STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF CAREERS IN PUBLIC RELATIONS

by

CATHY COLEMAN MORTON, B.G.S.

A THESIS

IN

MASS COMMUNICATIONS

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty

of Texas Tech University in
Partial Fulfillment of
the Degree of
MASTER OF ARTS

Approved

Accepted

December 1989
73

Copyright 1989, Cathy Coleman Morton

11
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am grateful to Dr. John C. Schweitzer who provided the direction

and patience for me to complete this project; to the other members of my
committee. Dr. Jerry C. Hudson, and Dr. Roger C. Saathoff, for their support;
and to Dr. Benjamin Bates and to fellow graduate student Minghua Xu for
giving me new respect for computers.
Thank you to Professors Coral Ohl, California State University,
Fullerton; Carol Oukrup, Kansas State University; Bill Baxter, Marquette
University; and Jon Wardrip, University of South Carolina, for their
assistance in administering the questionnaires to their students.
And to my husband, Harvey, for his continued love and support; my
children, Allison, Kimberly and Craig, for their understanding; and my
granddaughter, Mallory, for her promise for the future: thank you.

Ill
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS m
ABSTRACT / iv • •

LIST OF TABLES v
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 8
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 18
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS 21
CHAPTER HVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 42
LIST OF REFERENCES 47
APPENDIX 51

IV
 ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to identify the perceptions held by public
relations majors regarding the professional practice of public relations. The
research addressed the various reasons students choose their major and
explored the students' perceptions of the skills and knowledge necessary to
enter the public relations workforce.
Coorientation theory raises questions about the orientation of two
individuals or groups/organizations to the same object or concept (Newcomb,
1953). In this case the concept was the practice of public relations: What is the
degree of congruence that students have with professionals in the students'
perceptions regarding the practice of public relations? The study provides
direction to educators in counseling and advising students who desire to
major in public relations.
Students at five universities across the United States were surveyed to
determine what influenced their choices of public relations as a major and
their perceptions of the knowledge and skills necessary for the professional
practice of public relations. The results indicated students made independent
choices in selecting public relations as a major. Further, while students
recognize the value of strong writing skills and practical experience prior to
graduation, many express dislike for writing courses and few gain practical
experience while in school.
 LIST OF TABLES

1. TABLE 1: STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS BY UNIVERSITIES 27

2. TABLE 2: SELECTION OF PUBLIC RELATIONS AS MAJOR 28

3. TABLE 3: STUDENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROFESSIONAL

AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES BY UNIVERSITIES 30
4. TABLE 4: FACTORS IMPORTANT IN SELECTING PUBLIC ^
RELATIONS AS A MAJOR BY UNIVERSITIES 31

5. TABLES: FACTORS IMPORTANT IN SELECTING PUBLIC

RELATIONS AS A MAJOR BY GENDER AND CLASS 32

6. TABLE 6: KNOWLEDGE CONSIDERED IMPORTANT

BY STUDENTS BY UNIVERSITIES 35

7. TABLE 7: EXPERIENCE OF STUDENTS BY UNIVERSITIES 36

8. TABLE 8: FACTORS CONSIDERED IMPORTANT BY STUDENTS

EM GETTING A FIRST JOB BY UNIVERSITIES 37
9. TABLE 9: FACTOR ANALYSIS OF SKILLS CONSIDERED
IMPORTANT BY STUDENTS 38

10. TABLE 10: STUDENTS' FAVORITE AND LEAST FAVORITE

COURSES BY EXPERIENCE, GENDER AND CLASSIHCATION 40

VI
 CHAPTER ONE
ESJTRODUCTION

Between 1970 and 1980 the total number of students enrolled in

undergraduate public relations sequences grew nine-fold, from slightly more
than 2000 to 18,000 (Walker, 1982) and has continued to grow into the late
1980s (Becker & Engleman, 1988; Gersh, 1989), with an enrollment of more
than 21,000 projected in fall 1988 by Becker (1989). However, a survey of 1987
graduates of journalism and mass communications programs (Becker &
Engleman, 1988) suggested public relations graduates are not finding the jobs
they had prepared for within their field. Six months after graduation only
46.5% of the Class of 1987 had taken jobs in public relations (27.3%) or related
fields (19.2%). The growth in the number of public relations majors coupled
with the percentage of graduates who do not find employment in
communications raises questions about students' knowledge and
understanding of career options in public relations.
Public relations sequences or degree programs are offered in more than
160 colleges and universities across the United States (Commission, 1987). In
1985 public relations students represented 13% of all students enrolled in
departments and schools of journalism/mass communications. In the early
1980s undergraduate public relations sequences ranked first or second in
student enrollment in more than 60% of the programs where the sequence is
a part of the journalism unit (Commission, 1987). A 1988 survey (Becker,
1989) showed that public relations dropped to fourth in student enrollment in
journalism/mass communications schools—behind news-editorial,
advertising, and radio/television telecommunications.
1
 The basis for this study was formed from three current debates in
public relations education. The three issues are interrelated. All are
concerned with providing the best and most appropriate educational
experience for students.

The Public Relations Sequence

Where does the public relations sequence belong—in journalism/ mass
communications, speech communications or business? This question was
not addressed in this study. However, it is relevant to the study because the
location of the public relations sequence can be expected to influence the
emphasis of the courses and the perceptions students have of a major in
public relations.
While journalism/mass communications departments account for
nearly half of public relations majors, results of a 1980 survey indicated a
slight trend toward schools of speech communication as a home base for
public relations. Students are receiving a broader communications
foundation, with an emphasis on oral and interpersonal communication
and electronic media (Walker, 1982).
Gibson (1987) argued that speech communication departments offer
students the theoretical foundation and skills for public relations education— ^
that "persuasion and non-sensory information constitute the heart of
effective public relations."
Little progress has been made in integrating public relations into
business education even though business courses are essential to the
educational background for public relations majors (Walker, 1982).
 Nonetheless, 71% of the public relations programs cited as outstanding
in a recent informal survey of Public Relations Society of America educators
are part of journalism/mass communications academic units accredited by
the Accrediting Council on Education in JournaHsm and Mass
Communications (Staff, 1989).
Betsy Ann Plank, co-chair of the 1987 Commission on Undergraduate
Public Relations Education, envisions public relations as a separate
department in a school or college of communications as the optimal setting.
However, she recognizes that some programs must continue to develop
within existing academic units (VanLeuven, 1989). Within this context,
educators must recognize the importance of advising students and directing
them to courses and experiences which will best prepare them for careers in
public relations.

Public Relations Course of Study

What course of study should be emphasized in public relations
curriculum? And, what skills are essential to the public relations student,
both for an entry level position and to provide promise for promotions?
Brody (1985) pointed out that no concensus appears to be developing to
bring professionals and educators together on how best to meet the needs of
students and practitioners.
In the early 1970s the first Commission on Undergraduate Public
Relations Education was established (Bateman & Cutlip, 1975). In 1983 a
second Commission, established jointly by the Public Relations Division of
the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
(AEJMC), the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and the Educators
Section of PRSA, was charged with developing and recommending a public
relations curriculum for U.S. colleges and universities.
Results of a survey conducted in 1985 for the Commission on ""^--^
Undergraduate Public Relations Education indicated "virtual unanimity of /
opinion between public realtions practitioners and educators on what public/
relations education should be" (Anderson, p. 18). Practitioners and educators
*"<-»V

agreed thatjacility with the English language is the most important andj)asic
skill required in public relations practice. This includes writing skills.in all
communications,disciplines. Marketing was the essential business course
most often mentioned. Management was the second most often mentioned
course.
The study further.5Uggested that public relations curricula should
emphasize research, planning, evaluation, electronic communications, and
ethics. Respondents also placed a high value on internships (a rating of 6.67
of a possible 7). Taylor (1988) suggested that internships were important in
crystallizing vocational self-concepts and work values, reducing reality shock
for new professionals, and increasing employment opportunities. The
emphasis on internships reflects the need for educators to continue efforts to
assure quality practical experiences for students prior to graduation
(Anderson, 1986).
The latest Commission on Public Relations Research (1987) expanded
earlier reports and addressed course content as well as course descriptions in
an effort to standardize public relations coursework.
Implications for using the data gathered in the Commission's study
(1987) lie in counseling and advising students both before they select public
relations as a major and as they advance toward graduation. While there is a
continuing difference of opinion on what is the most important element in
public relations education and in which academic unit public relations
sequences should be housed, educators are challenged to prepare students to
meet the expectations of the professional world.
In 1988 the Body of Knowledge Task Force of the Public Relations
Society of America Research Committee published "The Public Relations
Body of Knowledge" as a resource and authority for public relations educators
and professionals (Body, 1988). This work is a part of the effort to standardize
public relations education.
The greatest effort to increase standards and professionalism in public
relations is through the development of accreditation programs. PRSA began
in 1965 to offer accreditation to its members. Presently about one-third of
PRSA's 14,000 members have earned the APR (Accredited Public Relations)
designation (Wilcox, Ault & Agee, 1989). The International Association of
Business Communicators also has initiated an accreditation program;
however, fewer than 5% of its 12,000 members have received the ABC
(Accredited Business Communicator) designation (Wilcox, Ault & Agee,
1989).
Citing the 1981 Smith-Buchwald Commission report, Baxter (1985)
emphasized the importance of faculty counseling and staff advisement in
directing students to courses which will best prepare them for careers in
public relations.
The underlying question for this study was whether public relations
educators are imparting these professional expectations to students. Are
educators providing adequate information about or exposure to the practice of
public relations? Are educators advising students to take the range of courses
identified by professionals as essential to an adequate education for public
relations practitioners? Are educators counseling students about the skills
necessary for public relations practitioners?
In reviewing the literature on college professional education and its
relationship to stress and burnout, Endres and Wearden (1989) criticized
college professional education. They suggested that professional education
tends to create unrealistic expectations for students regarding the job world;
often it is not thorough, practical, or relevant enough; does not sufficiently
train students in interpersonal skills; does not provide adequate information
on the nature of bureaucratic organizations and how to function within the
constraints of the work setting; and does not teach students how to cope with
uncertainty, change, conflict, stress and burnout.
Professionals have criticized the educational background of public
relations graduates. Alan Metrick (1988), an executive vice president of David
M. Grant & Partners, issued a poignant indictment in an editorial in Public
Relations Journal: ". . . the recent graduates I've seen with public relations
degrees struck me as being woefully unprepared for a career in this business
despite their completing what amounts to trade schooling in the guise of a
university degree."
It is the responsibility of educators, in the classroom and as advisors, to
respond to these criticisms. To respond educators must know what students
perceive about their career.
For more than a quarter century, journalism students have been the
subjects of research on career choice and job perception (Bowers, 1974; Lubell,
1959). More recentiy, a researcher has begun to look at advertising majors to
 7
determine their motivation and expectations of the workforce (Schweitzer,
1988).
As public relations has emerged as a separate academic sequence in
schools of journalism and mass communication, and as efforts continue to
develop the public relations curriculum, it is appropriate to investigate the
perceptions and motivation of students who choose to prepare for careers.
 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW

Research in public relations education has been directed toward

practitioners and educators to determine what skills and knowledge they
consider important to the public relations graduate. There appears to have
been little research to explore why students choose careers in public relations
and what skills they anticipated would be helpful to them in their
preparation for entry-level employment. This study examined responses
from students at five universities who were beginning their upper-division
courses in public relations and sought to determine student perceptions about
the field of public relations.
While professionals can give direction to educators on public relations
curriculum, it was anticipated that examining how public relations students
understand their major would be helpful to educators advising students who
enter public relations sequences.
A review of recent literature takes two directions. The first addresses
the student's choice of a career. Influence and expectations are explored in the
first dimension. The second direction of the literature review examines the
curricula and skills necessary for the public relations student in an entry level
position.
Coorientation theory (Newcomb, 1953) raises questions about the
orientation of two individuals or groups/organizations to the same object or
concept. In this case the concept was the practice of public relations: What is
the degree of congruence that students have with professionals in their beliefs
or perceptions of the practice of public relations? The research in this study
8
sought to compare what professionals want and what students perceive about
their career choice.

Choice of Public Relations as a Course of Study

Recent literature reveals much concern about the feminization of
public relations. The number of women working in public relations and the
number of female students enrolled in public relations courses has risen
sharply in recent years.
The number of women in public relations jobs has risen from less
than 10% in the late 1970s to more than 50% in 1988 (Ames, 1986).
Membership in the International Association of Business Communicators
was 63% female in 1986 (Staff, 1986), and 48% of the membership in the Public
Relations Society of America was female in 1988 (Hunt & Thompson, 1988).
The 1989 Salary Survey reported in Public Relations Journal revealed a
significant gap between median annual salaries of male and female public
relations practitioners, $51,716 and $31,993, respectively. However, much of
the discrepancy may be attributed to other variables. Barnes (1989, p. 18)
suggested that male public relations practitioners are generally older and have
more experience, work in larger departments or firms, have management
positions, and are in higher-paying specialties. Female practitioners are
younger, have less experience, work in smaller departments or firms, have
entry-level or junior-level positions, and are concentrated in lower-paying
areas. This study confirmed trends noted in earlier literature (Ames, 1986;
lABC, 1986).
Studies have addressed motivations and aspirations of females vs.
male students preparing for careers in public relations. DeRosa and Wilcox
 10
(1989) surveyed public relations majors at five California universities. In
their review of occupational choice literature, DeRosa and Wilcox discussed
possible psychological differences between men and women in the work-
place. A lack of confidence among women might preclude their entry into
potentially risky, but more responsible and promising, employment (Nieva
& Gutex, 1981). An external orientation for women inhibits their confidence
that they can be successful as a result of their own actions (Harlan & Weiss,
1982). Lower expectations and aspirations in women than in men affects
women's capacity to succeed (Harlan & Weiss, 1982). Women's perception of
public relations as a job rather than a career reflects a lack of serious-
mindedness (lABC, 1986). Women's lesser interest than men in management
skills, coupled with the influx of women in public relations, might degrade
the status of the field to one of women in low-paying technician roles (LABC,
1986).
DeRosa and Wilcox (1989) hypothesized that students choose public
relations as a career for several reasons: (1) perceived job possibilities,
(2) opportunity to use communication skills, (3) having a job valuable to
society, (4) a career path to management, (5) a distaste for working with
numbers, and (6) an enjoyment of "working with people." Results of their
survey of students in California supported their hypotheses, and they
concluded that students, both male and female, take the profession seriously
and reject common stereotypes of public relations practitioners.
Results of DeRosa and Wilcox's research indicated only slight gender
differences among public relations students. The conclusion offers
promise that gender differences are not as significant as might earlier have
 11
been thought. However, results of their survey are reported in terms of
women vs. men. Their study is replicated here to some extent with the
emphasis on "students" rather than "female students" and "male students."
Basic to advising public relations students is an understanding of how
and why they have made specific choices, that is, what are their perceptions
and expectations of public relations as a career?
Psychologists Lin and Dumin (1986) reported a correlation between
access to occupations and fathers' occupations and ties with relatives, friends
and acquaintances. Students whose fathers are professionals were most likely
to have access to (and information about) professional jobs. This might be
extended to their mothers' occupations as more and more women have
entered the work force. Women entering the professional world have a
measurable impact on the career choices of their children. In homes where
both father and mother are in the work force, parents will likely hold less
traditional attitudes about abilities and interests and career choices of men
and women (Zuckerman, 1985).
A majority of the students surveyed by Matthews and Schweitzer (1989)
did not identify anyone other than "self" as significant to helping them
choose public relations as a major. After self-choice, males indicated "friend"
and females indicated "relative" as influencing their decisions.
Students make career choices based on their perceptions of the field
and what it will be like to work in that field (Endres & Wearden, 1989). What
influences these perceptions prior to entering undergraduate school and what
role educators have in developing student perceptions are significant to
students' meeting the expectations of professionals upon graduation (Endres
& Wearden, 1989).
 12
Endres and Wearden surveyed 416 students at five undergraduate mass
communications/journalism schools. Although the sample was purposively
selected, there is little reason to think the students are not representative of
journalism/mass communications majors nationwide.
The results of Endres's and Wearden's (1989) survey have strong
implications for the role of educators in influencing students. Students
indicated they received the most information about their career choice from
observing media performance and from journalism/mass communications
faculty. However, students further indicated that their best information came
from journalism/mass communications faculty, with observing media
performance second. Media work experience, textbooks, and articles about
the media followed. And, both in the case of quantity and quality of
information received, friends and parents/family ranked last.

Skills Necessary to the Public Relations Graduate

Fewer than a dozen colleges and universities offered degrees in public
relations in the 1960s. By the beginning of the 1980s hundreds of public
relations majors were available on hundreds of campuses across the country.
This rapid growth has prompted a continuing debate about the content of
public relations sequences (Walker 1982, 1984).
A 1981 survey of communications professionals in Southern
California revealed a positive response to public relations education-contrary
to the unfavorable reaction of professionals in the related fields of
advertising, marketing, and journalism toward professional education
(Pinzon, 1989). This note is made to emphasize that the debate is on content
of the courses rather than quality of the students.
 13
Historically public relations education has been a mix of liberal arts
education and professional traiiung. Students h ^ e b e e n taughtjnot_only
how (techrucal skills in writing and production as well as management
concepts) to communicate but^lso what and why. Teaching "what" and
"why" has pushed students into liberal arts and science courses to examine
the enviromnent in which they will work (Commission, 1987).
A lack of uniformity in public relations programs requires a review of
the academic background of undergraduates with degrees in public relations.
Sequences offered in business schools emphasize basic business courses;
sequences accredited by ACEJMC emphasize writing skills; and speech
communications programs emphasize rhetoj;ic and persuasion. In each
instance, the graduates may be weak in other areas (Brody, 1988).
Practitioners and educators agree that a minor in business is most
appropriate for public relations students (Anderson, 1986; Commission, 1987).
English as a minor is a distant second, followed by economics and finance. In
the same survey respondents ranked "use of the English language" as the
essential element in a public relations education._This might indicate that an
emphasis in English should be required in the public relations curriculum
rather than chosen by the student as a minor discipline (Anderson, 1986).
Based on a study of public relations practitioners, Turk (1989) insisted
that non-communication skills—specifically, planning, problem-solving,
budgeting and analytical skills—as well as technical skills such as writing and
graphics must be included in the public relations curriculum. According to
Turk, failure to develop these skills could limit the transition from an
entry level technician role to a management role. Turk added that an
 14
understanding of ethics and social responsibility is also important to the
public relations graduate.
Brody (1988) observed that larger public relations firms look more at a
graduate's maturity and general knowledge and anticipate that the new
employee can be taught the necessary public relations skills. On the other
hand, smaller firms prefer that students have more public relations skills.
Corporate^public relations practitioners responding to a 1984 survey
agreed that^ writing and other journalism-related (reporting, editing, etc.)
skills should bejhe first priority of public relations students preparing for jobs
in the corporate sector. Next were public relations courses—theory,
techniques, case studies, etc. Internships which provide practical experience
were third, and speech communications courses fourth. Fourteen business
and business-related courses followed in the ranking, with marketing cited as
the priority business course (Baxter, 1985).
Walker (1984) concluded from his 20 years of teaching and another 10
years of teaching and full-time practice of public relations that employers look
first for strong communication skills, especially writing and editing.
According to Walker, if the prospective employee has knowledge of public
relations and its practice, it is a "plus."
In a speech to students attending the Public Relations Student Society
of America 1989 National Convention, Jerry Dal ton, president-elect of the
Public Relations Society of America, emphatically stated, "Writing is the
r — •

foundation of everything we do." Dalton further pointed out that entry-level

employees use their writing skills to learn about the business and work
setting.
 15
Parsons (1988) noted "extreme discomfort with creative work,
including writing" in public relations students surveyed as part of a study
of 585 communications majors. Because the path to management is often
through writing employee publications. Parsons identified the level of
discomfort as a potential problem which professionals and educators might
want to explore further. ^

Wakefield and Cottone (1986) examined the global poUtical/

economic/social/cultural/environment (PESCE) of the 1980s to make specific
recommendations for the development of effective public relations programs.
The researchers cited economists in the Division of Occupational Outlook,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, who predicted a 27-32% increase in the number of
public relations specialists needed by 1995 and similar increases in jobs closely
related to public relations. Further, they noted an international political
environment which has been greatly affected by advances in communication
science and acknowledged changes in Western society and culture which
have given rise to controversial areas of corporate concern. Ultimately,
Wakefield and Cottone recognized the need for a more comprehensive
perspective in public relations education.
In a later article, Wakefield and Cottone (1987) identified the
knowledge and skill areas important to public relations employers. Their
analysis of 188 responses from 120 agencies and the public relations directors
of 68 corporations and governmental and nonprofit organizations revealed a
greater emphasis on knowledge and skill in interpersonal communication
(customer/client relations, decision-making and problem solving), general
copywriting and promotional writing than on skill in writing news releases.
The data also revealed significant employer emphasis on management
 16
(project management, coordination of creative efforts, budgeting), persuasive
and interpersonal communication (sales and service), promotion design and
writing rather than on media relations. In other words, the role of the public
relations professional has expanded beyond working with the news media.
The survey used in this study incorporates areas of knowledge and
skills identified by Wakefield and Cottone in their survey of public relations
employers and seeks to identify a relationship between professional
needs/desires and student perceptions.

Research Questions
The literature review demonstrates the interest public relations
professionals have in the educational background of potential employees. It
reaffirms an emphasis on writing skills which historically has been the
foundation of education in mass communication. At the same time it
suggests that a broader, more comprehensive education is appropriate for
students preparing for careers in public relations.
How public relations students understand and respond to the
expectations of professionals is an important factor in the educational
process. It is reasonable to expect that students whose perception of public
relations practice is similar to that of the professionals for whom they will
work will be more successful in finding their first job and in advancing in the
field.
Specifically, the following research questions guided this study:
1. What influences students to choose public relations as a major
course of study?
 17
2. What academic areas do public relations majors identify as
important to support their public relations education?
3. What skills and experience do public relations majors identify as
significant to their careers in public relations?
4. How do student perceptions compare to concerns of public relations
professionals reflected in recent studies?
 CHAPTER TFIREE
METHODOLOGY

Students in public relations writing classes at five universities were

selected to participate in the study. In each case students had completed the
prerequisite journalism and mass communications courses and the public
relations writing class was the first upper division public relations course.
Universities were purposively selected for geographic variation: California
State University, Fullerton (Department of Communications), Kansas State
University (Department of Journalism and Mass Communications),
Marquette University (College of Communication, Journalism and
Performing Arts), Texas Tech University (School of Mass Communications),
and University of South Carolina (College of Journalism and Mass
Communications). All are affiliated with the Association of Schools of
Journalism and Mass Communications (ASJMC) and are accredited by the
Accrediting Council for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.
While the sample was purposively selected, it is geographically diverse
and, in the aggregate, should be representative of public relations students
nationwide.
The questionnaire was constructed using a combination of open-ended
and closed-ended questions (Nachmias & Nachmias, 1981; Wimmer &
Dominick, 1987). Open-ended questions concerning course work and job
identification provided the opportunity for students to give a variety of
answers which were later grouped by the researcher into categories for data
entry. Closed-ended questions were either multiple choice or semantic
differential scales. Multiple-choice questions to measure student activity,
18
 19
influences upon their choice of public relations as a major, and demographics
were developed. Each question offered several mutually exclusive answers
with "other" offered as an alternative in some instances. Semantic
differential scales were used to measure student feelings; respondents were
given five choices, from "very important" to "unimportant" or "a great deal"
to "very littie" (See Appendix).

Wimmer and Dominick (1987) suggested pre-testing questionnaires to

determine how well questions are understood and answered. The
questionnaire was pre-tested by the researcher on three senior students. The
students were asked to complete the questionnaire and to make notes of any
problems in comprehending a question or selecting an answer from choices
given. Without their knowledge, students were timed to estimate the time
faculty members would be asked to take from their classes to have students
complete the questionnaire. As a result of the pre-test, two questions were re-
worded to improve clarity and more space was allowed for answers to open-
ended questions. Students required approximately 14 minutes to complete
the questionnaire.

Procedure
Faculty members at the five participating universities were contacted
by telephone and their assistance requested in administering the survey.
Questionnaires and instructions were mailed in bulk to cooperating faculty
members. Pre-paid return envelopes were provided to return the completed
surveys. This survey method was used because of the relative ease and the
low cost of collecting data from a specialized audience (Wimmer & Dominick,
1987).
 20
One hundred seventy-seven students were enrolled in classes selected
by faculty members at the participating schools; 140 students completed
questionnaires; and 134 questionnaires were used in the analysis, for a
response rate of 75n%. Six of the completed questionnaires were not used
because the students completing them were identified as advertising majors.
Responses were coded and entered into the statistical program
Statistical Program for Social Sciences (SPSS-X). For the semantic differential
scales, responses were coded from " 1 " for "very important" or "a great deal"
to "5" for "unimportant" or "very little." Frequency distributions were
calculated for the total sample and for the individual universities for
comparison. Explanatory responses to open-ended questions were grouped
manually for discussion with the results.
Crosstabs were run to observe student involvement in professional
organizations and activities and important factors in selecting a major by both
sex and class. Crosstabs also were run to observe variations in favorite/least
favorite class by gender, class and experiences.
A factor analysis grouped responses to a question about skills necessary
to the public relations professional. New variables were created and
compared by crosstabulation with responses to questions about favorite
courses and students' experience level.
 CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS

Demographics
More than two-thirds (69%) of the students were female, and one-half
(50%) were under 22 years of age. The large number of female students is
consistent with the increasing numbers of women in public relations (Barnes,
1969). Nearly three-fourths (72%) of the students overall were seniors
approaching graduation. Only in classification of students did the students at
the five universities vary substantially. Virtually all (97%) of the Texas Tech
students and 89% of the Kansas State students were seniors, but only 45% of
the Marquette students were seniors (Table 1).
Two-thirds (66%) of the students overall declared public relations as
their major during their freshman or sophomore year, but the range varied
from 42% at Kansas State to 79% at Texas Tech and 90% at Marquette (Table 2).
Approximately one-fourth (24%) of all the students chose to minor in
business; however the variation is from 13% at California State to 43% at
Texas Tech. More than one-fourth (26%) chose minors in various areas in
the arts and sciences. Again there was a wide variation—from 12% at Texas
Tech to 50% at Marquette. Sixty percent of the students had previously
pursued a major other than public relations, with the only substantial
variation being 41% at South Carolina. Overall 22% of the respondents had
been business majors, and 16% had been majors in other communications
fields. Again a wide variation was noted. Five percent of the Marquette
students and 6% of the South Carolina students had previously majored in
business and 37% of the Kansas State students had majored in business. Forty
21
 22
percent of the students at Marquette had previously majored in other areas of
communications although the students at the other schools were fairly close
to the overall percentage of 16%.
In general, the respondents were not actively involved in student
activities, either professional or social. Fewer than half (40%) were members
of Public Relations Student Society of America (PRSSA). Marquette,
however, does not have a PRSSA chapter; and the other percentages varied
from 18% at South Carolina to 60% at California State. Crosstabs revealed
that senior students were more likely to be involved in PRSSA than juniors:
42% of the seniors and 33% of the juniors were members. Females (43%)
were more likely than males (31%) to be members (Table 3).

Influence on Choice of Public Relations as a Major

Several questions solicited responses from students about how they
were influenced in their choice of public relations as a major. Sixty percent of
the students indicated they were personally acquainted with someone whose
job they would classify as public relations. More than three-fourths of those
students who indicated they were personally acquainted with a public
relations professional identified the acquaintance as a family or personal
friend. However, approximately two-thirds (66%) of the students failed to
identify anyone other than themselves who influenced their decision to
major in public relations.
Students rated the importance to themselves of six variables in
selecting public relations as a major on a semantic differential scale: (1)
credibility of the field, (2) good pay and working conditions, (3) advancement
and promotion opportunities, (4) contribution of the field to society, (5) desire
 23
to develop communication skills, and (6) desire to develop planning/
decision-making skills. The values assigned ranged from 1 for "very
important" to 5 for "unimportant." Leading reasons for seeking a career in
public relations given by the students were the desire to develop
communications skills (M = 1.6) and the desire to develop planning/decision-
making skills (M = 1.7). Only Kansas State and CaHfornia State students were
not consistent in ranking the desire to develop communications skills first.
Both Kansas State and California State students ranked the desire to develop
planning/decision-making skills first (Table 4).

When these six variables [(1) credibility of the field, (2) good pay and
working conditions, (3) advancement and promotion opportunities, (4)
contribution of the field to society, (5) desire to develop communication
skills, and (6) desire to develop planning/decision-making skills! were
crosstabbed by gender and classification in school, there was no statistically
significant difference in the responses between males and females or between
juniors and seniors. A Chi-square analysis was computed after omitting
empty cells and collapsing the responses into three options rather than five
(Table 5).

Knowledge Important to Public Relations Professionals

The students were also asked to indicate how important a number of
factors were to public relations professionals. A semantic differential scale
ranging from 1 for "a great deal" to 5 for "very little" measured the students'
perception of the knowledge important to the practice of public relations.
Overall, the students believed an understanding or knowledge of public
opinion was most important to public relations practitioners. Second was
 24
opinion was most important to public relations practitioners. Second was
knowledge of marketing. Economics and accounting were perceived to be the
least important. The mean scores among the five universities were
consistent in identifying public opinion and marketing as more important
or at least important. There were slight variations in the mean scores of the
other variables among the schools. The variables are listed in Table 6 in
descending order of perceived importance.
Marketing and public opinion were also the most often mentioned
factors when the students were asked what five areas they anticipated they
would spend most of their time on in their first jobs.

Experience and Skills Important to Public Relations Professionals

Somewhat more than a third (37%) of the students completing the
questionnaire had experience on high school and/or college publications.
Notably 100% of the students at Kansas State had gained experience on a
college publication. Only 25% of the students overall had completed an
internship in public relations: 31% of the males and 23% of the females; 37%
of the juniors and 22% of the seniors. Students who had completed
internships worked in both nonprofit and corporate settings. Similarly, fewer
than half (45%) of the students reported having had any experience in public
relations: 41% of the males and 47% of the females; 63% of the juniors and
39% of the seniors. Stiidents who indicated they had experience in public
relations had, in most instances, worked on their college campuses as
volunteers for campus organizations (Table 7).
The students agreed (M = 1.2) that practical experience was the most
important of five variables in getting their first job in public relations. Table 8
 25
shows the five variables in descending order of the importance identified by •
the students.
Almost 70% of the students responding anticipated they would work in
public relations after graduation. The largest group, almost half (48%), hoped
for corporate work. The students were optimistic about employment
opportunities. Almost half (49%) expected to find their first job before
graduation. However, they were less optimistic about salary expectations.
More than three-quarters (81%) expected a starting annual salary between
$15,000 and $25,000. More than half (60%) expected to work between 40 and 50
hours per week.
A factor analysis identified only one clear factor from among the 32
skills listed as potentially important to the public relations practitioner. The
factor included variables as diverse as media relations and writing for various
media, graphics and design, planning special events, and fundraising. To be
retained in the factor a variable had to have a primary loading of .60 or more
and no secondary loading on other factors above .30 (Burgoon, Burgoon &
Buller, 1986). The factor, called technical skills, explained only 28% of the
variance (Table 9).
Students were asked to identify, from among all the required courses
for their major, their favorite class. Responses were grouped by the
researcher into seven categories. Twenty-eight percent of the students (37
students) identified a writing/technical skills course as their favorite. With
an open-ended question students were also asked to identify, from among all
the required courses for their major, their least favorite class. Responses were
grouped by the researcher into eight categories. Thirty-two percent of the
 26
students (43 students) identified a writing/technical skills course as their least
favorite.
Crosstabs were run to determine the relationship between
identification of a writing/technical skills course as either the favorite or least
favorite course and students' experiences, gender, and classification. The only
statistically significant relationship observed was between students who
identified writing/technical skills as their favorite course and experience or
lack of experience in an internship. See Table 10 for the comparison.
 27

(0
o ^ ^,^ ^ ^_^ ^ ^^
O N ON CN rf T-H ON 0 0 O CM TT CN CM Tt CN ^
H CS V O
cn
I-H
•^ en ^
en
I-H
CM t ^ CO
r—1
^

ii C
«J o ^ 5§
C/5 0) lO t—I ^ ID NO rsi c» in IT) O Tf in
CO -^ t—I CS
nj 3
U UH

5? 65
Os t>» C>» 1-H in ON in O N in ON
CO 58 CO CO (N 00
i4

W 5S
in O N NO
6§
J? o NO CN •^ in CN o
PQ CN NO ^
< U

^ ^_^ ^ ^.^ ss ^^
o o o
CO c^ o
CN in ino
tx CN o o o
CN o in in o
in -^ o
CN

u 5S
CO O ON O N CO CO CO t^ o o CO
H
V)
NO
CO 3 CO CO ON CO

X
H

O) a* CI
>
o
J-i ^ •co C c
gj <C 5 ON T-^ C O
O .2 T3
CN CN to CO II
"5 r. o -^ o
C
2 2 •2
00 O CN
1—1 CN CN CN
2
-a
c
X)

o rz
(J C
 28

nj
o ^ ^^ 5S ^.^
E-^ i n 1—1 •<^ i n 1—1 Tt ^ in -^ CN NO in T—1 t^ rr
t-i i n cNi CO CN r^ CN CN CO
^ T-^
6S

_Q; c
"«« o 65
^^ ^rf
C/5 b ON T-^ 1—1 0\
o o in CN CO t N CN O ON in
o i n CO CN

u«J b3

^ 2i ^ ^
ON in NO CN in CN ON
C O CN CN in o o o
<a -5
cT) T—1 CO ^ CO
^

CN
W ^
3 O 0 0 i n NO NO i n CN 00 CN ON O o ON
r—< T—1 »-H CN CN
CD J5 ha 1—1 CO CO

< U

O)

a» 55
3 o o o o o o o in o o S in o o o
Of CN t>» r-i CN t-i CO <N
«5

55 ^ ^_^
T—I 00 1-1 o o o CO O CO CO CN NO CO CO CO
H cs i n CN CO ' ^ C O t—1 CO
CO
X
0)
H
eft
o»
u
o eft c
'cO C 'u eft

:s a;
,o C/5 3
O
CO
O) 01
13 QJ ha

u
a» IS •2
eft X <
u . 3 T V "^ 0» u CO
II I!
a; 3 cft O C X O eft
'cJ ^ a,-g c 2 o 2 2 03 w O cy^ 2 2 2
en
2
p- o
U
to
o
>-
 29

^^
o ^ ^_^ 65 .^-v
E- O 0 0 CN Tt NO f S CN NO C^J CN "^
NO CO CO I—1 CN i—i ^ CO

a> 3
CO O ^_^ 65 ^.^
.^rf 6^
^^
C/5 ON 1—1 O in ^ r-i T f 00 O NO in
NO CO "^ 1-1 CO 1—1 CO
"^
CO 3
U PL,

eft
CO 0>
eft CO
65
3 0 0 CN C3N o t^ NO i n CN ON
CO y5 NO CO 1—1 CO 1—1 CO
^
T3
O)

C
•t-H
^-> CO
c X .2
o t ^ NO NO CN O C3N
u o 2 1—1 1—1 0 0
T f T f 1—I
in
r4 c/5 CO

W
U

O)
<
65 y.-V 65 ^^
3 iNO
n CO
in o o
CN o
T t in o CM
o o CO
in o
CN
a'
CO

X
u ^ ^_^ 65 ^^
o; ON 1—1 O CO CN 00 O i n CO CN CO
H Tj* i n CO 1-H 1-H 1-H in CO
eft
CO
X
OJ

eft
OJ
u
3
.Si
U eft
cn 3
"^ o
_o 1-1
0) eft fl) 01
'cO eft
•C 3 eft
2 eft ^
Xeft < J2 3
eft
3
cO
C 3 - 2 T V "l^ U CO II
O S o o 3 eft W 3 X ^ O 2
revi

>i2 2 O 3 3 i : ' ;z: J5

U CQ w O 2 2
t-
TS X
(O 3
I
 30

E2 Tf o CO i n NO O "?t o o
T^ CO 1—' 1—I 1—I

0) 3
"cO 65
<^rf o
^rf
ON 0 0 t^ Tf Tt
CO a; CN o o o
NO
CO 3
u ti.

65
3 .2 o CN i n i-< i n i n CN i n in
CO C/5

en CO

W X .2
CN 0 0 O O NO ^ 1—I 0 \ 0 0 NO
CO
o CM T f CN 1—I
c$? CO
< u

O)

"S 65
3 o o o in in in o in in in
Ot 1—1 CO CN
CO 0)

eft
3
CO
O
X "a
u 6^
0» Cx \ 0 ON 00 CN
so CO ON Tt<
H Tf CN CN Tt 1—I r—
eft
CO
X
o o
eft eft
3 3
_o V-
CO
3 ..n u
03 Oi Of CO 0»
N X 3
2 X
'5 o eft >> "2 "eft
65
CO o 3 }.N
0) "— eft o
o
ther ocia

O) >
onor cie

^^ O
ther rofe

b4) 6 isxi - SCO

3 o
CO
«-i
o 3
en U-> U en CL,
3 eft CO

3 ' eft
'5 1 . ^
uden

3 3
Social

O en ^ CO

< ^ ^ b: X 13 OX o
Pi Q CO c
< en eft o X en OO -ft
C 3 <—
o O Cjj
T3 -0 w " !
_^ .^1
2 U en '-r-Ji
 31

I— * t% a\ o
1-H
CJN Tt 1-H
in o rt CN CO
NO ^s ON I—1 CN CN
CN CN CN

6^

CO 1% CO *sO 1—'
Si 3 CO NO CO in 1—1
CO O t>. q CO CO CO
en *-> 1—1 CN CN CN CN

,«j 3
U iu

.316

.000

.684
.842
.684

in
ON
00
1—1 1—> CN CN CN
CO cn

CO 1—1 NO '^ CO CO 1-H

^if t^ a\ in in 'Jf
X .2 ON 1—1 CN CO CO ON
1 "2
en CO
1-H 1-H 1-H I—>

<
U
o
.000
.950

in
in NO
1-H CN CN CN CN
3
a'
CO

in
.000

.242
.848

00 CO
in
in CN
^ 1-H CM CN CN CN

cn
CO 3
X CO
A^
H u
O
o.
2
to 3
c eft 3
2
& ^-^
eft 0>
'X u
2 in
CO 3 : 3 "a
»-^ eft eft 3
73 2 3 a CO
O i« ^ W3 3 o-.ai .3
^^
k.
.2 3 CO O
11 >i "3
aa. O O T3 -5 O
O
a.
3 ="
O) o 2
.2 2 5 c
o 's -^ 2 2 3 CO o
u CO too
2 c 3 o -2 S Q- 3 >
*- 5 a .2 CO
> 2 3 "^
T3 i 2
o
<U
eft
3
3 _V« eft •^ 5:;
eft ' C < o U 2 o o U
Q S Q -O
 32

C/5
eft eft
3 65 3
O o 65 II NO t>» CO
t>s 1-H
CO
ON
II
H '2 ^
t^
00
t-H
CN CO
ON
CL 5X
< Cl> CN"" CN
en II II

s^ 3
in
^ en CO
8
^ u eft
eft o 00 o o Os CN tN o o ON CN
CO •2 0 0 1-H CN t^ CN CN

Z U 3 II 11
O < 2 2

in H w
U Q
w
CO
w
< cn O en eft
>^ 3 3
"co II II
Ol
O
00
NO
1-H
o 00
Cv
t v CN
rH o
ON
O CN ON

II
CN
II
<
H 2
in NO
o ON
in
811
fin S3 ^^
65 II ^
73 o CO CO tN CN t x i n CO tv CN
"cO CO ^s T-i CO X
00
II
2
o
H
U
<

tl 1
3
3 eft
en 3
CN in CO r3 CN in
ka h<
-^ O
ka
o "o' tft
o o
eft D ' tl CO Tj<
0 CO l-H

^ en O 3 73 •T3 T3
3 O) CJ 13 ^ OJ O Ol
> O > ..:< ^
0) CO
cat

3 3 3 3 3 3
•T3 CO CO CO TS 2 CO CO (O
O '2 ^ ^ Q^ o
1 csi Pi p<
3
*- 3
Oi
0) _o
k.
2 u 'eft
Desi
com

eft
O 'C
O
Q T3
 33

eft eft

^ >^v 3 3
O CN - ^ CO II ON \ 0 o CM II
CN CN ON ON
3 a. i n CN 1-H SX.
QJ II V
CN
CN
cn 2 II II
3 -a" "^
V

i1-H
n in
CO
CJ CO CN
1-H

en ^ ^^^ II 65
eft O ON
CO o t^ o a\ CN o t>s o CN
CN
'2 0 0 1—1 CN ?<i
G 3 II
73
a; 2

O
u
lO eft
eft
_0j 3
3
CO 65 II
II OS
PQ 2 T t O CN
t ^ CN
o 00
^
OS
1-H
ON
00
01 CN"
< II CN

2 ^3 -«^
in
00 NO
o
ON
CN
CO
O)
65 S5
T3
3 .2 CN 00 in tN CN 1-H CO
CO
<N
^s 1-H CO i n CO
o;

eft
O)
u (N in
• ^4
3 k> ^
X >
_3 o O 3 o CO •^
o
73 CO Tfi 0 1-H
3 O
1-H
..2 73 73
CO 73 73 73 ^<kM
u 73
o. CJ 0) 0) o O o» O 0)
ent

eft ^ ^ ^
3
o 3 O 3 3 3
3 CO
• ^
CO
^
CO _o 4H CO CO CO
2 P< P!5 P i ^^ eft
3
piS csi P i
_o X 3
3 o C '^.
'w'
CO
> 2 ^^ ^^
3 CO
73
rel

o O
< ol U
 34

en
3 en
3
tl 65
3
• ^ 1-H 1-H CO Sx. in o 1-H CO
in CO 1-1 C3N in CO 1-H Os j:^.
O) CN
en II II CM"
II
3 2 2 II

in
CO
u s CO
CO
eft
eft O
65 tl
O CO CO ON CN CO CO o ON CN
t>. CN CN in CO 1-H
CO
•s CN

0 3
II
2

o
lO en en
3 3
w Ol
65 II 65
PQ 2 i n CO C3N
i n CO
o 5X 0 0 NO CO
i n CN r H
o
C3N
5X
V

< 01 C3N CN CN
PU II
II II
II
-a" 2 "^
2 oo" in
CN
CN CN
CN
Ol
73 ^
,2 ON i n CN 1-H O N in in <N
g "co \ ^ 1-H CO i n CO CO

(J II
2

CN in
2 CN in
ha >-i
en o o 01 o o
3 1-H CO "it X l-H CO -^
O 73 TJ 73
73 73 73
CJ 01 0) 01 01 01
73
3
"5
3
^ ^ ^
3 3 3
o ^ M ^
3 3 3
CO O CO CO CO >, CO CO CO
>, ^ Pi P< ps; Pi Pi p<
CO tl
D' 3
73 73
O u
o O o
(J ^ U
 35

CN CO O CN CO CN CO
— * IN CN in NO NO CO rt< O
CO C CO in 00 00 ON P p CO CM
U (0
O CJ CN CN CM CO

>s

NO 00 NO 00 00 O O 00
2i 3 NO in in NO o Ox
CO O Csl CO in <3N ON ON o CN NO
en "H CN CN CN CO
CN
CO ' 3

in CN ON ON 00 CO CO
CM CN CN CO OO 00
^ 2i o NO IN CN CN
in
1-H
NO
CN
^o
5 2 CN CN
CN
CN
CO cn CO

NO cO NO NO CN NO
o CN
CO
in
NO
o CN
o NO

W X ^ C3N 1-H
CO c^ o
* X CN CN 00
s O CN Cv.
CN
CD ^ CO
< U

o o o o o
o
oin
^^
Ol
*^ in in in in ON 1-H in in
CN "«*" in NO o CM
01
CN CN 1-1 CN CN CO
3
O'
h-
CO
3.242
2.121
2.212

2.091

1.909
1.939
1.488
1.273

1.788
1.576
1.091

XOl
01
H
en
CO 3
X
Ol i2
h.
H o
O-
3 2
01
2
CJ
to 3 CJ
in
CO CJ h.
3 c
CO 2 3
S CJ u
bJD
3 "eo CO
3
2
O 3 CO en 3
atio

2 >^ 3 to
ting

to to eft
• PH 3 >^
CI, N 3 o a •X3
U eft O
ycho

2 3
dget

Ol CJ 3 3 U O 3 >
O
^ CO
eft
^
2 3
O
O
y
Pub

Org

CO h<
:3 eft O o u
Ol
J
<0
pa PH > W <
PH o
 *
"co
«.<
o 65
CN tN in in
CO CO CN "^
65

2 3
iS 2 ^
1-H NO
•^ 1".
Ol
^^ . ^
CO 1-^ CO
,«» 3
U tl.
H
CD

W
sas

> o>
»-H CO
^
g 3 en
CO
C30
in 8
1-H
CM
CO
^ ^
>
PQ
cy^
lina

X
w ^
65
"^ PsI CN
U o
h,
1—1

pa e^ CO
"^ CN 1-H
-^r
< 2
H
U

C/5
ti^ 2
O 01
3
^
o o in p
NO CO in c^
u h-
CO
2 en
h,
01
2 en
3
w
CIH
Xu CO
01
sTe

X 00 ON CO NO
hanlOO% due to m tip

1-H CO CO • ^
w CO P - ^

X 3
Ol
experience

3
bHcatio

tion

3 CO eft ^^
Cl, 3
• 9 ^
O h.
Colleg e pub
Highs chool

Public relati

Is mo
Intern:ship

jO
o
*
 37

^ it ON SP CN t^ NO
CO 3 CO tv 1-H CM ON
(^ CO CN "^ NO NO CO
0) ^
a
>
> 1-H 1-H 1-H CN

01
3
CO
CO
c^
NO
O
O
ON
00
"co 0 CO CN 00 CN
cn
ler

1-H

H en '"' 1-H CN

z CT) ^^
U
CO
^mm

3
PL,
u
Q
P H
H cn
cn PJI 1-H cy\ <o\ NO ON
>
PQ
w
>
^ 2
52 CO
1-H
CN
00
Cv
IN
in
CN
in
C>s
in
l-H CN
CO e n
H 2: J^
5^
<
PQ
00
w
o PQ
C14
r-
•p* •*-«
CO
3
in
CO
CN
in
NO
0.
C?S
CM
in
CO
in
CO
ON
in

0 1-H 1-H 1-H 1-H

p
CN
PQ H—1
5
g 0
h-
1—H .n CO
< H
U
Q
p<
w <
o 0
in
0
in
0
in
Q ^^ 1-H CN ON in CO

cn 0 OJ
3
1-H 1-H OJ

2 Of
CO
H
0
UH
cn
CN NO NO NO
X r-. O CN CO CO
u
02 01
CN NO NO
1-H
NO
CN

U
<
en
CO 3
X CO
PH 01
^^
H ha

en
o
3 ^
en
3
3
73
CJ II
h. *^
CO in
O) u
01 ^^
en
3
h,
3
gree

X
2 3 0 _2
CI. i«
cu 2 o
a.
X
3 en
3
OJ
73
a
73
a.
01 O
a. ^-^ 73
0
^ X ^
_o
X u 01
tn
u 3 '0 3 >
CO
ter

van
o ha >
CO
U 0 73
PH i t- <
 38

0) CM -^
3 ^»
CO
IN
•^
CO
CN
NO
o CTs
ON
CO
ON ON
ON
NO
IN
NO
CO
IN
NO
ON
00
ON
IN "^ c^
C3N 1-H CO ON ON 00 in
To CO CN ON ON o
CN l-H o
IN in in in
> Cv CN CN IN NO NO 3 NO NO in in in in

Q
w
pii
w
Q
HH

Z H
p^
U w
c/5 Q
H ^
d H
ON
U
S^
cn >H
HJ PH ^
PQ
< OH
H ^ 5
cn <
>1 H
d f^
^o eft
O
Z. ^ 8 CJ
< ^ en 73 eft
73
e<^ a. eft
3
_o
O en
CO
H 3 u
U 'eft X
< en
^ CO
3
PH en en Cl.
.2" 3 S .2 bO
01
> 01
4H O o •2 o 3
3
73
X Ol CO
en eft en X o '2 2 CO ha
u X
en u O 2 Cl, o
en
01
X
3
0)
en o
3
CO
o^
'cj
ha eft
O
e- 3
eft ha 73 > eft o
&, eft 3 _3 >
"co O o OJ o CO
CJ
u
CO
O OJ V4-I
X
CO
"S 73
3 .2 v.ta
o»
2 X ^^ o eft 3 M) 73 op "a o "co
'2 Ol
cn CO
ha
3 OJ .2f 3 01 3
CO 'eft
3
_OJ0
X O) 'eft 73 'eft O
u 01 o OJ CO 01 feO 73 a
E^ iS a 73 73 CO 3
3 73 eft
ha
"^
ha
eft 3
It • " ^
ttj eft en W3
6UD (50 o eft
u
en
"3
U
u 3
u X 3 u 3 Ol h. X 3
u
3 3
3 O, '2 X > 73 O, a, '2
CO CO
3 3 CO 3
tl. ha 3 a, O 3 h.
CO

^ % % CO
CO
ha
U O u ^
u
 39

Ol CO in ON
1-H NO
3 (^
o NO "^
"to ^ CN T-H

> in in in

.»H

c
a
u
ON
w
PQ
<

00
CN

CO
xpl ainec
med

eft

Ol CJ
3 CJ
cu u
X 3
CO
'^^
3 X 'C
CO
(X
to
1to >
o
X 3 3 4M*

u 3
O) "5b 2ha 0>
Ol
Cl> CO ha
CL. 3 o 01
CO ^ PH
en
2
 en en 40
8 3 3
3 65 II 2 65
Ol
O CN o 00 in IN i n CO 5X o " ^ CN CO O 'St ON CN NO
•c
X
CO CO
1-H

1-H

II
V
I CM CN CN 1-H

CN
II

in C^
c^ 00
8 CO
3 65 CN 65 CN
CJ
1-H ^ ON 1-H C O O O O O C O C O O
II
r CN CN CN
>
•^ CO CN

X en eft
ha

zo OJ

CO
ha
U
u

eft

(^ in 3
Ol eft
o 73 3
3
X en
en 65
3 o o o ON CO O N vX) CO
"co o rH O CN CO 1-H 1-H CN rf
ha CO CO 1-H CO CN rH
o; II 2 11
3 PU
cn
pq
X
O.
3
in
^ CO
ON
PQ cn CN
3 65 CM
CO
< ha T t CN CO I N CO 0 0 CN CO CO 0 0 o CO OO in
o; CN 1-H CN CN " en CN CM CN
> 01
^ lo eft
o
0> > ^ O
2 2 2
CO CO
ha h.

u U

VJ en
en f-i^
en
r^ 3 73 3
M _o ^ O
en cn en en '.3
^^ 3 "co __ 3 CO
publi c rel

Telec muni*:atio
Writi /tech nica
ng/tech;nica

municatio

"2 X
resea rch

Ol
eft
a Ol
en Ol ^
publi
resea
Favo rite Cour

ha
ment
Igement

3
O
nswer

ha

U 01
[UIO

UIO

a; X CO
ha
> , en
ha
^§i)x CO >>
h. u
-= CO u
Speei

Gene
Iheo
Spee
Gene
Telec

Theo

Man

o .-3 3 CO CO
Law

Law

> h. (B O
CO 2 2
tia
 eft en 41
8 3 3
3 g5 II
01 S5 II
O tx o o o
I
CN CN 00 5X
•c CO 1-H CN CN
0 0 CN
CO
<—' i n o CN O
CM
CO

X
Nd
CM

in
8
3
Ol
i
ON 65 CN
<—' CM CN C3N vfi T^ CN CO
•c CO CN CN C^ O O CO o CO c>^ o
CN rH CO
o II
X
> ^ >
w CA
ha
en
o 01
ha

Z 2
2 CO
ha
U u

eft
3
e/i
o;
73
eft

3 3
3
II
II en
a» eft 65 65 s:^.
3 O O O c 3 N C N O i n c 3 N Tt
5X .2 C3N CN in
CO rH rH CN OO" CO ^ •<t O N ( N NO CN NO"
c ha CM CN CN
.i.iH
Ol
3
II 2
Ol
-a' ti,
o CN
V
cn
= .2083

tudent

X rt
cn
rt
3 65 CN
ha C O C M i - H t ^ ^ C O C O C O 1-H
1 — ' O O C O O O C O O C O C N
p:^ CO CN CN en
2 > o;
•^ 1-H ^- (M
Mai

PQ o
[er's

en
\a
<
Z Ol

CO 2
ha CO
ha
u u

eft eft
3 3
a; eft
_o Ol
en
a ^
eft
en en ha eft
ha 3 "co
3 ^ M
3 CO
3 CO _o "Sxu O CO

O u en
"co U U en .2 "^ XOl
3 u u U ha
U X a.. ;— CO CJ '2 ha
• aa 3 ja CJ 3 - I 2
en
CO
tec

O
O)
5i Ol
a.'
3 t : eft 'hi X en
o eft
c 2 X 3 3 01 *-
> < 2 2 2 5o- hi
01 »H
^ >
(O
^.^
to CJ 2 2 Cl. hi o
CO
U- bO 01
2 3^ " u
-
CO
ir
>^
^
eft
C
PU

eft
3 C
tCiJZ
3
3
O u
OO .^ X
•75 C —
u 01
o
^1
"eft .t: t 3
CO
Ol ha <n
ex. CO , ^ _0l £2 ! CO
O
^ *^ en X ««i L— s^
JZ o
^2 en HJ ;a H -J
H 2
 CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This study attempted to answer four questions:

1. What influences students to choose public relations as a major
course of study?

2. What academic areas do public relations majors identify as

important to support their pubUc relations education?
3. What skills and experience do public relations majors identify as
significant to their careers in public relations?
4. How do student perceptions compare to concerns of public relations
professionals reflected in recent studies?
From the preceding results, the data suggests that public relations
students do not have a clear perception of the academic area they have chosen
as their major.
There was no statistically significant difference observed between male
and female students in any of the statistical analyses—evidence that the
gender gap may, indeed, be narrowing in public relations, and that we can
begin to look at ''students'' rather than "males" and "females."
Sixty percent of the students responding to the questionnaire indicated
they were personally acquainted with someone whose job the students
defined as public relations. More than three-fourths of those students who
knew public relations professionals said the acquaintance was a family or
personal friend. Yet two-thirds of the students said no one other than them-
selves influenced their decision to major in public relations. This differs
somewhat from the psychology literature which suggests career choices
42
 43
are influenced by family and friends (Lin & Dumin, 1986). But it is consistent
with recent research by Matthews and Schweitzer (1989).
When students were asked to rank variables in terms of importance to
them in selecting pubUc relations as a major, the leading reasons observed
were the desire to develop communications skills and the desire to develop
planning/decision-making skills. These results are confusing when
considered with results which indicated almost one-third (32%) of the
students' least favorite class was a writing/technical skills course and that
management was the most seldom mentioned "favorite" class.
Students agreed that practical experience and an internship in public
relations were the most important factors in getting a first job in public
relations. However, fewer than half (45%) of the students reported having
any practical experience in public relations, and only 25% of the students have
had an internship in public relations. These results should be reflected in
students' perceptions about the work world.
The failure to find statistically significant relationships between factors
important to students in selecting their major when the results were
crosstabbed both by gender and classification suggests that many students
might have similar questions about their choice of public relations as a career.
Results of the study indicate almost half (49%) of the students expected
to find their first job in public relations before they graduate from college.
This high expectation is interesting in view of recent research which
indicated only 46.5% of students who graduated from college in 1987 with
degrees in public relations had jobs in public relations or related fields six
months after graduation (Becker & Engleman, 1988).
 44
The conflicting results, considered with research which suggested
students make career choices based on their perception of the field and what it
will be like to work in that field (Endres & Wearden, 1989), seem to indicate
that educators should take a more active role in advising students about the
realities of careers in public relations.
Students consistently identified a knowledge of public opinion as
essential to the practice of public relations (M = 1.2). In the same set of
questions, however, the students ranked politics, government structure, and
economics near the bottom. This raises questions about the students'
understanding of what influences public opinion and how it is formed.
Students also ranked a knowledge of marketing high (M = 1.4) but only
one-quarter (24%) of the students had declared a minor academic area in
business. The students do seem to perceive the importance of supporting
their public relations courses with a business background.
The lack of experience of the students overall should be considered
important in their perception of knowledge which they will use in the
practice of public relations.
A factor analysis of skills potentially important to the public relations
practitioner produced interesting results. The skill variables were drawn
from a list used by Wakefield and Cottone (1987) in their survey of public
relations employers. The analysis identified only one strong factor from
among the 32 skills listed. The factor included media relations and writing
for various media, graphics and design, planning special events, and
fundraising—skills which might be termed technical skills.
 45
Failure of the factor analysis to identify more than one factor from the
list suggests that students do not see beyond the technical skills and do not
grasp the broader concepts of public relations management.
Recent studies of professionals cited in Chapter Two are consistent in
emphasizing strong writing skills in the public relations curriculum.
Professionals agree also that a business minor is most appropriate for the
public relations major. One of the purposes of this study was to determine
how student perceptions compared to professional perceptions in line with
the coorientation theory.
It seems apparent that students perceive public relations to be a field
which requires skill in written communication, but they are—as Parsons
(1988) noted-extremely uncomfortable with the idea. Responses indicated
that almost one-third (32%) of the students identified a writing/technical
skills course as their least favorite class. Further, students perceive business
knowledge and courses as important to the practice of public relations, but
most do not choose to minor in business and they fail to identify business
skills as a strong factor. Fewer than one-quarter (24%) of the students had
chosen to minor in business.
The results seem to indicate there is no coorientation between
professinals' and students' perceptions of what is necessary to prepare for
entry-level jobs in public relations.
The results of this study suggest faculty is not providing adequate
information about public relations as a career and to challenge educators and
academic advisors who counsel students to become more involved with the
students, to explain course content and relevance to them, and to direct them
to appropriate courses to compliment their degree in public relations.
 46
Areas for Future Research
The results of this investigation of public relations majors revealed
several areas for future research.
First, the results indicate that students are choosing to major in public
relations without substantial external influences. Future research might
explore how students develop a perception of entry-level jobs in public
relations.
Another line of research might investigate recruitment programs in
schools of mass communications to determine how the public relations
sequence is presented to students.
This study also raises questions about how students perceive the
relevance of various courses to their major. Future research might explore
students' understanding of the relationship of various academic disciplines to
public relations.
Findings in this study raise questions about why students choose public
relations as a major when they apparently do not like courses which are basic
to the practice of public relations. In other words, if a student's perception of
public relations is technical skills oriented and the student dislikes
writing/technical skills courses, why does the student major in public
relations?
 LIST OF REFERENCES

Ames, K. (1986, July 7). Public relations: the velvet ghetto. ADWEEK, p.
W26.

Anderson, J. W. (1986). By the books. Public Relations TournaL 42(4), 16-19.

Barnes, K. (1989, June). PRJ's fourth annual salary survey. Public Relations
Journal, 44,17-21.

Bateman, J. C , & Cutlip, S. (1975). A design for public relations education.

New York: PRSA.

Baxter, B. L. (1985). Education for corporate public relations. Public Relations

Review, 11(1), 38-41.

Becker, L.B., & Engleman, T.E. (1988). Class of 1987 describes salaries,
satisfaction found in first jobs. Tournalism Educator, 43(3), 4-10.

Becker, L.B. (1989). Enrollment growth exceeds national university averages.

Tournalism Educator, 44(3), 3-15, 71-76.

Body of Knowledge Task Force (1988). The public relations body of

knowledge. Public Relations Review, 14(1), 3-39.

Bowers, T.A. (1974). Student attitudes toward journalism as a major and

career. Tournalism Ouarterlv, 39, 285-291.

Brody, E.W. (1985). What ought to be taught students of public relations?

Public RelaHons Ouarterlv. 30(2), 6-9.

Brody, E.W. (1988). What is a public relations graduate? Public Relations

Ouarterlv, 33(2), 14.

Burgoon, J.K., Burgoon, M. & Buller, D.B. (1986). Newspaper image:

Dimensions and relation to demographics, satisfaction. Journalism
Ouarterlv, 63(2), 771-781.

Commission on Public Relations Research. (1975). A design for public

relations education. Public Relations Review, 1(3), 56-66.

47
 48
Commission on Public Relations Research. (1987). A design for public
relations education.

Dalton, J. (1989). Keynote speech. National Convention, PubUc Relations

Student Society of America. Dallas, Texas. October 22,1989.

DeRosa, D. & Wilcox, D.L. (1989). Gaps are narrowing between female and
male students. Public Relations Review. 15(1), 80-90.

Staff. (1989, June). Educators rank public relations programs. Public

Relations TournaL pp. 11-12.

Endres, F. F., & Wearden, S. T. (1989). JMC students' perceptions of the work
environment and potential job stress. Unpublished manuscript.

Gersh, D. (1989, September 23). A stabilized enrollment: Results of the latest

study on journalism/mass communications programs. Editor &Publisher,
p. 18.

Gibson, D. C. (1987). Public relations education in a time of change:

Suggestions for academic relocation and renovation. Public Relations
Ouarterly. 32(3), 25-31.

Harlan, A., & Weiss, CL. (1982). Sex differences in factors affecting
managerial career advancement. In Wallace, P.A., (Ed.) Women and the
Workplace. Boston: Auburn Publishing.

Hunt, T., & Thompson, D.W. (1988). Bridging the gender gap in PR courses.
Tournalism Educator, 43(1), 49.

lABC Foundation. (1986). The velvet ghetto: The impact of the increasing
percentage of women in public relations and business communications.
San Francisco.

Lin, N. & Dumin, M. (1986). Access to occupations through social ties. Social
Networks, 8,365-385.

Lubell, S. (1959). High school students' attitudes toward journalism as a

career. Tournalism Ouarterlv, 36, 199-203.

Lubell, S., & Kimball, P.T. (1960). High school students' attitudes toward
JournaHsm as a career: II. Tournalism Quarterly, 3Z, 413-422.
 49

Matthews, C. B., and Schweitzer, J. C. (1989). The path to the velvet ghetto.
Paper presented at the Southwest Symposium for Journalism and Mass
Communications, (1989, October 8-9). Arizona State University, Tempe,
Arizona.

Metrick, A. (1988, May). Educated people. Public Relations TournaL p. 7.

Nachmias, D. & Nachmias, C. (1981). Research methods in the social

sciences. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Newcomb, T.M. (1953). An approach to the study of communicative acts.

Psychological Review. 60(6), 393-404.

Nieva, V.F., & Gutex, B.A. (1981). Women and work: A psychological
perspective. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Parsons, P. R. (1988). Student values and professional self-selection. Paper

presented to Mass Communications and Society Division, Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Portland, Oregon, July
2-5,1988.

Pinzon, C. M. (1989). Advertisers and advertising agencies: A national

survey of current attitudes toward advertising graduates. Paper presented
to Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication,
Washington, D.C., 1989.

Public Relations Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and

Mass Communication. (1981). Report of the 1981 commission on public
relations education.

Schweitzer, J.C. (1988). Who are all these advertising majors and what do
they want? Tournalism Ouarterly, 53, 733-739.

Staff. (1985, December). The feminization of public relations. Marketing &

Media Decisions, 10.

Staff. (1986). Women communicators ghetto-ized. Association Management,

p. 19.

Taylor, M.S. (1988). Effects of college internships on individual participants.

Tournal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 393-401.
 50

Turk, J. V. (1989). Management skills need to be taught in public relations.

Public Relations Review. 15(1), 38-52.

VanLeuven, J. (1989). Practitioners talk about the state of pr education. Public

Relations Review. 15(1), 5-11.

Wakefield, G. & Cottone, L. (1986). Education for the '80s and beyond. Public
Relations Review. 12(2), 37-45.

Wakefield, G. & Cottone, L. (1987). Knowledge and skills required by public

relations employers. Public Relations Review. 13(3), 24-32.

Walker, A. (1975). Status and trends of public relations education in U.S.

senior colleges and universities: report of findings of survey. New York:
Foundation for Public Relations Research and Education.

Walker, A. (1982). End-of-decade survey shows academic growth in public

relations. Public Relations Review. 8(2), 46-60.

Walker, A. (1984). Public relations education: 1983 survey and report. Public
Relations Review. 10(1), 18-29.

Wilder, J. F., & Plutchik, R. (1982). Preparing the professional: Building

prevention into training, pp. 113-119. In Paine, W.S. (Ed.), Tob stress and
burnout: Research, theory and intervention perspectives. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.

Wilcox, D.L., Ault, P.H., «& Agee, W.K. (1989). Public relations strategies and
tactics. Harper & Row: New York.

Wimmer, R.D. & Dominick, J.R. (1987). Mass media research. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.

Zuckerman, D. (1985, February). Moms' jobs, kids' careers. Psychology

Today, p. 6.
 APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE

This survey is being administered to students on selected campuses around the country.
Included in the sample are students enrolled in the first upper division public relations course.
Your thoughtful completion of the survey is appreciated

1. What is your minor (or your anticipated minor if not yet declared)?

2. Did you have another major before public relations?

Yes (If Yes, go to question 3.)

No (If No, go to question 4.)

3. What was your previous major?

4. In what year did you declare public relations as your major?

Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior

5. To what student communications organizations, if any, do you belong? (Check all that
apply.)

American Advertising Federation

Public Relations Student Society of America
Sigma Delta Chi
Women in Communications
Other
Specify:

6. To what other student organizations, if any, do you belong? (Check all that apply.)

Honor Society
Social Fraternity or Sorority
Student Government
Other
Specify:

7. Are you personally acquainted with anyone whose job you would classify as "public
relations?"

Yes (If Yes, go to question 8.)

No (If No, go to question 9.)

51
 52
8. What is the individual's relationship to you?

Father
Mother
Brother/Sister
Other relative
Family friend
Personal friend (peer or contemporary)

9. Who most influenced your decision to major in public relations?

Father
Mother
Brother/Sister
Other relative
Family friend
Personal friend (peer or contemporary)
Teacher
No one other than myself

10. How important were each of the following to you in selecting public relations as your major?

Very important Unimportant

Credibility of the field

Good pay and working conditions

Advancement and promotion opportunities

Contribution of field to society

Desire to develop communications skills

Desire to develop planning/

decision-making skills
11. How much knowledge of each of the following do you think public relations professionals
need to be
good at their job?

A great deal Very little

Accounting

Psychology

Budgeting

Economics
 53

Governmental Structure

Law

Marketing

Organizational Management

Personnel Management

Politics

Public Opinion

12. How important do you think each of the following skills is to the public relations
professional?

Very important Unimportant

Budgeting

Computer Information Systems

Convention/meeting planning

Coordination of creative efforts

Copywriting/proofreading

Decision-making/problem solving

Fundraising and development

Graphics/design of

broadcast advertising

corporate publications

direct mail pieces

news releases

print advertising

promotional films/videos

slide shows/film strips

Interviewing
 54

Negotiation

Persuasion

Photographic design/direction

Photographic shooting skills

Planning special events

Managing projects

Research

Speech writing

Planning trade shows/exhibits

Working with the news media

Writing broadcast advertising

Writing corporate publications

Writing direct mail pieces

Writing news releases

Writing print advertising copy

Writing slide shows/film strips

Writing training and

promotional films/videos

13. Refer to the items listed in question 11. On which five do you think you will be spending
most of your time in your first job?

14. Have you had experience in any of the following? (Check all that apply.)

High School publication

College publication
Internship
Specify:
 55

15. Have you had any public relations experience?

No
Yes (If so, describe it briefly.)

16. Among all the required courses for your major, which was your favorite?

17. Among all the required courses for your major, which did you like the least?

18. How important do you think each of the following will be in getting your first job?

Very important Unimportant

Internship in public relations

Advanced degree

Portfolio (demonstrated skills)

Practical experience

"Connections"

19. Do you expect to work in public relations after graduation?

No
Yes

20. What kind of job do you expect to have?

21. Where do you expect your first job will be?

Corporation (including business, manufacturing, retail)

Educational Institution
Government
Nonprofit Organization
Public Relations or Advertising Agency
Other
Specify:
 56

22. When do you expect to find your first job?

before graduation
within one month after graduation
within two months after graduation
within three months after graduation
more than three months after graduation

23. What do you anticipate your starting salary in your first job will be?

Less than $15,000

$15,000 to $19,999
$20,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $29,999
More than $30,000

24. How many hours per week do you expect to work on your first job?

25. What is your age?

18-19
20-21
22-23
24 or older

26. Are you male or female?

Male
Female

27. How are you classified?

Junior
Senior
Graduate Student
Other
Specify:

28. What is/was your father's occupation? (Please give job title if you can, such as butcher,
mechanic, teacher.)

29. What is/was your mother's occupation?

 51

30. What was your parents' marital status when you entered college?

Married
Widowed
Separated
Divorced
 PERMISSION TO COPY

In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for a master's degree at Texas Tech University, I agree

that the Library and my major department shall make it freely avail-

able for research purposes. Permission to copy this thesis for

scholarly purposes may be granted by the Director of the Library or

my major professor. It is understood that any copying or publication

of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my

further written permission and that any user may be liable for copy-

right infringement.

Disagree (Permission not granted) Agree (Permission granted)

Student's signature lature

StudentVB^signa

//- 3D -e'f
Date Date