Journalism students’ professional identity in the making: Implications for education and practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Changes in journalism spurred by technological shifts and industry restructuring have left observers questioning both the nature of the profession and what educators ought to do in order to prepare aspiring journalists. Despite attempts to rethink what it means to be a journalist and the educational experience needed to prepare students, few qualitative studies have emerged that track how learners are negotiating professional values. This article does precisely that by providing a case study of how students in an undergraduate Canadian university’s journalism program are conceptualizing the profession against the backdrop of changing practices and principles. Based on the data generated from 96 open-ended reflections, this investigation offers some important findings about the student professional identity experience within a 4-year program. More precisely, the results indicate that the ideals of ‘high modernism’ (especially those surrounding objectivity, the role of the public watchdog, and ethical practice) are being negotiated by journalists in training in important and meaningful ways.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it