Pages Navigation Menu

Most Recent Articles

Building foundations for great journalism

Posted by on Aug 7, 2017 in Blog, News, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Share

by Kristin Taylor

Inevitably, my intro journalism students have one question: “When do we get to start writing?” Their impatience is understandable — they joined my class to become reporters, and they are eager to start that work — but I believe it is critically important to build a solid foundation in law and ethics before sending them out for that first assignment.

I want them to see the bigger picture — to get a sense of why journalists pursue stories and how they make difficult decisions during that process. I want them to understand their own rights and the role of a free press in a democracy. I also want them to have a sense of the laws affecting them — for example, what libel is and how to avoid it and what constitutes “invasion of privacy.”

It’s heavy stuff, so my goal is to keep them engaged during those first few weeks as we talk about journalistic ethics and break down how the First Amendment, state laws, libel laws and court cases affect them.

Here are some strategies I’ve developed that I hope will help other advisers build those crucial foundations without losing students’ interest:

• Make it concrete. Rather than just giving them a list of journalist ethics, ask them to apply those ethics to situations they could face in the year to come. For example, what does it mean to “be    independent” as sports reporters? Share coverage of a professional sports team and ask why the reporter doesn’t end with “Go [sports team]!” at the end. How does that impact their own sports reporting?

• Use case studies. Give students “what if” scenarios based on real situations or scandals and let them discuss and problem-solve. Provide relevant laws or guidelines for students to use as resources. Once they’ve come up with their own approaches, reveal the real situation and explain what happened.

• Have a debate. To introduce important court cases such as Hazelwood, split the class in half and let them debate each side, giving them enough information that they can see each perspective. At the end of the debate, share the actual outcome, discuss their feelings about the case and what they learned about its impact.

• Don’t talk too much. Too often when presenting this kind of information, we slip into lecture mode while our students drift away. Don’t talk for more than 5-6 minutes straight; get your students to think about the information, turn to a neighbor to discuss it and then share takeaways with the class — or — break up longer lectures with multiple choice games like Kahoot so they can compete to check their understanding. Kahoot is also a great way to start class to review previous learning.

• Look for multimedia. You can often find short videos to explain foundational knowledge rather than talking about it yourself. The Newseum Ed site — register for a free teacher teacher account —has great video resources about topics ranging from the First Amendment to fake news.

• Co-teach. New students, especially younger ones, look up to the older editors and advanced writers. Let them co-teach these crucial foundations with you. Your newbies will listen to them much more than they listen to us. You could also bring in local adult journalists.

• Reflect.  I believe this is the most important part of instruction, yet we often run out of time and skip it. Leave time at the end of every class to reflect on what students have learned and why they are learning it. Why is it important? How does it affect them as student journalists? As future members of society? Also, don’t forget to reflect on your own instruction. Ask students for feedback on how the class went and use that feedback for future instruction. If they feel like you’re all part of the same instructional team, they are a lot more likely to invest in their learning.

Whatever approach you take, this is the time to build the foundations to make your media program strong. Don’t let them skip “the boring stuff” — prove how important and exciting it can be.

Read More

Now’s the time to consider
applying for FAPFA recognition

Posted by on Aug 1, 2017 in Blog, News, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Share

by John Bowen, MJE
As we start a new school year, JEA’s Scholastic Press Rights Committee hopes first and foremost on your list of things to do is to reaffirm your student media’s support for and adherence to the First Amendment and free expression.

Your students can also continue to recognize the  importance of First Amendment practices and policies – and be recognized for it – by applying for this year’s FAPFA award.

This First Amendment Press Freedom Award recognizes high schools that actively support, teach and protect First Amendment rights and responsibilities of students and teachers. The recognition focuses on student-run media where students make all final decisions of content without prior review.

Roughly, here’s a sample of what the judging committee looks for in determining FAPFA recipients:

  • No prior review or restraint by school faculty for all student media.
  • Student staffers make all final decisions of content for all student media.
  • Establish policies at all student media and school system levels or both as public forums for student expression.
  • Remove Internet filters for student journalism use
  • Students, advisers and administrators agree on First Amendment practices, philosophy and application across platforms.

As in previous years, schools seek FAPFA recognition by first answering questionnaires submitted by an adviser and at least one editor. Those who advance to the next level will be asked to provide separate responses from the principal and all media advisers and student editors, indicating their support of the First Amendment. In addition, semifinalists submit samples of their school and media online or printed policies that show student media applying their freedoms.

Schools recognized as meeting FAPFA criteria will be honored at the opening ceremony of the JEA/NSPA Spring National High School Journalism Convention in San Francisco.

First round applications are due annually before Dec. 15. Downloadable applications for 2018 are available at this link. Even if your school received the recognition previously, you must re-apply yearly.

This is the 18th year for the award.

Read More

No license, no car

Posted by on Jul 24, 2017 in Blog, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 1 comment

Share

by Stan Zoller, MJE
One of my favorite arguments, if one can have such an entity, is with other journalism educators regarding how they start their course.

While in the midst of this discussion a number of years ago, one adviser told me she always starts with interviewing and then moves into journalistic history.

And what about journalistic laws and ethics?

“Oh,” she said, “I cover those later in the course.”

I was reminded of this discussion while teaching at a recent workshop.  My students were all editorial leaders and during our discussion of prior review, prior restraint and New Voices legislation, both the Tinker and Hazelwood cases (naturally) came up.

To my dismay none of the students were familiar with either of these cases.

Where, pray tell, were their journalism teachers and/or advisers?

While some students were working on club media, or had small programs, there obviously has to be a faculty member or administrator involved. They should, at the very least, be familiar with both Tinker and Hazelwood so they can provide guidance to the student journalists.

They apparently don’t.  Unfortunately, several students told me content for their media is prior reviewed and, as one student said, needs to be written so it presents the school in a positive light.

[pullquote]

Why is it important to start with the fundamental press law and ethics? I like to equate it to driver’s education – you don’t get the keys to the car and go on the road until you know the rules of the road.

[/pullquote]

I can hear Fred Rogers saying “Can you say PR tool, boys and girls? I knew you could.”

Why is it important to start with the fundamental press law and ethics? I like to equate it to driver’s education – you don’t get the keys to the car and go on the road until you know the rules of the road.

While Tinker and Hazelwood are not the foundation of press law, when it comes to scholastic journalism, they are an essential part of the foundation. All journalists should know the basics of media ethics and law before they go on an interview, take a picture or start recording video.

This is not breaking news, but journalists, in this case beginning with scholastic journalists, need to realize laws tell journalists what they must do while ethics guide scribes to what they should do. This is why it’s paramount to make sure journalism students are well versed in these fundamentals before they start their work as journalists.

The basics of both the Tinker case Tinker Decision and Hazelwood case Hazelwood decision will help students understand the scope of what administrators can – and cannot do.  JEA members can find additional information about both cases in the JEA curriculum at JEA curriculum

If scholastic journalists are going to be prepared to deal with issues related to prior review, prior restraint and the scope of New Voices registration, they need to have the basics down pat.

Not sure?

Ask yourself – would you ride with someone who never took driver’s ed?

A complete look at key cases, including Tinker and Hazelwood, can be found at JEA’s Scholastic Press Rights Commission’s web site, Scholastic Press Rights Commission

 

Read More

When international issues turn local

Posted by on Jul 18, 2017 in Blog, News, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Share

by Candace Bowen, MJE
What kind of coverage has appeared in your student media about climate issues? No, not rehashing something from CNN about the trillion-ton chunk of ice that broke off Antarctica, though that is certainly a concern. And not repeating Time’s coverage of President Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron discussing the causes of extreme bad weather.

What has your staff written about how climate change is impacting you and your community – and what the future could be like where you live? Showing leadership is a part of the ethical role of all journalists, and informing your readers and helping them understand complicated issues is part of your job.

[pullquote]What has your staff written about how climate change is impacting you and your community – and what the future could be like where you live? Showing leadership is a part of the ethical role of all journalists, and informing your readers and helping them understand complicated issues is part of your job.[/pullquote]

So, what is the best way to explain this multi-faceted, often contentious issue? How can you localize it … or CAN it be localized?

When President Trump announced early this summer that the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate accord because the 2015 agreement was unfair to American businesses, not everyone agreed this was a good thing.

In particular, mayors of cities all of country were concerned with what more than 95 percent of climate scientists say – humans are causing increasingly severe impact to our way of life.

With that in mind, mayors from all over the nation responded to a survey from the Alliance for a Sustainable Future, a new organization made up of the  U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) and Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES).

Survey results showed many think this doesn’t have to be an issue supported at the federal level – cities can make a difference, too.

Is your city or one nearby part of a conscious effort to make a difference in the climate? What are some of the actions these cities are taking? Is there something your audience could do to help? Survey results include the list of cities involved and information about what they are doing.

Find a science teacher in your school or a nearby university to talk through the suggestions. Contact the official in charge in your area. Get the facts. Good journalists – with any kind of media – can make a difference.

 

 

 

 

 

Read More

They need the freedom
to make mistakes, too

Posted by on Jul 11, 2017 in Blog, News, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Share

by Lindsay Coppens, adviser of The Harbinger, Algonquin Regional High School, Northborough, MA

Scholastic press freedom is a big responsibility, and true freedom comes when young journalists aren’t just free to do great journalism but also are free to make journalistic mistakes and learn from them.

As teachers and advisers, we work hard to teach our student journalists the principles, skills and ethics they need while fostering their abilities to problem solve and communicate.

We need to continually remember, though, that it is the students’ publication, and while it can be tempting to continually hold their hands or catch them before they fall, the most powerful lessons can come from failures. My new editorial board recently had one of these learning-from-failure experiences, and I am confident they are stronger journalists because of it.

[pullquote]We need to continually remember, though, that it is the students’ publication, and while it can be tempting to continually hold their hands or catch them before they fall, the most powerful lessons can come from failures.[/pullquote]

Like many publications, at our paper a new editorial board begins its work in the spring. The new editors take the reins continuing established traditions, figuring out how to make their own mark, and tackling the behemoth task of organizing and creating social media posts, daily online updates and a final print issue of the year.

This year’s new group of 15 editors did a particularly great job putting together an ambitious 24-page print issue two weeks before school let out for summer. They set a goal (and met it) of pushing their page design in a more creative direction while taking on issues of substance.

They took a stand by writing an editorial which reprimanded the graduating class and others of recent years for destructive pranks and behaviors at celebratory school events, encouraging future seniors to have fun while being less harmful to others. They did all of this working as a team for the first time while I, their adviser who is normally there for most of the long after school “press week” hours, was largely absent due to a family medical emergency.

As I told the editors, my absence during their first issue was a true test of their skills and will. I hadn’t read about half the published pieces until the print issue hit the stands, and while I saw many of the pages pre-publication (mainly through pictures editors texted me asking for feedback) and gave some suggestions, this was the most hands-off I’ve been with any issue since I started advising eight years ago. I was incredibly proud of what they accomplished.

Then a few hours after the paper was distributed, I received an email from a senior class adviser who was angry about the editorial. She listed at least four key facts she claimed they got wrong, and while she recognized it was an opinion piece, she was “very disappointed with the wild inaccuracy of the article.”

Immediately my heart sank. What had happened? Was she right or were the kids?

I briefly replied, thanking her for the feedback, affirming that accuracy is of the utmost importance and letting her know I was forwarding her concerns to the student editors-in-chief who would be in touch with her soon.

I wanted the communication to be directly between her and the editors, but I also respect my relationship with my colleague. After meeting with the editors who looked physically ill when they realized their mistake in reporting rumors which they had not fact checked, I sent her one more follow up email the same afternoon:

“I just wanted you to know that the kids are having an editorial board meeting right now, and the biggest topic is the editorial–what went right, what went wrong (and how & why). They are picking apart their process and how they do or don’t fact-check, and what to do when mistakes are made. Anyhow, it sounds as if the process fell apart and they forgot about being skeptical reporters and that opinions need to be based on verified facts. The editors should be in touch with you soon to talk.”

[pullquote] “‘Thanks for following up with me and hopefully this can be a good real-life learning experience for our budding journalists. :-)’”[/pullquote]

She wrapped up her reply to me on an understanding note, which reaffirmed that much of our community understands the school paper isn’t just a product but an educational process: “Thanks for following up with me and hopefully this can be a good real-life learning experience for our budding journalists. :-)”

Meanwhile, at their lengthy meeting the editors identified every single fact that needed to be verified (and should have been before publication), and they put a plan into action that two editors would spearhead a fact-checking mission and write a completely new editorial to be published online.

This editorial would be honest in recognizing their mistakes and emphasize transparency in an attempt to not only set the record straight but also regain the trust of readers.

They also realized that the editorial was not a mistake of only one person, but illuminated a weakness and breakdown in their collective process: they had all read and approved of the piece, but not one had questioned the details beyond phrasing, word choices and grammar.

As a group they agreed they needed to be more skeptical and rigorous in their reading, even and perhaps especially of each other’s work. They also recognized the need to establish a clear fact-check protocol for every published piece.

In the end the editors formally interviewed seven sources, informally spoke with many others, and attempted to interview additional key players, all while preparing for and taking their final exams. As a result, they wrote and published an editorial, “Be skeptical of rumors, thoroughly check facts,” that I am incredibly proud of.

The piece begins candidly: “We made a mistake because we listened to rumors instead of skeptically stopping and checking the facts.”

The editorial continues by revealing and apologizing for their mistakes, sharing their process of determining the facts and affirming their commitment to their readers. Their work clearly demonstrates humility, transparency and dedication to being good journalists.

Yes, they stumbled and briefly fell, but my team learned more than I could have taught them in a classroom lesson. They are stronger journalists for the experience.

Read More