Comments on: Who needs professional education?

By: David Reich my 2 cents

David Reich my 2 cents — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 00:46:40 +0000

You don’t need to have a degree in p.r. to practice p.r., but I think some basics of public relations should be a part of every marketing curriculum and also part of any general business degree.

What can we do to correct the damage done by the Princeton Review piece? We’re doing it now by writing about it. It’s shame we don’t have an effective and respected association to represent us, but we should also push PRSA to make some noise about this, for what it would be worth.

By: Inside PR » Blog Archive Inside PR #77 - Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Inside PR » Blog Archive Inside PR #77 - Tuesday, September 18, 2007 — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 14:57:05 +0000

[...] 04:05 Gary Schlee chimes in with an audio comment. He mentions these links in his commentary: The Princeton Review, Gary’s A Class Act blog, PR Conversations, and the IABC Advocacy Commons. [...]

By: Kristen Sukalac

Kristen Sukalac — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 09:41:59 +0000

Living in a country (France) where education is generally very specialized, regardless of what field you are going into, I have come to believe that excessive specialization is bad. That being said, the best systems probably provide a balance of the two. I think we definitely need trained specialists with very specific job skills. But we also need people with analytical and adaptability skills that aren’t related to any specific job per se (management and strategy skills, if you will). I think a world of technicians would be horrible, but so would a world of managers. Any organization’s communications function will need a mixture of these two to be truly successful. Too much specialized education can mean churning out people qualified for yesterday’s jobs who don’t have the ability or skills to adapt to a new context and not having any leaders with the vision to fix the problem.

By: Carrie Mamantov

Carrie Mamantov — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:22:16 +0000

So, hopefully you welcome a “youngster’s” opinion in this matter.

It sounds like we have a challenge before us:
1. To better collaborate with universities and organizations like Princeton Review to better comprehend what we do and the value we offer to business success.
2. As part of our Advocacy position, find ways to also directly reach the young professional as they enter the work force to instill any learning they may have missed in the classroom.

I’ve been working hands-on in the communications field for six years now. I graduated with a very strong Corp Comm and Public Affairs degree from SMU, and I am very proud of the breadth of skills they gave me. But I will say, equally proudly, I have sought out and earned every bit of the education I have to date.

I took an internship in a different field every summer — not a university requirement, although it should be. I have since been very involved in IABC, taken advantage of every company training program available, and a year ago I was promoted to manage a team of three.

Not to brag, but I do believe, you make yourself. Education needs to give you a foundation, principles, the tools as they say, so then the intelligent individual can figure out how to put it together. So, yes, universities can still be doing more to provide a better real-world experience, and that probably means having better relationships with communications professionals to be visiting lecturers, etc. And potentially IABC partnering with some council of educators to be more directly connected to curriculum decisions.

But this also means having great managers and mentors around you to challenge you as you start out in the real world. And I have found many through IABC.

I know I’m in the minority, and I love it most of the time, but I am also disappointed I have not found more young professionals in our association. I mean, under 30, like me. I think they are missing out, and I think all you seasoned professionals could do more to encourage your younger team members/employees to experience IABC, for this exact reason, to continue to learn, grow and become an even more well-rounded communicator. When I started out, it was a huge deal for me to pay that full amount, on the near-full credit card [sheepish grin], but it is completely worth it.

By: Jenn Mattern

Jenn Mattern — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 18:41:48 +0000

Then, as I’ve already stated David, it would be their responsibility to “find a way to make up for that lack of specialized formal training in some other way,” whether that be through a later secondary degree or certification as a colleague suggested elsewhere to quite an extensive amount of experience beyond the training of a single employer or two and their chosen methods.

By: David Murray

David Murray — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:20:36 +0000

Jenn, some people would consider it a crime of the soul to know at 18 years of age that one wanted to be a public relations executive when one grew up.

By: Fiesty Little Devils: The PR Education Debate : Naked PR

Fiesty Little Devils: The PR Education Debate : Naked PR — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 14:31:02 +0000

[...] agree with someone who went the general route (our mysterious friend only to be known as “Anne“. Oooh, [...]

By: Jenn Mattern

Jenn Mattern — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 13:23:41 +0000

I’m free to have my opinion on the matter, and you’re free to disagree Anne. I’m certainly not going to apologize for something I believe based on a lot of experience and observation across colleagues in multiple fields of communication and their educational background just because someone may feel offended. I certainly didn’t expect everyone (especially those who have gone the general route) to agree or “like” what I said. As far as I’m concerned, if you know what you want to do with your life, you ought to be able to show it with specialization in some form or another, and if you choose a general degree path, you’d better find a way to make up for that lack of specialized formal training in some other way. If you personally feel that you have, then that’s great, and why you care about my personal opinions baffles me. Be confident in your own work and talents if you’re so sure of them, and spend your time proving it in your work instead of letting someone’s opinions on a blog rub you the wrong way.

By: Anne

Anne — Wed, 05 Sep 2007 19:40:23 +0000

I’d like to briefly address Jenn Mattern’s comment that “getting a general degree shows a lack of dedication to a line of work.” As Jenn anticipated, I wholeheartedly disagree, and I strongly hope that the majority of others do as well. I earned an English degree from a liberal arts college even though I wanted to become a journalist. I was, in fact, dedicated enough to the line of work to seek out and speak with writers, editors and hiring managers of newspapers in my city about liberal arts colleges vs. J-schools. Every single one said that, all things equal, they would hire a graduate with a general degree over a graduate with a journalism (PR, communications, etc.) degree. You may argue that all things are not equal and that J-school students have more journalism experience, but this is not necessarily true, as liberal arts students can gain the same experience through extracurricular activities, supplemental classes, internships and jobs. Many of the men and women I spoke with also compared J-schools to trade schools (in a negative way).

I did take their advice into consideration, but my choice to attend a liberal arts college was based on many different factors, including extensive research into the courses offered by liberal arts English programs and J-schools. The fact that I chose a liberal arts college does not mean that I did not put thought and effort into my decision. It’s hardly true that every English major put as much thought into their degree as I did, but it’s hardly true that everyone who gets a general degree lacks dedication. The fact that people believe statements such as the offending one quoted is not only offensive, but highly discouraging to individuals with general degrees who are as talented and qualified, if not more so, than those with specialized degrees. Jenn, I think your attitude is doing both employers and job-seekers a disfavor.

By: Mike Klein

Mike Klein — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 05:51:34 +0000

The distinction between “vocational” and “academic” post-secondary education in Europe is an official one, though the relationship between the two is becoming blurrier. In the UK, the institutions once had separate nomenclature (academic “Universities” and vocational “Polytechnics”), the Polytechnics were renamed Universities in the Thatcher era…and are now often disparagingly called the “New Universities” (or “old polytechnics”).

In the Netherlands, the institutions remain separate. Interestingly both the universities (WO) and the more “vocational” hogeschools (HBO) offer “bachelors” degrees, and both types of institution can offer communication programmes, though the HBO programs tend towards more practical training in PR/Journalism/Business Communication and the WO programs more academic and theoretical.

Other countries may have more rigid distinctions between types of post-secondary education (Germany, Belgium come to mind), others less so (Ireland?)…

Mike