Abstract
As journalism schools continue to respond to industry disruption, some are adding curricula about practices that reframe traditional journalism. In this article, I examined experiences of some of the first university instructors of solutions journalism—critical reporting on responses to social problems—to explore the opportunities and challenges of initial coursework implementation. Using the nominal group technique and interpretative phenomenological analysis, I found two themes: (a) solutions journalism courses inspire and (b) teaching an emerging practice within an established field. Findings suggest this pedagogy is important as disruption continues and need increases to find effective journalism practices and education strategies.
Keywords
Since the advent of peace journalism in the 1960s, some journalists have questioned the field’s traditional theory of change, which suggests that merely providing information is enough to ensure positive aims in a democratic society. The emerging practice of solutions journalism follows in the footsteps of both peace journalism, which questioned conflict as a news value, and civic or public journalism, a 1990s movement that sought to promote citizens’ voice in setting agendas (Wenzel, Gerson, & Moreno, 2016). Although solutions-oriented stories appeared as early as the 1990s (Benesch, 1998), the approach gained momentum with the creation of the Solutions Journalism Network (SJN) in 2013 (Wenzel et al., 2016).
While using the critical standards of traditional journalism, solutions journalism emphasizes comprehensive explorations of why and how solutions work. Solutions journalism reframes traditional journalistic approaches to reporting on social problems as it seeks to engage readers, offer a blueprint for change, and alter the tone of public discourse. The SJN purports that improving society demands more than journalism’s traditional approach (i.e., exposing wrongdoing leads to reforms) can deliver (Martin, 2013). Furthermore, Gans (2010) posits that journalists are not the bulwarks of democracy that they assume themselves to be, questioning the validity of whether uncovering and sharing information leads to citizen participation in political life. Instead, journalists must cover solutions to social problems so people feel empowered to improve society (Martin, 2013). Critics of solutions journalism worry that such stories verge on advocacy or sentimentalism, but proponents say true solutions journalism is “tough-minded” and includes a solution’s drawbacks or pitfalls (Benesch, 1998, p. 38).
Some journalism schools suggest that undergraduate preparation should include community-based public journalism that empowers communities (Webber & Pearson, 2015). Incongruously, a review of online course catalogs and discussion with SJN leaders revealed that solutions journalism-specific courses likely began at U.S. universities within the 2015-2016 academic year. In this budding area of teaching, I examined opportunities and challenges of initial implementation of solutions journalism coursework. A systematic literature search suggests that the current study is the first empirical examination of teaching solutions journalism. 1 By using the nominal group technique and interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) to extract meaning from an online focus group of solutions journalism instructors, I found that the coursework inspired educators and students, and improved student understanding of journalism overall. However, questions remain about the most effective ways to teach this emerging practice.
Literature Review
Solutions journalism is one model that can help journalism schools re-invigorate their curricula to fit the changing industry (Schaffer, 2014). Solutions stories more readily increase readers’ knowledge, strengthen audience engagement, and catalyze audience potential to engage with issues (Curry & Hammonds, 2014; Curry, Stroud, & McGregor, 2016). Shifting journalism education from an “industry-centered model” that focused on professional socialization to a “community-centered model” focusing on creating useful information for society will help journalism schools prepare students for an industry in flux (Mensing, 2010). Solutions journalism provides a path to creating new content, which may drive revenue and offer opportunities to reconnect with underserved communities, many of which have been turned off by traditional journalism (Wenzel et al., 2016).
In trying to make journalism education more applicable to an industry experiencing profound disruption, journalism schools have focused primarily on expanding technology training and realigning course sequences (Mensing, 2010). Instead, journalism schools should revise curricula to prepare students to innovate continually and engage communities (Pavlik, 2013). Schaffer (2014) advises that journalism schools should embrace new models that aspire toward the public good to energize both journalism education and the industry’s audiences. Today’s news consumers seek more than storytelling benefits and convenience via multimedia; they also want journalism that is positive and that inspires action (Dockterman, 2013).
Some journalism schools are adapting by providing new courses or programs focused on connections between the media, social good, and community engagement. The University of Richmond offers “Civic Journalism and Social Justice,” which seeks to inform students about their “responsibility to tell stories that inspire social change” (“Civic Journalism,” 2011, para. 1). In 2014, the City University of New York Graduate School of Journalism (n.d.) announced a master’s degree in social journalism, which emphasizes helping communities meet goals and solve problems. Contemporaneously, two of Denmark’s three journalism schools unveiled plans for a collaborative Centre for Constructive Journalism (England, 2014). In March 2016, Temple University (2016) School of Media and Communication announced a US$2 million endowed chair to promote a solutions-based approach to journalism.
The current study examines both the anticipated and realized opportunities and challenges that some of the first implementers of solutions journalism coursework experienced. I analyzed (a) how teaching this non-traditional form of journalism might benefit instructors, students, and institutions and (b) how future instructors might improve their pedagogies by asking, “What opportunities and challenges associate with initial implementation of solutions journalism coursework?”
Method
After the associated university’s institutional review board granted approval for this research, I collected data through an online focus group with two other initial instructors of solutions journalism in April 2016.
Participants
In November 2015, instructors from five U.S. journalism undergraduate schools met at SJN’s New York City offices to develop a loose framework of guidelines and principles for teaching solutions journalism to undergraduates. The instructors collaborated on this project with the New York Times Fixes columnists David Bornstein and Tina Rosenberg, two of the network’s founders. The instructors continued to discuss course development via email. I recruited participants from that group of instructors; participants’ courses varied in length, delivery method, theme, and course structure.
Data Collection and Analysis
Participants, including the author, responded to four overarching questions about their experiences teaching solutions journalism:
What did you anticipate as the opportunities teaching solutions journalism could provide?
What did you anticipate as the challenges teaching solutions journalism might bring?
Now that you’ve taught the course once, what opportunities developed or are developing either for you or for students?
Now that you’ve taught the course once, what challenges were there for you or students?
I video screen-captured the focus group and then transcribed the data that these questions generated. Afterward, I sought additional clarification on Question 1, so participants provided further details via email. I used two distinct analytical methods: IPA and the nominal group technique.
IPA
I analyzed the transcript using IPA, which focuses on individuals’ lived experiences and how they make sense of it (Eatough & Smith, 2008). IPA requires purposive sampling, a small number of participants, open and exploratory questions, and a data collection method that allows participants to share experiences thoroughly (Shinebourne, 2011), which was concordant with the other method applied in this study. IPA is designed to detect emergent themes, and its advocates suggest using a limited literature review “as the primary research questions are phenomenological and the process is inductive rather than theory-driven” (p. 63).
Nominal group technique
I applied the nominal group technique to increase understanding of solutions journalism, a new course topic that has not yet reached most journalism schools. The nominal group technique organizes small meetings so individual opinions may be aggregated when there is uncertainty about the problem and solutions. As a research tool, the nominal group technique can be used to gather individuals’ judgments and generate consensus. Also, the nominal group technique enables a researcher to avoid focus group biases that stem from status differentials and/or external-processing individuals who might dominate group dynamics (Moore, 1994). Each of the four questions followed the same nine-step process. First, I asked the question aloud. Second, participants spent about five minutes writing down responses. Third, participants each shared one response, which I displayed on a white board. Fourth, participants continued to share responses in round-robin fashion until I had recorded all of them. Fifth, participants discussed each response to ensure clarity. During that process, we combined repetitious items only if all group members agreed to the change. Sixth, participants chose their five most important items individually and silently. Seventh, participants rank-ordered their choices. Eighth, I tallied results on the white board. Ninth, the group discussed items that received multiple rankings.
Findings
Because data from the methods were mutually reinforcing, I interweave findings from both IPA, which produced two superordinate themes, and the nominal group technique (see Tables 1-4) in this section. Emergent themes included (a) solutions journalism courses inspire and (b) teaching an emerging practice within an established field (see Table 5).
NGT Question: “What Did You Anticipate as the Opportunities Teaching Solutions Journalism Could Provide?”
Note. NGT = nominal group technique.
NGT Question: “What Did You Anticipate as the Challenges Teaching Solutions Journalism Might Bring?”
Note. NGT = nominal group technique.
NGT Question: “Now That You’ve Taught the Course Once, What Opportunities Developed or Are Developing Either for You or for Students?”
Note. NGT = nominal group technique; SJN = Solutions Journalism Network.
NGT Question: “Now That You’ve Taught the Course Once, What Challenges Were There for You or for Students?”
Note. NGT = nominal group technique.
Themes Developed Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis.
Participants in this study believed themselves to be part of a burgeoning movement; Participant B described teaching students to write stories with social impact as a “mission.” Teaching solutions journalism differed from participants’ other experiences teaching journalism; they felt solutions offered more import or impact. Participant B said, “We’re not just teaching students how to cover news or events, how to cover city council or school board meetings.” Participant A did not “want to abandon journalism; I just want it to be something different,” characterizing her learning about solutions journalism as helping reconcile her concerns about the profession. Participant A’s statement underscores how participants’ deep commitment to changing the industry stemmed from their ambivalence about experiences when they were practitioners. As journalists, participants harbored expansive views of the profession, but felt constrained by prevailing attitudes about what journalism ought to be.
As a journalist, I was very dissatisfied with the nature of journalism, but I found very little room for that in the newsroom without being labeled “soft.” And it was very painful, actually.
If I’d have had access to solutions journalism training in college, my life would’ve changed. Honestly. It would have spared me years trying to figure it out.
In addition to their initial desires to teach solutions journalism, teaching the course inspired the instructors in return. Participant B found herself “fueled” by students’ enthusiasm and passion. Participant C called the opportunity to teach students to report on social impact what he “lives for.” Rather than seeing their nascent forays teaching solutions journalism as a response to a changing profession, participants viewed themselves as contributing to the change. For example, Participant C said, “I think the practice and teaching develop simultaneously. I sense an emerging movement and I find that inspiring.” He compared the experience teaching solutions journalism to a previous experience teaching journalism on psychological trauma when it was considered “fringe.” He found it . . . very rewarding. I felt this was happening the day we all met and I felt it was happening in my classroom. I feel really strongly that we are in the early stages of an important movement. How important, who knows? But important. And that’s inspiring.
Many opportunities participants anticipated when implementing solutions journalism courses centered on student advantages. As shown in Table 1, participants emphasized the following: empower students to differentiate themselves through skills and experience, help prepare students for emerging practices, and expand students’ tool kits and student access to cutting-edge practice. Interestingly, participants suggested that students not only realized these opportunities, but were also inspired by them. For instance, Participant C said, “They feel like they’re on to something new and they’re empowered by it.” Although, Participant B noted that solutions journalism is not for all students: Not everyone has that drive, that sense of adventure . . . But, I think for the ones that do this makes sense to them, they want to be the founders of something, they want to be the ones who initiated change in their industry or their careers or whatever it is. They want to be leaders.
By learning to report on social impact, students inherently confronted the question of whether journalism should change. According to Participant B, some students find “a sense of relief. It’s as though finally they’re realizing that they can use their skillsets as journalists to make a difference in the world.” Parallel to participant ambivalence about traditional journalism, their students seemed attracted to exploring and contemplating a more expansive model of journalism.
“I found a lot of students are hungry . . . they see journalism is changing . . . There are students who are like, ‘I don’t really want to be in PR, but I’m not really sure I want to be in journalism either.’ This really spoke to them.”
“Some of them are pioneers just by their nature, so when you give them the opportunity to actually put this pioneering nature to work that’s just something that just clicks in their heads, like, why wouldn’t they be a part of it?”
“The difference between most of those I retained and most of them that withdrew is that they’re risk takers. They took a course that hadn’t been on the books before.”
Although solutions journalism courses seemed to inspire instructors and students, teaching an emerging practice within an established field provided opportunities and challenges for both groups. Instructors reported struggling at times to convey either specific attributes of solutions journalism, the higher level concepts, or skills inherent in the practice. For instance, one solutions story model is positive deviance, in which a reporter looks for data outliers that denote successful responses to social problems (e.g., states with exceptionally low teen pregnancy rates). Participant B noted that students struggled with evidence-based reporting in other classes, but found the problem to be more acute in a solutions journalism course: Trying to understand how much value a database is to reporting out solutions, not just having the data to support or refute your story, but also finding stories in data and learning how to critically analyze a data set for a story idea: It’s a tough connection for them.
Participants discussed how the structure or makeup of some solutions journalism stories confused students, making it difficult for instructors to teach underlying concepts, including how solutions journalism differs from advocacy. According to the SJN (2015), solutions journalism stories must possess four qualities:
Present a response to a problem
Offer evidence of results linked to the response
Convey an insight or teachable lesson
Explain the limitations of the response
The network has also identified seven solutions journalism “impostors.” For example, “hero worship” stories focus on the “who” instead of the “how” and thus fail to explore a systemic response to a problem. They are more akin to public relations pieces or advocacy than objective journalism.
Participant A shared with her students a solutions story from the New York Times about how Xavier University of Louisiana leads the nation in producing the greatest number of Black alumni who apply to and then graduate from medical school. The story starts with an anecdote about why the university president decided to address low numbers of Black students attending medical school. According to Participant A, some students found that lede confusing and thought the story was an example of “hero worship.” The participant felt the need to choose solutions stories with simpler structures in future iterations of the course.
Rather than using SJN’s four qualities of solutions journalism, Participant C shared the network’s “10 questions to ask yourself when writing/producing a solutions-oriented story,” which expand upon the four qualities. The questions led to student confusion if stories did not “answer” all 10. Participant C said, A lot of the examples in the solutions journalism network database might have five or seven (answers to the 10 questions) and students would say, “Hey, don’t you have to do this or that?” And I would say, “Well, yes, this is suddenly awkward because I’m trying to teach you, but this is not an ideal example.” And another thing that happened was some of the finest examples of solutions journalism didn’t meet with my generalized sort of nutshell and narrative structure advice that I had been giving everybody.
Solutions journalism often relies on the “howdunit” narrative structure, which requires reporters to report extensively about how successful programs operate. Reporting for “how” is a skill many students are not familiar with; participants surmised that students’ general lack of experience with interviewing further hindered their inability to report for “how.”
Academic term lengths presented another challenge for successfully introducing a newer form of journalism and allowing sufficient time for students to practice it. Participants felt that challenging traditional assumptions about journalism exacerbated existing difficulties in teaching students who might be less comfortable with journalism basics. According to Participant A, Just based on my knowledge of teaching other courses and how difficult it is to get students to write a lede and an inverted pyramid in (one term) I thought, “Well, I really better select the topics so I could address what I saw as the No. 1 issue,” which I saw as understanding (solutions journalism) and then actually creating it.
Participant A ultimately chose not to pre-select the story topics for students’ projects, in part because of the time needed to secure participation from sources. Participant B chose story topics, but worried about “losing” some of the lower-performing students. Participant C chose solutions to violence as an overarching theme for the course, but allowed students to select their own story ideas; several students chose the same topic.
Participant A created assignments that required close textual analysis of the building blocks and key concepts of solutions journalism, scaffolding the “four qualities,” then the “seven impostors,” then appreciative inquiry interviewing, then the “howdunit” structure, and then rigor of reporting. She partnered with a professor teaching a production course in the subsequent term; students could create solutions stories in that course. In Participant A’s class, instead of writing a story, her students coalesced their solutions reporting on a “giant poster,” for which students co-constructed the rubric. However, not every student registered for both courses, and some students thought the posters were a “waste of time.”
Participants felt limited clarity about the balance between teaching students a specialized journalism practice alongside standard journalistic skills. Participant C, who has also taught peace journalism, said, This is the third sort of “journalism ideals” course I’ve designed and taught. And it’s always difficult to distinguish between what part of the teaching . . . is addressing the fundamentals of journalism, just trying to help them become better journalists according to standard practices, and which part of my feedback is about the new aspect.
Instructors used a range of strategies, including making adjustments mid-stream.
“I warned students I’m a pretty brutal line editor. What I failed to do was say, ‘This is your feedback around solutions journalism and this is your general narrative structure feedback.’ They got demoralized. We came back from spring break and I very much blew up the class . . . I created a form . . . It helped separate the solutions training from the other journalism education. And if I had this to do over, that’s how I would have started and had them do the narrative at the end.”
Yet, participants were surprised that students credited solutions journalism for improving their understanding of journalism and writing in general. Participants ranked “Students improved understanding of ‘good’ journalism and writing in general” second among realized opportunities. Participant B said, “I think it’s really powerful that (students) were able to assimilate the information we presented and make those connections for themselves.”
Discussion
This article examined experiences of some of the first instructors of solutions journalism courses at U.S. universities to explore the opportunities and challenges of initial implementation of coursework in an emerging journalistic practice. Teaching solutions journalism to undergraduates is a new endeavor; this study is believed to be the first exploration of the opportunities and challenges involved and instructors’ experiences with teaching coursework in this area. Conducting an online focus group using the nominal group technique generated a rank-ordered list of problems and benefits of teaching solutions journalism. IPA allowed two superordinate themes to emerge: (a) solutions journalism courses inspire and (b) teaching an emerging practice within an established field.
Instructors anticipated and realized that solutions journalism courses might inspire themselves and their students. According to participants, solutions instructors and students shared the dual identity of standing apart from the field of journalism and becoming leaders within it. Focus group findings suggested that the topic attracts a particular type of instructor and perhaps student. Also, instructors anticipated and struggled with how to teach a newer form of journalism comprehensively while not abandoning the traditional goals of journalism education. Simultaneously, teaching a specialized form of journalism unexpectedly proved to be a boon to student understanding of journalism and writing in general. Instructors disagreed about the most salient characteristics of solutions journalism, creating in some instances, problems for student comprehension.
Limitations
There appear to be only a handful of solutions journalism educators nationwide, so the sample size is small. Accordingly, data are not generalizable. Course lengths ranged from a few weeks to a few months; one of the courses was a digital short course. This study does not explain potential variations in instructor experiences due to course length and delivery methods. Although each course focused on solutions journalism, course themes varied, as well.
Conclusion
Journalism schools continue to grapple with disruption of the profession that technological changes have wrought. Following a response focused on technology and course alignment, some universities are introducing courses and programs connected to ideas of social change and community engagement. Solutions journalism coursework has a key role to play in that trend. Shoemaker (1993) raises the notion of journalism schools having a blind spot when it comes to teaching critical thinking. Because solutions journalism pushes students to question the role of the journalist/journalism in society, teaching this emerging practice presents one approach to encourage critical thinking in journalism classrooms.
This study reveals that institutions should consider seeking instructors who feel personally committed to solutions journalism before creating coursework in it. Although it seems that students in these initial courses viewed themselves as pioneers, it is unclear to what extent students self-selected or changed their identities due to taking the course. One area for further research would be to disentangle causal or associate relations between student enrollment in solutions journalism courses and a disposition toward innovation.
To teach solutions journalism more effectively, educators and researchers should find consensus on the definitional components of the practice that are essential for teaching it. Next, they should study the best ways to integrate teaching an alternative form of journalism within the general aims of journalism education. For example, early adopters might create a list of solutions journalism stories most conducive to demonstrating the practice’s tenets to students. Lessons learned from this study include the implication that this line of pedagogy is important to journalism education and the profession as both face continued disruptions. As solutions journalism courses proliferate—SJN plans to collaborate with faculty at other universities with at least two more solutions courses slated for the 2016-2017 academic year—research should focus on how these courses advance or dovetail with industry trends toward community engagement and other forms of journalism that seek to reframe media coverage and examine the reframing effect on audiences. In addition, research should explore how initial opportunities and challenges associated with solutions journalism coursework might shift over time and whether students enrolled in these courses create change and innovation within the profession.
Footnotes
Author’s Note
The participants’ identities, with the exception of the author, have been kept anonymous.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.