Vol. 12 - Number 3, July 2021

Journal of Media Education

JoME

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION2

MISSION STATEMENTThe Journal of Media Education is an editor-reviewed pedagogical journal published

electronically four times each year by the Broadcast Education Association. Its mission is to provide resources associated with the education and employment of students in vari-ous media fields and to promote communication among educators and media profession-als.

JoME is BEA’s principal forum for articles on pedagogy pertinent to the various media, industry analysis, responsive essays, reviews of books and other instructional materials, and reports on research and other work that may not fit the editorial objectives of tradi-tional scholarly publications.

HISTORYThe Journal of Media Education was originally published by the Broadcast Education

Association as Feedback (Volumes 1-50; 1959-2009). For fifty years, Feedback provided media professors and practitioners with information and articles enhancing the mutual appreciation of goals and demands associated with the education and employment of students in media fields. JoME, which launched in 2010, represents the on-going commit-ment to those goals while embracing the technological evolution of electronic publication.

GUIDELINESThe Journal of Media Education is an interactive publication designed to provide read-

ers with a broad array of resources, including audio, video, slideshows, multi-media and Internet links related to the articles published. JoME is an editor-reviewed journal pub-lished electronically four times a year by the Broadcast Education Association. JoME pub-lishes: (1) articles or essays dealing with pedagogical issues in any aspect of media educa-tion including, but not limited to, class syllabi, tutorials, and case studies; (2) responsive essays-especially industry analysis-reacting to issues and concerns raised by previous JoME articles and essays; (3) scholarly papers including those presented at conferences but not published in other publications; and (4) reviews of books and other instructional materials.

JoME is available online only at the BEA web site. All communication regarding busi-ness, membership questions, and changes of address should be sent to the BEA Member Services, 1771 N Street NW, Washington, D. C. 20036 or Help@beaweb.org.

JoME is Copyright 2021, Broadcast Education Association.

Editors: Craig M. FreemanDennis Conway

Production Scott Davis

3VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

FROM THE EDITOR

JoMEJournal of Media Education

This is an unusual Journal issue for an unusual year. We usually feature the top submissions from BEA’s Assessment Boot Camp in July. It is one of our most popular favorite issues, full of helpful tools for readers navigating the assessment/ accreditation process. In a year where many of those reviews have been postponed, we decided to skip the special topic issue this year.

This July issue features two excellent articles discussing timely issues in our field. Adam Earnheardt and Mary Beth Earnheardt provide valuable insight on developing media entrepreneurship programs. Barney McCoy’s survey of student of remote learn-ing is particularly helpful as we prepare for classes this fall.

We will return to our normal pattern in October, which once again features creative submissions. Stay tuned for the very best in audio, interactive multimedia, narrative and documentary film/ video, news, sports and screenwriting.

Please note that we are transitioning to a new editor. I am working with Dennis Conway on the transition this year. Dr. Conway will become the sole editor in Janu-ary. You’re welcome to reach out to Dr. Conway at editor@beajome.org or dpconway@valdosta.edu with questions, comments and/or suggestions.

We are always on the lookout for reviewers. Remember, JoME transitioned to be-come a peer-reviewed journal in 2018. If you would like to serve as a reviewer for JoME, please send an email with your vita and a brief description of the areas you are most comfortable reviewing.

Thank you for helping the Journal continue to educate for tomorrow’s media.

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION4

3

9

15

19

24

30

Contents5

18

42

Click on article title to view page.

JoMEJournal of Media Education

EXPLORING MEDIA ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION AT THE MASTERS LEVEL

Adam C. Earnheardt & Mary Beth Earnheardt, Youngstown State University

IN THE TRENCHES: COLLEGE STUDENT ONLINE/REMOTE LEARNING EXPERIENCES DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Bernard R. McCoy, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

THE GENESIS OF THE BEA RESEARCH GRANTSAugust E. Grant, University of South Carolina

5VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

INNOVATION

EXPLORING MEDIA ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION AT THE MASTERS LEVELAdam C. EarnheardtMary Beth EarnheardtYoungstown State University

This work has not been previously published. A previous version of this paper was accepted by the Broadcast Education Association Curriculum, Assess-ment & Administration Division for presentation at the April 2018 Convention in Las Vegas.

Media outlets continuously evolve in terms of the scope, immediacy, event coverage, techno-logical advancements, and international interest. Traditional media companies have been chal-lenged and, to some extent, replaced by inter-nationally-based media boutiques and outlets launched by members of the Millennial genera-tion as well as displaced media veterans. These new media entrepreneurs have passion, vision and drive similar to entrepreneurs in other indus-tries where new ideas can emerge and challenge the status quo. While the global media upheaval has caused hardship for some who held tradition-al media jobs, the changes have created unparal-leled opportunities for those with enterprise re-porting, media production, writing, data analysis and communications skills. The Internet, social

media, and the explosion of information immedi-acy have created huge demand and opportunity for entrepreneurs armed with basic knowledge, skills and desire. To meet these demands, this study calls for the development of robust media entrepreneurship programs. We review various expert definitions of entrepreneurial media edu-cation and explore the market for graduate media programs in free enterprise.

By definition, media entrepreneurship is the “creation and ownership of a small enterprise or organization whose activity adds at least one voice or innovation to the media marketplace” (Hoag, 2005). Media entrepreneurship has also been defined using several conceptual and prac-tical concerns identified in communication and entrepreneurship studies. For example, Hoag and Seo (2005) suggested:

first, and obviously, our conceptualization includes all media products and services. Second, it talks about both new entrants and existing small firms. Third, it implies Schum-peter’s entrepreneurship – innovation connec-tion but does not exclude small media busi-nesses that may not be constantly innovating. Next, it rules in both for-profit and non-com-

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION6

mercial forms of media enterprise. Finally, for this initial inquiry, our conceptualization sets aside the psychology and sociology of entre-preneurship, though they are well-developed strains of entrepreneurship research. Of par-ticular significance to future study of media entrepreneurship, would be the entrepre-neur’s ability to perceive opportunities and capacity for risk-taking. (p. 3)Furthermore, Hoag and Compaine (2006)

found that media entrepreneurs are motivated by social, political and cultural mission(s) as much as they are by profit (see Bull & Willard, 1993; Wennekers & Thurik, 1999).

During a 2011 roundtable discussion spon-sored by the Paley Center for Media, Jeff Jarvis and Geneva Overholser identified essential skills for a media entrepreneur, including business plan writing, understanding revenue and ex-penses, managing a spreadsheet, marketing and advertising, understanding digital media, being able to gather information for publication on the web (e.g., curation), and multimedia editing. Of course, Jarvis and Overholser identified these skills a decade ago, but many media profes-sionals and educators would likely argue these abilities are just as relevant today as they were in 2011.

Entrepreneurs who are equipped with these skills can seize opportunities to create their own media business. To understand the requisite skill set, the term “media” in media entrepreneurship must be fully explored. In this sense, “media” can be simply defined as traditional mass commu-nication, its systems and content. But it can also include other technologies we use for delivering content and mediating human communication and ideas (Hoag & Seo, 2005). For example, we could define “media” in our traditional under-standing of publishing (newspapers, periodicals, books), electronic (radio and television via broad-casting, broadband, cable or satellite), motion picture, gaming, music, advertising and public relations endeavors. Of course, we also define

media as it is wholly-intertwined with wireless adaptation of traditional systems and content, where “smart” and “mobile” are common par-lance in discussions of mass mediated content delivered to handheld devices.

Therefore, the common denominator of a suc-cessful new media entrepreneur: a sound idea, a path to an audience, and business management skills. Strong graduate programs would be able to provide the skills necessary for students to launch their own entrepreneurial global media careers.

LITERATURE REVIEWIn 2002, the editors of the International Journal

of Media Management themed their issue, Media and Entrepreneurship (Dowling & Mellewigt, 2002), and featured four articles dealing with areas of media and telecommunication that were being changed by new media technologies and the way these technologies opened the door to unprecedented levels of entrepreneurship. The study of media as an industry is relatively recent in business management research, with few areas well-defined in business theory. The conclusion drawn by these educators and media scholars was that media management is relatively new discipline and ripe for study. However, the stud-ies published in this special issue were just the first steps in this new line of inquiry and educa-tion.

An examination of research done by the U.S. Census Department was used to examine the landscape of media entrepreneurship in the Unit-ed States (Hoag, 2008). Results showed that the media sector has experienced a spike in turbu-lence, going from relatively stable in 1990 to very turbulent in 2001. The media was the most tur-bulent business sector in this 11 year period. The turbulence occurred in nearly all sectors of media including, cable, advertising, movies, television, radio and telecommunications. The only sector that showed stability was publishing. Overall, media industries were more entrepreneurial than

7VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

the average U.S. industry and the most consis-tently entrepreneurial sector of any U.S. industry. The results went on to show that nascent entre-preneurship (new enterprise creation) is higher, although not by much, than the all-industry rate. Within the different industries, the motion pic-ture industry is rated the highest and newspaper publishing is the lowest.

Ehrman, Haas and Harms (2002) examined the way two common entrepreneurial concepts translate into the online book market. They reviewed liability and size and determined that newer, larger companies have a better web presence than old smaller companies do. As a consequence of these findings, newness, while traditionally seen as a liability, does not have a negative impact on businesses in the online book market. Also, the authors conclude that size does matter. A company must invest enough resourc-es, and have access to enough available resources to invest, if they want to maintain a high quality online storefront.

Justifying the utility and necessity of creating small, entrepreneurial media organizations to both augment material from larger corporations and fill otherwise neglected information needs leads to growth areas for free enterprise. Funabiki (2011) points to two areas of growth for media start-ups. First, is the “little media” entrepreneur. This term is used to refer to broadcaster, bloggers, web page administrators and other individuals who use a mixture of citizen journalism and pro-fessional reporters to record and publish stories that are essential to their small communities. The second area of opportunity in media entre-preneurship is the community-based nonprofit organization. This area provides an essential way for smaller communities to serve media and information needs without relying on a larger or-ganization that either may come too late to fully investigate a problem or worse, ignore smaller communities altogether.

Entrepreneurship in the creative markets is also a way for marginalized groups to find iden-

tity (Yue, 2007). In a study of queer Singapore it was found that media entrepreneurs used cre-ative strategies to create a positive identity for a group that has traditionally been persecuted. The role of disruption in media has primarily fo-cused on the means by which large corporations are morphing business practices to accommodate new media technologies. In an essay address-ing the problem of this issue, van Weezel (2010) identified four primary reasons for this. First, the larger a firm is the more excitement it generates when business practices are changed. Second, larger media companies produce more data than smaller ones, and this data is more available for analysis by third parties (some of whom are smaller media businesses). Third, the data that is available is large and therefore often provides more power when conducting analysis. Fourth, the theories tested in the field of media econom-ics and media management are usually devel-oped to apply specifically to industry leaders, not small start-ups that have yet to prove their eco-nomic worth or viability.

Abidin (2013) examined the way commer-cial bloggers in Singapore found their lives dis-ordered by using social media and their own personalities as brands for media consumption. These bloggers were motivated by money, social pressure and personal satisfaction. The downside to hosting a blog of such a personal nature is the constantly accessible environment of social me-dia, which has led to an intensification of stress and emotional strain since the widespread adop-tion of mobile technology. The continuous look into the lives of these bloggers made consumers feel more connected, and these new parasocial relationships led to bloggers develop coping mechanisms to deal with the relational problems. These strategies are meant to provide the blog-gers with a sense of work-life balance.

Sanchez, Torrijos and de la Casa (2015) stud-ied entrepreneurial strategies in sports journalism in Spain. Findings showed that to be a successful entrepreneurial sports journalist one had to be

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION8

willing to engage a variety of diverse products and to embrace the advantages made available through technological innovation. The two pri-mary types of delivery discovered were niche in-formation products and hyperlocal publications.

With what is known about media entrepre-neurship and models for small media business around the world, it is next necessary to examine strategies used to teach entrepreneurship and mine them for strategies that translate into well-designed programs. However, designing media entrepreneurship programs and developing ap-propriate learning outcomes requires knowledge of the industry and a clearer understanding of learner attitudes about business and media.

Entrepreneurship EducationIglesias-Sanchez, Jambrino-Maldonado,

Velasco and Kokash (2016) examined attitudes to-ward entrepreneurship in students. Students had a moderate predisposition toward creating their own start-up businesses because they lacked confidence in their own abilities and because they believed it was risky. Maritz, Jones and Shwetzer (2015) examined the way Australian universities conduct entrepreneurship education. Most pro-grams in entrepreneurship in Australia were at the undergraduate level (included were both ma-jors and minors). Scott, Penaluna and Thompson (2016) looked at learning outcomes in entrepre-neurship education. They examined the learning outcomes as both innovation to the market and implementation of ideas. It is clear that matching the expectations of outside audiences and using creative problems solving strategies that help in-novate served as appropriate learning outcomes and drove discussions of market innovation and idea implementation.

Mandel and Noyes (2016) examined under-graduate programs in entrepreneurship. They found that these types of programs are abundant, and that they have difficulties attracting and retaining strong faculty mentors and securing the proper resources for success. Additionally, at the undergraduate level, learning outcomes seem

focused solely on business skill development with little time and few outcomes focused on the infusion of media skill development.

Characteristics that a student is inclined to study entrepreneurship include attitudes about ability, perceived personal skillset, and a per-ceived independent learning style (Mustapha & Selvaraju, 2015). In addition, those who had a family member who was involved in a business and positive thoughts about the image of entre-preneurs were also more likely to want to pur-sue this type of education. A study of education levels on those who become entrepreneurs, either formally or informally found that education has a positive impact on formal entrepreneurship (Jimenez, et al., 2015).

While there is some insight into the role high-er education plays in successful entrepreneurs, much of it exists outside of the United States and focuses specifically on individuals enrolled in entrepreneurship programs, not programs spe-cific to media entrepreneurship. The potential for growth and innovation in media and the limited number of programs that address this area pro-vides an opportunity to better understand how a graduate program could assist students who wish to create start-up media companies.

METHODOLOGYThe first step in creating a new graduate pro-

gram at most universities is to develop a survey to determine if a market exists for the program. To ascertain interest levels in a graduate level media entrepreneurship program, a survey instrument was created and distributed to 72 participants. Additionally, to explore the growth of these programs in the higher education mar-ket, we conducted an analysis of existing gradu-ate programs in media entrepreneurship at U.S. universities. Finally, we included data from the bureau of labor and statistics to provide a clear picture on growth in the media entrepreneurship sector. These data helped to provide evidence of need for these programs in U.S. graduate schools.

9VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

Sample and InstrumentThe sample consisted of working media pro-

fessionals. The survey asked these professionals to indicate basic demographic information, global interest in changing careers, and their specific interest in taking a variety of courses that would be part of a graduate degree program in media entrepreneurship. The courses included in the survey were drawn from the analysis of other programs (e.g., Fordham University, American University) and the courses offered as part of the graduate-level media entrepreneurship curricu-lum. The Likert-type questions were organized on a scale and professional media contacts were asked to complete the survey online. A complete version of the survey is available in Appendix A.

RESULTSAnalysis of this preliminary survey of media

professionals, data compiled on existing U.S.-based graduate programs focused on media entrepreneurship, and data collected from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, a suggest a need for the type of graduate level education. There are relatively few comparable media business programs at the undergraduate level, and even fewer at the graduate level (see Appendix B).

Survey Data Our preliminary survey of media profession-

als and discussions with industry experts yielded results supporting a graduate-level program in media entrepreneurship. Survey results of me-dia professionals (N = 72) suggest a need for this type of graduate program. We allowed respon-dents to identify with more than one industry. Forty-two of these respondents work in the newspaper industry, 23 in television, 25 in new media, 18 in PR, 15 in radio, and 15 in magazines. 71% of the respondents indicated some interest in using their professional skills to start their own media companies. 73% suggested some interest in earning a graduate degree in media entrepre-

neurship as opposed to an undergraduate degree, as a graduate degree allowed for more flexibility in scheduling, a higher level of learning, and an advanced degree (i.e., respondents were not in-terested in pursuing a second bachelor’s degree).

Potential coursework for which respondents showed the most interest included: media effects, statistics, entrepreneurship and innovation, me-dia law and ethics, media project and technology management, developing media content, market-ing management. Some respondents also ex-pressed an interest in courses related to financial analysis and accounting, organizational leader-ship, research methods, and journalism and mass communication theory.

Existing Programs Specifically, we researched programs with this

specific focus on a multidisciplinary approach to media entrepreneurship (see Appendix B). There are only a handful of universities in other states that offer graduate programs in media entre-preneurship, including American University, the City University of New York and Fordham University. City University of New York special-izes in entrepreneurial journalism. American University’s School of Communication and the Kogod School of Business partnered to offer a media entrepreneurship Master’s program. This program appears to target mid-career profession-als seeking training as consultants and content providers in new media. Fordham University’s program is slightly different in that the entire program is housed in its Graduate School of Busi-ness Administration. Nonetheless, Fordham touts the program as an “interdisciplinary program,” drawing on multiple disciplines in the business school (management, marketing, finance, com-munication) to train students on how to develop, finance, market and launch new media enter-prises.

There was a great deal of variability in the courses examined (see Appendix B). Common courses dealt with media law, entrepreneurial

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION10

business models and some sort of capstone, ap-prenticeship or other applied experience. The total credit hours in these three programs varied from 30-48. All programs had at least 3 courses that would be considered as part of the business focused learning outcomes of an interdisciplinary program. All programs had at least one course that focused on using technology and there was room in each curriculum for elective coursework, although these electives were limited to disci-plines willing to offer courses to students in these programs.

Labor OutlookBureau of Labor and Statistics data provide

evidence for growth in new media businesses, specifically at the small business development level. With large numbers of people wanting to work in the media and associated industries, of-fering a graduate degree in media entrepreneur-ship serves as a catalyst for graduate enrollment. Moreover, the failure to offer this type of degree may serve a distinct disadvantage. For example, graduate students interested in media studies may search for competing programs in other schools if they find limited media business-relat-ed, graduate-level study opportunities.

Evidence of this claim can be found in em-ployment projection data. For example, employ-ers seek those who have new, relevant skills in advertising, marketing, content development, promotions, public relations, and sales cam-paigns involving new media, including the understanding of big data (note: “big data” is the term for a collection of data sets so large and complex that it becomes difficult to process using on-hand database management tools or tradition-al data processing applications). Newly designed graduate degree media programs in free enter-prise have the potential to address this need and

to provide these skills.

CONCLUSIONOwners and managers of leading media or-

ganizations repeatedly state that practical experi-ence is far more important than qualifications to get a job in media. Therefore, the development of a media entrepreneurship program may be viewed by many major media companies as an excellent recruitment pool, even if the end goal is to provide media professionals the tools to create their own media businesses. More importantly, these skills are highly valued by virtually all industries – researching, writing, analyzing, com-municating, and data analysis. Because of this, experiential learning should be at the heart of all new graduate degrees in media entrepreneur-ship, and students should have the appropriate venues to combine their course experiences with hands-on experience, in various media environ-ments.

The lack of a consistent body of graduate programs in media entrepreneurship inhibited our ability to find a consistent way to approach creating a curriculum. A few items, however, do seem consistent in the programs. There is a need for technology, law and business courses, which indicates this type of program needs a faculty with a variety of expertise. Also, it seems as though the best programs allow students to begin incubating projects before graduation. The results of this study and the labor market analysis indi-cate that these types of programs have the poten-tial for growth, and can provide graduates with either the skills to develop their own media busi-nesses or be hired in existing companies. As we see shifts in technology and the media landscape continue to create opportunities, it is important that we help our students realize their potential in meeting them.

REFERENCESAbidin (2013). Cyber-BFFs*: Assessing women’s ‘perceived interconnectedness’ in Singapore’s com-

mercial lifestyle blog industry *best friends forever. Global Media Journal: Australian Edition, 7.

11VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

Bull, I. & Willard, G. E. (1993). Towards a theory of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 183-195.

Dowling, M., & Mellewigt, T. (2002). Editorial: Media and entrepreneurship. JMM: The International Journal on Media Management, 4(4), 201-202.

Ehrman, T., Haas, F., & Harms, R. (2002). The bases of successful market entry: The liability of size and of newness in e-commerce. JMM: The International Journal on Media Management, 4(4), 203-211.

Funabiki, J. (2011). A growing time for little media. National Civic Review, 100(3), 12-14.

Hoag, A. (2005). Media, democracy, and entrepreneurship: Evidence and theory for public policy. Presented at the Babson-Kauffman Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Wellesley, MA, June 9, 2005.

Hoag, A. (2008). Measuring media entrepreneurship. The International Journal on Media Management, 10, 74–80.

Hoag, A. & Compaine, B. (2006). Media entrepreneurship in the era of big media: Prospects for new entrants. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 26(19), Article 2.

Hoag, A. & Seo, S. (2005). Media entrepreneurship: Definition, theory and context. Presented at the National Consortium for Teaching about Asia (NCTA) Academic Seminar, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2005.

Iglesias-Sánchez, P. P., Jambrino-Maldonado, C., Velasco, A. P., & Kokash, H. (2016). Impact of entre-preneurship programmes on university students. Education + Training, 58(2), 209-228.

Jarvis, J., & Overholser, G. (2011). Panel: Real tales from the real world: Education of the entrepre-neurial journalist. The Paley Center for Media. Presented at A Way Forward: Solving the Challenges of the News Frontier, New York City, NY, February 2011.

Jimenez, A., Palmero-Camara, C., Gonzalez-Santos, M. J., Gonzalez-Bernai, J., & Jimenez-Eguizabal, J. A. (2015). The impact of educational levels on formal and informal entrepreneurship. Business Research Quarterly, 18, 204-212.

Mandel, R., & Noyes, E. (2016). Survey of experiential entrepreneurship education offerings among top undergraduate entrepreneurship programs. Education + Training, 58(2), 164-178.

Maritz, A., Jones, C., & Shwetzer, C. (2015). The status of entrepreneurship education in Australian universities. Education + Training, 57(8/9), 1020-1035.

Mustapha, A., & Selvaraju, M. (2015). Personal attributes, family influences, entrepreneurship educa-tion and entrepreneurship inclination among university students. Kajian Malaysia, 33(1), 155-172.

Sánchez, J. L. M., Torrijos, J. L. R., & de la Casa, J. M. H. (2015). Entrepreneurial journalism: Sports journalism in Spain. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 70, 69-90.

Scott, J. M., Penaluna, A., & Thompson, J. L. (2016). A critical perspective on learning outcomes and the effectiveness of experiential approaches in entrepreneurship education. Education + Training, 58(1), 82-93.

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION12

Wennekers, S. & Thurik, R. (1999). Linking entrepreneurship and economic growth. Small Business Economics, 13(1), 27-55.

Van Weezel, A. (2010). Creative destruction: Why not researching entrepreneurial media? The Interna-tional Journal on Media Management, 12, 47–49.

Yue, A. (2007). Hawking in the creative city: Rice Rhapsody, sexuality and the cultural politics of New Asia in Singapore. Feminist Media Studies, 7(4), 365-380.

APPENDIX AQuestionnaire for professionalsFor purposes of evaluation, please indicate the following demographic information.Age: 18-24 25-35 36-45 46 and olderYears of Professional Experience: _______________Media related career fields: (check all that apply)Public relationsBroadcastingNew media/webJournalismOther (please specify) ____________Company Name ______________________________________

The Youngstown State University is trying to determine if there is an interest or need in developing programs that would provide a path for working media professionals to leave legacy media organiza-tions and pursue careers in university journalism and mass communication teaching or in entrepre-neurial media. The following questions are meant to gauge the interest working professionals may have in these types of programs. Answering these items in no way commits you to pursuing these programs.

Please answer the following items by indicating:1 for items with which you strongly disagree2 for items with which you disagree3 for items about which you feel neutral4 for items with which you agree5 for items with which you strongly agree

1. I plan to work professionally in the private sector for my entire career. 1 2 3 4 5 2. I would be interested in teaching courses in journalism and mass communications education at a college or university. 1 2 3 4 5

13VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

3. I would be interested in a doctoral program that focused on the teaching of journalism and mass communication. 1 2 3 4 5

4. I would be interested in conducting research that focused on journalism and mass communication. 1 2 3 4 5

5. I would become a full-time, resident student if I could be done with a PhD program in 2 calendar years. 1 2 3 4 5

6. I would be interested in using my professional skills to create my own media company. 1 2 3 4 5

7. I would be interested in a master’s degree program focused in media entrepreneurship. 1 2 3 4 5

8. I would become a full-time, resident student if I could be done with a master’s degree in media entrepreneurship in 2 calendar years. 1 2 3 4 5

What types of courses do you believe would be most valuable/interesting? Indicate a:1 for classes that you believe are of no value or interest2 for classes that you believe are of some value or interest3 for classes that you believe are of great value or interest

1. Higher Education Curriculum Design – Concepts and theories of designing higher education cur-riculum. Class design and structure, linking to educational goals. 1 2 3

2. Statistics – Introduction to basic univariate and multivariate statistics. Focus on using social scien-tific statistical analysis software to analyze data and report results. 1 2 3

3. Journalism and Mass Communication Theory – Exploration of the major theories underlying the scholarly study of journalism and mass communication. Introduction to seminal articles and develop-ment of theories. Emphasis on preparing students to produce scholarly work. 1 2 3

4. Journalism and Mass Communication Research Methods – Exploration of qualitative and quanti-tative methods of social scientific inquiry related to journalism and mass communication research. 1 2 3

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION14

5. Teaching of Writing Theory and Practice - Problems, issues, practices, and research that affect the teaching of writing in college courses. 1 2 3

6. Media Effects – Focus on the societal effects of messages produced by the media. Obligations to audiences and consequences of technology. 1 2 3

7. Experiential Learning Theory and Strategies - Exploration of theory and methodology of using real world experience to enhance education. Focus on community partnerships and collegiate media. 1 2 3

8. Journalism and Mass Communication Measurement and Design – Designing research projects that focus on JMC and Higher Education. Focus on creating method, collecting data, analyzing data and discussion findings. 1 2 3

9. Teaching of Technology Theory and Practice – Problems, issues, practices and research that affect the teaching of technology in college courses. 1 2 3

10. Distance Education Theory and Practice – Strategies for delivering JMC instruction using new media technology. Focus on research and theory that guide the field. 1 2 3

11. Grants and Funding - Exploration of funding models for university JMC projects. Focus on writ-ing and persuasive techniques, grants accounting, measuring program success/failure. 1 2 3

12. Journalism and Mass Communication Education Internship – Field experience working in the classroom or in experiential learning environment. Could include teaching courses in JMC, produc-ing and conducting workshops for media professionals, working with student media or other student learning initiatives. 1 2 3

13. Media Entrepreneurship Seminar – Exploration of how new ventures and established media/communication companies have been successful in the digital environment. Focus on developing ideas, finding funding, competitive strategies and creating a business plan. 1 2 3

14. Entrepreneurship & Innovation – Problems, issues, practices and research about entrepreneur-ship. Focus on understanding of attitude, behaviors and skillsets of the successful entrepreneur. 1 2 3

15VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

15. Media Law and Ethics - Exploration of legal and ethical problems and issues associated with journalism and mass communication. Focus on first amendment, electronic communication, libel, copyright, and privacy. 1 2 3

16. Organizational Leadership Seminar – Focus on theory and practice of organizations and human resources management. Students will develop plans for leading a staff and becoming a spokesperson for their own projects. 1 2 3

17. Media Project and Tech Management – Exploration of the digital and business technologies needed to successfully manage product and workflow of a start-up media company. 1 2 3

18. Financial Analysis and Accounting – Focus on conceptions of management tool in financial analysis, planning, and decision-making. Underlying concepts of accounting and financial manage-ment in the development and implementation of a business plan. Focus on using business theories and techniques to manage risk, price products and make investment decisions. 1 2 3

19. Marketing Management – Basics of media marketing and strategies for finding profits in intellec-tual properties. 1 2 3

20. Media Entrepreneurship Capstone Project – Working with a small business development center and a business incubator, students will create a business plan and proposal. During the course of the project students will present to investors and look for funding models to launch their media product. 1 2 3

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION16

APPENDIX B

American Fordham CUNYTotal credit hours 30 48 36Programs contributing courses

Communication and Management(interdisciplinary)

Journalism Communication and Media Management (CM)

Courses in marketingCourses in management 4

Courses in accountingCourses in other business disciplines 3 8

Courses in entrepreneurship 4

Courses in writing 4Courses in communication 4 7

Courses in technology 1 3 4Other media courses 10Number of internship/experience or capstone 1 1 recommended

1 required 0

Elective courses 2 4 3

Course titles at these universities have included:

• Communicating Corporate Image and Responsibility• Leadership with Public Relations• Crisis Communication and Media Strategies• Intensive Sector Analysis• Media Strategy Practicum• Consumer Adoption of New Media • Law of Traditional and New Media• Communication for Entrepreneurs• New Media Product Development Practicum• Ethics and Social Responsibility in Media Enterprises• Social Media• Media Systems and Markets• Innovation in Media Business Models• Consumer Adoption of New Media • New Business Models for News• Fundamentals of Business• New Business Incubation

17VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

• Technology Immersion• New Media Apprenticeship• Craft of Journalism II • Craft II-Broadcast• Business & Economics Reporting• Internship• Craft of Journalism I• Legal and Ethical Issues• Fundamentals of Multimedia Storytelling• Communication Law• Seminar in Media Entrepreneurship• Media Technology Management• Leading People and Organizations • Entrepreneurship and Innovation• Entrepreneurship Practicum: New Venture Business Plan• New Venture Start-up: Operational, Financial, and Legal Strategies• Capstone: Media Entrepreneurship

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION18

PANDEMIC

IN THE TRENCHES: COLLEGE STUDENT ONLINE/REMOTE LEARNING EXPERIENCES DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMICBernard R. McCoyUniversity of Nebraska-Lincoln

INTRODUCTIONAs college students arrive on U.S. campuses

in the fall of 2021, they will bring with them something unimagined two years earlier; they will come with broad-based pandemic-induced experiences and subsequent behaviors distilled from more than a year of predominantly online/remote learning. Variously described as virtual, distance, online or remote learning, this article uses the term “online/remote” to discuss our lat-est research findings.

Pre-pandemicUntil March of 2020, most American colleges

were educational communities where students learned in on-site classrooms. Students sat feet apart while listening, discussing and learning about a broad range of topics with guidance from college instructors who taught in classrooms big and small.

Online/remote learning was available as an option at higher ed institutions too. Typically

though, online/remote courses accounted for a fraction of the overall learning platforms and experiences available for most college students.

Then came the COVID-19 pandemic that flipped online/remote education from a part-time learning option to full-time necessity.

During the pandemicOn March 6, 2020, the University of Wash-

ington became the first large U.S. university to temporarily close its doors as the COVID-19 virus loomed larger. (Hess, 2020) To limit the spread of the virus, UW canceled in-person classes for nearly 50,000 students. For the foreseeable future, student exams would only be taken via online/remote.

Days later, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of the World Health Organiza-tion, declared COVID-19 a global pandemic. (Keaten, Cheng, Leicester, 2020) At that point, 556 COVID-19 cases and seven COVID-19 deaths had been reported in the United States. (The New York Times, 2021)

It is nearly impossible to overstate the effects the pandemic has had and continues to have on

19VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

the lives of every U.S. citizen and institution, including education. Few Americans might have predicted that in May 2021 the World Health Organization would report almost 33 million confirmed U.S. cases of COVID-19 with roughly 588,000 deaths. (Elflein, 2021)

Before the pandemic, the U.S. Department of Education reported about one-third of all U.S. college students had some type of online course experience while the other two-thirds remained traditional campus-based lectures. The Harvard Business Review noted “little-changed from hundreds of years ago.” (Gallagher, S., Palmer, J., 2020)

As March 2020 ended, 1,102 U.S. colleges and universities had temporarily closed and moved classes online because of the COVID-19 public health emergency. (Hess, 2020) Higher education institutions had little choice but to switch to crisis mode in the middle of the spring 2020 semester. One study found 90% of institutions switched to some form of emergency remote/online educa-tion to complete the spring term. Institutions that did not switch were typically already exclusively online or located in the few parts of the U.S. where shelter-in-place orders were not in force. (Lederman, 2020)

The pandemic forced colleges to upgrade their online technology and learning apps to handle the high-volume switch to online/remote classes. It required most college instructors (56%) to learn within weeks how to use online technol-ogy on a full-time teaching basis. (Ralph, 2020) During this time, a Bayview Analytics study found almost two-thirds of instructors changed “the kinds of assignments or exams” they gave to students. Nearly half (48%) lowered their expec-tations for the amount of work students would be able to do.

K. Holly Shiflett at FutureLearn noted the difficult transition to online teaching for some faculty members. “I am hoping that universities and faculty members will embrace the challenge and adapt.” (Lederman, 2020)

During this time, Goldie Blumenstyk at The Chronicle of Higher Education (2020) suggested the COVID-19 virus might be a “black swan” moment for Higher Ed. “It seems safe to say that this will be not only enormously disruptive but also paradigm changing, Blumenstyk wrote. “The ‘black swan,’ that unforeseen event that changes everything, is upon us.”

The abrupt changes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic were not always easy for students. The pandemic introduced additional difficulties into many of their lives such as unemployment, social isolation and economic uncertainty.

Studies, including this one, found the switch to online learning resulted in most students per-forming worse academically during the forced re-mote learning transition. Rates of anxiety, depres-sion, and suicide rose sharply too. (Dennon, 2021) One survey in the early days of the pandemic found 80% of college students reported their mental health was negatively impacted by the public health lockdown. One fifth of the students said their mental health worsened significantly too. (Brown, Kafka, 2020)

Distractions from online/remote learning during the pandemic were also greater for many students. In past surveys (McCoy, 2013, 2016, 2020), I examined classroom learning distractions experienced by college students and found about one-fifth of the respondents’ in-class learning time was disrupted by distractions from digital devices such as smartphones, laptops and tablets.

Before the pandemic, a phenomenological study by Flanigan & Babchuk (2015) suggested the temptation and use of social media was al-ready a prominent aspect of university students’ academic experiences, “both within and outside of the classroom setting.”

During the pandemic, where online/ re-mote classroom settings were in many students’ homes, distractions such as the presence of family members, other household activities, unchecked social media and text messages cre-ated new distractions not found in traditional

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION20

college classrooms. Nearly 80% of the students in our survey described online/remote learning as “A lot more” or “A little more” distracting than classroom learning.

By May 2021, the Higher Education Resource Center reported more than 4,200 U.S. colleges with 25 million students had responded directly to the seismic shift in online learning caused by the COVID-19 public health lockdown.

Correspondingly, by the end of May 2021, half of U.S. adults -- more than 129 million people over 18 – were fully vaccinated against the CO-VID-19 virus, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (Pereira, 2021)

With COVID-19 vaccinations climbing, most American colleges made plans to resume mostly in-person classroom teaching for the fall 2021 semester. (Whitford, 2021)

Building on prior research, the purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions students had from their online/remote learning experi-ences during the 2020/2021 pandemic. What did they believe were the challenges and benefits of online/remote classes? How did they rate their online/remote learning experiences and how did they compare to traditional classroom-only learn-ing? After more than a year of predominantly on-line/remote learning by students at U.S. colleges what instructional content, platform and delivery changes are likely in store for college classes in a post-COVID-19 pandemic world?

METHODS In winter and spring of 2021, we surveyed 500

students at 30 U.S. colleges in 22 states. Respon-dents answered 22 survey questions. Most of the questions asked students about their perceptions of online/remote learning during the 2020/2021 COVID-19 pandemic.

Respondents included freshmen, sophomores, juniors, seniors, and graduate students who at-tended colleges in Arkansas, Alabama, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Mary-land, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mis-

sissippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

The survey asked students to list the per-ceived advantages and disadvantages from their online/remote learning experiences during the 2020/2021 pandemic. Students were asked what percentage of their pandemic classes involved some form of online/remote learning. They were asked to rate and compare online/remote learn-ing experiences during the pandemic with their pre-pandemic classroom-only learning experi-ences.

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained before the survey’s administration. It included a cover page statement informing stu-dents that the survey’s completion and submis-sion constituted their consent to participate in the study.

Classroom instructors volunteered to recruit student respondents for the survey using email and personal contacts. All respondents had the option of voluntarily participating in the survey and were not asked to provide their names.

SurveyMonkey.com was the data collection tool. Survey results were compared statistically with demographic data for gender, age, grade point average, and year in school. In the results below, some percentages are rounded to the near-est 1/10 of a percent.

QUANTITATIVE RESULTSTable 1 shows graph results for this survey’s

questions. The last five survey questions (ques-tions 18-22) were demographic in nature. A question 22 graph is not displayed for privacy purposes.

Respondents were asked in Question 1 if they were 17 years and older and currently located in the United States. Of the responses, 98.8% an-swered “Yes,” and 1.2% answered “No.” (See: Table 1, Question 1)

Question 2 asked students what percentage of their classes in the spring 2021 semester involved

21VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

remote synchronous, remote asynchronous or a hybrid blend of synchronous and asynchronous classes.

• We defined remote synchronous classes as those with “online learning with a sched-uled class and required login times.”

• We defined remote asynchronous classes as “learning that does not require real-time interaction, where students access online content when it fits their schedules, and assignments are completed to deadlines.”

• We defined hybrid classes as those with a “blend of synchronous and asynchronous formats.”

The results indicate 87.92%, a significant majority of students, took remote classes 51% to 100% of the time during the spring 2021 semester. Of the 497 respondents to this question, 59.96% took remote classes 91% to 100% of the time dur-ing the spring 2021 semester.

A comparison analysis of Question 2 found a statistically significant response between fresh-men and seniors who took classes in the spring of 2021. Of the freshman respondents, 52% said they took remote classes 91-100% of the time com-pared to 67.57% of the seniors who said they took remote classes 91-100% of the time. Sophomores (62.67%), juniors (57.14%), and graduate students (56.67%) fell between the two extremes. (See: Table 1, Question 2 and Question 2 Comparison analysis)

Question 3 asked what percentage of the respondents’ classes in the fall 2020 semester involved remote synchronous, remote asynchro-nous or a hybrid blend of synchronous and asyn-chronous classes.

The results indicate a significant majority of students (90%) took remote classes 51% to 100% of the time during the fall 2020 semester. Of the 500 respondents to this question, 68% took re-mote classes 91% to 100% of the time during the fall 2020 semester.

A comparison analysis of Question 3 found statistically significant responses between all

class groups who took remote classes 91-100% of the time in the fall of 2020. Freshman (45.45%), sophomores (65.33%), juniors (76.60%), seniors (78.38%), graduate students (54.84%).

Except for graduate students, undergradu-ate students took a higher percentage of online/remote classes based on their seniority in school. (See: Table 1, Question 3 and Question 3 Com-parison analysis)

Question 4 asked what percentage of the re-spondents’ classes “BEFORE THE PANDEMIC” involved remote synchronous, remote asynchro-nous or a hybrid blend of synchronous and asyn-chronous classes.

The results indicate a significant minority of students (4.81%) took remote classes 51% to 100% of the time before the 2020/2021 pandemic. Just 2.81% of the respondents took remote classes 91% to 100% of the time before the 2020/2021 pan-demic. A majority of respondents (53.01%) took no remote classes before the 2020/2021 pandem-ic. (See: Table 1, Question 4)

Question 5 asked students to choose the top three advantages they experienced with remote learning. The top response for biggest advantage was “I can schedule classes around my part-time or full-time job,” at 47.34%. It was closely fol-lowed by “Saves time and money,” at 45.29%. “Less anxiety about the impact of COVID-19 in my life,” at 39.75 ranked third on the response list. (See: Table 1, Question 5)

Question 6 asked students to choose the top three challenges they experienced with remote learning. The top response for biggest disadvan-tage was “Too many distractions at home,” at 61.57%. Next came “Social isolation” at 59.15% and “Communication with other students in class is harder,” at 58.55%. (See: Table 1, Question 6)

Question 7 asked students to rate their learn-ing experience taking remote classes during the pandemic. “Good” was the most frequent response at 38.08% followed by “Mediocre” (29.26%), “Very Good” (18.24%), “Poor’ (10.22%), and “Excellent” at 4.21%.

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION22

On a five-point rating scale the weighted average for this question was 2.77. (See: Table 1, Question 7)

Question 8 asked students to rate the degree of technical problems (spotty internet, computer crashes, poor audio or video connection, dying batteries, etc.) they experienced while taking remote classes during the pandemic.

“About the same as I experienced in my non-remote class setting,” was the most frequent response at 32.26% followed by “High” (26.05%), “Low” (25.25%), “Very Low” (11.22%), and “Very High” at 5.21%.

On a five-point rating scale the weighted average for this question was 2.89. (See: Table 1, Question 8)

Question 9 asked students to rate their overall learning experience taking non-remote class-room courses during the pandemic. “Good” was the most frequent response at 31.43% followed by “Mediocre” (25.32%), “Very Good” (25.11%), “Poor’ (9.49%), and “Excellent” at 8.65%.

On a five-point rating scale the weighted average for this question was 2.98. (See: Table 1, Question 9)

Question 10 asked students to rate their over-all remote learning experience compared to more traditional non-remote classroom-only learning during the pandemic.

“Mediocre” was the most frequent response at 35.43% followed by “Good” (29.76%), “Poor” (20.04%), “Very Good’ (11.34%), and “Excellent” at 3.44%.

On a five-point rating scale the weighted average for this question was 2.43. (See: Table 1, Question 10)

Question 11 asked students “If you had to choose just one form of learning which would it be?” 48.70% of the student respondents chose “Classroom only - Scheduled in-person classes. No remote learning,” followed by 27.5% who chose “Remote hybrid- A blend of synchronous and asynchronous remote learning formats.” Next came “Remote asynchronous” classes at

17.03%, followed by “Remote synchronous,” classes at 8.42%. (See: Table 1, Question 11)

Question 12 asked “Is remote learning more or less distracting than classroom learning?”

“A lot more distracting” was chosen by 50.20% of the respondents, followed by “A little more distracting” at 29.32%. Next came “No more distracting” at 12.05%, “A little less distract-ing” at 4.22% and “A lot less distracting at 4.22%. (See: Table 1, Question 12)

When asked in Question 13 to rate the overall teaching skills of the instructors in their remote learning classes during the pandemic, 47% of the respondents chose “Good,” 23.40% chose “Very good,” 18.20% picked “Mediocre,” 7.40% chose “Excellent,” and 4.00% picked “Poor.”

On a five-point rating scale the weighted average for this question was 3.12. (See: Table 1, Question 13)

When asked in Question 14 to rate the overall teaching effectiveness of the instructors in their more traditional non-remote classes before the pandemic, 38.46% of the respondents chose “Very good,” 29.55% chose “Good,” 18.02% picked “Excellent,” 11.54% chose “Mediocre,” and 2.43% picked “Poor.” On a five-point rating scale the weighted average for this question was 3.58. (See: Table 1, Question 14)

In Question 15, we asked students to rate their institution’s effectiveness at switching class learning over to remote learning during the pan-demic. “Good” was the response by 42.74% of the survey group. “Very good,” came next at 23.79% followed by “Mediocre,” 20.56%, “Excellent” at 6.85% and “Poor” at 6.05%. On a five-point rating scale the weighted average for this question was 3.05. (See: Table 1, Question 15)

In Question 16, we asked students: “When the pandemic ends should remote learning op-tions be increased, decreased, or remain where they were during the pandemic?” The leading response by 47.20% of respondents was “De-creased.” It was followed by “Remain where they were during the pandemic,” by 34.80% of respon-

23VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

dents and “Increased” by 18.00% of respondents. (See: Table 1, Question 16)

Question 17 asked respondents: “Which state-ment they agreed with most regarding classroom learning during the pandemic. en the pandemic ends should remote learning options be in-creased, decreased, or remain where they were during the pandemic?” The leading response by 67.55% of the student survey was “I believe I learned less because of the shift to more remote online learning.” It was followed at 22.86% by “I don’t believe there was any change in the qual-ity of my learning because of the shift to more remote online learning.” Respondents chose “I believe I learned more because of the shift to more remote online learning,” 9.59% of the time. (See: Table 1, Question 17)

For question 18, of all respondents, females accounted for 65%, males, 34%, and 1% of the respondents answered “prefer not to say” regard-ing gender. (See: Table 1, Question 18)

Question 19 age breakouts among the respon-dents included .2% who said they were 17-years-old, 9.66% said they were 18-years-old, 19.52% said they were 19-years-old, 21.93 were 20-year-olds, 20.72% were 21-year-olds, and 27.97% of the respondents were 22-years-old or older. (See: Table 1, Question 19)

For question 20, college freshmen accounted for 20.36% of the student respondents, followed by sophomores at 15.12%, juniors at 28.43%, se-niors at 29.84%, and graduate students at 6.25%. (See: Table 1, Question 20)

For question 21, when we asked student respondents their approximate GPA, 8.8% said it fell between 2.0 and 2.9, 75.2% said it fell between 3.0 and 3.9, 15.00% said their GPA was 4.0 or higher, and 1% said they didn’t know their ap-proximate GPA. (See: Table 1, Question 20)

Question 22 asked respondents the names of their college or university. From the responses we identified 30 U.S. colleges and universities locat-ed in 22 states where students participated in this survey. (See: Table 1, Question 21)

DISCUSSIONSince the COVID-19 pandemic switched most

U.S. colleges to dominant online/remote teach-ing in early 2020, this survey and others suggest higher education would not return to the way things were before the pandemic. (Sykes, Witze, Barsotti, 2021 Educause, et al.) “We cannot return to the old model of purely classroom teaching with some modest accommodation towards on-line learning,” wrote Tufts University professor Justin B. Hollander. (2021)

There are several reasons why a return to pre-pandemic classroom teaching may no lon-ger be as effective as it has been in the past. Larger trends unfolded during the pandemic that changed the world beyond the institutional walls of higher education. The pandemic rewrote our social and personal lives. It touched on our finances, employment security, our dependency on technology, mental health, businesses big and small and the outlook many of us have for our futures.

The COVID-19 pandemic also changed the way many people used and relied on technology to communicate, stay in touch with each other, and conduct other activities while maintaining safe social distancing.

These experiences changed the attitudes and expectations many U.S. students have about the ways they wish to learn in college as well as their perceptions about the value of earning college degrees.

FINDINGSThe unique contribution of this study was its

measurement of student perceptions about their online/remote learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Our survey found 67.55% of respondents believed they learned less because of the shift to more online/remote learning during the pan-demic. (Survey Question 17.) That response may be associated with the challenges identified by a majority of respondents which included home

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION24

distractions (61.57%), social isolation (59.15%), and harder communication with other students (58.55%). (Survey Question 6.)

Our study asked respondents if they could pick just one form of learning when the pan-demic ends what would it be. We found 48.7% of respondents chose “Classroom only - Sched-uled in-person classes. No remote learning.” It is worth noting however that a majority of re-spondents (52.3%) picked one of the other three online/remote learning options (asynchronous, synchronous, hybrid) for this question. (Survey Question 17.)

Before the pandemic, another study found 70% of U.S. college students preferred mostly or completely face-to-face learning environments. However, about half of the students-including those who voted for “mostly” face-to-face in-struction—also wanted course options that com-bined in-person and online education. (Koening, 2020)

When the COVID-19 pandemic ends, 52.5% of our survey respondents also indicated they wanted online/remote learning options to re-main where they were during the pandemic or increased. (Survey Question 17.)

One explanation for this may be respondents’ perceived advantages from their experiences with online/remote learning during the pan-demic. The top three advantages were schedul-ing classes around part-time or full-time jobs (47.34%), saving time and money (45.29%), and less anxiety about the impact of COVID-19 on their lives (39.75%). (Survey Question 5.)

The pandemic’s experiential stagesAnother explanation may come from the

experiences students had with online/remote learning during three pandemic time frames be-tween March 2020 to May 2021. As a comparative baseline, our survey found a significant minority of respondents - just 4.81% - took remote classes between 51% to 100% of the time before the pan-demic. (Survey Question 4.)

Time Frame 1 was the mid-March to late May 2020 period in which the COVID-19 pandemic sparked a massive pivot from in-class to online/remote learning for students and instructors at most higher education institutions. The virtual learning shift involved adapting on the fly and survival during the initial stages of the COVID-19 public health crisis.

One benefit during Time Frame 1 was $14-bil-lion in federal funding made available for col-leges under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act or, CARES Act. It allowed colleges to make critical technology and soft-ware upgrades to ensure learning continued for their students during the COVID-19 pandemic. (CARES Act, 2021)

Time Frame 2 allowed more summer pre-planning for effective online/remote teaching strategies and better course design in preparation for the fall 2020 semester. Many colleges expand-ed their professional development over the sum-mer. Instructors reconfigured many of their fall online/remote courses again to make them more effective and deliberate. Included were conversa-tions about teaching format: Giving only lectures by Zoom would no longer cut it. Students also had time over summer 2020 to prepare for what most were told would be another semester of majority online/remote teaching.

During the fall 2020 semester our survey indicated 90% - a significant majority of students - took remote classes 51% to 100% of the time. Among the 500 respondents to this question, 68% took remote classes 91% to 100% of the time dur-ing the fall 2020 semester. (Survey Question 3.)

In Time Frame 2, college administrators fo-cused on another trend. According to the Nation-al Student Clearinghouse Research Center (2020), fall 2020 enrollment at U.S. public colleges (two-year and four-year combined), which enrolls 7 out of 10 postsecondary students, declined by 4% or nearly 530,000 students.

The enrollment declines and COVID-19 re-sponse effort cost universities and colleges more

25VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

than $120 billion by the end of 2020, the Ameri-can Council on Education estimated — a figure it said continued to rise. (Marcus, 2020)

Time Frame 3 involved the spring 2021 se-mester. It brought more refined online/remote experiences for instructors and students. During the spring 2021 semester our survey indicated 87.92% - a significant majority of students - took remote classes 51% to 100% of the time. Of the 497 respondents to this question, 59.96% took re-mote classes 91% to 100% of the time during the spring 2021 semester. (Survey Question 2.)

An additional $21.2-billion in CARES Act funding provided increased support for col-leges to make technology/software upgrades for continued student learning support during the COVID-19 pandemic. (CARES Act, 2021)

Other important and related developments unfolded during the spring 2021 semester. Stu-dents, teachers and administrators experienced broader COVID-19 testing to limit the spread of the virus. They witnessed the initial rollout stages of America’s mass immunization campaign with vaccines to protect individuals from exposure to the COVID-19 virus. (COVID Data Tracker, 2021) Stein (2020) noted that an end to the pandemic might be in sight with these potential exceptions:

• Too many people let their guard down too fast.

• More dangerous COVID variant cases surge before enough people are vaccinat-ed.

• The vaccination campaign stumbles badly. Falling U.S. college enrollment during the

spring 2021 semester fell 3.5 percent from a year earlier, a shortfall of 603,000 students. It was seven times worse than the decline a year earlier. (June, 2021)

At semester’s end, most U.S. college students and teachers had more than a year of personal learning or teaching involving synchronous, asynchronous, hybrid and other online formats. Supiano (2021) noted many instructors shared ideas and adopted strategies for more effective

teaching practices that helped them overcome many distance-learning barriers.

Students and instructors innovated too with new ways to learn and teach while using online/remote platforms. Such things as breakout rooms for small-group discussions, chat functions in Zoom, live polls, discussion boards, interactive online lessons and were found to be effective and could remain a part of post-pandemic cam-pus life. Better course design and technological advances such as these may further increase the demand for online/remote courses.

WHAT’S NEXT? As colleges head into the 2021-2022 school

year, experts have predicted many of the tech-nologies that helped colleges survive and main-tain classroom continuity during the pandemic will play permanent, pivotal roles in teaching and learning in higher education. Online teach-ing will remain in the post-pandemic spotlight too. “The need for accessible, affordable, blended, relevant, and high-quality online learning will extend far beyond the pandemic,” said Chip Paucek, CEO of online company 2U. (Friedman. Moody, 2021)

Yet, noted Curtin (2021), the shift to online/remote learning was not a replacement for the campus experience many students covet. “Stu-dents have made it clear they want the option to return to campus. They also want—and will expect—the option to join any class remotely or watch it later and contribute their thoughts to an asynchronous conversation,” Curtain wrote.

Klein (2020) noted digital technologies such as teleconferencing were lifelines during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown but believed more lasting protections may be distinctly more human. Klein suggested hiring more teachers. “Introducing those kinds of changes would be hard, to be sure,” wrote Klein. “But they are not nearly as risky as giving up on the tried-and-true technology of trained humans teaching younger humans face-to-face, in groups where they learn

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION26

to socialize with one another to boot.” Eutsler, Antonenko and Mitchell (2021) said

the emergency response to the COVID-19 health crisis also illuminated the need to focus on hu-manizing remote instruction. They suggested traditional classroom management that include grouping strategies and differentiating instruc-tion to meet learners at their level. They also favor new strategies that encompass online small group learning (i.e., Zoom breakout rooms) and support active student engagement (e.g., online polling, synchronous Google docs, Flipgrid, NearPod)

Post-pandemic shifts to more student-cen-tered learning may likely feature more classes using blended learning models combining the strengths of in-person and online instruction. Online programs offering working students more scheduling flexibility to complete college courses and earn degrees are another incentive for colleg-es to rebuild enrollment. A College Student Em-ployment (2020) survey found 43% of full-time undergraduate students worked full or part-time jobs in 2018.

Friedman and Moody (2021) noted the digi-tal divide became a glaring issue during the pandemic leaving students without computers or high-speed internet access at a disadvantage in completing online courses. This survey con-firmed that. It found nearly one third of respon-dents (31.26%) rated their technical problems

including spotty internet connections, computer crashes, poor audio or video connections as “high” or “very high” while taking remote class-es during the pandemic. (Survey Question 8.)

STUDY LIMITATIONSOne limitation of this study was its larger

sample of female respondents compared to male respondents (65.39% vs. 33.60%). Future research might use a more proportionate U.S. Census de-mographic sample of female and male (50.3% vs 50.7%) respondents to see if different responses result.

The pandemic’s large-scale online/remote learning experiences, for better and worse, were a difference maker for millions of U.S. students compared to the primary classroom learning experiences that preceded it. The results of this study suggest some pandemic learning experi-ences are reflected in new and increasingly in-novative ways present day instructors teach at many higher education institutions.

How the evolving post-pandemic learning will proceed should qualify for future research examining the effectiveness of new online/remote and blended teaching methods. Such methods did not broadly exist before the COVID pandemic made its sobering and redefining 2020 interruption.

27VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

REFERENCESBarsotti. S., (2020, September 14). Higher Education Was Already Ripe for Disruption. Then, CO-

VID-19 Happened. https://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/archives/2020/september/higher-edu-cation-covid-disruption.html

Blumenstyk, G., (2020, March 11). The Chronicle of Higher Education. Why Coronavirus Looks Like a ‘Black Swan’ Moment for Higher Ed. https://www.chronicle.com/newsletter/the-edge/2020-03-11

CARES Act: Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund, (2021). U.S. Department of Education. Re-treived from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/caresact.html

College Student Employment. (2020, May). National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/ssa

COVID-19: Higher Education Resource Center. (2021) Retrieved from https://www.entangled.solu-tions/coronavirus-he/

COVID Data Tracker, (2021, June 9). CDC. COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States. Retrieved from https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

Curtin, R., (2021, April 6). Eucause. Reimagining Higher Education: The Post-Covid Classroom. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2021/4/reimagining-higher-education-the-post-covid-class-room

Dennon, A., (2021, February 12). Best Colleges. Coronavirus Impacts on Students and Online Learn-ing. https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/coronavirus-impacts-on-students/

Elflein, J., (2021, June 6). Statista. Number of new cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) in the Unit-ed States from January 20, 2020 to June 3, 2021, by day*. https://www.statista.com/statis-tics/1102816/coronavirus-covid19-cases-number-us-americans-by-day/

Eutsler, L., Antonenko, P.D. and Mitchell, C. (2020), “Initial response to COVID-19: a mixed-methods analysis of media and school communications to identify pedagogical implications for remote teaching”, Interactive Technology and Smart Education, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0159

Flanigan, A. E., & Babchuk, W. A., (2015, December). Learning and Individual Differences. Social media as academic quicksand: A phenomenological study of student experiences in and out of the classroom. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.11.003

Gallagher, S., Palmer, J., (2020, September 28) Harvard Business Review. The Pandemic Pushed Universities Online. The Change Was Long Overdue. https://hbr.org/2020/09/the-pandemic-pushed-universities-online-the-change-was-long-overdue

Hess, A., (2020, March 26). How coronavirus dramatically changed college for over 14 million stu-dents. CNBC.com. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/how-coronavirus-changed-college-for-over-14-million-students.html

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION28

June, A.W., (2021, June 10). Chronicle of Higher Education. Spring Enrollment’s Final Count Is In. Colleges Lost 600,000 Students. https://www.chronicle.com/article/spring-enrollments-final-count-is-in-colleges-lost-600-000-students?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_2444313_nl_Academe-Today_date_20210610&cid=at&source=ams&sourceId=5096278

Keaten, J., Cheng, M., Leicester, J., (2020, March 11). WHO declares coronavirus a pandemic, urges aggressive action. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/united-nations-michael-pence-religion-travel-virus-outbreak-52e12ca90c55b6e0c398d134a2cc286e

Klein, N., (2020, May 8). The Intercept. Screen new deal. Retreived from https://interc.pt/2WCdYLL

Lederman, D., (2020, March 18). Inside Higher Ed. Will Shift to Remote Teaching Be Boon or Bane for Online Learning? https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2020/03/18/most-teaching-going-remote-will-help-or-hurt-online-learning

Marcus, J., (2020, December 29). PBS, The Hechinger Report. For some colleges, COVID-19 ‘acceler-ated innovation’ in how to adapt. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/for-some-colleges-covid-19-accelerated-innovation-in-how-to-adapt

McCoy, B., (2020). Journal of Media Education, 11(2), 5-23. Gen Z and Digital Distractions in the Classroom: Student Classroom Use of Digital Devices for Non-Class Related Purposes. https://en.calameo.com/read/0000917898a07ac2096e4

McCoy, B., (2016). Journal of Media Education Vol. 7 Iss. 1 (2016) p. 5 – 32. Digital Distractions in the Classroom Phase II: Student Classroom Use of Digital Devices for Non-Class Related Purposes. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290427877_Digital_Distractions_in_the_Classroom_Phase_II_Student_Classroom_Use_of_Digital_Devices_for_Non-Class_Related_Purposes

McCoy, B., (2013). Journal of Media Education, 4(4), 5-14. Digital Distractions in the Classroom: Stu-dent Classroom Use of Digital Devices for Non-Class Related Purposes. http://en.calameo.com/read/000091789af53ca4e647f

McKenzie, L, (2021, April 27). Inside Higher Ed. Students Want Online Learning Options Post-Pan-demic.https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/04/27/survey-reveals-positive-outlook-online-instruction-post-pandemic

National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. (2020, December 17). Fall 2020-Current Term En-rollment Estimates. Retrieved from https://nscresearchcenter.org/current-term-enrollment-esti-mates/

Pereira, J., (2021, May 25). ABC News. Half of US adults now fully vaccinated against COVID-19: CDC. https://abcnews.go.com/Health/half-us-adults-now-fully-vaccinated-covid-19/story?id=77860393

Ralph, N., (2020). Bay View Analytics. Perspectives: COVID-19, and the future of higher education.https://www.bayviewanalytics.com/covid.html

29VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

Stein, R., (2021, March 26). NPR. The Future Of The Pandemic In The U.S.: Experts Look Ahead https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/03/24/976146368/the-future-of-the-pandem-ic-in-the-u-s-experts-look-ahead

Supiano, B., (2021 June 2). The Chronicle of Higher Education. A Pandemic Silver Lining? More People Are Talking About Teaching. https://www.chronicle.com/article/a-pandemic-silver-lining-more-people-are-talking-about-teaching?utm_source=Iterable&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=campaign_2414530_nl_Afternoon-Update_date_20210602&cid=pm&source=ams&sourceId=5096278&cid2=gen_login_refresh

Survey Report: Student Perceptions of Online Learning in Higher Education During COVID-19. (2021). Retreived from https://www.sykes.com/resources/reports/college-online-learning-expe-rience-survey/

The New York Times. (2021, May 31). Coronavirus in the U.S.: Latest Map and Case Count. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html

Whitford, E., (2021, March 12). Inside Higher Ed. Vaccine Timing ‘Fortunate’ for Admissions https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/03/12/why-colleges-are-racing-tell-students-they%E2%80%99ll-be-open-person-fall

Witze, A., (2020, June 1). Nature. Universities will never be the same after the coronavirus crisis.https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01518-y

TABLE ONE- GRAPHS, QUESTIONS 1-21

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION30

31VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION32

33VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION34

35VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION36

37VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION38

39VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION40

41VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION42

GRANTS

THE GENESIS OF THE BEA RESEARCH GRANTSAugust E. GrantUniversity of South Carolina

In 2022, the Broadcast Education Association plans to award the first annual BEA Research Grants, capping a yearlong effort by dedicated scholars and the BEA board. These grants are funded through an endowment which will en-sure they can be awarded in perpetuity. The need for this support is underscored by the history of research grants from BEA.

HISTORYThe Broadcast Education Association (BEA)

was created as a partnership between academ-ics and the National Association of Broadcast-ers (NAB) in 1957. Beginning in 1963, the BEA presidency alternated every other year between an academic and a professional broadcaster, with roughly half of the BEA Board of Directors be-ing appointed by NAB. The strong relationship with NAB provided numerous benefits to BEA, including office space in the NAB headquarters building in Washington, D.C., access to NAB conventions for BEA members, and other finan-cial support. One of the programs supported by the NAB was the NAB Research Grants, competi-tively awarded through BEA to fund academic research projects relevant to broadcasting.

As BEA membership and services grew, the influence of NAB over BEA inevitably decreased, reflecting the diversity of an ever-expanding media universe. As BEA became stronger and more self-sufficient, in the 1990s, the BEA Board of Directors was reconfigured to have a greater number of academic representatives. The practice of selecting a professional broadcaster as presi-dent in alternating years ceased in 1994. NAB has continued to provide significant financial and other support for BEA, cementing the deep relationship between the industry and academia. One significant initiative, the NAB Research Grants, ceased about ten years ago due to a lack of funds which coincided with the global reces-sion that impacted all sectors but particularly the broadcasting industry.

Over the 30+ years that the NAB Research Grants were awarded, more than a hundred aca-demics were awarded grants to fund direct costs of their research projects, providing insight into topics as varied as television audience behavior (Wakshlag et al., 1983), radio remote broadcasts (Wilkinson, Bates, Chambers, McClung, 2000), and the adoption of next-generation broadcasting (Book & Grady, 2005).

OPPORTUNITYAlthough the grants were no longer awarded,

43VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

the need for the grants remained. Research is a foundation of academia, and scholars are evaluat-ed by their publication record. Although some re-search can be conducted at little or no cost, much of the most significant published research was facilitated by funds to pay for things like research assistants, equipment, travel, and even recruit-ing participants with hard-to-find characteristics. Many academic programs consider grant support to be so important for research that the ability to earn grants to fund research has become an inte-gral part of the tenure and promotion process.

While many academic fields solicit funding from the Federal government (in the form of NSF, NIH, CDC, DoE, and other grants), funding for the communication industries has been more limited. For more than three decades, the NAB Research Grants filled this role, leaving a void when the grants were discontinued.

FIRST-PERSON EXPERIENCEAs a recipient of an NAB Research Grant

when I was an Assistant Professor at the Univer-sity of Texas, I gained a great appreciation for the role that this grant played in my own scholarship when I received an NAB Research Grant to sup-port my research into television audience behav-ior (which provided data for Rosenstein & Grant, 1997). As a long-time member of BEA, I grew to look forward to the two sessions at the BEA An-nual Convention related to those grants: the ses-sion where last year’s grant recipients presented their research results, and the session announcing who the next year’s awardees would be and the topics being funded.

Since the last awards were given, I have had countless conversations about the need for re-search grants through BEA and ways to regener-ate a research grant program. The discussions crystalized a number of ideas related to the grants:

1. The grants were still needed; in fact, the need is even greater than before.

2. A permanent source of funding for the

grants was needed.3. The grants should be configured to ben-

efit both academics and the industry and reflect the expanding media industry universe. Research is needed to provide insight into audience behaviors, technol-ogy adoption, creative processes, history, communication policy and regulation, and more.

4. Any grant program needed a champion to get it started and nurture growth.

As a member of the BEA Board of Directors and Executive Committee for eight years, cul-minating in a term as BEA President from 2016-17, I continued to plant seeds wherever I could about the need to re-start a BEA research grant program. When my term in leadership ended in 2018, I decided to devote my energies to be that champion—With a name like “Grant” I felt it was my responsibility.

Over the next two years, I spoke with anyone who would talk with me about the possibility of regenerating research grants. Those discussions were eventually distilled into a plan to create an endowment that would permanently fund a new BEA Research Grant program, using only the in-terest on earnings to make those awards. At least $200,000 would be needed to launch the pro-gram. The old BEA grants were for a maximum $5,000. At this early stage we’re hoping to start by awarding three to five small to medium sized grants of $2,000-$4,000 each and eventually work up to $5,000 maximum.

Instead of trying to raise $200,000 in a single step, the goal was split into four $50,000 chunks. This would entail raising at least $50,000 from two different donors, persuading the BEA Board of Directors to allocate $50,000 of the organiza-tion’s long-term reserve, and then raising $50,000 from the general BEA membership and others eager to support this cause.

In early 2020, all of the pieces fell into place. The plan had been articulated, a committee was

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION44

in place, and the BEA Board of Directors and Executive Committee all affirmed their support. But in March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic hit, putting everything on hold. Media industries were hit especially hard, and looking over lists of prospective contributors confirmed the timing was off.

This is where the story gets personal. One day, during my pandemic self-isolation while working at home, I took a break and gazed at the shelf that held some of my most prized bottles of bourbon. I have been collecting bourbon for several years, and as a collector, I’ve acquired some bottles that are rare enough to be very valuable to other col-lectors. I literally was thinking that I would never open a bottle worth thousands of dollars because it feels too extravagant. So, then I wondered whether I would just look at these bottles for the rest of my life. That’s when it hit me—I could sell my most precious bourbons and use the money to be the deep-pocket donor I had been looking for.

At first, the idea seemed crazy. I’m just a regu-lar academic who worked hard to find financial security in my career through a combination of frugality and a little bit of consulting. But there was enough value in those bourbons I had been collecting to meet at least half of the seed money for the endowment. I realized I would rather look at an empty shelf and help fund the research grants than hold on to bottles I would never open.

After consulting my wonderful and under-standing wife, Diane, we made a commitment. We would sell what bourbon we could, kick in my consulting income for the year, and do some other creative things so we could donate $100,000 to jump start the BEA Research Grant Endow-ment.

In November 2020, the BEA Board of Directors agreed to the plan, including allocating $50,000 of BEA’s long-term reserve to generate earnings for the grants. In December 2020, I wrote the biggest check of my life: $100,000 to BEA.

That brings us to 2021. The last piece of the puzzle is the $50,000 we need to raise from BEA members and others who want to help. We start-ed soliciting donations in January 2021. By July, we had received pledges for more than a quarter of the total needed, and we already had over $165,000 thanks to a combination of contributions and earnings on money already donated.

NEXT STEPSOne of the important next steps is to create a

process for awarding the BEA Research Grants. Those of us who are directly involved know that it will evolve over time with needed input from others. We hope the constant is that, as long as there is a Broadcast Education Association, there will be BEA Research Grants.

The grant application process and criteria are scheduled to be announced in Fall 2021, and we are projecting that the first awards can be an-nounced at the BEA Annual Convention in April 2022. We know from 2020 that things can change at any time, but we are confident that all the key pieces have come together to begin making these awards.

WHAT YOU CAN DOFirst of all, the $200,000 goal for the endow-

ment is close but not yet reached. Any pledges or gifts are deeply appreciated. Don’t put off util tomorrow what you can do today!

Second, those with active research agendas should begin pulling together topic ideas and research teams now. Modern universities reward collaboration, so introduce yourself to someone new, either in your department, your school, or area of interest. Remember, research topics al-ways need polishing, and we expect the best ones will shine the brightest.

Third, spread the word to others that BEA is growing stronger and more diverse. We already boast the amazing Festival of Arts and are leaders in creative work.

Now we are strengthening our commitment to

45VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

research and intellectual scholarship. BEA has always been a member-driven orga-

nization. I hope that you have the opportunity to work through BEA to achieve your personal

goals as I have. In the meantime, your partici-pation and support of the BEA Research Grant Endowment will help to strengthen the Broadcast Education Association.

WORKS CITEDBook, C. L., & Grady, D. A. (2005). Consumer adoption of new radio distribution systems. NAB Grant

Report.

Rosenstein, A. W., & Grant, A. E. (1997). Reconceptualizing the role of habit: A new model of televi-sion audience activity. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 41(3), 324-344.

Wakshlag, J. J., Bart, L., Dudley, J., Groth, G., McCutcheon, J., & Rolla, C. (1983). Viewer apprehension about victimization and crime drama programs. Communication Research, 10(2), 195-217.

Wilkinson, J.S., Bates, B.J., Chambers, T.L., and McClung, S.R. (2000). What makes a good radio re-mote: Factors leading to perceived cost-effective and well received on- site radio promotional sales events. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 44(4), 716-730.

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION46

MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION GUIDELINES(Pedagogical Articles/Essays, Responsive Essays, and Scholarly Papers)1. One electronic copy of the manuscript must be submitted for initial review. Au-

thors should submit a copy via e-mail as a Microsoft Word document to editor@beajome.org.

2. The manuscript text must be double-spaced, and if research is cited, adhere to the current edition of the American Psychological Association (APA) style manual.

3. Articles are limited to 3000 words or less, and Essays to 1500 words or less. Charts, graphs, supplemental graphics, video clips, audio clips, slideshows, multi-media, and Internet links are strongly encouraged as JoME is an interactive on-line publication.

4. Submissions must be carefully proofread to ensure that the quality of writing, appearance of the manuscript, grammar, and citation of references, all conform to high standards.

5. All authors must indicate the following information on the first page of the manu-script: name, employer, professional rank, address, telephone number, fax number, email address, and whether the work has been presented at a prior venue.

REVIEWS OF BOOKS AND OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS:1. Potential instructional materials that can be reviewed include books, computer

software, CD-ROMs, guides, manuals, web pages, video programs, and audio programs.

2. Reviews may be submitted as a Word document e-mailed to editor@beajome.org3. Reviews must be 250-500 words in length.4. The review must provide a full APA citation of the reviewed work.5. The review must provide the reviewer’s name, institution, and e-mail address.6. The review should follow the guidelines below:

• Read the whole book and any ancillary materials (CD/DVD, websites, etc.)• What is the book’s focus?• Does the book accomplish the stated purpose?• Is the book a contribution to the field or discipline?• Does the book relate to a current debate or trend in the field and if so, how?• What is the theoretical lineage or school of thought out of which the book

rises?• Is the book well written?• What are the books terms and are they defined?• How accurate is the information (e.g., the footnotes, bibliography, dates)?• Are the illustrations/ancillary materials helpful? If there are no illustra-

tions/ancillary materials, should there have been?• What courses would this book be appropriate for? • How does the book compare to other books in the field?

JoMEJournal of Media Education

47VOL. 12 - NUMBER 3, JULY 2021

Classic book review structure is as follows:1. Title including complete bibliographic citation for the work (i.e., title in full, au-

thor, place, publisher, date of publication, edition statement, pages, special features [maps, color plates, etc.], price, and ISBN.

2. One paragraph identifying the thesis, and whether the author achieves the stated purpose of the book.

3. One or two paragraphs summarizing the book.4. One paragraph on the book’s strengths.5. One paragraph on the book’s weaknesses.6. One paragraph on your assessment of the book’s strengths and weaknesses.

WEBSITE REVIEW GUIDELINES

While there are many websites designed by and for educators, there are almost no reviews of those sites available. In order for our readers to make effective use of these resources, JoME invites reviews of websites based on the criteria below.

1. Reviews should be e-mailed to editor@beajome.org2. Reviews must be 250-500 words in length.3. The review must provide a full APA citation of the reviewed work.4. The review must provide the reviewer’s name, institution, and e-mail address.5. The reviewer should follow the criteria below:

• Title including complete bibliographic citation for the work (including “http address”)

• One paragraph identifying the purpose of the site, and whether the site achieves that purpose.

• One or two paragraphs summarizing the site.• One paragraph on the site’s strengths.• One paragraph on the site’s weaknesses.• Issues to consider when reviewing the text: • Look at the entire site, following all links.• Is the site easily navigated?• Do you immediately get a sense of what the site is all about?• Are the graphics appropriate to the subject of the site?• Are there graphics that seem superfluous or unnecessary?• Does the technology work - Java, scripts, movies, etc. or are you required to

load a program or do something in order to use the site?• Is the layout cramped and ‘too full’ or is it aesthetically pleasing?• Are the areas of content clearly defined?• Is the content what you expected/needed?• Can the content be used in the classroom?• What courses would this site be appropriate for? • How does the site compare to other electronic resources?

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION48

JOURNAL OF MEDIA EDUCATION ADVISORY BOARD

Pat Bryson - Bryson Broadcasting InternationalDale Cressman - Brigham Young UniversityNann Goplerud - University of North TexasJoe Misiewicz - Ball State UniversityMichael Murray - University of Missouri - St. LouisDave Muscari - WFAA and Belo Partnerships

UPCOMING SUBMISSION DEADLINES FOR JOME

The Journal of Media Education accepts submissions on an on-going basis. Submis-sions are considered in the order in which they are received.

JOURNAL OF EDUCATION COPYRIGHT NOTICE

The use of the material contained in this publication is protected by the Fair Use Clause of the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976, which allows for the use of copyrighted materi-als for the purpose of commentary, criticism, and education. All other use is prohibited without the express written consent of the Broadcast Education Association.