't understand what I can do for them, but we are working together and getting it right." Interns, however, were more likely to remain in student mode: "As interns we participated in training seminars and information
sessions. We learned what pr is all about."
As educators, students had to assume a managerial role at their site, although the inherent power differential often made this difficult. As one student noted, "I have found that practitioners must put second their expertise to make way for the egos of the heads of the organization." Said another, "You must learn to work with your client to get things done. My ideas are not always like my client's ideas. Sometimes it's difficult." With internships, however, students believed client relations tended to follow well-established patterns of behavior and occur at a more technical, rather than managerial, level: "The clients are big and the pace is fast-you just keep pitching them." All students reported media relations as their main internship duty.
With a more managerial role came an added degree of responsibility. While students in internships believed they were mainly responsible for creating tactical components of plans that would then be reworked by superiors, service-learning placements often required that students be responsible for strategic planning through execution, which meant the consequences of their actions were more apparent and loomed larger: "I realized it was up to me whether their major annual fund raiser was a hit or a flop because I was in charge." For those students who believed they had poor internships, the contrast in level of responsibility was stark: "This was not an internship, it was secretarial work, and my director didn't care what kind of job I did because what I was doing was of no import."
The second major category that emerged-personal development-comprised initiative, community involvement, and career exploration. Initiative was related to the greater levels of responsibility in service-learning placements. Students felt compelled to step up to the plate and assume responsibility, but they believed the rewards were also greater when they did. As one student noted, "I learned to take the initiative. These people are incredibly busy, and it is your responsibility to make sure your part gets done. No one hands you anything, but any glory is yours as well."
In contrast, students viewed internships as more teamwork oriented, with fewer chances for individual development because clients and experiences were often simulated for training purposes. Motivations for seeking internships were often based more on how it would look to prospective employers than on what the intern would actually get out of the experience: "I took it because it was a quick, two-week internship that would look good on a resume." Some students expressed the notion that internships were more about social development than personal development: "It was a chance to have fun with 25 other interns. We had group activities and nights out in the city." In contrast, students in service-learning placements occasionally said they felt like outsiders at their organizations. The small staffs had developed close working relations, and students consequently "never really felt part of the team."
Community involvement was characterized by two aspects unique to the service-learning placements: a call to volunteerism and an increased awareness of news and local issues. Most were surprised to learn how large a role social services play in meeting community needs and how important volunteers are to the process. As two students noted:
I have developed a true respect and understanding of the odds working against nonprofits these days. At the very least, working with the United Way has ingrained in my mind that no matter where I may work in any field, incorporating volunteerism is a necessity as a member of the community.
The lengths to which nonprofits have to go to get media coverage is surprising, especially since they work so hard with so little to provide necessary community services. Since I'm responsible for events and their success, I feel I've taken on a bigger community role.
Concurrently, students became more aware of local issues and their impact on community life. A student working with a Hispanic support group noted
I have become much more aware of issues affecting a local population [previously] unknown to me. My understanding of proactive public relations has expanded to consider organizations with powerful, important messages that consistently go unheard by the media and the general public. This experience has reinforced my commitment to work for meaningful change.
In almost all cases, students were surprised that these issues were not more prominent on the media agenda; most started to critically question the role of socioeconomic forces in shaping media content.
Students believed that both internships and service-learning placements helped them develop their career goals, but in substantially different ways. Students considered internships good trial grounds for exploring areas of public relations practice, such as media relations, sports marketing, or healthcare communications ("I wanted to try healthcare. I learned I didn't like it") or for exploring different types of employer, such as agency or corporate ("I liked the fast pace of agency work; I know now that's what I want to do for at least a few years"). Students viewed the service-learning placements, however, as orienting them more toward their long-term career goals in relation to their personal development, even though they often expressed the desire to never work, or sometimes even "to set foot," in a nonprofit again. One student said, "This experience has reinforced my commitment to work for meaningful change." Another noted, "I have thoroughly felt as if I have been using wha
t I have learned to benefit others, which makes me feel good about my education here and my future as a pr professional." For many, the experience made them broaden their goals and their perspectives.
I've learned that we can use public relations to help people in need, it's not all spin. I've seen how community oriented people in this area are, and I feel more a part of the community because of this experience. This may sound cheesy, but this experience has made me more thankful for what I have: health, money, everything. It is also making me question what I want to do with my life-help others or climb the corporate ladder. Now I'm exploring ways to do both.
For some, the experience provided a broader perspective that helped them find a renewed commitment to their career goals.
At first, I just didn't connect with it. I went in starting to feel jaded about the profession. I've come out renewed. I now know not only why I'm going into this business, but I also found out a lot about me and my place in the world I hadn't considered before. It was invaluable.
A few students, notably always male, expressed frustration with what they viewed as the lack of 'real world' experience provided by the service-learning placements. Said one, "Geez, cut out the warm and fuzzy stuff. We need a real budget to work with, not this piddly $3,500 stuff." These students often contrasted their service-learning placements with what they believed was their more meaningful and professional internship experience.
In answer to the research questions, these data suggest that students believe internships and service-learning placements are qualitatively different experiences. Some of these differences are related to external factors, namely that most service-learning placements are with nonprofits whereas most students interned with agencies or corporations. Also, service-learning placements were local and took place during the semester, whereas many internships were in distant cities during summer months. Other factors emerged, however, that appear to be inherent to the experiences themselves. Service-learning placements engendered feelings of civic involvement that internships did not, although internships fostered a feeling of teamwork that service-learning placements did not. A few male students viewed internships as more professional and reality based, although others thought internship work was often of less practical use to the organization. Service-learning placements appear to requi
re students to take on a variety of roles, in keeping with Kolb's model of experiential learning, whereas students believed they tended to remain in a student role throughout their internships. Although these results suggest both internships and service-learning placements contributed to students' career development, in contrast to the findings of Gray et al. (1999) reported earlier, the aspects of career development were substantially different between the two.
The central concept that emerged during selective coding was that students highly prize both experiences, but for different reasons: students tend to evaluate service-learning placements internally, in terms of how the experience is contributing to their personal development, whereas they tend to evaluate internships more externally, in terms of how others within the profession will assess the experience. Service-learning placements are a part of class, and therefore of their life as a student, but internships are part of the professional world, and therefore have a more 'real world' aspect. A poor service-learning placement, then, is a disappointing class experience and viewed as a waste of time, but a poor internship experience is still valuable in that it directly contributes to their entry into the professional world.
Research Phase Two: Quantitative
Given the qualitative results and literature reviewed earlier, a survey (Appendix A) was constructed to obtain generalizable data and to test the following hypotheses:
H1 Students will rate both service learning and internships more highly if they receive support from the organization, with support operationalized as having their questions answered, necessary guidance provided, reasonable time demands, and treated as a professional
member of the organization.
H2 Students will perceive the work they do for the service-learning placement as being of more
use to the organization than they will the work they do for an internship.
H3 Students will rate both experiences highly for their ability to help clarify career goals.
H4 Students will have more responsibility in their service-learning placement than in their internship.
H5 Service-learning placements will require students to assume more roles than will
internships, particularly those of educator and manager.
H6 Students will feel more like part of a team at their internship than at their service-learning
placement.
H7 Students will experience more community and civic involvement in their service-learning
placement than in their internships.
H8 Students will be more likely to indicate they would not work for their service-learning organization in the future than they will their internship organizations, but these ratings will
not correlate with their overall ratings of the experience.
H9 Students will rate both experiences highly on amount learned.
H10 Males will rate internship experience more highly than service-learning experience.
The survey was pretested in a second round of interviews with 6 of the original interview subjects and was approved by the Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects.
Subjects were recruited through current classes, fliers, PRSSA meetings, and meetings with their advisers. Although the preference was for students who had taken the service-learning course and completed at least one internship, any student was allowed to fill out the survey who met one or the other of the requirements. Because the researchers were concerned about keeping the survey to a manageable length they employed primacy/recency effect to ask subjects to rate their first and most recent internships only, with the expectation that these would be most vivid for subjects.
Results
Eighty-two completed surveys have been received to date, representing probably close to two-thirds of all students on campus eligible to respond at this time. Of these, 64 had taken or were taking the Public Relations Writing service-learning course and had at least one internship. The average respondent was female (85.4%), 21 years old (52.4%), a senior (70.7%), planning a career in public relations upon graduation (53.7%), had taken only this one service-learning course (65.9%), and had one internship experience (42.3%; Table 1). Only one respondent had taken the service-learning class before having any internship experience, so no analyses could be run using this variable as a discriminator. Only 28 students had more than one internship. Overall, the make-up of the subjects appears representative of the population.
The means and standard deviations for all scaled items are given in Table 2. All three experiences-service learning placements, first internships, and most recent internships-were given high ratings for reasonable time requirements, working with student schedules, allowing students to create work that was of use to the organization, being treated as professionals, getting their questions answered, providing necessary guidance, and being open to student perspectives. Results were mixed for all three experiences, however, on the amount of responsibility entailed, the difference the work made in people's lives, and whether the role filled was more technical or managerial.
Chi-square analyses revealed no significant differences for the overall course rating based on which semester or year respondents took the course or which of the six instructors taught it. Students whose service-learning placement was with an on-campus organization were significantly more likely to report feeling like part of a team at their organization (X2 = 10.86; 4 d.f., p = .028), suggesting they may feel more readily at home in the campus environment. Their overall rating of their experience, however, was not significantly different from that of respondents whose placements were off-campus. Chi-square analyses of the internship ratings revealed two significant differences. Students who interned at corporations were significantly more likely to report the organization was less open and accepting of their perspective (X2 = 21.34; 12 d.f., p = .046), and students who were paid were significantly more likely to report feeling like part of a team than those who received credit or
nothing (X2 = 16.70; 8 d.f., p = .033). Overall ratings of the experience were not significantly different by type of organization or compensation received.
The results of t-tests between students who planned a public relations career and those who did not or were unsure revealed 5 significant differences. Not surprisingly, those who did not plan public relations careers or were unsure were significantly less likely to say their first internship clarified their career goals (t = 2.96; 62 d.f., p = .004) and significantly more likely to say they would not consider working for the group in the future (t = 2.38, 25 d.f., p = .025). They were also more likely to report not having their questions answered at their service-learning placement (t = 2.41; 62 d.f., p = .019) and to report a more technical, rather than managerial role, at both their service-learning placement and first internship site (t = 2.67; 62 d.f., p = .010; t = 2.34; 62 d.f., p = .023).
Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis 1, which stated that students would rate both service learning and internships more highly if they received organizational support, was mainly supported by the data. As shown in Table 3, students' overall rating of their service-learning placement and first internship experience significantly correlated with reasonable time requirements, being treated as a professional, having their questions answered, and getting necessary guidance (a = .65 and .77 respectively). Students ratings of their most recent internship, however, correlated with all of the above factors except reasonable time requirements (a = .67). Apparently, the time required of subsequent internships is not related to student satisfaction, although with only 28 respondents in this category, results must be viewed with caution.
Students did not perceive the work they did for their service-learning placement as being of more use to the organization than they did the work performed for their internships, contrary to hypothesis 2. As shown in Table 2, no significant differences emerged, and the highest rating was given to work produced during the first internship. Significant differences did emerge, however, between those students currently taking the service-learning course (M = 1.93) and those students who had already completed the course (M = 1.17), with current students significantly more likely to believe the material they were producing was not of as much use to the organization (t = 2.10, 62 d.f., p = .040).
Hypotheses 3 and 4 were also not supported by the data. Students rated internships significantly higher (M = 1.98 and 1.93 for first and most recent, respectively) than the service-learning placement (M = 3.00) for clarifying career goals (Table 2; t = 6.65, 47 d.f., p = .000 and t = 2.91, 23 d.f., p = .008, respectively). Again, however, students who had completed the class before filling out the survey were more positive about the contribution of the service-learning placement to clarifying their career goals (M = 2.17), although not significantly so and still not at levels comparable to those of the internship experiences. No significant differences emerged in the amount of responsibility students believed they had in the service-learning placement versus their internship experience, although the data trended in the expected direction (Table 2).
The data partially support hypothesis 5. Students reported a significantly higher educator role in their service-learning placement (M = 3.20) than for their first (M = 4.05) or most recent (M = 4.03) internships (t = -3.70, 47 d.f., p = .001 and t = -2.50, 23 d.f., p = .020, respectively). No significant differences emerged for managerial versus technical roles, however, although the data trended in the expected direction for the service-learning placement and first internship. The highest rating for managerial responsibility was given for the most recent internship experience, however, which may be indicative of students being given more managerial responsibility as they gain experience (Table 2). Additionally, a significant correlation emerged for the most recent internship only between taking on a managerial role and having to persuade the organization to adopt the students' viewpoint (R = -.375, p = .049), which suggests that as students gain experience they actively confron
t more managerial issues.
Students reported feeling significantly more like part of a team at their first internship than at their service-learning placement, partially supporting hypothesis 6 (M = 2.65 and 1.92 respectively; t = 3.09, 47 d.f., p = .003). Although the data trended in the expected direction for the most recent internship as well, the difference between it and the service-learning placement was not significant (Table 2).
Hypothesis 7 was not supported by the data. Students did not believe that their service-learning placement allowed them to make a significantly greater contribution to people's lives than did their internship experiences. A significant difference does emerge, however, between those students who completed the service-learning course and those who were currently enrolled. Students who had completed the course believed they had made a significantly greater contribution to people's lives (M = 1.83) than those who were currently enrolled (M = 2.81; t = 2.009, 62 d.f., p = .049), which suggests that this hypothesis might be at least partially supported over time. No significant differences among experiences emerged from student ratings of the differences their organizations made in peoples' lives, although the data trended in the expected direction, with students rating their service-learning placements most highly on this dimension (Table 2).
The data partially support hypothesis 8. Students were more likely to indicate they would not work for their service-learning placement in the future than they were their internship positions, although the ratings were not significantly different (Table 2). As shown in Table 3, however, for both the service-learning placement and the first internship, a lack of willingness to work for the organization in the future did significantly correlate with a poorer rating of the experience overall (R = .585, p = .000 and R = 536, p = .000 respectively), contrary to the hypothesis.
As shown in Table 2, hypothesis nine was supported. Students rated all three experiences highly for the amount learned. Although the service-learning experience rated significantly lower than the first internship on this dimension, students who had completed the service-learning class rated this dimension higher than those who were still taking the class (M = 1.50 and 2.34 respectively; t = 1.93, 63 d.f., p = .058). These findings suggest that over time students gain greater appreciation and recognition of the amount learned during an experiential learning opportunity.
Hypothesis 10 was only weakly supported. Men did rate their overall internship experience slightly more highly than they did their service-learning experience (M = 3.67 and M = 3.78), but the differences were small and not significant, and the low number of males included in this survey make any conclusions tenuous. Only two males who responded had taken more than one internship, and both of them gave this experience the maximum rating of 5, which suggests that males may believe subsequent internships provide better experiences than one service-learning experience.
Discussion
Similarities Between Experiential Learning Types
This study confirms that students value experiential learning no matter what form it takes. The data demonstrate that service-learning placements and internships share many commonalties in student assessments of their worth (Table 3). Eight factors significantly correlated with students' overall ratings of all three experiences: feeling that their work was of use, being treated as a professional member, having their questions answered, getting necessary guidance, clarifying their career goals, feeling like part of a team, believing their efforts were making a difference in people's lives, and gaining knowledge from the experience. Careful site supervision, meaningful work, being treated like a member of the profession, and having the opportunity to explore career options, then, are key to a quality experience from the student perspective. The majority of these findings are consonant with the literature on internships, particularly those of Thiel and Hartley (1987), but this study
expands them to service-learning placements as well, which has not been empirically well established in the literature to date. This study also expands the literature by suggesting that increased civic involvement is a valued factor not just of service-learning placements but of internships as well, with public relations students aspiring to become socially responsible practitioners.
The factors that students value for experiential learning reflect many of the National Society for Experiential Education's principles of good practice: planning clarity, training and mentoring, monitoring and assessment, evaluation, and acknowledgment. Poor experiences, whether service-learning or internship, fell short on these standards, as the following comments from the open-ended survey question illustrate. One student who rated her service-learning placement quite poorly succinctly noted, "Make sure the non-profit organization for the service-learning program needs an intern." Another student expressed the same frustrations with her internship:
Service-learning was much more useful in experiencing various areas of pr. The agency internship was essentially a 'go for' internship. It was very unorganized as far as my duties, and much of my time was spent organizing supplies, sending out FedEx, making copies, etc. Even some of the writing was futile because it wasn't needed/wasn't used.
Although increased self efficacy and confidence was not measured in this study, it is notable that many students included comments on this aspect of experiential learning in the open-ended question on the survey. Typical of this sentiment is the comment that "The more experience I have, the broader my knowledge is of the field and the more confidence I have in myself." Students believed any work experience, service learning or internship, contributed to increased confidence, which supports the findings of Beinstein (1976) and Thiel and Hartley (1997) for internships and those of Bourland-Davis and Fall (1997) for service learning.
One factor that significantly correlated with overall satisfaction with the first internship and the service-learning placement was the amount of responsibility assigned. The more responsibility students were given in these experiences, the higher they rated the overall experience, suggesting that students value responsibility. This finding is contrary to the recommendation made by Taylor (2000) that service-learning placements not place too much responsibility on students. Students in this study disagreed, although such findings need to be viewed within the larger context of the support received both academically and onsite, which cannot be determined from a case study design only. Students did not rate amount of responsibility a significant factor in their satisfaction with subsequent internships, a finding discussed in more detail below.
Four factors did not significantly correlate with students' overall ratings of all three experiences: familiarity with the organization beforehand, how willing the organization was to work with their schedule, how often they had to educate others about public relations, and how often they had to try and persuade the organization to adopt their viewpoint. These factors did correlate negatively with the overall rating of the experience but not significantly so, suggesting students are willing to put effort into their experiences by getting to know the organization, making adjustments in their schedule, and educating and working with other perspectives. One interesting aspect of the educator role is that while it was insignificant for the satisfaction rating for all three, adopting an educator role was positively correlated with the overall rating of the service-learning placements and negatively correlated with the overall rating of internships. This finding confirms the qualitative
research results that students expect to learn more about the profession itself from internship placements than they do the service-learning experience.
Differences Between Experiential-Learning Types
Some idiosyncratic findings are apparent in Table 3 as well that suggest differences between experiential learning types. First internships are remarkable for being the only experience in which job role significantly correlated with overall rating: students who believed they filled a more managerial function in their first internship were significantly more likely to rate the experience higher, but this correlation did not hold for subsequent internships. All but one subject reported their first internship as their first venture into experiential learning, and this experience rated highest of all three on several key factors: reasonable time demands, performing useful work, professional treatment and being part of a team, and the amount learned. These findings suggest the first experience may, over time, acquire a halo effect, particularly since some of these dimensions, such as producing useful work, are more frequently associated in previous studies and in the qualitative portio
n of this study with service-learning placements. A student comment on the open-ended survey question implies as much: "I have had a lot of internship experience at nonprofit, corporate and agency level, which is why my [service-learning] internship has not affected me as much." More studies are needed, including trends over time and focus groups, to determine if the halo effect is occurring. The findings confirm, however, the value students place on experiential learning, particularly when they first encounter it.
Two students, however, suggested in answer to the open-ended question on the survey that the course come before any internship experience because it would better prepare students for the professional world. One noted that "the lessons in [the class] are invaluable for a pr internship." Another believed the course was key to being accepted as a professional: "I have found it to be very difficult to get internships. People want interns, but experienced interns. Well, isn't the purpose of the internship to gain experience?" For these students, the course provided semi-professional training and experience that could be leveraged for entry into the profession and help guarantee success once there.
Subsequent internships were remarkable for having the fewest factors that significantly correlated with higher ratings. Unlike service-learning placements and first internships, reasonable time requirements, amount of responsibility, and whether they would work for the organization in the future did not significantly correlate with higher satisfaction ratings for more recent internships. These findings suggest that other factors play a larger role in satisfaction obtained from subsequent internships, such as how the internship will look on a resume as opposed to the actual knowledge gain achieved. One student put multiple internships in terms of climbing the career ladder: "They have thus far proven invaluable in securing other/better positions." Care should be taken, then, not to equate internships because these findings suggest student motivations and rewards are substantively different for subsequent internship experiences. This finding may help explain why Hite and Bellizzi (
1986) found that most students took internships for academic gain, whereas Cannon and Arnold's 1998 replication of their study found a more pragmatic orientation. In later years, the emphasis has been on multiple internships, which this study suggests correlates with more pragmatic motivations.
Contrary to the findings of the Pauley Report (Case, 1996), a lack of pay was not viewed as demeaning, although pay could help create team spirit. Further research is needed to verify that this variable is not a continuous one on the satisfaction scale, as these results suggest. Further research is also needed into the male perspective on subsequent internship experiences. The limited findings of this study, that males give the highest ratings to subsequent internships despite encountering more problems with them, suggests that a gender difference exists in how students assess continuing internship experience and is worthy of further study with a larger sample size.
Only one factor was important to service-learning ratings and not to those of internships-whether the organizations' efforts made a difference in peoples' lives-suggesting that students expect nonprofits to fulfill this function and achieve some degree of satisfaction in helping assist those efforts. It is notable, however, that students who interned with nonprofits did not express significant differences on this factor from those who interned at other types of places. This difference may be explained by the fact that the nonprofits that serve as service-learning placements are often small and approach the university for help, whereas the nonprofits at which students intern usually have a formalized public relations function and defined internship position.
Consonant with the findings of Gray et al. (1999), the survey results suggest service learning is not as efficacious in helping students define their career goals as are internships. This finding should be viewed with caution, however, given the strong evidence from the qualitative portion of the study that service learning does contribute to this area, but in quite different ways. It is likely that the one question on the survey that addressed this construct (i.e., The experience helped clarify my career goals) was too narrow to address the career issues raised by the service-learning experience. As noted in the qualiatiatve results, students believed internships were more helpful in narrowing career choices, whereas service learning encouraged students to think about the choice of profession more generally and the role it plays in society. Further research is necessary to tease out these distinctions.
On the open-ended survey question, two students noted the conflict that could arise between course requirements and the needs of the placement site. Said one: "Service learning is more limiting because there are specific requirements which cut into time that other experiences could be taught or learned." Another suggested that these conflicts formed part of the barrier to feeling like a team at the organization: "Because of course requirements my organization could not use many of the things I did for it. I spent so much time in class I did not give the organization my utmost attention." This tension between academic requirements and placement needs is a potential problem with service learning well documented in the literature (e.g., Taylor, 2000). In this case, both comments were from students who were taking the class from an instructor teaching it for the first time, which suggests further research is necessary to determine how instructors handle this tension over time and the role of academic flexibility in service-learning placements.
Such tension, however, can be viewed in light of Kolb's theory of experiential learning (1976; 1984) as a necessary component of the learning experience. Learning takes place when dialectical tension between experience and conceptualization is resolved, and those students who could not resolve the tension may not have learned as much from the experience. Resolving tension requires time for reflection and abstract conceptualization, in contrast to what students view as the usual immediate classroom learning experience of taking notes from lecture. In this study significant differences were noted in the ratings of students who had completed the course as opposed to those who were currently enrolled in it. In terms of how much they believed their material was of use to the organization, how much of a difference they were making in people's lives, and how much they had learned, the most positive ratings for any of the three experiences was for the service-learning course from those st
udents who had already completed it. For many students, the value of service learning may not be apparent until after the experience when they have had time to further reflect on it, supporting Kolb's model (1976; 1984), and clarifying the findings of Corbett and Kendall (1999) concerning the long-term benefits of a service-learning experience.
Limitations and Conclusion
This study's limitations stem in large part from the case study design. Many circumstances peculiar to this program and University could affect student ratings of experiential learning, including the general lack of academic supervision provided for internships, the number of unpaid internships, the lack of internships available locally, the large number of small nonprofits locally, and the tangible and intangible support the University provides for service-learning efforts. More research is needed to determine the role these factors play, and a wider sampling frame is necessary to produce more widely generalizable results. Further research, particularly concerning gender differences, is necessary with a larger sample size. This study also raises questions about long-term effects that a longitudinal study could better address.
Despite these limitations, the findings are valuable for extending the academic literature on the relative merits of different forms of experiential learning in the public relations curriculum. The qualitative and quantitative results demonstrate that service-learning placements, first internships, and subsequent internships are qualitatively different experiences, but the outcomes and benefits from the student perspective are often the same. Given these similarities in outcomes, this study suggests recommendations for a work experience requirement not be limited to internships. Because of the factors noted above, internships might be a large burden for students at some schools at which service-learning opportunities might be more easily instituted. More scrutiny should be given to the overall quality of the experience than to the particular type of experience. This study confirms that the National Society for Experiential Education's principles of good practice provide valid criteria by which to judge the quality of a work experience and safeguard programs from the criticism noted in the recent Macleans' article on experiential learning that universities are selling out to vocational demands and thus undervaluing intellectual literacy (Schofield & Caragata, 1999).
Given these criteria, public relations educators can ensure that students have the opportunity to gain the work experience that they, practitioners, and public relations students alike believe is so valuable despite the constraints of each program's geographic location and level of administrative support. This study suggests it is more important to provide ways to make the experience possible for each student and each program than to proscribe specific forms that would limit the opportunity many students might have to obtain a work experience. For as one student noted, the synergy that can be obtained from a quality work experience and academics is unique:
A [work experience] provides an educational experience that cannot be compared to classroom teaching-it amplifies your interests in public relations as a profession and, for me, enhanced my approach to my classes and how much I value the teaching [here].
Table 1. Profile of Subjects
Variable Value Percent number N
Gender female 85.4 70
male 14.6 12 82
Class Year junior 29.3 24
senior 70.0 58 82
Age 19 1.2 1
20 18.3 15
21 52.4 43
22 25.6 21
24 1.2 1
32 1.2 1 82
Career Plans Public relations 53.7 44
Other 15.9 13
Don't know 30.5 25 82
Other Service-Learning None 84.4 54
Classes One 10.9 7
Two 4.7 3 64
Service-Learning Site On-campus 18.8 12
Off-campus 76.6 49
Did not mark 4.7 3 64
Number of Internships None 13.4 11
One 36.6 30
Two 32.9 27
Three or more 17.1 14 82
Number of Public None 29.2 24
Relations Internships One 46.3 38
Two 19.5 16
Three or more 4.9 4 82
Internship Prior to Not applicable 36.6 30
Service Learning Yes 62.2 51
No 1.2 1 82
Internship Site On-campus 17.1 12
(first or most recent) Off-campus 82.9 58 70
Table 1. Profile of Subjects (cont.)
Variable Value Percent number N
First Internship-Type Agency 26.6 17
of Organization Nonprofit 23.4 15
Corporation 28.1 18
Government 9.4 6
Other 12.5 8 64
Most Recent Internship- Agency 27.6 8
Type of Organization Nonprofit 20.7 6
Corporation 31.0 9
Government 6.9 2
Other 10.3 3 28
First Internship- Course credit 12.5 8
Compensation Pay/stipend/salary 50.0 32
Nothing 37.5 24 64
Most Recent Internship- Course credit 25.0 7
Compensation Pay/stipend/salary 53.6 15
Nothing 21.4 6 28
Table 2. Means and Standard Deviations for Scaled Items (significant differences by t-test within rows appear in bold; 1 = strongly
agree and 5 = strongly disagree)
Service First Most Recent
Learning Internship Internship
Statement M S.D. M S.D. M S.D.
Beforehand, I was familiar with the organization 3.67 1.57 3.03 1.27 2.62 1.74
Time required was reasonable 1.88 0.88 1.72 1.03 2.07 1.73
Organization was willing to work with my schedule 1.27 0.60 1.58 0.96 2.03 1.70
Work I did was of use to organization 1.86 0.87 1.63 0.88 1.83 1.54
I was treated as a professional member of the organization 1.86 0.81 1.80 1.04 2.00 1.65
People at the organization were willing to answer questions 1.36 0.57 1.47 0.71 1.69 1.51
The organization did not provide necessary guidance 4.02 0.95 4.00 1.21 4.03 1.52
The experience helped clarify my career goals 3.00 1.15 1.98 1.13 1.93 1.62
I did not have a lot of responsibility in my position 3.53 1.05 3.09 1.33 3.21 1.82
I often had to educate others about public relations 3.20 1.26 4.05 1.23 4.03 1.66
I felt like part of a team at my organization 2.55 1.19 1.88 1.11 2.21 1.59
I felt like my efforts made a difference in people's lives 2.72 1.16 2.71 1.25 2.89 1.57
The efforts of my organization made a difference in people's lives 1.89 1.16 2.28 1.15 2.45 1.59
I often had to try and persuade the organization to adopt my view 4.16 0.89 4.17 0.85 4.03 1.45
I would not consider working for this organization in the future 3.56 1.49 3.62 1.55 4.11 1.59
I learned a lot from this experience 2.27 1.04 1.57 0.89 1.89 1.62
The role I filled at my organization was technical (1)/managerial (5) 2.83 0.98 2.41 1.19 2.86 1.66
Overall, I would rate the experience as poor (1)/excellent (5) 3.78 0.90 4.03 1.05 4.48 1.15
Table 3. Correlation Matrix of Scaled Items with Overall Rating of the Experience (rating scale: 1 = poor, 5 = excellent; scaled
items: 1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree; significant correlations appear in bold)
Service First Most Recent
Learning Internship Internship
Scaled Item R p R p R p
Beforehand, I was familiar with the organization -.191 .135 -.024 .849 -.097 .624
Time required was reasonable -.435 .000 -.386 .002 .026 .896
Organization was willing to work with my schedule -.243 .055 -.160 .210 -.093 .637
Work I did was of use to organization -.609 .000 -.492 .000 -.427 .023
I was treated as a professional member of the organization -.586 .000 -.608 .000 -.632 .000
People at the organization were willing to answer questions -.336 .007 -.487 .000 -.574 .001
The organization did not provide necessary guidance .357 .004 .326 .009 .567 .002
The experience helped clarify my career goals -.489 .000 -.584 .000 -.483 .009
I did not have a lot of responsibility in my position .308 .014 .326 .009 .229 .241
I often had to educate others about public relations .166 .192 -.038 .769 -.094 .633
I felt like part of a team at my organization -.639 .000 -.724 .000 -.763 .000
I felt like my efforts made a difference in people's lives -.561 .000 -.668 .000 -.483 .011
The efforts of my organization made a difference in people's lives -.497 .000 -.180 .157 -.334 .082
I often had to try and persuade the organization to adopt my view .099 .438 .138 .281 .012 .950
I would not consider working for this organization in the future .585 .000 .536 .000 .365 .061
I learned a lot from this experience -.686 .000 -.701 .000 -.760 .000
The role I filled at my organization was technical (1)/managerial (5) .133 .299 .477 .000 .290 .134
Bibliography
Bales, K. (1979). Experiential learning: A review and annotated bibliography. Journal of Cooperative Education, 16, 70-90.
Bateman, J. C., & Cutlip, S. (1975). A design for public relations education (Report of the Commission on Public Relations Education). New York: Foundation for Public Relations Research and Education.
Beinstein, J. (1976). Urban field education: An opportunity structure for enhancing students; personal and social efficacy. Human Relations, 29(7), 677-685.
Bourland-Davis, P. G., & Fall, L. (1997, August). Evaluation and assessment of a service learning component in academia: A case study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago, IL.
Boyer, E. I. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. New York: Harper & Row.
Burns, L. T. (1998). Make sure it's service learning, not just community service. Education Digest, 64(2), 38-41.
Bush-Bacelis, J. L. (1998). Innovative pedagogy: Academic service-learning for business communication. Business Communication Quarterly, 61(3), 20-34.
Cannon, J. A., & Arnold, M. J. (1998). Student expectations of collegiate internship programs in business: A 10-year update. Journal of Education for Business, 73(4), 202-205.
Case, K. (1996, Nov.). 19 Items top Pauley report. Quill, pp. 18-19.
Ciofalo, A. (1988). Evaluating internships effectively. Journalism Educator, 43(1), 66-70.
Cohen, J., & Kinsey, D. F. (1994). "Doing good" and scholarship: A service-learning study. Journalism Educator, 48(4), 4-14.
Corbett, J. B., & Kendall, A. R. (1999). Evaluating service learning in the communication discipline. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 54, 66-76.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.
Drake, J. W. (2000, Sept.). Uniting service learning and pr at the University of Findlay. Public Relations Tactics, pp. 24-25.
Easterling, D., & Rudell, F. (1997). Rationale, benefits, and methods of service-learning in marketing education. Journal of Education for Business, 73(1), 58-61.
Fischer, R. (2000). Rethinking public relations curricula: Evolution of thought 1975-1999. Public Relations Quarterly, 45(2), 1-15.
Gault, J., Redington, J., & Schlager, T. (2000). Undergraduate business internships and career success: Are they related? Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 45-53.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
Gray, M., Ondaatje, E., & Zakaras, L. (1999). Combining service and learning in higher education: Evaluation of the Learn and Service America, Higher Education Program (RAND, MR-988-EDU).
Hite, R., & Bellizi, R. (1986). Student expectations regarding collegiate internship programs in marketing. Journal of Marketing Education, 8(3), 41-49.
Hursch. B., & Borzak, L. (1979). Toward cognitive development through field studies. Journal of Higher Education, 50(1), 63-77.
Katula, R. A., & Threnhauser, E. (1999). Experiential education in the undergraduate curriculum. Communication Education, 48(3), 238-255.
Kolb, D. A. (1976). The learning style inventory technical manual. Boston: McBer and Co.
Kolb, D. A. (1986). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kruckeberg, D., & Paluszek, J. (1999). A point of entry: Public relations education for the 21st century (Report of the 1999 Commission on Public Relations Education). New York: PRSA.
Markus, G. B., Howard, J. P. F., & King, D. C. (1993). Integrating community service and classroom instruction enhances learning: Results from an experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(4), 410-419.
Parilla, P. F., & Hesser, G. W. (1998). Internships and the sociological perspective: Applying principles of experiential learning. Teaching Sociology, 26, 310-329.
Putnam, R. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. National Endowment for Democracy.
Redecker, L. L. (1992). Internships provide invaluable job preparation. Public Relations Journal 48(9), 20-21.
Ryan, M., & Cassidy, J. R. (1996). Internships & excellence. Liberal Education, 82(3), 16-23.
Schofield, J, & Caragata, W. (1999, Nov. 15). Learning on the front lines. Maclean's, pp. 90-94.
Schwartz, D. F., Yarbrough, J. P., & Shakra, M. T. (1992). Does public relations education make the grade? Public Relations Journal 48(9), 18-20, 24-26.
Sellnow, T. L., & Olster, L. K. (1997, September). The frequency, form, and perceived benefits of service learning on speech communication departments. Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 3, 190-197.
Stahl, K. (1999). Co-op education in the liberal arts. Liberal Education, 85(3), 34-35.
Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Taylor, A. M. (2000, August). Avoiding pitfalls of service-learning programs in public relations courses. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Annual Convention, Phoenix, AZ.
Thiel, G. R., & Hartley, N. T. (1997). Cooperative education: a natural synergy between business and academia. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 62(3), 19-24.
Tucker, M. L., McCarthy, A. M., Hoxmeier, J. A., & Lenk, M. M. (1998). Community service learning increases communications skills across the business curriculum. Business Communication Quarterly, 61(2), 88-99.