“Making the Connection”: Aggregate Internship Data as Direct and Indirect Measure Informing Curricula and Assessment

Abstract

This article focuses on aggregate internship data from an accredited Midwestern mass communications school to illustrate how feedback loops inform curricula and assessment according to standards of the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC). A sample survey instrument is shared with data directly related to ACEJMC values and competencies. Final recommendations are made to help accredited programs earn compliance in assessment by using direct and indirect measures from internships.

Keywords

assessment internships aggregate data ACEJMC journalism advertising public relations

Introduction

Assessment is perhaps the most important standard in the accrediting process as administered by the Accrediting Council for Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC). Unlike other standards, assessment is intricately and directly linked to the quality of curriculum and instruction. However, the assessment standard over recent years has resulted in nearly half of all noncompliances in all the other standards combined.

Indicators and evidence of those standards can be viewed in full at the ACEJMC website (http://www.acejmc.org/):

Standard 1. Mission, Governance, and Administration

Standard 2. Curriculum and Instruction

Standard 3. Diversity and Inclusiveness

Standard 4. Full-Time and Part-Time Faculty

Standard 5. Scholarship: Research, Creative, and Professional Activity

Standard 6. Student Services

Standard 7. Resources, Facilities, and Equipment

Standard 8. Professional and Public Service

Standard 9. Assessment of Learning Outcomes

According to the ACEJMC chart below, Table 1, there have been a total of 93 noncompliances since the 2010-2011 academic year (when the organization began reviewing undergraduate and graduate programs separately), with a total 45 noncompliances in assessment as opposed to 48 in all other standards (C. A. Reinardy, ACEJMC STANDARDS: PROGRAM REVIEWS/Noncompliances9Standards, Email attachment, 2:45 p.m., October 2, 2017).

Table 1.

ACEJMC Standards: Program Reviews/Noncompliances in Nine Standards.

Standard	2010-2011	2011-2012	2012-2013	2013-2014	2014-2015	2015-2016
1. Mission/Governance	3		2			2
2. Curriculum	5	2			2	1
3. Diversity	6	1	1		3	3
4. Faculty		2		1		1
5. Research	1	2		1	2	1
6. Student Services		1	1	1
7. Resources		1			1	1
8. Professional/Public Service
9. Assessment	16	8	4	5	6	6
Total noncompliances	31	17	8	8	14	15

Undergraduate/professional master’s programs reviewed separately.

Beginning with 2012-2013, reflects noncompliances found during revisits.

This study analyzes the correlation between internships as a component of Standard 2, Curriculum and Instruction, and as a source of direct and indirect measures for Standard 9, Assessment of Learning Outcomes, showcasing how one accredited program developed a survey instrument as feedback loop to enhance curriculum.

ACEJMC has long been concerned about noncompliances in assessment, publishing an informative online sourcebook titled “A Guide to Assessment of Learning Outcomes for ACEJMC Accreditation” (Brown, Hardin, & Parsons, 2012). The guide defines indirect and direct measures:

Indirect measures capture perceptions, attitudes, and outcomes of the learning experience. These include self-reports of student learning or data and outcomes that indicate program goals have been achieved. (Examples: student surveys, alumni surveys, employer surveys, exit interviews, focus groups, student awards, graduation, and employment data).

Direct measures require students to demonstrate their learning. These measures examine actual student work to determine whether students demonstrate the knowledge, values, and competencies required to achieve program goals. (Examples: examinations, capstone projects, student portfolios, aggregate internship evaluations, course-embedded assessment).

The reference to “aggregate internship evaluations” as direct measure involves feedback from professionals who supervise student interns. ACEJMC believes those data can inform programs “looking for trend lines that may suggest ways to improve curriculum and instruction.”

In noting how the assessment process develops curricula, the ACEJMC Guide makes special reference to internships with one key observation (i.e., “if the evaluation instrument is linked to ACEJMC’s professional values and competencies”). ACEJMC has long documented how internships can generate feedback informing curricula. Moreover, the organization states that its “curriculum and assessment standards are closely connected” (Brown et al., 2012). However, that observation is not borne out by the percentage of noncompliance in Standard 2, Curriculum and Instruction, and Standard 9, Assessment, as the Figure 1 illustrates:

Figure 1.

Percent assessment versus curriculum noncompliance.

To be sure, there is a host of different compliance indicators for the Curriculum and Assessment standards that create dozens of variables to account for the discrepancies in the above table. Nevertheless, one might also observe that something may be amiss. Thus, this article documents how one program uses a survey instrument—with questions based on both ACEJMC standards and the school’s curriculum committee concerns—in the collection of aggregate data from students and internship supervisors as a source of direct and indirect measures. The objective here is to link curriculum and assessment with the internship experience to help earn compliance in Standards 2 and 9.

Literature Review

One would think that assessing internships would be discussed frequently in the annals; however, scant information exists on how internships might inform curricula as a direct measure, or feedback loop, about the quality of courses in the typical journalism and mass communication program. Direct measures are critical components of the ACEJMC assessment standard: “The unit has a written assessment plan that uses multiple direct and indirect measures to assess student learning” (ACEJMC, 2017). Moreover, internships are essential components of accredited curriculum: “Records and statistics on and evaluations of internships, with and without academic credit” (ACEJMC, 2017). As such, the two components are linked in this study because the effectiveness of coursework is tested when students bring skill sets to the workplace during internships. Yet again, inadequate research exists on the value of the internship experience in preparing students for the challenges of transitioning from classroom to newsroom and board room (Barnett, 2012).

Multiple articles note that internships are indispensable and should be part of curricula in journalism and mass communication. Other than internships, students gain practical experience creating content for an audience only if they take summer jobs at media outlets or work for campus newspapers, magazines, broadcast stations, and student-run public relations and advertising agencies or organizations, but even these are insufficient in adequately preparing students for the workplace (Freedman & Poulson, 2015). The internship experience is also typically viewed as more important than faculty recommendations or grade point average (GPAs; Poindexter, 2014). Successful internships also have been associated with quicker employment upon graduation in addition to higher salaries and overall job satisfaction (Sapp & Zhang, 2009). Media companies also benefit from internships; while students gain practical experience and enhance their portfolios, companies benefit by adding a free or inexpensive content stream to their businesses (Madison, 2014).

Nevertheless, students often are surprised about workplace demands. They may not know organizational cultures or possess the required skills for adequate performance even when they may have had vocational training through hands-on classes, summer employment, or campus media and organizations (Barnett, 2012). Socialization in any new workplace setting often is complex for students in venues lacking formal orientation programs (Gaitens, 2000). The transition is even more multifaceted for students charged with content creation, especially writing and editing, in that they not only must master those skill sets but also form a working knowledge of organizational culture so as to accurately represent it to their audience and clients (Gaitens, 2000).

These challenges can be overcome in part through faculty advising. As Sapp and Zhang (2009) note, faculty advisors have a responsibility to assess internship experiences

to confirm that defined learning objectives are being met, that students’ experiences are consistent with our programs’ mission, and that the expectations of those who share responsibility for supervising our student interns and who will eventually employ our programs’ graduates are being considered. (pp. 277-278)

Advising also should include contact with internship providers and supervisors. This not only helps in the socialization process but also can determine how academic programs might meet employer expectations and learn about industry trends (Todd, 2009). The problem there, however, concerns whether faculty advisers who learn about those trends update their courses or share the information with Curriculum Committee colleagues.

The internship-curriculum feedback loop can only be assured in aggregate through assessment. Many articles and news reports associate internships with curricula only as a “for credit” component of unpaid assignments. Academic programs may provide such credit so that work done on internships, technically, is not free. Over time, this has led to an explosion of unpaid internships (Wexler, 2016). Some have likened the unpaid internship to exploitation and even “indentured servitude” (Sides, 2014, p. 119). Credit alone cannot inform curricula even if faculty share insights from their own internship advising or supervision. That can only occur through formal curricular assessment. Lacking that, faculty may think they know about their advisees’ readiness for the workplace based on interaction with providers or quality of class presentations and portfolios, but in reality, instructors are only making assumptions (Sapp & Zhang, 2009). This is particularly evident in writing courses that focus on common writing conventions and tenets “for an abstractly defined workforce” (Bourelle, 2015, p. 407).

The last major feedback loop involving internship and curricula concerned “convergence,” triggered at the start of the 21st century as media corporations retooled with technology (DeMars, 2010, p. 12). Assessment had long been associated with curriculum and instruction in standards of the Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications, which adopted a schedule for the development and implementation of assessment plans in September 2001 (“Schedule for assessment plans,” p. 15). ACEJMC began requiring formal assessment plans to be in place by 2003 with data collected in 2003-2004 and with programs showing how those data were informing curricula in 2004-2005. Since then, ACEJMC has made a point of emphasizing internships as a source of direct measures in assessment. In its online guide, the organization emphases “aggregate internship evaluations” that look for “trend lines that may suggest ways to improve curriculum and instruction,” noting that such efforts must “go beyond behavioral measures (dependability, punctuality, ability to work independently)” and evaluate such values and competencies as clear and accurate writing, technology skills, and critical and creative thinking (Brown et al., 2012).

Accreditation standards amplify the internship experience so that students are prepared for the aforementioned challenges, from socialization to application of skills. Accreditation develops clear curricular standards, assuring clients and the public about “a base level” of competency (Savage & Seible, 2010, p. 64). Moreover, accreditation criteria in professional programs should lead to standardization of curricula that prepare students for internship challenges (Savage & Seible, 2010). While each program may offer different curricula or possess individualized cultures, commonalties exist “if viewed in the context of a teaching and learning environment” (Poindexter, 2014, p. 2). This is why the internship-curriculum feedback loop is vital in assessment planning in accredited or certified programs.

The internship experience requires three-way communication among the academic program, student interns, and worksite supervisors; however, when it involves assessment, too often there is a lack of reliable instruments to assess the quality of that experience, let alone how the experience can inform curricula (McDonough, Rodriguez, & Prior-Miller, 2009).

Survey Instrument

The journalism and mass communication school used in this study is located in the Midwest, houses three degree programs (advertising, journalism and mass communication, and public relations), enrolling 900 majors. It passed the assessment standard in the school’s last re-accreditation based in part on the development of internship survey instruments that inform curricula and measure ACEJMC values and competencies. Keep in mind that this is a single case study meant to launch discussion about assessment standard failures—constituting almost half of all ACEJMC noncompliances. As the aforementioned literature review affirms, internships are an important component in the assessment process. The survey example to follow specifically mentions the ACEJMC standards, generating aggregate data as direct measure, the absence of which typically results in noncompliances in assessment.

This particular school uses a survey instrument that evaluates performance based on ACEJMC values and competencies as well as specific Curriculum Committee concerns about courses and job performance. The required internship involves a minimum 400 hr of supervised employment with an approved provider, overseen by a faculty member who supplies additional guidance, views survey results, and grades a final portfolio. The professional internship serves as the school’s unified capstone experience, which not only captures indirect and direct measures for the three degree programs but also unites those degrees under a common accreditation and curricular umbrella.

To receive academic credit, the internship must be supervised by a professional with an education or significant professional experience in journalism, advertising, public relations, or a closely related field; have duties related to advertising, journalism and mass communication, or public relations; and be completed in a professional workplace. Students are evaluated and receive a satisfactory-fail grade.

The survey instrument is administered to each student and internship supervisor through a web-based platform at the mid-term and end of each applicable semester. The 5-point Likert-type scale (where 1 is “strongly disagree” and 5 is “strongly agree” and a “not applicable” option is also available) measures the student’s (a) general abilities and skills in the workplace, (b) specific skills, (c) job-related skills, (d) interpersonal communication skills, (e) professional conduct, and (f) overall performance. The statements used on student and employer evaluations with the first 12 items measuring ACEJMC values and competencies are shown below.

General Abilities in the Workplace

1. Intern understands the role of communication as it relates to the mission and goals of our organization.

2. Intern understands and can apply First Amendment principles and the law appropriate to professional practice.

3. Intern works ethically in pursuit of truth, accuracy, fairness, and diversity.

4. Intern shows sensitivity to diversity and cultural issues in verbal and visual communication.

5. Intern is able to think critically and independently.

Specific Skills (NOT All May Be Applicable to Each Job)

6. Intern writes correctly and clearly in appropriate forms and styles.

7. Intern understands and/or uses good visual communication concepts and techniques.

8. Intern demonstrates creativity in completing assignments.

9. Intern can apply basic numerical and statistical concepts.

10. Intern demonstrates adequate skills in appropriate technology and software.

11. Intern demonstrates research/fact-finding skills.

12. Intern can critically evaluate his or her own work and that of others for accuracy and fairness, clarity, appropriate style, and grammatical correctness.

Job-Related Skills

13. Intern’s academic preparation was adequate for this internship.

14. Intern is eager to learn new skills.

15. Intern is well organized and has good work habits.

16. Intern is able to work under pressure.

17. Intern has good problem-solving skills.

18. Intern meets deadlines.

19. Intern is completing a sufficient quantity of work.

Interpersonal Skills

20. Intern works well with others.

21. Intern communicates well with others.

22. Intern deals effectively with conflict.

23. Intern is able to take direction.

24. Intern accepts constructive criticism.

25. Intern asks questions when he or she does not understand.

Professional Conduct

26. Intern has an appropriate level of self-confidence.

27. Intern has a positive attitude.

28. Intern is at work when needed and is punctual.

29. Intern dresses appropriately for this environment.

30. Intern willingly accepts responsibility.

31. Intern demonstrates appropriate office etiquette.

Overall Assessment

32. Intern is making a strong contribution to our organization.

33. The quality of the intern’s work is high.

34. Overall, I am satisfied with this intern’s performance.

It is important to keep in mind, while examining the survey instrument, that Questions 13 through 34 are idiosyncratic to this particular school’s faculty and curricula concerns. To be sure, categories of “Job-Related Skills,” “Interpersonal Skills,” “Professional Conduct,” and “Overall Assessment” might apply to concerns across a broad spectrum of programs; however, these were determined at this school through shared governance and alumni and internship provider recommendations. Another school’s shared governance and constituents may devise different categories and statements. As such, data from these idiosyncratic categories are not included in this article.

Findings

In the sample below, 190 students completed their 400-hr internship between October 16, 2014, and October 15, 2015. Of those students, 64 were advertising majors, 79 were journalism and mass communication majors, and 47 were public relations majors. Values and competencies are abbreviated for display purposes; see the survey instrument above for complete statements. Table 2, “Sample Results: Student Versus Employer Final Survey,” shows student perception of performance (indirect measure) compared with supervisor assessment of performance (direct measure) and Table 3, “Sample Results: Employer Final Survey and Degree Comparison,” shows how supervisors in advertising, journalism and mass communication, and public relations rated overall performance.

Table 2.

Sample Results: Student Versus Employer Final Survey.

Student final (n = 190)	M	Employer final (n = 190)	M
1. Ethics	4.88	1. Ethics	4.72
2. Role of communication	4.84	2. Diversity	4.69
3. Diversity	4.81	3. Role of communication	4.68
4. Think critically	4.76	4. Visual communication	4.64
5. Research	4.72	5. Technology	4.64
6. Visual communication	4.71	6. Research	4.62
7. Creativity	4.7	7. Creativity	4.62
8. Critically evaluate	4.7	8. Think critically	4.59
9. First amendment	4.64	9. First amendment	4.58
10. Technology	4.63	10. Critically evaluate	4.57
11. Write	4.59	11. Write	4.55
12. Statistics	4.4	12. Statistics	4.53

Note. ACEJMC Competencies (highest to lowest rated) for internships completed from October 16, 2014, to October 15, 2015; overall (ADVRT [Advertising], JLMC [Journalism and Mass Communications], PR [Public Relations] majors combined). ACEJMC = Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications.

Table 3.

Sample Results: Employer Final Survey and Degree Comparison.

ACEJMCValues and competencies	ADVRTN = 64	JLMCN = 79	PRN = 47
1. Role of communication	4.67	4.73	4.6
2. First amendment	4.53	4.61	4.6
3. Ethics	4.69	4.74	4.74
4. Diversity	4.66	4.68	4.74
5. Think critically	4.58	4.63	4.53
6. Write	4.62	4.5	4.53
7. Visual communication	4.63	4.68	4.59
8. Creativity	4.66	4.66	4.51
9. Statistics	4.55	4.52	4.56
10. Technology	4.71	4.61	4.68
11. Research	4.57	4.66	4.61
12. Critically evaluate	4.55	4.55	4.62

Note. October 16, 2014, to October 15, 2015. Employer: Competencies by major. ACEJMC = Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications; ADVRT = advertising; JLMC = journalism and mass communications; PR = Public Relations.

Interestingly, the variations in indirect (student perception) and direct measures (supervisor evaluation) are remarkably similar, with the top three (ethics, diversity, role of communication) only slightly different in each sample. Writing and statistics (at the bottom of the above table, ranked 11 and 12) also are the same. Students, in general, ranked themselves higher on the Likert-type scale than employers. Essentially, however, there was agreement between the two groups concerning the importance of ACEJMC values and competencies and student-perceived and employer-assessed analyses.

The school believes that ACEJMC values and competencies need to be evaluated by degree program to ensure that major-specific courses are adhering adequately to accreditation standards. In Table 3, data are shown according to the numerical order of the survey statements displayed earlier.

This particular school believes anything below 4.5 in employer evaluation should be discussed in curriculum committee to see if coursework is delivering adequately on ACEJMC values and competencies, along with other idiosyncratic concerns (Questions 13-34). These results did not trigger a review, but the 4.5 in the writing category of journalism and mass communication majors might spark discussion among faculty about whether reporting and editing requirements should be strengthened in core courses.

The survey also allows for supervisor comments at mid-term and end of semester, which also inform the faculty. Here is a sampling:

As multimedia on the web becomes even more tightly embedded into every day journalism and communications in the corporate world, [student name excised] should continue to hone his photography, Photoshop, HTML formatting, and other media skills.

Learn basics of Google Analytics: (This speaks to the need to know various types of software, web applications, etc., when heading out into the workforce.)

Additional training on Adobe Creative Suite would be beneficial.

Small community paper does not have the hustle and fast pace of our larger competitors but we do have the flexibility for writers to carve out their interest. Ideas are welcomed and the paper could be a good canvas growth. To succeed in any field, students must be more assertive and self initiate thoughts and interests into tangible goals. Contributing more to the newspaper, as in more ideas, and so on will allow the person to grow as a writer.

Real-life experience always helps students to develop their skills. Incorporating students into the school’s newspaper and working with local publications allow students to work in a professional environment. To also require students to align themselves with online digital capabilities because this is the direction of journalism as well. Print and television is important but we lack the skills from many writers that have taken over the “‘blogger’ world.” We cannot ignore how significant bloggers are but we can improve that entry with better and skilled writers.

I recommend that students make it a requirement to be knowledgeable of different outlets out there spread across different platforms. They should know the major news shows, daily periodicals, and magazines, and it should be a requirement to stay up-to-date with those outlets.

Good writing and photography skills will also be valued by potential employers—keep honing your skills in these areas!

While only final survey results and comments are included in this article, it also should be noted that the mid-term surveys provide an early warning system for the faculty adviser so that he or she can intercede if any employment issue or problem is reported by either student or supervisor. The mid-term data also help show in aggregate any trending concern.

One such trending concern involved inadequate Microsoft Excel skills, according to the school’s internship coordinator who supplied the above comments from her 2014-2015 files. “Since that time,” she added, “some basic Excel work has been mixed into some of the classes to help improve these skills” (Name withheld so as not to identify school providing data, email interview, March 9, 2017).

Discussions and Recommendations

To be sure, internship surveys constitute only part of compliance-worthy ACEJMC assessment plans and feedback loops. Unlike this particular school, many programs do not relegate the term “capstone” to the internship experience. However, internships do something in aggregate that is generally lacking in non-compliant evaluations of assessment, that is, a keen focus on employer direct measures that show trend lines informing curriculum committees on desired changes in coursework to keep pace with rapid developments in advertising, journalism and mass communications, and public relations. That focus is vital and immediate in the internship experience through twice-administered online surveys that provide access for faculty advisers to view student progress and for supervisors to share evaluations and concerns. Moreover, aggregate data from internships inform faculty about the effectiveness of core and degree-specific courses. For instance, a marked decline over several semesters in media ethics might indicate a change in catalog requirements or teaching effectiveness that should be considered or examined. As data in Tables 2 and 3 also indicate, there is a decided correlation between internships as a component of Standard 2, Curriculum and Instruction, and as a source of direct and indirect measures for Standard 9, Assessment of Learning Outcomes.

The internship experience, properly surveyed for ACEJMC values and competencies, also fulfills tenets articulated earlier in the organization’s online sourcebook, “A Guide to Assessment of Learning Outcomes for ACEJMC Accreditation,” in which it is plainly stated earlier in this article that direct measures “require students to demonstrate their learning . . . to determine whether students demonstrate the knowledge, values and competencies required to achieve program goals.” What better vehicle for this than a capstone internship experience that unifies degree programs and requires a minimum of 400 hr, over which trend lines can be discerned at mid-term and end-of-semester?

This particular school heeded the ACEJMC recommendation cited earlier that “aggregate internship evaluations” is a proven method to “for trend lines that may suggest ways to improve curriculum and instruction.” This is why the ACEJMC Guide also recommends that survey instruments be linked to accreditation’s professional values and competencies.

Those aggregate data on values and competencies also provide evidence that ACEJMC might look more closely at the correlation (or lack thereof) of noncompliances in Standard 9, Assessment of Learning Outcomes, and concomitant compliances in Standard 2, Curriculum and Instruction. This article makes no conclusive determination in that regard but does identify lack of correlation here as an area of possible concern for the Accrediting Council in as much as noncompliances in assessment do impact the overall quality of curricula and instruction. Moreover, properly worded surveys are essential if curricula are to be informed by the internship experience. Indeed, ACEJMC advocates for surveys that go beyond measuring such on-the-job concerns as “dependability, punctuality, ability to work independently.”

In conclusion, this school’s approach to internships may help improve the assessment plans of other programs seeking compliance in Standard 9 by

including ACEJMC values and competencies in surveys;

using a web-based survey instrument to encourage supervisor comments and improve faculty oversight and advising;

administering surveys at mid-term and end-of-semester to inform faculty advisers for job-specific advising and possible intervention;

requiring a minimum of hours (in this case, 400 hr) so that trend lines can be spotted over time and addressed;

comparing student perceptions (indirect measures) with supervisor evaluations (direct measures) to inform curriculum committees for course enhancement;

parsing data for various majors (in this case, advertising, journalism and mass communications, and public relations) as an assessment measure for degree-specific coursework.

Finally, these practices also address concerns raised in the literature review of this article about the internship experience serving as a vehicle of three-way communication (faculty, interns, supervisors). Another three-way feature of the experience—aggregate data indicating trend lines to enhance instruction—can unify standards of assessment and curricula and help earn ACEJMC compliance.

Footnotes

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.

ORCID iD

Michael Bugeja

Author Biographies

Michael Bugeja directed Iowa State’s Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication for 14 years before stepping down in 2017 to teach media ethics. He won the 2015 Charles E. Scripps Journalism and Mass Communication “Administrator of the Year” Award and in 2016 was elected to the Accrediting Council on Journalism and Mass Communications, representing the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. His many books include Interpersonal Divide: The Search for Community in a Technological Age, Living Ethics Across Media Platforms, and Interpersonal Divide in the Age of the Machine, all published by Oxford University Press.

Melissa Garrett is a 2017 cum laude graduate of the Master’s Program in Journalism and Mass Communication at Iowa State University and served as a teaching and research assistant in media ethics. She is an adjunct journalism instructor at Iowa Central Community College in Fort Dodge.

References

Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. (2017). Assessment of learning outcomes. Retrieved from http://www.acejmc.org/policies-process/nine-standards/

Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communication. (2017). Curriculum and instruction. Retrieved from http://www.acejmc.org/policies-process/nine-standards/

Barnett

(2012). Student interns’ socially constructed work realities: Narrowing the work expectation-reality gap. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 75, 271-290. doi:10.1177/1080569912441360

Bourelle

(2015). Writing in the professions. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 78, 407-427. doi:10.1177/2329490615589172

Brown

Hardin

Parsons

(2012). A guide to assessment of learning outcomes for ACEJMC accreditation. Retrieved from http://www.acejmc.org/resources/acejmc-guide-to-assessment/

DeMars

(2010). Media careers in changing times. AEJMC News, 43(3), 11-12.

Freedman

Poulson

(2015). Real-world learning of public affairs and environmental journalism. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 70, 187-196. doi:10.1177/1077695814555716

Gaitens

(2000). Lessons from the field: Socialization issues in writing and editing internships. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 63, 64-76.

Madison

(2014). Training digital age journalists: Blurring the distinction between students and professionals. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 69, 314-324. doi:10.1177/1077695814532926

10.

McDonough

Rodriguez

Prior-Miller

M. R.

(2009). A comparison of student interns and supervisors regarding internship performance ratings. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 64, 140-155.

11.

Poindexter

(2014). Raising awareness about the dirty side of internships. AEJMC News, 47(3), 2-4.

12.

Sapp

D. A.

Zhang

(2009). Trends in industry supervisors’ feedback on business communication internships. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 72, 274-288.

13.

Savage

G. J.

Seible

M. K.

(2010). Technical communication internship requirements in the academic economy: How we compare among ourselves and across other applied fields. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 40, 51-75. doi:10.2190/TW.40.1.d

14.

Sides

C. H.

(2014). From the editor’s desk. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 44, 119-120. doi:10.2190/TW.44.2.a

15.

Todd

(2009). PRSSA faulty and professional advisors’ perceptions of public relations curriculum, assessment of students’ learning, and faculty performance. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 64, 71-90.

16.

Wexler

(2016, May 17). When students pay tuition to work unpaid internships. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/05/17/when-students-pay-tuition-work-unpaid-internships