Like you, I eschewed the “classics” until shorty after I turned 40. I decided it was time to take them in, and I have been working on that ever since. (I include among my “classics” everything from “Robinson Crusoe” to “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.” I have a liberal definition of “classic,” OK? I love 19th Century American Lit, my fav being Steven Crane.) But you didn’t need that mini-lecture, did you?

By the way, boys are NOT cut from the same cloth as girls, and I think most sociology research will bear me our on that. There is a difference in how men and women approach tasks and life. Some if biological, more of it is sociological. That’s why we must strive for diversity in our field.

However, I don’t really mind it. In fact, I’ve found that I greatly enjoy working with young women, particularly in group projects. I’ve found my female peers to be highly organized, highly flexible and consistently willing to communicate on all levels.

Not to say that men aren’t cut from the same cloth, but this whole “girls are more organized and better communicators” stereotype has certainly rings true in my experience. If working in the “real world” after graduation leads to much of the same, I’ll be one happy camper.

Last but not least, I have a theory about the whole “can’t-write-for-shit” phenomena. We all know that reading for pleasure leads to better writing. However, there is a real dearth of good literature for kids and teens in schools.

Instead of choosing from the wide array of Young Adult literature out there — much of it written in an easy style that is meant to engage readers from the first page — schools insist on relying on old classics. I love “Catcher and the Rye” as much as the next guy, but some of the other crap I read was a real snore.

I didn’t pick up a book for pleasure until I was a sophomore in college. Always a horror fan, I looked for books that reflected that. From there I discovered Anne Rice, Dean Koontz, Doug Preston and Lincoln Child, as well as some old Stephen King. Lo and behold, my writing improved.

Coincidence? I think not.

As a student recruiter for the UO I can’t tell you the number of young high schoolers who didn’t know what PR was. But I can tell you at least a third of the young men interested in joining the College of Business wanted to study advertising. I told them that “advertising is actually part of the School of Journalism and Communication. I started out as an Ad major but switched my focus to PR because I’m interested in strategic writing.” I think there are many who want the glory of the industry without putting in the meticulous effort.

My 6th grade writing teacher told me I was a “bad writer,” so I got better. My high school history teacher emphasized concise writing in her class, which honed my skills for college (I later learned she worked in Advertising prior to teaching, so maybe that has something to do with my affinity for strategic communication). PR doesn’t have to be taught at an early age; better writing practices do. Then introduce the occupational paths to professional writing, aside from shooting for the next Great American Novel.

In my PR Planning & Problems course I was one of 16 students with a “Y” chromosome. When asked “why PR?” I gave my usual answer: “crisis communication…public outreach…continue honing my writing skills.”

A number of the young women in the class (and the entire major) were interested in entertainment PR, perhaps inspired by the offal — waste and/or unused parts of a butchered animal — MTV program “PR Girls,” which meant to glorify entertainment PR while in reality damaged the industry in the eyes of today’s twenty-somethings. (The word “awful,” although an adjective, just wasn’t enough to describe that program like the noun used in its place.)

While PR practitioners spend so much time promoting and publicizing their clients, there’s a lack of energy dedicated to promoting the profession itself. Even if more men choose advertising and marketing over PR, I think people need a refresher course on the industry in order to steer away from the spin-doctoring perception that many hold.

Just my two cents.

I can’t really see recruiting marketing majors because they’re more people who would be bsa and want to just be a paper pusher in the corporate world, but are avoiding the math-heavy part of the bsa major. Writing a lot doesn’t appeal to these groups. I think since the new marketing sequence is a lot more similar to ours, you should pay attention to if students are embracing it, and if so, which ones.

I’d go after international relations majors…..a lot of them go after that major for the same reasons people are drawn to pr and many of them have misconceptions as to what jobs come with an international relations degree (many list pr jobs).

Greg raises a concern about our programs becoming too vocational. We don’t have that debate at Kent State, as we opted long ago to be a “professional program.” Our colleagues in academe often view us as a “technical school,” but employers view us as source of entry-level professionals who can (pardon the cliche) “hit to ground running.” Our classroom experiences here are very much real-world and hands-on, just like the faculty who teach them. It works for us, but you need administrators who understand professional education and are willing to offer tenure-track positions to people without PhD’s. Tough sell.

A 92% placement rate leads to legions of happy alumni. Now, if only those happy grads would reach for their checkbooks.

Also, many students undertake PR because they see it as an easy/soft option. Consequently we get stuck with an over supply of lazy students (i.e., those who can’t write and can’t see the value in it). It doesn’t help when PR is position in “creative” Schools, rather than with business.

At next Sunday’s career’s day I’ll be doing my bit to emphasise the writing aspect. Meantime, we continue to develop new units, including “writing for PR” and “working with the media”. These courses, however, are vocational and more suited to technical colleges. The dilemma is that employers expect students to be job-ready..

So we are moving from the why to the how.

I would look to technically minded men to make an appearance on this scene. Perhaps, there needs to be a move in formal PR curriculums and schools to develop these sorts of programs and find new ways to market the major in general.