College-level radio curriculum: educator and manager perceptions on curriculum content and convergence curriculum adoption

Thumbnail Image
Date
2004-01-01
Authors
Kappmeyer, Kersten
Major Professor
Advisor
Committee Member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Altmetrics
Authors
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Organizational Unit
Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication
The Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication offers two majors: Advertising (instructing students in applied communication for work in business or industry), and Journalism and Mass Communication (instructing students in various aspects of news and information organizing, writing, editing, and presentation on various topics and in various platforms). The Department of Agricultural Journalism was formed in 1905 in the Division of Agriculture. In 1925 its name was changed to the Department of Technical Journalism. In 1969 its name changed to the Department of Journalism and Mass Communications; from 1969 to 1989 the department was directed by all four colleges, and in 1989 was placed under the direction of the College of Sciences and Humanities (later College of Liberal Arts and Sciences). In 1998 its name was changed to the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication.
Journal Issue
Is Version Of
Versions
Series
Department
Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication
Abstract

College-level radio educators and radio station managers were asked to rate the perceived importance of specific courses within the radio-related curriculum, and their perceptions of the importance assigned by the opposite group members to each course. Using the co-orientation model, the levels of agreement, congruency, and accuracy between groups were measured. The respondents were also asked to rate their support of convergence curriculum adoption in college-level radio education, and the reasons for their level of support. Educators and managers exhibited a degree of agreement on the courses they preferred as part of a complete radio curriculum. In fact, both groups supported radio skills courses to a high degree, as well as management, and new media courses. Managers, however, placed greater importance on advertising and marketing courses, while educators emphasized law, regulation, ethics, and criticism. An examination of congruency and accuracy of inter-group perceptions revealed a great amount of differences. At a significant level, educators perceived manager views as one-dimensional in emphasizing radio skills courses, while managers felt educators gave too much emphasis to liberal arts courses; neither of these views was accurate. Therefore, the data showed that most differences were in perception, not in reality. Educators and managers both perceived the adoption of a convergence curriculum as a positive response to media trends. Managers tended to be less positive in their support but this tendency was not statistically significant between the two groups. The tone of reasons given for and against this support was significantly different, with educators providing more positive reasons. However, the data showed that educators and managers welcome convergence in radio education. The specific findings give radio educators and radio managers a quantitative basis on which to base curricular discussions. It also fosters an understanding of group positions based on reality, not in mere perceptions. Mass communication education can benefit from additional evidence on which to base convergence curriculum adoption decisions. The methodology presented here also gives curriculum designers a way to effectively assess content in any area of study with industry ties.

Comments
Description
Keywords
Citation
Source
Copyright
Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2004