Search News


Browse Archives

News

Keeping J-School Relevant

March 25, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Despite the recent demise of a handful of newspapers around the country, applications to Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism have risen by about 40 percent since last year.

To give graduates a better chance of success in uncertain times for an ever-changing industry, the school is yet again considering a set of significant curricular changes. Only four years ago, the school made one such shift, introducing a one-year master of arts program meant for seasoned journalists to hone their knowledge in a specialized area of coverage. It retained, however, its more traditional master of science program, meant for mostly first-time journalists, without many changes.

Now, some officials at the school hope to substantively change this "bread-and-butter" program by better integrating new media and business skills within its traditional reporting curriculum.Though Columbia administrators insist the Journalism School is "not playing catch-up" with the new media revolution -- the school has had a new media concentration since 1995 -- some faculty members expressed concern that they might not be embracing it throughout the curriculum fast enough.

The City University of New York's Graduate School of Journalism, for example, recently announced that students will no longer have to pick a media concentration. This, its officials argue, will allow students to customize their own program for the "increasingly converged world of journalism." Also, two years ago, Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism introduced a new curriculum in which "multimedia storytelling is integrated through all reporting classes, and quantitative skills and ethics are woven throughout the curriculum."

Leading the Columbia Journalism School’s charge into the great unknown is Bill Grueskin, former deputy managing editor for news at The Wall Street Journal, who was named the school’s new dean of academic affairs last summer. Grueskin is sponsoring two major initiatives that could shake up the school’s established method of training would-be journalists in its 10-month master of science degree program.

Among other required courses, these students currently take a law course and a course combining journalism history and ethics. Grueskin’s first initiative would shuffle these courses slightly, splitting history and ethics into separate courses and bringing a more modernized approach to the law course. As journalism has moved predominantly online, he noted, legal discussions surrounding it have shifted in a way that demands students be aware of how copyright and other laws apply in this new environment.

“These courses should be taught with a different agenda in mind,” Grueskin said of his revamped requirements. “Students will be going off, when they leave these walls, into a very different environment than the one that greeted them years ago.”

In addition to covering the typical bases in their law course -- studying defamation, fair use and libel among other topics -- journalism students would also focus, in their required courses, on how the industry and its practices have changed with the times.

Having this historical perspective, Grueskin argued, is vital to becoming an accomplished journalist in the 21st century. Still, he noted that being a little business savvy would not hurt, either.

Grueskin advocates adding to the law, history and ethics courses one in business -- which would be a first for the school’s traditional curriculum. Though he acknowledged that the course would bridge the longstanding gap between the business and editorial sides of the journalism world, he did not think this would present an ethical problem for students. If anything, he said, it might help them in a market where some journalists have had to become entrepreneurs to find an audience for their work online.

“Most journalism schools have a historical aversion to teaching the business of journalism,” Grueskin said. “It, however, is incumbent upon us to show our students the [changing business] model. We’re not blurring the lines between business and editorial. The truth is, business considerations have always enabled or disabled journalism -- more the latter than the former as of late. We’re not trying to graduate people to work in ad departments but those who can talk to those in the ad department.”

Grueskin’s second initiative would make significant changes to Reporting & Writing I, an introductory course required of all journalism students. Though all incoming students receive some formal new media training prior to their first term at the school in a technical skills “boot camp,” the proposed changes would further embed the instruction of these skills within the introductory course’s traditional reporting exercises. This change would probably affect students in the broadcast, magazine and newspaper concentrations the most, as students in the new media concentration already receive significantly more training with these tools.

Currently, most student work in the introductory course is in print -- sometimes published by a professor on a course’s Web page. It is Grueskin’s hope that, in the future, these students might produce more multimedia-driven pieces at this early stage as well.

“It’s important for the school and for our students that Web training not be segregated from the core journalism curriculum,” Grueskin said. “I think it’s important for us to address digital skills training for everybody, not just those who will be new media majors. Students who are multi-talented will have the intellectual dexterity to adapt to some of the technological change that will come in the next 5 to 10 years. Still, at the core is journalism. All of the [new media] tools in the world don’t cover up bad journalism.”

The proposed changes, currently being considered by the school’s Committee on Instruction, have been well-received by faculty. Some of the school’s more traditional faculty members, though ultimately supportive, are considering these proposals with some caution.

LynNell Hancock, member of the Committee on Instruction and journalism professor at the school since 1993, said the wall between the business and editorial side of the journalism industry is always “an incredibly sensitive topic,” especially in today’s online marketplace, where the line is often blurred. Considering this, however, she argues a course exploring this nuanced landscape is needed to help the journalists of tomorrow.

“For those of us who were in newspapers and magazines, the wall between the two was sacred,” Hancock said of the business and editorial aspects. “Still, if we don’t approach this with integrity we might as well just give up. It’s a different model. There just isn’t a choice anymore. As much as you’d like not to think about it, you have to.”

Regarding the proposed changes to the introductory course, Hancock was also cautiously optimistic. A healthy integration of new media skills in the classroom, she argued, should not take away from the nuts-and-bolts of reporting basics.

“If we look at these tools as just another way to tell stories differently, then it’s an exciting advance,” Hancock said. “The overall concern is how do we integrate these techniques and not lose all the other things we teach. A combination is essential.”

Though there has been some talk among the school’s faculty about potentially abandoning the media concentrations students must choose in favor of a more open-ended degree program -- much like at CUNY -- the move has not generated much traction.

Nicholas Lemann, dean of the school, said he would oppose such a move, calling specialization “the lifeblood” of the journalism industry. He argued that creating “Swiss Army Knife all-purpose journalists” would make employers less likely to hire the school’s students.

Lemann reported that the school has hosted more prospective employers this year than last. With news outlets opening and closing daily and technology always on the move, he said journalism schools still have their place and offer their graduates an advantage in the job market.

“None of us knows what the economy is going to look like or what journalism will look like in the future,” said Lemman, noting that he believes the school has always tried to keep pace with the changes. “Not that long ago most employers were just looking for a good old fashioned general assignment reporter. Now, it’s actually easier to make the case for journalism school because there’s a more specialized set of skills that we’re finding employers are looking for.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Keeping J-School Relevant

  • Changing curricula, majors
  • Posted by Hugo Ottolenghi , SJMC at Florida International University on March 25, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • About time.

  • Posted by Steve , Specialist at Illinois on March 25, 2009 at 10:30am EDT
  • Hate to throw a wet blanket on all the 'adapting to the digital age' talk but when the changeover includes a 'slight' blurring of the lines between business and journalism you can bet that even grads from the prestigious Columbia SofJ will become mere foot soldiers for profit. Not that the lines were always or obviously distinct before but when its included in the curriculum, well what rookie reporter with that background wanting to keep their job is ever going to say no to the ad department? I read about a pritn paper now blended news entity that was sending its "news" reporters out to cover things like store openings and the like. When it gets to that point, well then what is the point of having J schools?

  • Journalists and business
  • Posted by Puffin on March 25, 2009 at 11:30am EDT
  • The Any broadly educated hack can adapt to new technology; I've been a backpack journalist since 1981, and the raw reporting -- no matter the medium -- is infinitely more difficult to do well than any technical skill I've come up against. Okay, maybe not infinitely, but none of the technical stuff even begins to approach the difficulty of the simplest rocket science. So ... to these I've adapted, rather easily. (Yes, I'm a broadly educated hack. The education has come in handy.)

    Not so easy is the business end: To survive, tomorrow's journalists will have to know how to run a business, because they'll increasingly have to sell themselves. (Dealing with ad departments, I think, will be secondary.) The challenge of self-employment -- or multiple employers -- does not come naturally to even the most broadly educated hacks, unless that education includes business. The most dramatic changes in the media landscape have less to do with technology than with a shift to business models that increasingly de-emphasize full-time jobs. I guess it's like higher education that way, isn't it?

  • Reply to Steve
  • Posted by John on March 25, 2009 at 11:45am EDT
  • The point is that when these reporters become editors, they might have the knowledge to respond to the bean counters--in a way that the current generation of editors has failed to do. It's just good sense for anyone planning to enter a profession to understand that profession, and the business of journalism will determine where and how these future journalists will work.

    We know what happens when journalists consciously ignore that side of the industry and assume their jobs are too important to go away: the Wall Streeters merge-and-acquire to the point that otherwise profitable newspapers and television operations are so over-leveraged they can no longer cover their debt.

  • Keeping J-School Relevant
  • Posted by George Patsourakos , Retired Administrator at Harvard University on March 25, 2009 at 12:15pm EDT
  • I believe that the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism would be wise to require a course in journalism law as well as a course in business aspects of journalism, because these courses will more effectivel allow the School of Journalism to keep pace with significant changes occurring in our society. A journalism law course would make a journalist more familiar with several legal factors in journalism, such as a reporter's need not to reveal the name of a confidential source of information -- even in a court of law -- to prevent the likelihood of losing confidential sources. A business-related journalism course would provide a journalist with more knowledge of the business world. This knowledge would assist the journalist when he or she is writing articles dealing with banks, insurance companies, city or town budgets, chamber of commerce plans, etc.

  • Reply to John
  • Posted by Steve on March 25, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • Like many addressing this problem, you've got the tail wagging the dog. The current problems weren't caused by individual journalists ignoring the business end - they were caught up in factors beyond their control like Wall Street takeovers of family newspapers and ad revenues going to online outlets. So you missed my point, which wasn't that journalists should be ignorant of business realities; instead it was that by blurring the lines between what is newsworthy and what is profit-inspired reporters cease to do real journalism - and if that is the case what is the point of having J schools?

  • Second reply to Steve
  • Posted by John on March 25, 2009 at 7:00pm EDT
  • Steve, you're right, I read past your point. At the same time, I disagree that I'm blaming individual journalists (my argument has more to do with professional training and a shared outlook). I think we're in agreement that most of what is sold as "news" today is lacking.

  • Missing perspectives
  • Posted by Sarah , Student at Columbia on March 26, 2009 at 5:45am EDT
  • This article was particularly shoddy journalism as it lacks the student perspective as well as the potential employers of these students' perspectives. Why change journalism school if we don't hear from a voice saying if it matters or not? This article reads like a press release, not a journalistic piece -- does Higher Ed need a stint in journalism school so it doesn't just write fluff pieces?

  • J Schools pointless
  • Posted by Bruce , retired journalist on March 26, 2009 at 5:45am EDT
  • As an innocent youth, I made the mistake of signing on to the Columbia J-school. It was largely a waste of time and money. The faculty consisted of a bunch of tired fossils (probably younger then than I am now) who proved the adage "Those who can do and those who can't teach." A bunch of old dogs trying to teach obsolete tricks. More than 40 years in journalism have confirmed my original disgust with the phony-ness of the J-school myth.

  • building the new new media
  • Posted by Molly Smith on March 26, 2009 at 4:30pm EDT
  • I graduated from Medill at Northwestern University two years prior to the curriculum change there. I was jealous when I learned that, starting in 2007, incoming students would be required to have iPods because they'd be creating content for mobile devices. Only one of my core classes involved video in any way. The focus was pure, old-school news (and magazines, my particular track). Dean Lavine was nearly strung up for implementing the current curriculum, for suggesting that students should learn about the business behind journalism.

    Here's a Chicago Magazine article on the Medill shakeup, in which Lemann is quoted: http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/September-2007/Campus-Revolutionary/

    In that article Lemann says an added emphasis on marketing wouldn't happen at Columbia, "not on [his] watch." He obviously didn't forsee such a violent media shakeup occuring in the next two years. These times call for a nimble response. Classes being more "Webbie," as Lemann conceded Columbia's were becoming in 2007, feels laughably obvious now.

    Journalists need to understand that their stories won't sell papers just because they are good. This doesn't mean we sacrifice quality of content and journalistic ethics--it just means everyone working in media needs to have a more holistic view of what will make that smart, hard-hitting story available to readers. J-school grads are like art school kids. They are taught that their pure, unadulterated craft should exist for the sake of existing, because it is necessary, and are sent into the world expecting to remain unsullied. That's not reality. Painters need to sell paintings to live, and journalists need to sell stories. Better to teach students how good editors will be working with publishers to integrate content with campaigns that bring value to the reader, for example, then for students to be blindsided upon entering the industry, lose their footing, and compromise their standards or lose faith entirely.

    The future of journalism is being built now. Clearly things can't stay the same. I feel more comfortable knowing that the upcoming architects of new new media are graduationg from the old-guard bastions of journalistic ethics.

  • Posted by Tom on March 27, 2009 at 5:00am EDT
  • I attended Columbia J-School some years ago and I would not have taken a new media class there because of the cost. When you're paying $1,500 per credit, or whatever it is these days, it's not economical to get software training at Columbia. There are half a dozen or more schools in NYC that offer Web design classes for much less. Why spend $4,500 on a single class of Ivy League software instruction that could be gotten at one of the local art colleges for $650?

  • Master of Science in Journalism
  • Posted by DFS on March 28, 2009 at 5:30pm EDT
  • Perhaps first it would be good that such a master's would follow from a qualified bachelor's. In other words, when a journalist reports the number 123, the journalist actually says "one hundred twenty-three" instead of the usual "one hundred and twenty-three."

    Further, perhaps the undergraduate journalism major should actually pass a course in logic, thereby establishing some actual credentials when implying to the audience that 'This yields That' is equivalent to 'If Not That, then Not This.'

    Such is the state of journalism in America today. They cannot speak or write correct English, and they cannot apply correct logic to their reports.

    Hence, the oxymoron "journalistic standard," or "journalistic integrity."

    Just "whisper" to me, Connie.