Also, to clarify the statement about research in the Cheeseburger report, the research methodology was not as strong in its basis on a national data set. The report was based on some small-scale data tat did not compare with the national data in the Captive Voices report.

Attending: Eileen Solomon, George Daniels, Nerissa Young, Butler Cain, Neil Ralston, Jimmy McCollum. Teresa White and Becky Tallent

Also attending: SPJ President John Ensslin and SPJ staff member Tara Puckney.

The meeting started at 8:02 a.m. Pacific Time (11:02 a.m. Eastern) with Becky asking if anyone is interested in writing Quill Toolbox columns for the final three deadlines of 2012. Butler Cain will write the column for the July/August issue on students deciding between maintaining traditional newspapers or switching to social media outlets for their reporting. Jimmy will write for the August 17 deadline and Eileen will take the Oct. 19 deadline, and their topics will be determined later.

In reviewing the Death by Cheeseburger project, George said he has talked with the Center for Scholastic Journalism (CSJ) Advisory Board and explained why the CSJ recommends we do not repeat the Cheeseburger study. While the data in the report is visual, George said the CSJ said the data is sketchy. George said it is recommended he committee look at replicating the 1984 work Captive Voices rather than Death by Cheeseburger because the original study was stronger. It is suggested the SPJ J-Ed Committee meet with the CSJ to determine the most critical questions to be asked and identify which questions should be addressed now and which should be addressed later. George acknowledged that some members of the committee want to use this as a research project for tenure and promotion, but we need to look at the whole picture as well as smaller pieces.
Becky asked if we replicate the Captive Voices project, as suggested by CSJ, would we keep it to New England (as the original study)? George said we should broaden it as much as possible; combining our respective locations around the country with CSJ’s identified areas.
George recommended a small sub-committee from SPJ meet with CSJ representatives to begin the discussion. Butler and Becky volunteered to meet via a conference call. Addendum: Lee Anne Peck has also volunteered for the subcommittee.
New committee member Teresa White from Indiana University asked for some more background, which was supplied by George and Becky. SPJ President John Ensslin asked George to supply the name of a CSJ contact and he will reach out as well. Neil said there is also a group of high school teachers who have implemented a website to discuss issues, and he will find the information that will be shared with the committee.

The SPJ Advisor Breakfast for the AEJMC Conference in Chicago has been set and Tara Puckney described the event, and then asked for any additional discussion topics from committee members. Eileen said the meeting should emphasize programs and how to deal with students diluting the SPJ meeting by attending other groups that are specific to their area of interest (PRSSA, BEA, UNITY, etc.). George added the breakfast time will be limited so the questions should be submitted in advance and the meeting should talk about strategizing so SPJ chapters can integrate with existing classes. George noted the later does put additional pressure on student leaders to know what is happening in the classes and to plan enough in advance to coordinate the meetings with lectures. George also echoed earlier comments about co-advisor models so campus advisors do not burn out because they must do everything.

Looking at the new minimum chapter requirements, George and Neil explained this is a way for all the chapters to know what they should do, exactly how chapters will be reviewed and what the officers should expect. Neil said the last board meeting changed the number of required campus chapter advisors from two to one, which should make it easier for smaller chapters to form. They also explained the inactive status for some chapters is actually a form of housecleaning by SPJ, identifying those chapters who have not turned in annual reports for the past several years. By inactivating, they said, it makes it easier to re-boot the chapter later than if the charter was revoked and the chapter process would need to be started from the beginning.

Becky reminded everyone of the committee’s Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/223322924414419/) and the blog. On questioning if anyone wanted to handle managing the blog, George reminded everyone we have had the discussion before; we should blog when we have something of importance that should go out.

Finally, George reminded everyone the new voting rules for SPJ means every member will be able to vote for national officers now, so here will be educational information being sent out for, by and about candidates. Every member should take note and vote.

The meeting ended at 8:56 a.m. Pacific/11:56 a.m. Eastern.

As someone who spent my entire career as a journalist before moving into teaching full time, it was a great opportunity for me to compare CCTV’s coverage to that of other networks, especially when the topic was related to China.

One particular episode stands out. The summer of 2009 marked the twentieth anniversary of the Chinese government’s violent response to protesters in Tiananmen Square. To remember the event – and to further protest the government’s response – thousands of marchers filled the streets of Hong Kong as the anniversary neared. It was a major event and nearly all of the news networks covered it throughout the day.

China’s CCTV, however, did not. Its evening newscast not only ignored the events in Hong Kong, but also made no mention of the Tiananmen Square anniversary.

I wasn’t surprised.

CCTV is the Chinese government’s broadcaster, so you can be sure that it will not air a news report on any topic contrary to the government’s point of view. The Chinese Communist Party uses CCTV’s English language channel for public relations purposes (or for propaganda, depending on your point of view).

So how does this story relate to a thesis?

During a previous semester at West Texas A&M, I served on a thesis committee in which the graduate student (who was from China) was examining how Chinese audiences respond to a particular television program. Part of his thesis included a history of CCTV. However, it lacked consideration of CCTV’s problems with censorship.

This raised some questions for me that I have yet to answer. On one hand, a solid academic thesis would require some analysis of CCTV’s problems with forthright journalism. On the other hand, I presume anyone in China can read his thesis. Could that analysis cause problems for a Chinese citizen who was returning to China to begin his new career? Another of my Chinese students, when asked for her thoughts on this question, answered “yes.”

How does a faculty member – or a thesis committee – balance the desire for a thorough thesis against the desire to protect a student from potential political and personal retribution, particularly when that student plans to settle down back home?

I kept my recommendations intact, but this issue still nags me. Perhaps I’ve exaggerated any possible repercussions such research might cause for him because I’m still not familiar with how closely China might be paying attention to its thousands of citizens who get an education in America. However, I’m keenly interested in any points of view readers are willing to share.

Butler Cain is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication at West Texas A&M University. He is a member of SPJ’s Journalism Education Committee.

Members attending: David Burns, George Daniels. Kym Fox, Mac McKerral, June Nicholson, Renee Patrina, Jeff South, Nerissa Young, Eileen Solomon, Amber Rossner, Bill Oats, Neil Ralston, Becky Tallent.

The meeting began at 12:05 pm (Eastern) with a discussion on the status of gathering syllabi and best practices materials for new journalism professors/instructors.

Jeff recommended we make sure we are not fragmenting our efforts with other groups and suggested we make sure to link with other groups – such as NewsU and IRE – who also offer syllabi to new faculty. The committee essentially agreed there cannot be too many resources and that it is good to get a conversation going in a constructive way. Jeff volunteered to build the syllabus link information and Amber suggested we put a call out to all our colleagues for their best syllabi and practices of which they are proud and will want to share. We agreed it should be a broad sweep of all journalism classes, not just be limited to writing and editing.

Kym said the state of Texas has passed a law requiring all syllabi to be online and that each syllabus must be within three clicks of the home page. Kym said she will send a copy of the law to the committee.

Last year, the committee agreed to offer mentors to new SPJ faculty advisors to help develop student chapters. George said he had several people at the AEJMC conference last week express an interest in either being a mentor or being mentored. From the committee, Mac, Jeff, Neil, Kym, Nerissa and Becky volunteered to act as mentors. George recommended and the committee agreed this year be used as a pilot project, starting with five mentors/mentees in New Orleans. George said the pairs could exchange emails and have phone conversations twice a semester, and then the committee could build a promotional strategy for the project.

The third item, articles and Toolbox columns for Quill, Jeff said Dorothy Bland had expressed an interest in doing a Quill Toolbox on two items: one was why teaching journalism is still so important due to the critical thinking required and how that is important in today’s world. Another column she suggested is one on diversity and the importance of bringing students of color into journalism/helping them stay in the profession despite cutbacks. Everyone agreed the second column is a better fit with the Diversity Committee.

Mac and George discussed the rule that writers for the Journalism Education Committee need to be a member of the committee, although the Diversity Committee has no such rule. It was recommended the education topic Dorothy wants to write might be a better fit for a full Quill article.

In discussions about future Toolbox columns, Mac is working on the next column; Eileen volunteered to write a column on schools changing curriculum; Amber volunteered to write a column on how to use Intercollegiate and Interscholastic online news networks as a resource; and David said he would like to write a column on schools donating equipment to other universities (such as his school’s recent donation to Baghdad University). Mac’s column is due August 18; Eileen’s column is due October 20, and other deadlines are yet to come from Scott Leadingham.

In discussing the committee’s blog, we agreed to post the minutes of the committee meeting and to post stories of SPJ education committee-related events. In addition, we agreed to post information from other groups with links. All committee members will receive username and password information so they can post on the blog.

In new business, George said last year’s resolution (which was rejected by the resolutions committee) has been revived and the resolutions committee has asked for a resubmission. George will send a copy of the resolution to the education committee members for review before sending to the resolutions committee.

Acting in his role as resolutions chair, Mac said for people attending conference, we should know there is a resolution calling for a change in the way committee chairs and members are appointed. Two other resolutions on the horizon are calling for a reinstatement of the Helen Thomas Award.

The meeting adjourned at 12:50 pm Eastern/9:50 am Pacific Time.

Larry Baden, Mary Cox, Eileen Solomon pose with SPJ V.P. For Campus Affairs Neil Ralston after their meeting Thursday at Webster University.

ST LOUIS– While in town for the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication Annual Conference, SPJ Vice President for Campus Affairs Neil Ralston and George Daniels, campus adviser at-large visited Webster University.

The students and faculty at the school in Webster Heights community of St Louis recently received a charter for new chapter.

The SPJ Chapter will be based at Webster’s School of Communications.

Eileen Solomon and Mary Cox will serve as the co-advisers of the new chapter.

Soloman and Cox along with Program Coordinator Larry Baden met with Ralston and Daniels August 11 to talk about programming ideas and membership strategies.

SPJ Executive Director Joe Skeel addresses those attending the Advisers Breakfast at the AEJMC Conference in St. Louis Friday.

ST LOUIS– More than two dozen SPJ campus advisers and journalism department heads met SPJ Executive Director Joe Skeel for breakfast here at the AEJMC Annual Convention Friday.

The Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication is the nation’s oldest and largest organization for journalism educators.

In 2010, SPJ renewed its affiliate membership in AEJMC.

Friday’s Advisers breakfast was designed to connect new advisers and veteran advisers to help strengthen SPJ’s campus chapters, which are greater in number than PRO Chapters.

In many cases, the lack of a faculty adviser can be the biggest barrier to having a functioning campus chapter.

The Journalism Education Committee is launching a campus advisers mentoring program. Several of the advisers at the breakfast will be either mentors or mentees.

Advisers received information about the upcoming Excellence in Journalism Convention next month in New Orleans and other training opportunities for both college students and their chapter advisers.

Several members of both SPJ’s National Board and the Sigma Delta Chi Foundation Board also attended the event.

I’ll go first. One of my favorite best practices is a lesson I borrow/adapt from a Diversity Across the Curriculum session at the Poynter Institute. I assign my students to visit a neighborhood gathering place for an hour or so, to observe with all of their senses, and then to write a descriptive piece using dialogue, sensory details and their own insights. The pieces don’t have to be long–500 to 800 or so words–but they do illuminate characters, writing styles and even some subtle biases that can be addressed from an instructional standpoint during future class meetings. The best part, for me, is that my students love this assignment. It offers them a chance to be anonymous, to be creative and to be immersed in their reporting.

Have a best practice to share? Email me at elissa.sonnenberg@uc.edu so I can add you to the blog!

Minutes, SPJ J-Ed Committee, Aug. 19, 2010

Minutes of telephone meeting of the SPJ Journalism Education Committee, Thursday, Aug. 19, 2010

The meeting began at 4 p.m. EDT. The following people were present for all or part of the meeting:

Committee members:

David Burns
Mark Butzow
Kym Fox
Lee Anne Peck
Elissa Sonnenberg
Jeff South
Bonnie Stewart
Becky Tallent
Virginia Whitehouse
Nerissa Young

Ex-officio members:

George Daniels
Neil Ralston

Agenda

1. SPJ’s affiliate membership with AEJMC. George gave a report. He noted that SPJ’s executive board voted in July to reup as an affiliate member of AEJMC. Among other things, this will allow SPJ to have input into programming for AEJMC conventions. As SPJ’s executive director, Joe Skeel will be SPJ’s point person on the AEJMC Council of Affiliates. George said Joe probably will seek advice and ideas from the SPJ Journalism Education Committee.

2. Report from the AEJMC convention in Denver. With help from Neil and others, SPJ circulated a flier promoting a breakfast at the AEJMC convention. George and others attended the breakfast. Neil said one issue that SPJ would like to address with AEJMC is the recruitment and development of advisers for SPJ campus chapters. In that regard, SPJ is developing a set of online resources for SPJ campus chapters. George and Neil discussed this “Programming in a Box” idea. J-Ed Committee members also suggested that we develop a list of experienced campus chapter advisers who could mentor and help newbies.

3. Discussion of the J-Ed Committee at the SPJ national convention in Las Vegas. The committee is scheduled to meet in Las Vegas at 3:30 p.m. on Monday, Oct. 4. We discussed which J-Ed Committee members plan to attend the convention and the meeting.

4. Discussion of the chapter leadership session that will be held on Sunday, Oct. 3, at the SPJ convention. One question was: Should we have separate meetings for the campus advisers and the students? The J-Ed Committee’s consensus was to keep the advisers and students together.

5. Consideration of a resolution for presentation to the SPJ delegates at the national convention. George prepared a resolution that “… members of the Society go on record supporting continued involvement with preparing tomorrow’s journalists by maintaining its membership in on the Accrediting Council for Education and Journalism and Mass Communication …” The J-Ed Committee unanimously approved the resolution with some editing changes. [Note: On Sept. 2, the resolution was e-mailed to Mac McKerral, chairman of the SPJ Resolutions Committee.] 

6. Committee membership for the coming year. If you’re interested in serving on the J-Ed Committee next year, let Jeff know (jcsouth@vcu.edu). And/or contact SPJ’s president-elect, Hagit Limor (hlimor@wcpo.com).

 7. Ideas for future Toolbox columns or Quill stories. We kicked around several ideas, including:

• How students have changed over the years
• Ways to grow your chapter
• Teaching social media

8. Discussion of past issues, including possible changes in the SPJ Campus Chapter ratings system (Neil said some proposals are in the works).

The meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m.

The meeting began at 4 p.m. EST. The following people were present for all or part of the meeting:

Committee members:
David Burns
Mark Butzow
Butler Cain
Kym Fox
Gene Murray
Patti Gallagher Newberry
Lee Anne Peck
Jeff South
Karon Speckman
Bonnie Stewart
Becky Tallent
Virginia Whitehouse
Nerissa Young

Ex-officio members:
George Daniels
Sue Kopen Katcef
Neil Ralston

SPJ headquarters:
Scott Leadingham, editor, Quill magazine
Lauren Rochester, Awards Coordinator
Kevin Smith, SPJ president

Agenda

1. Upcoming Toolbox columns for Quill.

By consensus, the committee agreed on the following lineup for Toolbox columns for the near future:

 Think of ideas for columns for the June, August and October deadlines.

2. The J-education issue of Quill.

As we kicked off the discussion of possible themes for the traditional “journalism education issue,” George and others suggested we rethink the mission: Do we even need an education issue now that Quill publishes only six times a year and is seeking to bolster its Web-site content?

Part of the discussion was triggered by Scott suggestion that we move the education issue from July/Aug (deadline: June 18) to May/June (deadline: April 20). This proposal would allow Quill to devote the July/Aug issue to awards. Lee Anne and other committee members said the April 20 deadline would be hard to meet because of end-of-semester grading and the preparation of research papers for AEJMC.

Ginny noted that the annual education issue started about 10 years ago, timed so that educators could prepare their contributions over the summer. She likes the idea of having education-related stories in Quill throughout the year – instead of packing them into one issue.

Patti asked Scott whether he needs copy (such as the education issue) to fill the Quill news hole. Scott said he receives a lot of story pitches and often must turn them away. He said he agrees with George that maybe it’s time to rethink whether to have a designated “journalism education issue.”

By consensus, the Journalism Education Committee agreed to eliminate the journalism-education theme issue of Quill. Instead, the committee will seek to generate periodic feature-story contributions to Quill throughout the year. These stories would be above and beyond our Toolbox columns. Scott said features generally range from 1,200 to 3,500 words.

If you have ideas for feature stories, bounce them off Scott and/or send them to our committee’s listserv.

3. An “SPJ student news service” of sorts for Quill content (in print and online). From Scott: “We’re in the process of a Web site redesign, and will eventually move Quill to a dedicated stand-alone site with daily content (more like CJR and AJR). One thing I’d like to do is encourage more student contributions from chapters and really make SPJ a resource for them … giving them the ability to build clips (and, as I’d adamantly argue, get paid for their work). So, I’m curious what the members of the committee think about this admittedly very rudimentary idea.”

According to our discussion, this idea still is evolving:

It could take the shape of students producing industry-related news for SPJ members. (For example, the Quill Web site carried a package by two students from Virginia Commonwealth University about changes in state laws requiring local governments to publish legal notices in local newspapers.)

And/or it could involve general-interest news for a broad audience, such as a wire service for college journalists. This would be harder to pull off.

Scott will continue refining the proposal. In the meantime, if students have ideas for stories for the Quill Web site, he is happy to consider them. (Likewise, students could contribute items to appropriate SPJ blogs.)

4. Possible changes in the SPJ Campus Chapter ratings system.

Sue is heading up a committee to explore such changes. She is in the preliminary information-gathering stage. Sue said she doesn’t want to eliminate standards, but she wants to make sure that the goals are reasonable for campus chapters to meet. (The standards require campus chapters to hold a certain number of meetings per year, etc.) Many students involved in SPJ are overwhelmed and overworked, we don’t want to burn them out.

Karon noted that the standards (such as bringing in guest speakers) can hard especially on small and isolated campus chapters.

Neil said another problem is that the ratings system requires campus chapters to have representatives at regional and national meetings. This can be too expensive, and sometimes students can’t miss class.

Sue said one way to address the problem might be through additional training for campus advisers and student chapter officers (something parallel to the Scripps leadership conference). The training could be virtual (a Webinar) or in-person.

Karon moved that the SPJ Journalism Education Committee go on record as supporting efforts to finance and encourage the training (virtual or in-person) of campus advisers and student chapter officers. David seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously.

Kevin said he will take this issue to the next Executive Committee meeting. He said he might come back to the Journalism Education Committee with a request to form a subcommittee to further investigate the idea.

5. The online entry submission system for the SPJ Mark of Excellence Awards.

Lauren asked for the committee’s help to spread the word about the online submission system, which she said is going well.

The committee could play a role in getting the word out to community colleges. Lauren will forward to our committee’s listserv a note that she has sent to community colleges about the MOE contest. Mark said he would pass that note along to the College Media Advisers organization. Jeff said he would distribute it via the Virginia Community College System. And perhaps other committee members could forward the note to interested parties.

6. The possibility of creating a high school student SPJ membership category.

Neil has been circulating this proposal informally. He said there is nothing official on the table but the idea would involve having a type of reduced-price membership for high school journalists as we do for college journalists. The downside might be that high school students would flood the SPJ membership rolls, but committee members said that possibility is very remote.

On a motion made by Becky and seconded by Mark, the committee voted unanimously to endorse the idea that SPJ explore creating a membership category for high school journalists.

7. An update on the collaboration between SPJ and the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Kevin said the SPJ International Committee met with the executive director of CPJ and worked out a cooperative agreement. Part of the agreement would involve SPJ working on behalf of journalists imprisoned around world. This is where the Journalism Education Committee could help. Kevin said CPJ will provide the names of six imprisoned journalists and that perhaps campus chapters could adopt the journalist and undertake letter-writing campaigns or provide other support.

The Journalism Education Committee will work with Kevin, the International Committee, CPJ and the campus advisers to distribute the information about the imprisoned journalists to campus chapters and to encourage efforts to support those journalists.

8. SPJ convention ideas

Mark noted that the deadline to submit proposals for the 2010 Las Vegas convention is Jan. 3: “SPJ only wants sessions with one or two presenters, not panel discussions. The person who submits the proposal does not have to be one of the presenters, but would be the liaison for the session (if chosen) whether a participant or not.”

The Journalism Education Committee discussed a list of possible proposals that was developed at our meeting in August. We whittled the list (one idea was obsolete; another was for the 2011 convention). Here are the ideas on the table. We encouraged committee members to volunteer to “adopt” an idea and handle the submission process. Mark has adopted “Web writing for broadcast news outlets.”

• Multimedia teaching challenges when your units are separated on campus – perhaps a best practices roundup session. (“making it work even though you’re in different departments”)
• 10 things to know when you pick up a video camera.
• Where you can get outside grants to help pay for equipment.
• Web writing for broadcast news outlet

The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.