Journal of Advertising Education - American Academy of Advertising

Transcription

advertising
advertising
Editors: Editors:
Past Editors:
Past Editors:
Jami Fullerton
Jami Fullerton
Patricia B.
Patricia
Rose B. Rose
ProfessorProfessor
Mary Alice
Mary
Shaver
Alice Shaver
Peggy Welch
PeggyEndowed
Welch Endowed
Keith Johnson
Keith Johnson
ResearchResearch
Chair Chair
School ofSchool
Mediaof&Media
Strategic
& StrategicAdvertising
Advertising
Division Division
Executive
Executive
Committee:
Committee:
Communications
Communications
Sela Sar,
Sela
head
Sar, head
Oklahoma
Oklahoma
State University
State University University
University
of Illinois
ofat
Illinois
Urbana-Champaign
at Urbana-Champaign
[email protected]
[email protected] George George
Anghelcev,
Anghelcev,
vice head
vice
and
head and
programprogram
chair chair
Alice Kendrick
Alice Kendrick
Penn State
Penn
University
State University
Marriott Marriott
ProfessorProfessor
of Advertising
of Advertising
Kelty Logan,
Kelty research
Logan, research
chair chair
TemerlinTemerlin
Advertising
Advertising
InstituteInstitute
University
University
of
Colorado-Boulder
of
Colorado-Boulder
SouthernSouthern
Methodist
Methodist
University
University
Karie Hollerbach,
Karie Hollerbach,
student student
paper chair
paper chair
[email protected]
[email protected]
Southeast
Southeast
MissouriMissouri
State University
State University
Book Editor:
Book Editor:
Debbie Debbie
Yount, professional
Yount, professional
freedomfreedom
and
and
responsibility
Susan Westcott
Susan Westcott
Alessandri
Alessandri responsibility
University
University
of Oklahoma
of Oklahoma
Department
Department
of Communication
of Communication
&
&
PadminiPadmini
Patwardhan,
Patwardhan,
special special
topics chair
topics chair
Journalism
Journalism
Winthrop
Winthrop
University
University
Suffolk University
Suffolk University
John Wirtz,
Johnteaching
Wirtz, teaching
standards
standards
chair chair
41 Temple
41 Street
Temple Street
University
University
of Illinois
ofat
Illinois
Urbana-Champaign
at Urbana-Champaign
Boston, MA
Boston,
02114MA 02114
Keith Quesenberry,
Keith Quesenberry,
secretary/events
secretary/events
[email protected]
[email protected]
coordinator
coordinator
& Production
Manager:
DesignerDesigner
& Production
Manager:
MessiahMessiah
College College
Adam Wagler
Adam Wagler
Sheryl Kantrowitz,
Sheryl Kantrowitz,
newsletter
newsletter
editor editor
University
University
of Nebraska-Lincoln
of Nebraska-LincolnTemple Temple
University
University
[email protected]
[email protected]
Original design
Originalby
design
ElainebyWagner
Elaine Wagner
J ou
r
J ou
r
Volume
2
0
on •
•N
ati
uc on • Volume 20 u
•
N
ati
u
uc
f AodfvAedrtviseirntgising
o
Ed Ed
l l
na na
Research
Research
& commentary
& commentary
on instruction,
on instruction,
curriculum
curriculum
& leadership
& leadership
in advertising
in advertising
education
education
Subscription
Subscription
Rates: Rates:
Members
Members
of the Advertising
of the Advertising
DivisionDivision
of AEJMC
of receive
AEJMC receive
the Journal
theofJournal of
Advertising
Advertising
EducationEducation
as part of
astheir
part of their
annual Division
annual Division
membership.
membership.
Individual
Individual
subscriptions
subscriptions
are by year
are by year
(volume).
(volume).
Subscriptions
Subscriptions
receive receive
the
the
full set of
fullissues
set offor
issues
that for
year.
that year.
Subscription
Subscription
prices are:
prices are:
U.S. individual:
U.S. individual:
$25 per $25
yearper year
U.S. institution:
U.S. institution:
$65 per $65
yearper year
Single issue
Single
price:
issue$15
price: $15
Foreign Foreign
air mail,air
add
mail,
$20add
per $20
yearper year
Journal
Journal
of Advertising
of Advertising
Education
Education
Copyright
Copyright
information:
information:
Individuals
Individuals
and all establishments
providing
photoduplication
providing
photoduplication
servicesservices
may photocopy
in theofJournal of
may photocopy
articles articles
in the Journal
Advertising
Advertising
EducationEducation
without without
permis- permission —for
either
for personal
use or for
sion — either
personal
use or for
use or distribution
to students
for
use or distribution
to students
for
classroom
use.
classroom
use.
Subscription
Subscription
information:
information:
Requests
Requests
to reproduce
to reproduce
materials
materials
in
in
JAE for any
JAE other
for any
purpose
other purpose
should be
should be
AddressAddress
changeschanges
must reach
mustAEJMC
reach AEJMC directeddirected
to:
to:
offices 30
offices
days 30
prior
days
to prior
the actual
to the actual
change of
change
address.
of address.
Copies that
Copies
are that are
Jennifer Jennifer
McGill, Executive
McGill, Executive
DirectorDirector
not delivered
not delivered
becausebecause
of address
of address
AEJMC AEJMC
change will
change
not will
be replaced.
not be replaced.
Other Other
234 Outlet
234Pointe
OutletBlvd.
Pointe Blvd.
claims for
claims
undeliverable
for undeliverable
copies copies
Columbia,
Columbia,
SC 29210-5667
SC 29210-5667
must bemust
made
bewithin
madefour
within
months
four months
803.798.0271
803.798.0271
(voice) (voice)
of publication.
of publication.
You must
You
provide
must provide
803.772.3509
803.772.3509
(fax)
(fax)
old address
old address
and zip and
codezip
as code
well as
as well as
[email protected]
[email protected]
(E-mail)(E-mail)
the newthe
address
new address
and zip and
codezip
oncode on
all change
all notices.
change notices.
Subscriptions
Subscriptions
Only that
Only
office
thatmay
office
grant
may
the
grant
request,
the request,
are non-refundable.
are non-refundable.
after assessing
after assessing
a fee. a fee.
education
education
m
2 2
r 1- r 1be be
m
Journal of Advertising Education
20th Anniversary Special Edition
1996 - 2016
A publication of the Advertising Division | AEJMC
Journal of Advertising Education (ISSN 1098-0482) is published by the Advertising Division
of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.
Printed by Professional Printers, West Columbia, SC
© 2016, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Summer 2016
1
Editorial Review Board
Contributors
From the Editors
Summer 2016
Research Articles
8
Looking Backward, Looking Forward: A Systematic Review of 20 Years
of Research and Commentary Published by Journal of Advertising Education
John G. Wirtz, Jameson L. Hayes and Yan Shan
22
A Comparison of Characteristics and Cultures of Academic Disciplinary
Areas in the Context of Advertising and Public Relations Education
Sally J. McMillan
32
Effects of Integrating Advertising Ethics into Course Instruction
Michelle A. Amazeen
44
Team Teaching of Creative Advertising and Public Relations Courses
Pamela K. Morris
54
From Introducing the World Wide Web to Teaching Advertising in the Digital Age:
A Content Analysis of the Past Twenty Years of the Journal of Advertising Education
Elizabeth C. Crawford, Emory S. Daniel Jr., David K. Westerman
AdEd Insight and Innovation
66
Explaining Ethics: Using the Explainer Genre to Integrate Ethics
into Advertising Curricula
Jean Kelso Sandlin
Commentary
85
Twenty Years Later
Jim Avery and Jim Marra
86
Looking Back
Pat Rose
87
Advertising education and the Journal of Advertising Education: The 20-year evolution
Sheri J. Broyles
2
Summer 2016
92
Advertising Industry Diversity: We’ve “Kind of” Come a Long Way Baby,
but Larger Pipeline and More Intentional Action from Industry and
Educators Needed
Osei Appiah and Dana Saewitz
97
The Times Are Changing. Is It Time to Change Your Major?
Keith A. Quesenberry
104
Addressing the Elephant in the Room
(Or, I dare you to ignore this any longer.)
Karen L. Mallia
From the JAE Archives
Reprints of classic articles from the past 20 years
111
Preparing Campaigns Students for Group Work (Fall 1997)
Fred Beard
122
Integrating Public Speaking Into the Advertising Curriculum (Fall 2001)
Kim Golombisky
135
Statistics Anxiety and Math Aversion Among Advertising Students
(Fall 2002)
Jami Fullerton and Don Umphrey
144
Account Management and the Changing Advertising Landscape
(Spring 2008)
Brett Robbs and Carla Lloyd
Book Review
154
Social Media Strategy: Marketing and Advertising in the
Consumer Revolution
By Keith A. Quesenberry
Amber Benson
155
Remembering Tom Weir
Summer 2016
Jami Fullerton
3
Summer 2016
Editorial Review Board
Sue Alessandri, Suffolk University
Beth E. Barnes, University of Kentucky
Fred K. Beard, University of Oklahoma
Bruce Bendinger, Copy Workshop
Courtney C. Bosworth, Radford University
Sheri J. Broyles, University of North Texas
Hong Cheng, Virginia Commonwealth
Bonnie Drewniany, University of South Carolina
Lisa Duke, University of Florida
Olan Farnall, Texas Tech University
Kim Golombisky, University of South Florida
Frauke Hachtmann, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Joe Bob Hester, University of North Carolina
Jisu Huh, University of Minnesota
Gayle Kerr, Queensland University of Technology
Ken Kim, Xavier University
Lance Kinney, University of Alabama
Jan LeBlanc Wicks, University of Arkansas
Wei Na Lee, University of Texas-Austin
Bobbi Kay Lewis, Oklahoma State University
Lynda Maddox, George Washington University
Michael Maynard, Temple University
Lori McKinnon, Oklahoma State University
Nancy Mitchell, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Jay Newell, Iowa State University
Yorgo Pasadeos, University of Alabama
Kartik Pashupati, Research Now
Padmini Patwardhan, Winthrop University
Joseph Phelps, University of Alabama
James Pokrywczynski, Marquette University
Lance Porter, Louisiana State University
Tom Reichert, University of Georgia
Jef I. Richards, Michigan State University
4
Summer 2016
Editorial Review Board (cont'd)
Marilyn Roberts, Zayed University
Shelly Rodgers, University of Missouri
Patricia Rose, Florida International University
Kim Sheehan, University of Oregon
Jan Slater, University of Illinois
John Sweeney, University of North Carolina
Sandra Utt, University of Memphis
Jorge Villegas, University of Illinois, Springfield
Ludmilla Wells, Florida Gulf Coast University
Karen Whitehill King, University of Georgia
Joyce Wolburg, Marquette University
Lara Zwarun, University of Missouri – St. Louis
Summer 2016
5
Contributors
Michelle A. Amazeen is an assistant professor at Boston University
Boston, MA 02215
Osei Appiah is a professor at Ohio State University
Columbus, OH 43210
Jim Avery is a professor emeritus at the University of Oklahoma
Norman, OK 73019
Amber Benson is a visiting lecturer at Southern Methodist University
Dallas, TX 75205
Sheri J.Broyles is a professor at University of North Texas
Denton, TX 76203
Elizabeth C. Crawford is an associate professor at North Dakota State University
Fargo, ND 58108
Emory S. Daniel is a doctoral student at North Dakota State University
Fargo, ND 58108
Jami Fullerton is a professor at Oklahoma State University
Tulsa, OK 74106
Jameson L. Hayes is an assistant professor at the University of South Florida
Tampa, FL 33620
Karen L. Mallia is an associate professor the University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC 29208
Jim Marra is a professor emeritus at Temple University
Philadelphia, PA 19122
Sally J. McMillan is a professor at University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996
Pamela K. Morris is an associate professor at Loyola University
Chicago, IL 60611
Keith A Quesenberry is an assistant professor at Messiah College
Mechanicsburg, PA 17055
Pat Rose is a professor emeritus at Florida International University
Miami, FL 33199
Dana Saewitz is an associate professor at Temple University
Philadelphia, PA 19122
Jean Kelso Sandlin is an associate professor at California Lutheran University
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
Yan Shan is a visiting assistant professor at the University of South Florida
Tampa, FL 33620
David K. Westerman is an assistant professor at North Dakota State University
Fargo, ND 58108
John G. Wirtz is an assistant professor at the University of Illinois
Urbana, IL 61801
6
From the Editors
Twenty years ago, the Ad Division had a big idea.
Jami Fullerton & Alice Kendrick
In 1995, the Advertising Division of AEJMC
began an initiative to publish a peer-reviewed
academic journal dedicated to research and
commentary on instruction, curriculum and
leadership in advertising education. The first
issue of the Journal of Advertising Education arrived in the summer of 1996 thanks to
founding editor Keith Johnson and a hardworking group of Ad Division members
including Division Heads Jim Avery and
James Marra. Mary Alice Shaver edited the
journal from 1999 to 2005 when Pat Rose became editor. Alice Kendrick and I took over
from Pat with the Spring 2011 issue.
With this issue, we have proudly published
Volume 20. It is a big “double issue” – Nos. 1
& 2. In it you will find two content analyses,
two articles on ethics (one an experiment with
students, the other an AdEd Innovation that
can be used in your classes), a comprehensive
survey of advertising students and a study on
team teaching advertising classes. Beyond
these original research articles, we decided to
include some classic JAE from our archives
for you to re-visit and ponder. Additionally,
six seasoned Ad Division members contributed essays and commentary to this issue,
which provide context and insight as we look
back and forward. There’s a book review and
a tribute to our dear friend and JAE contributor Tom Weir, who passed away this winter.
All in all, we believe what you hold in your
hand is quite a “meaty” issue, and we hope
you will enjoy it. We would like to acknowledge our advertisers in this issue, who helped
us not only get this double decker issue printed and mailed, but also whose contribution
will allow us to throw a birthday party for the
journal at AEJMC in Minneapolis.
As we mark this 20th anniversary, Alice
and I would like to thank some of the people who help us with the journal, including
Adam Wagler, our current designer and Stacy
James, who preceded Adam until she recently
retired. We also want to thank Susan AlesSummer 2016
sandri, JAE book editor for many years who
just stepped down (and yes we need someone
to replace her). We also want to thank our
many, many reviewers who keep the journal
relevant and accurate. Without their labor,
there would be no journal. Finally, we want
to thank the readers – the Ad Division members – who had a vision more than 20 years
ago and continue to support that vision in the
form of their Ad Division dues every year.
We still look forward to the day when faculty
and their academic administrators and universities in general demonstrate greater support
for educational and pedagogical research. We
believe that such inquiry represents important
scholarship and makes us all better educators.
This 20-year anniversary is just a marker
along the path of what we hope to be a longlived journal. We are looking forward to many
more issues of JAE and invite our advertising colleagues to send us good manuscripts.
We would especially like to see studies on
analytics, big data, online teaching, graduate education, department organizational and
leadership changes, comparative evaluations
of various teaching methods or assignments,
as well as large-scale surveys of students.
Think ahead as the fall semester commences
about setting up a quasi-experiment with your
classes or creating a before-after scenario in
which you might assess the impact of a teaching innovation that might result in helpful
findings that you could share with JAE readers.
As we all know, in the last 20 years, publishing, advertising and higher education have
changed a great deal. We believe that JAE has
skillfully adapted to the changes and continues to be one of the Ad Division’s biggest and
best ideas. We are happy to have shepherded
it through this stage of its evolution.
Jami and Alice
7
Looking Backward, Looking Forward:
A Systematic Review of 20 Years of Research
and Commentary Published by
John G. Wirtz, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Jameson L. Hayes, University of South Florida
Yan Shan, University of South Florida
Abstract
This article presents a systematic analysis of all refereed articles, research reports and invited
commentaries (N = 197) published in the Journal of Advertising Education from 1996 to 2015.
The analysis revealed that the most common article theme was classroom and course instruction
(52.8%; n = 104). Within that theme, articles about using a tool or approach in the classroom
(e.g., using a class wiki; 47.1%, n = 49) and achieving a learning outcome (e.g., developing
teamwork skills; 30.8%; n = 32) were most popular. The authors performed additional analyses
on articles reporting data collection and analysis (N = 122). The researchers found that only
26.2% (n = 32) of these articles identified a theory by name, and only six (4.9%) offered a theoretical implication in the discussion. However, a significant majority of these articles provided
practical implications for educators (86.1%; n = 105).
Introduction
In recent years, scholars and practitioners alike
have questioned the direction and progression
of advertising as a field (e.g., Faber, Duff &
Nan, 2012; Kerr & Schultz, 2010; Nyilasy &
Reid, 2007). One primary concern relates to
the implications of the evolving media environment and the changes in how, when and
where media content is consumed. As a result,
industry professionals over the years have
reassessed how to conduct account planning
and strategy, how to develop and disseminate
creative content, and how to determine when
a campaign has been successful (Ehrenberg,
1999; Malthouse, Calder & Tamhane, 2007;
Richards & Curran, 2002). The uncertainty
created by the shifting media landscape has
also led to calls for academic researchers to do
a better job explaining the impacts of this new
environment on advertising effects (Faber et
al., 2012; Kerr & Schultz, 2010).
One way that scholars have at least partially
addressed these calls for advertising research
is by “looking backward” and evaluating existing research, then “looking forward” by
offering insights about potentially fruitful
areas of research that should be explored further (e.g., Kim, Hayes, Avant & Reid, 2014;
Pasadeos, Phelps & Kim, 1998; Yale & Gilly,
1988). For example, Pasadeos and colleagues
(1998) tracked the influence of advertising
scholarship and authors via citation analysis
8
and discussed implications that the “invisible
colleges” they identified may have on advertising research. Yale and Gilly (1988) and,
more recently, Kim and colleagues (2014)
examined trends in research published in advertising and marketing journals. Both sets
of authors then reflected on how advertising research has changed over time and how
their findings could be used by researchers to
address topics that are poorly understood or
under-researched.
However, changes in media production
and consumption not only affect advertising
research and practice, they also affect what
and how educators teach about advertising. For example, Google’s ad revenue has
risen to $19.1 billion per quarter – more than
double its quarterly revenue only five years
ago (Peterson, 2016). This rapid growth and
shift in ad spending has implications for what
is taught in certain courses, as well as what
courses should be included in an advertising curriculum. One implication here is that
the same type of “looking backward, looking
forward” research analysis that has occurred
in advertising effects research would also be
valuable for advertising pedagogy research.
Somewhat interestingly, though, little effort
has been made so far to systematically review
and analyze existing advertising education
research. As a result, areas where significant
amounts of research have been conducted
and areas where additional research would be
beneficial may not be readily accessible to advertising educators and researchers.
The current article makes a novel and potentially valuable contribution to the field of
advertising by presenting the results of the
first systematic analysis of a large sample of
articles about advertising education. By adapting approaches used by researchers who have
analyzed advertising effects research (Kim
et al., 2014; Yale & Gilly, 1988), as well as
researchers who have analyzed pedagogical
research in other fields (Chang & Tai, 2005;
Eybe & Schmidt, 2001), the study seeks to
provide a benchmark for the state-of-advertising education research and make suggestions
regarding future research directions.
Because of the importance of the Journal
of Advertising Education (JAE) as an outlet
for this type of research for the past 20 years,
it became the sole focus of this study, which
set to analyze all research articles and commentaries published from the journal’s first
volume in 1996 to the most recent volume
published in 2015. Given that this is one of
the first studies of its kind, the authors included broad themes and coding categories (e.g.,
article type and general theme, productive
authors), as well as more specific topics and
variables (e.g., method, sample unit, analytic
strategy) in the analysis. The article concludes
by placing key findings in context and with
some suggestions about where additional advertising pedagogy research is needed.
Literature Review
Academic advertising literature to this point
has largely focused on effects-based research
and the development of theory, methods and
tools to support it (e.g., Belch, Belch & Villarreal, 1987; Brown & Stayman, 1992). While
no systematic review of advertising education research has been published, approaches
taken by studies examining the state of advertising research provide useful templates
for analyzing advertising education research
and for bridging that gap in the literature (e.g.,
Kim et al., 2014; Pasadeos et al., 1998; Yale
& Gilly, 1988), as well as studies that have
analyzed pedagogical research in other fields
(e.g., Eybe & Schmidt, 2001; Tsai & Wen,
2005). Further, previous advertising education research does suggest particular themes
that advertising pedagogy research can be organized around, including the philosophy of
advertising education, advertising as a field,
and methods and tools for teaching advertising (e.g., Banning & Schweitzer, 2007; Gale
& Robbs, 2004; Neill & Schauster, 2015).
Summer 2016
Discussion of these themes in the context
of the templates for field examination provided by the three noted studies offers a useful
framework to begin assessing advertising
pedagogy research. To provide context for
the reader, the next sections of the paper first
introduce pertinent approaches taken be Kim
and colleagues (2014), Yale and Gilly (1988)
and Pasadeo and colleagues (1998), and then
discuss each of the advertising education research themes, providing relevant examples
and outlining their connections with the three
articles from which this examination has
drawn.
Pertinent Looking Backward Studies of
Advertising Research
Previous research outlined two important
approaches in analyzing published advertising research for the purpose of ascertaining
insights into the direction and growth of the
field: citation analysis and content analysis.
Pasadeos and his colleagues (1998) provided
the most recent and relevant citation analysis of
advertising research. Citation analysis is particularly useful because it identifies patterns
of disciplinary growth and the development of
schools of thought by mapping the influential
work and authors across the discipline. This
not only notes influencers but can also point
out gaps in influence in certain areas of study.
For example, analyzing citations from major
advertising research journals, Pasadeos and
colleagues (1998) illustrated that the field: 1)
became more self-sufficient; 2) became less
paradigmatically diverse; and 3) showed temporal progressions in topic area. This approach
will likely render similar insights regarding
advertising pedagogy research as well.
Yale and Gilly (1988) provided the first
large-scale content analysis of advertising
research, examining specifically the characteristics of the research, including advertising
topic areas, methods used, sampled units and
implications. Analysis of these variables allowed the scholars to determine the extent
to which the topics focused on in advertising research provided useful insights for the
practitioner audience, as well as highlighting
under-researched areas. Thus, the research
served as a roadmap to marketers and practitioners in finding journals that cover certain
topic areas of relevance and to scholars in
identifying research opportunities.
Kim and colleagues (2014) updated and
extended Yale and Gilly’s (1988) study, providing a longitudinal analysis of advertising
research over 30 years. Aside from the variables examined by Yale and Gilly (1988),
Kim’s research analyzed articles from the top
9
advertising research journals for research approach and presence of theory. Adding these
variables allowed for a comprehensive view
of how advertising research is done, as well
as which theories drive the discipline. The
results indicated that advertising research indeed had begun using different methods and a
higher percentage of theory to attempt to understand changes in the advertising landscape,
but had failed to incorporate novel theoretical
approaches to these issues or produce qualitative research that could have unearthed novel
ways of thinking about the “new” advertising.
These issues are also particularly relevant
for advertising pedagogy and will be adapted
for the current analysis of advertising pedagogy research. The following sections discuss
themes in advertising education research and
point out correlations with the analyses above.
Although no review of advertising education
research currently exists, previous research
reflects numerous themes that have appeared
in this journal and other outlets that publish
advertising education research. Three of
those themes that are relevant to the current
study are advertising as a field, developing a
philosophy of advertising education that is expressed in courses and curriculum, and tools
and methods for teaching advertising.
Advertising as a Field
One key theme in advertising education research focuses on the field itself. This includes
research about who works in advertising and
what type of content they produce, how students perceive the field, and the types of jobs
and work conditions that interest students. For
example, Mallia (2008) analyzed the creative
directors and creative teams that produced Adweek’s “best” 50 commercials over the span of
11 years. Mallia found that only 13.4% of the
creative directors were female; she then reflected on the implications that her study and
similar studies could have for the field.
Fullerton, Kendrick and Frazier (2008)
offered an example of research about perceptions of the field, as they presented the results
of a large-scale survey reporting advertising
students’ attitudes toward the field. As might
be expected, Fullerton and colleagues found
that in general, the students had positive attitudes toward advertising and its role in the
economy. Fullerton, Kendrick and Frazier
(2006; 2009) also offered a slightly different
take on these issues by surveying advertising students and asking them what they were
looking for in a career and what their ideal
job would be. A final example is research
analyzing what types of skills are required in
employment ads (McMillan, Sheehan, Heine10
mann & Frazier, 2001).
JAE has also published commentary about
broader philosophical issues of advertising
education. Examples include diversity in advertising education (Chambers, 2003; Cooper,
2003), integrating new media and marketing into an advertising curriculum (Gould,
2004; Lingwall, 2009), and emerging trends
and challenges in advertising education (Broyles & Slater, 2014). The emphasis on more
timely topics likely reflects the vision of its
editors, but it also provides a more contemporary comparison point that is useful when
evaluating advertising curricula. All of this research helps advertising educators understand
what is known about the field and how it is
perceived, and this knowledge can be used to
better prepare students for their future careers.
Yale and Gilly (1988) discussed extensively
a chasm between advertising practitioners and
advertising scholars regarding the balance
between theory-driven insights and practical
knowledge. They and, later, Kim and colleagues (2014) provided analyses that served
as roadmaps for practitioners to find practical
implications in advertising research and for
scholars to identify fruitful areas of interest.
By examining advertising education research,
the current research seeks to provide insight
into how the area might better bridge the
students’ understanding of practitioners and
practitioners’ understanding of the next generation’s workforce.
Educational Philosophy
The second theme – how to prepare the next
generation of advertising practitioners in a
way that both serves them and the industry –
is an ongoing discussion within the academic
community (e.g., Banning & Schweitzer,
2007; Gale & Robbs, 2004). One of the central
arguments in this topic is finding the balance
between requiring courses that train students
in practical skills related to advertising (e.g.,
copywriting, ad design) and courses that focus
on broader, more conceptual topics, such as
strategy and critical thinking.
Rotzoll and Barban (1984) reviewed the
historic tension between those who believed
advertising education should emphasize applied and technical skills and those who
believed theory and critical thinking should
be stressed. Rotzell and Barban noted the
many times that Ad Age had published articles
criticizing an “overemphasis on theory” in
undergraduate advertising education. These
articles typically featured one or more advertising executives complaining that advertising
faculty were “out of context to the realities of
the job market” (J. Fields in Rotzoll & BarJournal of Advertising Education
ban, 1984, p. 9) and that most professors had
“been teaching [advertising] for 40 years, and
they never worked in advertising” (J. Della
Femina, in Rotzoll & Barban, 1984, p. 10).
An emphasis on teaching applied skills
can be contrasted with the approach to advertising education advocated by Charles H.
Sandage (1955; 1962). Sandage argued that
teaching students how to think about advertising was much more important than teaching
them how to do advertising. To illustrate his
point, Sandage (1962) used the example of
a surgeon’s education to underscore the importance of the “philosophical foundations”
of advertising education, stating that these
foundations provided an invaluable base
from which a surgeon could demonstrate his
or her surgical skills as a “craftsman.” The
inconsistency of attitude toward advertising
curriculum calls for more attention and better
understanding on the past, present and future
direction of advertising education.
As a result of such inconsistency of attitude
toward advertising curriculum, advertising
education research should have become more
diverse and up-to-date in topic areas, as the
advertising industry itself has changed due
to the shift in the media environment. The
prevalence of new technology in classrooms,
such as new teaching tools and learning assessments, will also have impact on future
direction of advertising education. Just as
Kim and colleagues (2014) and Yale and Gilly
(1988) have examined research approach, topic areas, methods, sampled units and research
implications to understand trends in academic
advertising research, present research will
adapt these variables to understand the nature
of advertising pedagogy research.
Research about the Most Effective Ways to
Teach Advertising
The third broad theme relates to research
about the most effective ways to teach advertising. This theme includes research about best
practices for teaching courses or topics, recommendations from advertising practitioners
and articles about how to employ a specific
pedagogical tool in the classroom. For example, Robbs and Gale (2005) discussed
some of the challenges in teaching an advertising research course, while Kim and Patel
(2012) gave advice on teaching media planning in light of changes to media consumption
patterns and audience fragmentation. For advertising practitioners, Newell, Daugherty
and Li (2002) surveyed industry professionals about their perceptions of an advertising
curriculum, while Banning and Schweitzer
(2007) conducted a similar study with adSummer 2016
vertising educators. Finally, one of the most
common approaches to advertising education
is by presenting recommendations for how to
use a pedagogical tool in the classroom. Examples include using blogs (Grau, 2007), the
Google Marketing Challenge (Lavin, Alstine,
Scott, Oliver & Murphy, 2009) and social media (Muñoz & Towner, 2010).
In the era of “big data” and social media,
perhaps the most obvious need for change
in pedagogy comes in understanding how to
adapt the curriculum and teaching approaches
to accommodate these phenomena. Kim et al.
(2014) noted the importance of examining tendencies and changes in topic areas, methods
and implications, in order to assess whether
the field is adapting to address changes in the
media landscape. The current study borrows
this approach and explicitly discusses emerging themes and outcomes in the literature.
Research Questions
The current study presents the results of an
analysis of all research articles and commentaries published in JAE from 1996 to 2015.
Because no previous analysis of advertising
education research has been published, the
research approach and analytic strategy used
herein were influenced by backwards-looking
advertising effects research (Kim et al., 2014;
Pasadeos et al., 1998; Yale & Gilly, 1988) and
reviews of pedagogical research from other
fields (Eybe & Schmidt, 2001; Tsai & Wen,
2005). The study was guided by the following
research questions:
RQ1: What patterns of authorship
emerge from articles published in JAE?
RQ2: What general themes and specific
topics are addressed most frequently in
JAE research articles and commentary?
RQ3: What role does theory play in
guiding research articles?
RQ4: How frequently do authors report
theoretical and practical implications and
study limitations in research articles?
RQ5: What are the most common research approaches, methods, samples,
outcomes and strategies for data analysis?
Method
Sample
The sampling frame was the 36 issues of
JAE published between 1996 and 2015.1 The
primary criteria for inclusion were: 1) that
an article appeared in the table of contents
with one of the following labels: “Refereed
Articles,” “Report” or “Special Reports,”
11
“Commentary” or “Invited Commentary;”
and 2) that at least one author be identified
by name. Articles labeled as “Editor's Notes,”
“Teaching Tips” or book reviews were excluded, because these items are often considerably
shorter (i.e., a page or less) and because their
format and content usually differ significantly
when compared to research articles, reports
and commentaries. By applying the criteria
for inclusion and exclusion, 197 JAE articles
emerged for scrutiny.
Development of Protocol and Coding Categories
A preliminary codebook with a content analysis protocol and category and item definitions
was developed, following recommendations
by Riffe, Lacy and Fico (2014). Categories
and definitions were adapted from studies
reporting analyses of advertising effects research or pedagogy research from other fields
(Eybe & Schmidt, 2001; Kim et al. 2014;
Tsai & Wen, 2005; Yale & Gilly, 1988). Two
graduate students were then trained in content analysis over the space of two weeks. A
sample of five articles was selected and coded
by the first author and the graduate students.
Results were compared and discussed, and
the codebook and coding sheets were edited
to clarify and refine categories and definitions.
This procedure was repeated two additional
times, but with only the graduate students
coding the articles. By the third iteration of
coding and discussion, there were no major
changes. Minor edits were made, and the final
codebook and coding sheets were distributed
to the coders.
General Article Characteristics and
Themes
Article type and authorship. The last name
and first initials of each author and number of
authors were recorded for each article. Article
type was coded using the following three categories: 1) research article (i.e., article reported
results of data and analysis using quantitative,
qualitative or mixed methods); 2) pedagogical summary article (i.e., article summarized
advertising research or theoretical model or
summarized classroom experience(s), but did
not report data collection, analysis or method);
3) commentary or essay (i.e., article presented
commentary about an issue affecting advertising education and/ or the industry, but did not
report data collection, analysis or method).
Researcher productivity. The procedure
described in Pasadeos, Renfro and Hanily
(1999) was used to create an author-article
credit for articles, which was then assigned to
each author of the article. The author-article
credit was calculated by assigning a value
12
of 1 to each article and then dividing by the
number of authors. For example, authors of
sole-authored articles received 1 credit for
each sole-authored article. Authors received
.5 credits for each article they published with
one co-author, .33 credits for each article with
two co-authors, etc.
General theme and specific topic. Each
article was coded for a general theme and
a specific topic, adapting the “major and
minor topics” approach used by Yale and
Gilly (1988). The general article themes
were: 1) macro-level issues in advertising education, defined as articles addressing
pedagogical issues that extend beyond an
individual classroom or course; 2) classroomand course-relevant issues in advertising
education, defined as articles about methods,
tools and outcomes applied to an instructor’s
classroom or to a specific course; 3) student
perspectives and co-curricular activities, defined as articles focusing on thoughts and
feelings of advertising majors and their educational activities outside the classroom; 4)
industry perspectives and analysis, defined as
articles presenting research about practitioners’ views of the education and the industry
and articles evaluating the advertising industry; and 5) other, defined as articles that did
not fit in the other four categories.
Articles were also coded for a specific
topic within the four main general themes.
Specific topics within macro-level advertising education issues were: 1a) educators’
perspectives on advertising education; 1b)
advertising curriculum development and evaluation; 1c) analysis of advertising majors or
programs; 1d) trends and issues in advertising education; and 1e) other. Specific topics
within classroom- and course-relevant issues
in advertising education were: 2a) applying
a teaching tool or approach in the classroom
(e.g., using a class wiki, experiential learning); 2b) achieving a student learning outcome
(e.g., developing skills in teamwork, teaching
creativity); 2c) teaching a specific course (e.g.,
account planning, media sales); 2d) teaching
philosophy and effectiveness; and 2e) other.
Specific topics within student perspectives
and co-curricular activities were: 3a) student
attitudes and aspirations; 3b) student organizations (e.g., AAF, NSAC); 3c) internships;
3d) the job search and job market; 3e) study
abroad; and 3f) other. Specific topics within
industry perspectives and analysis were: 4a)
practitioner views of advertising education;
4b) practitioner views of the advertising industry; 4c) analysis of the industry or content
produced by the industry; and 4d) other.
Coding Categories for Research Articles
Articles identified as research articles were
also coded using categories adapted from
Eybe and Schmidt (2001) and Yale and Gilly
(1988). Because some articles reported the results of more than one study (e.g., Kim, Baek
& Kim, 2011), a two-step coding process
was deployed, in which one set of items was
coded for each research article and another set
of items was coded for each study and/or relevant item reported by the authors.
Items coded for each research article. Methodological approach was coded using the
following categories: 1) quantitative methods only; 2) qualitative methods only; and,
3) mixed methods (i.e., article presented
one or more quantitative method and one
or more qualitative method). For example,
Basow (2007) was coded as using mixed
methods, because the author presented results from a survey of instructors who teach
campaigns courses and results of a series
of in-depth interviews. Presence of theory
was a dichotomous variable that was coded
“yes” if the authors explicitly identified one
or more theories by name in the introduction
or literature review. For example, Schauster,
Ferrucci and Sharkey (2015) stated that cultivation theory influenced their analysis. Use of
research questions or hypotheses was coded
as: 1) presents research question(s) only; 2)
presents hypothesis(es) only; 3) presents research question(s) and hypothesis(es); and 4)
presents neither research questions nor hypotheses. Three items were also coded from
the discussion section of each article: theoretical implication, implication for teaching
and study limitations. Each of these items was
coded dichotomously and to be coded “yes,”
authors needed to explicitly identify a theoretical or practical implication or limitation.
Items coded for each study. The authors’
designation of their research was used to determine the number of studies each article
reported. However, as noted, whenever authors reported data that fit within one of the
following categories, it was also recorded.
For example, Stuhlfaut and Berman (2009)
used content analysis to examine 44 institutional websites and 39 syllabi. The current
authors recorded this article as presenting one
study, because Stuhlfaut and Berman had not
stated that they had conducted two studies. In
contrast, Kim et al. (2011) was coded as two
studies, because the authors had explicitly
identified Study 1 and Study 2 in the text.
After recording the number of studies,
coders then coded each separate method the
author had used. Categories were: 1) exSummer 2016
periment or quasi-experiment; 2) survey or
questionnaire; 3) in-depth interview; 4) focus
group; 5) content analysis; 6) textual analysis;
7) participant observation; 8) case study; or
9) other. It turned out that many articles reported the authors’ experiences in one class
or semester with some type of accompanying
data and analysis (e.g., descriptive statistics of
student evaluations of a course). However, if
the author had reported data from one class or
semester and had presented even limited data
and analysis, it was coded as a case study.
Researchers also coded for sampled units and
sample size. Sampled units were coded as: 1)
college students (undergraduate or graduate);
2) advertising educators or faculty; 3) industry
professionals; 4) print or Web content (e.g.,
Web pages, forum posts); 5) audio or video
content; and 6) other. Sample size was recorded when it was reported.
For experiments and surveys, each outcome measure was coded according to the
following categories: 1) attitude; 2) individual
difference variable or psychological state; 3)
behavioral intention; 4) self-reported behavior; 5) self-reported student engagement; 6)
self-reported student satisfaction with course;
7) self-reported assessment of learning; 8)
external assessment of student learning outcome; and 9) other.2 Finally, type of analysis
was coded as: 1) descriptive statistics only; 2)
inferential statistics only; and 3) descriptive
and inferential statistics.
Coding Procedures and Inter-Coder Reliability
An electronic copy or hard copy of each
relevant article in the 36 issues of JAE published between 1996 and 2015 was obtained
via online library access or personal request
to faculty colleagues or the editors of this
journal. Because some issues of JAE were
not available when the project began, coding
started in one academic year but was completed the next academic year. During that time,
one of the graduate student coders left the
university, so a third graduate student joined
the project as a coder. Coders also were advised to consider possible emergent categories
that would be useful in exploratory analyses
(Berg, 2004). When themes emerged, new
categories and definitions were developed
and then applied retroactively by the coders
to all articles. Three themes emerged and are
considered exploratory: 1) preparing students
to work in a creative department; 2) diversity,
and addressing diversity in the classroom; and
3) graduate students and graduate education
in advertising.
To establish intercoder reliability, all three
13
graduate students coded the same set of 33
articles that were randomly selected from the
total sample of 197 articles. This represented
17% of the total sample, which is between
15% and 20%, as suggested by Wimmer
and Dominick (2003). Krippendorf’s alpha
was calculated on each item using the KALPHA SPSS macro (Hayes & Krippendorf,
2007), and the results indicated acceptable
levels of agreement among the three coders
(i.e., between .84 and 1.00 on all items). The
remaining 164 articles were coded independently, with the first graduate student coding
72 additional articles, the second graduate
student coding 42 additional articles, and the
third graduate student coding 50 additional
articles. Data from each coder were then combined to create an omnibus data set that was
used in the analysis.3
Findings
Article Authorship and Type
Of the 197 articles that met the criteria for
inclusion in the study, 61.9% (n = 122) were
research articles; 24.8% (n = 49) were pedagogical recommendation articles; and 13.2%
(n = 26) were essays or commentaries. There
were 235 unique authors (i.e., authored or coauthored at least one article) in the sample of
articles. The mean number of authors per article was 1.91 (SD = .95), and 42.1% (n = 83)
of the articles were sole-authored; 32.4% (n =
64) had two authors; 18.3% (n = 36) had three
authors; and 7.1% (n = 14) had four or more
authors.
Author-article credits were summed for
each author, and all authors were ranked from
highest to lowest by total author-article credits. The most productive researchers were:
Jami Fullerton (6.65 credits, 15 articles); Alice Kendrick (5.15 credits, 12 articles); Brett
Robbs (4.83 credits, 9 articles); Sheri Broyles (4.16 credits, 7 articles); Jan Slater (3.16
credits, 6 articles); John Cronin (3.0 credits,
3 articles); Billy Ross (2.5 credits, 5 articles);
Keith Johnson (2.5 credits, 5 articles); and
Connie Frazier (2.32 credits, 5 articles).
General Article Theme and Specific Topic
The most common general theme for articles
was classroom- and course-relevant issues in
advertising education (52.8%; n = 104). This
was followed by macro-level issues in advertising education (18.8%; n = 37); and then
student perspectives and co-curricular activities (14.2%; n = 28), and industry perspectives
and analysis (14.2%; n = 28), which were tied.
Each article was then coded within the four
general themes for a specific topic.
14
Results of coding for specific topic.
For the 104 articles about classroom and
course-relevant issues, the two most common categories were how to use a teaching
tool or approach in the classroom (47.1%; n
= 49) and achieving a student learning outcome (30.8%; n = 32). There were also 10
articles (9.6%) about teaching philosophy and
effectiveness and eight articles (7.7%) about
teaching a specific course. For the 37 macrolevel issues articles, only two categories stood
out: there were 16 articles (43.2% of total)
about trends and issues in advertising education and 14 articles (37.8%) about curriculum
development or evaluation. The student perspectives and co-curricular activities category
(n = 28) was dominated by articles about student attitudes and aspirations (n = 17; 60.7%),
although there also were five articles (17.9%)
on student organizations. Finally, the industry
perspectives and analysis category (n = 28)
had two important categories – practitioner
views of advertising education (n = 9; 32.1%
of total) and practitioner views on the industry
(n = 10; 35.7% of total).
Analysis of Research Articles
As noted, there were 122 research articles
(i.e., presented some type of data collection
and analysis). Of that number, 51.6% (n = 63)
were coded as quantitative only, 41.8% (n =
51) were coded as qualitative only, and 6.5%
(n = 8) were coded as mixed methods. Only
about one-quarter of the articles explicitly
identified a theory by name in the text (26.2%;
n = 32). For the category of research question
or hypothesis, research question only was the
most common category (42.6%, n = 52), followed by hypothesis only (5.7%, n = 7) and
research question plus hypothesis (2.5%, n =
3). This means that almost half of the research
articles did not state a research question or hypothesis (49.2%, n = 60). In the analysis of the
discussion sections, only six articles (4.9%)
mentioned a theoretical implication of the
article. Conversely, a significant majority of
the research articles (86.1%; n = 105) offered
one or more practical implications for educators. Finally, 43.4% (n = 53) of the research
articles explicitly identified at least one study
limitation.
Analysis of Research Articles by Study
The researchers identified 125 individual
studies within the 122 research articles, and
method, measures and analysis were coded
for each study. For mixed methods studies
(e.g., article where authors reported only one
study while reporting results of survey and
set of in-depth interviews), data were coded
within the proper category. In some instancJournal of Advertising Education
es, authors did not report information, such
as sample size or quantitative outcome measures; in those cases whatever data the author
had provided were coded. For these reasons,
the denominators in the next sections vary.
Method. There were 133 instances in which
an article reported data that could be coded as
a method. The two most common methods
were surveys (41.4%; n = 55) and case study
(26.3%; n = 35). Three other categories were
noteworthy – in-depth interviews (11.3%,
n = 15), content analysis (8.3%, n = 11) and
experiments (5.3%, n = 7). The remaining
studies were dispersed across the other categories.
Sampled unit and sample size. There
were 98 studies in which the sampled unit was
identified. Among that group of studies, the
four most common sample units were college
students (24.8%; n = 34), industry professionals (17.5%; n = 24), advertising educators
(16.8%; n = 23), and written content (8.8%;
n = 12). The mean sample size was 300.91
(SD = 379.46) for student samples; 62.83
(SD = 70.52) for professionals; 107.52 (SD
= 196.41) for educators; and 368.75 (SD =
458.87) for written content.
Outcome measures. The final analysis
was performed only on the 62 studies that
were classified as surveys or experiments.
In particular, the researchers were interested
in the types of outcomes that were reported.
The most popular outcome was “beliefs and
evaluations” of some aspect of advertising
education (31.4%, n = 27). This was followed
by outcomes identified as “attitudes or preferences” (24.4%, n = 21). The most common
other measures included self-reported behavior (10.5%, n = 9), self-reported student
engagement or achievement (9.8%, n = 8),
external assessment of learning (8.6%, n = 7),
and individual differences or psychological
measures (7.0%, n = 6). For type of analysis, 58.1% (n = 36) presented descriptive and
inferential statistics, and all of the remaining
studies presented descriptive statistics only
(40.3%, n = 25) except one study that only
presented inferential statistics (1.6%, n = 1).
Exploratory Analysis of Emergent Categories
Of the sample of 197 articles, only 32 (16.2%)
related to careers in advertising, and many of
those articles addressed more than one career.
The most commonly explored career was in
creative (e.g., creative director, copywriter;
56.3%, n = 18). This was followed by account
planning (37.5%, n = 12) and media planning
(28.1%, n = 9). This seems interesting given
the size of creative departments relative to
Summer 2016
other departments in most advertising agencies.
A second theme that emerged was the relatively few articles that addressed diversity in
advertising or how to address the issue of diversity in the classroom. For example, there
was a special section on diversity in the fall
2003 that consisted of six articles. But of those
articles, only two (Chambers, 2003; Cooper,
2003) provided examples of how to address
the issue in the classroom proper, although
Golombisky (2003) did also make recommendations about how to create a more inclusive
teaching environment. Mallia (2008) addressed the lack of gender diversity in teams
creating award-winning ads, while Windels, Lee and Yeh (2010) studied how gender
norms may influence perceptions of creativity
and who should be hired in a creative department. Finally, Dominguez and Rose (2004)
studied which communication skills may be
valuable in reaching the Hispanic market, and,
more recently, Oliver, Murphy and Tag (2014)
wrote a case study about using a summer ad
camp to increase advertising student diversity.
Finally, only three articles addressed
graduate education in advertising: 1) Alessandri’s (2001) commentary on being a
graduate student with teaching responsibilities; 2) Richards’ (2012) essay about how
doctoral students can become successful academics; and 3) Mackert and Muñoz’s (2011)
article about teaching a graduate account planning class. There also were a few articles that
reported using graduate students as part of a
study sample or to compare with undergraduates (Kelly & Fall, 2011) or that described an
assignment given to an undergraduate and a
graduate class (Wetsch, 2012).
Discussion
The goal of the current study was to analyze
all of the research and commentary articles
published in JAE over the past 20 years. The
authors were influenced by advertising research (Kim et al., 2014; Yale & Gilly, 1988)
and pedagogy synthesis and review research
(Eybe & Schmidt, 2001; Tsai & Wen, 2005),
and adapted their methods and coding categories to the universe of JAE articles. The
planned and exploratory analyses have yielded several interesting findings and suggest
some areas where future research is needed.
Key Findings in Research Articles and
Commentary
RQ1. The first research question was
about patterns of authorship in the articles
published in JAE. Findings indicate that the
average number of authors per article, num15
ber of unique authors and research output of
most productive scholars reflect findings from
other areas in mass communications, such as
business communication (Cantor, Bolumole,
Coleman & Frankel, 2010) and public relations (Pasadeos et al., 1999), as well as other
fields that employ both humanistic and social
scientific research approaches (Endersby,
1996; Tsai & Wen, 2005). One implication
here is that JAE is not dominated by a small
group of authors; rather, its authorship and
content indicate its openness as a venue for
advertising education research.
RQ2. The second research question was
about what general themes and specific topics appear most frequently in JAE articles and
commentaries. Almost three quarters (71.6%)
of the articles addressed micro-level (e.g., using a specific method in the classroom, teach
a specific course) or macro-level (e.g., content
of curriculum, structure of major) issues. The
authors believe that this is consistent with the
journal’s mission to publish peer-reviewed
“research and commentary on instruction,
curriculum and leadership in advertising education” (“About JAE,” n. d.). The finding also
suggests that reviewed authors and the journal’s editors are especially sensitive to the
pragmatic aspects of advertising education.
RQ3 & RQ4. The third and fourth research questions relate to the role that theory
plays in guiding research and the frequency
with which theoretical and practical implications are articulated in the discussion sections.
Here, the findings can be interpreted as mixed.
For example, only 26.2% of the research articles explicitly identified a theory or theories
that guided the study, and only 4.9% of them
identified a theoretical implication. Combined
with the relatively high percentage of research
articles that did not state any research questions or hypotheses (49.2%), it seems that
developing and testing theory related to advertising education is a potential opening for
further research. To provide two points of
comparison, Kim and colleagues (2014) found
that about half (48.6%) of the advertising effects articles they analyzed were driven by
theory, while Riffe and Freitag (1997) found
similar percentages for explicit identification of theory (27.6%) and articles with no
research questions or hypotheses (54.3%) in
a content analysis of journalism research (although the latter study was published almost
20 years ago).
Two additional observations emerge on
these points. First, this study used a narrow
definition of theory that required an explicit
reference to a theory or theories that guided
16
the research. As a result, concepts that may
have been based in but not directly referenced
to a theory, such as the definition of creativity or experiential learning, were not captured
in the coding scheme. This suggests that a
deeper analysis of the advertising education
research should be conducted that includes
not only named theories, but also concepts,
frameworks and models. Second, the percentage of articles offering practical suggestions
was very high (86.1%), although, again, it was
hard to find a direct comparison. The closest
was Kim et al.’s (2014) finding that only 1%
of the advertising effects articles included a
pedagogical implication of the research. The
latter result likely reflects the ongoing debate in advertising about finding the balance
between theory and practice in advertising
education and illustrates that authors feel
compelled to make their research practical
and relevant to the classroom.
RQ5. The findings related to the final research question, which asked about methods,
samples and measures, also reflect what seems
to be an inclination toward the practical aspects of teaching among the sample of articles.
For example, about 40% of the total sample of
articles was classified as case studies or articles that were “pedagogical recommendation
articles,” because they presented suggestions
about teaching, but offered no other data. At
one level, this is a positive finding, as it suggests that authors are willing to report on their
efforts to implement innovative teaching ideas
in a timely and self-reflective manner. The
finding also indicates that the current and past
editors of the journal value and promote classroom-based research, even if the sample is
one class and one semester. At the same time,
the case study method is sometimes criticized
for a lack of generalizability (e.g., Campbell
& Stanley, 1966). But even if one rejects this
type of criticism, the finding suggests that researchers may be missing an opportunity to
use case studies to build theory that is relevant
to advertising education.
A surprising number of the outcome measures in the empirical studies were based on
self-report, particularly the multitude of studies that included a student self-assessment of
how much they had learned (or thought they
had learned). This is in contrast to studies
that used external measures of learning efficacy, such as using a scale to measure course
learning outcomes (Zwarun, 2007), analyzing student performance inside or outside
the classroom (Hachtmann, 2006; Mattern,
Child, Vanhorn & Groneworld, 2013), and
using experts to rate the quality of student
work (Rosenkrans, 2006). This appears to
be a general area of concern in pedagogy research (Brown, Bull & Pendlebury, 1997), as
well as communication and mass communication education research (Sprague, 2002).
Further, it is likely that using external measures of knowledge or skill acquisition will
require IRB approval and student permission
to analyze test scores, which complicates the
researcher’s task. Nevertheless, there are examples within advertising education research,
as well as in related fields (e.g., Witt & Wheeless, 2001), that could be used as a model for
future research, which is the topic of the next
section.
Areas for Future Research
Although the goal of the study is not to be
critical of advertising education research, it is
worth highlighting a few areas where future
researchers may consider making a contribution. One of the most salient is the issue of
using theory to guide advertising education
research and explicitly stating the research
questions and/or hypotheses that guide a
study. The issue is not unique to advertising,
and other parts of the communication field
have recognized and discussed it. For example, more than 20 years ago Sprague (1993)
argued that research about teaching communication needed to connect with broader
theories of education and learning, and that
researchers should develop discipline-specific
teaching theories to help explain the unique
contexts in which teaching communication
occurs. While the writers of this review would
disagree with Sprague’s latter point, advertising education research would benefit from
greater use of broad theories about learning.
Because many of these theories are based in
psychology and because advertising historically has drawn from and used psychological
theories (Kim et al., 2014), this seems like a
natural fit. Seamon (2009) echoed Sprague’s
argument, as he urged researchers of mass
communication education to draw from the
education literature, providing examples, such
as the effect that different curricula, teaching
styles and grading methods influence student
achievement. This suggests that in the future,
advertising education researchers may want
to move beyond simply adapting measures
of knowledge attainment and compare how
teaching styles or grading affect student success. One challenge here is that not only may
research about teaching be less rewarded by
tenure reviewers and deans, but there may be
a disincentive to test a new way of grading if a
possible result is either reduced effectiveness
or poor student evaluations.
Summer 2016
A second area where advertising education
research could grow is in relying less on case
studies and small samples and more on research with comparison groups. While it can
be instructive to read an article about how a
pedagogical tool was applied in a particular
setting, it is difficult for advertising educators to know if what is presented in an article
would be relevant to their own classrooms.
While this is always going to be a question,
applying a pedagogical tool or assessing an
outcome to a larger sample size would increase its external validity and an article’s
contribution to the field. Again, this type of
research presents a challenge because it can
be difficult to create a comparison or control
condition, especially when, in a best-case scenario, students would be randomly assigned
to a treatment or control, which also requires
the same instructor to teach more than one
section. Although not a perfect solution, collaborating with someone at another school or
comparing one semester to another semester
would provide additional data and a point of
comparison. Along the same lines, there is a
need for more research that measures higherorder student learning outcomes. A number of
studies reported data on knowledge or skill attainment, but relatively few measured critical
thinking or analytical skills – skills that are in
demand from employers.
Finally, there is significant room for additional research about strategies and tools
for teaching diversity in the classroom. But
beyond traditional topics associated with diversity (e.g., gender, race/ ethnicity), there is
also need for research about other populations,
such as teaching students with disabilities,
teaching underprepared or first-generation
college students and teaching international
students. Another potential gap in advertising education research is teaching graduate
students. Potential topics in this area include
teaching international students and students
for whom English is a second language. The
Newell, Li and Zhang (2012) article testing
multilingual teaching in the classroom that appeared in this journal could provide a model
for other studies in this area. Finally, although
there are some articles about measuring the
impact of social media or how to use social
media in the classroom (e.g., Cronin, 2014;
Muñoz & Towner, 2010), there is relatively
little research about how student involvement
with social media may impact learning outcomes. The continued increase in social
media use suggests that research addressing
this topic likely would make an important
contribution.
17
Limitations and Conclusion
This study has a few limitations. First, the reviewers only analyzed works published in the
Journal of Advertising Education. Potentially
relevant articles are sometimes published in
other journals, such as Journalism and Mass
Communication Educator, Communication
Education or Communication Teacher. So,
while JAE would be first among equals as an
outlet for advertising education research, any
generalizations to the population of advertising education research articles should be
made cautiously. Future research should also
include samples of articles published in these
other journals.
Second, the analyses presented here were
broad, and they focused on providing an overview of research and commentary published
in JAE. While this objective was largely accomplished, two matters should be noted.
First, Teaching Tips were not analyzed, so
no tally exists on how frequently topics (e.g.,
addressing diversity in the classroom, teaching graduate students) were addressed in that
section of the journal. Second, the authors did
not look at whether there were any changes
in themes, topics, methods, etc. over time, as
some other academics have done (Kim et al.,
2014). While anecdotally it seemed that there
was more consistency in what was included
in articles published the last few years as
compared to the early years of the journal, additional research here would be valuable.
Finally, this study underscores the abundance of articles that relied on single case
studies and small samples. Because the current study did not present any inferential
statistical tests, it is unclear if variables, such
as number of articles published or author’s
home institution, may help explain some of
the variance in topic or method used. Similarly, the current study itself was non-theoretical,
in that it was not guided by nor did it test any
theory related to advertising education. This
suggests that future versions of this research
should investigate more deeply the theories
related to pedagogy and research synthesis.
Synthesizing the results of research about
advertising pedagogy is an underexplored
area in the field of advertising. Such synthesis can help advertising researchers and
educators understand not only best practices
but also what theories to employ when planning a new course. While the current study
indicates that there is a broad range of topics
and pedagogical tools that have been offered
as topics of research, as the field of advertising matures, it is important that advertising
18
education become more theory-driven and
methodologically stringent.
References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2008). Scaling and
testing multiplicative combinations in the expectancy-value model of attitudes. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 38(9), 2222-47.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00389.x
Alessandri, S. W. (2001). Being both student
and teacher: Lessons from the classroom.
Journal of Advertising Education, 5(2), 5960.
Banning, S. A., & Schweitzer, J. C. (2007).
What advertising educators think about advertising education. Journal of Advertising
Education, 11(2), 10-20.
Basow, R. R. (2007). Curricular convergence
and campaigns: Learning outcomes in the
capstone course. Journal of Advertising
Education, 11(1), 17-23.
Belch, G. E., Belch, M. A., & Villarreal, A.
(1987). Effects of advertising communications: Review of research. Research in
Marketing, 9, 59-117.
Berg, B. L. (2004). Qualitative research
methods for the social sciences (5th ed.).
Boston: Pearson.
Brown, G. A., Bull, J., & Pendlebury, M.
(1997). Assessing student learning in higher education. New York: Routledge.
Brown, S. P., & Stayman, D. M. (1992). Antecedents and consequences of attitude
toward the ad: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Consumer Research, 19(1), 34-51.
Broyles, S., & Slater, J. (2014). Big thinking
about teaching advertising. Journal of Advertising Education, 18(2), 46-50.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs
for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Cantor, D. E., Bolumole, Y., Coleman, B.
J., & Frankel, R. (2010). An examination
of trends and impact of authorship collaboration in logistics research. Journal of
Business Logistics, 31(1), 197-215. DOI:
10.1002/j.2158-1592.2010.tb00135.x
Chambers, J. (2003). Incorporating diversity
into the advertising curriculum. Journal of
Advertising Education, 7(2), 12-14.
Chang, T.-K., & Tai, Z. (2005). Mass communication research and the invisible
college revisited: The changing landscape
and emerging fronts in journalism-related
studies. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(3), 672-94. DOI:
10.1177/107769900508200312
Cooper, C. (2003). What’s age, race and gender got to do with advertising? Everything!
Cronin, J. J. (2014). Teaching ROI analysis in
an era of social media. Journal of Advertising Education, 18(2), 28-35.
Dominguez, L. V., & Rose, P. B. (2004).
Communication competencies for a growing Hispanic market. Journal of Advertising
Education, 8(1), 5-16.
Ehrenberg, A. (1997). Description and prescription. Journal of Advertising Research,
37(6), 7
Endersby, J. W. (1996). Collaborative research
in the social sciences: Multiple authorship and publication credit. Social Science
Quarterly, 77(2), 375-92.
Eybe, H., & Schmidt, H-J. (2001). Quality
criteria and exemplary papers in chemistry
education research. International Journal
of Science Education, 23(2), 209-25. DOI:
10.1080/09500690118920
Faber, R.J., Duff, B. R. L., & Nan, X. (2012).
Coloring outside the lines: Suggestions for
making advertising more meaningful. In S.
Rodgers & E. Thorson (Eds.), Advertising
theory (pp.18-32). New York: Routledge.
Fullerton, J. A., Kendrick, A., & Frazier, C.
(2006). An analysis of career aspirations of
1,200 U.S. advertising students. Journal of
(2008). A nationwide survey of advertising
students’ attitudes about advertising. Journal of Advertising Education, 12(1), 15-25.
(2009). Advertising student career preferences: A national survey. Journal of
Gale, K., & Robbs, B. (2004). Enhancing strategic thinking throughout the advertising
curriculum: An account planning perspective. Journal of Advertising Education,
8(2), 8-16.
Golombisky, K. (2003). Locating diversity
within advertising excellence. Journal of
Gould, T. (2004). Shall we converge: The
embedding of new media and advertising
curricula. Journal of Advertising Education, 8(2), 33-42.
Grau, S. L. (2007). Using blogs to facilitate
group communication and collaboration: A
constructivist learning approach. Journal of
Hachtmann, F. (2006). How to improve
critical thinking skills in the media strategy course by implementing an online peer
learning component. Journal of Advertising
Education, 10(1), 17-26.
Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability
measure for coding data. Communication
Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77-89. DOI:
Summer 2016
10.1080/19312450709336664
Kelly, S. & Fall, L. (2011). An investigation
of computer-mediated instructional immediacy in online education: A comparison
of graduate and undergraduate students’
motivation to learn. Journal of Advertising
Education, 15(1). 44-51.
Kerr, G. F., & Schultz, D. (2010). Maintenance person or architect? The role of
academic advertising research in building
better understanding. International Journal of Advertising, 29(4), 547-68. DOI:
10.2501/S0265048710201348
Kim, J., Baek, T. H., & Kim, D. (2011).
Quality of work and team spirit as drivers
of student peer evaluation on advertising
group project performance. Journal of Advertising Education, 15(2), 14-24.
Kim, K., Hayes, J. L., Avant, J. A., &
Reid, L. N. (2014). Trends in advertising research: A longitudinal analysis
of leading advertising, marketing, and
communication journals, 1980 to 2010.
Journal of Advertising, 43(3), 296-316.
DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2013.857620
Kim, Y., & Patel, S. (2012). Teaching advertising media planning in a changing media
landscape. Journal of Advertising Education, 16(2), 15-26.
Lavin, M., Van Alstine, L., Scott, A., Oliver,
J., & Murphy, J. (2009). The Google Online
Marketing Challenge: Fostering student
learning of search advertising. Journal of
Lingwall, A. (2009). IMC and its integration into programs of journalism and mass
communication. Journal of Advertising
Education, 13(2). 25-36.
Mackert, M., & Muñoz, I. I. (2011). Graduate
account planning education: Insights from
the classroom. Journal of Advertising Education, 15(2), 35-39.
Mallia, K. L. (2008). New century, same
story: Women scarce when Adweek ranks
“Best Spots.” Journal of Advertising Education, 12(1), 5-14.
Malthouse, E. C., Calder, B. J., & Tamhane,
A. (2007). The effects of media context
experiences on advertising effectiveness.
Journal of Advertising, 36(3), 7-18. DOI
10.2753/JOA0091-3367360301
Mattern, J. L., Child, J. T., Vanhorn, S. B., &
Gronewold, K. L. (2013). Matching creativity perceptions and capabilities: Exploring
the impact of feedback messages. Journal
of Advertising Education, 17(1), 13-25.
McMillan, S. J., Sheehan, K. B., Heinemann,
B., & Frazier, C. (2001). What the real
world really wants: An analysis of employment ads. Journal of Advertising Education,
5(2), 9-21.
19
Muñoz, C. L., & Towner, T. L. (2010). Social
networks: Facebook’s role in the advertising classroom. Journal of Advertising
Education, 14(1), 20-27.
Neill, M. S., & Schauster, E. (2015). Gaps in
advertising and public relations education:
Perspectives of agency leaders. Journal of
Newell, J., Daugherty, T., & Li, H. (2002).
Creative opportunities in media promotion:
Entry-level hiring by television and radio
promotion departments. Journal of Advertising Education, 6(1), 36-44.
Newell, J., Li, N-S., & Zhang, Y. (2012).
Multilingual teaching in an American
advertising course: Implementation and
assessment. Journal of Advertising Education, 16(2), 37-46.
Nyilasy, G., & Reid, L. N. (2007). The academician-practitioner gap in advertising.
International Journal of Advertising, 26(4),
425-45.
Oliver, S., Murphy, M., & Tag, N. R. (2014).
Advertising summer camp for high school
students: A recruitment tool for industry diversity. Journal of Advertising Education,
18(2), 36-44.
Pasadeos, Y., Phelps, J., & Kim, B.-H. (1998).
Disciplinary impact of advertising scholars: Temporal comparisons of influential
authors, works and research networks.
Pasadeos, Y., Renfro, R. B., & Hanily, M. L.
(1999). Influential authors and works of the
public relations scholarly literature: A network of recent research. Journal of Public
Relations Research, 11(1), 29-52.
Peterson, T. (2016, February 1). Google’s ad
revenue rises in Q4 2015 despite continued
price decline. Advertising Age. Retrieved
from http://adage.com/article/digital/
google-q4-2015-earnings/302462/.
Richards, J. I. (2012). Doctoral students’ guide
to a successful academic career. Journal of
Richards, J. I., & Curran, C. M. (2002). Oracles on “advertising:” Searching for a
definition. Journal of Advertising, 31(2),
63-77.
Riffe, D., & Freitag, A. (1997). A content analysis of content analyses: Twenty-five years
of Journalism Quarterly. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly, 74(3), 515-24.
DOI: 10.1177/107769909707400306
Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. G. (2014). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative
content analysis in research (3rd ed.). New
York: Routledge/ Taylor Francis.
Robbs, B., & Gale, K. (2005). Teaching the
undergraduate research course for advertising majors: Course content and key
challenges. Journal of Advertising Educa20
tion, 9(1), 19- 30.
Rotzoll, K. B., & Barban, A. M. (1984).
Advertising education. Current Issues &
Research in Advertising, 7(2), 1-18.
Rosenkrans, G. (2006). Assessment accountability in courses that deploy advertising
competitions and experiential learning techniques. Journal of Advertising Education,
10(1), 27-38.
Sandage, C. H. (1955). A philosophy of advertising education. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly, 32(2), 209-11.
DOI: 10.1177/107769905503200210
Sandage, C. H. (1962). A positive approach
to advertising. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 39(4), 451-56. DOI:
10.1177/107769906203900404
Schauster, E., Ferrucci, P., & Sharkey, K.
(2015). As seen on TV: How The Pitch
depicts the advertising creative process.
Journal of Advertising Education, 19(2),
18-29.
Seamon, M. C. (2009). Ferment in the classroom? How we can benefit from the
research direction of the education literature. Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator, 63(4), 290-302.
Sprague, J. (1993). Retrieving the research
agenda for communication education:
Asking the pedagogical questions that are
“embarrassments to theory.” Communication Education, 42(2), 106-22.
Sprague, J. (2002). Communication Education: The spiral continues. Communication
Education, 51(4), 337-54.
Stuhlfaut, M. & Berman, M. (2009). Pedagogic challenges: The teaching of creative
strategy in advertising courses. Journal of
Tsai, C.-C., & Wen, M. L. (2005). Research
and trends in science education from 1998
to 2002: A content analysis of publication
in selected journals. International Journal
of Science Education, 27(1), 3-14. DOI:
10.1080/0950069042000243727
Wetsch, L. (2012). A personal branding assignment using social media. Journal of
Witt, P. L., & Wheeless, L. R. (2001). An
experimental study of teachers’ verbal
and nonverbal immediacy and students’
affective and cognitive learning. Communication Education, 50(4), 327-42. DOI:
10.1080/03634520109379259
Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2003).
Mass media research: An introduction (7th
ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/ Wadsworth.
Windels, K., Lee, W.-N., & Yeh, Y.-H. (2010).
Does the creative boys’ club begin in the
classroom? Journal of Advertising Education, 14(2), 15-24.
Yale, L., & Gilly, M. C. (1988). Trends in adJournal of Advertising Education
vertising research: A look at the content of
marketing-oriented journals from 1976 to
1985. Journal of Advertising, 17(1), 12-22.
Zwarun, L. (2007). Assessing outcomes of
service learning in advertising courses.
5-16.
Endnotes
Only one issue per volume was published in 1996
and 1997, and no volume or issue was published in
1998.
2 Although several of these measures fit the expectancy-value definition of attitude (e.g., Ajzen & Fishbein,
2008), we coded them as they were presented in order
to provide additional insight into what was measured.
1
Data from the first graduate student’s coding of the
inter-coder reliability sample were used, as she was the
most experienced coder. This means that she provided
data for 105 articles. Also, several categories were
added after the third coder was added. In those cases,
inter-coder reliability was established using the same
sample of articles and another coder who coded the
new category independently.
3
Summer 2016
21
A Comparison of Characteristics and
Cultures of Academic Disciplinary Areas
in the Context of Advertising and Public
Relations Education
Sally J. McMillan, University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Abstract
This study examines factors such as academic preparation, socioeconomic status, faculty/
student relationships and extracurricular activities in different colleges at a public research
university. The goal of this study is to begin to understand the cultures of different broad academic disciplinary areas where students may study advertising and public relations. Student
survey responses combined with institutional data about those students did reveal differences
based on academic disciplinary areas. Communication students were somewhat less prepared
academically, more likely to be the first in their family to attend college, most likely to report
having a faculty mentor and most likely to be involved in student media. They also engaged in
internship and co-op experiences, used career services and were more active in Greek life than
students in most other colleges. Students in business, arts and sciences and professional disciplines also participated in the study, and multiple significant differences were found.
Introduction
In the 49th edition of the report Where Shall
I Go to Study Advertising and Public Relations?, the editors note that advertising and
public relations education is offered in different areas at different institutions – sometimes
as stand-alone majors, sometimes combined
with each other and sometimes as part of a
major with a broader title. Advertising and
public relations instruction is often housed
in mass communication and marketing programs but sometimes also exists in programs
such as speech, English or consumer sciences
(Ross & Richards, 2015). Ross and Richards
provide detailed information on all types of
programs to help students decide which type
of program might be best for them. But the reality is that more than half of college students
attend an institution of higher education that is
within 50 miles of their hometown (Hillman
& Weichman, 2016), and about 80% of students in the United States change their major
at least once (National Center for Educational
Statistics, 2016).
While there is value in providing a guide to
help students select an advertising and/or public relations program, students, parents and
educators could also benefit from understanding characteristics of students who achieve
academic success in different broad disciplinary areas – especially when the student wants
22
to stay close to home but is not sure which
disciplinary area at that nearby college or
university is the best “fit.” The current study
offers comparisons of students who study in
communication, business, arts and sciences
and other programs in terms of their academic
preparation and performance, socioeconomic
background, engagement with faculty and
extracurricular engagement. Understanding
similarities and differences among students
in these broad fields of study could support
students as they consider both their choice
of institution and major field of study. Findings may also be of use to administrators who
recruit students and/or assist students in selecting fields of study.
Literature Review
Researchers have used multiple resources to
try to understand choices that students make
about their field of study. The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth reported that males
are more likely to enter fields of study with
high economic returns than are females and
that socioeconomic status predicts entry into
selective colleges and lucrative fields within
those colleges. That study also reported that
academic ability is an important predictor of
choice of field of study (Davies & Guppy,
1997). Other studies have also reported linkages between socioeconomic status, as well
as gender, risk tolerance, ethnicity and race in
students’ choice of field of study (De Paola &
Gioia, 2012; Ma, 2009).
Multiple studies have examined advertising and/or mass communication in greater
depth to understand student major choice. For
example, Taylor (2012) found that most students entering advertising majors believed
that they would pursue creative careers. However, women who actually do pursue creative
careers often find themselves in a male-dominated environment in which they struggle to
excel, and researchers have found that gendered career patterns begin in the classroom
(Windels & Lee, 2012; Windels, Lee & Yeh,
2010; Windels, Mallia & Broyles, 2013).
Other studies (Fullerton & Kendrick, 2013;
Fullerton & Umphrey, 2002a) have found that
many advertising students have relatively low
confidence in their ability to work with math
and statistics despite the centrality of statistical and business concepts in the advertising
field.
Becker’s longitudinal studies for many
years have shown a trend toward decline or
stagnation in enrollment in mass communication fields (Becker, Vlad & Simpson, 2014).
Becker’s studies have also shown a rise in
women in advertising and public relations – a
trend that has been found in other studies as
well (Fullerton & Umphrey, 2002b). By contrast, colleges of business have seen increases
in enrollment (particularly among males),
and business students use both popular media
portrayals of business careers and parental
recommendations to guide their choice of major. Parental guidance was important for both
business and non-business students, but nonbusiness students also often relied on faculty
and advisors (West, Newell & Titus, 2001).
Students who are the first in their families
to go to college are often at a disadvantage in
major selection, because their parents have
little basis for providing them guidance. Many
other factors also contribute to the challenges
for first-generation and low-income families.
Students from high schools that serve lowincome students typically expend high levels
of energy to become college-ready and are at
risk for burnout from both academic and nonacademic hardships during their high school
years. To mitigate these risks, students need
the support of faculty and peers to help sustain
their ambitions for pursing post-secondary
education – particularly when they come
from families that do not have a college-going
tradition (Perez-Felkner, 2015). Family education levels can also impact other important
personal characteristics. For example, apathy
Summer 2016
was found to be higher among college students who come from families in which no
siblings or parents had attended college (Ahmad, 2015).
The advertising industry in the United
States has struggled to recruit underrepresented groups to its workforce. Some programs
are looking for ways to engage those students
earlier and provide them with both an understanding of and passion for advertising before
they begin to think about post-secondary
careers. For example, an AdCamp program
supported by the American Advertising Federation shows some promise for encouraging
underrepresented students to pursue collegelevel study that will prepare them for working
in the advertising field (Oliver, Murphy &
Tag, 2014).
Advertising and public relations programs
in communication and/or business often build
on strong links to specific practitioner communities. For example, faculty sometimes
team teach with practitioners and offer students experiential learning opportunities that
extend beyond the classroom (Slater, Broyles
& Clifton, 2015). Students studying in liberal
arts areas typically have less access to these
kinds of advertising industry partnerships,
but some of those programs have responded
by highlighting benefits of a liberal arts major that prepares students for lifelong learning
and leadership in advertising and public relations fields while also helping them fine-tune
their writing skills (Smith & Costello, 2015).
Whether in communication, business, liberal arts or other disciplinary areas, such as
retail and consumer science, many programs
that prepare students to work in the advertising and public relations industries also often
offer the kind of internship supervision that
has been found to lead to positive outcomes
for both students and internship sites (SeungChul & Morris, 2015). Regardless of their
academic home, students bound for advertising and public relations careers also need
exposure to other transformational skills, such
as curiosity (Koranda & Sheehan, 2014).
A recent study found that both practitioners
and educators in advertising and public relations agree on the need for students to have a
broad and “integrated” understanding of strategic communication principles and practices
(Phyllis & Len-Rios, 2006). Even in small
markets, practitioners stress the importance
of integrated marketing communications
and multiple types of expertise: communication skills, ability to use technology, a broad
liberal arts education, the ability to think strategically and creatively, a professional work
23
ethic, productivity and experience with working in teams. Employers also pointed to the
need for students to have a basic understanding of the business challenges that clients face
(Beachboard & Weidman, 2013).
In summary, students who are deciding
where to study advertising and public relations
may limit their consideration set of schools to
those that are close to home. But even within
a single institution they may be able to pursue
more than one broad academic disciplinary
area that can prepare them for advertising
and public relations careers. Students studying communication, business, liberal arts and
even other professional disciplines, such as
retail and consumer sciences, may experience
different norms related to gender, race and
career goals. Both academic preparation and
expectations, as well as family experiences
and resources, may also influence student
success regardless of their choice of broad academic disciplinary area. Finally, faculty and
staff may create different cultures in different
academic disciplinary areas that focus more or
less on professional development, liberal arts
education, industry partnerships and integrated understanding of the creative and business
practices of advertising and public relations.
Selection of an academic major is a complex process influenced by factors ranging
from high school preparation to parental and
peer pressure. Students whose majors are advertising, public relations or marketing have
elected fields of study most likely to provide
them with exposure to the advertising and
public relations disciplines. But students in
English or retail and consumer sciences might
also have an interest in advertising/public relations. The goal of the current study is not to
determine which field of study is “right” for
advertising/public relations career preparation, but rather to help students understand the
“culture” they might experience in different
types of academic environments.
Research Questions and Method
This study addresses three core research questions:
1. How do students studying in communication, business, arts and sciences and other
majors compare in terms of:
a. Demographic profile;
b. Academic preparation and performance;
c. Socioeconomic background.
2. How do students in these four academic
disciplinary areas engage with faculty?
3. What differences are there among students in these four areas in terms of
extracurricular engagement?
This study utilizes data that were collected
at a large public research university in the
Southeast. All students who had achieved
senior standing (having earned more than 90
semester credit hours) were asked to complete
a survey about their experiences both in and
out of the classroom. The primary purpose of
the survey was to gather information about
what helps students persist. This secondary
analysis drew on the survey data and also
matched survey respondents with institutional
data to address the research questions outlined
above.
A total of 6,091 students received the
survey. Of those, 819 (13.4%) responded.
Persons who responded to less than half of the
questions were removed from the list for a total of 749 valid responses (12.3% of the senior
class). Survey responses were matched with
institutional data to supply demographic, so-
Table 1:
Summary of Four Student Groups
Number of
respondents
Share of all
respondents
Arts & Sciences
281
37.5%
Broad range of majors in arts,
humanities, social sciences and
natural sciences
Business
136
18.2%
Marketing, management,
accounting, finance, etc.
Communication
44
5.9%
Advertising, public relations,
journalism, communication studies
Other
288
38.5%
Education and human sciences,
engineering, nursing, etc.
College
24
Majors included
Table 2:
Demographic Characteristics
Communication
Business
Arts &
Sciences
Other
χ2
(p value)
Female
88.6%
(1.9)
54.4%
(-1.6)
66.9%
(.3)
65.6%
(.0)
18.048
.000
Non-White
17.5%
(.4)
13.4%
(-.5)
17.7%
(1.1)
12.9%
(-.9)
2.767
.429
Out-of-State
4.5%
(-1.2)
11.0%
(.3)
7.8%
(-1.2)
12.8%
(1.4)
5.589
.133
Transfer from
other institution
29.5%
(-.2)
29.4%
(-.3)
33.1%
(.7)
29.5
(-.4)
1.073
.784
Note. Percent and standardized residual (in parentheses) shown for each cell.
cioeconomic and academic performance data.
Institutional data were also used to group students by major and college.
For the current study, students were placed
into one of four groups based on their major
field of study. The institution where the study
was conducted has a college where communication-specific majors are taught. All
undergraduate students in that college were
grouped together. The institution also has a
college of business, and all business majors
were grouped together. All students studying
any discipline within arts and sciences were
grouped together. The final category of “other” includes all students in education, health
and human science disciplines, and other
professional programs, such as nursing and
engineering. Table 1 shows the distribution of
students in these four groups.
Chi square analysis was used to test for
differences in the four broad fields of study
in terms of demographics, socioeconomics, faculty engagement and extracurricular
engagement. ANOVA was used to test for
differences among the broad fields of study
on the continuous variables (GPA and ACT
scores) used to measure academic preparation
and performance.
Findings
Table 2 addresses research question 1a: How
do students studying in communication,
business, arts and sciences and other majors
compare in terms of demographic profile?
The only significant difference was in gender
distribution, with women being a much larger
portion of students in communication and
men being a much larger portion of students
Table 3:
Academic Preparation and Performance Mean Scores
Communication
Business
Arts &
Sciences
Other
F ratio
(p value)
ACT
Composite
26.05
26.55
27.18
27.36
2.174
.090
ACT Math
22.92
25.53
25.45
26.66
9.669
.000
High School
GPA
3.79
3.84
3.90
3.96
1.813
.143
University GPA
3.16
3.12
3.25
3.29
2.693
.045
Summer 2016
25
studying in business (χ2 = 18.048, p < .001).
Table 3 summarizes data that address research question 1b: How do students studying
in communication, business, arts and sciences
and other majors compare in terms of academic preparation and performance?
There were no significant differences in
high school GPA and composite ACT scores
– two factors that are often key admissions
criteria. Only one significant difference was
found on ACT sub-scores – math (F = 9.669,
p < .001). Communication students had the
lowest average ACT math score, and students
in the “other” category (which includes engineering) had the highest scores. Math scores
are important because success (or lack thereof) in mathematics courses has been tied to
retention and graduation (Jacobson, 2006).
Other researchers have also reported significant math challenges for advertising and
public relations students (Fullerton & Kendrick, 2013; Fullerton & Umphrey, 2002a).
Table 3 also shows significant differences
in GPA at the university for these seniors (F
= 2.693, p < .045). Students in the “other”
category had the highest GPAs, followed by
students in arts and sciences. Business students and communication students averaged
about .10 lower in GPA than students in the
other two academic disciplinary areas.
Two analyses address research question
1c: How do students studying in communication, business, arts and sciences and other
majors compare in terms of socioeconomic
background? First, parental education was
cross-tabulated with the four academic disciplinary areas. Communication students were
most likely to come from homes in which neither parent had earned an education (18.2%),
followed by business students (14.0%), arts
and sciences students (12.8%) and students
in other programs (7.6%). These differences
were significant (χ2 = 7.509, p = .047)
Secondly, varying levels of family income
were cross-tabulated with the four academic
disciplinary areas. As shown in Table 4, differences in income levels were not significant.
Table 5 addresses research question 2: How
do students in these four academic disciplinary areas engage with faculty? Students were
asked to indicate whether, during their time
at the university, they had a faculty member
who served as a mentor, who excited them
about learning and/or who encouraged them
in the pursuit of their goals. Only the mentoring role was significantly different across the
groups (χ2 = 7.649, p = .045). Communication
students were most likely to report having a
faculty mentor, and business students were
least likely.
Students responding to the survey were
presented a list of more than 20 programs and
services offered by the university that they attend outside of classroom instruction. They
were asked to indicate whether or not they had
utilized those programs and services. Those
responses were used to address research question 3: What differences are there among
students in these four areas in terms of extracurricular engagement? Table 6 lists programs
Table 4:
Socioeconomic Background
Adjusted Gross Family
Income
Communication
Business
Arts &
Sciences
Other
< $50,000
30.0%
(-.7)
34.4%
(-.5)
42.4%
(1.5)
33.8%
(-.8)
$50,000 to < $100,000
27.5%
(.1)
28.0%
(.2)
27.2%
(.1)
26.4%
(-.2)
$100,000 to < $150,000
12.5%
(-.4)
15.2%
(.1)
14.0%
(-.3)
15.6%
(.4)
$150,000 to < $200,000
12.5%%
(.6)
8.8%
(-.3)
5.8%
(-1.9)
13.0%
(1.8)
17.5%
(1.1)
13.6%
(.6)
10.5%
(-.6)
11.2%
(-.3)
>$200,000
Note 1. Percent and standardized residual (in parentheses) shown for each cell.
Note 2. χ2 13.445; p = .338.
26
Table 5:
Engagement with Faculty
Communication
Business
Arts &
Sciences
Other
χ2
(p value)
Faculty member(s)
encouraged me
toward my goals
90.9%
(.2)
91.2%
(.3)
86.1%
(-.4)
88.9%
(.1)
2.780
.427
Faculty member(s)
excited me about
learning
95.5%
(.2)
94.9%
(.3)
93.2%
(.2)
89.8%
(-.5)
5.147
.161
Have a faculty
mentor
65.9%
(.9)
47.1%
(-1.4)
55.9%
(.1)
59.6%
(.7)
7.649
.045
and services for which significant differences
were found between groups.
Some of the results reported in Table 6
are to be expected. For example, it is not at
all surprising that communication students
are far more likely than any other group to
have been involved with student media (χ2 =
25.361, p < .001). Similarly, it is not surprising that students in professionally oriented
programs, such as communication and business, are more likely to utilize career services
(χ2 = 37.889, p < .001) and participate in internships and co-op programs (χ2 = 49.937, p
< .001) than are students in arts and sciences.
Students in arts and sciences are most likely to engage in undergraduate research (χ2 =
22.530, p < .001). This is consistent with the
reality that many of them envision graduate
school as their “next step” after finishing a
four-year degree.
The remaining programs and services are
more removed from the academic disciplines,
so it is somewhat surprising to see some significant differences. The greater participation
in recreational sports (χ2 = 22.046, p < .001)
among business and “other” (a category that
includes engineering) students may be related
to large male populations in those programs.
Participation in Greek life is strongly associated with business and communication
students (χ2 = 22.156, p < .001), whereas
arts and sciences and other students are more
likely to have lived in living/learning communities that are in residence halls (χ2 = 8.056,
p = .045). The data used in this study do not
suggest any causal relationship between living arrangements and major choice, but it
could be interesting to examine that relationSummer 2016
ship in the future.
Finally, it is interesting to note how much
less likely communication students are to
participate in peer mentoring programs than
are students from the other three groups (χ2
= 12.846, p = .005). Again, these data do not
provide information about why this difference
exists, but the disparity is worthy of future
study.
Discussion
The only demographic factor to differ significantly among the four groups of students
from broad academic areas was gender, with
women being most likely to be found in
communication and least likely to be studying in business. This trend is consistent with
research reported earlier (Davies & Guppy,
1997; West et al., 2001; Windels et al., 2010;
Windels et al., 2013). To further drill down
into this finding, institutional data were examined separately from the survey reported
above for four groups of students at the institution where the survey was conducted. Using
the framework provided by Ross and Richards
(2015) four specific groups of majors were
examined: advertising and public relations,
marketing, English and consumer sciences.
The greatest percentage of men was found
in marketing (62.5%), and the concentration
of women was highest in consumer science
(81.0%). Women were also highly represented in advertising and public relations (72.7%)
and English (67.7%). Becker and colleagues
(2014) found that women made up 63.6% of
undergraduate students enrolled in journalism
and mass communication programs. A national study also found graduation rates to be
27
Table 6:
Extracurricular Participation
Communication
Business
Arts &
Sciences
Other
χ2
(p value)
Career services
72.7%
(1.3)
76.5%
(2.9)
46.6%
(-2.4)
56.6%
(-.2)
37.889
.000
Fraternity/sorority
36.4%
(1.3)
39.7%
(3.0)
19.2%
(-2.4)
25.7%
(-.2)
22.156
.000
Internship/co-op
47.7%
(2.1)
43.4%
(2.8)
15.7%
(-4.5)
35.8%
(1.7)
49.937
.000
Living/learning
communities
6.8%
(-1.8)
14.0%
(-1.2)
18.9%
(.2)
21.9%
(1.4)
8.056
.045
Peer mentor/
mentee
9.1%
(-1.7)
19.1%
(-.5)
17.8%
(-1.2)
27.4%
(2.3)
12.846
.005
Recreational
sports
38.6%
(.0)
47.8%
(1.8)
27.8%
(-2.8)
43.8%
(1.5)
22.046
.000
Student media
56.8%
(3.8)
21.3%
(-1.3)
29.5%
(.8)
22.9%
(-1.4)
25.361
.000
Undergraduate
research
13.6%
(-1.4)
10.3%
(-3.2)
29.9%
(2.1)
25.7%
(.7)
22.530
.000
higher for women than for men studying advertising (Windels et al., 2010). Thus, both the
local and national data suggest that, with the
exception of marketing, the fields most likely
to nurture students with an interest in advertising and public relations are female dominated.
No significant differences were found on
the two key indicators of academic preparation most often used in admission decisions:
high school GPA and composite ACT score.
This suggests that academic preparation in
itself should not be a reason for a student to
select a major in any of these four areas. But,
the ACT math sub-score is significantly lower
for communication students than for the other
groups. Thus, even though both the advertising and public relations industries have strong
research components, students may gravitate
to those communication-based majors more
for their love of words than for their ability
with numbers. This, too, is consistent with
28
research cited earlier (Fullerton & Kendrick,
2013; Fullerton & Umphrey, 2002b).
The only measure of college-level academic performance examined in this study was
university GPA. Differences were only marginally significant, and business students had
the lowest overall GPA. But given the relative
parity of grade point averages, there is little
reason to believe that the culture of studying
and learning is dramatically different among
these four groups of students.
As detailed above, significant differences
were found in level of parental education.
Findings are consistent with the literature
which suggested that business students may
be more likely to depend on educated parents
to guide their career selections and less likely
to engage with faculty mentors on career-related issues (Perez-Felkner, 2015; West et al.,
2001). The professional programs that make
up the majority of the “other” category also
seem to reflect a strong push from educated
parents to get students into career fields such
as engineering, nursing and architecture.
Communication programs may offer a kind
of “compromise” position, in which both students and parents can see a potential path to
academic and career success even when the
parents do not have college-going experience.
The findings related to faculty mentoring
may be useful to students who seek to understand the culture of a program before deciding
on a major. Students in communication are
most likely to report having a faculty mentor,
while students in business are least likely to
have a mentoring relationship with a faculty
member. This may be because of the accreditation-imposed requirement for some small
lab classes in communication programs that
typically leads to a lower student/faculty ratio
in communication programs. Some students
desire a closer relationship with faculty, but
for others the ability to go through college in
a state of relative anonymity may be more attractive.
Finally, the findings related to research
question 3 are most likely to help students understand what their classmates may be like in
different parts of the university. While the literature on major selection and advertising and
public relations education does not directly
address these issues, future studies could look
to the student affairs literature for more insight
into these factors. Students in both communication and business programs are likely to find
that many of their classmates are in fraternities
or sororities rather than in living and learning
communities. Those two sets of students will
also likely have internship/co-op experiences
and use career services during their time at
the university. Even though, as noted above,
communication students are likely to have a
mentoring relationship with faculty, neither
they nor business students are likely to find a
culture in which they work on research projects with faculty members; nor are they likely
to be in mentoring relationships with their
peers. If they seek undergraduate research or
peer mentorship at the university under study
here, they are best served in arts and sciences
and “other” programs. Finally, students who
are interested in participating in intramural
sports are most likely to find like-minded colleagues in business and “other” majors.
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
One of the most obvious limitations of this
study is that it takes place at a single university
and analyzes students in terms of broad acaSummer 2016
demic disciplinary areas rather than specific
majors. The grouping was necessary because
of relatively small numbers of respondents to
the survey which provided data used in this
secondary analysis.
Future research could draw samples more
intentionally from students studying advertising and public relations in different academic
contexts at different universities. Such a study
could draw on the findings of the current study
to determine relative importance of academic
preparation, socioeconomic background, faculty mentoring and extracurricular activities
in students’ selection of a field of study and/
or a college or university.
Future studies could also more specifically
examine the questions of why students choose
to study advertising and public relations.
National data of all college students show a
high rate of major changing. And anecdotal
evidence suggests that many students “find”
advertising and public relations after they start
their university studies. It could be interesting to explore potential differences in major
selection between those who began their studies with intentions of pursuing advertising
and public relations and those who started in
another major and migrated to these fields.
Are there differences in their preparation and
background? Does the culture of mentoring
and extracurricular engagement impact one
group more than another?
The current study reports on significant
gender differences among different types of
majors but does not offer any evidence to explain why those differences occur. The current
study also is not able to make any linkages to
advertising practice where different gender
patterns are found. Windels and Lee (2012)
reported that about 56% of advertising industry employees are women – significantly
lower than the percentage of women in any
academic discipline reported above, except
for business – and that women are particularly
underrepresented in the creative departments
(about 30% in the United States). This is particularly notable because earlier research has
shown that many students entering advertising programs wish to pursue creative careers
(Taylor, 2012) and that the culture of “creative
boys club” seems to begin in the college classroom (Windels et al., 2010).
Future studies could explore the role of
gender in both education and practice in more
detail. How and when does the gender balance
“shift” from the female-dominated classroom
that many students will experience to a maledominated advertising industry environment?
Do men who study marketing gravitate to the
29
advertising business? Do women who study
communication leave the advertising industry? What factors contribute to these shifts?
Future studies could also track students five
to ten years after graduation to determine if
career trajectories are different based on what
part of the university served as “home” to
their degree program. Are students who study
in mass communication programs more likely
to migrate to agencies and business students
more toward working in “client” organizations? Do students who come from programs
housed in liberal arts move into leadership positions more quickly? Do students who study
in consumer science programs tend to pursue
careers in retail?
Additional follow-up in 15 to 20 years could
also be interesting. Are there trends in degree
type and attainment of leadership positions?
Which type of student is most likely to switch
careers? Are there lasting effects of academic
preparation and socioeconomic status? How
important are faculty relationships and student activities when viewed in hindsight?
Implications
This study takes the question “Where shall I
go to study advertising and public relations?”
that has been examined for almost 50 years
and provides context beyond the “directory
level” information provided in that valuable
resource (Ross & Richards, 2015). The study
provides a starting point for a research agenda
that could help students make decisions about
which kind of “culture” will fit them best.
The study is also an important first step
in helping educators think about improving
their recruitment strategies. As all universities
become more tuition dependent, university
budget models are likely to place more emphasis on number of majors enrolled and
credit hours generated. Departments may
need to work much more closely with admissions offices and university offices that serve
undecided students to recruit majors. Understanding which students are most likely to find
a “fit” in their programs can help with that recruitment process.
Finally, this study also has implications
for advertising researchers. How does the
culture of a program or a college impact
student success? How can students who are
“mismatched” with their program culture be
identified and supported? What theories and
models can be developed to help advertising
and public relations educators better understand how to engage students in a way that
will help them learn in the classroom and succeed in their future careers?
30
References
Ahmad, S. (2015). Role of socioeconomic
status and political participation in construction of apathy among youth. Journal
of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 25(8), 801-809.
Beachboard, M. R., & Weidman, L. M. (2013).
Client-centered skill sets: What small IMC
agencies need from college graduates. Journal of Advertising Education, 17(2), 28-38.
Becker, L. B., Vlad, T., & Simpson, H. A.
(2014). 2013 Annual survey of journalism
mass communication enrollments: Enrollments decline for third consecutive year.
Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 69(4), 349-65.
Davies, S., & Guppy, N. (1997). Fields of
study, college selectivity, and student inequalities in higher education. Social
Forces, 75(4), 1417-38.
De Paola, M., & Gioia, F. (2012). Risk aversion and field of study choice: The role of
individual ability. Bulletin of Economic
Research, 64(issue supplement s1), s193s209.
Fullerton, J. A., & Kendrick, A. (2013). The
math problem: Advertising students' attitudes toward statistics. Journalism & Mass
Communication Educator, 68(2), 134-49.
Fullerton, J. A., & Umphrey, D. (2002a). Statistics anxiety and math aversion among
advertising students. Journal of Advertising
Education, 6(2), 20-28.
Fullerton, J. A., & Umphrey, D. (2002b). The
decision to major in advertising: Gender
differences and other factors. Southwestern
Mass Communication Journal, 18(1), 3647.
Hillman, N., & Weichman, T. (2016). Education deserts: The continued significance of
"place" in the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Retrieved from https://www.acenet.edu/
news-room/Documents/Education-DesertsThe-Continued-Significance-of-Place-inthe-Twenty-First-Century.pdf.
Jacobson, E. (2006). Higher placement standards increase course success but reduce
program competions. The Journal of General Education, 55(2), 138-59.
Koranda, D., & Sheehan, K. B. (2014). Teaching curiosity: An essential advertising skill?
14-23.
Ma, Y. (2009). Family socioeconomic status,
parental involvement, and college major
choices – gender, race/ ethnic, and nativity
patterns. Sociological Perspectives, 52(2),
211-34. DOI: 10.1525/sop.2009.52.2.211.
National Center for Educational Statistics.
(2016). Fast facts. Retrieved from https://
nces.ed.gov
18(2), 36-44.
Perez-Felkner, L. (2015). Perceptions and
resilience in underrepresented students'
pathways to college. Teachers College
Record, 117(8), 1-60. Available from
http://www.tcrecord.org/ExecSummary.
asp?contentid=17996
Phyllis, V. L., & Len-Rios, M. E. (2006). Integration of advertising and public relations
curricula: A 2005 status report of educator
perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 61(1), 33-47.
Ross, B. I., & Richards, J. I. (Eds.) (2015).
Where shall I go to study advertising and
public relations (Vol. XLIX). Lubbock,
TX: American Academy of Advertising.
Retrieved from http://www.aaasite.org/Resources/Documents/2015Where%20to%20
Go.pdf.
Seung-Chul, Y., & Morris, P. (2015). An exploratory study of successful advertising
internships: A survey based on paired data
of interns and employers. Journal of Advertising Education, 19(1), 5-16.
Slater, J., Broyles, S. J., & Clifton, R. (2015).
Digital bootcamp: Teaching advertising in a
digital age. Journal of Advertising Education, 19(2), 47-50.
Smith, M., & Costello, M. (2015). English
majors are professionals, too: Liberal arts
and vocation in the English writing major.
Composition Studies, 43(2), 193-96.
Taylor, R. E. (2012). Let me in: A document
analysis of essays written by applicants to
an advertising degree program. Journal of
West, J., Newell, S., & Titus, P. (2001). Comparing marketing and non-busness students'
choice of academic field of study. Marketing Education Review, 11(2), 75-82.
Windels, K., & Lee, W-N. (2012). The
construction of gender and creativity in
advertising creative departments. Gender
in Management: An International Journal,
27(8), 502-19.
Windels, K., Lee, W-N., & Yeh, Y-H. (2010).
Does the creative boys' club begin in the
classroom? Journal of Advertising Education, 14(2), 15-24.
Windels, K., Mallia, K. L., & Broyles, S. J.
(2013). Soft skills: The difference between
leading and leaving the advertising indusSummer 2016
try? Journal of Advertising Education,
17(2), 17-27.
31
Effects of Integrating Advertising Ethics
into Course Instruction
Michelle A. Amazeen, Boston University
A previous version of this paper was presented to the Advertising Division at the Association
for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Annual Conference, San Francisco, CA,
August, 2015. I would like to thank Jisu Huh, Arlene Wilner, Jami Fullerton and anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions, as well as members of the Bridging Research, Instruction
and Discipline-Grounded Epistemologies faculty development program at Rider University.
The analysis and any errors herein are my responsibility alone.
Abstract
Based upon the first-known quasi-experiment of advertising ethics education, this study offers
suggestive evidence that advertising ethics instruction using duty-based practices in combination with case-specific scenarios may facilitate student understanding of complex issues in
ethics. The comparison of those who have and have not had advertising ethics integrated into
class instruction appeared to show directionally that students who had received instruction
were better able to recognize ethical challenges, were significantly more likely to behave in a
manner consistent with their values, and were directionally better prepared to expect to confront an ethical dilemma in the future. If students are able to increase their ethical recognition
abilities and likelihood to behave consistently after extended exposure to ethics instruction, then
this practice may well help to address some of the negative activities plaguing the industry. This
study should be of interest to advertising and communication professors, administrators and
graduate students, as well as advertising and marketing practitioners.
Introduction
An enduring challenge for the profession
of advertising has been its association with
unethical practices. To wit, advertising is consistently one of the lowest ranked professions
in Gallup’s annual survey of professional
honesty and integrity (Gallup, 2015; Murphy,
1998). For example, in Gallup’s December
2015 report, just 10% of respondents evaluated the profession of advertising as having
high or very high ethical standards; only automotive salespeople, telemarketers, members
of Congress and lobbyists were rated lower.
While these figures would be troubling to
many people, they should be of particular
concern to advertising educators. Attitudes toward a profession are important because they
may affect the likelihood that students will
pursue a particular career (Sparkes & Johlke, 1996) or result in cognitive dissonance
and dissatisfaction when students are faced
with ethically challenging activities in that
field (McFarland, 2003; Fullerton, Kendrick
& McKinnon, 2013). Given the tremendous
structural and technological changes that are
32
pushing the boundaries in the advertising industry, both professionals and academics have
been encouraged to collaborate on a solution
to its ethical shortcomings (Beltramini, 2011;
Drumwright & Murphy, 2009).
A recurring debate in higher education is
whether ethics instruction should be a standalone course or integrated into the curriculum
(Amazeen, Kleiser, Lindgren & Shipp, 2014;
Swenson-Lepper et al., 2015). According to a
global survey of business ethics scholars, educators are concerned about how to integrate
ethics instruction with core courses and how
to involve faculty on a cross-disciplinary basis
(Holland & Albrecht, 2013). This is true for
advertising education, in particular, regardless of whether the program resides within a
school of communication or business (Lane,
1995). Although nearly two-thirds of journalism programs offer ethics instruction,
few advertising programs have courses or
specialized units specific to advertising issues (Stuhlfaut & Farrell, 2009). Moreover,
among programs that do offer advertising ethics instruction, it is typically in the form of
a dedicated undergraduate course with generally no effort to organize or integrate ethics
into other courses in the curriculum. Ambivalence toward incorporating ethics instruction
into the curriculum is related to concerns that
ethical discussions will negatively impact students by either discouraging their entry into
the profession or creating idealism that will
hinder their ability to succeed (Drumwright
& Murphy, 2009). Not only has it often been
challenging to incorporate ethics instruction
in curricula, but for advertising ethics in particular, the scholarship related to its pedagogy
has been minimal (Stuhlfaut & Farrell, 2009).
The purpose of this study is to build upon
the literature in pedagogical ethics regarding the outcomes of ethics instruction. In
particular, this research strives to extend
knowledge of the effects of systematic advertising instruction. Offering the first-known
quasi-experiment of advertising ethics, this
study compares students who have and have
not had integrated advertising ethics instruction on measures such as ethical recognition,
intended behaviors, expected encounters
with ethically challenging situations, as well
as other outcomes. The article first addresses the literature on advertising ethics and
pedagogical considerations. Following the
explanation of the study’s methodology, the
results section reveals the effects of advertising ethics instruction. The paper concludes
with a discussion of implications, limitations
and possible future studies.
Literature Review
A broad definition of advertising ethics refers
to doing what is right or good in its practice (Cunningham, 1999). Rooted in Greek
philosophical tradition, it involves the systematic study of the normative principles that
underlie behavior (Christians, Fackler, McKee, Kreshel & Woods, 2009). More precisely,
Schauster (2015) has refined this definition to
include an “awareness of ethical problems,
which includes an ability to ascertain moral
qualities, and subsequent ethical decision
making” (p. 162). These dimensions are related to and influenced by an organization’s
culture, the values of which may often conflict
with the reflectiveness and careful distinctions
required of ethics (Christians et al., 2009;
Duffy & Thorson, 2016; Schauster, 2015).
The literature on persuasion indicates a theoretical linkage between attitudes and behavior
(Shrum, Liu, Nespoli & Lowrey, 2012). For
example, the theory of reasoned action indicates an individual’s attitude toward an action
interacts with subjective norms in predicting
Summer 2016
behavioral intent (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).
Thus, as the expectations of both the individual and others can affect behavior, industry
standards – as well as those learned in a classroom – may affect how students perceive and
react to ethical situations (Fullerton, et al.,
2013).
Practitioners of advertising have been
described as suffering from moral myopia
(an inability to clearly recognize ethical dilemmas), or moral muteness (an ability to
recognize ethical dilemmas but choosing to
ignore them) (Drumwright & Murphy, 2004;
Schauster, 2015). These characterizations are
supported by suggestive evidence that the
moral development of advertising students
may actually decrease after graduation (Marino, 2008). Research has shown that business
students were more likely to report engaging in unethical behaviors when it appeared
to offer a competitive advantage. Marketing
majors, in particular, were found to report lessethical intended behaviors than other majors
(Lane, 1995), as were more male than female
students (Keith, Pettijohn & Burnett, 2008;
Lane, 1995). Another study specifically on advertising ethics found that in more than 80%
of cases, students’ anticipated behaviors were
inconsistent with their reported ethical values
(Fullerton et al., 2013). None of these studies reported the extent to which respondents
had received prior ethics instruction. However, past studies that did measure previous
ethics instruction (although not advertising
ethics, per se) demonstrated a positive correspondence with awareness and leadership
that was carried forth into professional practice (Gale & Bunton, 2005), positive effects
on student value systems (Surlin, 1987) and a
greater likelihood of equating ethical behavior
with success (Luthar, DiBattista, & Gautschi,
1997). Thus, providing adequate advertising
ethics instruction, in particular, may be effective in ameliorating the moral myopia and
muteness associated with the industry.
The availability and quality of ethics instruction offered by a program may be related
in part to the issue of adequate coverage in
textbooks. Meaningful attention in advertising texts has been lacking (Drumwright &
Murphy, 2009; Gale & Bunton, 2005; Plumley & Ferragina, 1990; Stuhlfaut & Farrell,
2009). An examination of leading marketing
and advertising communication texts found
a “broad-brush approach” to the coverage of
advertising ethics, with most only devoting
a single page to the topic. Moreover, Drumwright and Murphy (2009) found only one
textbook that made any reference to theoretical
33
discussions of ethics in marketing and advertising. Stuhlfaut and Farrell (2009) found no
textbooks dedicated to advertising ethics, specifically. This reinforces the problem facing
instructors: not only is there frequent ambivalence about incorporating ethics instruction
within a curriculum, but appropriate teaching materials are not integrated into general
course texts. Although specialized textbooks
with units on advertising ethics are becoming
increasingly available (Amazeen et al., 2014),
as of this writing, only one textbook dedicated
to advertising ethics has been located (Spence
& Van Heekeren, 2005).1 However, as the
lines between advertising, public relations and
traditional news blur, advertising ethics need
to be considered not in isolation, but as one
part of an increasingly interdependent media
ecosystem (Duffy & Thorson, 2016).2
Other useful instructional material may
come in the form of industry codes of ethics.
Although studies have found that advertising practitioners tend to follow the standard
of consequentialism, where decisions are
made based upon the perceived best outcomes (or those that are least problematic)
for immediate parties involved, a more appropriate framework within which to consider
advertising is deontological, or duty-based
ethics (Christians, 2007; Duffy & Thorson,
2016; James, Pratt & Smith, 1994; Rotzoll
& Christians, 1980).3 Duty-based ethics are
exemplified by the codes of conduct adopted
by many self-regulatory groups (James et al.,
1994). For example, the American Advertising Federation (AAF), in collaboration with
the Reynolds Journalism Institute and the
Missouri School of Journalism, has developed
“Principles and Practices for Advertising Ethics.” These eight principles are based on the
philosophy that all forms of commercial messaging – including advertising – should place
the interests of consumers foremost, which
in turn will benefit businesses as well (“Institute,” 2011). The study of these principles
serves as a framework to help students of
advertising understand the behaviors that are
expected to guide their personal and business
conduct.
It is important to consider not only the content of ethical instruction, but also the way in
which students learn. According to Perry’s
(1970) scheme of intellectual and ethical maturation, students progress through different
stages with respect to their attitudes toward
knowledge. In his model, students begin at a
simplistic understanding of a concept where
they believe that right and wrong answers
exist. As they develop, students increasingly
34
recognize that knowledge can be subjective
in nature depending upon a multiplicity of
perspectives that may result in conflicting answers. Similarly, Colomb (1988) argues that
students’ knowledge, writing and thinking are
socially constructed. Therefore, faculty need
to facilitate socialization of students into their
discipline. In both perspectives, it is important
to make clear to students what are sometimes
tacit understandings. While introduction
to disciplinary codes of ethics can provide
general guidelines to students and may be
useful as a framework, they typically are not
situation specific (Fullerton et al., 2013). The
integration of ethically challenging scenarios
has been advocated as an effective means in
the development of students’ ethical decision
making (Fullerton et al., 2013; Keith et al.,
2008; Patterson & Wilkins, 2011). Developing skills to analyze ethical problems is likely
to equip students to succeed in advertising
(Drumwright & Murphy, 2004, 2009). As
practices in the field of advertising become
increasingly blurred with marketing and journalism (e.g., native advertising), a systematic
integration of advertising ethics may be a superior way to encourage student consideration
and understanding of what advertising ought
to be.
Thus, the literature on advertising ethics
and pedagogy suggests the following predictions:
H1: Integrating advertising ethics into
course instruction will increase student
ability to recognize ethical issues.
course instruction will decrease the
intended likelihood of student engagement in unethical activities.
course instruction will result in greater
consistency between ethical recognition and intended actions.
expectation that they may encounter
ethically challenging situations in the
advertising profession.
receptivity to working in the industry.
Method
Two sections of an introduction to advertising course at a small, private university in the
mid-Atlantic area of the United States served
as the treatment and control groups during the
Fall 2015 semester.4 The treatment group (n =
18) received systematically integrated ethics
instruction throughout the semester. In addition to reading the few pages devoted to ethics
in one chapter of the course textbook (Arens,
Schaefer & Weigold, 2015), students were
given three ethics-focused assignments, as
explained below. The control group (n = 13)
received no ethics instruction or readings until
after the study assessment.
Ethics-Focused Assignments
Early in the semester, the treatment group was
assigned to read the Institute for Advertising
Ethics’ (IAE) Principles and Practices for Advertising Ethics (“Institute,” 2011). After an
introduction and discussion of these principles, students were administered a case study
(adapted from Drumwright, 2005). In this activity, students were asked to identify at least
one ethical problem, explain why that aspect
of the scenario was problematic in relation
to the industry ethical standards, envision at
least two ways the problem could be ameliorated, and articulate the pros and cons of the
alternatives. Another, similar case study was
administered in written format as part of the
mid-term examination. This assignment was
not administered to the control group (either
as an activity or an assessment) until the end
of the semester, after the ethics survey instrument was completed.
For a second ethics-focused assignment,
students in the treatment section were instructed to find three advertisements (from any
medium) that displayed various functions and
effects of advertising. At least one of the ads
was required to contain something that some
people may find socially or ethically problematic. In this writing assignment, students were
required to support their observations using
the IAE industry standards. Examples of ads
that violated one of the IAE principles were
discussed in class on the day the written assignment was submitted. The control class
completed a different writing assignment that
only involved finding ads that displayed different functions of advertising and nothing
about social responsibility or ethics.
The third assignment spanned the entire
13-week semester wherein each student in the
treatment class took turns giving a 5-10 minute presentation at the beginning of each class
on some aspect of advertising that he or she
considered ethically challenging. Each of the
following issues were to be addressed in the
presentation:
1. Identification of the potentially problematic issues;
2. Identification of the Principles and
Practices for Advertising Ethics that
were violated;
Summer 2016
3. Explanation of two or three possible
alternative ways the situation could
have been handled;
4. Explanation of the pros and cons (at
least two for each) for each alternate
action; and
5. Engaging the class in discussion
about strength or plausibility of alternatives.
Students in the control class had to give a
5-10 minute presentation about any aspect
of advertising (share an interesting ad campaign, ad execution, ad agency, etc.) with no
ethics-focused requirement. In both sections,
presentation topics had to be authorized by
the instructor in advance to ensure the material adhered to the guidelines. Furthermore,
each presentation was followed by a 5-minute
class discussion of the subject matter. Thus,
the framework of this particular assignment
ensured that for the treatment group at least
15 minutes of every class session was devoted
to advertising ethics.
To measure any effects of systematic ethics instruction on students, a paper and pencil
in-class survey was administered to both
treatment and control sections of the course
toward the end of the semester under the guise
of a departmental effort to assess the structure
and content of its advertising program. The
study was authorized and met the guidelines
of the university’s Institutional Review Board,
including implied consent, anonymity, confidentiality and voluntary participation. Under
supervision of the author, a research assistant
handled data entry of the surveys.
Instrument
The survey instrument (available upon request) was adapted from Fullerton and
colleagues (2013) and Keith and colleagues
(2008), using many of the same ethical scenarios. The first part of survey consisted of
evaluating six questions about the advertising
industry using a Likert scale (5 = “Strongly
agree,” 1 = “Strongly disagree”). The second
section required students to read 20 ethical scenarios. After each scenario, students
were asked to answer three questions using
a 7-point semantic differential scale: 1) perceived ethicality of scenario (7 = “ethical,” 1
= “unethical”), 2) likelihood of engaging in
similar behavior if faced with same situation
(7 = “very likely,” 1 = “very unlikely”), and
3) likelihood that they could find themselves
in a similar situation in the future (7 = “very
likely,” 1 = “very unlikely”). The last section
asked students about their status at the university and demographic questions.
35
Table 1:
Participants
Total
(N = 31)
Female
Treatment
(n = 18)
Control
(n = 13)
69%
56%+
85%
20.6 (1.14)
20.4 (1.25)
20.7 (1.03)
White
52%
56%
46%
GPA
3.1 (.42)
3.2 (.35)*
2.9 (.44)
45%
50%
39%
Age
Marketing major
Business major
3%
6%
0%
Advertising major
23%
28%
15%
Advertising minor
19%
17%
23%
Senior
22%
36%+
8%
Junior
52%
36%*
69%
Sophomore
26%
29%
23%
Previous ethics class
32%
39%
23%
+p < .10; *p < .05
Participants
A total of 31 students across both course sections took the survey. Most respondents were
female (69%), white (52%), marketing majors
(45%) who ranged in age from 19 to 23 (M =
20.6; SD = 1.14). Reported grade level was
22% seniors, 52% juniors, 26% sophomores
and no freshmen. Self-reported GPAs on a
4-point scale ranged from 2.1 to 3.9 (M = 3.1;
SD = 0.42). Noteworthy differences between
the two classes appears to be that the treatment group reported a higher average GPA (M
= 3.2; SD = 0.35) than the control group (M =
2.9; SD = 0.44; p < .05) and had fewer females
(56%) than the control class (85%; p < .10).
Moreover, the control class was predominated
by juniors (69%), while the treatment class
did not have a majority of any particular grade
level (see Table 1 for comparisons).
Findings
Hypothesis 1
To measure the perceived ethicality of various scenarios (H1), participants responded
to a 20-item battery using a 7-point semantic
differential scale ranging from “unethical” (1)
to “ethical” (7). Each ethical scenario is listed
in Appendix A. The 20 items were found to
be internally consistent (Cronbach’s α = .87)
and were averaged together to form an index
of ethicality (M = 2.62, SD = 0.88). Although
36
the treatment class perceived the scenarios to
be directionally more ethical (M = 2.70, SD =
0.90) than the control class (M = 2.50, SD =
0.89), a t-test revealed this difference was not
statistically significant. An OLS regression
model was specified to explore which factors
predicted ethical recognition. With ethical
recognition as the outcome variable and condition as the predictor variable, the model was
not significant. However, a marginally significant model (R = .75, R = .56, p < .10) emerged
when control variables were added, including
gender, grade level, GPA, past ethics class,
advertising as a major, advertising as a minor, race and knowing a student in the other
class condition.5 Two coefficients signaled a
significant positive relationship to ethical recognition: identifying as female (p < .05)6 and
as an advertising major (p < .05). To control
for any differences between groups on these
measures, a one-way ANCOVA was specified
with ethical recognition as the outcome variable, condition as the predictor variable, and
gender and ad major as covariates. Although
the model was significant [F(3, 25) = 4.20, p
< .05], the adjusted means between the treatment (M = 2.46, SE = 0.18) and control (M =
2.61, SE = 0.21) were not. However, in controlling for gender and advertising majors, the
adjusted means suggest directional support for
H1 as the treatment group was directionally
more likely to recognize ethically challenging
scenarios than was the control group.
Hypothesis 2
To measure the likelihood that students would
engage in similar behavior for various scenarios (H2), participants again used a 7-point
semantic differential scale ranging from “very
unlikely” (1) to “very likely” (7). The 20 items
were found to be internally consistent (Cronbach’s α = .85) and were averaged together to
form an index of similar behavior (M = 2.78,
SD = 0.87). The treatment class was directionally more likely to act in a similar behavior
(M = 2.79, SD = 0.84) compared to the control
class (M = 2.76, SD = 0.93), but a t-test revealed this was not statistically different. An
OLS regression model with similar behavior
as the outcome variable and the experimental condition as the predictor variable did not
yield significant results, even when control
variables were added. Although the models
were not significant, two coefficients signaled
a significant negative relationship to behaving
similarly: females (p < .05) and advertising
majors (p < .05) both reported they would
be less likely to behave in a manner similar
to the seemingly unethical scenarios. Thus,
once again, to control for any differences between groups on these measures, a one-way
ANCOVA was specified with similar behavior
as the outcome variable, treatment condition
as the predictor variable, and gender and ad
major as covariates. Although the model was
not significant, the adjusted means between
the treatment (M = 2.61, SE = 0.21) and control (M = 2.85, SE = 0.23) show directional
support for H2. The treatment group was directionally less likely to report behaving in a
similarly unethical manner than was the control group when controlling for differences
in gender and number of advertising majors
between groups.
Hypothesis 3
A paired-samples t-test was used to explore
the consistency between student perceptions
of ethical scenarios and their likelihood to
behave in a similar manner (H3). In both the
treatment (r = .86, p < .0001) and the control
(r = .87, p < .0001), classes demonstrated a
moderately high level of consistency. That
is, the more students found a scenario to be
unethical, the less likely they were to report
acting in a similar manner. However, there
was a marginally significant difference in the
paired-sample means for the control group (p
< .10) and not the treatment group. In other
words, there was a within-group differential
that approached significance between control
group members’ average recognition of an
Summer 2016
ethical dilemma (M = 2.50, SD = 0.89) and
their average likelihood of behaving in a similar manner (M = 2.76, SD = 0.93). They were
not as likely to claim to avoid acting in an unethical manner, as they were to recognize the
unethical behavior. There was no statistical
difference in the treatment group’s recognition of an ethical dilemma (M = 2.70, SD =
.90) and their reported likelihood of behaving in a similar manner (M = 2.79, SD = .84).
Thus, in support of H3, students exposed to
systematic ethics instruction were more likely
to report behaving in a way consistent with
their ability to recognize ethical dilemmas
than students who did not have this type of
instruction.
Hypothesis 4
Students also were asked how likely they were
to believe that they could find themselves in
a similar situation to the case studies in the
future (H4). For each of the 20 scenarios,
students responded to a 7-point semantic differential scale ranging from “very unlikely”
(1) to “very likely” (7). The 20 items were
found to be internally consistent (Cronbach’s
α = .90) and were averaged together to form
a similar situation index (M = 3.57, SD =
1.13). The treatment class was directionally,
but not statistically significantly, more likely
to believe they would face a similar situation
in the future (M = 3.74, SD = 1.06) compared
to the control class (M = 3.32, SD = 1.22). A
one-way ANCOVA resulted in no statistical
significance between groups. When controlling for gender and the number of ad majors,
the treatment group (M = 3.73, SE = .28) was
directionally but not significantly more likely to believe they could find themselves in a
similar situation in the future than the control
group (M = 3.25, SE = .32).
Hypothesis 5
To explore whether integrating ethics instruction makes students less likely to want
to work in the ad industry (H5) as feared by
some scholars, students were asked whether
they were interested in working in the ad industry. Students in the treatment group were
directionally less likely to agree (M = 3.44, SE
= 0.33) than were those in the control group
(M = 3.68, SE = 0.35). However, a t-test revealed this difference was not statistically
significant even when controlling for between
group differences. Similarly, students in the
treatment group were directionally less likely
to want to work long hours in the ad industry
(M = 2.54, SE = 0.37) compared to the control group (M = 3.19, SE = 0.38), again with
controls for between group differences. Thus,
there is directional evidence contradicting H5.
37
As shown in Table 2, students in the treatment
group were directionally more likely to question the ethicality of the ad industry compared
to those in the control group.
Discussion, Implications and Future Research
This study contributes to the advertising literature, specifically, by offering suggestive
evidence that integrating ethics instruction
into an introductory advertising principles
course results in students who may be better able to recognize ethically challenging
behavior compared to students receiving no
instruction. Furthermore, students who received the ethics instruction may be less likely
to report behaving in a similar seemingly unethical manner than their counterparts. In this
study, students having no ethical instruction
were directionally more likely to have inconsistent attitudes between perceived ethical
behaviors and intended actions compared
to students having ethical instruction. These
results also suggest directional support for
the hypothesis that ethical instruction makes
students increasingly likely to expect to be
confronted with similar ethical challenges in
their future. There was no support, however,
for the premise that ethical instruction would
increase student receptivity to working in the
advertising industry. Although there was no
statistical difference between the two classes,
students who received the ethical instruction
were directionally less likely to report having
an interest in working in the advertising industry even when controlling for differences
between the two groups.
As this was a nascent attempt to study advertising ethics in this manner, it is important
to acknowledge upfront the limitations of
these findings that may constrain the generalizability of the results. First, the sample sizes
were very small. Larger samples may have
resulted in more robust findings. Also, true
experimental designs rely on randomization
of participants. Since it was not practically
feasible to randomly assign students to class
sections that meet at different times, this study
is considered quasi-experimental. Controls
were used in the analysis to account for potential differences between the populations
in each group. Moreover, the student population in this study may not be generalizable to
students at large public universities or those
at elite institutions, for example. Similarly,
the advertising program at this institution resides in a business school, which may result
in findings that would differ from an advertising program in a school of communication
or journalism. Thus, the results of this study
should be used as suggestive with these limi-
Table 2:
Between Group Agreement with Industry Statements
Control
M
(SE)
Treatment
M
(SE)
13
18
Important to work for a company with high
ethical standards
4.41
(0.27)
4.40
(0.26)
The ad industry as a whole is ethical
3.16
(0.30)
2.79
(0.29)
Most people would rate the ad industry as
ethical
2.84
(0.20)
2.29+
(0.19)
A lot of companies aren’t very socially
responsible
2.91
(0.22)
3.37
(0.21)
Prepared to work 60-80 hours/ week in the
advertising industry
3.19
(0.36)
2.54
(0.34)
Interested in working in advertising industry
3.64
(0.34)
3.48
(.32)
N
Note. 1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree. All means are adjusted to control for
differences between groups on gender, GPA and grade level variables.7
+p < .10
38
tations in mind. Future research could address
these issues within different institutional contexts.
The theoretical implication for advertising
education is that framing ethics instruction using deontological praxis in combination with
case-specific scenarios may facilitate student
understanding of complex issues in ethics.
If students are able to increase their ethical
recognition abilities and likelihood to behave
consistently after extended exposure to ethics
instruction, then this practice may well help to
address some of the negative activities plaguing the industry. Furthermore, if this applies to
students, it is plausible that it can also apply
to agencies and businesses that embrace ethical codes of conduct. Indeed, research by Gale
and Bunton (2005) suggests a similar proposition: people who have experienced ethical
instruction were more ethically aware in their
professional practice. The organizational embrace of ethics needs to go beyond simply
posting a list of the codes next to the elevator or online and then forgetting about them.
As Snyder (2011) has argued: “the mandate
must be from the top down and run all through
the company” (p. 482) requiring and inspiring
the highest personal ethics in all work products among employees. Similarly, Schauster
(2015) has demonstrated how organizational
culture affects ethical behavior of employees.
Without a commitment by agency leadership,
consideration of ethics fails to materialize
among the rank and file.
At the same time, the concern that ethics
instruction may make students less receptive
to working in the industry may – at the outset – seem warranted. However, it would be
a disservice to our students, and to the profession, to continue to neglect preparing them
for the ethically fraught decisions they will
undoubtedly have to face. As important as
ethical conduct is in business generally, and
advertising specifically, little has been done
to significantly improve ethical practices in
the industry (Beltramini, 2011). Schauster
(2015) reports the continuance of the moral
myopia of advertising practitioners observed
by Drumwright and Murphy (2004) over a
decade earlier. As speculated by Fullerton
et al. (2013), it is possible that advertising
students (and consequently advertising professionals) may be less familiar with industry
codes of ethics than in some other professions
because of the lack of adequate attention to
ethics instruction at the collegiate level. After all, Stuhlfaut and Farrell (2009) reported
that few advertising programs specifically address advertising issues in their ethics-related
Summer 2016
courses or units. This would be an area worthy
of future study: does the knowledge level of
industry ethical codes differ between advertising practitioners and other related fields?
Moreover, among ad agencies that have created advertising recognized by the Federal
Trade Commission or other regulators as deceptive, do they have formal ethical codes of
conduct in place?
It should also be noted that students’ directionally lower receptivity to working in
advertising after ethics instruction could very
well be the result of the pedagogical approach
used in this study. The recurrent focus on advertisements that violated the industry code of
ethics during each class may have contributed
to the treatment group’s directionally lower
interest in working in advertising. Perhaps if
cases of advertising that were pro-social and
that upheld industry codes were interspersed,
students would have had examples of how advertising can be used to benefit society. After
all, advertising is but a tool that can be used to
promote good just as easily as it can tear down.
And, in the spirit of Plaisance (2015), if the industry wants to truly consider itself composed
of “professionals,” the public-good dimension
of their work needs to be evidenced through
ethical and socially responsible advertising.
Furthermore, in this study, instruction was
limited to applied ethics using case studies
anchored by industry codes of ethics, which
also may have affected student understanding of ethics and receptivity to working in
advertising. Many scholars argue that the
best way to instill ethical decision making is
to ground applied ethics in classical theoretical premises (Swenson-Lepper et al., 2015).
However, because advertising education is
structured within a wide array of programs,
including business, communication and journalism, their pedagogical missions diverge
(Stuhlfaut & Farrell, 2009). Some business
programs and scholars frown upon the utility of philosophical ethics instruction with the
outlook that, “Teaching moral philosophies,
character education, & ethical idealism is
not the solution for business students” (Ferrell & Ferrell, 2002, slide 22). The advertising
program in this study is housed in a business
school. Moreover, not only did the ethics instruction lack a theoretical grounding, it was
integrated into an introductory course on
advertising rather than being a stand-alone
course on advertising ethics. Researchers
have demonstrated the value of stand-alone
ethics courses in fostering complex reasoning
and comprehensive decision-making (see Swenson-Lepper et al., 2015 for a review). Thus,
39
Appendix:
Ethical Scenarios
Scenario 1: An ad agency is producing a television ad for a dog food manufacturer.
Several hours have been spent trying to get the star, a Labrador retriever, to eat the dog
food. Since the production is costing $12,000 per hour, someone places a steak in the
bottom of the dog food bowl. Though the dog never eats one bite of the dog food, the
camera angle makes it appear that the dog is devouring the manufacturer's product.
Scenario 2: An agency is producing a television ad for a weight loss company. In order
to be legal, the ad must contain the disclaimer, "These results are not typical." The legal
obligation is met by displaying the disclaimer so quickly and in type so small that it is
barely readable.
Scenario 3: In the ad that an agency is producing, the client, a fast food restaurant
chain, wants their burger to appear much larger than it actually is. A photographer uses
a camera lens and retouching to make the background objects look smaller.
Scenario 4: The client has requested an estimate for next year's advertising budget. The
account executive (AE) estimates that account service will be 40% of the budget. The
client will likely object to such a large allocation to account service. Knowing that the
client will probably never question budgeted printing costs, the AE shifts 10% of the
estimated account service cost to printing.
Scenario 5: In reviewing the agency's account billing, the account supervisor notices
that she has accidentally over billed one client by a substantial amount. However, payment has already been received from the client. She ignores the mistake.
Scenario 6: A graphic artist is employed by an ad agency but also does freelance work
on weekends. Another agency wants him to design an ad for one of their clients. While
the agency is not a direct competitor of his employer, the ad is for a client that directly
competes with one of his agency's clients. He accepts the freelance work.
Scenario 7: An art director for an advertising agency often takes work home. Her home
computer has the same software but not all of the fonts that she uses at the agency. She
copies all of the agency's fonts and installs them on her home computer.
Scenario 8: An account executive at Agency A believes that the advertising for a product handled by Agency B is misleading and unethical. He posts a message critical of
Agency B's advertising on a popular blog.
Scenario 9: At the ad agency where he works, an employee participates in a fantasy
football league. During work hours, he and coworkers spend a significant amount of
time making picks, corresponding via e-mail with updated scores, standings, offers for
trades, and sarcastic congratulations to the week's winner.
Scenario 10: Focus group results are to be included in a marketing brochure for a
client's product. The first set of focus group results is disappointing. An employee
discards the first set and includes in the brochure a second set of results that are more
favorable to the client's product.
Scenario 11: A media sales representative tells a client that a major competitor will be
running ads in his magazine. To close the sale, the sales rep tells the client the amount
his competitor will be spending on the ads.
Scenario 12: An expensive ad campaign was designed for a client, but the client failed
to pay the bill. Even though the ad agency has a client confidentiality rule, at lunch the
40
Appendix:
Ethical Scenarios
account executive tells several of her friends at other advertising agencies about the
client's failure to pay.
Scenario 13: A copywriter's friend works for a competing ad agency. Unknown to the
friend, both ad agencies, the copywriter's and the friend's, are competing for the same
account. Over dinner, the friend discusses plans to win the account. The copywriter
uses the information to gain a competitive advantage.
Scenario 14: A popular website announces a creative contest that will be decided by
the number of "hits" each competing ad receives. Agency A enters its ad, after which
its employees use special computer programs that automatically and repeatedly generate hits to their own ad, resulting in tens of thousands of computer-generated "votes."
Scenario 15: A large petroleum company showcases its environmental initiatives in
an ad campaign, even though it has been the subject of complaints by environmental
groups about its negative impact on the environment.
Scenario 16: An account executive is out-of-town visiting a client. He has a free evening, so he decides to have dinner with a couple of old college friends. The dinner
turns out to be quite expensive. He picks up the check and charges it to his agency's
expense account.
Scenario 17: An agency employee must book a trip to visit a client in another city.
Although she can obtain a less expensive fare on another airline, she chooses to book
the ticket with the airline on which she collects frequent flyer miles.
Scenario 18: A researcher is preparing a report that must include a 5-year profile of
a client's sales figures. Sales have steadily declined over the 5-year period. The researcher designs a line graph such that the year with the lowest sales is displayed first
and the year with the highest sales occurs last. Thus the data line rises from left to right
and gives a positive impression of the company's sales.
Scenario 19: A recruiting brochure for a company is to feature the company's employees and facilities. The company has no disabled employees, so the photographer asks
one of the employees to sit in a wheelchair for one of the photographs.
Scenario 20: A graphic artist is designing a package for a client whose product must
display a warning label concerning a potentially harmful side effect. To de-emphasize
the warning, the artist prints it in a pastel color that readily blends with the rest of the
package design.
any of these pedagogical factors could have
influenced student receptivity to working in
the industry.
As the advertising industry continues to
evolve in its structure and in the technological
advances that are influencing the content and
delivery of persuasive messages, it is important for educators to understand the benefits
of systematically offering advertising ethics
instruction to students. Integrated instruction
seems to facilitate student socialization into
complex understandings of ethics. The increasing use of product placement, guerrilla
Summer 2016
marketing, viral marketing and native advertising, coupled with the greater temptations,
risks and rewards inherent in the business
of advertising, renders ethics a professional
practice issue (Drumwright & Murphy, 2009).
Failure to educate students in the ethical practice of advertising is a disservice not only to
students but also to the profession and society overall. Continued neglect of advertising
ethics instruction will doom the profession to
remain among the likes of telemarketers, Congress and lobbyists on measures of perceived
honesty and integrity.
41
References
Amazeen, M., Kleiser, S., Lindgren, L., &
Shipp, S. (2014). Marketing ethics: Independent course or curriculum integration?
In D. DeLong, D. Edmiston & B. Vander
Schee (Eds.), A Community of learners: Proceedings from the 19th Annual
Marketing Management Association Fall
Educators’ Conference (pp. 20-21). San
Antonio, TX.
Arens, W. F., Schaefer, D. H., & Weigold, M.
F. (2015). Advertising (2nd ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Beltramini, R. F. (2011). From platitudes to
principles: An advertising ethics call to
action. Journal of Advertising Research,
51(3), 475-76.
Christians, C. G. (2007). Utilitarianism in
media ethics and its discontents. Journal of
Mass Media Ethics, 22(2/3), 113–31.
Christians, C. G., Fackler, M. B., McKee, K.
B., Kreshel, P. J., & Woods, R. H. Jr. (2009).
Media ethics: Cases and moral reasoning
(8th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Colomb, G. G. (1988). Disciplinary ‘secrets’
and the apprentice writer: The lessons for
critical thinking. Resource Publication,
1(6), 2-26. Upper Montclair, NJ: Montclair
State College. Retrieved from http://files.
eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED352331.pdf
Cunningham, P. H. (1999). Ethics of advertising: Oxymoron or good business practice?
In J. P. Jones (Ed.), The advertising business (pp. 499-515). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Drumwright, M. E. (2005). Advertising ethics: Reasons, rationalizations, biases,
and heuristics [Case study]. The Aspen
Institute Center for Business Education.
Retrieved from http://www.caseplace.
org/d.asp?d=2810.
Drumwright, M. E., & Murphy, P. E. (2004).
How advertising practitioners view ethics:
Moral muteness, moral myopia, and moral
imagination. Journal of Advertising, 33(2),
7-24.
The current state of advertising ethics: Industry and academic perspectives. Journal
of Advertising, 38(1), 83-107.
Duffy, M., & Thorson, E. (Eds.) (2016). Persuasion ethics today. New York: Routledge.
Ferrell, O. C., & Ferrell, L. (2002). Business ethics & social responsibility: How
to improve trust & confidence in business
[PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from www.
ocferrell.com/docs/importance_of_tchg_
ethics.ppt.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief,
42
attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fullerton, J. A., Kendrick, A., & McKinnon,
L. M. (2013). Advertising ethics: Student
attitudes and behavioral intent. Journalism
& Mass Communication Educator, 68(1),
33-49.
Gale, K., & Bunton, K. (2005). Assessing the
impact of ethics instruction on advertising
and public relations graduates. Journalism
& Mass Communication Educator 60(4),
272-85.
Gallup. (2015, December). Honesty/ ethics
in professions [Data file]. Retrieved from
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1654/HonestyEthics-Professions.aspx
Holland, D., & Albrecht, C. (2013). The
worldwide academic field of business
ethics: Scholars’ perceptions of the most
important issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(4), 777-88.
Institute for Advertising Ethics, Missouri
School of Journalism, University of Missouri. (2011). Process for endorsing
principles and practices for advertising
ethics. Retrieved from http://www.rjionline.org/institute-for-advertising-ethics.
James, E. L., Pratt, C. B., & Smith, T. V.
(1994). Advertising ethics: Practitioner and
student perspectives. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 9(2), 69–83.
Keith, N. K., Pettijohn, C. E., & Burnett, M.
S. (2008). Ethics in advertising: Differences
in industry values and student perceptions.
Academy of Marketing Studies Journal,
12(2), 81-96.
Lane, J. C. (1995). Ethics of business students:
Some marketing perspectives. Journal of
Business Ethics, 14(7), 571-80.
Luthar, H. K., DiBattista, R. A., & Gautschi,
T. (1997). Perception of what the ethical
climate is and what is should be: The role
of gender, academic status, and ethical education. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(2),
205-17.
Marino, S. (2008). A comparison of the moral
development of advertising and journalism
students (Unpublished manuscript). Louisiana State University.
McFarland, R. G. (2003). Crisis of conscience: The use of coercive sales tactics
and resultant felt stress in the salesperson.
Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 23(4), 311-25.
Murphy, P. E. (1998). Ethics in advertising:
Review, analysis, and suggestions. Journal
of Public Policy & Marketing, 17(2), 31619.
Patterson, P., & Wilkins, L. (2011). Media
ethics: Issues & cases (7th ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Perry, W. G., Jr. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college
years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Plaisance, P. L. (2015, November 8).
Advertisers still suffer from ‘moral myopia.’ Psychology Today. Retrieved from
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/
virtue-in-the-media-world/201511/advertisers-still-suffer-moral-myopia
Plumley, J., & Ferragina, Y. (1990). Do advertising texts cover ethics adequately?
Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 5(4), 24755.
Rotzoll, K. B., & Christians, C. G. (1980). Advertising agency practitioners’ perceptions
of ethical decisions. Journalism Quarterly,
57(3), 425-31.
Schauster, E. (2015). The relationship between
organizational leaders and advertising ethics: An organizational ethnography. Journal
of Media Ethics, 30(3), 150-67.
Surlin, S. H. (1987). Value system changes by
students as a result of media ethics course.
Journalism Quarterly, 64(2-3), 564-68;
676.
Shrum, L. J., Liu, M., Nespoli, M., & Lowrey,
T. M. (2012). Persuasion in the marketplace: How theories of persuasion apply to
marketing and advertising. In J. P. Dillard
& L. Shen (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of
persuasion: Developments in theory and
practice (2nd ed.) (pp. 314-330). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Snyder, W. (2011). Making the case for
enhanced advertising ethics. Journal of Advertising Research, 51(3), 477-83.
Sparks, J. R., & Johlke, M. (1996). Factors
influencing student perceptions of unethical behavior by personal salespeople: An
experimental investigation. Journal of
Business Ethics, 15(8) , 871-87.
Spence, E., & Van Heekeren, B. (2005). Advertising ethics. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson/ Prentice Hall.
Stuhlfaut, M. W., & Farrell, M. (2009). Pedagogic cacophony: The teaching of ethical,
legal, and societal issues in advertising education. Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator, 64(2), 173-90.
Swenson-Lepper, T., Leavitt, M. A., Hoffer,
M., Charron, L. N., Ballard, R. L., Bell McManus, L.M., … & Tompkins, P. S. (2015).
Communication ethics in the communica-
Summer 2016
tion curriculum: United States, Canada, and
Puerto Rico. Communication Education,
64(4), 472-90.
Endnotes
A search of leading higher education textbook publishers including Cengage, Macmillan, McGraw-Hill,
Oxford, Pearson and Wiley surfaced a single textbook
devoted to advertising ethics: Spence, E. & VanHeekeren, B. (2005). Advertising ethics: Basic ethics
in action. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
1
As this manuscript was being prepared for publication, Duffy and Thorson (2016) released Persuasion
Ethics Today, which takes an interdisciplinary look at
ethics at the intersection of advertising, journalism and
public relations.
2
For nuanced arguments on the appropriateness of
duty-based ethics, see Christians (2007), James et al.
(1994), or Rotzoll and Christians (1980). While the
author acknowledges the existence of other ethical
frameworks, comparative analyses have been undertaken by other scholars and are beyond the scope of
this paper.
3
4 A previous quasi-experimental study was unsuccessful at finding expected effects as the control group
received “superficial” attention to advertising ethics
rather than none. This was a deliberate choice to offer
some amount of minimal ethics instruction rather than
none at all. However, in so doing, the differences that
may have distinguished the two groups were diluted.
The present study corrected for the design limitations
of the initial study as suggested by independent reviewers.
5
Herein referred to as “control variables.”
This is consistent with previous research finding females to be more ethically aware than males (Fullerton
et al., 2013).
6
Another ANCOVA analysis also held constant the ad
major and ad minor variables between the two groups.
Results were essentially the same with the exception
of the marginal significance disappearing between the
groups on the measure of most people in America rating the ad industry as highly ethical.
7
43
Team Teaching of Creative
Advertising and Public Relations Courses
Pamela K. Morris, Loyola University Chicago
Abstract
Advertising and public relations are complex practices, and it is challenging for educators to
find instructors who can fulfill expertise across disciplines, particularly in creative applications
involving technology. Team teaching is one approach to provide multiple proficiencies. This
paper describes how two co-taught courses, Design for Advertising and Public Relations and
Commercial Production for Advertising and Public Relations, were developed, delivered and
assessed. A literature review of team teaching and creative instruction provides a framework
for course designs and student surveys. Course evaluations and instructor reflections are the
evidence used for evaluation. The study is important, as specialties from multiple practices,
including those that require technology, are increasingly necessary for preparing students for
these industries. The study adds to the literature about team teaching and provides a foundation
for effectively collaborating on creative courses.
Introduction
Advertising and public relations are interdisciplinary, complex and creative practices.
Advertising agencies are made up of multiple departments, such as creative, research,
media, traffic, planning and account management. While each is unique, all areas need
to function together to develop strategic and
innovative solutions for client communication challenges. Technology increasingly is
involved with special software for each discipline and is an especially important part of the
creative process.
Both creativity and training for creativity
were identified as areas ripe for improvement
in an investigation of undergraduate advertising programs (Stuhlfaut, 2007). Moreover,
new forms of media have made visual (Stuhlfaut & Berman, 2009) and online video
communication (Beard & Yang, 2011) more
important. While students need to be prepared
for these opportunities, finding instructors
with multiple expertise is difficult. Consider
that for a course on designing advertisements,
teachers require: an understanding of the advertising and public relations development,
strategy and creative process; design concepts
such as layout, color and type; and skills for
software programs, such as PhotoShop, InDesign and Illustrator. Likewise, in order to
instruct classes on television, video, digital
or other commercial broadcast production,
44
instructors require the advertising process
knowledge just mentioned, in addition to proficiencies in video, filming, lighting, editing,
sound, production and Adobe Premiere Pro or
similar technology.
An approach to bring together the multiple
experiences required to instruct advertising
and public relations courses, especially the
training for creative and technology skills, is
through team teaching. A teaching team can
blur disciplinary boundaries, integrate various perspectives and help make courses more
relevant to industry (Gaytan, 2010; Smith Ducoffe, Tromley & Tucker, 2006). It is also a
way for the academy to maintain pace with
business practices.
The purpose of this study is to understand
better the team teaching approach in creative
classes unique to advertising and public relations through assessing student surveys,
course evaluations and instructor reflections.
The current exploration is based on multiple
sessions of two team-taught courses offered
at a private Midwestern university. The paper provides educators with a useful context
and benchmark for team-taught course development and further research in this area of
pedagogy.
Literature Review
The first use of team teaching is attributed to
William Alexander, known as the father of
the American middle school, while he was attending a conference at Cornell University in
1963. Alexander’s intent was to create teams
of teachers to instruct relatively large groups
of students (Gaytan, 2010). Teacher collaboration, co-teaching (Wang, 2012), shared
teaching (van Amelsvoort, van Wijk & den
Ouden, 2010) and interdisciplinary teaching
(Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006) are related variations on the concept.
According to Davis (1995), team teaching is “All arrangements that include two or
more faculty in some level of collaboration in
the planning and delivery of a course” (p. 8;
see also Buckley, 2000). Parada and Franch
(2008) considered instructional methods, activities and course content to describe three
forms of team teaching: parallel, rotational
and interactive (as cited in van Amelsvoort
et al., 2010). Parallel, the most elementary
style, involves multiple instructors teaching in
the same course separately on different days.
Most often used for first-year undergraduate
introductory courses, classes may be large –
as many as 500 students. Rotational, the next
level, is applied when two instructors, usually
from the same department, create a course and
split the lecture content. The format is suited
for later years of a bachelor’s program. For
the most evolved style, interactive teaching,
instructors work together to plan and create a
course and blend content from the start. Such
methods are appropriate for upper divisions
and at the master’s level (van Amelsvoort et
al., 2010).
A similar model, interdisciplinary teaching,
takes place when scholars from two or more
disciplines, subdisciplines or professions
come together and integrate their unique perspectives (Davis, 1995; Smith Ducoffe et al.,
2006). Integration is particularly important in
interdisciplinary courses, as it is necessary for
instructors not only to present material from
their different areas, but also to weave the
proficiencies together and demonstrate how
they are linked. Integration can be placed on a
continuum, from courses taught with subjects
in silos to the other extreme, where practices
are related and shown to enhance one another
(Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006).
More than one instructor may be necessary
to effectively integrate material, and interdisciplinary courses are commonly team-taught
(Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006). Team teaching
can be ranked based on collaboration. At one
extreme are courses that are planned jointly
but taught separately, and on the other end
are courses planned and taught together. Collaboration is positively related to integration:
Summer 2016
that is, the more collaboration the more integration. Studies have shown the higher the
perceived amount of integration, the more
positive the course rating (Smith Ducoffe et
al., 2006).
Team teaching is a major commitment for
those involved, including faculty, administration and staff. It takes more time and effort
than teaching alone (George & Davis-Wiley,
2000; Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006; Sorensen
& Wittmer, 1996), with increased planning
and coordination in deciding topics to be
covered, managing grading and directing all
other course activities. Teachers must practice
or learn new skills, develop joint pedagogical strategies and manage their own egos
(George & Davis-Wiley, 2000; Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006). Like most group efforts,
teaching teams must build trust, communicate
effectively, foster an open climate and resolve
conflicts (Bakken, Clark & Thompson, 1998;
Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006; Sorensen & Wittmer, 1996). In addition, Armstrong (1980)
suggested that faculty may need to step outside of their individual comfort zones and
relinquish control in the classroom (Smith
Ducoffe et al., 2006).
Benefits of Team Teaching
Despite the challenges, team-taught courses
compare favorably with traditional, solo instructor courses (Davis, 1995; Smith Ducoffe
et al., 2006), and team teaching offers multiple benefits, some of which are summarized
below.
Reach more students. Many factors like
age, cultural background, learning potential,
learning skills, psychological readiness, motivation and outlook affect student learning.
Two teachers with different personalities and
backgrounds together are better able than one
instructor alone to address students’ various
needs, interests, attitudes and other issues
(Buckley, 2000).
More feedback. Studies have shown
that students get more feedback from teamteaching learning environments, as multiple
instructors have twice the capacities to devote
to students (Gaytan, 2010; Wadkins, Miller &
Wozniak, 2006).
More interesting and effective lectures.
Two teachers can make lectures livelier, more
engaging and more memorable (Buckley,
2000). Van Amelsvoort et al. (2010) described
how two instructors can use an interactive
format to keep lectures active and reinforce
meaningful points. One instructor can take a
leading role, while the other acts as a discussant to raise questions, provide criticisms and
make suggestions. Professors can interrupt
45
and challenge one another, involve students
in different ways and help provide relevance
to particular topics. These types of tactics
encourage students from passive to active
learning (Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006) and engage higher-order intellectual skills (Buckley,
2000).
Fosters independent thought. The exchange of two instructors can set an example
for how to use critical skills of synthesis,
analysis and evaluation, while at the same
time show respect for the material and each
other. The dialogue from professors’ unique
perspectives can illuminate that there may
be more than one right answer, encouraging
independent thought (van Amelsvoort et al.,
2010). As students join discussions and attempt to articulate their ideas, the process can
foster open self-expression, encourage active
participation, improve creativity, enhance
communication abilities and strengthen interpersonal relations (Buckley, 2000). These
particular proficiencies are especially critical
for brainstorming and critiques that are part of
the advertising and public relations strategic
and creative development process.
More holistic learning. Two teachers with
different expertise and points of view offer
interdisciplinary learning. A study of several team-taught courses at a business school
found that students rated such courses as
“more valuable” to their learning (Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006, p. 290). Others suggested
interdisciplinary learning, often associated
with team teaching, encourages holistic thinking (Auman & Lillie, 2008; Kraeplin &
Criado, 2005).
Planning Team Teaching
Planning team-teaching courses requires extra care and collaboration between professors
(Gaytan, 2010; Hammer & Giordano, 2001).
Consensus on all aspects of the course, from
topics and instructional strategies to materials and evaluations, needs to be reached
prior to the start of the class. Buckley (2000)
suggested teachers maintain their individual personalities, own classroom styles and
unique teaching techniques, and allow differences to complement one another.
In order to be part of the subject and course,
Gaytan (2010) advocated that faculty attend
all classes, sit among students and interact
with them to help with comprehension of the
material. Others proposed that instructors
not leading the lecture can provide a model
for learning by asking questions to generate
relevant responses, facilitate meaningful discussions and engage students (Hammer &
Giordano, 2001), behaviors cited to result in
46
positive student learning outcomes (Leavitt,
2006; as cited in Gaytan, 2010). Creating consistent grading standards is especially salient,
and grading rubrics are highly recommended
to avoid student confusion (Gaytan, 2010).
Team Teaching
The following provides details of the planning, implementation and assessment of two
team-taught courses offered in the School of
Communication at a private Midwestern university.
Course Design
With the goal to address the unique characteristics of creative, strategic and persuasive
print design and video commercial production, faculty in advertising and journalism
(specifically experts in design and film) created two special topic courses: 1) Design for
Advertising and Public Relations and 2) Commercial Production for Advertising and Public
Relations. An advertising/public relations professor (with over 20 years of experience at a
leading global advertising agency as a vice
president and account director) co-taught both
courses, along with an active designer in the
former and an award-winning filmmaker in
the latter. Course objectives were threefold:
• Offer courses that integrate design and multimedia broadcast
production skills with the specialty
of advertising and public relations;
• Create courses that are studentcentered, encourage independent
thinking and foster active experiential learning;
• Incorporate the university’s and
School of Communication’s missions, particularly ethics, social
justice and service learning, into
learning goals.
Course Attributes Developed Together
Literature suggested that the central idea of
team teaching, which guarantees its effectiveness, lies in two instructors both planning and
presenting a course together (van Amelsvoort
et al., 2010). With this in mind, instructors
jointly developed descriptions and learning
goals for each course, ensuring that the different disciplines were covered.
After course concepts had been approved by
the advertising/public relations and journalism faculties, the two teachers brainstormed
assignments based on learning objectives and
with specializations in mind. Textbooks were
also considered and selected at an early stage
of planning. From these parameters, the coteachers collaborated on a syllabus for about
two months during the summer through inJournal of Advertising Education
person meetings and email exchanges. Class
topics, lectures, readings, in-class activities,
assignments and tests were determined together.
In keeping with the hands-on type of learning found most effective in advertising and
public relations instruction (Stuhlfaut & Berman, 2009), assignments were project-based
and applied. Each task provided a communication challenge and required students to
actively immerse themselves in the lesson
material, take initiative and work through the
entire advertising and public relations strategic development process, from preparing
background research, identifying campaign
objectives and target audiences, developing creative briefs, to designing and filming
advertisements or videos and presenting and
selling the finished pieces.
Depending on the term, students in the
Design course worked solo to complete six
to eight projects, while in Commercial Production four or five team-based assignments
were required. Graduate students were given
additional work. Some of the projects were
for non-profit organizations and creative
competitions, such as the Super Bowl Doritos commercial contest. Grading rubrics were
created for each course that incorporated particular specialties.
Course Attributes Developed Individually
Other course content was developed individually based on expertise. While assignment
ideas were affirmed prior to the semester, both
teachers wrote directions and criteria for their
parts closer to the project’s introduction. The
design and film instructors detailed layout,
type, editing, photography, sound, music and
other technological requirements, while the
advertising/public relations faculty outlined
objectives, strategy and milestone due dates.
Instructors combined their parts into one document and continued to review details until
each was satisfied. When instructors agreed
on the specifics, one of them volunteered to
post the file to the online course portal and
make copies for distribution in class.
Similarly, instructors lectured and supervised class activities based on their
professional area. Principles of design, color,
type, space and other related topics and software instruction for InDesign, PhotoShop
and Illustrator were taught by the design
specialist, while video and broadcast production skills, such as shooting, lighting, editing,
green screen techniques and Adobe Premiere
Pro software learning, were given by the
filmmaker. In both courses the advertising
practitioner provided perspectives on creativSummer 2016
ity, branding, positioning, strategy, targeting,
creative brief design, business writing and
presentation methods. During lectures the
other instructors participated by actively listening, adding perspectives, asking questions
and offering examples.
Other Pre-Semester Coordination
Other pre-semester organization and planning
that are never a consideration when teaching
alone were necessary. Instructors contemplated class leadership styles as suggested by
Buckley (2000) and decided to share leadership roles, and follow areas of expertise to
offer their own different perspectives in lectures, critiques and discussions. Teachers also
agreed that each would attend all classes to
set an example of active learning and to fully
integrate into the course, both important characteristics for team teaching (Gaytan, 2010;
Hammer & Giordano, 2001).
Extra details, such as identifying overlapping office hours to ensure times for students
to visit with both instructors, and jointly preparing upcoming classes and grading were
established.
Method
With the goal to understand the team-teaching
experience, several semesters of two teamtaught courses, Design for Advertising and
Public Relations and Commercial Production
for Advertising and Public Relations, were analyzed. The author, a former account director
in a multinational advertising agency, cotaught both courses with creative specialists
– a designer, in the former, and a filmmaker,
in the latter. The three faculty included an African American female and Caucasian male
and female, with ages ranging from 35 to 60
years old. Two of the teachers were full time
professional-in-residence instructors, while
the third was a tenure-track professor. All had
or were currently working in industry in their
specialty areas.
Data were collected from multiple sources,
including a survey designed specifically to
gain insights about team teaching and general
university course evaluations that captured
student perceptions of the experience. In
addition, instructor reflections provide perspectives and details for the approach. The
following offers details for the team teaching
survey and general course evaluation formats.
Student Surveys
Based on the literature, several areas were
identified for investigation in a survey format.
Awareness and experience. Three questions aimed to assess awareness and experience
of team teaching. The first, “Have you ever
47
taken a course with two instructors before?”
could be answered “Yes” or “No,” and “If yes,
which ones(s)?” The second question, “What
did you notice when you registered for the
course?” offered two choices: (1) “Noticed
two instructors were listed” or (2) “Did NOT
notice two instructors were listed.” The third
inquiry, “What does team teaching do to your
interest in the course?” allowed respondents
to choose from three options: (1) “Increases
interest,” (2) “Decreases interest” or (3) “No
change in interest.”
Desirable student characteristics. An
attempt was made to identify attributes
that students find helpful in excelling in the
team-teaching environment. The literature
suggested that independently minded students
may be desirable, as they need to take direction from two professors, and the co-teaching
process itself encourages independent thought
(van Amelsvoort et al., 2010). Similarly, two
professors can model the process of synthesis,
analysis and evaluation in their instructions,
thereby helping students to use their critical skills (van Amelsvoort et al., 2010). The
process can also inspire holistic thinking (Auman & Lillie, 2008; Kraeplin & Criado, 2005)
and creativity (Buckley, 2000). To this end,
the survey inquired whether students viewed
being independent and having critical and creative skills as important traits for excelling in
a co-teaching course.
The more students participate in active
learning, the more they will gain from the
material (Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006). Inclass participation requires a certain amount
of effective communication and interpersonal
skills, as well as respect for others. While
team teaching can foster an active and engaging environment, it can also help strengthen
these particular qualities (Buckley, 2000).
Students were asked to rate how important it
was to possess the attributes of active participation, good communication, interpersonal
skills and having respect for others in order to
excel in this type of atmosphere.
Students were asked to select the three
most crucial characteristics for students out of
the seven key qualities previously reviewed
(independent, critical skills, creative, active
participation, good communicator, interpersonal skills and respectful). Specifically, the
survey inquired: “What characteristics of
a student are needed for a successful teamteaching environment? Please select the top
3.”
Desirable teacher characteristics. The
team teaching model may not be for everyone (Wadkins et al., 2006), and the literature
48
describes attributes faculty members should
possess in order to be effective in co-teaching situations. Smith Ducoffe and colleagues
(2006) considered team teaching based on
collaboration and posited that more collaboration increases student ratings of the course.
When teaching jointly, professors must be
good communicators with one another and
with students, and work through problems
and issues as they arise to keep courses moving (Bakken et al., 1998; Smith Ducoffe et al.,
2006; Sorensen & Wittmer, 1996). Students
were asked to rate the importance of faculty’s
ability to communicate and collaborate.
The key to fruitful collaboration is being organized, respectful and trusting. When
working with a co-teacher, consideration
needs to be given to the partner’s perspectives, schedule and plans, different than when
teaching alone, when one may be able to
decide at the last minute the lecture topic or
assignment. Respecting the co-teacher and his
or her efforts, opinions, style and time, makes
for effective collaboration. As in any group,
building trust is also important (Bakken et al.,
1998; Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006; Sorensen &
Wittmer, 1996).
A number of studies proposed that team
teaching takes more time and effort in planning and coordinating courses (e.g., George
& Davis-Wiley, 2000; Smith Ducoffe et al.,
2006; Sorensen & Wittmer, 1996). The additional efforts required compared to teaching
solo suggest that a co-teaching instructor is
committed to his or her work as an educator.
Although it may take extra time, learning to
weave specialties in with another area, learning new skills and stepping outside of one’s
comfort zone may make co-teaching more
exciting (Armstrong, 1980; Smith Ducoffe et
al., 2006). This also implies that team-teaching professors require the ability to adapt and
be open-minded, both while preparing the
course and in the classroom (Bakken et al.,
1998; Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006; Sorensen &
Wittmer, 1996). For these concepts, students
were asked if committed, adaptable and openminded were key qualities for team-teaching
professors.
On the other hand, as professors are experts
and scholars in their respective fields, sharing
in preparation and classroom lectures may be
difficult (Armstrong, 1980). More than one
researcher has suggested that instructors must
handle their own egos when team teaching
(e.g., George & Davis-Wiley, 2000; Smith
Ducoffe et al., 2006), and their ability to do
so was the final attribute students evaluated.
In summary, students were asked: “What
characteristics of a professor are needed for
a successful team-teaching environment?
Please select the top 3.” The list provided nine
different characteristics: collaborative, good
communicator, committed, adaptable, openminded, organized, respectful, trusting and
manages his/her own ego.
Style considerations and contradictions.
The literature recommended that co-teachers
consider instruction styles when planning
collaborative courses and that each maintain
their individual personalities and classroom
techniques, and work to complement one
another (Buckley, 2000). The concept of
teaching style variations was measured with
the following question and answer options:
“In this arrangement, which do you think is
more important?” (1) “Teaching styles of each
professor should be the same;” (2) “Teaching
styles of each professor should be different;”
or (3) “Teaching styles of each professor don’t
matter.”
Acknowledging the danger of contradicting
one another in the classroom, the survey directly inquired: “Have there been times when
the two professors contradicted one another?
If yes, please explain.”
Value perceptions. Team-taught courses
were found to be valuable in a study at a
business school (Smith Ducoffe et al., 2006).
Students’ value perception of the co-teaching
experience was operationalized by asking
them to rate their level of agreement on a
Likert-type 5-point scale (“Strongly disagree”
to “Strongly agree”) with four statements:
(1) “Having two professors teach a single
course is unusual;” (2) “The team-teaching
approach serves students’ needs;” (3) “Two
professors in the same classroom for each session provides twice the value of the learning
experience;” and (4) “I would take another
team-taught course.”
Advantages and disadvantages. Two separate open-ended questions, “What are the
advantages of having two professors for a single course?” and “What are the disadvantages
of having two professors for a single course?”
allowed students to write thoughts about their
experiences in the team-taught courses.
Demographics. Lastly, basic demographics
were captured, including year in school (freshman through graduate), major (advertising/
public relations, journalism, communication
studies, film and digital media, graduate or
other) and gender.
The survey was administered four times
over two academic years (fall 2013 to spring
2015) when the two courses, Design for
Advertising and Public Relations and ComSummer 2016
mercial Production for Advertising and Public
Relations, were offered. Participation was
voluntary and 48 students enrolled in classes
at the time completed questionnaires. Representation from the two courses is equally split.
Females (54%) slightly outnumbered males
across both classes and all four semesters.
Seniors (38%) represented the largest proportion, followed by juniors (29%) and graduates
(25%), with sophomores (8%) making up the
balance. Slightly more than half (54%) the
students were advertising/public relations majors, with graduate studies (25%) in second
place. Film and digital media (13%), communication studies (6%) and journalism (2%)
concentrations also were represented.
Course Evaluations
At the end of the semester students are expected to appraise courses via an online
questionnaire system. While not mandatory,
the university sends multiple email messages
strongly encouraging students to complete the
form. Responses used in the analysis came
from the open-ended request for students to
“Use the space provided in the text area below
for your comments.”
Findings
With the specific purpose of learning about
students’ perceptions of team-teaching efforts,
two team-taught courses were studied over
two years. Multiple sources of evidence were
used in the evaluation, including specifically
designed surveys, qualitative responses from
general university course evaluations and instructor reflections.
Awareness and experience. For most
(83%) students, these were their first teamtaught courses. Nearly all (90%) students
indicated that they had noticed two instructors
were listed when enrolling in the class. When
asked if the team-teaching method made them
increase, decrease or have no change in interest, two thirds reported that it increased
their interest, while 31% believed it made no
change in their interest level for the course.
Desirable student and teacher characteristics. Two questions attempted to capture
students’ perceptions for attributes that result
in successful team teaching. For characteristics of students, respondents were asked
to select the three most significant qualities
from a list of seven traits. A little more than
two thirds of the participants suggested that
students need to actively participate (69%)
and be good communicators (67%). Being
respectful (54%) was the third most popular,
and having interpersonal skills (48%) followed. On the other hand, critical and creative
49
attributes (38% and 33% respectively) and
being independent (21%) were rated not as
important.
Students were also probed for specific qualities that professors needed to have in order to
be effective in team teaching. Students selected three characteristics from nine alternatives.
Ranking at the top were collaboration (71%),
being organized (54%), being a good communicator (52%) and being open-minded (44%).
Students thought that being adaptable (31%),
respectful (29%), managing his/ her own ego
(27%), committed (19%) and trusting (10%)
were not as valuable for teachers.
Style considerations and contradictions.
About half (48%) of the students believed that
each instructor’s teaching style should be different, compared to 27% who thought they
should be the same. A quarter believed that
teaching styles did not matter. Slightly more
than half (52%) reported that professors had
contradicted one another. When asked to explain, students indicated that they perceived
the contradictions as beneficial, such as: “Professors had different creative opinions about
projects,” “Differing opinions on the strength
of an ad,” “Disagreements about if something
was effective” and “What makes a good commercial/things that can improve a commercial.
But I found this helpful.”
Moreover, students identified that the
contradictions were based on the different
perspectives and expertise that instructors
brought to the class. Responses on this theme
included: “Not contradicted, but had different skills” and “Being from slightly different
backgrounds they had different opinions on
certain aspects.” Just as important, the professional consideration and delivery of the
varying viewpoints were also noticed by
students, as they wrote: “It was handled respectfully and well” and “But only for the
sake of a good debate.”
Value perceptions. Students were split on
whether having two professors was unusual.
Half the students agreed or strongly agreed,
23% neither agreed nor disagreed, and 25%
disagreed. However, when asked to consider
if two instructors served student needs, a
large proportion (88%) of students agreed or
strongly agreed. Additionally, the majority
(66%) indicated that the team-taught courses supplied students with twice the value of
their learning experience. And 90% agreed or
strongly agreed with the statement that they
would take another team-taught course.
Advantages. Students were asked to describe advantages of having two professors
instruct a single course. Comments can be
50
grouped into three themes: appreciating different perspectives, reaching more students
with a variety of backgrounds and styles, and
creating a more interesting class.
Many student statements acknowledged
each instructor’s different views, such as:
“Teachers have different backgrounds – allow students to learn from 2 frames of mind,”
“You get 2 perspectives on everything. Each
professor brings something different to the table” and “You receive even more knowledge
on a subject from two different experiences
and backgrounds and there’s enough to go
around.”
A second theme was how the two professors offered alternative styles, personalities
and backgrounds to help foster a connection
in some way with individual students. Buckley (2000) suggested that due to variations in
instructor demographics and personalities, together they are better able than just a single
instructor to reach more students. In this case,
the students wrote: “Double the knowledge,
one is likely to teach in a manner closely related to your learning style,” “There is more
help and individual time” and “With two
professors . . . one professor’s teachings may
click with you better than the others.”
Students also expressed in several remarks
how the two teachers created an engaging and
interesting class. The following comments fall
into this category: “Each one is specialized in
his or her area of subject, so the class is very
enriching,” “Students benefit from the knowledge that each professor brings to the table.
Varying teaching styles keep students interested” and “Both professors bring their expertise
to the subject matter. Not every student’s major is the same, so those different perspectives
are great!”
Disadvantages. When asked to list disadvantages of having two professors for a single
course, seven of the 48 students wrote “None”
or left the question blank. Of those who
provided a reply, instead of citing specific examples, students wrote about the possibility
of contradictions, as in: “If the two professors
cannot get along then it can affect their teaching abilities,” “If teachers couldn’t cooperate/
don’t communicate well it could lead to confusion for students” and “They might grade
differently.”
There were a few specific criticisms, including “More work,” “Needing to hear back
from both when questions outside of [the]
classroom arise, or needing to wait for professors to consult one another for answer[s] to
questions” and “Sometimes opinions conflict,
making the student unclear about how to imJournal of Advertising Education
prove his/her work.”
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to better understand the team-teaching experience, with
a goal to improve collaboration efforts that
contribute to the quality of student knowledge
and learning. Team-taught courses are not
very common, but they can be particularly relevant and can offer an effective approach for
advertising and public relations instruction.
The instructors’ intent was to create industrylike practices and standards in the classroom
through project-based and applied assignments, multi-tasking schedules and different
professional perspectives for two team-taught
courses: Design for Advertising and Public
Relations and Commercial Production for Advertising and Public Relations.
The evidence of student sentiments found
in responses from a custom-designed survey about team teaching and general course
evaluations in this study reveals the benefits
of team teaching in practice as outlined in
the literature, including reaching more students, providing more feedback, giving more
interesting and effective lectures, fostering
independent thought, encouraging holistic
learning and modeling industry. In addition,
instructor reflections reinforce these and uncover other positive qualities of the team
teaching model.
Benefits of Team Teaching in Practice
Reach more students. Through the collaborative courses faculty were able to reach
more students, a benefit of team teaching, according to Buckley (2000). Student comments
previously mentioned, as well as, “Having a
variety of opinions. Having a greater opportunity for engagement” and “…one professor’s
teachings may click with you better than the
others,” exemplify the influence.
Although courses were advertising classes,
about half the students were from other majors, such as communication studies, film,
journalism and digital media and storytelling, and they benefited from learning about
the advertising and public relations creative
development process and career prospects.
Gaining new insight and inspiration from the
courses, some of these non-advertising majors
later took advertising creative courses as electives, interviewed for entry-level positions at
advertising agencies and started their careers
in the business, including as assistant producers. Others assisted the author on advertising
research projects. None of these relationships
and opportunities would have been made
without the dual nature of the course.
Summer 2016
More feedback. Team-taught courses have
also been shown to accomplish more, especially in offering students additional feedback
(Gaytan, 2010; Wadkins et al., 2006). Pertinent
student survey comments like “Get double the
attention as well as two different experiences
brought into the classroom per each professor’s background,” “More resources, multiple
opinions,” “Different opinions” and “More
opinions,” reveal the impact the multiple instructors made in each course.
More interesting and effective lectures.
Not only did students report that they received
more attention, but they also seemed to find
courses more interesting, a condition that
encourages higher-level learning (Buckley,
2000). “Varying teaching styles keep students
interested,” “A very interesting class that provides students an opportunity to add good
work to their reels, while learning the basic
fundamentals of advertising” and “Each one
is specialized in his or her area of subject, so
the class is very enriching” are student comments that paint a picture of their perceptions
for how instructors aimed to provide interesting and relevant lectures.
Fostering independent thought. The different viewpoints and the engaging nature
of the class recognized by students were
conscious attempts by the faculty to encourage independent thought, as outlined by van
Amelsvoort and colleagues (2010). The critiques and brainstorming that uncovered
multiple solutions to a single task were ways
for students to practice self-expression and
creativity. Several students used the word
“creative” in their survey and course evaluation comments, such as “It increases the value
of the learning experience and allows for creative thinking” and “I enjoyed getting the
chance to be creative and learn a little more
about design.”
Holistic learning and modeling industry. Students mentioned in surveys that each
professor provided a different expertise.
Interdisciplinary learning can encourage
holistic thinking (Auman & Lillie, 2008;
Kraeplin & Criado, 2005), and in these
courses students identified and valued the different perspectives that instructors brought
to classes. Respondents wrote: “Students get
two different perspectives of the same field,”
“I get to learn different things from two different professors,” “This course combines two
fields, so having two professors is absolutely
necessary” and “Different backgrounds +
work experience allowed for increased learning in the industry, & helped simulate [a]
professional work environment.”
51
Interdisciplinary courses are cited to better
model industry practice (Gaytan, 2010; Smith
Ducoffe et al., 2006) and general evaluation
thoughts reinforced this: “While at first this
class focused on theory, terminology, and program use, the majority of the class was projects
that mimicked real life assignments that are
salient to my major” and “[G]reat course and
[I] appreciated the breadth of knowledge both
professors were able to bring to the table. [It]
aided the presentation of material and learning
so that the students can bring this knowledge
into a professional setting.”
These findings are important considering
that instructors pondered how to present different opinions in the classroom and at first
were careful to not disagree with each other.
However, as the semesters progressed and
instructors became more familiar with each
other’s teaching styles, they realized it was
not only necessary, but also better to disagree
and offer various perspectives, analyses and
justifications in a respectful and professional
manner.
Stepping Outside Your Comfort Zone
Instructors met regularly after each semester to reflect on class results. The experience
revealed that while instructors were of different generations, backgrounds, ethnicities and
genders, all have similar challenges. The team
teaching approach helped all to become better
teachers and acquire more knowledge within
and beyond their own specialties.
By working through syllabi, lesson plans
and grading, as well as observing others in the
classroom, instructors gained different teaching methods and transferred those to their
solo-taught courses. Instructors also could be
better teachers knowing the unique attributes
and what is acceptable and unacceptable in
each area, such as grammar, punctuation
and other writing styles, and the scripted and
staged nature of advertisements compared to
the objectivity of journalism, documentaries
and film.
Learning about the other practice area also
forced instructors to step outside their comfort zone, as suggested by Armstrong (1980)
and Smith Ducoffe et al. (2006), and provided
opportunities to advance their specialties. The
designer has developed advertising campaigns
to brand and bring awareness to the School
of Communication and other organizations,
worked with students on branding, advertising, Web sites and portfolios, and enhanced
her Pinterest account with a section devoted to
creative advertisement design. The filmmaker
has reviewed thousands of international commercials, researched the advertising business,
nurtured voiceover and other talent for student
52
use, forged career opportunities and learned
about current trends. He has transferred his
multi-award winning filmmaking skills to create spec commercials for potential clients and
contests.
The filmmaker also has introduced brand
journalism, a growing area that “. . . allows
businesses to target customers with useful,
tailored editorial content while promoting
their brand, values, and products” (Cole
& Greer, 2013, p. 673), to his journalism
courses. As companies see the advantages for
creating their own media to target consumers,
not only will there be more opportunities for
trained journalists, but it will be important for
students to learn that while taking a position
in a story may be different than the traditional
objectivity of journalism, the communication
still needs to be transparent and accurate. As a
consequence of learning about advertising in
the co-taught course, the instructor is able to
lead students on current industry trends and
practices with ethical standards.
Limitations and Future Studies
A limitation to this study is that it is based
on student surveys and evaluations from
two courses over two years and only in one
university. Continuing the survey research
could provide a larger sample and a crosstabulation analysis could compare perception
differences by major. Additional explorations
could review team teaching across the university or even the United States to identify
the colleges, schools and departments employing the approach, detail the methods and
instructional styles, and review assessments
of effectiveness and learning outcomes. These
team-taught courses could also be compared
to those taught by single instructors to note
any perception or learning outcome similarities or differences.
In-depth interviews of students could also
be conducted to gain deeper understanding of
their perceptions of team teaching. Particular aspects of the approach could be probed,
including how co-teaching helped in student
learning and what they specifically liked and
disliked about the approach.
Conclusion
While new sophisticated technology has allowed nearly anyone with a smartphone
or other mobile device can take pictures
and videos to upload to Facebook and YouTube, communication practitioners will need
to have these skills at a professional level
(Beard & Tarpenning, 2001). In addition,
multinational advertising and public relations businesses will likely continue to have
specialized departments with unique technolJournal of Advertising Education
ogy and software that will need to collaborate
with one another. The team teaching model
attempts to bring together the various perspectives of creative, production, planning
and account management, and show how they
collaborate to achieve a common goal, which
makes these courses important.
However, co-teacher arrangements are unusual. Dedicating two professors to teaching
in the same classroom can be difficult for
administrators to manage and, as they must
cover courses with a limited budget and be
fair to faculty, team-taught courses bring up
multiple issues. Primarily, do courses count
for one or half a course and will online course
portals and systems accommodate two or
more instructors? Despite the challenges, the
team teaching method helps student learning,
reflects industry, provides opportunities for
faculty development and is an example of a
university’s commitment to being innovative
and progressive in its curriculum. Advertising
and public relations are complex practices, as
they are creative and multi-disciplined, and
therefore teaching courses on the subject is
just as complex. Team teaching is one style
that can help better prepare the next generation of these professionals with the critical,
analytical, creative and thoughtfulness necessary to be successful in communication
careers.
References
Armstrong, F. H. (1980). Faculty development through interdisciplinarity. Journal of
General Education, 32(1), 52-63.
Auman, A., & Lillie, J. (2008). An evaluation
of team teaching models in a media convergence curriculum. Journalism & Mass
Communication Educator, 62(4), 360-75.
Bakken, L., Clark, F. L., & Thompson, J.
(1998). Collaborative teaching: Many joys,
some surprises, and a few worms. College
Teaching, 46(4), 154-57.
Beard, F. K., & Tarpenning, D. (2001). Teaching TV advertising creative using digital
video on the desktop. Journal of Advertising Education, 5(1), 23-32.
Beard, F. K., & Yang, A. (2011). Choosing
and evaluating digital and online media: A
conceptual/instructional model. Journal of
Buckley, F. J. (2000). Team teaching: What,
why, and how? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cole II, J. T., & Greer, J. D. (2013). Audience
response to brand journalism: The effect of
frame, source, and involvement. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,
90(4), 673-90.
Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary courses
Summer 2016
and team teaching: New arrangements for
learning. Phoenix, AZ: American Council
on Education and the Oryx Press.
Gaytan, J. (2010). Instructional strategies to
accommodate a team-teaching approach.
Business Communication Quarterly, 73(1),
82-87.
George, M. A., & Davis-Wiley, P. (2000).
Team teaching a graduate course: Case
study: A clinical research course. College
Teaching, 48(2), 75-80.
Hammer, E. Y., & Giordano, P. J. (2001). Dual-gender team-teaching human sexuality:
Pedagogical and practical issues. Teaching
of Psychology, 28(2), 132-33.
Kraeplin, C., & Criado, C. A. (2005). Building
a case for convergence journalism curriculum. Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator, 60(1), 47-56.
Leavitt, M. C. (2006). Team teaching: Benefits and challenges. Speaking of Teaching,
16(1), 1-4. Retrieved from https://web.
stanford.edu/dept/CTL/Newsletter/teamteaching.pdf.
Parada, P., & Franch, J. (2008). Team teaching. In P. Mårtensson, M. Bild, & K. Nilsson
(Eds.), Teaching and learning at business
schools: Transforming business education
(pp. 47-62). Aldershot, UK: Gower Publishing Company.
Smith Ducoffe, S. J., Tromley, C. L., &
Tucker, M. (2006). Interdisciplinary, teamtaught, undergraduate business courses:
The impact of integration. Journal of Management Education, 30(2), 276-94.
Sorensen, J. E., & Wittmer, D. P. (1996). Stage
2: Designing team-taught transdisciplinary
courses – Where do we begin? Journal of
Management Education, 20(4), 422-34.
Stuhlfaut, M. W. (2007). How creative are
we?: The teaching of creativity theory and
training. Journal of Advertising Education,
11(2), 49-59.
Stuhlfaut, M. W., & Berman, M. (2009). Pedagogic challenges: The teaching of creative
strategy in advertising courses. Journal of
van Amelsvoort, M., van Wijk, C., & den
Ouden, H. (2010). Going Dutch or joining forces? Some experiences with team
teaching in the Netherlands. Business Communication Quarterly, 73(1), 96-101.
Wadkins, T., Miller, R. L., & Wozniak, W.
(2006). Team teaching: Student satisfaction
and performance. Teaching of Psychology,
33(2), 118-20.
53
From Introducing the World Wide Web
to Teaching Advertising in the Digital Age:
A Content Analysis of the Past Twenty Years
of the Journal of Advertising Education
Elizabeth C. Crawford, North Dakota State University
Emory S. Daniel Jr., North Dakota State University
David K. Westerman, North Dakota State University
Abstract
For 20 years, the Journal of Advertising Education (JAE) has “toiled in the vineyards of advertising academe” to become the primary venue for advertising education scholarship (Johnson,
1996, p. 3). The chronology of the journal has seen many changes in the way advertising professors and instructors educate their students about various topics in advertising. We explored the
last 20 years of literature in JAE. A content analysis revealed patterns in areas such as topical
focus, methods, authorship and Carnegie classifications of university authors. The study also
compared JAE’s data with two other journals that have a partial focus on advertising education. The study sets the stage for an exploration of new scholarship for JAE’s next 20 years.
You hold in your hands a piece of advertising education history.
(From the first issue of the Journal of Advertising Education, Keith Johnson, 1996, p. 3)
Introduction
Twenty years ago, the Advertising Division
of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC)
launched the first journal to focus exclusively on teaching advertising (Marra & Avery,
1996). Since its beginning in the spring of
1996, the Journal of Advertising Education’s
(JAE) goal was to “help advertising faculty
teach” (Marra & Avery, 1996, p. 4). James
Marra and Jim Avery, the AEJMC Advertising
Division heads who helped launch the journal,
stated that before the first issue of JAE was
published, “advertising education never could
claim its own medium to embrace and then
assist, guide, and refine the lofty mission of
teaching” (Marra & Avery, 1996, p. 4).
Since its first edition, journal contributors
have explored a range of topics, and JAE has
been publishing research in various areas of
advertising education, including media planning, creative, account planning, marketing,
student competitions, curriculum, and employment and internships. Contributors also
have explored how pedagogical innovations
can be applied to advertising education. In addition to exploring an array of topics, JAE has
embraced a variety of methods, ranging from
surveys and quasi-experimental studies to interviews and case studies.
54
JAE is a peer-reviewed scholarly publication that addresses issues related to instruction,
curriculum and leadership in advertising education. The journal is unique because it has
always been self-published by the AEJMC
Advertising Division. Advertising professors,
administrators and graduate students in the
United States constitute the journal’s audiences (JAE, n. d.).
This study’s objective is to examine JAE’s
20 years of contributions to advertising education research, while also providing an in-depth
look at the research trends and practices
that have shaped the journal with regard to
methods, authorship and content focus. This
article will also explore the dynamics of the
institutions and authors who have made this
journal a resource for advertising educators.
To achieve these goals, this research reviews
20 years of JAE content inductively to identify
research trends. Then, the study quantitatively
content analyzes JAE according to research
topic, method, Carnegie Classification and
authorship practice. The analysis concludes
by comparing JAE with its peer publications.
Literature Review
Since 1996, JAE’s first year of publication,
the advertising profession and, consequently,
the practices in advertising education have
rapidly evolved. JAE content has kept pace
with this evolution on several fronts. Kim,
Hayes, Avant and Reid (2014) analyzed advertising research trends from 1980-2010
that parallel trends in advertising practice.
The most frequently studied areas in the field
included advertising practice, effects, social
issues, content and methodology. Although
Web-focused research has recently increased
in popularity, advertising scholars have traditionally focused on print media analysis (Kim
et al., 2014). JAE was quick to adapt to Webbased media innovations, with many articles
exploring Internet-related issues in its earliest
years (Barnes, 1996; Everett, Siegel & Marchant, 1999; Frisby, 2000). JAE is distinct in its
methodological innovation and diversity. JAE
embraces a variety of qualitative methodologies, including interviews, textual analysis
and personal narratives, although advertising
and marketing research tends to be primarily
empirically and quantitatively focused (Kim
et al., 2014).
In addition to matching their research to
industry trends and being quick to innovate,
advertising professors publishing in JAE also
work to establish state-of-the-art industrycentered curricula and coursework. JAE has a
history of publishing articles on teaching industry-related skills as they apply to creative
(Barnes & Lloyd, 1997; Beard & Tarpenning,
2001; Blakeman & Haley, 2005; Duke, 2001;
Habib, 2015; Johnson & Jones, 2010; Robbs,
2010; Stuhlfaut, 2007), media (Kim & Patel,
2012; Kinsky, 2015; Martin, 2002; Slater,
Robbs & Lloyd, 2002), account planning
(Lavery, 2000; Morrison, Christy & Haley,
2003), internships and employment (Kendrick & Fullerton, 2002; Kendrick & Fullerton,
2003; Maynard & Saewitz, 2008; McMillan, Sheehan, Heinemann & Frazier, 2001;
Perlmutter & Fletcher, 1999; Roznowski &
Wrigley, 2003; Taylor & Sheehan, 1997; Yoo
& Morris, 2015) and student competitions
(Fullerton, Kendrick & Frazier, 2009; Marra,
Avery & Grabe, 1997; Parker, 2000; Spiller &
Marold, 2015; Weir, 1999).
Although skills instruction creates industry
relevance, one’s teaching methods and techniques are also critical to effective advertising
education. Many articles in JAE also apply
various pedagogical techniques and trends
to advertising instructional methods. Topics
of interest included teamwork and collaborative learning (Bichard, Roberts & Sutherland,
2000; Kim, Baek & Kim, 2011; Robbs &
Gronstedt, 1997; Treise, Wagner, Minter &
Correll, 2004; White & Smith, 2009), experiential learning (Gale & Kreshel, 2006; Greene,
Summer 2016
2010; Lewis, 2010; Rosenkrans, 2006; Scovotti & Spiller, 2009), using technology in
instruction (Barnes, 1996; Bovinet & Elcombe, 1999; Caravella, Ekachai, Jaeger &
Zahay, 2009; Everett et al., 1999; Grau, 2007;
Hettche & Clayton, 2012; Kim, 2012; Quesenberry, Saewitz & Kantrowitz, 2014; Wood,
Wetsch, Solomon & Hudson, 2009), evaluation and assessment (Hachtmann, Mitchell &
Shipley, 2009; McCain & Miller, 2013; Reber,
Frisby & Cameron, 2003; Rosenkrans, 2006;
Sitz & Thayer, 1996), service learning (Grow
& Wolburg, 2005; Zwarun, 2007), diversity
and inclusiveness (Chambers, 2003; Rios,
2003; Slater, 2003; Treise et al., 2004) and
many other relevant topics.
The current stream of scholarship in JAE is
distinct in its more critical approach to studying advertising educators and students. For
instance, research by Yoo and Morris (2015)
stated that one of the key areas that students
look for in the advertising curriculum is major/
internship relevancy. To create this relevancy,
it is important that advertising professors’ research and teaching parallels current industry
practice and trends. There are a variety of
ways to cultivate industry/instruction parallels. From recognizing the changes that Web
2.0 and 3.0 tools have generated in advertising through user-generated content such as
blogs, Facebook, Twitter, wikis and consumer
reviews (Eckman, 2010; Myers, Czepiec,
Roxas & Whitson, 2011; Quesenberry et al.,
2014; Scovotti & Jones, 2011), integrating the
theory and “soft skills” that advertisers use
(Windels, Mallia & Broyles, 2013), addressing the needs of IMC agencies (Beachboard &
Weidman, 2013), to approaching advertising
effect issues from a critical perspective (Slater, 2003), JAE’s research is continuing to help
advertising professors create pedagogically
sound and industry-relevant curricula.
JAE also publishes research that explores
advertising education from the students’ perspective. Authors publishing in JAE have been
active in assessing educational trends and career paths that appeal to advertising students
(Kendrick & Fullerton, 2003), how students
interact with a changing media landscape
(Kim & Patel, 2012) and where advertising
education falls short (Stanaland & Helm,
2009) and can improve (Neill & Schauster,
2015).
Research Questions
This overview of articles in JAE and previous
analyses of education and mass communication scholarship (Ductor, 2015; Franceschet &
Costantini, 2010; Musambira & Nesta, 2010;
55
Riffe & Freitag, 1997) suggests several avenues for further analysis. Building from the
inductive historical review of trends in advertising education and research in JAE, the
following research questions were developed
to more completely assess the history of publications in JAE, compare this history to other
relevant journals and to help assess where the
field can go in the future:
RQ1: Which topics are most frequently
published in JAE?
RQ2: Which methods are most frequently used in research published in
JAE?
RQ3: What are the Carnegie Classifications of the colleges and universities
that JAE authors are affiliated with?
RQ4a: Which authors publish most frequently in JAE?
RQ4b: What are the Carnegie Classifications of the institutions of the most
frequently published authors in JAE?
RQ5: What is the nature of research collaboration and authorship in JAE (solo
author or multiple authors, universityaffiliated authors or industry-affiliated
authors)?
RQ6: How does JAE compare with
other journals that publish academic articles focusing on advertising education
(Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator and Marketing Education
Review)? More specifically, how does
JAE compare in terms of research
topic, authorship and method?
Method
This study content analyzed a population of
articles that included every full-length refereed article (i.e. excluding book reviews,
invited commentary) published in JAE from
spring 1996 to spring 2015. Article-by-article
examination by each author yielded a total of
167 refereed articles within a 20-year period.
To address RQ6, this study’s authors also examined Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator (JMCE) (n = 31) and Marketing
Education Review (MER) (n = 16). To examine JMCE and MER, authors conducted
an EBSCOhost search by journal title. Along
with Boolean phrases in the abstract containing “Advertising,” the researchers collected
a sample of the relevant articles that covered
advertising education specifically.
Two types of coding were used within the
content analysis of JAE, JMCE and MER.
The first round of coding focused on variables
within the articles. Two coders were trained
to analyze five different variables in the re56
search articles’ text. Basic coding information
included the year of publication, how many
authors wrote the article (solo or multiple)
and the author(s) type of affiliation (university, industry, university and industry, or other),
methodology and article focus. These classifications were quantified into coding categories
and transferred into an SPSS file. The coders
also explored the focus (Table 1) and method
(Tables 2 and 3) of the articles published in
JAE.
Second, JAE-published authors were coded
into the system. The variables included the
authors’ names, the number of times they
were published in the journal, their university
at the time of their publication, the Carnegie
Classification of the author’s university, the
enrollment of the university and the type of
program within the university. These classifications were quantified into coding categories
and transferred into an SPSS file. The 2010
version of The Carnegie Classification of
Institutions of Higher Education (n. d.) established the nature of the authors’ institutional
affiliations. The Carnegie Classification system accounts for institutional characteristics
such as most advanced degree offered, financial resources, and institutional reputation
and rankings (Musambira & Nesta, 2010).
The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of
Higher Education (n. d.) contains six levels,
five of which include multiple categories. The
categories found (including their frequencies) are listed in Table 6. The first level is
research or doctoral institutions, the second
level includes master’s universities, and baccalaureate colleges and universities form the
third level. The fourth level is composed of
fourteen types of associate colleges. Special
focus institutions constitute the fifth level and
include nine varieties of institutions offering
degrees in a grouping of related fields or in
a single focus area. The sixth and final level
is formed from Tribal college members of the
American Indian Higher Education Consortium (Musambira & Nesta, 2010; “Almanac,”
2011). JAE sometimes included authors
who were not affiliated with institutions in
the Carnegie Classification system. These
categories were labeled as Businesses and Organizations (e.g. Google, AAF), International
Universities (e.g., Queensland University of
Technology, University of Korea) and Other.
The data for these categories were gathered
and analyzed in Microsoft Excel.
Both coders were trained to code for article
focus and method. Once reaching agreement
on the categories, the authors each coded the
same 15% of the articles (n = 24) to test reliJournal of Advertising Education
Table 1:
JAE Article Focus by Decade
Article Focus
1st Decade
Frequency
1st Decade
Percentage
2nd Decade
Frequency
2nd Decade
Percentage
Overall
Frequency
Overall
Percentage
Pedagogy
18
27%
29
29%
47
28%
Curriculum
6
9%
11
11%
17
10%
Media planning
2
3%
15
15%
17
10%
Creative
10
15%
7
7%
17
10%
Internship
7
10%
9
9%
16
10%
IMC/ Strategic
communication
4
6%
10
10%
14
9%
Diversity
7
10%
5
5%
12
7%
Student competition
4
6%
5
6%
9
6%
Account planning
5
8%
2
2%
7
4%
Other
2
3%
3
3%
5
3%
Marketing
0
0%
3
3%
3
2%
Account
management
1
1%
0
0%
1
1%
Total
66
100%
99
100%
165
100%
Table 2:
JAE Methods by Decade: Qualitative
1st Decade
Frequency
1st Decade
Percentage
2nd Decade
Frequency
2nd Decade
Percentage
Overall
Frequency
Overall
Percentage
Narrative
6
9%
18
18%
24
14%
Case study
12
18%
9
9%
21
13%
Method
Interview
8
12%
6
6%
14
8%
Lit review
3
4%
5
5%
8
5%
Observation
0
0%
6
6%
6
4%
Textual analysis
0
0%
3
3%
3
2%
Legal/ Historical
0
0%
1
1%
1
1%
Focus group
0
0%
1
1%
1
1%
Total
29
43%
49
49%
78
48%
ability. A random number generator selected
the articles to be coded, and the authors presented their initial results to each other. They
then used a deductive approach and added
four categories. Cohen’s Kappa was calculated to determine the reliability of the individual
coding categories and the overall coding reliSummer 2016
ability of all coding categories. There was
high agreement in all categories including
year published (κ = 1.00, p < .001), quantity of
authors (κ = 1.00, p < .001), author’s overall
affiliation (κ = 1.00, p < .001), article focus (κ
= .897, p < .001) and method used (κ = .847,
p < .001). Overall reliability was also high (κ
57
= .953, p < .001), allowing the two coders to
then each code half of all the articles in the
sample (N = 167). Once coded, all of the data
were transferred from an Excel file to SPSS
software for data analysis.
Results
For the 167 articles, coding was performed
for the different areas of topical focus within the articles and the most commonly used
methods during the 20-year history of the
journal. To answer RQ1, coders examined
the areas of focus covered by JAE (See Table
1). Pedagogy yielded the largest frequency (n
= 47), making up 28% of all articles. Also,
Pedagogy yielded three additional subcategories that were broken down for further areas
of interest. Of those topics, Pedagogy with
Technology (n = 16, 9.6%) had the highest
frequency. Of the competitions mentioned
under the Student Competitions category,
the National Student Advertising Competition (NSAC) had the highest frequency (n= 5,
3%), and ECHO was mentioned twice (1.2%).
Lastly, this study looked into specific patterns
for the frequency of articles published per decade. Some of the more notable findings were
that Media Planning went from two articles
in the first decade (3%) to 15 articles in the
second decade (15%); Creative dropped from
ten articles in the first decade (15%) to seven
articles in the second decade (7%); and Diversity decreased from seven articles (11%) to
five articles (5%). It should be noted that one
issue in the first decade was specifically dedicated to diversity; otherwise, there may have
been little difference (See Table 1).
In addition to article focus, RQ2 examined
the frequencies of the methods most commonly used in the journal (See Tables 2 &
3). Surveys were the most used method, at a
frequency of 52 (31.1%). The research also
compared the patterns of methods used in the
first and second decades of the journal’s history. Tables 2 and 3 contain the full list, but the
most notable change occurred with Surveys,
which dropped from 31 articles in the first
decade (47%) to 21 articles in the second decade (21%). This decrease led to increases in
other methods, such as Experimental research
(from n = 1, 2% to n = 13, 13%) and Narratives (from n = 6, 9% to n = 18, 18%). Other
notable changes were found in Case Studies,
which dropped from twelve articles (18%) to
nine articles (9%) and Interviews, which also
dropped from eight articles (12%) to six articles (6%).
Regarding RQ3, this study examined the
authors who published in JAE over the past
58
20 years and recorded the institutions they
published for with their respective Carnegie
Classification (See Table 6). For the purposes
of this study, each school was examined using
Higher Education (n. d.) (RU/ VH, very high
research productivity and RU/ H, high research productivity). Concerning the authors
publishing in JAE, RU/ VH institutions were
the highest category at a frequency of 126
(40%). The highest frequency was based in
doctoral programs (n = 232, 75%). Although
there was little change in the two decades
(See Table 6), the most noticeable changes
came from the increase in Master’s L schools
– from 11 articles in the first decade (9.6%)
to 46 articles in the second decade (23%) –
and the decrease from RU/ VH schools, which
contained 65 articles (57%) to 61 (31%), respectively.
RQ4a and 4b addressed the authors who
were most published in JAE. For this study,
the top 15 authors (by number of times published) were examined (See Table 4). The
Carnegie affiliations of the top 15 authors paralleled the overall population, as RU/ H (n =
27, 46%) and RU/ VH (n = 23, 39%) were the
most frequently represented. Lastly, among
authors who represented institutions not associated with Carnegie Classifications, Business
and Organizations had the highest frequency
at 13 (4%).
To answer RQ5, frequencies addressed the
research collaboration among JAE’s authors.
In general, the papers accepted to JAE encouraged collaboration: as 103 (61.7%) of the
papers were co-written by multiple authors,
whereas 64 (38.3%) were solo-authored papers. RQ5 also addressed the author’s areas
of affiliation (university-affiliated author or
industry-affiliated author). The category of
Universities only contained the most manuscripts (n = 152, 91%).
RQ6 addressed two other mass communication education-centered journals: JMCE
and MER. R x K Chi Square tests were
conducted to determine if there were any
differences between JAE and the other two
journals regarding methods and article focus,
respectively. The journals remained similar
to each other in terms of methods used in
advertising education research, yielding no
significant results. The only significant result
found was between JAE and MER with respect to article focus (χ2 [12, n = 183] = 48.45,
p > .001, V* = .52). The difference in area of
focus resided in the Marketing coding category: it occurred six times in MER and three
times in JAE.
Table 3:
JAE Methods by Decade: Quantitative
Method
1st Decade
Frequency
1st Decade
Percentage
2nd Decade
Frequency
2nd Decade
Percentage
Overall
Frequency
Overall
Percentage
Survey
31
47%
21
21%
52
31%
Experiment
1
2%
13
13%
14
8%
Model development
2
3%
6
6%
8
5%
Content analysis
1
2%
6
6%
7
4%
Mixed method
2
3%
5
5%
7
4%
Total
37
57%
51
51%
88
52%
Table 4:
Top 15 Authors Published in JAE
Name
Institution
Research
Designation
Times
Published
1.
Jami Fullerton
Oklahoma State University:
Tulsa
RU/ H
10
2.
Alice Kendrick
Southern Methodist University
RU/ H
7
3.
Brett Robbs
University of Colorado: Boulder
RU/ VH
7
4.
Connie Frazier
American Advertising
Federation
Businesses and
Organizations
4
5.
Kendra Gale
University of Colorado: Boulder
RU/ VH
4
Rank
6.
Carla V. Lloyd
Syracuse University
RU/ H
4
7.
Matt Hettche
Christopher Newport University
Master’s S
3
8.
Lisa D. Spiller
Master’s S
3
9.
Mark W. Stuhlfaut
University of Kentucky
RU/ VH
3
10.
Stephen Banning
Louisiana State University
RU/ VH
3
11.
Eric Haley
University of Tennessee
RU/ VH
3
12.
Tom Weir
Oklahoma State University
RU/ H
3
13.
Beth Barnes
Syracuse University
RU/ H
3
14.
Michael J. Clayton
& American University
Master’s S &
DRU
3
15.
Terry Daugherty
University of Texas &
Vanderbilt University
RU/ VH
3
Discussion
Over the past 20 years, JAE has changed in
a variety of ways, but it has maintained its
focus in exploring current pedagogical issues
and teaching advertising students industryrelevant skills. Regarding article focus, JAE
consistently published research on pedagogiSummer 2016
cal practice, but this interest has increased even
more in the last five to ten years. Although basic advertising skills-related teaching topics,
including creative, media planning, account
planning and strategy/ marketing continue to
appear in JAE, their frequency has changed
with the times. Traditionally, creative was
59
the most frequently discussed teaching area
in JAE. However, with the increasing importance of mobile, social and Web media, media
has overtaken creative as the most popular
teaching topic or focus discussed in JAE. In
addition to creative, articles focusing on account planning and account management also
have decreased in frequency. Another area of
research that has become increasingly important is the integration between advertising,
public relations and marketing. The growing
interest in disciplinary integration is evident
in the increase in pieces on the topics of strategic communication and integrated marketing
communication. Perhaps because of the trend
toward an integrated strategic communication
or integrated marketing communication curriculum, more articles have taken a broader
focus by looking at curricular issues in advertising education.
There have been some significant changes
in the research methods used in JAE. JAE has
a strong tradition of being methodologically
diverse and inclusive, but methods of choice
have shifted over time. Over the past 20 years,
the use of surveys has declined in the realm of
quantitative research. Experiments and mixed
methods approaches are becoming more
popular. Likewise, there have been shifts in
the qualitative methods used. Observational
research, textual analysis and narratives are
becoming more popular, while the use of interviews is declining. Technological advances
may be responsible for some of these changes. Instead of talking with student informants
about advertising education, researchers can
now observe their posts on social media and
blogs.
The majority of research published in JAE
comes from faculty affiliated with researchoriented universities that are given the very
highest research designations by the Carnegie
Classification system: RU/ VH, very high research productivity and RU/ H, high research
productivity. Likewise, the most prolific authors who publish in JAE, with one exception,
come from RU/ VH and RU/ H institutions,
and the top five universities represented in
JAE are categorized as RU/ VH and RU/ H.
Of the universities sampled, University of
Colorado/Boulder had the highest representation, with 16 publications. Universities that
followed were Oklahoma State University (n
= 14), Southern Methodist University (n =
12), University of Tennessee-Knoxville (n =
11) and University of Florida-Gainesville (n
= 11). In the past ten years, the percentage
of authors affiliating with RU/ VH and RU/
H institutions has declined, though they still
60
Table 5:
JAE Top Author Institutions
by Carnegie Classification
Carnegie
Representations
Totals
Percentages
RU/ H
27
46%
RU/ VH
23
39%
Master’s S
8
14%
DRU
1
1%
Total
59
100%
produce the largest share of published manuscripts. However, among the very top authors,
the RU/ H affiliations outnumber the RU/ VH.
The RU/ H schools have also outperformed
the RU/ VH schools in AEJMC conference
presentations. This trend was attributed to
the fact that many RU/ H schools are trying
to attain RU/ VH status (Musambira & Nesta,
2010). However, it does not explain the fact
that authors from master’s level institutions
appear to be increasing their presence in JAE
as well. If current trends hold, the master’s
level institutions’ contributions to JAE could
eclipse doctoral-focused RU/ VH and RU/ H
schools. It is also interesting to note that the
number of master’s institutions (n = 728) is
more than double the number of doctoral research institutions (n = 295). In spite of JAE’s
pedagogical focus, authors affiliating with
undergraduate and teaching focused schools
were among the smallest group of authors.
To deepen the insights and broaden the scope
of their research, JAE authors might consider
collaborative partnerships with instructors
from teaching institutions in order to glean additional knowledge from alternative practices
at smaller or teaching-focused institutions.
JAE authors are highly collaborative. More
than 60% of articles published in JAE had
more than one author. Co-authorship is an efficient way to produce academic scholarship
and has been shown to increase academic
research productivity (Ductor, 2015; Franceschet & Costantini, 2010). Although it is
hardly surprising that most academic research
is created by academics, only four percent
of articles were authored by industry authors, and only 1.7% of articles were a joint
effort between an academic and an industry
professional. A variety of research cites the
importance of industry/ university research
collaboration (Anderson, 2001; Dooley &
Kirk, 2007; Junghagen, 2005; Webster & Etzkowitz, 1998) and perhaps this is something
that journals such as JAE could try to inspire
in the future. For example, maybe a special
issue could be published strictly for industry/
university collaborations.
According to Becker, Vlad and Simpson (2014), undergraduate enrollments in
mass communication have generally been
decreasing. However, enrollments in advertising and public relations specifically have
remained relatively level. The data seem to
suggest that students still see advertising and
public relations (combined and renamed strategic communication at some institutions) as
attractive major options and career paths. Understanding the skill sets that will help make
students employable is important to maintaining students’ interest in the area. Therefore,
maintaining interest in strategic communication programs will be increasingly essential to
mass communication educators.
Although JAE and its peers keep educators
up-to-date on advertising undergraduate education, neither JAE nor its peers have placed
any emphasis on studying graduate education.
This gap in research is surprising, because the
majority of the authors contributing to JAE
are affiliated with master’s or doctoral level
research institutions. Over the past ten years,
graduate enrollments in mass communication
related fields have been increasing (Simpson,
Becker & Vlad, 2014), which may reinforce
the need for more research in graduate education.
Implications and Conclusion
A 20th anniversary can be a pivotal time for
a journal, providing a special time for selfreflection and evaluation. In their study of
AEJMC convention presentations, Musambira and Nesta (2010) found that the study
of scholarly productivity in mass communication fields has been largely neglected. To
encourage academic inquiry in mass communication, it is essential to examine the research
that has been published to locate any lacunae
in the scholarship. Providing an analysis of
published scholarship helps the field identify
the research leaders, the most research-productive university programs and the direction
that academic scholarship is taking (See Table
4).
Since JAE was founded in 1996, the advertising industry has faced many changes
(Hanley & Lavery, 2008). One of the most
positive contributions that JAE has made to
advertising education is exploring the place
of technology in the advertising classroom.
JAE has explored how Web 2.0 and 3.0 and
user-generated content has changed advertising and how product-related information is
communicated (Caravella et al., 2009; Clayton, Hettche & Kim, 2014; Eckman, 2010;
Scovotti & Jones, 2011). With the advent of
social media, JAE has explored the role of
social networks in advertising education (Cronin, 2011; Eckman, 2010; Labrecque, Milne,
Phelps, Peltier, & Thompson, 2011; Muñoz
& Towner, 2010). And, JAE has addressed
the consequent changes in media planning instruction (Kim & Patel, 2012).
Table 6:
JAE Author Carnegie Classifications
Carnegie Classification
1st Decade
Frequency
1st Decade
Percentage
2nd Decade
Frequency
2nd Decade
Percentage
Overall
Frequency
Overall
Percentage
RU/ VH
65
57%
61
31%
126
40%
RU/ H
34
30%
54
27%
88
28%
Master’s L
11
9.6%
46
23%
57
18%
DRU
2
2%
16
8%
18
6%
Master’s S
0
0%
10
5%
10
3%
Master’s M
2
2%
5
3%
7
2%
Bac/ A&S
0
0%
2
1%
2
1%
Bac/ Diverse
0
0%
1
1%
1
1%
Bac/ Assoc
0
0%
1
1%
1
1%
114
100%
196
100%
310
100%
Total
Summer 2016
61
Technology will likely continue to be an
important part of JAE’s publications in the future as well. Technology can change quickly,
and Kurzweil’s (2005) Law of Accelerating
Returns would suggest that this advancement
is going to continue to accelerate, making the
next 20 years of technological growth more
bountiful than the previous 20. Although it is
hard to predict what things will look like in
20 years, some newer technologies on the horizon could be examined, such as virtual and
augmented reality systems. Technologies such
as the Oculus Rift and Microsoft’s HoloLens
will bring different mediated experiences to
consumers, necessitating research about advertising in the VR realm.
As technology changes rapidly, it will also
be important to increase focus on something
that does not change as quickly: people. This
is one way that theory can be an ever-more
important part of JAE’s articles in the future.
Theories of message response and processing,
such as dual-process models (e.g., Elaboration Likelihood Model; Petty & Cacioppo,
1981) and Exemplification Theory (Zillmann,
1999), might have a lot to offer to the study
of advertising education, and they will likely
remain relevant even in a newer technological
world.
As JAE faces the next 20 years, more articles might explore how to reach increasingly
fragmented and diverse audiences with hypercustomization messages. Students will learn
to manage brands that are no longer the sole
property of their client but the result of organization-community interaction. Although
studying creativity has decreased in JAE, creative is essential to cutting through a cluttered
media environment. Advertising is growing
increasingly complex. Teaching advertising is
becoming more challenging. JAE is poised to
play a significant role in the future of advertising education.
References
Almanac of higher education 2011: 2010 Carnegie classification of institutions of higher
education by classification category and
control. (2011, August 21). [Data set]. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. Available
at http://chronicle.com/article/2010-Carnegie-Classification/128571/.
Anderson, M. S. (2001). The complex relations between the academy and industry:
Views from the literature. Journal of
Higher Education, 72(2), 226-46. DOI:
10.2307/2649323.
Barnes, B. E. (1996). Introducing introductory advertising students to the world wide
62
web. Journal of Advertising Education,
1(1), 5-12.
Barnes, B. E., & Lloyd, C. V. (1997). Offering
a creative track in the advertising major: A
case history. Journal of Advertising Education, 2(1), 65-75.
Beachboard, M. R., & Weidman, L. M. (2013).
Client-centered skill sets: What small IMC
agencies need from college graduates. Journal of Advertising Education, 17(2), 28-38.
Beard, F. K., & Tarpenning, D. (2001). Teaching TV advertising creative using digital
video on the desktop. Journal of Advertising Education, 5(1), 23-32.
Becker, L. B., Vlad, T., & Simpson, H.
A. (2014). 2013 Annual survey of
journalism mass communication enrollments: Enrollments decline for third
consecutive year. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 69(4), 349-65. DOI:
10.1177/1077695814555432.
Bichard, S. L., Roberts, M., & Sutherland,
J. (2000). Group personality and performance: A model for managing advertising
student teams. Journal of Advertising Education, 4(2), 41-54.
Blakeman, R., & Haley, E. (2005). Tales of
portfolio schools and universities: Working
creatives’ views on preparing students for
entry-level jobs in advertising. Journal of
Bovinet, J. W., & Elcombe, R. J. (1999).
Computer simulation and an interdisciplinary approach for advertising and public
relations courses. Journal of Advertising
Education, 3(1), 17-24.
Caravella, M., Ekachai, D., Jaeger, C., & Zahay, D. (2009). Web 2.0 opportunities and
challenges for advertising educators. Journal of Advertising Education, 13(1), 58-63.
Chambers, J. (2003). Incorporating diversity
into the advertising curriculum. Journal of
Clayton, M. J., Hettche, M., & Kim, D.-H.
(2014). Moving participation beyond the
classroom: Who benefits from online social
communities? Journal of Advertising Education, 18(1), 5-13.
Cronin, J. J. (2011). Teaching integrated social network marketing communication
with a portfolio of experiential exercises
methods. Journal of Advertising Education,
15(1), 16-22.
Dooley, L., & Kirk, D. (2007). University-industry collaboration: Grafting the
entrepreneurial paradigm onto academic
structures. European Journal of Innovation
Management, 10(3), 316-32.
Ductor, L. (2015). Does co-authorship lead
to higher academic productivity? Oxford
Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 77(3),
385-407. DOI: 10.1111/obes.12070.
Duke, L. (2001). Like an idea, only better:
How do advertising educators and practitioners define and use the creative concept?
Eckman, A. (2010). It’s not new to them:
Using ning.com to enhance student engagement in the study of social Web marketing
and Web 2.0 direct response methods. Journal of Advertising Education, 14(1), 15-19.
Everett, M. W., Siegel, C. F., & Marchant, M.
J. (1999). An interdisciplinary team teaching model: A Web-based project approach
for teaching integrated marketing communication. Journal of Advertising Education,
3(2), 39-46.
Franceschet, M., & Costantini, A. (2010). The
effect of scholar collaboration on impact
and quality of academic papers. Journal of
Informetrics, 4(4), 540-53. DOI:10.1016/j.
joi.2010.06.003.
Frisby, C. M. (2000). If you build it, will they
learn? Effects of an advertising course web
site on student learning and teacher effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Education,
4(2), 17-27.
(2009). Advertising student career preferences: A national survey. Journal of
Gale, K., & Kreshel, P. J. (2006). “Involve me
and I shall understand:” Case-based teaching in advertising education. Journal of
Grau, S. L. (2007). Using blogs to facilitate
group communication and collaboration: A
constructivist learning approach. Journal of
Greene, H. (2010). Experiential learning with
direct response TV advertising. Journal of
Grow, J. M., & Wolburg, J. M. (2005). Service
learning across the curriculum: A collaboration to promote smoking cessation. Journal
Habib, S. (2015). Teaching approaches in
advertising: Creativity and technology.
17-25.
Hachtmann, F., Mitchell, N. & Shipley, L.
(2009). Adding bilateral transparency to
assessing student learning in the advertising capstone course. Journal of Advertising
Education, 13(2), 55-64.
Hanley, M., & Lavery, R. (2008). AEJMC Ad
Division report: State of the Advertising
Summer 2016
Industry 2008. Journal of Advertising Education, 12(2), 35-39
Hettche, M., & Clayton, M. J. (2012). Using social media to teach social media
advertising: How to leverage student prior
knowledge to WordPress blogs. Journal of
JAE (Journal of Advertising Education). (n.
d.). About JAE. Retrieved from: http://
journalofadvertisingeducation.org/
Johnson, K. F. (1996). Welcome to the Journal
of Advertising Education. Journal of Advertising Education, 1(1), 3.
Johnson, P. M., & Jones, S. K. (2010). Beyond
the banner: Teaching powerful creative
techniques in digital marketing. Journal of
Junghagen, S. (2005). Working with business and industry to enhance curriculum
development and student employability.
New Directions for Institutional Research,
2005(128), 69-81. DOI: 10.1002/ir.164.
Kendrick, A., & Fullerton, J. A. (2002). Employment preferences of students in the
2001 AAF National Student Advertising
Competition. Journal of Advertising Education, 6(2), 29-36.
Kendrick, A., & Fullerton, J. A. (2003). Challenging, fun and pays well: Top advertising
students describe their ideal jobs. Journal
Kim, H. (2012). The current status of digital
media education in advertising and other
communication disciplines. Journal of Advertising Education, 16(2), 27-36.
Kim, J., Baek, T. H., & Kim, D. (2011).
Quality of work and team spirit as drivers
of student peer evaluation on advertising
group project performance. Journal of Advertising Education, 15(2), 14-24.
Kim, K., Hayes, J. L., Avant, J. A., &
Reid, L. N. (2014). Trends in advertising research: A longitudinal analysis
of leading advertising, marketing, and
communication journals, 1980 to 2010.
DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2013.857620.
Kim, Y., & Patel, S. (2012). Teaching advertising media planning in a changing media
landscape. Journal of Advertising Education, 16(2), 15-26.
Kinsky, E. S. (2015). This means war: Using
an advertising war room simulation to teach
social media skills. Journal of Advertising
Education, 19(1), 29-41.
Kurzweil, R. (2005). The singularity is near:
When humans transcend biology. New
York: Viking.
Labrecque, L. I., Milne, G.R., Phelps, J. E.,
63
Peltier, J. W., & Thompson, D. (2011).
Oops, I did it again: What students need
to know about managing information in a
social media world. Journal of Advertising
Education, 15(1), 59-64.
Lavery, R. M. (2000). One design for the
account planning curriculum. Journal of
Lewis, B. K. (2010). Experiential learning and
media sales: A case study perspective. Journal of Advertising Education, 14(2), 25-35.
Marra, J. L., & Avery, J. (1996). Genesis of
the Journal of Advertising Education. Journal of Advertising Education, 1(1), 4.
Marra, J. L., Avery, J., & Grabe, M. E. (1997).
Student advertising competitions: Faculty
advisor beliefs concerning the AAF National Student Advertising Competition.
Martin, D. G. (2002). In search of the golden
mean: Impact of computer-mediated technologies on the media planning course.
Maynard, M., & Saewitz, D. (2008). The advertising internship: Tips on optimizing the
academic and business community relationship. Journal of Advertising Education,
12(2), 31-34.
McCain, J., & Miller, A. N. (2013). Evaluation
of a joint health communication campaign
simulation between an Ad/PR capstone
course and a health communication class.
5-12.
McMillan, S. J., Sheehan, K. B., Heinemann,
B., & Frazier, C. (2001). What the real
world really wants: An analysis of advertising employment ads. Journal of Advertising
Education, 5(2), 9-21.
Morrison, M., Christy, T., & Haley, E. (2003).
Preparing planners: Account planning and
the advertising curriculum. Journal of Advertising Education, 7(1), 5-20.
Muñoz, C. L., & Towner, T. L. (2010). Social
networks: Facebook’s role in the advertising classroom. Journal of Advertising
Education, 14(1), 20-27.
Musambira, G. W., & Nesta, C. (2010).
Analysis of refereed AEJMC convention
paper productivity in journalism and mass
communication. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 65(1), 56-73.
Myers, J., Czepiec, H., Roxas, J., & Whitson,
D. (2011). Teaching students self-advertising/ marketing skills in the age of social
media: Designing an experiential exercise.
64
23-29.
Parker, B. J. (2000). Putting it all together:
Effective participation in advertising competitions. Journal of Advertising Education,
4(1), 19-29.
Perlmutter, D., & Fletcher, A. D. (1999).
Feedback that fits: How experienced and
naïve students view internships. Journal of
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981).
Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: W. C.
Brown Co. Publishers.
Quesenberry, K. A., Saewitz, D., & Kantrowitz, S. (2014). Blogging in the classroom:
Using WordPress Blogs with BuddyPress
plugin as a learning tool. Journal of Advertising Education, 18(2), 5-17.
Reber, B. H., Frisby, C. M., & Cameron, G.
T. (2003). Changing direction: Assessing
student thoughts and feelings about a new
program in strategic communication. Journal of Advertising Education, 7(1), 32-46.
Rios, D. I. (2003). Diversity in communication education: The “D” word is all about
including others. Journal of Advertising
Education, 7(2), 15-16.
Riffe, D., & Freitag, A. (1997). A content
analysis of content analyses: Twenty-five
years of Journalism Quarterly. Journalism
& Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(3),
515-24.
Robbs, B. (2010). Preparing young creatives
for an interactive world: How possible is
it? Journal of Advertising Education, 14(2),
7-14.
Robbs, B., & Gronstedt, A. (1997). Incorporating team processes into the advertising
curriculum. Journal of Advertising Education, 2(1), 35-45.
Rosenkrans, G. (2006). Assessment accountability in courses that deploy advertising
competitions and experiential learning techniques. Journal of Advertising Education,
10(1), 27-38.
Roznowski, J., & Wrigley, B. J. (2003). Sign
me up! Undergraduate expectations of internship programs. Journal of Advertising
Education, 7(1), 21-31.
Scovotti, C., & Spiller, L. D. (2009). Experiential learning in capstone courses through
the Great Case Debate. Journal of Advertising Education, 13(1), 25-37.
Scovotti, C., & Jones, S. K. (2011). From Web
2.0 to Web 3.0: Implications for advertising
courses. Journal of Advertising Education,
15(1), 6-15.
Simpson, H. A., Becker, L.B., & Vlad, T.
(2014, August 6). Doctoral programs in
communication: Updated report for 20112012 graduates. A supplemental report:
Annual surveys of journalism & mass communication [report]. Retrieved from:http://
w w w. g r a d y. u g a . e d u / a n n u a l s u r v e y s /
Doctoral_Survey/Doctoral_2012/Doctoral_13_Combined.pdf.
Sitz, R. C., & Thayer, F. (1996). A survey of
faculty evaluation practices in journalism
and mass communication. Journal of Advertising Education, 1(1), 23-30.
Slater, J. S. (2003). Why diversity matters.
9-11.
Slater, J. S., Robbs, B., & Lloyd, C. B. (2002).
Teaching the advertising media-planning
course: Trying to serve two masters. Journal of Advertising Education, 6(2), 9-19.
Spiller, L., & Marold, D. (2015). Enhancing
student performance in collegiate marketing competitions: The ECHO judges’
perspectives. Journal of Advertising Education, 19(2), 30-46.
Stanaland, A., Helm, A., & Kinney, L. (2009)
Bridging the gap in IMC education: Where
is the academy falling short? Journal of Advertising Education, 13(1) 73-82.
Stuhlfaut, M. W. (2007). How creative are
we?: The teaching of creativity theory and
training. Journal of Advertising Education,
11(2), 49-59.
Taylor, R. E., & Sheehan, K. B. (1997).
Teaching job search skills to advertising
majors. Journal of Advertising Education,
2(1), 46-52.
Higher Education (n. d.). About Carnegie
Classification. Retrieved from http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/.
Treise, D., Wagner, E., Minter, L., & Correll,
L. (2004). Guidelines for accommodations:
What advertising teachers need to know
about working with learning-disabled students in team-based classes. Journal of
Webster, A., & Etzkowitz, H. (1998). Toward
a theoretical analysis of academic-industry
collaboration. In H. Etzkowitz, A. Webster
& P. Healey (Eds.), Capitalizing knowledge: New intersections of industry and
academia (pp. 47-72). Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Weir, T. (1999). The structure of AAF competition teams. Journal of Advertising
Education, 3(2), 29-38.
Summer 2016
White, A., & Smith, B. L. (2009). Effect of
discounting behaviors on the productivity
of student brainstorming groups. Journal of
Wood, N., Wetsch, L. R., Solomon, M. R.,
& Hudson, K. (2009). From interactive to
immersive: Advertising education takes a
virtual leap of faith. Journal of Advertising
Education, 13(1), 64-72.
Windels, K., Mallia, K. L., & Broyles, S. J.
(2013). Soft skills: The difference between
leading and leaving the advertising industry? Journal of Advertising Education,
17(2), 17-27.
Yoo, S.-C., & Morris, P. (2015). An exploratory study of successful advertising
internships: A survey based on paired data
of interns and employers. Journal of Advertising Education, 19(1), 5-16.
Zillmann, D. (1999). Exemplification theory:
Judging the whole by some of its parts. Media Psychology, 1(1), 69-94.
Zwarun, L. (2007). Assessing outcomes of
service learning in advertising courses.
5-16.
65
Explaining Ethics:
Using the Explainer Genre to Integrate
Ethics into Advertising Curricula
Jean Kelso Sandlin, California Lutheran University
Abstract
Innovations in advertising, such as sponsored social media posts and advertisers’ ability to
track consumers’ online activity, pose new ethical considerations for advertising professionals
at a time when consumer trust in the industry wanes. Although ethics courses are not required
in most advertising programs, ethics curricula can better prepare students for today’s dynamic
advertising industry. However, adding more content to existing courses is challenging, as advertising educators are already pressed to incorporate new content related to emerging digital
technologies. The Ethical Explainer Project, structured using the explainer genre and experiential learning theory, was designed to integrate ethics in undergraduate advertising courses.
The project meets student learning outcomes related to competencies relevant to advertising –
research readiness, collaboration and creating persuasive messages using digital technologies
– while simultaneously fostering students’ ethical cognizance.
Introduction
As today’s advertising environment increases
in complexity, advertising professionals must
be proactive in resolving ethical concerns
to build trust among consumers who expect
greater transparency (Institute for Advertising Ethics, 2011). In a recent study by Gallup
(Riffkin, 2014), only one in 10 consumers
rated the honesty and ethics of advertising
professionals as high or very high. In this environment, advertising professionals are being
called to give greater attention to ethics, as is
evident in the statement from 2010 Advertising Hall of Achievement honoree Jeff Levick:
“It’s critical for the industry to acknowledge
and accept that advertising is commercial information that must be treated with the same
accuracy and ethics as editorial information”
(in Snyder, 2011, p. 482).
In the advertising industry, ethical concerns
are constantly shifting with the advent and
use of new technologies (Institute for Advertising Ethics, 2011; Lopresti, 2013; Moraes
& Michaelidou, 2015). Advertisers’ ability to
track users’ online navigations undetected and
celebrities who are paid thousands of dollars
to post sponsored, but unidentified tweets (ignoring Federal Trade Commission mandated
disclosures) are just some examples of the
new ethical issues that have emerged with
technological advances (Bilton, 2013; Federal Trade Commission, 2013, 2015; Varney,
66
2013). To prepare for this dynamic environment, students must be aware of and critically
consider ethics in the context of advertising
and collaborate effectively to develop work
that reflects this new understanding.
Fostering advertising students’ ethical cognizance to prepare them to produce morally
responsible advertising is a critical component
of advertising curricula. However, the lack
of ethics courses offered in advertising programs underscores the need to integrate ethics
into existing courses (Fullerton, Kendrick &
McKinnon, 2013; Stuhlfaut & Farrell, 2009).
Adding a stand-alone ethics unit to existing
courses poses its own problems, as advertising educators are already challenged to keep
up with the changes of a fast-paced industry
and the evolving digital skill set it requires
(Hyojin, 2012). Most of top advertising programs do not offer stand-alone ethics courses
and instead give faculty autonomy to decide
how to integrate ethics into more generalized
advertising courses, such as “Advertising and
Society” (Drumwright & Murphy, 2009). To
compound the challenge, texts for advertising courses lack in-depth coverage and cover
ethics only in broad strokes (Drumwright &
Murphy, 2009).
The Ethical Explainer Project was designed
to address the need for ethics integration
into undergraduate advertising courses while
using content relevant to contemporary adverJournal of Advertising Education
tising education. The project does not just add
ethics as an appendage to an existing course,
but explores ethics in a way that complements
relevant student learning outcomes. The project fulfills three student learning outcomes: to
foster ethical cognizance by engaging students
with industry-specific ethical issues, to enhance research readiness skills and to provide
an experiential and collaborative environment
in which to hone skills needed to create persuasive messages using digital technologies.
Theoretical Framework
The Explainer Genre
The assignment was designed using the
explainer genre as the central focus. Increasingly used in journalism, the explainer genre
is a short video intended to bring clarity to
complex issues, establish baseline knowledge for the viewing public and create more
engagement in future mass media coverage
related to the topic (Andrew, 2015). In 2010,
ProPublica (a nonprofit that produces investigative journalism in the public interest) and
New York University’s Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute collaborated on the Building
a Better Explainer project in an effort “to enhance the genre of 'The Explainer,' a form of
journalism that provides essential background
knowledge to follow events and trends in the
news” (New York University, 2010, para. 1).
The explainer “is a work of journalism,
but it doesn’t provide the latest news or update you on a story. It addresses a gap in your
understanding” (Rosen, 2010, para. 5). The
explainer genre is “good at explaining the
world” (Klein, 2014, para. 6) and, according
to Rosen (in “Explainer Net,” 2011), is produced with the intent to be “engaging, not
only informative.” In January 2016, advertising executive Madonna Badger of the agency
Badger & Winters used an explainer video
posted on YouTube with the hashtag #WomenNotObjects to “trigger an international
conversation about sexism in advertising” (in
Feitelberg, 2016, para. 1).
Using Rosen’s criteria – to be both engaging
and informative – makes the production of an
explainer a pedagogical fit to help prepare students who desire to enter the competitive field
of advertising where their work must both
engage and inform the viewer. For this project, students collaboratively produce a brief
(three-minute) explainer video on an ethical
issue related to advertising (e.g., native advertising, advertising to children, objectification,
body image, privacy, etc.). The explainer can
include infographics, statistics, research findings, music, imagery and other materials with
Summer 2016
the potential to engage and inform the viewer.
While participating in this assignment, students analyze their own stance on ethical issues
related to the advertising industry, compare
their concerns with peers, research industryspecific issues and work collaboratively to
produce creative and persuasive digital content. By designing a project that develops
students’ ethical cognizance, research acumen
and technical and collaboration skills, the
Ethical Explainer Project achieves a balance
between academic objectives and technical
skills for which educators must constantly
strive (Hyojin, 2012). In addition, completed
projects are potentially portfolio worthy (an
added benefit for advertising students whose
portfolios help them access internships, jobs
and admission to graduate schools).
To more fully explain the scope of the Ethical Explainer Project, this paper begins with
the pedagogical assumptions and describes
the learning theory that anchors it. Second, it
describes the ancillary assignments and explains their role within the project structure.
Finally, it concludes with student outcomes
and instructor insights.
Experiential Learning Theory as Project
Basis
The Ethical Explainer Project was designed
using Kolb’s experiential learning theory
(Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2009). Experiential learning theory (ELT) promotes the use
of a four-step process in which students
participate in an experience, reflect on the
experience, analyze and conceptualize the
experience, and apply the experience to new
situations (Kayes, Kayes & Kolb, 2005; Kolb,
1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2009). Initially, advocating experiential learning to more fully develop
a highly cognitive process, such as ethical
cognizance, may seem like an odd coupling.
However, the four-step structure promotes
critical thinking, including the understanding
of ethical principles (Moore, 2010). ELT also
fosters higher level learning and shapes developmental potentialities (Kayes et al., 2005).
The use of experience is the core of ELT
and draws on the previous learning models of
John Dewey, Kurt Lewin and Jean Piaget, who
were aligned with the constructivist viewpoint
– that individuals learn through constructing meaning from experiences (Kolb, 1984).
When students engage in an experience (such
as planning and creating a video), it brings
together their past experiences, social interactions and engagement in the challenge at
hand. Through the process, cognitive learning
is deepened and cemented, and then affirmed
through reflection (Chan, 2012; Kolb, 1984;
67
Miettinen, 2000).
The use of ELT also fosters learning through
teamwork and collaboration. Two specific
components integrated into ELT that foster
learning through teams are, what Kolb terms,
conversational learning and the spiral of selfmaking. Conversational learning draws on the
theories of developmental psychologists, such
as Erik Erikson, and posits that humans construct meaning and are transformed through
interactions, such as conversation with others
(Chan, 2012; Kayes et al., 2005; Kolb, 1984).
Advocates of ELT credit the learning process
used in the model with developing students’
“social and human relations skills” (Chan,
2012, p. 407). In other words, when in teams,
discussions with other team members contribute to each individual’s learning, including
learning the social and relational skills that
lead to effective collaboration.
The second influence is the spiral of selfmaking, which posits that learners recognize
themselves as learning beings, recognize opportunities for self-development and learning,
and are drawn to things that interest them.
Self-development proceeds through the
identification and development of a person’s interests. It occurs through an ongoing
spiral of learning that refines, deepens, and
extends an initial interest in something …
We attend to those things that draw our
interest and select those experiences that
allow our interests to be explored and deepened in a continuing spiral of learning.
(Kolb & Kolb, 2009, p. 314)
Therefore, when a person expresses an
interest in something, it fosters learning (Anderson, Krathwohl, Airasian & Bloom, 2001).
The teams in the Ethical Explainer Project are
based on a self-identified interest in an ethical
topic and, therefore, by design, foster a robust
learning environment using both conversational learning and the spiral of self-making.
In summary, Kolb developed ELT based on
the belief that “learning is the process whereby
knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” (Kolb, 1984, p. 38), and
the Ethical Explainer Project adapted this
process to develop and deepen ethical cognizance, research acumen and technical and
collaboration skills in advertising students.
The next section details how the Ethical Explainer Project, with its ancillary assignments,
incorporates ELT’s four-step process in its design to foster students’ awareness and critical
thinking surrounding advertising ethics, while
developing students’ skills in research, digital
content creation and collaboration.
Project Design
The ELT structure requires guiding students
through an intentional four-step process. To
achieve this, the project incorporated ancillary assignments and in-class active learning
exercises to help the students cycle through
the stages of participation, reflection, analysis
and application. This section includes descriptions of each of the assignments and activities,
and indicates how they advanced the ELT process. Figure 1 provides an overview of the
project structure and time frame. It’s important to note that the process can start at any
point within the cycle, but for the purpose of
this paper, participation is referred to as Step
1, reflection as Step 2, analysis as Step 3 and
application as Step 4.
Figure 1:
Explainer Project structure and time frame using ELT.
v
68
Making Advertising Personal
Because students are exposed to 3,000-5,000
advertising images daily, including advertisements and brand exposures (Johnson, 2014;
Strasburger, 2006), it may not seem necessary
to provide an assignment to engage them with
advertising. However, because most students
believe they can tune out advertising (Simons
& Jones, 2011) and ELT requires concrete
involvement, it is important to provide assignments that intentionally guide students to
a personal recognition of advertising’s pervasiveness in their lives. This project used two
introductory assignments: brand new day (see
Appendix A) and the brand calendar (see Appendix B).
The brand new day assignment requires students to log each ad/ logo/ brand to which they
are exposed for a 24-hour period, along with
other details, such as the product, the medium,
the location and personal observations or insights. Once they begin to be more mindful of
advertising through this assignment, students
are often surprised at the quantity of one day’s
exposure and the pervasiveness of advertising
in their lives. The brand calendar assignment requires students to recall and record
the brand of daily items (shampoo, laundry
detergent, etc.) used during different periods
in their lives. This portion of the assignments
fulfills the first step in ELT. It builds awareness and engagement with advertising on a
personal level.
During the second week of class, the brand
new day and brand calendar assignments are
extended to foster reflection and analysis
(Steps 2 and 3 in ELT) by having students
perform an elementary coding exercise on
their daily logs and calendars. Students are
instructed to code their logs and calendars
to determine the most prevalent brands to
which they are exposed and the most prevalent brands of their childhoods. Working in
small groups, students compare and contrast
their findings. They are often surprised at the
similarity of their experiences or, in other cases, begin to recognize the differences based
on geography (as in the case of students who
spent their childhood in a different country).
After they create their list, students are asked
to compare it to the list of top advertisers (by
annual expenditures) to help them recognize
the influence advertising may have had in
their own brand preferences.
Experiencing New Perspectives
At the same time students are developing
personal awareness of advertising, the course
exposes them to other perspectives by requiring the viewing of four documentaries on
Summer 2016
advertising (Persuaders, Art & Copy, Naked
Brands and Generation Like) within that same
two-week period. Students are required to
view these on their own time. To move from
merely viewing the films (a Step 1 experience)
to more thoughtful reflection and analysis
(Steps 2 and 3), students are required to shape
their responses using a response form (see
Appendix C) that asks them to record points
that resonated with them personally, questions
the films evoked for them (reflection) and a
connection to the course materials (analysis).
To continue expanding their perspectives,
students read about ethical issues in their
text and participate in instructor-facilitated
viewings and discussions of contemporary
advertisements and the potential ethical concerns within them. In this way, students are
exposed to a variety of perspectives regarding
the ethical implications of advertising and can
relate those issues to contemporary examples.
Mapping Students’ Ethical Concerns
By the third week, students have established
a more personal awareness of advertising
pervasiveness in their lives and have been
exposed to the perspectives of others through
film, readings from their course text and classroom discussions of contemporary examples.
Armed with greater awareness and new insights, students are better able to identify
and describe ethical concerns in advertising.
At this point, they are required to map their
concerns, an exercise which requires personal
reflection (Step 2 in ELT).
During this in-class exercise, students are
instructed to create a personal list of ethical
concerns related to advertising. From their
own individual lists, students are invited to
write their top three concerns on a classroom
whiteboard. With the students’ input, the instructor facilitates collapsing categories that
are similar. For example, the topics “body
ideal,” “body image” and “unrealistically
skinny models” are combined into one category. Once the categories are collapsed, they
are numbered and students are given a mapping sheet (see Appendix D), on which they
individually compare each ethical concern
category to every other category and rate the
ethical concerns most salient to them. By adding the number of times they have listed the
category as the “most concerning” when comparing it to the other, they weight each ethical
concern.
Students are then instructed to add their
names on the whiteboard beneath their top
two weighted categories. In other words, the
mapping exercise helps them identify the ethical issues most salient to them. In this way,
69
they can see the names of their peers who are
also concerned about those specific ethical
issues. Students are instructed to gather near
their top interest category and form explainer
groups of three to four members based on
shared interests. Having a shared sense of purpose strengthens groups (Kayes et al., 2005),
so the opportunity to identify other classmates
who share their interest helps to more deeply
engage students in ethical issues and form
more cohesive groups.
Analyzing and Applying
The next ancillary assignment, the literature
summary and synthesis (see Appendix E), formalizes the analysis and conceptualization of
the ethical issue (Step 3 in ELT). It requires
each student to locate, summarize and synthesize two peer-reviewed research articles
that contribute to the understanding of their
group’s ethical topic. The assignment is due
Week 4 of the semester. On the day it is due,
students are given class time to share their
research with their group and are required
to post their completed assignment to their
group’s Blackboard site, so all group members have access to it. Instructor-provided
discussion questions (see Appendix F) guide
the student groups to begin collaboratively
planning their approach to the explainer.
Using the answers to this guided discussion, the next ancillary assignment for the
Ethical Explainer Project, the storyboard (see
Appendix G), is assigned to each individual
group member. It is due Week 6 of the semester. Just as students shared their literature
summaries with the group during class time,
they are also given class time in Week 6 to
share their storyboards – a visual portrayal of
how each of them conceptualizes the explainer. Storyboards are developed by students
individually outside of class time and are used
to help students more clearly express their visions of the project to their group members,
as well as further collaboration regarding the
creative direction of the explainer. The storyboard assignment also begins the process of
applying the cumulative experiences the student has gained regarding ethical issues to a
new experience (Step 4 in ELT).
Participating in the Creation Process
As the group members proceed in the creation of the explainer (see Appendix H), they
move into a new ELT cycle and begin the
four-step process again. Groups are given
creative freedom to produce the explainer using their choice of production tools. Students
are informed of free and university-provided
resources and are given access (through the
70
institutional portal) to free on-demand video
training.
From Week 6 to Week 9, two days of explainer workshops are built into the semester
schedule, during which students can work on
their explainer in their groups and request
instructor feedback. However, the class time
allocated is not sufficient to complete the
explainer, and work outside of class is typically necessary. The final explainers are due
during Week 9 of the semester. To continue
the cycle of learning based on ELT, students
are required to evaluate other groups’ explainers and, at the end of the 16-week semester,
are asked to write a personal reflection on the
course.
Assessing Student Learning Outcomes
To assess students’ ethical cognizance, the
main driver of the Ethical Explainer Project,
a textual content analysis was performed on
two data sets – student responses from their
end-of-course reflections and students’ openended responses on the course evaluations.
In addition to these formal measures, because
this course is limited to 25 or fewer students,
time is available for the instructor and students to have multiple interactions throughout
the semester. These interactions form the basis of the “instructor observations.”
In two semesters, 48 students enrolled in
the course. All students were requested to
complete online course evaluations via institutional email. Course evaluations are
voluntary, anonymous and are not graded.
Instructors do not get feedback from evaluations until after grades are turned in. Students
receive no incentives to complete the course
evaluations, but there is an institutional culture that evaluations are important. In addition
to course evaluations, students were assigned
a course reflection that was not graded, but
students were awarded a minimal amount of
points if they chose to complete it. Of the 48
students enrolled, 42 completed the online
evaluations, and 39 completed the reflection.
The course reflection asked the students to
“Discuss how this course changed or affirmed
your perspective about advertising.” Of the 39
completed reflections, all mentioned ethics,
either generally or by referring to a specific
ethical issue or the Ethical Explainer Project. The open-ended questions in the course
evaluation asked the students to comment on
aspects of the teaching and content that were
“especially good” or “could be improved.”
There was also space for “additional comments.”
Iterative Coding as a Discovery Approach
to the Student Experience
In addition to the evaluations, a textual analysis was performed through a methodic and
iterative coding process. Coding is heuristic
analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Richards
& Morse, 2013) – a qualitative methodology
used as a discovery process to link data (in
this case, student writings) to meaning. It is,
therefore, an appropriate method to analyze
students’ reflections and open-ended responses on course evaluations to better understand
the salient aspects of a learning experience
(Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). Recognizing that
involvement as an instructor filters how data
are perceived (Adler & Adler, 1987; Creswell,
1998), in-vivo coding kept the data rooted
in the participants’ own language (Creswell,
1998; Glaser & Strauss, 2009; Saldaña, 2013),
and coding was performed in three separate
analytical rounds. The first round of coding
captured meaning-making statements related
to students’ course experiences. The second
round of coding analyzed the data by seeking
patterns and connections to develop related
categories. The third round of coding analyzed the categories to determine themes. To
enhance trustworthiness, data were triangulated with open-ended responses from student
course evaluations, student reflections and
instructor notes and observations (Creswell,
1998).
Findings
From the analysis, five themes emerged. The
two most prevalent themes were related to the
Ethical Explainer Project: ethical cognizance
and recognition of experiential learning. The
other three themes were related to workload,
the instructor (personality, teaching style and
knowledge or experience) and overall sentiment about the course. For the purpose of this
paper, the themes of ethical cognizance and
experiential skill development – the aspired
learning outcomes for the explainer project –
will be explored.
The most prevalent theme was ethical cognizance, an expressed awareness of ethical
issues. Within this theme, there were three
categories that indicate varying levels of ethical cognizance – awareness, internalization
and action. Responses were categorically
coded for the following: ‘awareness’ if students recognized ethics through the course
experience; ‘internalization’ when students
expressed the consideration of an ethical issue
in relation to a personal concern; and ‘action’
when students took or intended to take action
based on ethical cognizance.
Table 1 contains representative expresSummer 2016
sions from students to provide greater clarity
and transparency for how the theme “ethical cognizance” was coded and the nuanced
categories of awareness, internalization and
action defined within that theme. It also contains representative expressions from students
regarding their recognition of experiential
learning and skill development.
In addition to textual content analysis of the
evaluations and reflections, the course evaluation survey design included a question related
to active learning, the focus of ELT. Students
were asked to respond on a scale from 1 to
5 (1 = “Strongly disagree” and 5 = “Strongly
agree”) to the statement: “The course was
structured to foster active student participation.” In both semesters, the response ranked
above the university-wide mean, with mean
scores of 4.5 and 4.77.
Instructor’s Insights and Conclusion
The Ethical Explainer Project was designed as
a solution to a multifaceted problem: advertising educators must prepare students to use
digital technologies and grapple with emerging ethical issues, but course content cannot
continue to expand, lest it become unwieldy to
teach in a 16-week semester. By designing an
assignment that combines outcomes relevant
to skill development and ethical cognizance,
advertising educators can avoid course content bloat and better prepare students to
produce ethical advertising.
With enrollments no greater than 25, the
author had the opportunity to interact with
her students. On the instructor’s end, the
adoption of this assignment has provided a
greater understanding of the value of genuine
student engagement and research regarding
ethical issues in advertising. Because students
were required to find and write about how the
scholarly articles could inform their explainer
project, they not only practiced researching
advertising-related content, but also demonstrated how they related the research to their
project.
For example, one student wrote: “These
articles will provide useful insight and information for the explainers assignment since
they analyze the effect that advertising and
media has on society’s perception of middleaged women and the aging process.”
Another wrote: “This article is useful for
our research because it shows how consumers respond to misleading advertisements and
breaks down demographically how participants in the study responded.”
Students seem to own the issues they explored in the explainer project. One example
71
Table 1:
Representative Student Expressions of Ethical Cognizance and Experiential Learning
Theme: Ethical
Cognizance
Category:
Awareness
Since researching
I have found
myself noticing the
degrading ads more
and more, and it’s
sad to see our society
hasn’t developed as
much as we have
thought.
I had never even
thought of it as a
problem until I learned
more about it from the
explainer.
The assignment …
was very helpful
in making us
more aware of all
the product ads
we pass by each
second of the day.
…with the
explainers
project, I
was able to
realize just
how influential
advertising can
be.
Theme: Ethical
Cognizance
Category:
Internalization
The facts about
advertising to
children I learned
through my
Explainer have
started to affect my
thinking about what
the future holds
for children, and
possibly even my
children, one day.
Alexander Wang had
recently came [sic]
out with raunchy
jean ads that I saw
on the internet and
was upset by. I had
chosen Sexualization
of Women in the Media
for my Explainer
project, so I was
especially sensitive to
women sexualized in
advertising. Alexander
Wang had a completely
naked woman on a
chair with jeans on her
ankles and Alexander
Wang’s new jean
brand name ‘Denim X’
covering her boobs.”
I think that as a
person in my 20’s
and as a user of
social media sites
that privacy would
be a big concern.
… there seems to
be little concern
over privacy,
which to me,
was the most
frightening thing
of all.
Theme: Ethical
Cognizance
Category:
Action or Action
Intention
Accidentally clicking
on odd-looking ads
has become such a
big concern of mine
that I have had to
install ad blocker on
all of my electronic
devices.
During the explainer,
I was able to get so
much information on
these issues, such as the
specific ways that these
issues cause damage
or how these issues
happen. I am definitely
a more careful
consumer now.
I want to work
with an agency
that is ethical…
the company that
you will end up
working for is a
representation of
yourself and your
standards.
I am now able to
inform those who
are unaware,
and have a solid
grasp on how
persuasive it
can be.
Theme:
Recognition of
Experiential
Learning
Category: Skill
Development
I loved how
interactive the class
was, it really made it
easy to learn and to
want to engage.
The projects were
definitely really helpful
in hands-on learning.
I also realized
that I have some
skillsets in my
arsenal that need
to be revisited and
polished. This was
apparent when I
was building the
Explainer project
in After Effects…I
realized how much
I actually know
about multimedia
production when
I produced the
Explainer.
The skills I
learned for the
Explainer … will
help me with my
future career.
Now that I know
how to construct
an advertising
campaign, I
can feel more
confident when I
apply for jobs.
72
of this reaction is illustrated in the following
student quote:
Alexander Wang had recently came [sic]
out with raunchy jean ads that I saw on
the Internet and was upset by. I had chosen
Sexualization of Women in the Media for
my Explainer project so I was especially
sensitive to women sexualized in advertising.
The outcomes from the explainer project
support Moore’s (2010) assessment that the
transformational value of experiential learning is dependent on careful planning and
execution:
We need to foster critical thinking through
decisive methods of instruction, so students
can understand not only how to do things,
but why they work the way they do, and
what ethical principles are at stake as they
engage in real-world activity. (p. 11)
Intentionally structuring the project to include ELT’s four-step process – participation,
reflection, analysis and application – fostered
awareness and critical thinking surrounding advertising ethics, while simultaneously
preparing advertising students with skills in
research, digital content creation and collaboration.
Further work with the Ethical Explainer
Project can include creating a mobile phone
app that would take the place of the paper
assignments “brand new day” (Appendix A)
and “brand calendar” (Appendix B). It would
provide a more efficient and accurate way for
students to record their interactions with advertising and compare their experience with
classmates and industry expenditures in a
more dynamic fashion.
Because the Ethical Explainer Project gives
students the choice of what ethical topic to explore and the freedom to select the technology
used to create the explainer, the project design
will easily adapt to emerging ethical issues
and new technologies developed in the future.
References
Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1987). Membership
roles in field research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage University Press.
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian,
P. W., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy
for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational
objectives. New York: Longman.
Andrew, L. P. (2015). The missing links: An
archaeology of digital journalism (Master’s
thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/97991.
Summer 2016
Bilton, N. (2013, June 9). Disruptions:
Celebrities’ product plugs on social media draw scrutiny [Web log post]. The
New York Times. Retrieved from http://
bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/
disruptions-celebrities-product-plugs-onsocial-media-draw-scrutiny/?_r=0.
Chan, C. K. Y. (2012). Exploring an experiential learning project through Kolb’s
Learning Theory using a qualitative
research method. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(4), 405-15.
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making
sense of qualitative data: Complementary
research strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry
and research design: Choosing among five
traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
The current state of advertising ethics.
Explainer Net (Producer). (2011). Jay Rosen
on building a better explainer [Online
video]. Retrieved from https://vimeo.
com/17317686.
Federal Trade Commission. (2013, March).
.Com disclosures: How to make effective
disclosures in digital advertising. Retrieved
from
https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/
files/attachments/press-releases/ftc-staffrevises-online-advertising-disclosure-guide
lines/130312dotcomdisclosures.pdf.
Federal Trade Commission (2015, May).
The FTC’s endorsement guides: What
people are asking. Retrieved from https://
www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/
plain-language/pdf-0205-endorsementguides-faqs_0.pdf.
Feitelberg, R. (2016, January 25). Madonna Badger launches campaign to
fight sexism in advertising. Women’s
Wear Daily. Retrieved from http://wwd.
com/media-news/media-features/
madonna-badger-womennotobjects-tofight-sexism-advertising-10329242/.
Fullerton, J., Kendrick, A., & McKinnon, L.
M. (2013). Advertising ethics: Student attitudes and behavioral intent. Journalism &
Mass Communication Educator, 68(1), 3349. doi:10.1177/1077695812472894.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The
discovery of grounded theory: Strategies
for qualitative research. Piscataway, NJ:
Transaction.
Hyojin, K. (2012). The current status of digital media education in advertising and other
communication disciplines. Journal of Advertising Education, 16(2), 27-36.
73
Institute for Advertising Ethics. (2011). Principles and practices for advertising ethics.
Retrieved from http://aaftl.com/wp-content/
uploads/2014/10/Principles-and-Practiceswith-Commentary.pdf.
Johnson, S. (2014, September 29). New research sheds light on daily ad exposures
[Web log post]. SJ Insights. Retrieved from
http://sjinsights.net/2014/09/29/new-research-sheds-light-on-daily-ad-exposures/.
Kayes, A. B., Kayes, D. C., & Kolb, D. A.
(2005). Experiential learning in teams. Simulation & Gaming, 36(3), 330-54.
Klein, E. (2014, January 26). Vox is our next.
The Verge. Retrieved from http://www.
theverge.com/2014/1/26/5348212/ezraklein-vox-is-our-next.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). The
learning way: Meta-cognitive aspects of experiential learning. Simulation & Gaming,
40(3), 297-327.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning:
Experience as the source of learning and
development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Lopresti, M. J. (2013). Growth of content
marketing. EContent, 36(5), 8-10.
Miettinen, R. (2000). The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey’s theory of
reflective thought and action. International
Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1), 5472.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994).
Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moore, D. T. (2010). Forms and issues in
experiential learning. New Directions for
Teaching and Learning, 2010(124), 3-13.
Moraes, C., & Michaelidou, N. (2015, July).
Introduction to the special thematic symposium on the ethics of controversial online
advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 1-3.
New York University. (2010, December 1).
NYU Carter Journalism Institute, ProPublica team up to enhance an essential form of
news coverage, “The Explainer” [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.nyu.edu/
about/news-publications/news/2010/11/30/
nyu-carter-journalism-institute-propublicateam-up-to-enhance-an-essential-form-ofnews-coverage.html.
Richards, L., & Morse, J. M. (2013). Readme
first for a user’s guide to qualitative methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Riffkin, R. (2014, December 18). Americans
rate nurses highest on honesty, ethical standards. Gallup. Retrieved from http://www.
gallup.com/poll/180260/americans-ratenurses-highest-honesty-ethical-standards.
74
aspx.
Rosen, J. (2010, November 30). Building a
better explainer: NYU and ProPublica will
collaborate and share what they learn [Web
log post]. PressThink.org. Retrieved from
http://pressthink.org/2010/11/building-abetter-explainer-nyu-and-propublica-willcollaborate-and-share-what-they-learn/.
Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for
qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Simons, H. W., & Jones, J. G. (2011). Persuassion in society (2nd ed.). New York:
Routledge.
Strasburger, V. C. (2006). Children, adolescents, and advertising. Pediatrics, 118(6),
2563-69. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.
aappublications.org/content/118/6/2563.
full.pdf.
Stuhlfaut, M. W., & Farrell, M. (2009). Pedagogic cacophony: The teaching of ethical,
legal, and societal issues in advertising education. Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator, 64(2), 173-90.
Snyder, W. (2011). Making the case for
enhanced advertising ethics. Journal of Advertising Research, 51(3), 477-83.
Varney, C. (2013, October 9). Celebrity Twitter
ads: Regulations, allegations and selling out
[Web log post]. Brandwatch. Retrieved from
https://www.brandwatch.com/2013/10/
celebrity-twitter-endorsements-regulationsallegations-and-selling-out/.
Appendix A:
Assignment: Brand New Day
Objective: Media researchers estimate that we are exposed to more than 3,000 branding/ advertising images per day. Many of those we don’t even notice. The purpose of
this exercise is to begin your journey as a more critical observer of advertising, and
toRunningHead:EXPLAININGETHICS
help “sensitize” you to the pervasiveness of the branded world in which we exist.
Appendix
A when you sleep. Record every
Directions: Start from when you first awake
and finish
product brand that appears to you during your waking hours. Use the Brand New Day
Assignment: Brand New Day
Spreadsheet (Page 2 of this assignment)
to record the product and brand, where and
when
you
saw
it,
the
medium
in
which
it appeared
notes
(e.g., images
“Wow,
Objective: Media researchers estimate that we are exposed
to more thanand
3,000any
branding/
advertising
permy
day. Many of
roommate
shirt ofmany
timesis toand
justjourney
noticed
it’s critical
promoting
those we donÕ has
t evenworn
notice. that
The purpose
this exercise
beginI your
as a more
observer Lucky
of advertising, and to
help Ò sensitizeÓ
you to the
pervasiveness
of the
branded world
which we exist.shirt, a TV ad, a Facebook
brand”).
Examples
may
be a Nike
swoosh
on a inroommate's
ad, a sign in the campus bookstore, or a billboard you saw on your way to campus.
Directions: Start from when you first awake and finish when you sleep. Record every product brand that appears to you during
Do
your best to keep an accurate journal. Pay attention! It’s not as easy as it sounds.
your waking hours. Use the Brand New Day Spreadsheet (Page 2 of this assignment) to record the product and brand, where and
Your
of notices
this and
assignment
is no
fewer
than 100
when target
you saw number
it, the medium
in which itfor
appeared
any notes (e.g.,
Ò Wow,
my roommate
has (10
worncompleted
that shirt many times and I
sheets),
butitÕ syou
will likely
have). Examples
more. You
every
brand
of aprodjust noticed
promoting
Lucky brandÓ
may do
be anot
Nikeneed
swooshtoonrecord
a roommate's
shirt,
a TV ad,
Facebook ad, a
signyou
in the
campus
or a billboard
you sawadvertisements,
on your way to campus.
your best
to keep
accurate
journal.
uct
use,
justbookstore,
those that
are obvious
likeDohuge
logos
on an
shirts.
But
if Pay
attention!
ItÕ saware
not as easy
as itmakes
sounds. Your
number
of notices for something
this assignmentyou’ve
is no fewer
than 100
(10 completed
your
more
state
you target
realize
or recognize
never
noticed
sheets), but you will likely have more. You do not need to record every brand of product you use, just those that are obvious
before,
by all means, record it. To complete this assignment, you will need to make at
advertisements, like huge logos on shirts. But if your more aware state makes you realize or recognize something youÕ ve never
least
nine
additional
copies
Brand
Dayyou
Spreadsheet.
Hand-written
pagescopies of the
noticed
before,
by all means,
record it.ofTothe
complete
this New
assignment,
will need to make
at least nine additional
are
acceptable
for this assignment.
Bring
completed
New
Day
Spreadsheets
Brand
New Day Spreadsheet.
Hand-written pages
are acceptable
for thisBrand
assignment.
Bring
completed
Brand Newto
Day
Spreadsheets
class on due date.
class
on dueto date.
Brand New Day Spreadsheet
Student Name__________________________
Brand/ Product
Time/ Location
Date Completed _______ Sheet ___ of ____
Medium
1.
o
o
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
2.
o
o
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
3.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
7.
o
o
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
8.
o
o
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
9.
o
o
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
10.
o
o
Clothing
TV
o
o
Radio
Outdoor
4.
5.
6.
Summer 2016
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Streaming
Internet (FB, etc.)
Other_________
Notes/ Insights,
Observations
75
EXPLAININGETHICS
2
Appendix
B
Appendix
B:
Assignment: Brand Calendar
Assignment: Brand Calendar
Objective:
When
researchers
begin qualitative
research
onturn
a topic,
first turn
Objective: When
researchers
begin qualitative
research on a topic,
they first
the lens they
on themselves
and the
consider the subject
lens
on themselves
and
consider
the subject
onbias/
a personal
tomight
try to
bringasmore
on a personal
level to try to
bring
more awareness
to personal
experience,level
etc., that
resurface
they begin the study.
To pave the way
us to thinkbias/
more critically
about advertising,
must first
recognize as
the influence
of advertising
awareness
to for
personal
experience,
etc., thatwemight
resurface
they begin
the in our own
lives. To pave the way for us to think more critically about advertising, we must first
study.
recognize the influence of advertising in our own lives.
Directions: Complete the calendar with the most dominant brand you recall from that era. It may or may not have been your
favorite or preferred brand, but it is the brand with rapid recollection. Don't spend a lot of time pondering the Ò rightÓ answer, go
Directions:
Complete
calendar
with the
mosttodominant
with your first reaction
to thethe
brand.
Bring completed
calendar
class on due brand
date. you recall from that
era. It may or may not have been your favorite or preferred brand, but it is the brand
with rapid recollection. Don't spend a lot of time pondering the “right” answer, go with
your first reaction to the brand. Bring completed calendar to class on due date.
Brand Calendar
Student Name__________________________
Age 3-7
Shampoo
Laundry Soap
Cereal
TV show
Recording Artist
Age 8-12
Shampoo
Laundry Soap
Cereal
TV show
Recording Artist
Age 13-17
Shampoo
Laundry Soap
Cereal
TV show
Recording Artist
76
Brand
Brand
Brand
EXPLAININGETHICS
Appendix C:
Assignment: Shaping Your Response to Film
Appendix
C your responses to the films, comObjective: To help you to more critically
consider
plete the following guide using the prompts to shape your responses. Please complete
Shaping Your Response to Film
a separate guide for each of the assigned
films.
3
Objective: To help you to more critically consider your responses to the films, complete the following guide using the prompts
Name
Student:
_________________
oftheFilm:
_________________________
to shapeof
your
responses. Please
complete a separate guide Name
for each of
assigned
films.
Name of Student: _________________________ Name of Film: _____________________________________
Your Response
Describe the film using a straight
description as you might read on the
DVD cover or hear on the movie trailer.
What three points resonated with you?
(Use quotes from films.)
What two or three questions circled in
your head after watching the film?
What connections can you make to our
coursework?
Summer 2016
77
Appendix D:
Ethical Issues in Advertising
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Which ethical issue is most important to you?
In class, we identified the issues listed above as some of the most concerning ethical
issues in advertising. Refer to those issues numbered above and compare them to each
other using the charts below. For example, is issue Number 1 or issue Number 2 more
concerning to you? Place the number of the issue that most concerns you on the line to
the right. Complete comparisons for all issues listed above.
1 or 2? ________
1 or 3? ________
1 or 4? ________
1 or 5? ________
1 or 6? ________
1 or 7? ________
1 or 8? ________
2 or 3? ________
2 or 4? ________
2 or 5? ________
2 or 6? ________
2 or 7? ________
2 or 8? ________
4 or 5? ________
4 or 6? ________
4 or 7? ________
4 or 8? ________
5 or 6? ________
5 or 7? ________
5 or 8? ________
6 or 7? ________
6 or 8? ________
7 or 8? ________
3 or 4? ________
3 or 5? ________
3 or 6? ________
3 or 7? ________
3 or 8? ________
Using the list above:
How many 1s did you list? ______
Which number was listed most frequently? __________
The number that you listed most frequently is the ethical issue in which you most likely
have a keen interest or deep concern. Refer to the list on the top of the page to identify
that issue.
78
Appendix E:
Literature Summary and Synthesis
Objective: Fact-finding and using research to inform creative strategy is part of the
information-rich culture of the advertising industry. Being first to report on a new finding that may influence how people approach/ buy/ relate to your product is important
and will make you a valuable member of an agency. This assignment:
• Gives you practice in locating peer-reviewed research;
• Adds to your awareness of ethical issues within the industry;
• Helps you frame your explainer with facts that are relevant to the issue.
Directions: Individually explore literature (scholarly articles/ peer reviewed) related
to your explainer topic and write a one- to three-page (double-spaced) summary/ synthesis on two of the most valuable articles you found. (Communicate among team
members to make sure no one is summarizing the same articles.) The one to three
pages should include information on both your articles.
To get credit you must make sure that:
• Your article is RELEVANT to your project (if it is not, keep searching) and accessible (provide a link).
• You clearly summarize (in your own words, not just copying the abstract) what the
study was about (method and findings).
• You clearly synthesize how this information makes a difference in the approach to
your project. Or why does it matter to the issue you are taking on?
On the due date, prior to class, submit your summary and links to your two articles
on Blackboard (via the assignment), and have a copy for each of your explainer team
members. You’ll be expected to share your secondary research with your team members and discuss how your research might inform your project.
Your grade will reflect:
• Content synthesis (You make the case that it is relevant to your explainer topic);
• Demonstration of understanding (Your summary is accurate);
• Clarity of expression and conventions (structure, grammar, etc.);
• Project links provided to both articles.
Summer 2016
79
Appendix F:
Explainer Worksheet
Group Members:
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
Working Title/ Topic of Explainer: _______________________________________
• Share your research. What direction does your research indicate you should take
your explainer? (Narrow your scope!)
• Who is your audience?
• What is your message/ call to action?
• What’s the tone?
• What’s your creative approach?
• What information is still missing and who will be responsible for obtaining it?
• How will you produce it (what software, how to edit, teamwork/ collaboration)?
• Create a rough timeline and project work plan that facilitates the equitable separation of duties.
80
Appendix G:
Storyboard
Objective: Storyboards create a visual representation of your project and are a way to
edit and organize the research you plan to include with persuasive imagery. For our
purposes, storyboards need to represent the general imagery and match it with the
corresponding information to be shared. It must also represent the progression of your
explainer, and the creative approach/ vision you have for it. In other words, we don’t
need specific camera angles or accompanying word-for-word audio, like you would for
a film class (but you may include them if you think they are key to communicating your
message). We need a general idea of the progression of the information. Remember,
your charge is to be both informative and entertaining/ persuasive.
Directions: There are many ways you can produce a storyboard¬ (e.g., by hand sketch,
using clipped photos or images to complete your storyboard). Just remember that your
final video needs to adhere to copyright law. (See the full explainer assignment for
details on this.)
You may use the storyboard sheets provided or use an app. Or one of the most efficient
ways to complete a storyboard is to use PowerPoint slides to create the individual
shots, and use the notes section to annotate content to be shared. Then you create a PDF
file of the slides printed with notes.
Remember, don’t overtax your viewer by having too much text and visuals happening
at the same time. Give your viewer space for thinking and processing the information
you are sharing. Consider using an infographic if you are trying to relay statistics in an
easy-to-digest manner. Free apps with templates are available at piktochart or canva.
Submit as a pdf file via Blackboard storyboard assignment.
Here’s a good video to watch before you venture into storyboarding: https://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=ux_Em1lVsjI
Carefully review the grading rubric on the following page.
Summer 2016
81
ExplainingEthics
8
Appendix G (continued):
Storyboard
Grading
Rubric
Storyboard
Rubric
OVERALL
SCORE (out of
20)
Content & Clarity
Creativity
Neatness and
professionalism
Credibility
4.5-5
The content selected
strongly defends your
ethical stance and
contributed to an
impactful message.
The message was
crystal clear.
Wow! The information
was presented in a
fashion that was
imaginative and
creative, unexpected
and not an ordinary
approach to the subject.
It compelled me to read
from start to finish. The
progression of
information made sense
and contributed to the
creative nature.
Professionally presented
with vivid photos or clear
sketches and typed
accompanying notes that
provide clear instruction.
The information was
backed up by
overwhelming
evidence Ð strong
statistics and
examples, along with
citations that fostered
a high level of
credibility.
3.5-4
represents your stance
and contributed to a
consistent message.
The message was
mostly clear with a few
missteps.
This was well presented
in a format that
compelled me to read
most of the time. The
progression of
information made
sense.
Nicely presented with clear
instructions.
The information was
backed up by some
statistics and
examples, along with
citations that fostered
credibility.
2.5-3
presented your stance,
but weakly at times,
and was not always
consistent in its
message. The message
was murky.
This selection of
information was
presented in a format
that had some high
points, but I found
myself drifting off and
not compelled to read
the entire storyboard.
May have been quickly
done. Appears to have
missed key instructions, or
images are not clear.
The information was
backed up
occasionally, but
there were gaps that
led me to question the
credibility at times.
1-2
From the content
selected, it was
difficult to understand
your ethical stance.
IÕ m still trying to
uncover the message.
Ho-hum. The selection
of information was not
particularly persuasive.
Not presentable.
The information
lacked consistent
back-up information
like statistics or
examples, and I found
myself questioning its
credibility.
82
Appendix H:
The Explainer Project
Purpose: This project: 1) enhances your critical analysis and research readiness skills; 2) fosters collaboration; and 3) helps you recognize and ponder important ethical issues while also helping you
apply your content creation and creativity skills. If done well, it can also be a wonderful portfolio piece.
Introduction: Advertising is controversial and replete with ethical issues. Ethical topics in advertising
range from the hyper-sexualizing of young girls, to the prevalence of stereotypes, to “green washing,”
as consumers become more environmentally conscious. There are also concerns over the advertising of
unhealthy products, such as tobacco, junk food and alcohol, especially to vulnerable populations such
as children and residents in low-income neighborhoods. Privacy in online advertising and online tracking has opened up a new set of ethical considerations. The clutter of advertising in all parts of our lives,
even in sponsorship of school programs, continues to be discussed as funding drops and sponsors jump
in to fill the gap. “Native advertising,” sometimes called “branded content,” is commercial messaging
that is fully integrated into a specific delivery platform, making it more likely that consumers can’t
tell the difference. And recently, unidentified “sponsored social,” where celebrities earn thousands to
post without informing consumers, are making their way into the advertising landscape. Ethical issues
plaguing the industry have led to legislation, regulation and voluntary self-regulation industry standards (chapter 2 in your text).
For this project, you will have an opportunity to research an ethical topic related to advertising and
create an “explainer” about the topic. The explainer should be a minimum of three and a maximum of
five minutes long and include research credits at the end that cite your sources. There should be no less
than two peer-reviewed articles per group member from current research (in the last three years) and
two additional resources. Note: not all research must be in the final project. Select for accuracy and
persuasive impact. Tell your story creatively and with impact, but make sure it is factually accurate.
What’s an explainer?
• You can view New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen talking about
the idea behind Explainer.net in this five-minute video on Vimeo: https://vimeo.
com/17317686 and emphasizing the importance of it here: https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=QatOgUlJ854.
• Read a blog post re: explainers here. Explainers have been produced about such
complex issues as fracking and the national home foreclosure crisis. Although
not a true “explainer,” the following video by Jean Kilbourne demonstrates
how an ethical issue regarding advertising can be explored through visuals and
a relevant and well-researched script (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Fpy
GwP3yzE&oref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D_
FpyGwP3yzE&has_verified=1).
• Here are examples from a previous class: https://youtu.be/cH7-jlFUynQ; https://
youtu.be/KuXW-nbxD2w.
The explainer project will give you an opportunity to:
• Critically consider an ethical advertising issue with social implications;
• Hone persuasive skills using visuals and audio;
• Plan a project from research to script to production;
• Practice and hone collaborative communication skills;
• Utilize and experiment with creative expression via technological tools;
• Develop a portfolio-worthy experience.
Summer 2016
83
Appendix H (continued):
The Explainer Project
The Process
1) Form a research team (max four members) with a common interest/ question related
to an ethical issue related to advertising. Decide what the persuasive focus of your
explainer will be. On what issue do you want to raise awareness?
2) Individually explore literature (scholarly articles) related to your topic and write a
one- to two-page summary on two of the most valuable articles you found. (Communicate among team members to make sure no one is summarizing the same articles.)
Share your secondary research with your team members and discuss how the other
research might inform your project. PLEASE SEE LITERATURE SUMMARY &
SYNTHESIS ASSIGNMENT.
3) Also gather documentaries, interviews with experts, news articles, etc. – two additional credible sources per team member that have the potential to contribute to your
project.
4) After your team has discussed the general direction, tone, themes and research to
be the basis for your explainer, individually create a storyboard that you feel best
organizes and communicates your message. PLEASE SEE STORYBOARD ASSIGNMENT.
5) As a team, discuss your storyboards, and use the ideas to analyze and revise your ideas
and planned techniques as your work on the project evolves. As a team, develop a cohesive storyboard and script that best communicates your message using the research
in an effective and compelling manner.
6) Produce a video explainer (no less than three minutes and no more than five minutes).
7) Share your explainer with the class.
The explainer will be graded based on the following criteria:
Content, Creativity, Clarity, Credibility, Overall impact
Important: The video must be produced in accordance with copyright laws, which means
you should have an original script, select music and graphics/ images that are from Creative Commons with appropriate permissions and use proper citations. (“Fair use” (Section
107 of the U.S. Copyright Act) allows you to use clips from advertisements for educational
purposes).
Creative Resources
Video training: Lynda.com (accessible through your university portal) (iMovie, Final Cut
Pro are available on campus computers)
Cloud-based video production sites:
http://www.powtoon.com/
https://www.wevideo.com/
Other creative sites:
http://goanimate.com/
http://mashable.com/2010/10/27/create-animations-online/
http://mashable.com/2010/10/24/create-your-own-comics/
http://www.nawmal.com/nawmaleduh
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2392701,00.asp
http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/how-to-make-an-animated-gif/
Images, Music & Sounds: (avoid copyright infringement)
• Many artists register their work with Creative Commons to allow noncommercial use.
You can find out more about how to find such work and how to attribute it on the Creative
Commons site at: https://search.creativecommons.org/
84
Twenty years later
Jim Avery and Jim Marra
It has been 20 years since the first issue of
the JAE was published. Jim and I were successive heads of the Ad Division of AEJMC
and were fortunate enough to see the birth of
the Journal of Advertising Education under
our watch.
The new journal was the collective brainstorm of Ad Division members from the late
1980s and early 1990s. As is often the case,
who really knows where, when or by whom
the seed of an idea is planted? In the Journal’s case, it was probably planted in the
fertile fields of Ad Division member discussions over the need to legitimize our teaching
efforts and achievements in the minds of our
mortgage holders, the university at large and
an old guard, primarily in Journalism. They
provided the home where we boldly took
a seat in the early 1960s, thanks to the pioneering efforts from the likes of Billy I. Ross
among others.
Having entered the home with ready cash
in the form of increasing student enrollments,
advertising’s rent was sure to be paid. Students flocked to the field. As a consequence,
ad education grew, requiring more resources,
more room, and more autonomy. In a way, allied disciplines such as Journalism were glad
to have and house us through those growth
years. After all, it’s not like our room was
free. We racked up the student tuition hours
and helped feed the coffers. We were good
tenants. Still, since advertising lacked the
time-tested history of academic success and
refinement, in the minds of some it was often perceived as “lightweight” or “crass.” In
effect, it had yet to become a legitimate academic field.
By the mid-90s, great strides had been
made to legitimize advertising as a “science”
and “art” with both depth and rigor. But what
distinguished the AEJMC Ad Division back
then was its focused thinking in giving voice
to how we “educate.” Set aside for a moment
the notion of how far back in time the nobility
of our craft has been memorialized by great
minds, and consider instead the raw fact that
“teaching” is one of the key legs on the threelegged academic stool. It is what we do, at
Summer 2016
least some of the time, if not most of the time.
And since that’s a large part of what we do,
it made all the sense in the world to give it a
voice, not only among ourselves but among
others as well.
The potential benefits seemed impressive.
In the journal’s first issue, we enlisted Elsie Hebert, Eric Zanot and Elaine Wagner for
their assistance in turning a journal idea into a
reality. Keith Johnson, of course, was chosen
as editor. Thanks again Elsie, Eric, Elaine and
Keith.
From those early days and throughout the
years, JAE has inspired the professional and
intellectual exchange of teaching ideas and
activities within the advertising discipline.
For a quarter century it has helped elevate
our craft and has given voice to our sharpest
minds.
Congratulations to all who have made
the journal a touchstone for our mission to
educate and often prepare students to enter a challenging, dynamic field that stands
broad-shouldered at the vital intersection of
commerce and creativity. And while we have
both retired from our respective universities,
we remain proud to have been part of the genesis of the Journal of Advertising Education.
Say thanks, Jim.
85
Looking Back
Pat Rose, Editor of JAE (2005-2010)
"plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose”
Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr
“I remember the discussions which
launched JAE – and the comment that we, the
advertising division of AEJMC had to focus
more on teaching...Tom Bowers and Mary
Alice Shaver took up the challenge and offered the pre-conference teaching workshop.
Keith Johnson gave birth to the first issue of
the journal.”
“Interestingly, when we started the journal,
public universities had more money, students
still watched television far more than they
used the internet, and, although not often,
even went to the library. Today, our students
equate secondary research with “Google.”
Our students appreciated the past; we could
use “classic” cases. Today, a communications
case that predates use of the internet is archaic… Thus, we constantly need to re-think both
how to deal with advertising and with our students…” (“From the Editor” by Pat Rose, JAE
Spring 2005)
Later, discussing what the editors had in
common, I stated:
“The three of us had at least two things
in common: we loved teaching – and we
saw a need to share teaching insights. Keith
wrote” “good, effective teaching is an art
form,...learning how to teach is important,
and ... teaching is important enough to warrant a journal.” Mary Alice concluded her
editorship with the comment: “Authors have
provided articles and teaching tips of insight,
interest and use to all of us in the field. Their
research and innovative ideas have sparked
thought, course revision and debate. And finally, when I passed on the editorship to Jami
and Alice, I stated: “I believe we all need to
enrich our pedagogy, expand our horizons,
and stay abreast of new developments in our
field and in methodologies that enable learning.” (“From the Editor” by Pat Rose, JAE
Fall 2010).
Looking forward:
I am not blessed with a crystal ball. The
field of advertising has changed drastically
since my days at an agency (think of Mad
86
Men and three martini lunches) and subsequently taught at Florida International
University (can you believe I “retired” two
years after Facebook was launched?). I am
still technologically inept – except for Microsoft Office. However, my penmanship was
always illegible – and, my fingers (an early
technology) still have trouble with texting.
But I listen, read, stay involved in the field,
and monitor new approaches in the field of advertising through my friends and colleagues.
Yes, sometimes I get lost in the verbiage of
our Ph.D. students. But I find that one major
thing remains unchanged: our need to understand the consumer. Whether we talk about
the FCB model, classic consumer behavior,
big data, psychophysiology or neuroscience
– we are still concentrating on and trying to
understand the consumer.
Although we certainly can’t know what
techniques and knowledge will be needed in
the future, I truly believe that if we continue
to see advertising’s role as understanding the
consumer, we’ll be on track. Accordingly,
all we - as educators - can really plan on is
knowing that our job, and hopefully passion,
is to educate students to think strategically, to
be to open to learning new ideas, and to take
risks. The future lies in challenging students
to apply what they have already learned to
new questions, new situations – always understanding that what we produce and deliver as
an end product is based on our target audience
– the consumer.
Advertising education and the Journal of
Advertising Education: The 20-year evolution
Sheri J. Broyles, University of North Texas
I started teaching as an assistant professor
20 years ago, and I met Brett Robbs at my
first academic conference. Like me, he started
in the professional world then moved to academe. And, also like me, he was a copywriter.
I naturally gravitated to him. He was not only
a limitless source of ideas and inspiration, but
also a believer in making the next generation better – and willing to share. We became
friends and co-authors and continued our exchanges until he retired from the University of
Colorado after 21 years of teaching. It seemed
especially fitting to talk with Brett about the
past 20 years – how we evolved as teachers as
well as the evolution of advertising education
and JAE. This is a retrospective of our conversation.
Our evolution as teachers
As we evolve as teachers, we seem to move
from a content-oriented approach to focus
on the bigger picture. That is, the longer we
teach the less (content) we teach and the better we teach it. This was true for both Brett
and me and, undoubtedly, for others. For example, in a 15-week semester there may have
been 14 different assignments that were, with
time, cut in half. Or five creative campaigns
cut to three. The result is that there is more
emphasis on the creative process and creative
problem solving – something that is important
for students as they move into their careers.
It should be noted that “creative” is used in a
larger context that applies not only to creative
classes such as copywriting, but to the thinking and problem-solving involved, especially
in upper-level classes.
Perhaps more importantly, students have
the self-discovery that everyone is “creative”
(or can solve problems) and have a newly
found confidence in themselves. Many may
never actually create an ad after they leave
our classes, but if they understand the process,
they can apply that to any problem whether in
their professional or personal lives.
Summer 2016
The same would apply to other classes. In a
planning or research class students learn how
to figure out what the problem is, then find
the resources to help solve that problem. In
media planning there is less number crunching – because computers do that for us – and
more learning how to understand data and
apply it. In campaigns, students learn how to
pull a large project together and pitch it (aka
presentation skills).
Consider this: how much does each of us remember from the classes we took in college?
Again, it isn’t the content as much as learning
where to find information as well as the larger
thinking and problem solving we apply every
day. Our job is to give our students the tools
to fill up their toolbox that they’ll use in their
future. For students in our creative classes
they learn that everyone is creative, which in
turn gives them more confidence. That selfdiscovery is an important part of the collective
experience we call college. As faculty, we see
our goals for our students evolve as well. First
we think we’re teaching them how to create
advertisements and later realize it’s the process that’s more important. Again, a move
from “content” to a thinking process that is
applicable to our student’s larger lives. We, in
advertising, teach this process: figure out what
the problem is, gather information, come up
with a solution then put that in a form that our
clients/bosses/whoever can use.
The evolution of advertising education
Twenty years ago advertising education in
many ways followed the agency model. We
structured our curriculum based on areas within a traditional agency: account management,
research, media and creative, then brought it
all together in a campaigns class. Today those
in advertising have to solve a variety of problems, and the solution may or may not be an
advertising message. This is a seismic shift in
both the advertising industry and for those of
us teaching the next generation of advertising
87
professionals.
Of course the biggest change – a second
revolution perhaps with as big an impact as
the Creative Revolution in the 1960s – is the
reverberations of social/digital media. Perhaps
this is an apt comparison because a creative
emphasis is especially important as digital has
taken center stage. However, no longer is it
only the writer/art director creative team solving a problem. Rather everyone is expected to
have creative answers – and everybody can. In
this brave new world of advertising, anyone
can come up with a smart, creative solution.
Sometimes it’s an ad, and sometimes it’s
something else.
Traditional research evolved into account
planning after Jay Chiat brought this new way
of thinking from London to the United States
in the 1980s. These planners worked directly
with creative teams to come up with bigger,
more strategic ideas. Planning has come into
its own – and into our classes. Consumer
insights are increasingly important and expected as a foundation for creative. Planners
have become “the voice of the consumer,” and
the creative brief is their masterpiece.
Creative also changed – especially how we
execute our ideas. Once we typed our copy on
typewriters then sent it to type houses. Galleys came back that were waxed and placed
on boards to take to clients for approval. It
was time consuming and expensive to make
changes, so only major errors were corrected.
Then Apple made us “Think different.” Not
only did the way we produce work evolve –
making InDesign, Photoshop and Illustrator
required programs for us to teach our students
– but computers also changed the speed of
our industry. And expectations. Clients can
change their minds more often in the process.
An even larger impact, perhaps, is that more is
expected from fewer people in less time.
Media planning, of course, is no longer
traditional in the larger world, nor should it
be in our classrooms. Where media used to
mean numbers crunching (e.g., reach, frequency, gross rating points), computers now
do the math for us. Today the emphasis is on
analytics that require the interpretation and
communication of patterns in data. But media
is more than just numbers. Keith Reinhard,
chairman emeritus at DDB Worldwide and
a member of the American Advertising Federation’s Hall of Fame, said that media is the
second creative department, and he looked
for “a new type of creative, strategic media
planner” who understands all forms of media.
Perhaps he was prophetic when he said this
88
in 1989. His statement rings true today in our
new social/digital media world.
As advertising continues to evolve, these
new media and how we use them are increasingly important. Today’s technology allows
consumer conversations and the ability to
track those feedback loops. Digital has made
what 20 years ago we called IMC – integrated
marketing communications – come to life.
This technology is pushing an evolution in
our classrooms to better prepare our students.
Another change, perhaps due to social media, is a greater focus on social responsibility
and making our clients more aware that it is,
indeed, a responsibility. For example, how can
casting talent enhance both our message and
society? Or how can we help our clients have
a more positive perception from consumers
with environmental packaging? Not only is
this thinking more demanded by consumers,
but it’s also the right thing to do.
The impact of the Journal of Advertising
Education
Not everyone can go to AEJMC or other conferences. However, JAE is the one place where
those of us in advertising can go to think about
teaching and find innovative ideas. It’s a place
where we can discover others who are addressing pedagogical issues that we struggle
with. It’s a channel that allows us to reach out
to them and start a broader conversation. Or
perhaps we cross paths at a conference and,
knowing their work from JAE, know that
might be a starting point for exploring those
issues together. We might learn that others are
struggling with the same issues, and we might
seek them out for answers. Or we find others
are concerned about similar issues, and we
might connect with them either via email or at
a conference. JAE shows us that others struggle with the same issues we struggle with, and
that might make us feel less isolated. Looking
at the bigger picture, advertising departments
or programs might look to JAE as they revise
their curriculum. It’s also a source for talking
about curriculum as we continually revamp
and improve.
Perhaps more important, JAE points to the
value of teaching, something that might not
appear that important at some institutions.
JAE reminds us that many value teaching and
its importance for our students – the next generation of advertising professionals. We are
academics who are committed to teaching by
talking about it, thinking about it and writing about it. Funding a journal that’s focused
on teaching shows a commitment that can be
both reassuring and inspiring.
JAE can have an impact on both our teaching and our research. Such a journal gives
us a window into what others are doing in
their classrooms and how they approach the
classroom or curriculum across different areas (e.g., creative, planning, media). Without
JAE there would be less research on advertising pedagogy. JAE is where the research
is published; it shows the importance of the
work and it encourages others to think about
these issues. For many of us it was essential
to our development as both teachers and as
researchers. We come up with better methods
by talking and working with others to develop
ideas that we might not be able to do individually.
Perhaps Brett summed it up most eloquently: “JAE allowed me to write about subjects I
cared about, which was essential to my development as a teacher and as a researcher, and
it allowed me to meet people that I shared interests with so we could go on this academic
journey together. Thanks to JAE, I had some
very good traveling companions. They made
the difficulties less difficult – and the rewarding parts even more rewarding. It was huge.”
I was one of Brett’s academic traveling companions, and I’m honored to have been the
co-author with Brett on his final paper before
he retired.
but that’s okay, too. You just move on and
change it the next time. Evolving your classes
not only makes them more relevant for your
students, but it makes the classes more interesting for us as faculty.
So here we are – 20 years of JAE. Twenty
years of learning. Twenty years of sharing.
Twenty years of growing. Now… here’s to the
next 20 years. Cheers.
Some final thoughts
In the end, instead of only learning something
about advertising, students discover a deeper
understanding about themselves. This isn’t
something most of us know when we first
come to academe so, like our students, we as
faculty evolve.
For those new to the academy perhaps it’s
important to know that we all go through
trial and error with our classes. We try something and, if it works, we keep doing that. If
it doesn’t, then we try something else. Over
time, our classes seem to solidify into a strong
base, but a base that can continue to evolve by
bringing in new ideas.
Brett and I both have learned that we, as
faculty, also have to have fun in our classes.
If you’re having fun in your class, the worst
thing that could happen is at least you are having fun. But, more likely, if you’re having fun,
your students in the room will have fun, too.
It becomes more spontaneous. Unpredictable.
And something for students to look forward
to. It’s a way you can also role-model risk
taking, which is important for students in
advertising. Of course not everything works,
Summer 2016
89
STRATEGIC ADVERTISING SPECIALIST
ENROLL. EXPLORE. EARN CREDIT.
STACK CREDITS TOWARD A CERTIFICATE OR MASTERS DEGREE
SMU’s flexible advertising programs are designed for marketing professionals who want to
enhance knowledge, or those wanting career preparation while keeping options open.
With small class sizes, industry professionals and leading academics as instructors; the
Temerlin Advertising Institute promises unique networking opportunities and an applied
education for real-world impact.
CERTIFICATE PROGRAM (18 credit hours)
3 Core + 3 Electives
1 Research/Analytics Class
2 Core Classes
3 Elective Classes
M.A. IN ADVERTISING (36 credit hours)
6 Core + 6 Electives
4 Core Classes
1 Research/Analytics Class
1 Capstone Experience
6 Elective Classes
Combine core courses with electives to meet your individual needs.
Core Classes
• Consumer Insight & Persuasion
• Advertising as a Cultural Force
• Marketing Communications Management
• Social Media Engagement Strategies
One research/analytics class
One capstone experience (professional report, campaign’s class, thesis, or internship)
Electives
Choose electives to build expertise in the areas of Agency Leadership, Consumer Insight,
Digital Marketing, or interdisciplinary specializations.
Account Planning
Agency Management
Brand Loyalty & Gamification
Creative Problem Solving
International Advertising
New Business Development & Procurement
Responsibility & Social Entrepreneurship
Strategic Communications for Non-Profits
Content & Email Marketing
Digital, Social & Mobile Marketing
Marketing Mix Analysis
PPC, Paid Search, Retargeting, & SEO / SEM
Qualitative & Quantitative Research
Shopper Marketing
One-week destinations: NYC | SxSW | Cannes
…and more
Personal growth. Professional distinction.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Peter Noble, Professor of Practice,
Graduate Program Coordinator
[email protected]
214.361.1234
smu.edu/temerlin/graduate
90
Department of Advertising & Public Relations
congratulates
on
20 years of enhancing advertising
education scholarship.
The Grady College AdPR program is globally and
professionally oriented.
Creative Circus Partnership
Cannes Lions Study Abroad
China Study Abroad
PHD-NY Scholars Program
Omnicom Fellowship Program
Google-Performics Scholars Program
To find out more about our program and offerings,
visit www.grady.uga.edu/adpr
or follow us at gradyadpr.blogspot.com.
Summer 2016
91
Advertising Industry Diversity: We’ve
“Kind of” Come a Long Way Baby, but
Larger Pipeline and More Intentional Action
from Industry and Educators Needed
Osei Appiah and Dana Saewitz
Diversity in the workplace makes us
smarter. Recent studies show that diversity,
particularly racial diversity, in both large
corporations and small groups, enhances
creativity and leads to innovation, better decision-making and more effective problem
solving (Phillips, 2014). While society has
grown more demographically diverse over
the years, the advertising industry – along
with the academic institutions that provide
it with the talent pool – has fallen woefully
behind the country. For example, according
to a study by the Madison Avenue Project,
Blacks represent 13% of the population but
make up only 5% of advertising professionals (Schultz, 2011). In fact, the study pointed
out that nearly a fifth of large ad agencies employ no Black professionals, a rate that is 60%
higher than the general labor market (Schultz,
2011). Moreover, research demonstrates that,
on those occasions when Blacks are employed
in the industry, most are generally relegated
to jobs in stand-alone multicultural agencies
(Bendick & Egan, 2009).
The advertising industry has been charged
with and trusted to reach and influence an
increasingly racially and ethnically diverse
populace, but lacks credibility given the
limited extent to which it has impacted the
color line within its own industry. Frankly,
this problem is not just the responsibility of
the advertising industry. It shares responsibility with the academy for the lack of workplace
diversity in advertising.
Although advertising managers voice their
desire to hire more ethnic minorities, many
claim they cannot find diverse candidates, because few minorities pursue advertising as a
career (Schultz, 2011). This is partially true.
The majority of college students studying
advertising and related fields actually reflect
the advertising workforce – predominantly
white and mostly female (Bendick & Egan,
2009; Fullerton & Kendrick, 2014). To impact
92
change, there needs to be a more concerted effort by both the industry and the academy to
diversify agencies by creating a talent pipeline
of diverse candidates.
The History of Advertising Workplace Diversity
The advertising industry has a dismal history
of hiring members from underrepresented
groups. As early as the 1960s, agencies have
been under significant pressure by civil rights
organizations to diversify, an issue that became particularly evident after an Urban
League investigation revealed few creative
and executive positions were occupied by
Blacks (Chambers, 2008). Another investigation, led by the American Association of
Advertising Agencies in 1963, discovered
that fewer than one percent of employees at
Madison Avenue agencies were Black (Patel,
2010). This disgraceful hiring record sparked
the New York State Commission on Human
Rights (NYSCHR) to launch several inquiries
examining the hiring practices of many New
York City agencies (Elias, Phillips, VanRysdam & Chun, in press).
For example, in 1968 the Commission
charged nearly a dozen leading ad agencies
with employment discrimination (Chambers, 2008) and initiated complaints against
a number of agencies for what the Commission called a poor record of hiring minorities
and an unwillingness and inability to make
meaningful changes to the culture (Chambers,
2008).
In fact, just ten years ago the New York City
Commission on Human Rights threatened to
force executives at leading advertising agencies to testify about their dismal record of
hiring ethnic minorities. Out of this fear, 16
of New York’s top ad agencies signed agreements with the Commission to increase their
ethnic minority recruiting, diversify senior
management and allow city officials to track
their hiring progress (Texeira, 2006). Despite
these efforts, a 2008 follow-up study conducted by attorney Cyrus Mehri and the NAACP
concluded in a 100-page report that despite
the threat of fines, necessary improvements
in racial balance in advertising employment
rates never occurred. The NAACP study
revealed that “racial discrimination is 38
percent worse in the advertising industry
than in the overall U.S. labor market [sic],
and that the ‘discrimination divide’ between
advertising and other U.S. industries is more
than twice as bad now as it was 30 years
ago [sic].” (NAACP, 2008, para. 3) Furthermore, the report focused on dismissing the
effectiveness of efforts long popular in the
ad industry, such as internships, scholarships
and entry-level hiring programs, given only
2% of New York City advertising managers
were Black, and Black employment rates had
barely improved since a similar report’s findings from 1968 (Cardwell & Elliott, 2006).
In 2009, the New York City Commission on
Human Rights expressed their dissatisfaction
with the limited progress made by the agencies since the Commission had intervened in
2006 with the threat of a lawsuit (Bush, 2011).
Signs of Progress
In fairness, some progress has been made to
diversify the workplace. By 2007, noticeable
improvements had been made by the 15 ad
agencies that voluntarily agreed to have their
minority hiring practices monitored. These
agencies reported that among their new hires
25% were Black, Hispanic or Asian American,
exceeding their target of 18% (Elliott, 2008).
In fact, for Young & Rubicam, 27% of their
newly hired managers and 46% of their newly
hired professionals were ethnic minorities (Elliott, 2008). In 2009, Blacks represented 5%
of the total advertising workforce across the
United States (Bendick & Egan, 2009) – not
sufficient, but significantly higher than the 1%
of the advertising workforce that Blacks occupied in the 60s and 70s (Chambers, 2008).
Moreover, the progress that the advertising industry has made extends beyond hiring
to include efforts to increase the talent pool
and expand the pipeline of racial and ethnic
minorities through specific initiatives. These
industry initiatives include: The American
Advertising Federation’s (AAF) Most Promising Multicultural Student Program, AAF
Mosaic Career Fair and Conference, the
American Association of Advertising Agencies’ Multicultural Advertising Internship
Program, the Marcus Graham Project and the
AdColor Awards.
Summer 2016
A few other programs initiated by industry
to change the face of the advertising workforce include a compelling video to attract
ethnic minority students to advertising entitled
The Pursuit of Passion: Diversity in Advertising. Additionally, in 2011, during the popular
NYC Advertising Week an annual one-day
conference sponsored by The One Club was
launched, entitled “Where are All the Black
People?”, to foster more diverse creative talent in the industry. This multicultural career
fair included seminars, workshops, panels and
on-site interviews aimed at college students
and young professionals. More recently, The
One Club has renamed this event “Here Are
All The Black People,” in part to respond
to industry executives’ claim that they cannot find Blacks to hire. The industry also has
partnered with the American Advertising Federation (AAF) to develop a summer program
for high school students called AdCamp (Oliver, Murphy & Tag, 2014).
Through the aforementioned initiatives
and programs, the advertising industry has
committed time, energy, talent and money
to diversify the advertising workforce. In
comparison, what has the academy done to
develop, prepare and increase the talent pool
of ethnic and racial minorities?
Like the advertising industry, the academy in general, and advertising educators in
particular, need to be accountable to support
diversity efforts. It is critical for the academy
to make more deliberate and proactive efforts
to recruit, train and retain diverse talent for
advertising programs within their institutions.
Communication and advertising departments
must take more responsibility to increase the
number of ethnic minority students majoring
in advertising and related fields.
The Pipeline – The Role and Responsibility
of Advertising Educators
Some ad agency executives eager to hire
young Blacks have complained that the lack
of diversity in agencies is not intentional, but
rather due to the lack of diverse applicants.
What is the responsibility of advertising educators to address this need?
Preparing ethnic minorities with the tools
they will need to attain and succeed in an advertising career begins in the academy (Grow,
Mallia, Williams, Pollock & Klinger, 2015).
The academy serves as the training ground for
future advertising employees (Erba, Phillips
& Geana, 2012). In an effort to produce ethnic
minority students, advertising and communication programs must first survey their own
programs to uncover any shortcomings that
93
may limit their efforts to create, maintain and
graduate a diverse talent pool (Erba et al.,
2012).
One contributor may be the dearth of ethnic minority students majoring in advertising
and communication. Ethnic minorities (i.e.,
Blacks, Hispanics and Asian Americans) constitute only about 20% of students studying
communication and advertising-related fields
(U.S. Department of Education, 2011). This is
particularly troubling for two specific minority groups – Blacks and Hispanics, who are
poorly represented. According to the data, although Hispanics and Blacks constitute 16%
and 12% of the population, respectively, they
only represent about 7% and 9% of students
enrolled in communication related programs
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2010; U.S. Department
of Education, 2011), which is exacerbated by
their high college attrition rates (Erba et al.,
2012). Hence, it is not surprising why industry leaders and educators alike argue that few
people from diverse racial and ethnic groups
are fully aware of advertising opportunities or
even understand the pathway to gaining positions in advertising (Vega, 2012). In his book
Madison Avenue and the Color Line, Jason
Chambers (2008) similarly points out that
the lack of a pipeline is often due to a lack
of awareness among young, educated African
Americans that advertising is a creative, lucrative, minority-welcoming profession, with
a clear career path that follows directly upon
completion of a college education.
Therefore, the responsibility to diversify
is shared, or should be shared, by employers, professional associations and advertising
educators. Universities, and the professors
and administrators within them, can literally
build the pipeline of talent. What changes can
educators make? What responsibilities and actions can and should educators take on?
First, it is essential to acknowledge that
diversity cannot be achieved accidentally.
It must be achieved with intentionality and
purpose. According to a 2006 article in the
Chronicle of Higher Education, “nearly every university, it seems, is racing to appoint
a chief diversity officer.” (Gose, 2006, p. 55)
(Many large corporations have also hired
people in this role.) These administrators are
responsible for diversifying faculty, curriculum and student body (Gose, 2006). Given the
enormous need for diverse candidates in the
pipeline to help support ad agencies in their
recruitment efforts, it is recommended that
communication and advertising departments
appoint “diversity officers” who are responsible for recruitment, mentorship, support and
94
career preparation for diverse, often underserved candidates.
Second, advertising educators should visit
and speak to high school students and inform
them about the advertising industry, as these
students are considering career options.
Reaching out to high school students can be
an important “recruitment tool for college
programs in advertising, public relations and
communications, as well as a means to increase diversity and funnel new talent into the
advertising industry” (Oliver, et al., 2014, p.
36).
For example, in 2011, Temple University
launched a High School Advertising Workshop. Advertising students were given an
opportunity to participate in a unique community-based learning course, in which the
university students traveled weekly to two
local inner-city public high schools to teach
advertising. For high school students, the
goals of the program were to inspire them
to graduate, apply to college and consider a
career in advertising. For college students,
the goals were to develop teaching skills
and leadership skills, strengthen and develop
advertising skills, and learn about the challenges facing urban education. The program
was funded by a grant from two professional
associations: The Philly Ad Club and the
Pennsylvania Association of Broadcasters.
The goal of the supporters was to help build
the pipeline to diversify the local advertising
industry. At the conclusion of the program,
qualitative results indicated that it was an extremely valuable experience for both the high
school and college students.
Third, diversity efforts by educators should
raise students’ awareness of the issue by incorporating curriculum changes, such as the
development and launch of diversity courses
like “Stereotypes in the Media,” “Multicultural Marketing,” “Advertising and Diversity,”
“Account Planning in a Diverse World” and
“Advertising and Society.”
Fourth, educators should encourage diverse students to form professional student
organizations that focus on advertising. For
example, in an effort to address and rectify the
underrepresentation of Blacks in advertising,
The Ohio State University (OSU) School of
Communication founded the national Black
Advertising and Strategic Communication
Association (BASCA) in 2012. This student
organization is a partnership among students,
faculty and industry professionals intended
to develop and prepare Black students for
careers in advertising, PR and marketing.
BASCA seeks to: 1) increase students’ unJournal of Advertising Education
derstanding of the advertising industry and
its practices; 2) lead more Black students to
aspire to and achieve careers in advertising
and related fields; 3) provide Black students
with information about and access to available careers in advertising and strategic
communication and 4) provide students with
access to academic and professional mentors
and role-models. This organization has been
responsible for students landing jobs at some
of the most prestigious advertising and PR
firms in the country, such as BBDO, Ogilvy &
Mather and Edelman.
Lastly, educators in advertising and communication departments should work with
faculty, administrators, university officials,
alumni and industry executives to establish
scholarships and student awards specific to
students of color who are majoring in advertising and related fields.
Although this is a short and insufficient list,
it represents some first steps that advertising
educators can utilize to develop a larger pool
of racially and ethnically diverse candidates.
Conclusion
It is important for advertising educators and
scholars to be more intentional in addressing
issues of diversity in their research. Little has
been written on the issue of advertising and
diversity in advertising and education-related
journals. For example, a rudimentary content
analysis, via a search using the terms ‘race,’
‘ethnicity’ and ‘diversity’ in articles published
in Journal of Advertising Education (JAE)
over the last six years, found only one such
article (i.e., Oliver et al., 2014). This finding substantiates the need for a special issue
in JAE on advertising and diversity. Just as
JAE has been at the forefront of advertising
education over the last 20 years, over the next
20 years it is hoped that diversity will be a
significant component of its issues, articles,
editorial review board and, of course, its success.
References
Bendick, M., & Egan, M. L. (2009). Research
perspectives on race and employment in
the advertising industry. Washington, DC:
Bendick and Egan Economic Consultants.
Bush, M. (2011, January 31). Sorry state of
diversity in advertising is also a culture
problem. Advertising Age, 82(5), 4-5. Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/news/
lack-diversity-advertising-hiring/148565/.
Cardwell, D., & Elliott, S. (2006, September 8). New York City ad firms agree to
hire more black managers. The New York
Summer 2016
Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.
com/2006/09/08/business/media/08ads.
html.
Chambers, J. (2008). Madison Avenue and
the color line: African Americans in the
advertising industry. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Elias, T., Phillips, H. L., VanRysdam, M. K.,
& Chun, J. (in press). A mixed methods examination of 21st century hiring processes,
social networking sites, and implicit bias.
Journal of Social Media in Society.
Elliott, S. (2008, April 16). Madison Ave.
charts some progress in meeting diversity hiring goals. The New York Times,
C6. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.
com/2008/04/16/business/media/16adco.
html?_r=0.
Erba, J., Phillips, L., & Geana, M. V. (2012).
Am I in? Influence of viewers’ race and
sex on image appeal for higher education
advertising. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 2(4), 1-31.
Fullerton, J. A., & Kendrick, A. (2014). Perceptions of work/life balance among U.S.
advertising students: A study of gender
differences. Advertising & Society Review,
14(4). DOI: 10.1353/asr.2014.0004
Gose, B. (2006, September 29). The rise
of the chief diversity officer. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(6), 55.
Available
at
http://www.fulbright.de/
fileadmin/files/tousa/stipendien/ees/Educational_Experts_Seminar_May_2013/
The_Rise_of_the_Chief_Diversity_Office__CHE_29-906.pdf.
Grow, J. M., Mallia, K., Williams, L., Pollock,
M., & Klinger, L. (2015). Preparing women
and minorities for success and leadership in
“creative”. American Academy of Advertising Conference Proceedings, 86-87.
NAACP. (2008). New data exposes dramatic
racial discrimination in U.S. advertising
industry [Press release]. Retrieved from:
h t t p : / / w w w. n a a c p . o rg / p r e s s / e n t r y /
new-data-exposes-dramatic-racial-discrimination--in-us-advertising-industry.
18(2), 36-44.
Patel, K. (2010, March 29). Too few diversity
dollars on Madison Avenue. Advertising
Age, 81(13), 1, 31. Retrieved from http://
adage.com/article?article_id=143009.
Phillips, K. W. (2014, October). Being around
people who are different from us makes us
more creative, more diligent, and harder95
working/ How diversity works. Scientific
American, 311(4), 43-47. Retrieved from
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/
how-diversity-makes-us-smarter/.
Schultz, E. J. (2011, January 3). Minneapolis’ Brandlab aims to diversify ad world’s
future. Advertising Age, 82(1), 2,21. Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/news/
minneapolis-brandlab-aims-diversify-advertising-s-future/147955/
Texeira, E. (2006, September 24). Ad agencies
look to recruit minorities. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://wapo.
st/1FLHxeC.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). 2010 Census results: United States. Retrieved from http://
www.census.gov/2010census/data/.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Digest
of education statistics: Bachelor’s degrees
conferred by degree-granting institutions,
by sex, race/ethnicity, and field of study:
2008-09 [Table 297]. Retrieved from http://
nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/
dt10_297.asp.
Vega, T. (2012, September 4). With diversity
still lacking, industry focuses on retention.
The New York Times, p. B3.
96
The Times Are Changing.
Is It Time to Change Your Major?
Keith A. Quesenberry, Messiah College
This essay is adapted from two articles that first appeared in the Fall 2015 and Winter 2016
issues of AdNews, the newsletter for the Advertising Division of the Association for Education
in Journalism and Mass Communication.
The times they are a-changin’.
— Bob Dylan, The Times They Are A-Changin’, 1964
They call the 1960s the “turbulent decade”
because of all the changes that happened.
This sentiment was summed up nicely in Bob
Dylan’s song of that decade. This fall, my
department set out to revise our major and
minor curriculum. In researching academic
programs, industry statistics and education research to inform and justify our modifications,
I found that we are living through one of the
most turbulent times in marketing, advertising
and public relations history.
As we celebrate the 20th anniversary of
the Journal of Advertising Education, it is
appropriate to consider the changes in the
advertising field and advertising education
that have occurred since the first issue of this
journal in 1996. Anniversaries are for reflection, so let’s take a moment to consider what
has changed in and around the advertising
discipline, and how those changes affect our
instruction and curriculum.
First, we must acknowledge that the name
‘advertising’ itself is changing. The Billy I.
Ross and Jef. I. Richards (2015) Where Shall
I Go to Study Advertising and Public Relations? is the directory to help students select
a college or university where a program in
advertising or public relations education is
offered. The 49th annual edition listed more
than 110 college or university programs, yet a
look at the names of the programs or departments reveals nearly 50 different versions of
names for advertising education.
Yes, there are still departments of advertising and public relations, but many programs
have changed their names. The specific wording differs, but a wide variety of words are
Summer 2016
now used to describe our programs, including
media, communication arts, communication
studies, communication information, communication design, mass communications,
mass media, media and culture, and strategic
communication. Integration of disciplines and
inclusion of marketing seem to be themes, with
other variations, including integrated strategic
communication, integrated marketing communication, marketing communication and
a department of advertising, marketing and
public relations.
Changes in academic department or program names follow a similar trend in the
industry. Agencies have moved away from the
name ‘advertising,’ as they have integrated
disciplines and moved into digital and social
media. Many ad agencies have rebranded
themselves, using terms such as ‘digital,’
‘integrated,’ ‘brand,’ ‘communications,’ ‘engagement,’ ‘ideation,’ ‘consumer connection’
and ‘experience.’ These new words all have a
sense of indicating a broader set of capabilities beyond traditional advertising and mass
media, with an integration of brand strategy
and new specialties in digital media.
Many advertising programs and agencies have changed their names, because so
much has changed in practice. In the last
two decades, marketing communications has
experienced significant changes in the field.
Unless your program is fairly new, marketing,
advertising and public relations have changed
dramatically since your major was created.
The extent of these changes became very apparent to me as we set out to review our own
major and minor, which was developed many
decades ago. I knew the facts outlined below,
but it really changed my perspective when
placing them on a timeline in contrast to when
our existing courses and curriculum were de97
signed.
The World Wide Web has only been around
since 1996. Albeit a short-lived existence by
most measures, it has changed so much in the
profession. Important areas such as digital
marketing and e-commerce have grown from
zero impact to great importance in the last 15
years.
Social media have changed everything
even faster. Facebook didn’t start until 2004,
and Twitter was not founded until 2006. As
of 2015, Facebook had more than 1 billion
monthly active users (Statista, 2016). Compare this to 20 years ago, when top rated TV
show ER pulled in 20.5 million viewers per
episode (“TV ratings…,” n. d.). I haven’t even
mentioned big data. Data analytics have really
only come on the scene in the last five years.
These changes in technology are very
influential and frankly disruptive to traditional marketing, advertising and public
relations practice. Communication professionals charged with creating and controlling
brand images feel they have lost control and
influence over the consumer. Nowadays, 25%
of brand mentions on the Internet are links
to consumer-generated content (Wainwright,
2012). What’s more, consumers tend to trust
those opinions much more than traditional
marketing and advertising (Nielsen, 2013).
These changes are not limited to business-toconsumer (B2C) brands. Business-to-business
(B2B) is changing as well. I discovered that
Maersk Line, a global shipping company, has
30 social media accounts and has found that
its clients view more than 10 pieces of social
media content before even calling one of its
salespeople (Moth, 2015).
We must also remember that digital does
not only influence online sales. Forrester
Research predicts that the Internet will influence 50% of offline retail sales by 2017 ($1.8
trillion in-store) (Kalyanam, 2013). Other research has found that 80% of local searches
on mobile turn into purchases, nearly 90% in
a physical store (Sterling, 2014).
On the academic side, we are aware that
changes must be made. Research indicates a
shift toward more specialized courses and curriculum. Interestingly, the need for this shift
was seen as early as 1987. A study of students
and business leaders found that students were
not graduating with the specific skills corporations were looking for (Schmidt, Debevec &
Comm, 1987). By 2010, a survey of marketing
faculty revealed that academics still believed
that the most important skills for their majors
were specialized skills over cross-functional
competence (Hyman & Hu, 2005).
98
It has been found that offering courses in
specialized subfields attracts more majors
and improves their job prospects (Campbell,
Heriot & Finney, 2006). Business leaders,
faculty members and students agree that for
undergraduates, functional expertise (specific
knowledge) is more important than being a
generalist (Schelfhaudt & Crittenden, 2005).
Business leaders indicate that cross-functional
teams can be formed once students are hired
where these experts can share their knowledge
with other experts (David, David & David,
2011).
In the Journal of Advertising Education,
Sheri Broyles and Jan Slater (2014) chronicled
some of the changes specific to advertising
education in their article “Big Thinking about
Teaching Advertising.” They identifed three
emerging factors shaping the future of the
advertising industry. Analytics has become
essential, as technology is improving the industry’s ability to gather big data to inform
content creation and content delivery and to
demonstrate advertising return on investment.
Relationships are now key, as brand communication requires consumer engagement.
Delivery is also changing through global messaging, branded content and integrated digital
and social strategies.
Marlene Neill and Erin Schauster (2015)
surveyed industry professionals to find what
core skills are needed for public relations and
advertising practice and what those executives perceive as gaps in education. The most
common skills emphasized were storytelling,
business, strategic planning, presentation,
math and client relations. One common new
specialization needed by both spheres is
education for the emerging roles of social listening and community management.
Neill and Schauster (2015) found both
advertising and public relations executives
agree that students need to understand practices from both of these industries, but also
indicated a growing need for more business
skills normally associated with marketing
programs. Entry-level advertising and public
relations students need to know statistics, financial documents and budgeting, plus have
an understanding of business vocabulary and
business challenges.
The industry professionals identified gaps
in specialization, saying students are not receiving real-time technical training, but also
emphasized the need for strategic thinkers.
The message here is not to throw out integration with technical training, but to integrate
curricula that teach problem solving through
both theory and critical thinking courses
with more tactical specialization courses.
Neill and Schauster (2015) did observe that
many programs already are offering courses
in the needed specialized areas, but they are
squeezed in as additional elective courses.
In my program, we found that our curriculum did offer some specialized skills courses,
but only as electives and many were outside
our program. This type of structure does not
emphasize the importance of specialization
or even assure the students will have room
in their schedules or be able to get into those
courses and learn the needed skills. After all
the research was said and done, we realized
we had to do something with our program to
reflect this new reality. Specialization seems
to be a key to success for our programs and
our students.
In the beginning, our department set out to
revise our major curriculum, but we found that
a simple revision was not enough. Instead, we
looked at everything and rebuilt the program
from the ground up around a structure that
works not only for today, but well into the
future. Every course was re-evaluated and reconsidered. Course descriptions and learning
outcomes were all reworked. We reduced our
core requirements, added required specialization courses for student choice and made
a structure for the future growth of courses
we do not even know we will need five or ten
years from now.
I have taught in advertising, IMC and
communications programs in large state universities (36,000 undergraduate students) and
midsize private universities (4,500 undergraduate students). I now teach at Messiah College
in a business department marketing program
that helps prepare students interested in advertising. We have 2,700 undergraduate students,
of whom 300 are business students and 50 are
specifically marketing majors.
Whatever your advertising, IMC, strategic
communications, public relations or marketing communications program is like, the basic
premise of what we did can apply to you as
well. We re-evaluated the entire core, removed some core courses, combed through
others and refocused the rest. From there, we
rebuilt the curriculum around a new flexible
structure that makes room for and requires a
significant number and variety of specialization courses.
Our department realized that we are now
way beyond adding some of these new skills
to existing courses or simply tacking them on
as more electives. We found that a curriculum designed more than 20 years ago simply
could not be retrofitted. When you think about
Summer 2016
it, how could the professors who designed the
current curriculum have possibly predicted or
accommodated for the dramatic changes we
have experienced in the field since the birth of
the Word Wide Web?
Here is a basic chart of the changes our department made (see Table 1). We reduced the
school/ department core from 41 to 34 credits
to make room for marketing specialization
courses, increasing the marketing major requirements from 18 to 24 credits. Our goal
was to reduce the school/department core
further and free up one more specialization
course (31 core credits and 27 specialization
credits), but we had to keep a course we felt
we could remove to maintain AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of
Business) accreditation. Ideally, for more of a
curriculum overhaul perhaps some of our accreditation standards should also change.
From the reduced core we then created
a bucket of required specialization credits
where students can go two or more courses
deep in an area of choice from specialized
courses in multiple areas. In creating the specialization bucket, we intentionally did not
formalize designated sequences or tracks. We
did this so our specialization course offerings
could adjust over time as the field evolves and
new areas of study and practice arise. As the
world changes or our enrollment grows, we
will add marketing specialty course options to
the major specialization electives.
As I attend conferences and hear yet again
about the types of classes we all need to provide our students in order for them to remain
competitive in the job field, I hear a lot about
cross-disciplinary curricula across schools
and departments. However, old academic silos are even harder to break. Perhaps you will
have more success working across traditional
disciplines. For now, our students have their
five college-wide free electives that we cannot
make part of our major, but they are free to
take any course they like, such as public relations, art or computer science.
I will not say the process was easy, but if,
like many of us, you have been simply revising an existing curriculum and courses
developed decades ago, it may be worth your
time to re-evaluate everything. Take the 20th
anniversary of the Journal of Advertising Education as an opportunity to take stock of your
major. Perhaps you need to subtract and simplify as well. As Bob Dylan says, “Your old
road is rapidly agin’” (1964). Change is hard,
but we tried to make every decision based on
what is ultimately best for our students.
99
Table 1:
New Major Structure with Reduced Core and Added Specialization
New Curriculum
Old Curriculum
General Education:
(17 courses/ 50 credits) – same
General Education:
Department/ School Core:
Major Requirements:
(12 courses/ 34 credits)
• 102 Opportunities in Business (1 credit)
• 141 Financial Accounting
• 107 Applied Mathematics for Management
• 242 Managerial Accounting
• 120 Principles of Management
• 190 Strategic Use of Information Technol• 120 Principles of Macroeconomics
ogy
• 130 Marketing Principles
• 102 Opportunities in Business (1 credit)
• 190 Strategic Use of Information Technol• 120 Principles of Management
ogy
• 350 Financial Management
• 220 Principles of Microeconomics
• 356 Decision-Making Tools in Manage• 130 Survey of Accounting
ment
• 281 Applied Statistics for Management
• 381 Business Law I
• 350 Financial Management
• 459 Strategic Management
• 381 Business Law I
• 120 Principles of Macroeconomics
• 459 Strategic Management (kept for ac• 220 Principles of Microeconomics
creditation)
• 230 Marketing Principles
• 333 Consumer Behavior
• 337 Advertising
• 339 Marketing Research
• 438 Marketing Management and Strategy
(capstone)
• 281 Applied Statistics for Management
• 107 Applied Mathematics for Management
Major Core:
Marketing Electives:
• 333 Consumer Behavior
• From list of 36 courses in 7 departments
• 337 Integrated Marketing Communication
(Advertising)
• 339 Marketing Research
• 362 Social Media Marketing OR 364 Digital Marketing
• 438 Marketing Management and Strategy
(capstone)
Major Specialization:
• 362 Social Media Marketing
• 364 Digital Marketing
• 357 Personal Selling
• 360 Topics in Marketing
• 391 Internship/ Practicum
• Plus other new specialized marketing electives to be developed in the future such
as Sports Marketing, E-Commerce, Data
Analytics, Supply Chain/ Logistics, etc.
Free Electives:
(5 courses/ 15 credit) – same
Free Electives:
(5 courses/ 15 credit) – same
Total:
Total:
100
References
Broyles, S., & Slater, J. (2014). Big thinking
about teaching advertising. Journal of Advertising Education, 18(2), 46-50.
Campbell, N. D., Heriot, K. C., & Finney,
R. Z. (2006). In defense of silos: An
argument against the integrative undergraduate business curriculum. Journal of
Management Education, 30(2), 316-32.
DOI: 10.1177/1052562905277231
David, F. R., David, M. E., & David, F. R.
(2011). What are business schools doing for
business today? Business Horizons, 54(1),
51-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2010.09.001
Dylan, B. (1964). The times they are a-changin’ [Recorded by B. Dylan]. On The times
they are a-changin’ [vinyl]. New York: Columbia Records.
Hyman, M. R., & Hu, J. (2005). Assessing faculty beliefs about the importance of various
marketing job skills. Journal of Education
For Business, 81(2), 105-10.
Kalyanam, K. (2013, November). Proof that
online search ads can boost offline sales
[Web log post]. ThinkWithGoogle.com. Retrieved from https://www.thinkwithgoogle.
com/articles/proof-online-ads-increase-offline-sales.html.
Moth, D. (2015, September 9). Q&A: How
Maersk Line created a brilliant B2B social
media strategy [Web log post]. Econsultancy. Retrieved from https://econsultancy.
com/blog/66901-q-a-how-maersk-line-created-a-brilliant-b2b-social-media-strategy/.
Nielsen. (2013, September 17). Under the
influence: Consumer trust in advertising
[Press release].Retrieved from http://www.
nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2013/
under-the-influence-consumer-trust-in-advertising.html.
Ross, B. I., & Richards J. I. (Eds.) (2015).
Where shall I go to study advertising and
public relations? Advertising and public relations programs in colleges and
universities. (Vol. XLIX). Lubbock,
TX: American Academy of Advertising.
Retrieved fromhttp://www.aaasite.org/Resources/Documents/2015Where%20to%20
Go.pdf.
Schelfhaudt, K., & Crittenden, V. L. (2005).
Specialist or generalist: Views from academia and industry. Journal of Business
Research, 58(7), 946-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.
jbusres.2003.12.003
Schmidt, S. L., Debevec, K., & Comm, C. L.
Summer 2016
(1987). Marketing majors’ satisfaction with
their college experience: Implications for
strategic planning in marketing departments.
Journal of Marketing Education, 9(3), 5863. DOI: 10.1177/027347538700900311
Statista. (2016). Number of daily active Facebook users worldwide as of 4th quarter
2015 (in millions). Retrieved from http://
www.statista.com/statistics/346167/facebook-global-dau/.
Sterling, G. (2014, April 9). Study: 78 percent of local-mobile searches result in
offline purchases. Search Engine Land. Retrieved from http://searchengineland.com/
study-78-percent-local-mobile-searchesresult-offline-purchases-188660.
TV Ratings: 1996-1997 [Table]. (n. d.). Retrieved from http://www.classictvhits.com/
tvratings/1996.htm.
Wainwright, C. (2012, February 7). Why usergenerated content is more important than
you think [Web log poswt]. Retrieved from
http://blog.hubspot.com/blog/tabid/6307/
bid/31258/Why-User-Generated-ContentIs-More-Important-Than-You-Think.aspx.
101
Advertising education at Illinois has a storied history.
Classes began in 1916 with a single advertising course taught by journalism faculty
in the English department. Charles H. Sandage, considered by many to be the father
of advertising education, arrived at Illinois in 1946.
By 1959, advertising became an official department.
Sandage’s philosophy is one we carry on today: advertising education should not
merely approach the subject as a collection of skills. Instead, advertising education
should recognize the institution of advertising as a fundamental economic and social
institution.
As we celebrate 100 years of advertising education at Illinois, we extend our
congratulations to the “Journal of Advertising Education” on its 20th Anniversary.
College of media
Charles H. Sandage
Department of advertising
media.illinois.edu
102
Great storytelling transcends.
Great stories are the foundation of advertising. They exceed the limits
of media. They extend the boundaries of time. And they expand the
possibilities of our imagination. Do you have what it takes to become
a great storyteller? We think you do. Join us at robertson.vcu.edu.
Summer 2016
103
Addressing the elephant in the room.
(Or, I dare you to ignore this any longer.)
Karen L. Mallia, University of South Carolina
“It ain’t easy being green,” according to
Kermit the Frog. It is never easy being “the
other.” Perhaps the biggest problem with
being “the other” is convincing those in the
mainstream to recognize that difference isn’t
wrong or inferior, and that the outlier, the
oddball, the proverbial square-peg is just as
important as those who conform.
Convincing people like you. Yes, you.
Because those who need to hear don’t really
listen. The minute somebody uses the F-word
or the D-word these days, more than half the
audience checks out. “Feminism” packs more
heat today than that other F-word, the four-letter one. Start talking about “gender disparity”
or “female representation,” and at least half
your audience (and roughly 97% of those under 25) runs for the hills. (That presumes they
were even within earshot at the outset.)
It’s not much better when you say the Dword (sshhhh, “diversity”), unless the listener
is some “other.” Some people think we don’t
need to discuss this anymore – that we now
live in a color-blind world. That because of
affirmative action and legislation banning discrimination, the “D” issue is old news and the
problem is solved. I’m guessing that’s why
only the usual suspects turned out for a 2015
panel about the state of diversity in advertising
at the AAA (American Academy of Advertising) conference, and why the number in the
audience exceeded the sum of esteemed panelists by exactly one (Grow & Mallia, 2015).
Where were you?
“Who Cares? I Don’t Care. The Public
Doesn’t Care. Noooo-bod-y Cares.”
One summer decades ago, I heard that exhortation at BSSJ (Blair Summer School for
Journalism) countless times from renowned
Independence, Missouri journalism teacher
Ron Clemons. He repeated it again and again,
to drive home the importance of having a
great lead in your news story to compel your
audience to take heed and read. His refrain is
every bit as relevant in persuasive communication, reminding us “nobody cares” unless
104
we make them care about a topic.
Nobody would actually admit to not caring about diversity. After all, few groups beat
the academy in talking a good game about
diversity and pledging allegiance to it. But unfortunately, we’re human. So it takes an awful
lot to make us stretch beyond our narrow
scope of personal interest and truly embrace
someone unlike ourselves, let alone her cause.
As we advertising educators know from both
theory and practice, it takes a powerful persuasive force to change strongly held opinions
and attitudes, and to compel behavior change.
Thus, despite the fact that we should know
better, we selectively hear what reaffirms our
existing notions and ignore the rest. We keep
doing what we’ve always done. Years pass.
And little ever changes. (Or if change does
occur, its incremental pace makes a glacier’s
movement look like the Iditarod.)
Of course, there are a few exceptions: 1) a
handful of people who have a strong moral
compass or ethical training; 2) those who are
evaluated on improving diversity or compensated for it or 3) those who have been
bypassed when less talented, white, younger,
your-adjective-here men start zooming past
them on the career ladder.
Perhaps you think you’re in the clear,
because you’ve nurtured so many female
students, perhaps even nominated some for
BBDO’s Allen Rosenshine Scholarship. Or
because you have a decent track record in
placing promising minority students with the
AAF’s MPMS program or in MAIP internships. Isn’t that enough?
Why should you devote any more time or
thought to the advertising industry’s persistent diversity problem? Who cares if young
women exit in mid-career as fast as young
graduates take their place, and female representation in creative is stalled – at best (Grow
& Deng, 2014)? Who cares if too many of
our best minority students walk away from
advertising to do just about anything else?
(“Survey contrasts perceptions …,” 2012) If
our students aren’t worried about work-life
balance in advertising (Fullerton & Kendrick,
2015), and even young professionals are blasé
about diversity, why should we worry about
it? (Meaning you, personally, not just me.)
What’s in It for You? (In the Academy? For
White Guys?) Plenty.
While the issues that impede women and
minorities in advertising may affect them
disproportionately and more directly, they’re
symptomatic of broader systemic problems
that will ultimately impact everyone in advertising and marketing communications
– whether they realize it yet or not. Likewise,
greater diversity benefits everyone. Not just in
a high-minded, didn’t-we-do-something-nicefor-those-poor-people sense, but in concrete,
direct – even almighty dollar – ways:
1. More diverse (gender, ethnic, skills,
every kind) teams have greater creativity and better ideas (Phillips,
2014; Shalley, Zhou & Oldham, 2004;
Thompson, 2015). (Nothing is more
important to a creative industry.)
2. Diversity has a positive impact on
business. It brings greater return on
equity, sales and invested capital
(Catalyst, n. d.; Goleman, 2016).
3. The factors that favor diversity are
what everyone wants in the workplace, (especially Millennials) like
job satisfaction, better work life balance and success ( Phillips, Liljenquist
& Neale, 2010; Ruderman & Ohlott,
2004; "To close the gap…," 2013), so
everybody wins.
Clearly, the benefits are there. The next
step in persuasion is the “reasons why.” The
evidence follows. Vast amounts of support are
found in research from the past two decades,
in the literature on creativity, psychology,
management, leadership and diversity.
Creativity demands diversity, on every
measure. Research demonstrates that the most
successful outcomes come from teams composed of diverse talent – individuals different
in gender, race, age – even skill diversity. On
the individual level, creativity is enhanced by
openness to diverse experiences (Sternberg,
2006). Many argue that having a breadth of
experiences is essential to creativity and innovation. Team diversity is highly correlated
with better thinking and solutions (Thompson,
2015). Companies with more women on their
boards have higher revenues (Boulton, 2013;
Landel, 2015).
If no corner of the creative industries benefits from the cultural dominance of young,
Summer 2016
white males, why do they continue to dominate creative departments across the globe
(Grow & Deng, 2014), sometimes even at
agencies that proclaim commitment to diversity (Conor, Gill & Taylor, 2015; Dan, 2015;
Ember, 2016)? Why? That’s easy to understand, but harder to address:
1. Universal beliefs that the business is a
meritocracy and that individual talent
and hard work equal success;
2. The false assumption that “breaking
in” is the hardest part;
3. Unconscious biases;
4. Nobody in power really cares (unless they are an “other,” or have been
wronged, or financially affected);
5. Change is hard.
Especially in creative, the first two myths
are widespread in the industry, and educators
who don’t challenge them – or teach students
otherwise – help to perpetuate the problem.
While hard work and dogged perseverance are
essential in a highly competitive field, that is
not all that it takes to build and sustain a career
(Eichler, 2012). A student should be schooled
in organizational behavior and culture and
networking skills, like how to successfully
advocate for oneself, find and work with
sponsors and mentors, how to understand industry culture and agencies’ cultures, and how
navigate organizational politics. This is the
kind of skill mastery that distinguishes those
who rise and succeed in the long term, who
stumble and who exit (Mallia, Windels & Broyles, 2013; Mallia, 2009; Mallia, 2013). Even
Sheryl Sandberg has recanted some of her
initial Lean In victim-blaming and acknowledged the persistence of systemic factors,
based on more recent findings from her own
initiative (Lean In & McKinsey & Company,
2015). Carefully examine the track record of
the AAF’s MPMS program for retention of the
stellar achievers they identify year after year
(“Survey contrasts perceptions…,” 2012).
In advertising, women and minorities face
both the same challenges they do in other
fields (Acker, 1990; Kanter, 1977) and experience additional ones created by an extreme
masculine, laddish environment (Ayman &
Korabik, 2010; Bird, 1996; Windels & Mallia, 2015). “Otherness” brings a lack of access
to needed social networks (Bird, 1996; Gregory, 2009), a shortage of mentors, difficulty
navigating organizational politics and other
hurdles (de Vries, Webb & Eveline, 2006;
Konnikova, 2014; Ragins & Sundstrom, 1989;
Sego, 1999; Windels & Mallia, 2015). Parenthood means negative career consequences
105
for women, yet positive perceptions for men
(Fuegen et. al., 2005). Women are perceived
and treated differently than men for exhibiting
the same behaviors (Catalyst, 2007; Davis,
2014; Torres, 2016; Windels & Mallia, 2015),
especially as leaders (Rudman & Kilianski,
2000). “Otherness” impedes not only agency
careers, but freelance success as well (Bird,
1996; Gill, 2002; Hekman & Foo, 2014).
The most dangerous of these impediments
to gender parity is unconscious bias, insidious even among those who truly believe they
are unbiased. Sadly, study after study demonstrates how unconscious bias undermines
“the other,” inhibiting women in the sciences (Gibney, 2016), and women musicians in
auditions that aren’t blind (Goldin & Rouse,
1997) . Even hurricanes are perceived to be
harsher and more damaging if given female,
rather than male, names (Jung et al., 2014).
The inequality becomes especially glaring in historically male-dominated careers,
such as STEM fields, from the science academy to Silicon Valley (Giang, 2015; Gibney,
2016;"Why science needs…," 2015).
For all the glamor and cultural edginess
associated with working in advertising, agencies have lagged most other businesses in
formalizing non-traditional work ways like
job sharing and flexiplace (Mallia, 2009).
Yet these are the very policies often cited as
significant in enabling women to succeed and
most often correlated with greater job satisfaction and employee retention (Ruderman
& Ohlott, 2004; Schwartz, 2014). In his book
examining both racial and gender inequities,
Chris Boulton (2013) confirmed that “The
Ghosts of Mad Men” still inhabit advertising
agencies.
Perhaps most agencies don’t care about the
longevity of their staffers. After all, we graduate thousands of bright minds from advertising
programs in U.S. colleges and universities
each year, sending sacrificial lambs willing to
“pay their dues” in the most extreme ways to
play in the major leagues.
Why You Need to Make “Female Trouble”
Everybody’s Problem
You can’t ignore the diversity problem in
advertising unless you are totally without a
conscience. Ignore it and you kill souls. You
destroy careers. You ruin lives. Yes, perpetuate
the myth of meritocracy and tell your students
“it’s all about the work,” and you may as well
drive them into a brick wall at 90 mph.
Shortly after Hollywood was publicly
shamed for its white-male domination in the
106
weeks leading to and including the 2016 Oscars, diversity in advertising jumped into the
news cycle again. Industry trades and social
media networks buzzed with advocates for
women observing and celebrating unexpected
diversity in the International ADDYs juries’
six high-profile women creatives – in particular, a jury photo including Xanthe Wells,
Chief Creative Officer of agency Pitch, working on a jury in Spain, with her infant son in
her lap (Wells, 2016). In social media, women
shared, applauded and celebrated. Progress.
Wow, right? Not from the perspective of
the other “others,” who saw only the whiteness of this panel of judges, rather than their
gender, and railed against the joy of the 3%.
Cause myopia drove the two advocacy groups
looking at the very same incident to see it differently. Considering the dearth of individuals
genuinely committed to improving diversity,
there’s little room for myopia and infighting.
This anecdote argues for precisely why the
cause of diversity needs objective outsiders,
advocates from the mainstream – people who
recognize both the human and business imperatives for diversity and are “all in.”
You, for instance.
It’s also a telling demonstration of why
diversity advocates should unite, rather than
squabble and compete in the public space.
(United we stand, and all that.)
Perhaps you don’t hear from alumni once
they’re seasoned by agency life. Or maybe
they’re reluctant to share news that’s bad or
sad or demoralizing. If they are women or
minorities, hitting that wall in five years or
ten years or so appears almost inevitable.
Especially if they’re a creative. But maybe
they won’t even remember that it was you
who started them on the road to fantasyland,
and believing that if they just worked hard,
had talent, put their nose to the proverbial
grindstone, they would succeed. It’s not just
advertising, that’s the damn American dream.
Could that be wrong?
Even those who’ve hit those barriers report they were blind early in their careers and
didn’t see barriers or recognize discrimination
for what it was – until someone else labeled
it for them, or it was too late (Mallia, 2009;
Windels & Lee, 2012). When you’re young
and starry-eyed and full of ambition, you’re
grateful just to get your foot in the door.
You’re special. The work, the portfolio did indeed play a larger role in getting that first job
than it will later on (Vonk & Kestin, 2005).
For a few years, you’re too busy learning the
business and doing all you can to keep your
nose above water to worry about macro-issues
like diversity and blissfully unaware of the
organizational behavior. Your 80-hour work
week barely leaves you time to sleep.
You’d Do More If You Knew the Research
Most advertising scholars devote their lives to
studying the product of advertising or its impact on audiences – not its culture and codes
and practices. (We often leave that research to
sociologists, psychologists and organizational
behavior researchers.) Otherwise, more ad
professors would be alarmed at the machismo,
workaholic culture that continues to prevail in
the industry – especially creative departments.
This culture honors and promotes career tunnel vision and workaholism – occasionally
working young people to death (Weissman,
2013), more often just to the brink of burnout. Generating enough profit to benefit major
holding companies, a handful of top brass and
shareholders depends on ever-narrower margins – frequently squeezed from overhead,
errr, personnel. Every year, we give them our
best and brightest filled with enormous talent,
intrinsic motivation and passion for the work,
naïve graduates who are utterly blind to organizational realities and the big-picture view.
The lure of the glamor of a creative industry is
powerful (Gill, 2002).
Industry and organizational culture
replicates itself when too few have any metacognition about its existence, when masculine
norms have become the accepted way of
working, living, acting and being. Or when
questionable behaviors are unquestioned,
or autonomic responses are borne out of our
upbringing and lives. You can’t change an
industry culture when the only people who
recognize that there’s a problem are those
who’ve seen or felt exclusion themselves.
When discomfort or circumstances compel
“others” to seek alternative careers where
they’ll be more comfortable or happier, or
when there’s more career risk in reporting bias
than there is in being accused of it, no one remains to lobby for change or work to achieve
it. Look at the risks that Erin Johnson took
suing JWT in 2016, and the risk (and loss) Ellen Pao incurred in fighting the tech industry.
Or those who sued agencies for discrimination and vanished from the industry (Rossini
v. Ogilvy & Mather) or left it for academia
(Cook, 1999; VCU Brandcenter - People, n.
d.).
Let the Brainwashing (err, Re-educating)
Begin
Summer 2016
There is no neutrality anymore. “If you aren’t
part of the solution, you’re part of the problem” (to continue to misquote what Eldridge
Cleaver actually said in more verbose fashion).
We all need to be part of the solution.
We need to re-calibrate gender roles and
blow apart racial and ethnic stereotyping in
every corner of our own lives, not just our
classrooms. We must force ourselves and others to see unconscious bias. It can only be
overcome when a big, bright interrogation
lamp is shone each time a cultural stereotype
or presumption is made. Every time your male
colleague doesn’t start a new pot of coffee because he thinks it’s women’s work. Every time
a woman is asked to take notes in a meeting.
Every time your husband says he’ll “help”
with a domestic chore. When you look with
suspicion at a Middle Eastern man in the airport. It happens even when you cut some slack
for the student who always raises her hand,
but not for the introvert who never participates in class.
Forewarned Is Forearmed.
We need to lead the industry and propose a
new agency model. Agencies have been struggling, in search of that since the death of the
15% commission and dawn of digital. Do the
applied research and be part of the solution on
a macro level. Industry firebrand Cindy Gallop has said more than once that advertising
needs to “blow shit up,” but you can’t do that
without a new paradigm to replace it. Find a
way to enable great work, inclusion, agency
profits, brilliant careers – and personal happiness.
Right now, teach your students that the real
world isn’t like college. Teach them the difference between “official policy” and what
actually occurs in hiring, and how important
it is to network and understand organizational
behavior and power and the realities of industry and cultural codes (Hackley & Kover,
2007; Windels & Mallia, 2015; Windels &
Lee, 2012). How meritocracy is a myth. Make
sure they know that everyone is guilty of unconscious bias and has to work to overcome
it. How certain work practices create de facto
discrimination and segregation, like when the
“guys” go out for a drink and there are ingroups and out-groups, and you get sneered
at for leaving on time to pick up your kid at
daycare or make it to a class (man or woman, BTW). Or when the dudes who messed
around all day finally get to work and stay
late are perceived as the “real” hard workers,
107
the dedicated ones – rather than the efficient
woman who gets twice as much done before
five than they do by 10 p.m. Or when a young
father doesn’t take all the family leave he’s
allowed, out of fear his boss will think he’s
not as dedicated as his peers. Make sure they
know how to do things differently, that flexible policies can and do work, so when they
rise to leadership they can challenge the status quo and be agents of change. Make sure
that they know it’s their ethical responsibility
to put themselves in the “other’s” place and
make sure everyone has an equal chance to
succeed – and have a life, too, because people are happier and more productive when
they feel valued as whole human beings, not
just employees. Make sure they know that
diversity isn’t just about race or gender, but
encouraging skill diversity and different ways
of knowing, and about diversity’s positive impact on teams and creativity. Reassure them
that diversity is not a zero-sum game, and that
the full participation of men and boys is needed, and that they have nothing to lose (except
some nasty, old baggage) when everyone gets
to play. Otherwise, all that is heard is the shrill
cry from the cheap seats, begging to be let in
on the game.
The United Nations’ HeForShe initiative
reports that at the current rate of change,
worldwide gender equity will take 81 more
years (UN Women, n. d.). Considering that
advertising so trails other businesses, it might
take longer unless we all help it along.
Gender bias lies at the root of human issues
far greater than advancement in an advertising career: violence against women and girls,
sexual harassment, domestic violence, discrimination. And human trafficking. What
does Boko Haram’s kidnapping of women in
Africa have to do with advertising creative departments? More than you realize.
References
Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A
theory of gendered organizations. Gender
and Society, 4(2), 138-59.
Ayman, R., & Korabik, K. (2010). Leadership:
Why gender and culture matter. American
Psychologist, 65(3), 157-70. DOI: 10.1037/
a0018806
Bird, S. R. (1996). Welcome to the men’s
club: Homosociality and the maintenance
of hegemonic masculinity. Gender and Society, 10(2), 120-32.
Boulton, C. (2013). The ghosts of Mad Men:
Race and gender inequality inside American advertising agencies. The Routledge
108
companion to advertising and promotional
culture. Available at: http://works.bepress.
com/chris_boulton/19/.
Catalyst. (2007). The double bind dilemma
for women in leadership: Damned if you
do, doomed if you don’t [Report]. Retrieved
from http://www.catalyst.org/system/files/
The_Double_Bind_Dilemma_for_Women_in_Leadership_Damned_if_You_Do_
Doomed_if_You_Dont.pdf.
Catalyst. (n. d.). Companies with more
women board directors experience higher
financial performance, according to latest
catalyst Bottom Line report [Press release].
Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/
media/companies-more-women-board-directors-experience-higher-financial-performance-according-latest.
Conor, B., Gill, R., & Taylor, S. (2015). Gender and creative labour. The Sociological
Review, 63(S1), 1-22. DOI: 10.1111/1467954X.12237
Cook, R. (1999, July 16). Global brief: Madison Avenue creative star sues JWT for
$25m. Campaign, 28, 16. Retrieved from
http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/
global-brief-madison-avenue-creative-starsues-jwt-dollars-25m---helayne-spivakrsquos-lawsuit-set-new-york-tongues-wagging/35467.
Dan, A. (2015, March 9). Advertising and the
issue of glass. Forbes. Retrieved from http://
www.forbes.com/sites/avidan/2015/03/09/
advertising-and-the-issue-of-glass/.
Davis, K. (2014, July 23). Damned if we do:
How women and minorities get penalized
for promoting diversity. Fast Company.
Retrieved from http://www.fastcompany.
com/3033402/strong-female-lead/damnedif-we-do-how-women-and-minorities-getpenalized-for-promoting-dive.
Eichler, L. (2012, June 3). Debunking the myth
of meritocracy in business for women [Web
log post]. Femme-O-Nomics.Retrieved
from
http://women2.com/2012/06/03/
debunking-the-myth-of-meritocracy-inbusiness/.
Ember, S. (2016, March 18). Accusations of
sexism and racism shake ad agency and
industry. The New York Times. Retrieved
from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/19/
business/j-walter-thompson-gets-newchief-after-departure-over-suit.html.
Fuegen, K.M., Biernat, E. H. and K. Deaux
(2004). Mothers and fathers in the workplace: How gender and parental status
influence judgments of job-related competence. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 737-54.
Fullerton J. & Kendrick A. (2015, July). Profiles of advertising students: Are “creatives”
different from the rest? Paper presented at
the American Academy of Advertising Asia
Pacific Conference, Aukland, NZ.
Giang, V. (2015, January 27). Why women
are ditching STEM Careers – And how to
change it. Fast Company. Retrieved from
http://www.fastcompany.com/3041381/
strong-female-lead/why-women-are-ditching-stem-careers-and-how-to-change-it.
Gibney, E. (2016, February 29). Women underrepresented in world’s science academies.
Nature. DOI: 10.1038/nature.2016.19465
Gill, R. (2002). Cool, creative and egalitarian? Exploring gender in project-based new
media work in Europe. Information, Communication & Society, 5(1), 70-89. DOI:
10.1080/13691180110117668
Goldin, C. and Rouse C. (1997). Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of “blind”
auditions on female musicians. National
Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series, Working Paper 5903.
Goleman, D. (2016, March 8). Women leaders
get results: The data [Web log post]. LinkedIn. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.
com/pulse/women-leaders-get-results-datadaniel-goleman.
Gregory, M. R. (2009). Inside the locker room: Male homosociability in the
advertising industry. Gender, Work
& Organization, 16(3), 323-47. DOI:
10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00447.x
Grow, J. M., & Deng, T. (2014). Sex segregation in advertising creative departments
across the globe. Advertising & Society Review, 14(4). DOI: 10.1353/asr.2014.0003
Grow, J. M. & Mallia, K.L. "Preparing
Women And Minorities For Success And
Leadership In Creative." Panel presented
at The American Academy of Advertising
Conference, Chicago, March 26-29, 2015,
In Nelson, M. R. (Ed.). AAA Proceedings
2015 Conference. pp 86-87.
Hackley, C., & Kover, A. J. (2007). The trouble with creatives: Negotiating creative
identity in advertising agencies. International Journal of Advertising, 26(1), 63-78.
DOI: 10.1080/02650487.2007.11072996
Heilman, M.E. & Okimoto, T. (2008). Motherhood: A potential source of bias in
employment decisions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 93(1), 189-198.
Hekman, D. R., & Foo, M.-D. (2014). Does
valuing diversity result in worse performance ratings for minority and female
leaders? Academy of Management ProceedSummer 2016
ings, 2014(Meeting Abstract Supplement),
12277. DOI: 10.5465/AMBPP.2014.297
Jung, K., Shavitt, S., Viswanathan, M. & J. M.
Hilbe. (2014), Female hurricanes deadlier
than male hurricanes. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 111 (24),
8782–8787, doi: 10.1073/pnas.140278611
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Some effects of proportions on group life: Skewed sex ratios and
responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 965-990.
Konnikova, M. (2014, June 10). Lean out:
The dangers for women who negotiate. The
New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www.
newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/
lean-out-the-dangers-for-women-who-negotiate.
Landel, M. (2015, February). Gender balance
and the link to performance [Commentary]. McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved
from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/
leading_in_the_21st_century/gender_balance_and_the_link_to_performance.
Lean In, & McKinsey & Company. (2015).
2015 women in the workplace study. Retrieved from http://womenintheworkplace.
com.
Mallia, K. L. (2009). Rare birds: Why so few
women become ad agency creative directors. Advertising & Society Review, 10(3).
DOI: 10.1353/asr.0.0032
Mallia, K. L. (2013). How to get ahead in
advertising even if you are a "girl." (Men:
Read this. It’ll do you good.) In L. Minsky
& B. Bendinger (Eds.), The Get a Job workshop: How to find your way to a creative
career in advertising, branding, collateral,
digital, experimental and more (pp. 28494). Chicago: The Copy Workshop.
Mallia, K. L., K. Windels & S.J. Broyles
(2013). The fire starter and the brand
steward: An examination of successful
leadership traits for the advertising-agency
creative director. Journal of Advertising Research, 53(3), 339-353.
Phillips, K. W. (2014, October 1). How
diversity makes us smarter. Scientific
American. Retrieved from http://www.
scientificamerican.com/article/how-diversity-makes-us-smarter/.
Phillips, K. W., Liljenquist, K. A., & Neale, M.
A.(2010, October). Better decisions through
diversity. KelloggInsight. Retrieved from
http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/better_decisions_through_diversity
Ragins, B. R., & Sundstrom, E. (1989). Gender
and power in organizations: A longitudinal
perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 105(1),
109
51-88. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.51
Ruderman, M. N., & Ohlott, P. J. (2004).
What women leaders want. Leader to Leader, 2004(31), 41-47. DOI: 10.1002/ltl.62
Rudman, L.A. & Kilianski, S.E. (2000). Implicit and explicit attitudes toward female
authority. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1315-1328.
Schwartz, T. (2014, October 31). What women need at work to give their all. The New
York Times. Retrieved from http://dealbook.
nytimes.com/2014/10/31/what-womenneed-at-work-to-give-their-all/.
Sego, T. (1999). The effects of sex and ethnicity on evaluations of advertising job
candidates: Do stereotypes predict discrimination? Journal of Current Issues &
Research in Advertising, 21(1), 63-74. DOI:
10.1080/10641734.1999.10505089
Shalley, C. E., Zhou, J., & Oldham, G. R.
(2004). The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where
should we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 933-58.
Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity.
Creativity Research Journal, 18(1), 87-98.
DOI: 10.1207/s15326934crj1801_10
Survey contrasts perceptions between multicultural and white ad professionals [Press
release]. (2012, April 12). Target Market
News. Retrieved from http://targetmarketnews.com/storyid04131201.htm.
Thompson, D. (2015, January 18). The secret
to smart groups: It’s women. The Atlantic.
Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/
business/archive/2015/01/the-secret-tosmart-groups-isnt-smart-people/384625/.
To close the gender gap, what needs to change
– Women or the system? (2013, March 27).
Knowledge@Wharton. Retrieved from
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=3219.
Torres, N. (2016, February 9). Proof that
women get less credit for teamwork. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/2016/02/proof-that-womenget-less-credit-for-teamwork.
UN Women. (n. d.). Retrieved November
from http://www.unwomen.org/en.
VCU Brandcenter - People. (n. d.). Retrieved
from http://brandcenter.vcu.edu/people/.
Vonk, N., & Kestin, J. (2005). Pick me:
Breaking into advertising and staying there.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
de Vries, J., C. Webb & J. Eveline. (2006).
Mentoring for gender equality and organisational change. Employee Relations
28(6), 573-587
110
Weissman, S. (2013, December 19). Agency
hours are bad for your health. Digiday. Retrieved from http://digiday.com/agencies/
agency-culture-long-hours-real-problem/.
Wells, X. (2016) February 20 Facebook post: https://www.facebook.com/
xanthehohalekwells?fref=ts
Windels, K., & Lee, W. (2012). The construction
of gender and creativity in advertising creative departments. Gender in Management:
An International Journal, 27(8), 502-19.
DOI: 10.1108/17542411211279706
Windels, K., & Mallia, K. L. (2015). How
being female impacts learning and career
growth in advertising creative departments.
Employee Relations, 37(1), 122-40. DOI:
10.1108/ER-02-2014-0011
Why science needs female mice. (2015, July
18). The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/19/
opinion/sunday/why-science-needs-female-mice.html?_r=0
Summer 2016
111
112
From the Journal of Advertising Education Archive | Fall
Sng1997
2000
Summer 2016
113
Fall 1997
114
Sng1997
2000
Summer 2016
115
116
Sng1997
2000
Summer 2016
117
118
Sng1997
2000
Summer 2016
119
120
Sng1997
2000
Summer 2016
121
Integrating public speaking
into the advertising curriculum
Kim Golombisky, University of South Florida
Recently, my advertising copy students said
they were put off by the number of times a guest
speaker said “OK,” “um,” and “uh.” Another
group of advertising students had as much to say
about presentation skills as they did strategy and
creative after observing district competition of
the American Advertising Federation’s National
Student Advertising Competition. I credit these
students for tuning in to the not-so-mysterious
features of a great presentation. They have learned
to value that spark of electricity that passes
between speaker and audience in a well-prepared,
well-rehearsed, and well-executed presentation.
When CEO Scott McNeally banned Microsoft
PowerPoint at Sun Microsystems a few years
back, it wasn’t just because of a rivalry with Bill
Gates (Nunberg, 1999). Relying solely on technology bells and whistles to carry a presentation
can be a career stopper. “Try to imagine the ‘I
have a dream’ speech in PowerPoint,” says Cliff
Nass, Stanford communication professor (Nunberg,1999). Body language, eye contact, voice,
visual aid management, and content, among
other things, separate “pros” from “amateurs,”
my students reported after the AAF competition.
From presenting their portfolios in job interviews to pitching new accounts, advertising students will need strong presentation skills. Every
“big idea” eventually has to be presented. But
public speaking may not be emphasized in the
advertising curriculum. In my experience,
advertising students who have elected to take a
public speaking course—significant numbers in
my classes—still have to be taught the connection between making speeches for a grade and
the “real world” of advertising.
In this essay I argue the need for a public
speaking component in the advertising curriculum and share a relatively painless method for
30122
teaching presentation skills in almost any advertising course. Below I discuss:
1. the role of presentation skills in advertising,
2. the merits of speaking-across-the-curriculum approaches to the classroom
3. a process for adapting advertising assignments to include presentation opportunities.
Oral Presentation Skills
and the Advertising Curriculum
Advertising professionals say they want more
“real world” training in advertising education
(Kendrick, Slayden, & Broyles, 1996; Robbs &
Wells, 1999). Yet, with our emphasis on writing
skills in mass communications education,
advertising educators and professionals may be
overlooking equally important oral communication skills. As Doris Drucker (2000) observes,
because we learn to speak long before we go
to school, we tend to assume “that we speak
perfectly” (p. 71).
Advertising trade publications have visited
the topic of presentations from time to time,
although rarely regarding oral communication
skills and never in reference to formal education. Instead the trades have focused on dos and
don’ts for new business pitches, from briefing
to follow-up (Brichta, 1993; Claggett, 1987;
Cullen, 1994; Farrell, 1993; Hoff, 1978;
Weinberger, 1992). Townsend (1984) reminded
Advertising Age readers that advertising is about
presentations, “and like it or not, a presentation
is a performance” (p. 48). Executive trainer Steve
Hess reported to Adweek’s Marketing Week that
training for on-camera media relations “goes
beyond the media interview and translates into
improved sales presentations” (Winkleman,
1989, p. 65). With technology and professional
talent so readily at our disposal, Drucker (2000)
Journal of Advertising
Education
From the Journal of Advertising Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2001
2000
believes we have little incentive to “cultivate the
art of speaking” (p. 71). But the anecdotes in
Moriarty and Duncan’s 1989 (revised 1996)
Creating and Delivering Winning Advertising
and Marketing Presentations demonstrate that
“good speakers and presenters become important, even powerful, because of that skill” (p. 3).
When educators have asked about the relative
importance of presentation skills in advertising,
the professionals were more forthcoming.
However, through a quirk of the literature, we
have tended to ask the question more often of
creatives and, even then, only as ancillary to the
primary research question(s). Robbs (1996)
found industry creatives agreed that “presentation skills” are valuable for advertising professionals and recommended “public speaking” as
an elective course. Robbs’ respondents said that
“entry-level creatives who are effective presenters get ahead faster,” although they still would
hire strong conceptual thinkers who presented
themselves ineffectively (Robbs, 1996, p. 29).
One respondent who also teaches at Atlanta’s
Portfolio Center said that “it’s real tough to teach
presentation (sic) when the focus is on concepting and writing” and that “the presentation skills
will come later” (Robbs, 1996, p. 32). In another study surveying advertising education among
“new creatives,” respondents “described the
value of gaining presentation experience within
the relatively safe classroom environment”
(Otnes, Spooner, & Treise, 1993, p. 12). “The
importance of learning presentation skills led to
frequent mention of another valuable course: acting” (Otnes, Spooner & Treise, 1993, pp. 13 – 14).
Responding to an integrated marketing communications survey, both advertising and public
relations professionals believe that public
speaking and oral presenting are an important
educational area (Rose & Miller, 1993). Not
surprisingly, Guiniven’s (1998) public relations
practitioners also rated good oral communication skills as “very important.” Nevertheless,
speech communication in the advertising curriculum has not been fully explored.
Speaking Across the Curriculum
Following the increased popularity of writing
across the curriculum (WAC) programs, some
Fall
2001 2016
Summer
speech communication educators have been
advocating speaking across the curriculum
(SAC) programs (Morello, 2000; Palmerton,
1988; Schneider, 1999). Variations on SACs
include: oral language across the curriculum
(Carson, 1988), oral communication across the
curriculum (Cronin & Glenn, 1991; Cronin &
Grice, 1991, 1993, 1997; Donofrio, 1997),
communication across the curriculum
(Morreale, Shockley-Zalabak, & Whitney, 1993;
Steinfatt, 1986), debate across the curriculum
(Bellon, 2000), and communication in the
disciplines (Dannels, 2001). Communication is
not alone in arguing the merits of an oral
communication emphasis. Smith (1997) uses a
“speaking-intensive” approach in both interdisciplinary statistics and finance for economics
majors, and he recommends incorporating the
same approach in foreign language classes.
Dannels (2001) describes a communication
skills partnership with a mechanical engineering department. There is even a national movement to incorporate standardized speaking and
listening competencies into elementary and
secondary education reform (Speech
Communication Association, 1991). Still, only
half of U.S. universities require a basic speech
course (Trank & Lewis, 1991).
Both WACs and SACs emerge from Britain’s
more integrated approach to written and oral
communication called Language Across the
Curriculum (Parker, 1985). WACs and SACs
share similar “learning to learn” goals in
approaching communication education as
“communicating to learn, increasing the power
of student discourse, de-centering the classroom,
and creating communities of active learners”
(Morello, 2000, p. 105). In other words, emphasizing students’ own communication and giving
them the skills to communicate successfully
encourage students actively to immerse themselves in the subject matter, which, in turn,
makes it personally meaningful (Bellon, 2000).
When that happens, school and life merge
(Bellon, 2000).
SACs, however, view oral communication as
an embodied communication performance. Smith
(1997) reminds professors that we learn our own
material better when we organize and lecture it.
31
123
SACs focus skills-building on targeting content,
form, and style of speech for specific audience
contexts and on orally communicating ideas supported with appropriate evidence (Morello,
2000; Weiss, 1990). Rather than “crowding out”
other curricular material, SAC programs look for
classrooms where public speaking is already a
common, though unrecognized or under-emphasized, practice (Morello, 2000).
Calling her approach “communication in the
disciplines” (CID), Dannels (2001) goes further
to argue that oral communication competencies
are discipline-specific, emerging from both
educational and professional practices. She
makes a case for a “situated pedagogy” that
accounts for a discipline’s specifics. “As students become majors, they witness and learn the
ways in which their discipline of choice socially
constructs communication competence” (Dannels,
2001, p. 151). She suggests each discipline define
its own goals for student competence, but the
examples she offers easily translate into professional advertising practices: “translating technical
material to a lay audience, paraphrasing complex
ideas into succinct phrases, synthesizing a mass
of information, visually representing large
amounts of data in simple forms, or critically
evaluating disciplinary content” (Dannels,
2001, p. 153).
Smith (1997) provides seven recommendations for developing a “speaking-intensive”
classroom. First, give students basic instruction
on effective speaking. Second, allow students
adequate preparation time for speaking assignments. Third, encourage students to synthesize
and express material in their own words. Fourth,
ask students to perform solo—“in the spotlight.”
Fifth, give students swift and specific feedback.
Sixth, then give students additional speaking
opportunities so they can use feedback to
improve. Seventh, allow the size of the class to
determine the intensity and number of formal
and informal speech performances. While large
classes can still offer students public speaking
experiences, “speaking-intensive” courses
should be limited to 20 students (Smith, 1997).
Instructors developing a SAC, CID, or
“speaking-intensive” classroom may encounter
student communication apprehension (CA), or
32124
public speaking anxiety. Among students, CA
runs highest at three points: the moment of the
speech assignment, during speech preparation,
and immediately prior to performance (Behnke
& Sawyer, 1999). CA is not always related to
students’ skill levels, but systematic desensitization does reduce it (Beatty & Valencic, 2000).
Speech instructors typically treat CA by building
students’ skills, creating a positive and supportive
classroom environment, and teaching students
to recognize CA as normal (Robinson, 1997).
Receiving motivational feedback also appears
to reduce CA better than receiving informational
feedback (McQuillen & Storey, 1993). Length
and quality of speech preparation also relates to
CA:
The more anxious individuals are, the less
likely they are to engage in preparation
processes that are essential for a successful speech. When they prepare speeches,
highly anxious people are less likely to
think about things that make for a good
speech—they spend less time on the audience, are less concerned about visual aids
and other support equipment, and spend
less time composing their speech text.
(Daly, Vangelisti, & Weber, 1995, p. 396).
Thus, students with CA need more time to
prepare speeches, and when they expect to have
their speeches evaluated, they do take more
time to prepare (Ayres & Robideaux-Maxwell,
1989). Expecting the worst, high CA students
often are pleasantly surprised at audience reception and feel more competent immediately after a
performance (MacIntyre & MacDonald, 1998).
The benefits of oral communication
approaches are tangible. Students markedly
improve their critical thinking skills and exhibit
greater overall mastery of subject matter
(Bellon, 2000). Beyond a single semester of
public speaking, integrating speech communication across the curriculum increases student
competency, thus confidence and self-esteem,
by providing opportunities to use skills that will
deteriorate if not practiced and by developing
new ones (Cronin & Glenn, 1991; Cronin &
Grice, 1991; Morello, 2000; Palmerton, 1988;
Rubin & Graham, 1988).
of Advertising
Education
From the Journal of Advertising Journal
Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2001
2000
If making presentations is an inevitable function of the advertising business, and if presentation skills can be taught in advertising education
without “crowding out” other content, then there
is no reason not to provide students with the safe
classroom public speaking training that will
allow them to get ahead faster. Next I describe a
method for developing students’ oral communication skills that is suitable for most advertising
courses.
A Public Speaking Component
for Advertising Courses
As Sprague and Stuart (1996) note, writing
about public speaking is something of a
contradiction since the immediacy of oral communication is what differentiates it from written
communication: “Public speaking is a lived,
performed, embodied event that draws its special
qualities out of the immediate context, the personality of a particular speaker, the response of
a certain audience” (p. 1). The performance of
prepared speech acts before a live audience can
be intimidating, but with training and preparation, it also can be exhilarating. The method I
use to integrate public speaking into advertising
courses builds on Dannels’ (2001) suggestion to
identify “the particular communication genres
and events students will face in their majors”
(pp. 153 –154), Smith’s (1997) recommendation
to give students basic instruction, and the literature on student public speaking anxiety.
The Introductory Unit
Introducing advertising students to public
speaking, then, requires instructors a) to convince students they will need public speaking
skills for presentations, b) to demystify the
process of public speaking itself, and c) to offer
some basic guidelines for planning and executing
presentations. Early in the semester I acquaint
students with public performance by way of
demonstration. I attempt a brief but exemplary
speech on the topic of making effective presentations, complete with visual aids and handouts.
This, I promise, is that most painful part of
teaching public speaking because it requires the
most preparation as well as putting yourself on
the line.
Fall
2001 2016
Summer
As in all pedagogical endeavors, instructors
first must teach why a subject is important
before students will engage the subject’s content. I begin with an “icebreaker”: 1
•
•
•
In 1979, a survey of employers listed “verbal/
oral communication skills” as the first skill
employers look for (Hagge-Greenberg, 1979).
Any changes in the work world since 1979?
(Students call out changes: internet/worldwide web, E-mail, telecommuting, speed of
communication, workforce diversity, etc.
Put the list on the board.)
With “public speaking” as a keyword on the
Lexis-Nexis database covering newspapers
and periodicals, 165 hits between 1998 and
1999 stressed communication as—and
sometimes more—important than technical
skills in business today. The same goes for
advertising.
(Put up a few quotes as visuals:)
•
•
Advertising professionals spend a lot of time
making presentations (Townsend, 1984).
In advertising, “good speakers and presenters
become important, even powerful because
of that skill” (Moriarty & Duncan, 1996, p. 3).
Advertising creatives agree presentation
skills are valuable for advertising professionals (Robbs, 1996).
Entry-level creatives who present effectively
get ahead faster (Robbs, 1996).
New creatives describe the value of getting
presentation experience in the classroom
(Otnes, Spooner, & Treise, 1993).
IMC professionals in advertising and PR say
public speaking and oral presenting are
important (Rose & Miller, 1993).
“Whatever area of advertising you eventually
wind up in, you’re always going to have to
present something to somebody. The more
experience you have in presenting, the better
you become. A great place to start presenting is in your classes” (Jewler & Drewniany,
2001, p. 257).
Moriarty and Duncan (1996) also offer a
number of enlightening “real world” agency
presentation stories easily condensed for this
•
•
•
•
•
33
125
lecture. Instructors may want to reveal personal
experience, such as worst and best presentation
moments. (Horror story: In a big new business
pitch, I didn’t check out an unfamiliar VCR in
advance and couldn’t it get to operate at show
time; I embarrassed the agency and myself.)
Then ask students to share their best/worst
public speaking experiences. Discuss one or two
stories to isolate the stakes involved in the presentation and the tactics that improved or could
have improved the speaker’s odds for success.
Next ask students to generate a list of situations
in which they can imagine having to prepare and
perform presentations in advertising—both
before they graduate (semester projects, advertising club meetings, campaigns competitions,
internship interviews) and after they graduate
(job searches, staff meetings, internal planning
sessions, regular client meetings, new business
pitches).
Second, after students understand that making
presentations is routine in advertising, I unpack
any fears about public speaking. People tend to
harbor four misconceptions about public speaking (Sprague & Stuart, 1996):
1. Some people are born natural public speakers; they rest of us are hopeless cases. False.
As in all skilled activities, practice leads to
improvement.
2. Making presentations is easy. False, again.
Good presentations require some hard work.
The more effortless a presentation looks, the
greater the backstage sweat factor.
3. Making presentations is always painful.
Also false. While hard work inevitably pays
off, the more you make presentations, the
more fun they become. Competence breeds
confidence.
4. All good presentations share one simple formula. Well, yes and no. Every presentation
demands its own process and execution.
However, good presentations do share a
couple things in common: preparation and
enthusiasm. Remind students that as they move
through the stages of “unconscious incompetence” to “conscious incompetence” to “conscious competence” to, eventually, “unconscious competence,” that the level of “fun”
34126
involved increases exponentially (Sprague &
Stuart, 1996).
For some students, introducing the idea of
public speaking in an advertising class will seem
like betrayal, as bad as telling advertising
students they will do math to calculate ratings.
Reassure students that any public speaking in the
classroom will be designed to allow students to
risk making mistakes in a safe, supportive environment. Suggest that it’s better to get through
the incompetence stages in the classroom than in
the “real world.” Reinforce process. Adequate
research and preparation are critical (Cullen,
1994; Weinberger, 1992; Winkleman, 1989), as
is practice. Rehearse out loud in real time
(Brichta, 1993; Jewler & Drewniany, 2001;
Kiechel, 1987; Weinberger, 1992).
“(P)ractice, practice, practice” (Baskerville,
1994). “Rehearse, rehearse, rehearse!” (Brichta,
1993).
Additionally, offer some tactics for overcoming stage-fright: visualize, breath deeply, have
a drink handy, don’t over- or under-eat, wear
clothing you can move in, be yourself, and look
for friendly faces (Baskerville, 1994). Armentrout
(1993) advises, “KEEP A SECRET. Even the
most experienced speakers are nervous before a
presentation. The key is not to let your audience
know you are nervous.” Everyone has little
habits that surface under stress, such as speaking too fast; learn what they are and try to control them (Armentrout, 1993). “Don’t be afraid
to pause and collect your thoughts. Go slow.
. . . In fact, pauses can add impact to your talk”
(Armentrout, 1993). Burns (1991) recommends
that anxious speakers try to think of themselves
as actors and go out of their way to associate with
successful public speakers. Beebe and Beebe
(2000, p. 23) send students to some websites
designed to help speakers cope with anxiety:
http://www.kaybritten.com/anxiety.html
http://www2.truman.edu/~rstjohn/
publicspeakers/visualizers.html
Here also, might be a good time to cover how
mutually supportive peers should behave, if it
hasn’t been covered already. It’s no different
than supporting each other during brainstorming. “Esprit de corps” and “all-for-one-and-
of Advertising
Education
Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2001
2000
one-for-all” will prevail. Remind students
they’re all in this together; it’s not a competition. Avoid personal attacks. Focus on positives
first. Frame negatives tactfully. Absolutely no
eye rolling.
Finally I cover content and organization,
including the importance of an introductory
hook and selling close. Open with a bang.
Exactly like advertising audiences, speech
audiences decide almost immediately whether
or not to tune in or out (Kiechel, 1987). As to
organizing an informative talk, I teach the old
“tell ’em” formula: First, tell them what you’re
going tell them; then, tell them; finally, tell
them what you told them. In other words, the
introduction previews the major points. The
body expounds on the major points. The close
summarizes the major points and, if appropriate,
calls the audience to action or closes the sale.
A variation on that theme is the “three things”
formula that organizes the preview, body, and
summary around three major points. “The standard wisdom says you can’t hope to put across
more than three main points” (Kiechel, 1987).
For organizing persuasive talks, “you’re probably
better off laying out the problem, marshaling
the evidence for your view, then ending with a
call to action” (Kiechel, 1987). On closing
client presentations, Jewler and Drewniany
(2001) advise advertising students:
Close with a summary statement, and
ask for the order. Remind the client how
effective this campaign will be, how
thoroughly it satisfies the marketing and
communication goals, and why it is the
best choice for the problem at hand
(p. 255).
As to content, my talk includes further comparisons between informative and persuasive
presentations, although advertising presentations
often combine both, such as informing the
audience of data and trends and then persuading
the audience that the new strategy, concept, and
creative address objectives. Stress the similarities between advertising and speeches. Just like
advertising, the key to informative speeches is
simplifying complex ideas and data to increase
the audience’s comprehension. Don’t overload
Fall
2001 2016
Summer
the audience with too much information; do
move from the simple and familiar to the more
complex and unfamiliar; reduce technical jargon;
group information under bullets or numerals
(O’Hair, Friedrich, & Shaver, 1995; Sprague &
Stuart, 1996). KISS!
Also like advertising, the key to persuasion is
understanding what motivates the audience
(O’Hair, Friedrich & Shaver, 1995; Sprague &
Stuart, 1996). Effective persuasion depends on
understanding “where the audience is at.” It’s
not about you, but what you can do for the audience, particularly clients or prospective clients
(Brichta, 1993; Townsend, 1984). “Try to give
listeners the feeling that the proposal you are
advocating is a natural extension of their existing attitudes and behavior,” write O’Hair,
Friedrich, and Shaver (1995, p. 450). Speech
audiences, like advertising audiences, also must
be moved through the stages of awareness,
interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption (O’Hair,
Friedrich & Shaver, 1995). For example, persuading a group with no preconceptions is much
easier than persuading a group with a negative
opinion. Where differences are obvious, stress
common ground (Sprague & Stuart, 1995). Try
to pre-empt negative reactions by addressing
possible objections or counter points of view.
Ad pro Ron Hoff (1992) likes to speak to the
concerns of opponents in the crowd before supporters. He also suggests preparing in advance
for unfriendly “so what” questions (Hoff, 1992).
Inevitably, my little performance on making
presentations is imperfect, as are most presentations. Instead of glossing over my mistakes, I
reflexively highlight them and take students
backstage to my feelings and strategies for
dealing with them. I end by inviting students to
critique my performance. They intuitively will
know what works and what doesn’t. I list their
suggestions on the board to make them official.
Almost always they cover most of my prepared
list, and I just finish with one or two additional
points.
After this brief introduction, the next step is to
provide students opportunities to practice speech
skills. To close the deal, I offer a few words of
encouragement and pass around the semester’s
presentation sign-up sheet—a calendar of
35
127
scheduled oral assignments. Three places to get
all advertising students to begin practicing presentations in class are major semester projects,
specially designed class reports, and day-to-day
individual or group assignments and exercises.
Assignments
Advertising students’ major semester projects
become the best places to practice presentation
skills, whether the course covers research, planning, strategy, media, creative, production,
campaigns, retail, Internet, sales, management,
or basic principles. From planning and explaining the assignment to presenting and evaluating
it, instructors should reinforce oral skills right
along with advertising process. Team projects
are an especially good place to employ “real
world” teamwork (Beard, 1997; Robbs &
Weisberg, 1999) toward putting on the fullblown “dog and pony” show.
Write up end-of-semester assignments to
include a paragraph about objectives and
expectations for the “performance” aspects of
these projects. For example, include a statement
such as:
The formal presentation of your projects
should be highly professional. Think of
these as client meetings. You’ll want to
leave an outstanding impression. Do not
underestimate the importance of a well
rehearsed, polished, enthusiastic, and
entertaining performance.
Since major projects represent the culmination of a semester’s work, evaluations for
presentations should be as stringent as for project content. Where instructors invite students’
feedback on their peers’ major projects, ask
students to include praise and suggestions on
the oral presentation of information as well as
the advertising itself. This also reinforces rules
of constructive criticism students should be
learning anyway.
In addition to major projects presentations, I
also require students to make one or, ideally, two
other short solo “speeches” during the semester,
and I schedule them so that one or two students
are presenting every class meeting. By dedicating the first 10 – 15 minutes of each period to
36128
presentations, students see presentations all
semester, and the class doesn’t lose a week or
more of course content given over to “speech
days.” A further benefit accrues by making the
content of these presentations correspond to the
course curriculum, so students are teaching
other students with supplemental material that
reinforces course objectives.
For example, in copywriting and design
classes, I adapt the standard “Good Ad” exercise into a three- to five-minute presentation.
Each student brings in an ad demonstrating
excellence based on what the class has learned
counts as good advertising. This forces students
to spend some time examining advertising, then
rationalizing why their choices work—or not. A
short project like this works not only for any
one-shot advertising, including students’ own
work, but also for other topics, such as case
studies and current events in other courses.
I also assign “Each One Teach One” presentations in nearly all my classes. “Each One
Teach One” stages an informative speech.
Students may read an additional book, sign up
for a contemporary topic, or they may choose to
research and report on a diversity issue in
advertising. In any case, presentation content
must correspond with whatever unit the class is
covering. If, for example, television is scheduled on the syllabus calendar, then the student’s
presentation should pertain to TV. Students’
five- to 10-minute “each one” presentations
focus on teaching the class the one most interesting or useful thing the presenter learned
beyond regular lectures or reading. I encourage
students to demonstrate or illustrate one concept or idea, or to involve the class in a short
active learning exercise. Furthermore, the “each
one” assignment requires the student to pass out
a summary of the book or research in the form
of a poster or brochure. Because it builds on the
syllabus and asks students to research beyond
the textbook, the “Each One Teach One” project
easily adapts to most courses.
Similar assignments, such as staging issues,
emerging technology, and current events presentations or debates, work in other advertising
courses, indeed in all mass communication
courses. Brief oral progress reports on students’
of Advertising
Education
Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2001
2000
major semester projects also integrate well and
keep students from waiting until the last minute
to begin work. In large classes, individuals can
present for and get feedback from small student
teams. Scheduling small groups to present
before the entire class represents another largeclass solution. I recall presenting my undergraduate retail-advertising project one-on-one
in my professor’s office. Fully outline these
kinds of assignments in the syllabus and develop a schedule in the first two weeks of class so
students can begin planning as soon as possible. I strictly enforce time limits, both to keep
the class on schedule and to convince students
to rehearse in advance.
Finally, the semester affords many day-today opportunities for students to do a more
informal kind of public speaking, especially if
instructors employ active learning methods.
Both interacting with and reporting back to the
class during small-group exercises represent
“mini” speech opportunities, a particularly useful technique for large lecture hall classes. This
works best if groups know to rotate the facilitator and reporter jobs among students. Asking
students to present their in-class and homework
assignments, complete with rationales, provides even more chances to practice presenting.
Maria Santana at the University of Central
Florida has students prepare class discussion
questions in advance based on readings or in
preparation for guest speakers. She notes this
helps shy students speak up. Similarly, in classes
of 25 students or less, I give students a couple
minutes to write down responses or ideas then
move around the room until every student contributes orally. This tends to mute habitually
dominant voices while giving quiet students
time both to think and to speak up. Generally,
the more students present and participate orally,
the more comfortable they feel and the better
at it they become. Most important, though,
students become sensitive to the nuances of
their own and others’ performances.
Regardless of the course or assignment, the
dos and don’ts of good oral presentations apply
from information gathering and organization
to actual performance. In addition to getting
students actively involved in course content,
Fall
2001 2016
Summer
allowing students to engage their peers, and
privileging students’ voices by providing them
with chances to present, student speakers have
inspired me with a steady stream of new ideas,
resources, examples, and exercises.
Evaluation
Whether students are presenting case studies,
campaigns, or even one-shots, the rules for
organizing content and managing delivery still
apply. Formal presentations, however, merit
formal feedback. Figure 1 reproduces the evaluation form I use for formal student presentations.2 Including it in the syllabus tells students
up front what expectations are and encourages
them to evaluate themselves before they present. Evaluations cover six areas: organization,
content and utility, language and voice, body
language, A/V and props, and fun factor.
1. “Organization” marks cover the basics of a
good speech, including a clear introduction
with a punch-’em-in-the-nose hook and preview, a fully developed body, and a conclusion with a summary, call to action, and
close that leaves the audience begging for
more.
2. “Content and Utility” refer to the quality of the
information presented according to the
assignment. This asks students if their subject
matter, whether informative or persuasive,
was useful to their audiences. This section
also addresses the ways students considered
and dealt appropriately with audience attitudes (O’Hair, Friedrich, & Shaver, 1995;
Sprague & Stuart, 1996). Here instructors
need to warn students off the caveat and
apologia, which Hoff (1992) notes annoy
audiences and undermine speakers’ credibility. Students should “(e)xude confidence
and affirm success” (Baskerville, 1994).
3. “Language and Voice” issues include volume,
pace, clarity. Drucker (2000) writes that
“speaking-to-be-heard is becoming a lost
art”; we have become “mumblers” (p. 71).
Tell students to enunciate and speak from
the diaphragm (Jewler & Drewniany, 2001).
Also, steer students away sub-vocals and
fillers (“um,” “uh”). Point out students’
37
129
amazingly consistent use of “OK” as a presentation introduction.
4. “Body Language” refers more to personal
style issues, including attire. Additionally,
some students are very good at making formal presentations behind a podium. Others
are better at more informal, chatty styles. I
encourage students to “risk” practicing the
style they feel least comfortable with. Get the
serious student who hides behind the podium
to move out into and around the classroom.
Ask the comedians and the star-struck to
consider trying a more serious, quieter body
language style. Discourage students from
reading their presentations. Making eye
contact is essential for connecting with the
audience. Miller (1998, 2000) says focusing
on one face to deliver a thought before moving on to another face not only helps the
speaker think clearly and breathe more naturally but also facilitates audience involvement. Warn all students against nervous
habits (ear tugging, hair smoothing, rocking
back and forth) and “object abuse,” such as
pocket-change jangling, paperclip twisting,
pen twirling (O’Hair, Friedrich, Shaver,
1995, p. 423).
5. The “A/V and Props” section examines students’ choices of supporting materials as
well as how well they manage them. Are
visuals large enough and positioned well
enough so that everyone can see them? Did
they enhance the presentation or distract
from it? As instructors well know, effectively
juggling notes, VCRs, handouts, and PowerPoint or overheads can be a challenge. Tell
students always to check out equipment
ahead of time. Murphy’s Law applies.
O’Hair, Friedrich, and Shaver (1995, p. 411)
summarize an excellent list of audio-visual
hints: When using electronic equipment,
check out equipment early, including outlets; also check and pre-set volume; test
room acoustics. For overhead projectors,
slides (and PowerPoint), don’t block the
screen and don’t talk to the screen; talk to the
audience. For chalkboards and flipcharts,
face the audience while writing; practice
38130
using the writing surface; plan words
(spelling and grammar) and placement
(space); set up materials beforehand. When
using objects, posters, or charts, make sure
they are visible to the entire audience; plan
and test how they will rest—glue, thumbtacks, tape?—otherwise they inevitably fall
at inopportune moments. Carefully plan
when to use handouts, which always seem to
sabotage students (and instructors) as if they
had a mind of their own. “(M)embers of
your audience will often read, make noise,
and create artwork with your handouts while
they ignore you” (O’Hair, Friedrich, &
Shaver, 1995, p. 411). To this I add a few
words about lists and bullet points. Nothing
turns an audience off faster than flashing up
a long list of points to be covered; the groans
will be audible. Group a long list under three
or four main bullet points. At the least, hide
a long list and reveal the next point only as
needed. Otherwise, class and instructor will
be snoring before point No. 3.
6. Last, the “Fun Factor” means entertainment
value as well as the je ne sais quoi of connecting with the audience. This is Sprague
and Stuart’s (1996) “special qualities” of
embodied live performance between a particular speaker and a particular audience.
Brichta (1993) asks, “Ever see a prospect
fall asleep during an agency pitch?” (p. 17).
Moriarty & Duncan (1996) write,
“Remember, presentations are show business”; “you can’t lull or bore your audience
into action” (p. 111). Encourage students to
use humor. Also remind them that if they
aren’t enthusiastic about their topics, their
audiences won’t be either. Here I talk about
“acting.” Being enthusiastic about one’s
presentation is great, but everyone eventually has to present less-than-exciting material.
The trick for presenters is to act as if it were
the most enthralling information ever
encountered.
To add a few comments about the evaluation
form itself, rather than the three levels of evaluation—“very good,” “good,” and “needs work”
—a scale might feel more comfortable for some
of Advertising
Education
Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2001
2000
instructors. I have found, though, that three
choices, corresponding with A, B, and C
grades, work well. Students rarely perform
below the C level, and, if they do, “needs work”
seems the least harmful way to couch criticism.
Additionally, for my part, I find that finer levels
of feedback beyond these three categories of
performance unnecessarily make evaluating
students more difficult. Save feedback nuances
for written notes and use the back of the form
for longer comments and suggestions. I preface
constructive criticism by praising the best feature or features of the student’s presentation
—sometimes it is a stretch. Nevertheless, as in
all feedback, keeping students motivated means
tempering the bitter with the sweet.
As the semester moves forward, raise the bar
for what qualifies as an A, B, or C presentation
every three or four weeks. Ratcheting up the
standard only seems fair given that students who
present later in the semester have the benefit
not only of more time to prepare but also of
learning from their brave peers’ early mistakes.
At whatever point the class has witnessed nearly the full range of “what not to do” in others’
presentations, I ask students to spend a few
minutes generating and processing a blackboard list of dos and don’ts for presentations.
“No names, please.” Students typically will
cover most of the list I have been compiling all
along.
Another excellent feedback method is videotaping student performances, standard procedure
in public speaking courses. Students viewing
their presentations in all their glory can be a
super, though painful, learning experience.
Providing this experience, of course, requires
the instructor to make the camcorder and tripod
available. Given the extra time and effort this
takes if students are presenting daily, saving the
videotaping until end-of-semester major projects may be a more efficient alternative. Ask
students or student teams to supply their own
videocassettes.
Conclusion
Presentations are an inevitable and important
part of the advertising business. Yet advertising
education does not emphasize the skills for
Fall
2001 2016
Summer
Figure 1:
Student Evaluation Form
How Did You Do? Assess Your Presentation
Very
Good
Average
Needs
Work
Organization
Introduction:
attention-grabber?
reveal topic?
preview points?
Body:
good support?
clear transitions?
Close:
restate topic?
summarize points?
powerful ending?
Content & Utility
fulfill assignment?
audience learn?
Language & Voice
clear, understandable?
conversational?
loud enough?
varied pace, volume?
ums, uhs, OKs—not?
Body Language
reading—not?
maintain eye contact?
not too stiff, frozen?
varied gestures?
varied facial expressions?
A/V & Props
appropriate?
support, not distract?
legible for everyone?
time enough to see?
Fun Factor
enthusiastic?
obvious you had fun?
audience had fun?
39
131
making effective presentations. Following writing across the curriculum programs, speaking
across the curriculum programs provide a model
for incorporating oral communication skills into
advertising courses. By reviewing the basics of
effective public speaking early in the semester
and then looking for opportunities to turn
advertising assignments into presentations,
instructors can encourage advertising students
to develop their abilities in a supportive, relatively risk-free learning environment without
“crowding out” traditional advertising content.
In my experience, giving students this knowledge and practice has additional beneficial
effects upon the classroom as a whole. By
allowing students to take the floor, we de-center
the classroom and shift power and authority to
students. We also provide a concrete demonstration that students’ voices are as valuable as
teachers’. In doing so, we create a community of
active learning where students participate in and
take responsibility for their own learning as well
as their peers’. I recommend the SAC method
for the amazing transformation that occurs both
in students’ confidence and in their increased
ownership of their advertising educations.
Mass communications educators, including
advertising professors, expend a lot of energy
convincing students that writing will be critical
to their professional success—and it will. But
advertising people spend a far greater amount
of time speaking—on the phone, interpersonally, in small groups, in formal and informal presentations, and, more and more, in video-conferencing. I know I did during my 12 years in
the advertising industry. I think the trouble lies
in the transparency of oral communication.
With the exception of the hearing and speech
impaired, everyone communicates orally. We
assume most do it competently. What if we didn’t make that assumption? We all also know
those rare people who seem to speak brilliantly
off the cuff. But in reality, most of the time hard
work and practice lie behind the image of talent
and eloquence. Before practice can make perfect, though, students have to believe the practice will have a payoff. To twist Tom Bowers’
remarks, requiring advertising students to tune
in to public speaking sends “a message that
40132
these things are important for the School’s graduates to know”; presentation requirements
“should act as a kind of siren, calling students’
attention to potential errors and teaching them
where to find answers,” (Johnson, 1996, p. 14).3
References
Armentrout, B. W. (1993). Public speaking: a
necessity for the ’90s. HR Focus, 70(12), 17.
Ayres, J., & Robideaux-Maxwell, R. (1989).
Communication apprehension and speech
preparation time. Communication Research
Reports, 6(2), 90 – 93.
Baskerville, D. M. (1994). Public speaking rule #1:
Have no fear. Black Enterprise, 24(10), 76 – 80.
Beard, F. (1997). Preparing campaigns students
for group work. Journal of Advertising
Education, 2(1), 54 – 64.
Beatty, M. J., & Valencic, K. M. (2000). Contextbased apprehension versus planning demands:
A communibiological analysis of public
speaking anxiety. Communication Education,
49(1), 58 – 71.
Beebe, S. A., & Beebe, S. J. (2000, 4th ed.).
Public speaking: An audience-centered
approach. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Behnke, R. R., & Sawyer, C. R. (1999). Milestones
of anticipatory public speaking anxiety.
Communication Education, 48(2), 165 – 172.
Bellon, J. (2000). A research-based justification
for debate across the curriculum.
Argumentation and Advocacy, 36(3), 161.
Brichta, I. (1993, July 12). Nine common
mistakes of new-business pitches: Most
involve not knowing the prospects needs.
Advertising Age, p. 17.
Burns, R. E. (1991). Combating speech anxiety.
Public Relations Journal, 47(3), 28(2).
Carlson, R. E., & Smith-Howell, D. (1995). Classroom public speaking assessment: Reliability
and validity of selected evaluation instruments.
Carson, D. (1988). Oral language across the
curriculum. Philadelphia: Multilingual
Matters Ltd.
Claggett, W. M. (1987, October 19). How clients
view pitches. Advertising Age, p. 18.
Cronin, M., & Glenn, P. (1991). Oral communication across-the-curriculum in higher
education: The state of the art. Communication
Education, 40(4), 356 – 367.
Cronin, M., & Grice, G. (1991). Oral communication across-the-curriculum: Implementation
and accreditation issues. Carolinas Speech
Communication Annual, 7, 34 – 45.
of Advertising
Education
Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2001
2000
Cronin, M., & Grice, G. (1993). A comparative
analysis of training models versus consulting/
training models for implementing oral
communication across the curriculum.
Cronin, M., & Grice, G. (1997, November).
Oral communication across the curriculum:
Designing, implementing, and assessing
a university-wide program. Short course
presented at the annual meeting of the National
Communication Association, Chicago, IL.
Cullen, K. N. (1994, January 24). New-business
pitches that win: Success starts with the
pre-pitch. Advertising Age, p. 26.
Daly, J. A., Vangelisti, A. L., & Weber, D. J. (1995).
Speech anxiety affects how people prepare
speeches: A protocol analysis of the preparation processes of speakers. Communication
Monographs, 62(4), 383 – 397.
Dannels, D. P. (2001). Time to speak up: A
rhetorical framework of situated pedagogy
and practice for communication across the
curriculum. Communication Education, 50(2),
144 – 158.
Donofrio, H. H. (1997, April). Oral communication across disciplines: Adding value to
academic pursuit and marketability. Paper
presented at the Southern States Communication Association Convention, Savannah, GA.
Drucker, D. (2000). How not to mumble. Training
& Development, 54(2), 71.
Farrell, G. (1993, December 6). The biggest call
of all. Adweek, p. 28(6).
Guiniven, J. E. (1998). Public relations executives
view the curriculum: A needs assessment.
Journalism & Mass Communication Educator,
52(4), 48 – 56.
Hagge-Greenberg, L. (1979). Report on liberal
arts employer survey: Opportunities for the
liberal arts graduate. Midwest College
Placement Association.
Hoff, R. (1978, January 16). What’s your
presentation quotient? Advertising Age, p. 93.
Hoff, R. (1992). I can see you naked. Kansas
City: Andrews and McKeel.
Jewler, J. A., & Drewniany, B. L. (2001, 7th ed.).
Creative strategy in advertising. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Johnson, J. C. (1996). Assessing the school’s
spelling-grammar exam: Are we demanding
too much, or too little? The UNC Journalist,
37(2), 14.
Kendrick, A., Slayden, D., & Broyles, S. J. (1996).
Real worlds and ivory towers: A survey of top
creative directors. Journalism & Mass
Communication Educator, 51(2), 63 – 74.
Fall
2001 2016
Summer
Kiechel, W. (1987, June 8). How to give a
speech. Fortune, 115, 179(3).
MacIntyre, P .D., & MacDonald, J. R. (1998).
Public speaking anxiety: Perceived
competence and audience congeniality.
McQuillen, J. S., & Storey, J. L. (1993). The impact
of speech criticism on speakers’ perceived level
of communication apprehension. College
Student Journal, 27(3), 322 – 327.
Miller, A. (1998). 365 tips for winning business.
New York: Berkley Publishers.
Miller, A. (2000). “Embrace the anxiety” and
give a better speech. Folio, 29(15), 10.
Morello, J. T. (2000). Comparing speaking across
the curriculum and writing across the
curriculum programs. Communication
Education, 49(1), 99 – 113.
Moriarty, S., & Duncan, T. (1996, 2nd ed.).
Creating and delivering winning advertising
and marketing presentations. Chicago: NTC
Business Press.
Morreale, S., Shockley-Zalabak, P., & Whitney, P.
(1993). The center for excellence in oral
communication: Integrating communication
across the curriculum. Communication
Education, 42(1), 10 – 21.
Nunberg, G. (1999). The trouble with PowerPoint.
Fortune, 140(12), 330 – 334.
O’Hair, D., Friedrich, G. W., & Shaver, L. D. (1995,
2nd ed.). Strategic communication in business
and the professions. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Co.
Otnes, C., Spooner, E., & Treise, D. M. (1993).
Advertising curriculum ideas from “new
creatives.” Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator, 48(3), 9 – 17.
Palmerton, P. (1988, November). Speaking
across-the-curriculum: Threat, opportunity, or
both? Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the Speech Communication Association,
New Orleans, LA.
Parker, R. (1985). The language across the
curriculum movement: A brief overview and
bibliography. College Composition and
Communication, 36, 173 – 177.
Robbs, B. (1996). The advertising curriculum and
the needs of creative students. Journalism &
Mass Communication Educator, 50(4), 25 – 34.
Robbs, B., & Weisberg, L. (1999). Identifying
critical teamwork tools: One way to strike a
balance between team training and course
content. Journal of Advertising Education,
3(2), 19 – 27.
Robbs, B., & Wells, L. (1999). Teaching practices
and emphases in advertising creative courses.
41
133
Journalism & Mass Communication Educator,
54(3), 57 – 64.
Robinson, T. E. (1997). Communication
apprehension and the basic public speaking
course: A national survey of in-class
treatment techniques. Communication
Education, 46(3), 188 – 197.
Rose, P. B., & Miller, D. A. (1993). Integrated
communications and practitioners’ perceived
needs. Journalism & Mass Communication
Educator, 48(1), 20 – 27.
Rubin, R., & Graham, E. E. (1988). Communication
correlates of college success: An exploratory
investigation. Communication Education, 37,
14 – 27.
Schneider, A. (1999, March 26). Taking aim at
student incoherence: Spread of speech
programs across the curriculum irks some
communication professors. Chronicle of Higher
Education, 45(29), A16(3).
Smith, G. (1997). Learning to speak and speaking
to learn. College Teaching, 45(2), 49(3).
Speech Communication Association (1991).
Guidelines for developing oral communication
curricula in kindergarten through twelfth grade.
Annandale, VA: Speech Communication
Association.
Sprague, J., & Stuart, D. (1996, 4th ed.). The
speaker’s handbook. New York: Harcourt
Brace College Publishers.
Steinfatt, T. M. (1986). Communication across
the curriculum. Communication Quarterly,
34(4), 460 – 470.
Townsend, S. G. (1984, October 22). Presenting 11
ways to catch their eye. Advertising Age, p. 48.
42134
Trank, D., & Lewis, P. (1991). The introductory
communication course: Results of a national
survey. In L. Hugenberg (Ed.), Basic communication course annual (pp. 106 – 122). Boston:
American Press.
Weinberger, M. (1992, October 5). New-business
miscues: 10 mistakes to avoid when making a
pitch. Advertising Age, p. 24.
Weiss, R. (1990, March). The DePauw University
oral communication competence requirement.
Paper presented at the Conference on College
Composition and Communication, Chicago, IL.
Winkleman, M. (1989, April 24). Teaching a
company executive to talk. Adweek’s
Marketing Week, 30(17), 65.
Notes
1 Thanks for this “icebreaker” go to Elizabeth
Bell, who teaches performance and supervises
the basic public speaking course in the
Department of Communication at the
University of South Florida.
2 My particular variation of speech evaluation
is similar to four instruments that Carlson and
Smith-Howell (1995) found valid and reliable
among speech communication and mass
communications faculty, both trained and
untrained in rating student speeches for
content and delivery.
3 Actually, Bowers was talking about mass
communications’ writing emphasis and
the English diagnostic test requirement
most mass communications undergraduate
programs have had since the late 1970s
and early 1980s.
Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2001
2000
of Advertising
Education
Statistics anxiety and math aversion
among advertising students
Jami A. Fullerton, Oklahoma State University
and Don Umphrey, Southern Methodist University
Do advertising students really dislike math?
Or is this question a manifestation of frustrated
media planning course professors?
Do women perceive they are poorer at math
than men? Do students with better grades like
math more? Are those interested in creative jobs
more likely to be math averse than those wishing
to pursue management-oriented advertising
jobs?
Or are these assumptions based on unfair
stereotypes?
There is scant research to address these
questions, but the answers would be helpful to
advertising educators, particularly to those who
teach courses that include math.
Surveys of advertising professionals clearly
indicate that students who intend to work in the
advertising business need to have math skills
and understand statistics. A survey of advertising
media directors, planners, buyers and executives
(Lloyd, Slater & Robbs, 2000) revealed professionals believe students should have a mastery
of basic math, percentages and index numbers.
The study also indicated that professionals were
concerned that newly hired advertising graduates lacked knowledge of media math.
An earlier study (Martin & Lloyd, 1992)
revealed that over half of media teachers surveyed
used media planning software and were therefore spending less time teaching skills oriented
material, such as media math. Crowley (1987)
interviewed several agency media directors in
an attempt to identify content for the advertising
media planning course. The professionals in the
study mentioned statistics as a need-to-know
skill.
There is clearly a need for advertising students to have math and statistics skills to work
in the advertising profession; however, advertis20Summer 2016
ing professors sense an aversion among students
to learning such skills. This paper will attempt to
explore the unanswered questions about advertising students’ level of anxiety toward math
and statistics and determine differences, if any,
among categories of students who claim to be
math averse.
Review of the Literature
Attitudes Toward Statistics
There is a substantial body of research dating
back to the 1950s (i.e. Bendig & Hughes,
1954), probing students’ attitudes towards math
and statistics. Studies have documented both
“math anxiety” and “statistics anxiety”
(Roberts & Saxe, 1982; Adams & Holcomb,
1986) and define them generally as a fear that
students have toward working with numbers
and taking the statistics course (See Birenbaum
& Eylath, 1994, for a historical review of statistics
anxiety). Other studies have examined the variables related to negative attitudes toward math
and statistics (Feinberg & Halperin, 1978;
Roberts & Bilderback, 1980; Benson, 1989;
Sutarso, 1992b; Schau, et al, 1995; Tremblay,
Gardner & Heipel, 2000), though no studies can
be found that specifically examine advertising
majors’ attitudes toward math and statistics.
Numerous studies showed a high correlation
between positive attitudes toward statistics and
high course grades (Wise, 1985; Benson, 1989;
Schau, et al, 1995). Anxiety was associated
with lower achievement in statistics (Tremblay,
Gardner, & Heipel, 2000).
Sutarso (1992a) created an instrument that
gauges students’ attitudes toward statistics by
measuring six underlying dimensions. Sutarso
used a sample of education and business students in developing the instrument and found it
135
to have strong reliability and validity. He also
identified some variables that related to students’ anxiety in learning statistics including
student achievement, preknowledge of statistics,
school, and current class level. Sutarso (1992b)
found no relationship between statistics anxiety
and other variables such as gender and ethnicity.
Feinberg and Halperin (1978) identified
several variables related to performance in
introductory statistics including anxiety about
math, mathematics achievement and previous
math experience. Age, gender and academic
major appeared to be unrelated to students’
success or failure in statistics. Roberts & Saxe
(1982) found significant relationships between
students’ attitudes toward statistics and previous
math experience. This study found men to be
more positive about statistics than women, but
showed no relationship between attitude toward
statistics and other variables such as birth order,
age or year in school.
Other studies have confirmed the relationship
between previous math experience and attitudes
toward statistics (Roberts & Saxe, 1982; Adams
& Holcomb, 1986; Birenbaum & Eylath, 1994;
Brown & Brown, 1995). According to
Heemskerk, (1975), aversion to statistics is
most strongly related to negative experiences
with math in high school.
communication majors. Umphrey and Fullerton
(2001) found that advertising majors had the
lowest quantitative SAT scores in comparison to
other groupings of majors on a university campus,
including behavioral sciences, math/sciences,
engineering, business, humanities, fine arts, and
other communication majors. They also found
that advertising majors did not vary significantly
from other types of communication majors in
regard to SAT math scores (Umphrey &
Fullerton, 2000). Based on the findings of earlier studies confirming the connection between
prior negative math experiences and statistics
anxiety (i.e. Brown & Brown, 1995), low SAT
quantitative scores among advertising majors
may contribute to their anxiety about statistics.
There also have been concerns about gender
stereotyping (Stocking & Goldstein, 1992) with
questions directed to why some fields of study
attract more of one gender than another, a phenomenon documented in “Are Our High
School,” 1994, and by Grandy, 1984; Lovely,
1987, and Ramist, 1984. SAT scores also have
been associated with the selection of a major
(Angoff & Johnson, 1988; Grandy, 1984).
These findings may lend credence to a notion
that students—and women in particular—are
attracted to advertising as a major because of
math aversion.
Gender and Math
Research Questions
Gender differences were not significantly
related to attitudes toward statistics in a study of
education majors (Cherian & Glencross, 1997).
Bradley & Wygant (1998) found that, while
women had significantly more anxiety about
taking a statistics course, they did as well as the
men in class. Elmore and Vasu (1986) measured
several gender-related variables as predictors of
statistics achievement and found that while
women had lower GRE quantitative scores and
fewer college math courses, they were more
positive than men about their success in mathematics.
The purpose of this study is to explore questions of math aversion and statistics anxiety
among advertising majors. The following
research questions are addressed:
What are the characteristics of advertising
majors who report being math averse?
Are there significant relationships between
student attitudes toward statistics and other
variables including student’s GPA, age and year
in school, current enrollment in statistics and
media planning courses, plans to work in an
advertising related job, and gender?
Advertising Majors and Math
Although none of the above studies are particular to advertising students, there is research
to support of a hypothesis connecting statistics
anxiety and advertising and other types of
Fall
2002
136
Methodology
Sample
Data were collected during the week of
February 5 – 9, 2001, by distributing self-administered questionnaires in advertising classes at
21
Sng2002
2000
two universities in the Southwest. One of the
universities was a medium-sized, private, liberal
arts institution and the other a large, state,
research institution. Both universities offer
bachelor’s degrees in advertising; a course in
statistics is required in each program. The private
institution houses its advertising department in
a college of fine arts, while the public university’s advertising program is part of a journalism
school in a college of arts and sciences.
According to instructions given in each of the
classes, questionnaires were to be completed by
advertising majors only. Further, individuals
who had completed a questionnaire in a previous class were instructed not to fill out a second
questionnaire.
Instrument
Students completed a five-page questionnaire
that included the STATS (Students’ Attitudes
Towards Statistics) inventory (Sutarso, 1992a)
for measuring students’ attitudes toward statistics.
The inventory consists of 21 items (See Table 1)
to which students responded on a five-point
scale from strongly agree (coded as a 5) to
strongly disagree (1). Sutarso (1992a) also identified six underlying factors in this inventory,
also identified in Table 1. All students were asked
to respond to 11 of the items. Only students
currently enrolled or who had completed a statistics course answered the remaining 10 items
related to their behaviors in the course.
In addition to the STATS inventory, the questionnaire included demographics, GPA, favorite
and least favorite high school subjects, and an
item asking students to indicate the type of
advertising job they find most interesting. The
questionnaire also included the following three
items where students responded with the same
five-point scale and coding indicated above:
“When I graduate from college, I expect to
work in an advertising-related job.” “I majored
in advertising because of the creative aspects.”
and “I majored in advertising because of the
business aspects.” There were additional items
on the questionnaire that were not a part of this
study. The students completed the questionnaire
in an average of six minutes and twenty-eight
seconds.
22Summer 2016
Completed questionnaires were coded into
an Excel spreadsheet and analyzed using SPSS
Version 10 for Macintosh. Statistical tools
included frequencies, mean scores, t-tests,
Pearson correlations, chi-squares and ANOVAs.
Results
The response rates included 179 advertising
majors out of a possible 227 at the private university, accounting for 78.9% of the advertising
majors and 96 out of 131 majors at the public
university, a 73.2% response rate. There were
275 total respondents.
Overall, the students participating in the study
were traditional college age (96% between 18
and 23) and 77% were juniors or seniors. The
sample was 64% female and 85% white. The
mean score of their self-reported GPA was 3.08
on a 4.00 scale. Almost half (48.5%) of the
students reported math as their least favorite
subject in high school, followed by science
(26.3%), history (11.5%) and English (7.4%).
Most favorite subjects were English (23.4%),
history (14.7%), science (14.3%), math (11.7%),
and art (9.2%).
There were minor differences in demographics between the students at the two universities.
Students at the public university were slightly
older with a mean age of 21.27 years versus
20.78 years for the private university (t =2.497;
p < .013), and higher in school year (public university 1.72; private, 1.92 t =1.986; p < .048,
where a 1 was coded for senior and a 4 for
freshman). There were no significant differences between the two schools in terms of GPA
or in ratio by gender.
Eighty-five percent of the respondents had
completed or were currently enrolled in a
required statistics course.
When the attitudinal item, “I like working
with numbers,” was correlated with the rest of the
STATS inventory, there were significant correlations in expected directions on all the items
except the three dealing with initiative and extra
effort. (See Table 1) This finding indicates that
positive or negative feelings towards math in
general are reflected in attitudes towards statistics.
137
Table 1
Pearson Correlations Between Statistics Inventory and Selected Variables
I like
working
with numbers
Self-Confidence
Learning statistics is easy for me.
I understand/understood statistics better
than the majority of people in my class.
Statistics make me anxious
Attitudes
I like working with numbers
I enjoy working with a calculator.
I enjoy working with a computer
.541***
.470***
-.305***
Year
in School2
Plan to go
into Ad
Related Job
.143*
.357***
.141*
—
.663***
.138*
Parental Influence
My mother likes mathematics
or statistics, and so do I.
My fathers likes mathematics
or statistics and so do I.
.137*
.144*
.560***
.611***
Interest
Statistics is very useful in my major
Statistics will improve my research ability.
Statistics will be important for my future career.
I will be more competent in my
subject area when I master statistics.
I can master statistics with a great deal of effort.
I find statistics is a very interesting subject.
Instructor
I like/liked statistics because of my
instructor’s method of teaching.
The instructor’s friendliness in answering
students’ questions helps/helped me
to like statistics.
The instructor’s explanations help/helped
me to like statistics.
.138*
.363***
.314***
.380***
.160**
.174**
.337***
.122*
491***
Initiative and Extra Effort
I study/studied statistics regularly, even
when there is/was no specific assignment.
I see/saw my statistics instructor when
I do/did not understand something in that class.
I ask/asked questions when I do/did not
understand something in my statistics course.
I like statistics now.
Grade
Point
Avg.1
.153*
.218***
.163**
.171**
.133*
.197**
.157*
.192**
.162*
.144*
.162*
.273***
.527***
.173**
.162*
Note: Unless indicated, items are on a 5-point scale with Strongly Agree = 5, Strongly Disagree = 1, etc.
Self-reported grade point average on a 4.0 scale
2
1 = freshman, 4 = senior, etc.
1
* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; empty cells indicate non-significant relationships
Fall
1382002
23
Sng2002
2000
Characteristics of math averse students
Comparisons were made between the students
who named math as their least favorite high
school subject and those who named another
subject as least favorite. There was a significant
difference by gender with 56.4% of the male
students citing math as their least favorite in
comparison to 43.6% of the female students
(X2 = 3.9, d.f. = 1; p < .046), but this was the
only significant demographic finding with this
variable. With the STATS items (See Table 2),
students naming math as least favorite scored
significantly lower on items dealing with selfconfidence, attitudes and parental influence, but
not significantly different in measures dealing
with interest or initiative and extra effort. They
were also less apt to perceive their statistics
instructor as being friendly in answering their
questions and less apt to agree that they liked
statistics now.
Future Career Plans.
There were few significant differences
between students interested in the creative
aspects of advertising and those who were more
management-oriented. This was measured on
three different variables.
First, students were asked to select one career
path in which they were most interested. A total
of 33.5% selected one of the following manage
services, client-side, media sales, media buying/
planning, or research, while 36.7% chose a creative endeavor, including art direction, copy
writing or graphics. Four respondents (1.5%)
checked “other” and another 10.9% indicated
“don’t know / undecided.” Coded as missing were
the 17.5% of the students who checked more
than one of the career interests or checked none.
A total 40.7% of those who selected a management career said math was their least favorite
high school subject compared to 53.5% of those
who named a creative career and 65.6% of the
“other / don’t know” group (X2 = 6.8, d.f. = 2;
p < .033). But analyses of variance with these
three groups and the STATS items revealed no
significant findings.
For the additional analyses gauging differences between creative and management-types,
t-tests were conducted on the STATS items
24Summer 2016
between those who strongly agreed or agreed and
those who were neutral, disagreed or strongly
disagreed to “I majored in advertising because
of the creative aspects” and “I majored in advertising because of the business aspects.” There
were no significant findings among those who
said they majored in advertising because of the
creative aspects. There were five significant
findings among those professing to be management-oriented, and these were concentrated into
the areas of attitudes and interest (See Table 2)
with no significant differences in self-confidence or initiative and extra effort.
There were several significant correlations
(See Table 1) when the STATS items were correlated with the scaled item relating to intentions
of going into an advertising-related job. These
reflected more positive attitudes toward math
and greater interest in statistics among those
who were planned to seek an advertising career.
The highest correlation was with the item,
“Statistics will be important for my future
career.”
Correlations between student
variables and STATS items
GPA. There was no significant difference in
GPA between students who reported math as
their least favorite subject in comparison to
other students.
There were few significant correlations with
GPA and the STATS items. (See Table 1) While
those with higher GPAs were more apt to agree
that they understood statistics better than their
peers with lower GPAs, they were not more likely to score any different in attitudes or interest.
Age and Year in School. The significant correlations with year in school were concentrated
in the area of self-confidence and interest,
showing some indications of higher agreement
among less advanced students. (See Table 1)
The only significant finding between age and
the STATS items (r = -.120, p < .048) was with
“I will be more competent in my subject area
when I master statistics.” Since the less
advanced/younger students are those currently
enrolled in the required statistics classes at both
universities, the significant correlations with year
in school and with age would seem to indicate
139
Table 2
T-Tests—Mean Scores on Three Variables
Male
Self-Confidence
Learning statistics is easy for me.
.
I understand/understood statistics better
than the majority of people in my class.
Statistics make me anxious
2.82
Attitudes
I like working with numbers
I enjoy working with a calculator.
I enjoy working with a computer
2.50
2.89
Parental Influence
My mother likes mathematics
or statistics, and so do I.
My father likes mathematics
or statistics and so do I.
2.24
Interest
Statistics is very useful in my major
2.94
Statistics will improve my research ability. 3.34
Statistics will be important
for my future career.
I will be more competent in my
subject area when I master statistics.
I can master statistics with a great
deal of effort.
I find statistics is a very interesting subject.
Initiative and Extra Effort
I study/studied statistics regularly, even
when there is/was no specific assignment.
I see/saw my statistics instructor when
3.11
I do/did not understand something
in that class.
I ask/asked questions when I do/did not
3.38
understand something in my
statistics course.
Instructor
I like/liked statistics because of my
instructor’s method of teaching.
The instructor’s friendliness in answering
students’ questions helps/helped
me to like statistics.
The instructor’s explanations
help/helped me to like statistics.
I like statistics now.
.
2.86
Female
Math
was least
favorite
high school
subject
2.93
Other
subject
was
least
favorite
2.83
3.41***
3.39***
2.18
2.64
3.23***
3.45***
1.71
2.31***
2.00
2.88***
Chose
major
for
business
aspects1
Did not
chose
major for
business
aspects2
2.91
3.20
2.52**
2.91*
3.34
2.93**
3.23
2.91**
3.13*
2.89**
3.21*
2.60*
3.26*
3.61*
2.92
2.59***
.
3.41*
3.69*
.
3.28*
2.87
3.23*
2.58
2.99**
.
Note: Items are on a 5-point scale with Strongly Agree = 5, Strongly Disagree = 1, etc.
1. Strongly agreed or agreed that they majored in advertising because of the business aspects
2. Neutral, disagreed or strongly disagreed in majoring in advertising for business aspects.
* indicates significant difference in means was < .05;
** < .01;
*** < .001; empty cells indicate non-significant relationships
Fall
2002
140
25
Sng2002
2000
consistency between more positive attitudes and
current enrollment, as seen immediately below.
Enrollment in Statistics Courses and Media
Courses. Students who were currently enrolled
in the statistics and/or media courses tended to
be somewhat more interested in statistics as
compared to students who were not currently
enrolled (either completed or had not taken).
Students currently enrolled in the statistics
course were significantly more likely to agree
with the statement “Statistics is very useful in
my major” as compared to students who had not
taken or had already completed the statistics
course (f = 4.947, p = .008). Students currently
enrolled in the media-planning course were
slightly more likely to agree with the statements
“Statistics will be important for my future
career,” (f = 3.989; p = .02) and “I will be more
competent in my subject area when I master statistics” (f = 3.212; p = .042). Current enrollment
in statistics and media planning seems to have a
positive effect on attitudes toward statistics;
however, the positive attitude diminishes somewhat after the course is completed.
Gender. In the analyses by gender, self-reports
from women indicated a mean GPA of 3.16 compared to 2.92 for men (t = - 4.659, p < .0001).
Women reported greater levels of anxiety regarding statistics but at the same time had higher
mean scores on attitudinal items dealing with
working with numbers and using a calculator
(Table 2). Female students also scored higher on
two of the interest measures, two of the items
focusing on initiative and extra effort and one of
the instructor items.
In the socialization measures women reported
greater influence from their father but no difference than men on influence of their mother.
There was a significant positive correlation
between the influence of the father and intention
of working in an ad-related job (Table 1). There
were also significant findings regarding influence of both father and mother in the analyses of
least favorite subject, but the influence of the
father was higher among both groups (Table 2).
Discussion and Implications
Who are these advertising majors who dislike
math?
26Summer 2016
Perhaps surprisingly, they are not necessarily
those who are attracted to advertising for the
creative aspects. It is true that those who
planned to embark on a creative career were
slightly more apt to have named math as their
least favorite high school subject. However, there
were no other measured differences on the
STATS inventory in analyses of either those
who named interest in a specific creative career
or those who strongly agreed or agreed that they
were attracted to the advertising major because
of the creative aspects.
Men were more likely to have said math was
their least favorite subject; this was the only
demographic indicator.
According to these findings, attitudes relating
to mathematics generally go hand-in-hand with
perceptions about statistics. These attitudes
seem to be enduring because measurements
trace them to socialization from both parents and
include lower self-confidence, being less likely
to enjoy working with numbers or a calculator
and being less likely to say, “I like statistics
now,” when currently enrolled or having completed the class.
Those who disliked math in high school were
less apt to agree they would work in advertising
after graduating from college and were more
apt to answer “don’t know/undecided” to
advertising career paths. This may indicate that
they majored in advertising less as a career path
than as a means of gaining a college degree and
possibly avoiding math courses.
Lack of significant differences between math
averse students and the others in measurements
dealing with interest and initiative/extra effort
indicate no difference in recognizing the importance of studying math and putting in the work
required to master the subject area. Their lack of
self-confidence in regards to working with
numbers may serve as a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Variables such as GPA, age and year in
school made little difference in students’ attitudes toward statistics. This finding is consistent
with previous studies (Bendig & Hughes, 1954;
Feinberg & Halperin, 1978; Roberts & Saxe,
1982). Not consistent with many studies
(Cherian & Glencross, 1997; Feinberg and
Halperin, 1978, Sutarso, 1992b) were the findJournal of Advertising Education
141
ings showing women scoring higher on many
of the measurements.
The results here seem to indicate that women
may turn their anxiety into a positive by being
more apt to seek help from their instructor and
ask questions in class. Though there was not a
measurement of grades in math-oriented classes,
women in this sample had higher self-reported
GPAs than men.
Implications for Advertising Educators
Of the three items dealing with the statistics
instructor, only one was significant in the analyses by least favorite high school subject: the
math averse students perceived their instructors
to be less friendly. Thus, a positive attitude on the
part of the instructor and words of encouragement to students suffering from math anxiety
would seem to be of benefit. Since there were
findings showing more positive attitudes among
those with more definite career goals, counseling towards this end might help some students
to see more relevance to math and statistics.
Findings of this study indicate a slightly
more positive attitude toward math and statistics
among students currently enrolled in mathoriented courses. Therefore professors should
not avoid teaching mathematical concepts just
because they believe that students are math
averse, but rather incorporate math into their
course curriculum. Media teachers need to
teach basic media math skills and possibly ask
students to create their media plans by hand
(with a calculator) and not with the computer
software. Teachers in other advertising courses,
including creative courses, should remind students about the importance of working with
numbers in the advertising business. This could
be accomplished by using case studies that
require the interpretation of an advertising
research problem or budget-setting activity.
Limitations and Future Research
The sample of students only represents 275
students from two universities. The STATS
inventory, while recognized and tested, is
admittedly not without flaws (Sutarso, 1992a).
The current sample included few minority students; therefore, differences among racial and
Fall
2002
142
ethnic groups were not available. Ad majors not
currently enrolled in advertising classes were
not included in this study. Most importantly,
grades in statistics were not obtained from the
advertising majors and therefore it is impossible to know if negative attitudes toward statistics
results in poor grades and poor performance in
statistics class.
Future studies should investigate statistics
anxiety and math aversion among other groups
of students and compare them to advertising
students to determine if ad students, in fact, are
more math averse than other students on campus.
Given the importance of math and statistics in
the 21st century marketplace, advertising educators need to help students embrace statistics and
reverse the conventional wisdom that students
who major in advertising are math averse.
References
Adams, N. A. & Holcomb, W.R. (1986).
Analysis of the relationship between anxiety
about mathematics and performance.
Psychological Reports, 59 (October),
943 – 948.
Angoff, W. H. & Johnson, E.G. (1988). A Study
of the Differential Impact of Curriculum on
Aptitude Test Scores. Princeton, N.J.:
Educational Testing Service.
Are Our High School Graduates Prepared in
Mathematics and Science? (1994) Iowa City,
IA: American College Testing Program.
Bendig, A.W. & Hughes, J.B. (1954). Student
attitudes and achievement in a course in
introductory statistics. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 45, 268 – 276.
Benson, J. (1989). Structural components of
statistical test anxiety in adults: An
exploratory model. Journal of Experimental
Education, 57(3), 247 – 261.
Birenbaum, M. & Eylath, S. (1994). Who is
afraid of statistics? Correlates of statistics
anxiety among students of educational
sciences. Educational Research, 36(Spring),
93 – 98.
Bradley, D. R. & Wygant, C.R. (1998). Male and
female differences in anxiety about statistics
are not reflect in performance. Psychological
Reports, 82(February), 245 – 246.
Brown, T. S. & Brown, J.T. (1995). Prerequisite
course grades and attitudes toward statistics.
College Student Journal, 29(December) 502–507.
27
Sng2002
2000
Crowley, J. (1987). Media directors help plan a
media course. A paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication (70th, San Antonio, TX,
August 1 – 4, 1987).
Cherian, V. I. & Glencross, M.J. (1997). Sex
socioeconomic status, and attitude toward
applied statistics among postgraduate
education students. Psychological Reports,
80(June), 1385 – 1386.
Elmore, P. B. & Vasu, E.S. (1986). A model of
statistics achievement using spatial ability,
feminist attitudes and mathematics-related
variables as predictors,” Educational &
Psychological Measurement, 46(Spring),
215 – 222.
Feinberg, L. B. & Halperin, S. (1978). Affective
and cognitive correlates of course performance
in introductory statistics. Journal of
Experimental Education, 46(Summer), 11–18.
Grandy, J. (1984). Profiles of Prospective
Humanities Majors: 1975 – 1983. A Study of
Students Taking the College Board Scholastic
Aptitude Test and the Graduate Record
Examinations. Final Report, Revised Edition,
Supplement I and Supplement II, Princeton,
N.J.: Educational Testing Service.
Heemskerk, J. J. (1975). Statisticsphobia:
Structure of negative attitudes of teachers
and social science students toward statistics.
Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht,
22(2), 65 – 77.
Lloyd, C. V. Slater, J. & Robbs, B. (2000). The
advertising marketplace and the media
planning course. Journalism & Mass
Communication Educator, (Autumn), 4 – 13.
Lovely, R. (1987). Selection of undergraduate
majors by high ability students: Sex
differences and the attrition of science majors.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Association for the Study of Higher Education,
San Diego.
Martin, D.G. & Lloyd, C. V. (1992). Media
planning courses and dedicated software.
Journalism Educator, (Spring), 38 – 47.
Ramist, L. (1984). Predictive validity of ATP
tests. In T. Donlon (Ed.), The College Board
Technical Handbook for the Scholastic Aptitude
Test and Achievement Tests, New York: College
Entrance Examination Board.
28Summer 2016
Roberts, D. M. & Bilderback, E.W. (1980).
Reliability and validity of a statistics attitude
survey. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 40, 235 – 238.
Roberts, D. M. & Saxe, J.E. (1982). Validity of a
statistics attitudes survey: A follow-up study.
Educational and Psychological Measurement,
42(3), 907 – 912.
Schau, C., Stevens, J., Dauphinee, T.L., & Del
Vecchio, A. (1995). The development of
validation of the Survey of Attitudes Toward
Statistics. Educational & Psychological
Measurement, 55(October), 868 – 875.
Stocking, V. B. & Goldstein, D. (1992). Course
selection and performance of very high ability
students: Is there a gender gap? Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association,
San Francisco.
Sutarso, T. (1992)a. Students’ attitudes toward
statistics (STATS). Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Education
Research Association (Knoxville, TN,
November 11 – 13, 1992).
Sutarso, T. (1992)b. Some variables in relation to
students’ anxiety in learning statistics. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the MidSouth Education Research Association
(Knoxville, TN, November 11 – 13, 1992).
Tremblay, P, Gardner, R.C. & Heipel, G. (2000).
A model of the relationships among measures
of affect, aptitude and performance in
introductory statistics. Canadian Journal of
Behavioural Science, 32(January) 40 – 48.
Umphrey, D. & Fullerton, J.A. (2001). An
exploratory study of SAT Scores, GPA and
gender: A comparison of college graduates in
advertising and other majors. Presented at the
American Academy of Advertising Conference
(Salt Lake City, Utah, March 29 – 31).
Umphrey, D. & Fullerton, J.A. (2000). An
analysis of SAT scores, GPA and Gender:
How do communication majors compare?.
Southwestern Mass Communication Journal,
15(2), 38 – 46.
Wise, S. L. (1985). The development and
validation of a scale measuring attitudes toward
statistics. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 45(2), 401 – 405.
143
Account Management
and the Changing Advertising Landscape
Brett Robbs, University of Colorado at Boulder
Carla Lloyd, Syracuse University
Account management is neither new nor trendy.
Yet, it retains its appeal for students entering
the advertising profession. In fact, in surveys
conducted among the finalists in the American
Advertising Federation National Student
Advertising competition, account executive
has repeatedly been the choice of almost half of
those surveyed (Kendrick and Fullerton, 2002,
Kendrick and Fullerton, 2003).
Although educators have explored how to
best prepare students for careers in a variety of
agency departments, little attention has been
devoted to the skills and knowledge successful
account managers need. Perhaps that is due to the
low regard in which the position was sometimes
held in the past. Within the advertising agency
culture, as Matthew Creamer (2006) has
suggested, account people were often known as
“yes men,” and “bag carriers.” Considering that
attitude there is little wonder that scant interest
has been given to exploring what special training
might be necessary for the position.
If such a negative characterization of account
executives were ever true, it no longer is. Today,
they are more critical to an agency’s success than
ever. But the changes that have transformed the
advertising landscape, are also leaving their
mark on the account management function. As
Advertising Age phrased it, “even the most dyedin-the-gray-wool suit will be forced to change,
or accept his ultimate demise” (Creamer). To
decide how best to prepare students for careers in
account management, it is important to determine
2144
the changes that have most impacted the position
and the skills and knowledge now required.
This study is designed to do precisely that.
Literature Review
Educators and practitioners have been debating
advertising education at least since Walter Dill
Scott first spoke to Chicago’s Agate Club in
1901. While earlier discussions explored the
proper preparation for a career in advertising in
general, more recently, the focus has been on the
best way to prepare students for specific areas
of the agency business. A number of scholars,
for example, have examined the types of skills
agencies look for in entry-level creative people
(Blakeman and Haley, 2005; Kendrick, et al.,
1996; Lee and Ryan, 2005; Otnes, Spooner and
Treise, 1993; Otnes, Oviatt and Treise, 1995;
Robbs, 1996; Robbs and Wells, 1999). Others
have explored the curricular implications of
changes in the media landscape (Lloyd et al.,
2000; Slater et al., 2002) and the best ways
to prepare account planners for entry-level
positions (Lavery, 2000, Morrison et al., 2003,
Gale and Robbs, 2004, Robbs and Gale, 2005).
But account management has received little
attention in academic literature. Deckinger et
al (1989) surveyed agency professionals and
educators to determine points of similarity and
difference in the skills each group felt to be
essential for four agency positions including
account executive. The area has naturally
received more attention in textbooks and
From the Journal of AdvertisingJournal
Education
Archive | Education
Sng2008
2000
Fall
of Advertising
publications directed to working professionals.
Ed Applegate and Art Johnson (2007) present a
helpful outline of the duties and skills of entry
level and senior account people and then place
the work itself in context through case studies.
The cases, while helpful, are so brief as to provide
little sense of what the account person’s job
itself actually entails. Jay Quinn (1999) provides
a better sense of both the account person’s role
and its challenges as he points to the position’s
requiring a rare combination of left and right
brain skills as well as to the internal conflict
posed by the need to represent the interests of
both the agency and the client. Robert Solomon
(2000, 2003) draws on his many years of
experience in account management to provide
very helpful tips for dealing with those and a
variety of other challenges. Because a broader
picture of the account person’s overall role does
not accompany his advice, his insights are of
most use to working professionals.
Jon Steel (1998) has examined the more
recent challenges presented to account people
by the rise of the account planner. As Steel sees
it, there is no real conflict, because the account
person’s understanding of the client’s business
complement’s the planners’ insights into the
consumer. Of all of the professional literature,
Don Dickson (2003) provides the most indepth study. Not only does he offer a valuable,
detailed examination of each aspect of the
account person’s job, but he also notes how it
has changed in response to recent changes in
the business landscape. In particular, he points
out that the broadening of the agency service
portfolio and changes in the way agencies are
compensated have directly affected the account
manager’s function. But because he is writing
a textbook to introduce students to the account
person’s responsibilities, he is unable to explore
the impact of these and other changes in any real
depth.
The trade press has also given some
attention to the changing role of the account
person. Most recently, Creamer reports that the
changes transforming advertising were placing
new demands on account executives for which
they were unprepared. He pointed out that
the executives he spoke with indicated that in
Spring
20082016
Summer
this changed advertising landscape account
executives needed: (1) business acumen, not
just advertising expertise; (2) familiarity with
marketing disciplines such as direct and the
internet; and (3) extensive training although
agencies say they lack the resources to provide
it (2006).
But there has been no effort to examine in
a more thorough manner the way in which the
account function has changed and the skills
and knowledge account people now need to
succeed. This study was designed to explore
those issues. Moreover, because agencies no
longer provide training programs to help juniors
acquire the more sophisticated skills they need
to advance, educators may need to help their
students begin to understand those higher-level
skills. So this study also explores the sorts
of knowledge and abilities skilled account
people will need throughout their careers.
Method
This study is based on in-depth interviews,
which as Lofland and Lofland (1995) have
observed, are well suited to learning as much as
possible about an unexplored aspect of a topic
and discovering how respondents interpret a
particular subject. Interviews were conducted
with 14 senior advertising executives with
strong account management backgrounds all of
whom worked for different agencies. To broaden
the perspective, interviews were also conducted
with the director of a client organization and
a marketing consultant, both of whom had
extensive experience on the agency side as
account managers.
The sample was a “purposive” one in order
to increase the range and scope of data exposed
as well as the “likelihood that the full array of
multiple realities” would be uncovered (Lincoln
and Guba, 1985). Interview subjects were
chosen because of their ability to contribute to
an understanding of the impact of change on the
account management function. In selecting the
interviewees, consideration was given not only
to level of experience and the quality of the
agency’s account service department but also to
location and agency size.
The interviewees had an average of more
27
145
than 20 years of experience in account service
and held such positions as Senior Vice President
and Group Account Director, Senior Vice
President and Group Management Supervisor,
and Vice Chairman and General Manager.
Because of their length of service and high level
of experience, respondents had a perspective
that enabled them to indicate ways in which the
account function had changed.
Nine of the interviewees worked for large
or mid-sized national agencies all of which had
won an EFFIE award in the last three years.
While there are no awards given specifically
for outstanding account service, the EFFIEs
do honor client and agency teams that take on
a marketing challenge and develop a big idea
that achieves significant results. That suggests
the winning agencies probably have strong
account management departments. Five of
those interviewed were from regional or local
agencies whose overall growth and success
also suggested the presence of strong account
managers. Interviewees were also from different
parts of the country with three being located on
the West Coast, three in the Midwest, two in the
Southeast and six in the Northeast.
The interviews were conducted by telephone
or in-person and were audiotaped. The individual
sessions lasted 30 to 45 minutes and were
based on a semi-structured interview guide.
The interviews were designed to determine
the changes that have most impacted account
service. The interviewees were asked a series
of questions about their own backgrounds,
how the marketplace has changed and if and
how the responsibilities of account managers
have changed accordingly. Those interviewed
were also asked to share a story about a project
they’d recently worked on that shows account
management at its finest and to describe the skills
and characteristics now required for success.
Interviewing continued until a saturation point
was reached (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). All
interviews were transcribed for analysis.
The resultant text was analyzed for emergent
themes related to the research questions.
Critical incidents in the text were identified
and the most revealing were used to exemplify
the textual themes (Lincoln and Guba, 1985).
28146
Findings
Agency size did not seem to influence the
interviewees’ perspective on the changing role of
the account person. Title and geographic location
also seemed to have no impact. Executives with
varying titles from agencies of quite different
sizes in different parts of the country all indicated
that the responsibilities of account managers had
been impacted most by the increasing emphasis
clients place on profitability and return on
investment and by the impact of technology on
the media landscape and the speed of business.
Those two issues seemed to converge in one
of the key emerging themes as interviewees
described how in order to help clients meet their
quarterly earnings goals, it is even more critical
for the account person to help the agency team
identify and solve the client’s business problem
and solve it much more quickly than in the past.
The client’s increased concern with profitability
is also at the root of other major themes that
were identified in the interviews. As the agency
executives we spoke with pointed out, if the
advertising is to help move the needle, it’s more
important than ever for account people to make
sure the creative will work hard against the
strategy and deliver the desired results quickly.
That, they said, requires account managers to
forge a closer working relationship with the
creative team than often existed in the past. It also
requires them to facilitate a closer relationship
between creative and media people in order to
take full advantage of new media opportunities
and find more effective ways to get the client’s
message out. In short, as the major themes
discussed in much more detail below make
clear, at a time when technology is dramatically
altering the media landscape and clients are
increasingly concerned with the bottom line,
the account person’s role is more challenging
and probably more important than ever.
Solving the business problem
Certainly, interviewees emphasized that clients
are more focused on the bottom line than ever
before. The former General Manager of a global
network noted, “The largest changes come from
the pressures of Wall Street on client earnings.
This has forced most clients to make decisions
of Advertising
From the Journal of AdvertisingJournal
Education
Archive | Education
Sng2008
2000
Fall
based on quarterly earnings as opposed to the
brand.” Interviewees repeatedly pointed out that
this concern with ROI and “moving the needle”
makes it more important than ever for the account
person to be able to identify and solve the client’s
business problem. As a Managing Partner put it,
“What is the business egg we’re trying to crack?
What is the business problem that people are
paying us a whole bunch of money to solve?
That’s job one for account people.”
Identifying and solving that problem, the
interviewees indicated, continues to require
research, analytical skills, math abilities, and a
comfort with all kinds of data from quantitative
research reports to data on sales and market share.
While the need for such skills and understanding
is not new, what may be new is the speed with
which those skills must be used. That theme
surfaced repeatedly. The President of a major
West Coast agency indicated that, “speed is
of the essence. You don’t have a lot of time to
mull things over” because “we generally have
less time and fewer people to get the job done”
than in the past. His East Coast counterpart had a
similar perspective: “The days of sitting in your
office as an account executive and writing a tenpage white paper…are over. In terms of account
management and maintaining client relationships,
the strength of your thinking is very important
but the quickness of your thinking has become
important as well.” Being able to choose a course
of action quickly and accurately, the interviewees
suggested, may demand a level of confidence
and mastery not easily acquired on the job
especially in the absence of training programs.
The importance of creativity
Creativity is seldom mentioned in the literature
on account management. But the interviewees
suggested again and again that creativity is
a key part of the account person’s job. Not
only must they stimulate creative thinking in
others, but they must also use it themselves
to help solve business problems. A Director
of Account Service argued that, “Solving
business problems creatively is literally the
underpinning of the entire advertising industry.
And account managers have a key role to play
in that process.” As the President of another
Spring
20082016
Summer
agency said, account executives are expected to
be “creative people just as much as the agency’s
writers…(and) should be held to creative
standards just like everyone else at the agency.”
In fact, that is essential, a marketing consultant
suggested, if account managers are to “provide
the team with non-stop ideas like product
improvements, new product opportunities, new
use possibilities, new pricing strategies, new
ways to look at problems and new media ideas.”
Balancing creativity and results
Delivering the results the client wants has
always been one of the account person’s key
responsibilities. But with clients keeping a
sharper idea on the bottom line, interviewees
repeatedly stated that trying to make sure the
creative will produce the desired results has
become an even more critical part of their job.
As a Group Management Supervisor pointed
out, “For many years advertising was able to
get away with and skate around with being
a soft science. But now everybody wants a
ROI.” That means the account person must be
more involved than ever in making sure the
creative will work hard against the strategy. An
Account Supervisor at an agency known for its
creative work noted, “With clients measuring
results quarterly and sometimes even daily, you
definitely have to keep things in check in a way
you might not have in the past and know that the
creative is going to work in the best way possible
to help move the client’s business forward.” A
Group Account Director added, “Balancing the
aesthetic desires of the agency to produce work
that’s award-winning with the desire to deliver
for the client is one of the most critical things an
account person has to do today.” It is also one of
the most challenging. As one agency President
said, “If there’s to be a strong partnership and
not a tug of war, account people have to respect
the creatives and creatives have to respect the
account people.”
The need for partnerships between creative
and account, while perhaps more important than
ever, is not new. But what may be surprising is
that many interviewees suggested that the key
to a successful working relationship resides in a
shared passion for the creative product. As one
29
147
Account Director explained, “You have to earn
your place at the table as an account guy…. So
you have to pay a price to earn the creatives’
trust. You have to prove that you care about the
work and that you can add something to it that
will make it better.” Both points – caring about
the work and making it better - are important.
To be a “strong creative partner,” a Group
Account Director said, “you have to understand
how creatives think so that you can bring them
fodder and stimulation.” Doing that, another
pointed out, “is really about digging down and
figuring out what the real problem is. The more
informed you are about the client’s business and
the more insight you have into what the problem
is, the more creatives will feel you’ve helped
their process.”
Insight, however, is not enough. It must be
grounded in a passion for the work itself. As an
Account Supervisor emphasized, “unless you
can demonstrate that you share their passion
and want to do great stuff, it’s much more
difficult to impact the work.” Added a Group
Director, “If you’re an account person who has
a strong relationship with your creative people
and you’re highly valued, you can come in
and really help fine tune some of those ideas.
So you might say, ‘I understand where you’re
going with this, but maybe you want to put a
slightly different angle on it that is more in line
with what the problem is.’” Being able to make
those sorts of adjustments allows the account
people to bring the best possible ideas to the
table - ideas that have the best chance of giving
clients the kind of results they demand. But the
ability to impact the creative in that way grows
out of the account person’s insight into the
business and commitment to the creative work.
Less revenue and more challenges
Clients are looking to enhance their profits not
only by generating stronger results but also by
cutting expenses. As the President of a regional
network pointed out, “Purchasing departments
are buying agency services as a commodity
product. They’re seeking the lowest possible
cost.” Changes in compensation and new
technologies are placing additional pressure on
agency revenues.
0
148
What all of this means for the account person,
the interviewees said, is that it’s more important
than ever to keep a close watch on the hours to
make sure the agency does not invest more time
into the account than is covered by the client’s
fee. In fact, added a Senior Account Director,
“keeping an eye on an account’s profitability
and renegotiating a contract when necessary is a
key responsibility especially for account people
at the highest levels.” Moreover, because of the
high cost of new business pitches, interviewees
suggested the best way to generate more revenue
on the agency side is by getting additional
assignments from existing clients. That, of course,
depends on the results the agency generates for
those clients, which is just one more reason why
identifying and solving the client’s business
problem is such a critically important task.
New media and new challenges
The need to show results, an agency President
noted, has already pushed agencies to do “a
lot more direct marketing, a lot more database
and data strategy,” which, of course, pushes
account people to become more familiar with
those media than they were in the past. But
technology has had an even greater impact on
the media landscape and consequently on the
role of the account executive. The interviewees
consistently indicated that because traditional
forms of advertising are less effective than they
once were, today the account person must work
more closely with the rest of the agency team
to find new ways of getting the client’s message
out.
In fact, one Account Director emphasized
that the advent of new media presented account
managers with an opportunity: “Now when a
lot of us are at the brink between new and old
technologies, one great way for account people
to separate themselves from the pack is to
understand different ways of bringing creative to
life by taking creative assets and pushing them
across the spectrum of media channels.” Not
everyone in the agency is comfortable with “this
new frontier.” So, as an Account Supervisor
noted, “It becomes imperative for the account
person to take the lead in getting everyone on the
team to think about ways to make ideas bigger by
Sng2008
2000
pushing them across a variety of evolving media
platforms.” A Group Account Director added, “If
you’re going to create content that people want to
see and look for, one of your key responsibilities
has got to be to explore - and help others explore
- these new and emerging media opportunities.”
That often means facilitating meetings between
creative and media people – something many
interviewees noted that they would have seen
no reason to insist upon in the past. One Group
Management Supervisor believes that creating
such partnerships “can help ideas get richer and
more plausible.” A creative team, she explains,
“can say ‘that’s a great idea but we’ll never be
able to pull that off.’ And a media person can
say, ‘Well, yeah, we absolutely can pull that off,
or we can’t pull off something exactly like that,
but we could do this.’”
Of course, account people are not just
facilitating such partnerships. In order to make
sure the agency takes advantage of new media
opportunities and prevents those dollars from
being siphoned off by digital agencies, account
managers are also leading by example. So
they are involving themselves more actively
in the media planning process. An Account
Supervisor told of how he, his media planner
and connection planner “talked throughout the
day to figure out where else the message could
be amplified by using new forms of media,
particularly interactive media.” After all, said an
Account Director, “If you’re not thinking how
you can push work into areas (like YouTube),
you’re leaving money on the table.”
But developing an effective strategy utilizing
new media channels is just the first step. As
one senior account manager noted, “Keeping
great new media ideas alive and sold becomes
a critical responsibility.” Because these channels
are new and because they have less of a track
record, the client’s senior management is
often unfamiliar or uncomfortable with them.
Making sure the idea survives as it moves up the
client’s management food chain takes enormous
persuasive power and requires an even closer
client-agency partnership than in the past. A
Managing Partner explained: “It takes getting
into a foxhole next to the client and helping them
make believers out of people. Even if you get
Spring 2008
Summer 2016
a chief marketing officer who really buys into
it, he’s got a boardroom full of people who pay
his salary who are skeptical. So a lot of times
you have to go arm in arm into these meetings
with the client and help people understand that
this is a smart path to take and the one they’re
going down is sort of bankrupt and is no longer
a viable option. That becomes an enormous
job particularly for senior account people.”
Discussion
The former chairman of a global advertising
network pointed out that “agencies can’t afford
to train people anymore.” So if entry-level
employees are to “hit the ground running,” they
must come with the kind of knowledge and
skills agencies are looking for. As the founder of
a regional network explained, “We are not just
hiring people with great personalities. We are
hiring people with ability, who have some real
skill sets and bring something to the job.”
But those skill sets will need to include
more than just the basics. With the elimination
of agency training programs, interviewees
consistently said that participation in higherlevel meetings, where juniors can watch senior
colleagues in action, is a good way for entry-level
employees to develop the more sophisticated
skills they will need to advance. One account
director called such sessions “a private tutorial.”
Others explained that the chance to participate
depended on whether “you prove that you can
add something to those discussions,” which,
in turn, “depends on the skills and knowledge
you bring to the job.” In short, if entry level
employees are to get the chance to participate
in the meetings that will help them advance
quickly, they need more than basic skills; they
also need the kind of deeper understanding that
will enable them to contribute to higher-level
agency discussions.
Helping students gain such an understanding
may depend in part on an advertising program’s
being able to form alliances with other units
on campus. For example, as the interviewees
pointed out, identifying and solving the client’s
business problem is “job one” for account
managers. That is likely to require more training
in business than most programs can provide on
1
149
their own. One approach would be to reach an
agreement with the business school to allow
advertising students to take at least entry-level
business courses. While business schools can
be difficult to work with, such lower division
courses are often large lecture sections. That
can make gaining access for advertising majors
easier. Then the advertising program could build
on that foundation by offering its own casebased course in which students would use the
knowledge they acquired in the business school
classes to help them identify and solve the types
of problems clients often wrestle with.
Students planning on careers in account
service not only need a deeper understanding of
business, but a broader understanding of media
as well. The interviewees repeatedly noted that it
is not enough for account managers to be familiar
with the basics of traditional media; they must
also understand how consumers are using new
forms of media and how to push creative ideas
across emerging media channels. Most programs
are probably already including such material in
the introductory media class. Because of the
growing importance of partnerships between
creative and media, one way to enliven the class
is to ask students to discuss creative that grows
out of a synergistic relationship between creative
and new media. One source for such creative
work is Media Post’s Media Creativity.
Moreover, because new media channels are
increasingly important to consumers and clients,
advertising programs may want to consider
adding a course that combines media planning
and connection planning. That would help
students explore the role such channels play in
a consumer’s life, what they can help brands
accomplish and how creative ideas can be
pushed across a variety of media platforms. In
fact, as one account director said, having a good
understanding of such matters is “one great way
for account people to separate themselves from
the pack.”
Finally, interviewees consistently pointed
to the importance of creativity. If as one senior
executive said, “solving business problems
creatively is literally the underpinning of the
entire advertising industry,” then all students
– and not just those planning on careers as
2150
writers and art directors – need to take at least
one creative course. Such a class can help them
develop the creative thinking skills they can
use to address a wide range of business issues.
But the course should also examine awardwinning work and provide students planning on
careers in account management and creative the
chance to create work together. That experience
would help those students planning on careers
in account management gain the understanding
they will need to appreciate and evaluate
creative work. More importantly, experiencing
first hand the challenge of creating good work
and the passion required to do so can help future
account executives develop a real respect for
strong ideas and the people who create them.
That can lay the foundation for partnerships
between creative and account management partnerships that interviewees said are essential
if agencies are to produce the kind of work
and results clients demand. Previously, little
attention had been given to the changing role
of the account executive or ways advertising
programs can prepare students for careers as
account managers. Admittedly, this study only
offers a snapshot. A broad survey is needed to
gather more data about the account manager’s
changing role and responsibilities. Nonetheless,
this study provides insight and direction that can
help guide the development of a curriculum that
will prepare students for successful careers in
this critical area of the agency.
.
References
Applegate, Edd and Johnson, Art. (2007). Cases
in Advertising & marketing management:
Real Situations for Tomorrow’s Managers.
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Blakeman, Robyn & Haley, Eric (2005). Tales
of Portfolio Schools and Universities:
Working Creatives’ Views on Preparing
Students for Entry Level Jobs as Advertising
Creatives. Journal of Advertising Education,
Fall, 5 – 13.
Creamer, Matthew (2006). The Demise of the
Suit. Advertising Age, March 13, 1, 37.
Deckinger, E. L., Brink, James, M.,
Katzenstein, Herbert, & Primavera, Louis
of Advertising
Education
Education
Archive | Fall
Sng2008
2000
H. (1989-1990). How Can Advertising
Teachers Better Prepare Students for Entrylevel Advertising Agency Jobs. Journal of
Advertising Research, December –January,
37 – 46.
Dickinson, Don. 2003). The New Account
Manager. Chicago: The Copy Workshop.
Gale, Kendra & Robbs, Brett (2003).
Enhancing Strategic Thinking Throughout
the Advertising Curriculum: An Account
Planning Perspective (2004). Advertising
Educator, Fall, 8 – 16.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967). The
Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies
for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Kendrick, Alice & Fullerton, Jami A (2002).
Employment Preferences of Students in the
2001 AAF National Student Advertising
Competition. Journal of Advertising
Education, Fall, 29 – 36.
Kendrick, Alice & Fullerton, Jami (2003).
Challenging, fun and pays well: Top
advertising students describe their ideal jobs.
Journal of Advertising Education, Spring,
2003, 47 – 54.
Kendrick, Alice, Slayden, David & Broyles
Sherri (1996). Real Worlds and Ivory
Towers: A Survey of Top Creative Directors.
Journalism and Mass Communication
Educator, Summer, 63 – 74.
Lavery, Roger M. (2000). One Design for the
Account Planning Curriculum. Journal of
Advertising Education, Spring, 36 – 38.
Lee, Tien-Tsung & Ryan, William E. (2005).
Advertising Creative Practitioners on
the Value of Advertising Education:
An Overview. Journal of Advertising
Education, 14 – 21.
Lincoln, Yvonna C. & Guba, Egon G. (1988).
Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park,
California: Sage.
Lloyd, Carla V, Slater, Jan & Robbs Brett
(2000). The Advertising marketplace and
the Media Planning Course. Journalism &
Mass Communication Educator, Autumn, 4
– 13.
Lofland, J. and Lofland, L.H. (1995). Analyzing
Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative
Observation and Analysis. California:
Spring
2008
Summer
2016
Wadsworth Publishing.
Morrison, Margaret, Christy, Tim & Haley, Eric
(2003). Preparing Planners: Account
Planning and the Advertising Curriculum.
Journal of Advertising Education, Spring, 5
– 20.
Otnes, Cele, Oviatt, Arlo A & Treise, Deborah
M ((1995). Views on Advertising
Curriculum from Experienced “Creatives.”
Journalism Educator, Winter, 21 – 30.
Otnes, Cele, Spooner, Eric & Treise, Deborah
M (1993). Advertising Curriculum Ideas
from “New Creatives.” Journalism
Educator, Autumn, 9 – 17.
Quinn, Jay (1999). The Account Executive in
an Advertising Agency. In John Philip
Jones (Ed.), The Advertising Business,( pp.
29 – 34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Robbs, Brett (1996) The Advertising
Curriculum and the Needs of Creative
Students.” Journalism & Mass
Communication Educator, Winter, 25 – 34.
Robbs, Brett & Gale, Kendra (2005). Teaching
the Undergraduate Research Course for
Advertising Majors: Course content and
Key Challenges. Journal of Advertising
Education, Spring, 19 – 30.
Robbs, Brett & Wells, Ludmilla (1999).
Teaching Practices and Emphases in
Advertising Creative Courses. Journalism
and Mass Communication Educator,
Autumn, 57 – 64.
Slater, Jan S., Robbs, Brett, & Lloyd, Carla V.
(2002). Teaching the Advertising Media
Planning Course: Trying to Serve Two
Masters. Advertising Educator, Fall, 9 – 19.
Solomon, Robert (2003). The Art of Client
Service. Chicago: Dearborn
Solomon, Robert (2000). Brain Surgery for
Suits: 56 Things Every Account Person
Should Know. New York: Strategy Press
Steel, Jon (1998). Truth Lies and Advertising:
The Art of Account Planning. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
151
THE
NEWEST
MEMBER
OF OUR
FACULTY IS
AN ALIEN.
FROM
JUPITER.
A founder of The Jupiter Drawing Room in Cape Town, brings
with him a wealth of experience and success – along with a
wicked sense of humor.
The Department of Advertising + Public Relations at Michigan
State University is delighted to welcome Ross Chowles as a
faculty member.
152
Summer 2016
153
Book Reviews
Social Media Strategy: Marketing and
Advertising in the Consumer Revolution
By Keith A. Quesenberry
(Rowman & Littlefield; 2014;
ISBN: 978-1-4422-5153-3)
Writing a book on social media strategy is a
bit like cleaning up after a toddler. You may
succeed, but it’s just a matter of time before
the toys are all over the floor again. That
said, there is a certain amount of satisfaction
in knowing that–for a fleeting moment–there
was once order brought to the chaos. Keith
A. Quesenberry’s new book, Social Media
Strategy: Marketing and Advertising in the
Consumer Revolution will provide that momentary relief for any instructor tasked with
teaching social media.
Quesenberry, an assistant professor of
marketing at Messiah College and a former
advertising industry executive, provides a solid foundation for introducing the complexity
of social media strategy to students. The book
contains four sections: a brief overview of underlying theories supporting social media as
a communication channel, a strategic framework for analyzing social media participation,
a review of popular social media platforms
and a look at integrating social media across
business functions.
In the first section, the author provides
necessary background for students who have
grown up as digital natives. The brief exposition of the evolution of marketing from push
vs. pull and from control to engagement will
give students context for understanding the
revolutionary nature of social media proliferation.
The strategic framework the author introduces is grounded in traditional account
planning tactics including quantitative and
qualitative research, competitive audits and
insight development. He also dedicates a
chapter to the relationship between marketing,
operations and customer service in executing
on an effective social media strategy.
While the strategic approached outlined
is sufficient, it lacks an exploration of what
makes social media strategy unique–namely,
the interactivity between the brand and the
consumer and the challenges that creates for
154
community management and corporate governance of social media communication. A
robust discussion of social media metrics,
building ROI models for social and social
media budgeting would have also enhanced
this section.
The third section of the book provides an
outstanding introduction to the types of social
media engagement and their representative
platforms. While no printed book will be
able to exhaustively catalog all social media
platforms, the author does a thorough job explaining the functionality of major platforms
such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and
Pinterest, as well as the differing consumer
motivations for participation on each platform.
The book concludes with an introduction
to the uses of social media beyond marketing
promotion across the organization. Social media research, customer service response and
co-creation are all discussed.
Social Media Strategy is well-formatted,
however, students might find it to be a bit
copy heavy. Each chapter includes up-to-date
case studies, thoughtful discussion questions
and additional exercises to facilitate classroom interaction with the material.
While choosing a social media textbook often deserves the status of “It’s Complicated”,
any professor looking for a quality introductory textbook for social media would do well
to be “In a Relationship” with Quesenberry’s
contribution.
— Amber Benson
Southern Methodist University
Remembering Tom Weir
It is with great sadness and great affection
that we remember Tom Weir, who died
at age 66 on February 14, 2016 in Columbia, South Carolina. Tom joined the
faculty at the University of South Carolina’s School of Journalism and Mass
Communications in 2008 and served as
interim director from 2014-2015 until he
retired in 2015. Prior to working at the
University of South Carolina, Tom taught
at Oklahoma State University and served
as Director of the School of Journalism
and Broadcasting from 2003 until 2008.
Tom was a beloved advertising professor, wise mentor and loyal friend. His
work with the NSAC team at Oklahoma
State and South Carolina was unfailing and resulted in many awards for his
schools and many more great lessons
and memorable experiences for his students. Tom’s students absolutely adored
him. The 10th District of the American
Advertising Federation named him Outstanding Educator in 2004.
Tom Weir received his undergraduate
degree from the University of Kansas
and later earned his master’s and doctoral degrees from the University of
Missouri after a long industry career in
the newspaper business in Colorado. His
dissertation was among the early research
Summer 2016
that explored the diffusion of online
newspapers. Tom was a contributor to
the Journal of Advertising Education as
an author and as one of our most capable
reviewers.
Tom was part of the team that hired
me at Oklahoma State and was a wonderful friend and mentor throughout our
time together at OSU and even after he
moved to South Carolina. Typical of the
great copywriter that he was, Tom was
extremely witty and always kept me
laughing. He loved the beach, his dog
and a good glass of Chardonnay.
Tom was born in Kansas City, Missouri on April 2, 1949, to the late Gordon
Mac and Thelma Fasig Weir. He leaves
behind many, many friends and family including his wife, whom he greatly
cherished, Dr. Susan Basham Weir.
-- Jami Fullerton
155
T E M E R L I N
ADVERTISING
INSTITUTE
is pleased to announce the appointment of
Dr. Alice Kendrick
as the
Marriott Professor
in Advertising
156
advertising
advertising
Editors: Editors:
Past Editors:
Past Editors:
Jami Fullerton
Jami Fullerton
Patricia B.
Patricia
Rose B. Rose
ProfessorProfessor
Mary Alice
Mary
Shaver
Alice Shaver
Peggy Welch
PeggyEndowed
Welch Endowed
Keith Johnson
Keith Johnson
ResearchResearch
Chair Chair
School ofSchool
Mediaof&Media
Strategic
& StrategicAdvertising
Advertising
Division Division
Executive
Executive
Committee:
Committee:
Communications
Communications
Sela Sar,
Sela
head
Sar, head
Oklahoma
Oklahoma
State University
State University University
University
of Illinois
ofat
Illinois
Urbana-Champaign
at Urbana-Champaign
[email protected]
[email protected] George George
Anghelcev,
Anghelcev,
vice head
vice
and
head and
programprogram
chair chair
Alice Kendrick
Alice Kendrick
Penn State
Penn
University
State University
Marriott Marriott
ProfessorProfessor
of Advertising
of Advertising
Kelty Logan,
Kelty research
Logan, research
chair chair
TemerlinTemerlin
Advertising
Advertising
InstituteInstitute
University
University
of
Colorado-Boulder
of
Colorado-Boulder
SouthernSouthern
Methodist
Methodist
University
University
Karie Hollerbach,
Karie Hollerbach,
student student
paper chair
paper chair
[email protected]
[email protected]
Southeast
Southeast
MissouriMissouri
State University
State University
Book Editor:
Book Editor:
Debbie Debbie
Yount, professional
Yount, professional
freedomfreedom
and
and
responsibility
Susan Westcott
Susan Westcott
Alessandri
Alessandri responsibility
University
University
of Oklahoma
of Oklahoma
Department
Department
of Communication
of Communication
&
&
PadminiPadmini
Patwardhan,
Patwardhan,
special special
topics chair
topics chair
Journalism
Journalism
Winthrop
Winthrop
University
University
Suffolk University
Suffolk University
John Wirtz,
Johnteaching
Wirtz, teaching
standards
standards
chair chair
41 Temple
41 Street
Temple Street
University
University
of Illinois
ofat
Illinois
Urbana-Champaign
at Urbana-Champaign
Boston, MA
Boston,
02114MA 02114
Keith Quesenberry,
Keith Quesenberry,
secretary/events
secretary/events
[email protected]
[email protected]
coordinator
coordinator
& Production
Manager:
DesignerDesigner
& Production
Manager:
MessiahMessiah
College College
Adam Wagler
Adam Wagler
Sheryl Kantrowitz,
Sheryl Kantrowitz,
newsletter
newsletter
editor editor
University
University
of Nebraska-Lincoln
of Nebraska-LincolnTemple Temple
University
University
[email protected]
[email protected]
Original design
Originalby
design
ElainebyWagner
Elaine Wagner
J ou
r
J ou
r
Volume
2
0
on •
•N
ati
uc on • Volume 20 u
•
N
ati
u
uc
f AodfvAedrtviseirntgising
o
Ed Ed
l l
na na
Research
Research
& commentary
& commentary
on instruction,
on instruction,
curriculum
curriculum
& leadership
& leadership
in advertising
in advertising
education
education
Subscription
Subscription
Rates: Rates:
Members
Members
of the Advertising
of the Advertising
DivisionDivision
of AEJMC
of receive
AEJMC receive
the Journal
theofJournal of
Advertising
Advertising
EducationEducation
as part of
astheir
part of their
annual Division
annual Division
membership.
membership.
Individual
Individual
subscriptions
subscriptions
are by year
are by year
(volume).
(volume).
Subscriptions
Subscriptions
receive receive
the
the
full set of
fullissues
set offor
issues
that for
year.
that year.
Subscription
Subscription
prices are:
prices are:
U.S. individual:
U.S. individual:
$25 per $25
yearper year
U.S. institution:
U.S. institution:
$65 per $65
yearper year
Single issue
Single
price:
issue$15
price: $15
Foreign Foreign
air mail,air
add
mail,
$20add
per $20
yearper year
Journal
Journal
of Advertising
of Advertising
Education
Education
Copyright
Copyright
information:
information:
Individuals
Individuals
providing
photoduplication
providing
photoduplication
servicesservices
may photocopy
in theofJournal of
may photocopy
articles articles
in the Journal
Advertising
Advertising
EducationEducation
without without
permis- permission —for
either
for personal
use or for
sion — either
personal
use or for
use or distribution
to students
for
use or distribution
to students
for
classroom
use.
classroom
use.
Subscription
Subscription
information:
information:
Requests
Requests
to reproduce
to reproduce
materials
materials
in
in
JAE for any
JAE other
for any
purpose
other purpose
should be
should be
AddressAddress
changeschanges
must reach
mustAEJMC
reach AEJMC directeddirected
to:
to:
offices 30
offices
days 30
prior
days
to prior
the actual
to the actual
change of
change
address.
of address.
Copies that
Copies
are that are
Jennifer Jennifer
McGill, Executive
McGill, Executive
DirectorDirector
not delivered
not delivered
becausebecause
of address
of address
AEJMC AEJMC
change will
change
not will
be replaced.
not be replaced.
Other Other
234 Outlet
234Pointe
OutletBlvd.
Pointe Blvd.
claims for
claims
undeliverable
for undeliverable
copies copies
Columbia,
Columbia,
SC 29210-5667
SC 29210-5667
must bemust
made
bewithin
madefour
within
months
four months
803.798.0271
803.798.0271
(voice) (voice)
of publication.
of publication.
You must
You
provide
must provide
803.772.3509
803.772.3509
(fax)
(fax)
old address
old address
and zip and
codezip
as code
well as
as well as
[email protected]
[email protected]
(E-mail)(E-mail)
the newthe
address
new address
and zip and
codezip
oncode on
all change
all notices.
change notices.
Subscriptions
Subscriptions
Only that
Only
office
thatmay
office
grant
may
the
grant
request,
the request,
are non-refundable.
are non-refundable.
after assessing
after assessing
a fee. a fee.
education
education
m
2 2
r 1- r 1be be
m

Journal of Advertising Education - American Academy of Advertising

Transcription

Similar documents

WWIN 816 SHOW INFO KIT PT. 1

Brockton Enterprise Contract Newspaper Guild

alarm force fear factor

Lightning Fast Search Solutions for the Enterprise

SyracuseUniIntroAdvertising v2

Online Advertisement

Download: The Guide to the Know-WOW

WGNS RADIO WORKS

WFA draft6 révisé par M signé [Mode de compatibilité]

our 2015 Guide to Advertising on ThePrizeFinder.com