2010 - Public Relations Society of America

Another 15% of respondents (n = 8) expressed concerns about the competence of their
fellow faculty, both inside and outside of their academic units. “An increasingly important
concern is the weak writing skills of younger faculty,” wrote one faculty member. “In some
cases I have to ‘unteach’ what has been taught in a lower level course.” “Ultimately, it takes a
lot of faculty time to work on improving student writing, and many faculty aren’t willing to
make the investment,” noted another. “Despite students’ resistance to improve their writing, they
could do it if they knew that they had to do it. If they whine and resist, faculty and
administration usually give in,” added a third respondent.
Of this group, three respondents mentioned the English departments at their universities.
“I think more JMC programs need to reach out to the English departments at their schools,”
wrote one faculty member. “We’re both in the ‘good language’ business with different
applications. Students really need to be able to write well before they can understand the
sometimes nuanced variations with media writing, and that starts with their English classes.” “I
would like the English department to focus on grammar and composition and less on literature in
English 101 and 102,” added another respondent. “University English departments do not teach
writing. They prefer to teach something more akin to ‘expression.’”
Encouragingly, 11% of respondents (n = 6) offered some constructive techniques for
writing skills improvement. Ideas included the use of rubrics, the university writing center, peer
editing, or a pre-test and post-test in introductory media writing classes.
Conclusion
This study was limited by two main factors. First, the survey may have attracted more
respondents who were strongly dissatisfied with student writing skills in their own programs,
creating some response bias. Second, the response rate of 16.6% was less than desired. At the
same time, clear patterns in perceived writing proficiency and issues raised by deficiencies,
coupled with a lack of any clear trends in measures utilized or their success, indicate that
program planners must now begin doing more to meet students where they are and then
implement meaningful assessment and improvement measures that work for their own
institutions. Some remediation is inevitable, but it must be tempered with academic rigor that
students need in order to become competent thinkers, writers, and communication professionals.
Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended that future research explore
partnerships that might be undertaken with the K-12 educational system to strengthen student
writing instruction in primary and secondary education. In addition, future studies should explore
individual assessment/improvement measures on a longitudinal basis to examine how well they
have improved student writing performance over time.
The issues surrounding student writing are complex and multifaceted. From an early age,
writing skills are influenced at every turn of one’s life and education. By the time a student
appears in a university-level media writing course at age 19 or 20, much of the die has already
been cast. Yet, weak writing skills are not irreversible. Educators and policymakers at all levels
have much work ahead. The task begins with substantive policy changes and stronger writing
instruction at the K-12 educational level. The task continues as students arrive at the university
gates as freshmen, and then matriculate into mass communication programs. In the meantime,
educators will be best served by a dual approach stressing both remediation and rigor.
The National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges challenges
educators at all levels to do better. They stress the importance of strong writing skills – not only
in gaining an education or securing meaningful career employment – but in shaping America’s
future. The commission recommends that every state should revisit its education standards to
135