JMC Internships

Thirty-four students completed Journalism and Mass Communication internships since the last assessment review a year ago. They scored high in "interest in the job" and their "ability to work with others." They also performed well in their "ability to work independently," "ability to work under deadline" and "acceptance and constructive use of criticism."

Evaluation means showed minor fluctuations in several categories however, all of the mean scores were high; the lowest rating of 3.2 would translate to an 80% or a letter grade of B using the system that most faculty in the department employ (3.2 / 4.0).

The quantitative data are from summer and fall 2001 as well as spring 2002 internships with evaluations made by on-site supervisors. The items are based on a 1-4 scale with 1 being "below average" and 4 being "superior." Characteristics on which supervisors were asked to rate students resulted in the following accompanying scores which are listed from highest to lowest:

		98-99		99-00		00- 01		01-02
Interest in job		3.6		3.7		3.6		3.7
Ability to work with others		3.9		3.8		3.6		3.6
Ability to work independently		3.6		3.5		3.5		3.5
Acceptance/constructive use of criticism		3.4		3.5		3.5		3.5
Ability to work under deadline		3.4		3.6		3.4		3.5
Promptness		3.2		3.5		3.6		3.4
Comparison with previous interns		3.3		3.2		3.4		3.4
Appearance		3.6		3.6		3.3		3.4
Professional attitude		3.5		3.5		3.3		3.4
Ability to organize		3.5		3.5		3.5		3.3
Quality of work produced		3.5		3.5		3.4		3.3
Amount of work produced		3.4		3.4		3.4		3.2
Resourcefulness		3.3		3.4		3.4		3.2
Possessed necessary skills		3.4		3.3		3.3		3.3
OVERALL		3.4		3.4		3.4		3.4

The overall rating was 3.4 which was identical to the 3.4 score from last year.

Eight of 34 of this year 's internships were outside of Nebraska (Maryland, Utah, Washington D.C., Florida, Pennsylvania, New York and Indiana). Of the rest, 19 were in Kearney and the others were in various communities in the state.

2001 - 02 Speech Internships

During this assessment period, there were 23 Speech internship enrollments. Internships were completed in a variety of settings, including organizations such as a community college working in basic education, a public library, continuing education, university relations, sales, college admissions, student recruitment, a regional museum, a national amusement park and convention planning.

The following are samples of comments which employers wrote about the internees:

"XXXXX has done an outstanding job of working on projects with others and independently. She is a pleasure to work with."

“XXXXX has been a delight to work with. We wish we could keep her."

"XXXXX is a motivated young man who did a commendable job.”

Students were evaluated positively. Supervisors evaluated each student on 14 items. Ratings were on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being "unsatisfactory" and 5 being "very good." No students were rated below 3 on any individual item.

The average ratings were:

1.	Dependability		5.00
2.	Seems to comprehend		4.86
3.	Care with equipment		4.86
4.	Meets People Well		4.86
5.	Works harmoniously		4.71
6.	Understands instructions		4.86
7.	Keeps on the job		4.86
8.	Follows instructions		4.86
9.	Volume of work		5.00
10.	Takes criticism		4.57
11.	Has desire to learn		5.00
12.	Attends to details		4.57
13.	Production		4.86
14.	Quality of work		4.71

Evaluation means showed minor improvements in four categories, slight declines in six categories and no change in four others. Regardless of whether scores were ranked high or low, the fact is that all of the mean scores were high; the lowest rating of 3.3 would translate to an 83% or a letter grade of B using the system that most faculty in the department employ (3.3 / 4.0).

The quantitative data are from summer and fall 2000 as well as spring 2001 internships with evaluations made by on-site supervisors. The items are based on a 1-4 scale with 1 being "below average" and 4 being "superior."     Characteristics on which supervisors were asked to rate students resulted in the following accompanying scores which are listed from highest to lowest:

		00-01		99-00		98-99
Ability to work with others		3.6		3.75		3.85
Interest in job		3.6		3.66		3.6
Promptness		3.6		3.5		3.15
Ability to work independently		3.5		3.5		3.6
Ability to organize		3.5		3.5		3.45
Acceptance/constructive use of criticism		3.5		3.46		3.4
Ability to work under deadline		3.4		3.6		3.35
Quality of work produced		3.4		3.5		3.5
Amount of work produced		3.4		3.4		3.35
Resourcefulness		3.4		3.4		3.3
Comparison with previous interns		3.4		3.2		3.29
Appearance		3.3		3.6		3.55
Professional attitude		3.3		3.5		3.5
Possessed necessary skills		3.3		3.26		3.4
OVERALL		3.442		3.471		3.449

The overall rating was 3.442, nearly identical to the 3.471 score from last year. This was still a very solid rating which provides room for improvement. The fact that no characteristic was rated under 3.3 this year compared to 3.2 last year is positive and suggests that the quality of the department's students completing internships is improving.

    Four of fifteen of this year 's internships were outside of Nebraska. Of the rest, six were in Kearney and the other five were in Scottsbluff, Doniphan, Hastings, Omaha and Grand Island. Just over half of the students worked for the media and the others worked for a variety of companies and organizations.

Speech Internships

During this assessment period, there were 14 internship enrollments. Internships were completed in a variety of settings, including organizations such as a communication consulting firm, distribution center, community foundation, television station, pharmacy, U.S. senatorial office, educational service unit, alumni association and a religious organization.

The following are samples of comments which employers wrote about the internees:

"XXXXX is a very good worker. She comes to work each day with a positive attitude and is always willing to give her best. XXXXX is eager to learn and is open to feedback. We have enjoyed having her here and hope for a possible future with her on our staff."

"I find XXXXX to be reliable and trustworthy. He always arrives to work on time, and , in fact, is frequently early. In addition, he is willing to remain after hours to help finish extra work. XXXXX is a very bright and resourceful young man and shows great enthusiasm for his work."

"XXXXX is a quality young man who did a nice job for us. I hope when he graduates that he will come to work for us. If not, I will be happy to be a reference for him."

"XXXXX was a very professional intern. She took responsibilities very seriously and attacked each learning opportunity. She often asked, "Is there something else I can do?" She quickly learned the equipment and news writing. She handled criticism very well and always tried to improve."

"I have found her to be very thorough in all her work, detail oriented and precise in her reports to local, state and federal officials. She is a consensus builder . . . and does an excellent job of facilitating meetings and encouraging communication and participation from all group members."

Students were evaluated positively. Supervisors evaluated each student on 14 items. Ratings were on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being "unsatisfactory" and 5 being "very good." No students were rated below 3 on any individual item.

1.	Dependability		5.0
2.	Seems to comprehend		5.0
3.	Care with equipment		5.0
4.	Meets People Well		4.9
5.	Works harmoniously		4.9
6.	Understands instructions		4.9
7.	Keeps on the job		4.8
8.	Follows instructions		4.7
9.	Volume of work		4.6
10.	Takes criticism		4.6
11.	Has desire to learn		4.6
12.	Attends to details		4.5
13.	Production		4.3
14.	Quality of work		4.3

"Interest in job" was the next highest rated characteristic for UNK JMC interns followed by "appearance" and "ability to work under pressure." The latter showed significant improvement from a year ago although the most improved category was "promptness."

Evaluations showed improvement in eight categories, declines in four categories and no change in two categories: "quality of work produced" and "professional attitude" which remained high at 3.5

The quantitative data are from summer and fall 1999 as well as spring 2000 internships with evaluations made by on-site supervisors. The items are based on a 1-4 scale with 1 being "below average" and 4 being "superior".

Characteristics on which supervisors were asked to rate students resulted in the following accompanying scores which are listed from highest to lowest in 99-00:

		99-00		98-99
Ability to work with others		3.75		3.85
Interest in job		3.66		3.6
Appearance		3.6		3.55
Ability to work under deadline		3.6		3.35
Ability to work independently		3.5		3.6
Quality of work produced		3.5		3.5
Professional attitude		3.5		3.5
Ability to organize		3.5		3.45
Promptness		3.5		3.15
Acceptance/constructive use of criticism		3.46		3.4
Amount of work produced		3.4		3.35
Resourcefulness		3.4		3.3
Possessed necessary skills		3.26		3.4
Comparison with previous interns		3.2		3.29

The overall rating was 3.471, up slightly from 3.449 last year. This was a very solid rating which provides room for improvement. The fact that no characteristic received a score under 3.2 this year compared to 3.15 last year is positive and shows a well-rounded group of willing, capable students. The fact that "possessed necessary skills" declined from 3.4 in 1998-99 to 3.26 in 1999-2000, however, merits review.

Supervisors' open-ended responses showed that the students' most significant strength was their positive attitude. This was followed by initiative (self-starter) and computer skills; then personality, willingness to learn, organizational skills, work ethic, ability to research and to write.

Supervisors said interns could improve by coming to their internships with more advanced skills in their fields, by bringing new ideas, and by not trying to do too many things at once. One supervisor mentioned the need for better listening skills and another said more attention should be paid to detail. Both these are comments worthy of note because they can help all students improve.

Three-fourths of the students' supervisors suggested that they receive an A, and the other fourth suggested their interns receive a B. In addition, every supervisor (that answered this question) said they would hire their intern if they had an opening for a person with that background, except one who cited budget restrictions. In addition, every supervisor (that answered this question) said they would be interested in having another intern for a future semester. All these responses bode well for the JMC internship program.

Only one supervisor made a suggestion for the program. She said interns should provide a list of classes taken and skills learned so that supervisors had a better idea of the knowledge or skill base from which the intern was starting.

This year's internships were all in Nebraska--half in Kearney and the other half primarily in Omaha and Lincoln. One-third of the students worked for the media, and the other two-thirds worked for a variety of companies and organizations.

1990-00 Speech Internships

During this assessment period, there were 29 internship enrollments. Internships were completed in a variety of organizations, including a builders' association, a daily newspaper, a health system, university advising, university recruitment, a church youth program, a music production company, a residential home for youth at risk, a children's museum and a employment consulting firm.

Employers offered the following comments about their respective interns:

"She is very good with people and is very conscientious."

XXXXX is very organized and diligently attends to details when planning to be sure everything goes well."

"Her people skills have helped the Association to grow, and she has had a very positive impact."

XXXXX has such a natural ability to work well with others, carries herself in a professional manner and was a true role model for all the staff members. She will undoubtedly represent UNK well in the professional world."

"I feel fortunate to have worked with XXXXX."

"She has both the organizational and interpersonal skills it takes to be truly successful."

Generally, the students received positive evaluations. Each student was evaluated by supervisors on 14 items. Ratings were on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being "unsatisfactory" and 5 being "very good."

The results of the rating were:

1.	Quality of work		5.00
2.	Meets People Well		5.00
3.	Has desire to learn		5.00
4.	Understands instructions		5.00
5.	Seems to comprehend		5.00
6.	Care with equipment		5.00
7.	Works harmoniously		4.85
8.	Attends to details		4.85
9.	Production		4.66
10.	Volume of work		4.66
11.	Dependability		4.66
12.	Follows instructions		4.66
13.	Keeps on the job		4.66
14.	Takes criticism		4.50

Numerous students (n=21) completed internships since the last assessment review and again scored high in their ability to work with others, a characteristic which is vital in the work world, but which is difficult to teach.

The quantitative data are from summer and fall 1998, and spring 1999 internships with evaluations made by on-site supervisors. The items are based on a 1 - 4 scale with 1 being "below average" and 4 being "superior."

Characteristics on which supervisors were asked to rate students resulted in the following order and accompanying scores:

1.	Ability to work with others	3.85
2.	Ability to work independently	3.60
3.	Interest in job	3.60
4.	Appearance	3.55
5.	Quality of work produced	3.50
6.	Professional attitude	3.50
7.	Ability to organize	3.45
8.	Possessed necessary skills	3.40
9.	Acceptance and constructive use of criticism	3.40
10.	Ability to work under deadline	3.35
11.	Amount of work produced	3.35
12.	Resourcefulness	3.30
13.	Comparison with previous interns	3.29
14.	Promptness	3.15

The overall rating was 3.449, which was solid but provided room for improvement. The fact that no characteristic received a score under 3.15 is positive and shows a well-rounded group of willing, capable students.

Ability to work with others was the highest-rated characteristic for the second year running. Also continued highly rated characteristics were as follows: interest in job, professional attitude and quality of work produced. These are all qualities that employers seek in their new hires and they are often difficult to impart. It is therefore gratifying to find them exhibited by JMC interns for two consecutive years.

These scores were reflected in supervisors’ open-ended responses. Nearly half of the supervisors commented on students possessing both the ability and the people skills to perform the job and succeed in the work environment. In addition, a quarter of the supervisors noted the interns’ willingness and their reliability. Other strengths mentioned more than once were attitude, organization, enthusiasm and resourcefulness.

Negative comments repeated once or twice were that students should be on time, make work a priority, become a self-starter, learn to juggle multiple responsibilities and continue to hone their skills. Because last year’s interns scored high in promptness, this dip in performance must be shouldered by the individuals rather than the program.

It should be noted that internships were probably some of the most geographically varied of any year, with students in Gothenburg, Ogallala, Kearney, Hastings, Norfolk, and Omaha as well as Boston and New York City. Half of the students worked for the media, and the other half worked for a variety of companies and organizations.

In areas where students were rated lowest, the department can have only a moderate influence through curricula and instruction; the expectations of a professional are often higher than what some 19- or 20-year olds are capable of delivering.

Speech Internships
During the last assessment period, 51 undergraduates and six graduate students completed internships for a variety of organizations such as: a travel agency - customer relations, personnel relations, internet selling; retailing - purchasing, customer service, display merchandising, marketing; a cable company - service representative, fiber systems proposal/application team; the Safe Center - on call advocacy, crisis worker; a psychological clinic - client care representative, office management; a church - youth leadership, youth ministry, fundraising, travel planner; University Relations - special projects; the university library - completed training procedures and training manual for new employees; a hospital - human resources and a home builders association -marketing, promotion.

Employers offered the following comments about their respective interns:

"XXXXX is talented in display merchandising, but his strongest area is in customer relations. He really communicates well with the customers."

"XXXXX has been very reliable. She tries hard to do a good job, and she has been an active volunteer. We will miss her when she leaves."

"XXXXX has been a joy to work with. Her ambition and enthusiasm have added an uplifting spirit which the entire office staff has enjoyed. Her desire to learn and achieve has been noted throughout her internship with us. XXXXX will be missed greatly as she graduates with her degree and moves on to her next challenge. It truly has been a pleasure to have had her on staff."

"In the time that I have worked with XXXXX I have been very impressed with her work. XXXXX has an amazing amount of energy and ambition which she applies to  her work. She takes on more in one week than many people take on in a month or more. She works well with others, but, as in all situations in life, there are simply some people with whom it is difficult to 'get along.' XXXXX, however, finds a way to grin and bear it. She takes criticism well and tries to improve day by day. I have rated XXXXX as excellent as that is precisely where she deserves to be."

"We will certainly miss XXXXX when she is gone."

In general, students received positive evaluations. On the evaluation forms completed by supervisors, students received their highest ratings in: meeting people well, working harmoniously with others, desire to learn, quality of work, volume of work, dependability and desire to learn. Students did not receive any negative evaluations, however, the following areas were rated lower for some students: ability to take criticism, attending to details, understanding instructions and following instructions.