The formation of the journalist profession by the media industry: The impact of internship on journalist students
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Professions are defined by the fact that they consist of more or less exclusive groups of individuals acting in situations characterized by uncertainty, thus requiring professional judgement based on the professional's theoretical knowledge as well as experience (Abbott, 1988). Professions are reproduced through recruitment mechanisms (Harrits & Olesen, 2012) and through specialized training and internships with experienced professional practitioners as teachers. This also applies to the journalistic profession in Denmark, which in large part is reproduced through the four-year bachelor program at the Danish Media and Journalism School with 2.5 years of schooling and 1.5 years of internship in news, entertainment media and communications organizations. The journalistic profession is formed in two very different settings. The school curriculum is primarily oriented towards providing the skills set out in the Act of the Bachelor in Journalism, while the internship is also characterized by the terms and conditions which apply specifically to the media and communications industry as commercial, political or publicist organizations or companies. In other words, there is no reason to assume identical content or outcome of the two processes of formation, which also can be considered as the distinctions in literature between media and journalism profession (Svith, 2011). This paper examines how the industry forms the profession. What happens to the students' professional standards (how the professional practice should be) and their perception of professional practice (how to practice) during the year and a half internship? It is examined by a panel survey pre and post 18 months internship (4th-6th semester). Recruitment patterns and journalist training in the first 18 months will characterize students’ attitudes and perceptions at 3th semester. The attitudes and perceptions of the students at the 7th semester are impacted by the 18 months internship period, where they participated in the production processes of the industry. On a micro level, the results based on a comparison of responses pre and post internship from individual students show changes in more than half of their responses. On a meso level, less change is observed for the cohort as changes are opposing. Future research will focus on the explanations of these observed changes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».