Diagnosing Health Campaigns: A Campaign Evaluation Assignment

1. Public Relations Education
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Journal of
JPRE
Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018
A publication of the Public Relations Division of AEJMC
ISSN 2573-1742

2. Volume 4, Issue 2, Fall 2018
A publication of the Public Relations Division of AEJMC
ISSN 2573-1742
© Copyright 2018 AEJMC Public Relations Division
Journal of Public Relations Education
Editorial Staff
Emily S. Kinsky, West Texas A&M University, editor-in-chief
Tiffany Gallicano, University of North Carolina at Charlotte,
senior associate editor
Lucinda Austin, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
associate editor
Chuck Lubbers, University of South Dakota, associate editor of reviews
Kathleen Stansberry, Elon University, web manager
Note from the Editor-in-Chief:
In this issue, you will find three research articles, all five of the top
AEJMC PR Division’s Great Ideas For Teaching presented in Washington,
D.C., and two reviews by Matt Kushin, which relate to one another on the
topic of teaching social media.
Volume 4, Issue 2 reflects an incredible amount of work done prior to
my editorship. The previous editor-in-chief, Chuck Lubbers, handled the
review assignments for each of the research articles for this issue prior to
me moving into this role on Jan. 1, 2018, and two of them were accepted
for publication under his tenure in 2017. The first acceptance letter I was
honored to send as the editor went to Drs. Brunner, Zarkin and Yates. A
special thanks to Chuck for his work with authors and reviewers to get us
ready for Volume 4.
Thank you to Tiffany, Lucinda, Chuck and Katie, who have invested
countless unpaid hours proofreading, editing and formatting this issue.
Without your service, this issue would not exist. Special thanks go to
Rebekah Grome, who also came to our aid with proofreading.

3. Table of Contents
Research Articles
1-20
21-50 What do Employers Want? What Should Faculty Teach? A
Content Analysis of Entry-Level Employment Ads in Public
Relations
Brigitta R. Brunner, Kim Zarkin, & Bradford L. Yates
51-86 Teaching Digital and Social Media Analytics: Exploring Best
Teaching Briefs
PRD GIFT Winners from AEJMC 2018
87-98 Building a Social Learning Flock: Using Twitter Chats to
Enhance Experiential Learning Across Universities
Amanda J. Weed, Karen Freberg, Emily S. Kinsky,
& Amber L. Hutchins
99-106 Diagnosing Health Campaigns: A Campaign Evaluation
Assignment
Laura E. Willis

4. Teaching Briefs (continued)
PRD GIFT Winners from AEJMC 2018
107-114 Teaching Trolling: Management and Strategy
Leslie Rasmussen
115-122 Sparking Creativity Through Purpose-Driven Storytelling
Chris Cooney
123-127 Looking in to see out: An Introspective Approach to Teaching
Ethics in PR
Regina Luttrell & Jamie Ward
Reviews
128-133 Social Media Campaigns: Strategies for Public Relations and
Marketing
Matthew J. Kushin
134-145 Meltwater Media Intelligence Software
Matthew J. Kushin

5. PRD GIFT Winner AEJMC 2018
Diagnosing Health Campaigns: A Campaign
Evaluation Assignment
Laura E. Willis, Quinnipiac University
Rationale
The purpose of this assignment is to have students engage in
the evaluation of real-world, contemporary health communication
campaigns developed and disseminated by a leading public health
organization. The final product of this assignment is a written analysis
paper; however, the content of that paper is meant to be developed through
group discussion. The assignment was developed for an upper-level,
major elective on strategic health communication for public relations
undergraduate students. This assignment has two primary components.
First, groups of students are asked to apply the six components of health
communication campaign design (formative research, use of theory,
audience segmentation, message design, channels/message placement, and
evaluation) in their evaluation of the campaign overview and materials
presented on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC)
website. Additionally, student groups are asked to consider the role of
evidence within the campaign development and evaluation. Second,
groups have the opportunity to discuss how organizations communicate
about their campaigns, including what information they provide and what
information would have been more helpful in determining the outcomes
of the campaign. This assignment has been popular in both the on-ground
and online sections of the strategic health communication elective class,
as it provides students the opportunity to apply course material to a real
health campaign in collaboration with their peers.
Journal of Public Relations Education
2018, Vol. 4, No. 2, 99-106

6. 100
Student Learning Goals
This assignment asks students to engage in critical and creative
thinking in their application of key concepts from course materials to
assess a campaign, as described on the CDC’s website. Moreover, the
assessment of the campaign deepens students’ understanding of the
purpose of research in strategic health communication, an inquiry and
analysis learning outcome. These are learning outcomes for both the
analysis paper and the group discussion about the CDC’s communication
about its campaigns on its website. This assignment directly connects to
public relations theory and practice, as it asks students to consider the
output of contemporary campaign practices and identify possible theories
that may have informed the campaign.
The assignment also asks students to practice effective
communication in their discussions with their group members about their
assigned campaign, in the analysis paper they submit as a group, and in
the follow-up discussion. Finally, working as a group also encourages
them to practice professionalism in group dynamics, which is a social and
emotional intelligence learning outcome.
Connection to Practice
This assignment provides students with the opportunity to evaluate
how components work together in practice. Students apply the six
components of campaign development and consider the role of evidence
to a real-world example in group discussions and a subsequent paper.
Moreover, this assignment helps them to feel more familiar with these
concepts before they begin their final project for the course (a health
campaign proposal plan).
Willis

7. Vol. 4(2), 2018 Journal of Public Relations Education 101
Evidence of Student Learning Outcomes
In-Person Classroom
When this assignment has been utilized in a class running in
person, students are divided into small groups, in which they select from
a list of pre-determined CDC campaigns. Generally, student groups begin
to work on the analysis of the campaign during class time. By providing
time in class for this work, the instructor can observe a group’s dynamic
and get an idea of their individual contributions to the assessment of the
campaign, as well as answer questions as they arise. An analysis paper
is due afterward (generally by two class meetings after the in-class work
time). In the class meeting in which the paper is due, we wrap up the
assignment with a more meta-level discussion of how the CDC organized
and discussed the campaign efforts on its website.
Virtual Classroom
In an online setting, the timeline varies slightly, and the nature of
group work and discussions shifts. In-person work and discussions shift
to a virtual group messaging program and/or a discussion board on the
class’ website. Student professionalism in the small group setting can be
assessed through group evaluation, which is due after the submission of
the paper.
In both on-ground and virtual settings, students have noted that
this assignment helped them to more fully understand the implications
of critical campaign components, such as audience segmentation or
evaluation, on an individual campaign’s success, as well as the generation
of strategic health communication knowledge for future campaign
development.

8. 102
Assignment
Once students have been separated into small groups (no more
than four, depending on the class size), they are given a list of CDC
campaigns that they have likely never heard of before, but which have
sufficient information about the campaign available through the CDC’s
website. For example, previous student groups have analyzed campaigns
such as “Screen for Life,” “Inside Knowledge,” “Get Smart,” “One and
Only,” and “One Conversation at a Time.” The groups are then asked to
select campaigns, and students are given some quiet time in class to begin
reviewing the campaign information. After that, student groups are asked
to begin discussing both the campaign itself, as well as the communication
efforts about the campaign.
Discussion Prompts
Student groups are asked to consider the following prompts as they
begin to critically review and discuss their CDC campaign.
• What information was easiest for you to discern about your assigned
campaign from the CDC’s website?
• Was the organization of the information easy for you to navigate?
• Who do you think the target public is for these web pages?
• If you were planning on developing a campaign that shared the same
topic (or target public), what information would have been most
helpful to you? What would you like to know that wasn’t provided on
the website?
• How do the ways in which the CDC communicates about its
campaigns connect to what you understand about evidence-based
practice?
Within their groups, students are asked to discuss how they see
the six key components of health communication campaigns within
Willis

9. Vol. 4(2), 2018 Journal of Public Relations Education 103
their assigned campaign, as this will be a major focus of the final paper
(for analysis paper directions, see Appendix A; for grading rubric, see
Appendix B).
Appendix A
Analysis Paper Directions
Work with your group members to review and analyze the CDC campaign
you’ve been assigned. You must evaluate both the campaign itself and the
information provided about the campaign on the CDC’s website.
(1) From the CDC’s website, what can you determine related to the six key
components of campaign design:
• Formative research
• Use of theory
• Audience segmentation
• Message design
• Channels and message placement
• Evaluation
Questions to consider:
• What do you perceive the goals of the campaign are?
• Who is the target audience for the campaign?
• What channels appear to be utilized by the campaign?
• Using what you know about the key components of a successful
campaign, what does the campaign seem to be doing well?
• What possible changes would you suggest?
(2) Moreover, what might the information provided suggest for the
evidence-based approach to health communication?
Questions to consider:
• Does this campaign appear to have been based on evidence?

10. 104
• Would you be able to incorporate lessons from this campaign into the
development of future health communication campaigns?
Write up the critical analysis in no more than 5 pages (using APA style).
This paper should be a true group effort – you should NOT divvy up the
work and individually write subsections; this will result in a paper that
lacks a consistent tone of voice.
Connections to course material must be made and cited appropriately.
Your contributions and professionalism will be assessed through group
evaluations at the end of the assignment.
Willis

11. Vol. 4(2), 2018 Journal of Public Relations Education 105
Appendix B
Analysis Paper Grading Rubric
Reminder: Your individual grade for this assignment may be impacted
by the evaluations provided by you and your group members. It is your
responsibility to be a professional and effective group member. Failure to
submit a fully completed evaluation will result in a 5-point reduction from
your individual grade.
Equal Weight
(20% each)
Mastery
(90-100%)
Proficient
(80-89%)
Developing
(70-79%)
Feedback
& Score
Identification of
the main aspects
of the campaign
Identifies and
demonstrates
a sophisticated
understanding
of the main
components of
campaign design
Identifies and
demonstrates
an acceptable
understanding of
most components of
campaign design
Identifies and
demonstrates
a weak
understanding of
some components
of campaign design
Analysis /
evaluation of the
campaign
Presents an
insightful and
thorough analysis
of all aspects of
the campaign
Presents a thorough
analysis of most
aspects of the
campaign
Presents a
superficial or
incomplete
analysis of some of
the aspects of the
campaign
Recommendations Supports
recommendations
and opinions with
strong arguments;
recommendations
are reasonable
and objective
Supports
recommendations
and opinions with
limited reasoning
and evidence;
demonstrates little
engagement with
ideas presented
Little or no action
is suggested, and/
or inappropriate
solutions are
proposed to the
issues

12. 106
Links to course
material
Makes
appropriate
and powerful
connections
between
identified health
communication
aspects and the
course readings
and lectures
Makes appropriate
but somewhat
vague connections
between identified
issues/concepts and
concepts studied in
course material
Makes
inappropriate or
little connection
between aspects
identified and the
concepts studied in
course materials
Writing mechanics
and formatting
Demonstrates
clarity, concise-
ness, and correct-
ness; formatting
is appropriate,
and writing is free
of grammar and
spelling errors
Exhibits occasional
grammar or spelling
errors, but there is
still a clear presen-
tation of ideas; lacks
organization
Writing is unfo-
cused, is rambling,
or contains serious
errors; writing is
poorly organized
and does not follow
specified guide-
lines
Total:
Editorial Record: Submitted to AEJMC-PRD GIFT Competition by February 5, 2018. A
blind copy was peer reviewed by the PRD Teaching Committee, led by Chair Katie Place,
and selected as a Top GIFT. First published online on August 17, 2018.
Willis
Appendix B (continued)
Analysis Paper Grading Rubric