University Stance on PR Licensing

Below is a position paper with a university stance on PR licensing -

The public relations field is taught using the individuality of students to allow the field to experience the diverse thoughts and practices. Taking this education and requiring it be condensed into a licensing test is not a process we see fit to put into action. Our current curriculum is not one that is quantified by a simple test. We stand against immediate required licensing because it will require time for our degree program to change the curriculum, create testing that still encourages individuality, and provide financial support to the licensing process.

University’s Side to Required Licensing

The University of Tennessee Knoxville is a relatively large school with the power, influence, and financial backing to adapt to a variety of obstacles that could influence campus and its students. The College of Communications and Information is also a highly self-sufficient segment of campus. However, change does not come overnight, even for these competent institutions. The education of students on this campus is planned in detail long before it is put into practice. Throwing conflict into a system like this can have negative impacts on all levels, and it is why I believe simply requiring public relations licensing for all practitioners can cause more long-term damage to the growth of the profession.

Changing Curriculum

Requiring licensing will cause a drastic change in curriculum. This change will require time to develop, resources to make it successful, and professors that can carry out the change. Any trials in this process will delay the new developments and place a harder strain on our institutions as we work to develop our reformed program. This can mean loss of resources (i.e. computer labs, printing, research resources, etc.) for our students to help balance the monetary costs, loss of individual advantages our institution has over others, and the loss of professors not prepared to support the reform (Quinlan). This can influence our ability to provide quality education for current and prospective students.

Licensing without Loss of Quality

The process of licensing will be carried out through standardized testing and cookie cutter methods of educating the future of the profession. This is not the style of teaching currently used, and we agree that creating this style of education will not be a long-term benefit for the public relations field. Public relations curriculum is currently taught using emphasis on individual experiences and field-based knowledge to help our students find the areas of the field and develop those skills using practical instruction. The transition to theoretical knowledge needed for standardizing will not be the desired education our students will prosper under. Standardizing the education of public relations means standardizing the methods used in the field (Quinlan). Public relations practices could find itself as standard as medical practices; approved practices of right and wrong allowing no variation to growth or individuality.

Financing Licensing

Licensing students requires an amount of financial preparation as well. Paying for testing, proctors, and locations to test each student upon completion of their education will cost our institution money that will need to be reassessed and planned for. It will require financial backing to get students licensed, and it will be left to the university to provide that support. Otherwise, a student will have to bear that burden, and those who are not as financially able will be added another hurtle to overcome. Financial planning of this size will have to be fundraised or taken from other services that are used for students today.

Opposing View

Licensing is a way to add credibility to the public relations field, and it allows PRSA to add a level of punishment for misconduct. It is an influential idea to require the accreditation, but it require more thought and process than slapping a standardized test on the desk of a recent college graduate.

The way to licensing cannot be required effective immediately. It will take time to make the process the beneficial advancement to the field we want it to be. The stances made by our university is going to be common across the education spectrum. These are issues that will have to be address closely to keep the licensing process from backfiring and doing further damage to our field, and there are realistic ways to address those concerns.

Developing the licensing process would mean some form of regulation for educational institutions offering the public relations degree. There will be objectives and standards that would be required to teach in order to test them. The process, in order to be effective, will have to address those issues without taking away the individuality of the field that currently allows it to thrive.

Another recommendation of field’s established organizations would be to provide aid to financially support the schools licensing the future professionals. Allowing scholarships and grants programs to individual students or universities will make the process develop more efficiently.

Overall, the university thinks it is important to note the timeline that this requirement will take. Though we want to progress the field as efficiently as possible, there are multitudes of people who are involved in the transition to required licensing. Accreditation is important to ensuring integrity in the field of practice but practicing the correct way to do so is the most important to ensure it is effective. This change should start at the education level and transition to benefit the profession rather than create issues in educating the future of the public relations profession in the long run.