Technology in the PR Classroom

Tech and PR (B10)

The video “This Is Scholarship”(Braun & Gilbert) displayed many ways that digital scholarship is growing and suggested that opening the requirements for tenure and promotion to include works in new media formats would be productive. While I agree that new media forms can be interesting ways to present research, I am still not adjusted to reading online scholarship “on screen” or taking as much information away from web video as I would from an article.

For now, I prefer reading an article on paper, in a familiar format, where I do not have to divert my attention from the content while trying to get past the form. Perhaps there will eventually be a shift and reading in many formats (and using hyperlinks when reading) will be commonplace, but I personally find it more distracting to move back and forth between pages (particularly when I have to scroll anyway) than flipping a page. Also, the paper format is much more durable than the web. We can read scrolls from 2,000 years ago, but I have files on disk (3.5) that have been corrupted beyond the point of opening. I am a little old school, I guess, but I want to know that anything I write or cite is going to be on paper _somewhere_.

When Krause makes the point that many online journals discussed in his 2002 article are no longer online, he highlights a fear that is quite understandable - loss of information. Later, as he highlights a few of the authors that have made their work available through a personal webpage, he inadvertently raises another point - Carolyn Miller's website has since changed, and so the work is not accessible in the current form in this article!

So even though it is still "publishing" many web users rightly think that clicking on a link will take them somewhere. When a website changes, is it the author's responsibility to update it when we are talking about an online publication? If not, what is the advantage to online versus paper publishing?

As far as web published documents counting for tenure, Krause says that it was either "good news" or "no news", and that it was more a supplement to tenure portfolios than a part of them. Clearly, web publishing has not taken the place of traditional peer reviewed work, and I don't imagine that things will change so much in the next 10 years (as far as tenure review goes) that I will take good articles that could be published and craft them for the web.

Moving to a discussion of blogs, Krause notes that wile he views his blog as part of his academic identity, he does not see blogs being counted as "small s scholarship" that would be counted toward the larger assessment of academic work. Crafting an identity online is certainly a concern for me as a developing scholar, though I don’t know how I would balance a blog (that is not required as part of a course) with my other responsibilities as a scholar.

When Wiley and Martindale discuss student use of blogs and cite permanence as an advantage of blogs over discussion forums, and the public aspect of the blogs being read, I was reminded of how some of my classmates used the permanence argument as a reason for _not_ using blogs. Do we want our development indexed? I know some of my classmates don’t. Anyway, We’ll see if this post ever comes back to haunt me (like when I do my dis as a series of podcasts, lol).

Posted at 12:13PM Nov 05, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[0]

Tech and PR (B9)

This week started off tough for me as I wondered how I would bridge my feelings about fair use as a teacher and a students and my feelings as a PR practitioner protecting an organizational image. I had a hard time at first with the manifesto, which "argues for a view of intellectual property that protects Fair Use, and that privileges free and open use over profits and persecution.'" It is in conflict with what I would be teaching in a course on PR and new media. In preparing students to work at organizations where they are responsible for maintaining an organizational image, I would want stress the importance of protecting an organization's digital assets. I think the distinction between "copyleftists" and "copyrightists" is still an important one to make, particularly when practitioners have to manage the delicate balance between sharing information (with the media and the public) and maintaining a consistent organizational image (by instituting communication policies concerning employee blogging, etc.).

Questions about citations, getting permission for use of a digital text, and crediting unknown authors is a relevant concern for public relations writing when the information used comes from outside the organization. When a practitioner crafts a position paper, whitepaper, or article on behalf of a client or the home organization, generally much of the research is from the client or company that the student is writing for as the organization - meaning that citations are not necessary. It is common practice to repurpose text from product sheets, previous press releases, and the website without citation. The issues of fair use and copyright are complicated, however, when the practitioner is asked to craft a document that draws on outside research.

Many organizational whitepapers that explain complex issues are meant to be a service to the public, and function as a demonstration of the sponsoring organizations expertise. When these documents are written for non-academic publics, citations are used much differently (if at all) than they would be in academic research. It is imperative that practitioners understand copyright and what constitutes fair use to avoid lawsuits when using outside sources. "Repurposing" is fine when using materials written by or for the organization, but the distinction has to be made for how different outside sources need to be treated. The Rife (2007) article, in explaining the ins and outs of copyright and fair use, might be a good place to start.

I want to make a quick point about PR and plagiarism. I have a pretty strict plagiarism policy, and have always been serious about producing original work as a student. I just want to share the shock and horror of my first day on the job in PR to demonstrate the divide between campus and the workplace on these issues: I was told on my first day of my internship to write a press release (I did not learn about the technical or "craft" side of PR in courses, only the planning and managerial side). I asked my new boss where to start, where to get the information to put together my first ever press release. She told me to simply go to the filing cabinet, pull the release for this event from the previous year, and change the dates. I was shocked.

My dilemma - my name was on it. I tried to change a few things, but she insisted that there was nothing wrong with this. I felt awful my first few days there, thinking that I was stealing someone else's work. The difference, though, is that the previous release was written as "work for hire" and belonged to the organization, and even though my name was on the new one, it didn't belong to me. My reputation as a PR practitioner still depends on whatever is on that sheet of paper with my name on it, but it is not mine. I think that this discussion is an important one to have with students in PR, and perhaps the best way to broach it is through a conversation about plagiarism, copyright, fair use, and work for hire.

Also, I like creative commons licensing, and want to know what everyone in class thinks about it - I am thinking that course designs, assignment designs, and anything else I put on my online portfolio should be protected in some way, and want to know if there is any issue with doing that since I wonder whether or not these activities are work for hire and belong to the university and not me... thoughts?

Posted at 05:53PM Oct 22, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[0]

Tech and PR (B8)

The more "Explanations in Plain English" videos I see, the more I like them. I would like to find a way to incorporate them into the course design I am working on this semester for preparing students to write for PR in new media/digital environments. The social networking explanation (though its a little obvious, I guess) might help students who have grown up using (and perhaps not thinking critically) about technologies see them in a different light (or at least start a conversation).

I started watching a few more of them, and found the social media video interesting, which uses a story about ice cream to explain social media. This would also work great for a PR and technology class, to get them thinking about how to tap into social media as both a research and communication technique. For fun, there is also a "Zombies in Plain English" video that is pretty great.

Switching to the reading for this week, I found myself asking the question of why one would want to have an extended conversation about gender and sexuality in a composition or rhetoric class. I understand the benefits that moving a discussion about gender to a computer-mediated anonymous forum can bring, such as giving students who are normally more reserved a voice, etc.... What I don't really understand is how exactly the scenarios that students played out in the book chapter, the ones where students were to imagine that they woke up "in a world in which homosexuality is the norm and heterosexuality is demonized or considered 'not the norm'" (Alexander, in Computers in the Composition Classroom, 2008, p.213), would really get at the social constructedness of gender/sexuality.

At the end of the chapter, Alexander reminds the reader of a (presumably) narrow-minded student he discussed at the beginning of the chapter, who accused him of promoting homosexuality. Alexander writes that he encourages "all students-- both gay and straight" to think about how identities are shaped. I feel that his focus on the homo/hetero distinction reinforces the idea that there is a binary when it comes to gender/sexuality, which misses the constructivist aspect doesn't it? There also exist people somewhere in between gay and straight, and between hypersexual and asexual (gasp!). Maybe it was implied or something and I just wasn't picking it up, but kind of felt like he should have at least given a shout out to a few other orientations. This chapter kinda got on my nerves!

Wow, this is a little all over the place. I'm going to end on Ch. 14, which Shayne warned me about - a 3 page chapter. With the whole Universal design idea and taking up accessibility issues, shouldn?t the authors have given us the option to read on paper, or at least print the screen shots of the website in landscape so they are 10 instead of 2 point font or whatever? Argh! And making me go on the Internet and type in a long url. Quick question on the article though- anyone used text talking programs successfully? I've tried them, and they're a nightmare for me (might just be my pronunciation, though).

See you soon!

Also - the Williams was interesting to me, but not so much for PR reasons. The only thing I think the article raises for my project is the question about students using these pages without intention to present a cohesive message. There is nothing wrong with that, but when representing an organization in a social network, students might have to un-learn the way they did profiles/personal sites before and begin to think about them critically. Also, for fun:

Which Harry Potter Character are You?
I am....

You?re book smart, moral and cool under pressure. You love learning and showing others what you know. You?re way more mature than those around you, and you always seem to know what?s best.

Nice.

And...
Which LOTR Character are You?


You are most like Aragorn. You have strong convictions and you stick to them. Although you are more of a recluse, you are extremely loyal to the few friends that you have. You are very serious about things, but you like having fun. Fame and fortune mean little to you, and you aren't concerned with being popular. Good for you!

And one last one, though probably NO ONE cares....
What Stargate Atlantis Character are You Most Like?


Which Stargate Atlantis character are you most like?

Congratulations! You're Rodney McKay. That means that you're a conceded, arrogant, self-centered, sarcastic genious. Is this hurtful to you? No way! You don't care what other people say about you, and you believe in yourself. Plus, you're really smart! If you had to improve on something, it should be your ego and your sarcasm--dimm it down a little, and people will become less annoyed at you.

Posted at 11:18AM Oct 15, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[2]

Tech and PR (B7)

So this will be the first time this semester that I am composing my blog in the actual browser window and not in the .doc file that I normally work on my blog posts in. I am not on my computer (second day) and it is driving me insane.

I am using my husband's computer, which is pretty irritating. For starters (and to keep this authentic), I have been using IE, which I personally detest. I don't have my bookmarks here, so had to dig through web mail for important links or search for them all over again. This computer does not remember my username, there is no auto complete in the address bar, and my tabs are not multi-color. Also, when using the NCSU web mail (which is squirrel mail, right?) I accidentally deleted an email instead of sending it, which I blame this computer for.

Also, I can't access all of my "stuff" - documents, pictures, music, email filed on "local" space, my cool desktop background, and whatever. I am not connected to my computer 100% of the time, but usually jump on for 5 - 10 minutes every few hours. I guess laptops are kind of like the cell phone - you can use any old one, but your numbers aren't in it and it can be unfamiliar here and there (plus its next to someone else's head all day...)

Switching gears, then, the readings:

I thought Lunsford brought up some excellent points in her keynote address that will be important to consider when designing a PR writing for digital media course. I am interested to look into Shankar's terms "spriting" and "talkument" as ways to understand the new media texts that students might have to produce to prepare for the field of PR. The recommendations coming out of the article that I will be keeping in mind when designing my final project for this course are first the list of three considerations kept in mind when adjusting the course (balancing academic and practical assignments, balancing critique and analysis with production, and balancing technical training with writing/rhetorical training) and the idea that the course should make reasonable expectations about the final products students will produce. Perhaps it would also make sense to make a general PR writing course a pre-requisite, so that students could bring at least some higher-level writing proficiency to the course before experimenting with new media forms.

The Lo-Fi manifesto was also helpful, though I thought that the first few paragraphs were much clearer than the rest of the document (too much technical jargon in that article for me, at times). I think assigning the article to students taking a writing for new media class (in any discipline) would be important early in the semester, to get them thinking about why we choose the forms we do and to consider the reality that sometimes more complex is not always the way to go and why.

The discussion about open-source/free software in the Riley and Williams (2005) piece was interesting when I thought about it in the context of some of the discussions that have been occurring intermittently on the TLTR list serve since I joined a year ago (I would go into more detail, but they are all archived on my computer, so I don't have specifics). Anyway, my solution is for Google to make course management software, and all of the problems will be solved. The end.

For now, I am going to get back to missing my computer -KO

Posted at 07:50PM Oct 05, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[2]

Tech and PR (B6)

Writing New Media offers some suggestions for teaching students how to be producers and critical consumers of new media content that seem to easily transition into the PR classroom. There are other suggestions that do not (see Geoffrey Sirc?s chapter ?box logic?)

In the opening chapter of the book, Wysocki points out that we (and students) should consider the material choices for producing texts in a digital medium and the impact that those choices have on the way that our messages are received. This is something that can clearly translate into a ?digital PR writing? course in that the effects of media channels must be considered both  in the context of the public receiving a message and the ?PR technician? producing it.

I also liked the distinction between media texts and digital texts, and that a new media text need not be digital. The idea that traditional media in a way remediate digital media is important ? just because a practitioner is writing what looks like a traditional press release, the coming of the ?news release? (we are not just releasing to the presses anymore) speaks to this. Writing style, content chosen, and objects added to a release all must be considered, as well as the form of a ?release? (even if that is on paper !)

I very much enjoyed the Jonson-Eilola chapter on the database and the essay, and the identification of writing as symbolic-analytic work and articulation, both of which resonate with the practice of PR (and any writing, for that matter). The ?theory of contexts? that articulation theory brings to the mix is an almost essential idea for PR, which does not hold to the transmission view of communication. Actually, this ?theory of contexts? reminds me a little of Carey?s ?ritual view? of communication ? be interested in what you guys have to say about that.

I was most excited to see the activities that followed Jonson-Eilola?s chapter, particularly the first two (blogs and search engines). This assignments/activities could easily be modified to be used in a PR classroom to get students to think critically about corporate blogs and the search result hits aspects of PR and new media. Also, the database metaphor could be used to explain to students one aspect of sharing information with the public as the idea of building a database that includes the company web site, bios, new and archived news releases, and other important information that is all indexed and searchable.

Who knows ? maybe I?ll come around and see how box logic might play into all this ? but I?ll need help from the class for that : )

Posted at 11:59AM Oct 01, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[0]

Tech and PR (B5)

After reading over all the information about distance learning (mostly focused on composition and public speaking), I wonder how different PR classes would work in a distance learning environment. While I am still unclear about how lectures would work, I think that a higher level PR course (either in PR writing or a course on technology in PR) may work well in an online environment.

I have to say that while I am convinced that writing could work well (at least on a technological level), I was surprised that Ongyod suggested that public speaking could be taught online. The bandwidth requirements for downloading videos, even when compressed, can be prohibitive. Not all students can be expected to have high-speed Internet access at home, and even if they do, new pricing structures for access may make it cost prohibitive. Also, I?d imagine talking into a webcam is different than speaking in front of a live class of 30.

Many of the articles touted online learning as being great for adult learners in that it is generally more convenient and flexible. Again, though, I?d like to highlight that we are talking about adult learners with access to technology, who have a basic understanding of how to use it, and a connection that can support many of the applications needed for distance learning. I do not think that access to and experience with technology should be underestimated: last semester in a course I was taking we struggled to maintain a voice connection on Skype, sometimes reverting to AOL chat rooms when the voice chat would not work. Even then, we would sometimes have problems getting a chat together - and there were only five or six of us.

This aside, I was interested in the role of the instructor in distance learning. As Peterson points out, some feel that corporate interests may have more sway than instructors when delivering online courses. I was shocked in the Blair and Hoy piece to see the suggestion that the bcc function be used on instructor-student emails to log teaching time/activity. That threw up a major flag for me, as I value my privacy and would not want to work in an academic department that saw my email as a measure of progress: our privacy is violated enough. I would imagine I am not alone.

The idea of ?outsourcing? courses that Anson discusses is also scary. Many of us in the program are looking to end up in the university, though if this trend continues some of us could end up at distance learning course farms with little opportunity to research much more than how to process more students in a semester. Anson?s point that the proliferation of distance learning courses could promote low-paying non tenure-track positions at the university also makes me nervous.

I am interested to learn more about blended learning as opposed to distance learning environments to see what the differences are, as it seems to me that many of the benefits of teaching with technology for PR can be achieved in a blended environment rather than at a distance. See you all online!

Posted at 12:28PM Sep 24, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[1]

Tech and PR (B4)

Selber?s Multiliteracies for a Digital Age (2004) confronts three major literacies that come into play concerning technology in the composition classroom: functional, critical, and rhetorical literacies. Arguing for a ?post-critical stance? that argues an instrumental approach (while useful) hampers students? ability to think ?critically, contextually, and historically? (p. 9) about the effect of technology on writing and communication practices, Selber provides a more comprehensive teaching and learning approach and speaks to responsible and informed technology practices.  I?d like to do through each of these three areas to discuss the implications for teaching and learning in the PR classroom:

Functional Literacy (Computer Use)
What I am interested in discussing here is the issue of ?computers as tools? as a useful metaphor (p. 40). Particularly, the discussion of tools as increasing agency and the Turkle quote that follows discussing Marx?s distinction between tools and machines: while a tool is an extension, a machine imposes its own ?rhythm?.

In public relations, perhaps we should encourage students to look at the various media outlets (particularly the newer ones where conventions are not set in stone) as tools. This may encourage them to think about their purpose for communicating before letting a form dictate their action. Equipped with a solid theoretical base, students could evaluate new media, moving the field forward with new practices that escape the creatively binding ?press release?. Could we say that the press release, in a way, has become a machine, imposing its old rhythm from a time long ago? The step to calling it a news release (and recognizing media who do not use a ?press?) is a positive step, but envisioning new media channels as tools and giving future practitioners a view of ?what can I do? instead of ?what must I do? seems like real progress.

Critical Literacy (Culture)
The table on p. 96 lists four parameters for critical literacy: design cultures, use contexts, institutional forces, and popular representations. The chapter summarizes that students ?should be able to recognize and articulate the ways power circulates in technological contexts,? something that I feel is central to my research areas in technology and the production of social space (p. 133).

In PR, this does not seem to have a logical place on the syllabus, though perhaps it would fit in with a discussion of ethics where we could ask students to examine the implications of using different media channels for targeted messaging. After all, many in PR will be working in implementing design, framing  messages, and working on communicating the popular representations of institutions (!). Yes, perhaps ethics. If anyone has another suggestion, I would like to hear what you have to say ? having a much easier time aligning this with my research than teaching!

Rhetorical Literacy (Creation)
The parameters listed on p. 146 ? ?persuasion, deliberation, reflection, social action? seem to be most aligned with the goals of PR instruction. The quote that struck me as something that should be in the ?technology and PR? section in any number of PR texts was ?one facet of a multiliteracies program [insert: PR program] should prepare students to be authors of twenty-first-century texts that in some measure defy the established purview of English departments [insert: the field]? (p. 139).

This is precisely what we need to be teaching students in PR ? how to understand what is needed in a given situation and the best way to write and distribute messaging in new media formats. They will need to know how align the parameters Selber lists (persuasion, deliberation, reflection, social action) with their organization?s message, and then think that through in the context of new media.

So this is a pretty huge responsibility, and while I was reading and thinking about incorporating these aspects, I felt overwhelmed. I was relieved to see that in Selber?s chapter on ?Systematic Requirements for Change? there was a diagram showing how there are ?nested contexts? that radiate from the technical and pedagogical out to the institutional level, and so this isn?t a task that any one instructor must face alone.

As experts in Communication, Rhetoric, and Digital Media, I feel that graduates of our program will be well suited to help initiate these discussions in our future departments and institutions, enlisting our colleges to think through these challenges together in order to best prepare students for a rapidly changing technological environment.

See you all this afternoon! -KO

Posted at 09:19AM Sep 17, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[0]

Tech and PR (B3)

Educating the Net Generation (from http://www.educause.edu) highlights a number of challenges and opportunities facing instructors today. Particularly interesting were the student perspectives on the ?net gen?, which focused on interaction and hands on experience. It seems a ?traditional? classroom would hinder the learning styles of net gen students, and that with shortages of appropriate learning spaces, instructors will bear the burden in meeting student needs.

Beyond discussions of single point of contact university services, the chapters in the book seemed to stress the need for faculty development and training and designing curricula that meet student needs. Clayton-Pederson and O?Neil stress the importance of this faculty development, and offer Gamson?s seven principles for good practice with technology in the classroom, including incorporating technologies that: encourage contact, encourage active learning, and communicate high expectations. In the absence of spaces like those discussed by Brown and later in the book by Lippencott, what are instructors to do?

How can we incorporate some of the emerging technologies discussed in the Horizon Report (2008) without the necessary infrastructure? While user created video and geotagging seem to hold promising routes to enriching learning, it is difficult to incorporate these technologies in active learning. We cannot expect that most students will be savvy with new technologies, and without the facilities and expertise to train them, many of the benefits will go unrealized.

I was thinking, particularly while reading through the Horizon Report, how important spaces are that would allow students to experiment with technologies such as GPS and video production. While I myself lack the skill to teach the application of either of these, more facilities (complete with technical experts to instruct on the production) would give our students the edge in the job market and in the workplace. With university budgets already stretched thin, however, this seems like a far off possibility.

Further, as budgets are stretched and universities hire less tenure-track professors and more contract instructors and lecturers, what incentive will there be for instructors to ?go the extra mile? and implement these technologies? From what we have learned so far, it seems the trend for the instructor is more work and not less when using technology. How will universities respond to the conflicting desire to stay on budget and at the same time deliver outstanding education and training to students?  

PR students should have spaces where they can apply their critical thinking skills about PR to experiment with applications such as myspace, youtube, and various other online services used in the field (such as Bacons media list builder and PRnewswire). Its unfortunate that the resources and the instruction necessary to use them may be unavailable for many students due to lack of training or lack of money. It certainly isn?t (or at least shouldn?t be) for lack of wanting to provide students with what they need to succeed in the field.

In the mean time, I will be thinking about ways to incorporate aspects of these emerging technologies into the ?smart classroom? complete with internet access and projector. I know some of my classmates do not have the benefit of even a computer in their classrooms ? how are they supposed to incorporate these technologies at all? I?d be interested to hear more from those not in smart classrooms about how they intend to teach students with and about technology.

Posted at 03:40PM Sep 09, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[2]

Tech and PR (B2)

This week?s readings brought up and interesting set of questions for the use of technology in the PR classroom.

While I am not (and most likely will never be) an instructor of composition, the Palmquist et al chapter in CCC dealing with writing in a computer lab versus a traditional classroom environment was interesting. While teaching introduction to Public Relations in a traditional classroom environment seems fitting, I imagine that a lab environment would be productive in an advanced PR writing course. In my experience as a student in the PR classroom, learning about the press release in a traditional classroom is limited. While it is straightforward to explain the form and use of a press release, actually putting one together involves research, editing, and distribution. In a computer classroom, the ?workshop? environment is much closer to the realities of a PR firm ? students can gather information, draft, exchange, proof, and distribute the document during a normal class period (50 ? 75 minutes).

While I would like to see the updated statistics on the digital divide discussed in chapter 6, I enjoyed chapter 7 and the discussion of the pencil as a technology ? it highlights (among other things) that what might feel like a ?traditional? classroom is actually chock full of technology, just technologies that instructors are more accustom to. I will be honest and say that while I enjoy the study of technology, I am at a loss when thinking about how I will eventually incorporate technologies such as blogs, wikis, and chats in my teaching. Furthermore, it will take careful reflection (and most likely trial and error) to figure out the best ways to teach PR students about emerging technologies.

In my work experience in PR, I went from paper press releases and writing articles for a printed magazine to email distribution of news releases and carefully designed customer emails. There are a range of communication technologies that professionals in the field are still figuring out ? technologies that today?s students will have to use to communicate relevant information about their organizations to the public. Chances are organizations will hire new practitioners with the hope that they will know how to use these new media, and I feel that it will be my job as an instructor to see that they do. The question remains: How?

On a broader level, the article about the status of the ?basic course? (Morreale at al, 2006) was thought provoking: while technology was a minor topic added to the study, I am interested to see if eventually the burden of introducing students to the appropriate uses of CMC will fall in the purview of the basic course. If so, how much liberty will instructors have in selecting (in the limited span of a semester) what technologies to integrate into their teaching of either public speaking or hybrid courses? Will communication and first-year writing programs forge an alliance to ensure that students learn basics of email, PowerPoint, blogs, and online-conferencing? Would a communication technology course supplement or supplant the basic course?

Switching gears, though Kim (2007) points out numerous advantages to using blogs in an educational context, I wonder whether forcing students to comment on other blogs is authentic. Kim writes that if students receive more comments, they might be motivated to blog more (p. 1346). I wonder, though, when framing blogs as an assignment, if students will enter extra blog posts about a topic or comment extensively on other blogs if it is not expected of them. This is the second course in which I have been required to blog, and while I am excited to actually be using the technology, I have never found myself blogging ?just because?. Maybe this is different with undergrads, who I imagine have more time on their hands than the typical PhD student - I will be interested to test the use of blogs in my classroom and see the results from the instructor's perspective.

Posted at 05:23PM Sep 02, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[3]

First Thoughts on Tech and PR (B1)

For research purposes, the Hratsinki and Keller (2007) lit review is extremely helpful. Getting an overview on trends in published research in CMC seems like an extremely helpful way to begin thinking about the shape that my research project will take. Particularly, the trends/suggestions in the article that struck me are:

-research needed in emerging media - PR practitioners have to work with any media that best reaches their publics. This can mean blogs, wikis, learning communities, and a host of other emerging media. As practitioners will have direct contact with these media, it is important that PR instructors (like their students will have to) evaluate these media for reaching target audiences. What implications do these media have for message format? What do they mean to more traditional media?

-blended education - PR students should be familiar with many of the forms of message delivery and the technologies they will have to use on the job. What resources can the University provide to give them access to (and a chance to develop literacy with) these new media? I feel that the blended learning environment points toward a solution. I think the COM dept. is working on a new digital media lab, and I would be interested in looking into the ways that this lab can be used as a blended learning space for PR students.

The first three chapters in Computers in the Composition Classroom were thought provoking. I was particularly struck by the discussion of electronic rating, which I feel happens, but not in the way that the statement discusses. While I think the assessment of work in a learning environment should be a human process, as more media moves to a searchable format, students may have to prepare to write for the machine. With PR, marketing and advertising firms utilizing web-optimization services (SEO and SEM), it is clear that sometimes machines will read what we write before people do. It seems to me that instruction on how to write for PR (and perhaps all writing) should address these issues.

Ohmann's piece, though somewhat dated, brought up the issue of incorporating computer literacy elements into a curriculum (p. 27), he made clear that a single course would not be enough to cover the core objectives of computer education. Doesn't sound too far of from where CXC and WAC scholars stand in regard to communication and writing in the curriculum. Perhaps graduates from the CRDM program would be well suited to work in "technology across the curriculum" programs as Universities face increasing demands to prepare their graduates for a working world saturated with technology.

 I am thinking that my final project in this course would be oriented toward blended learning environments where students could explore and develop mastery with new media technologies for use in the public relations field, though the idea of communication technology across the curriculum is also interesting...

- KO

Posted at 04:31PM Aug 26, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[2]

Technology changes

Much has changed from the time that I was in undergrad.

First of all, I did not have a laptop. I had my own computer, which I thought was a big enough deal. It even ran the rare and unstable operating system Windows ME. It seems like many students today have laptops, and with wireless connections across many campuses, can work on the computer almost anywhere (I had to wait for a workstation to become available).

I used 3.5" floppy disks (and sometimes needed to carry a few of them). Today's undergrads can store huge files in their email, in a phone, or on a thumb drive. I bet many of them have never seen a zip or (gasp) a jazz disk.

A quick comparison:

Things I used to use: AIM, hotmail, Yahoo.com, message boards, dial up, flash videos
Things I use now: gmail chat, gmail, google, facebook, cable, YouTube

I don't know what all this means. I was just as distracted with the internet when I was in undergrad, but maybe its just that everything I did took longer. Maybe I got to think deeper thoughts about things while I was waiting for images to load. Or maybe it doesn't matter. I hope to find out.

Posted at 02:42PM Aug 20, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[3]

About

My name is Kathy Oswald, and I am a second year student in the Communication, Rhetoric, & Digital Media (CRDM) program at NCSU. While my research interests hover around space and mobility, I am interested in preparing students to use technology throughout their careers in communications fields, specifically PR.

Here I will be discussing various teaching technologies as they relate to the PR classroom, in the hopes that I can both become a better instructor and share what I learn with others preparing students to work in the field of public relations.

Posted at 01:50PM Aug 20, 2008 by OSWALD, KATHLEEN in General  |  Comments[0]