Roles of School Leaders in Public Relations - Article Example

Roles of School Leaders in Public Relations During the first quarter of the present century the term “publi was used to explain what is now called public relations as personal or group action that affects the social attitudes and behavior toward a given issue or product. In a positive sense, public relations may be defined as the art and science of persuading people in favor of the issue or product represented by an individual or a group. Anyone who doubts the need for public relations practice in the administration of schools today needs only to glance at the headlines. School bond issues are being voted down, teachers are striking, graduates are suing schools because they cannot read, parents demanding revised curricula, students and teachers being attacked in the classroom. The growth in news coverage of education reflects in part the public’s increased awareness of schools and their impact on society (Wilder, 2000). With the rapid evolution of protests in the streets, the discovery of the poor, the rise in industrial technology, and swiftly changing patterns, the social urgency of education has been firmly established in the public mind. The list of problems in our school can go on. Most large school districts now realize that part of their responsibility as social institutions is to keep the public informed about their operations. There are three basic groups of school leaders/administrators which the 10 articles have in common. First, the teachers, this includes primary and secondary and college/university professors. The next group, which we will refer to, in this article as the principal will include school principals, superintendents and university and college presidents, the last group, consist of the members of the school board. Wilder (2000) also mentioned that, if a school leader says that he does not care about what the public says about his school, that teacher, administrator or member of the board is a liability to all the schools. He explained that no school, public schools to be exact, has any moral right to allow itself to be unexplained, misunderstood or publicly distrusted for by its unpopularity it poisons the pond in which we all fish. Before going into details about the specific roles of the different groups, let us first take a closer look on accountability. This concept is one of the similar functions of the three groups and therefore needs special attention. The performance and costs of schools has generated increasing dissatisfaction which in turn lead to a greater demand for accountability and transparency on the part of the educators. Therefore, one of the basic roles of the school leader in connection to public relation is to be accountable for the financial support generated by the school trough government funding or donations given by the private sector (Meyer & Macmillan, 2001). Let us note though, that accountability does not only refer to money matters, it also requires good records and transparency of actions and decisions. The school leader should also stimulate public interest in the schools and to produce written materials for dissemination to news media, government bodies and local groups and to encourage the media to devote more time and space for education and schools. In order for the roles of school leaders in public relations to be effective there are essential requirements so as to make it possible (Cutlip, 2001). First, the school board, administrators and teachers should commit to a public partnership. Second, the school staff should be competent and there should be a centralization of public relations policy making. Third, there should be a free- flowing communication from and to the public- up, down and across. Lastly there should be a commitment of all efforts to ensure accomplishment of goals. Commitment of the board is essential. Even today, there is disturbing evidence that many school boards and administrators do not recognise the need to build a strong support from the public (Nel, 1995). Teachers DiRanna and Loucks-Horsley (2001) emphasized that public relations is one of the basic skill that a teacher should posses. Every teacher has a personal stake in public relations. He’s work and the work of his associates depends on whether he practices good public relations. Also, teachers in their day-to-day activities are in position to relate effectiveness to students, parents and others. As a result they are able to provide valuable feedback to administrators and those responsible for the curriculum and other programs. Teachers and professors can contribute most by inspired teaching, by counselling his students, by research accomplishments, and by lending his talent to public service (Nel, 1995). This requires a continuing internal information program. The staff should be constantly reminded of its public relations responsibilities. Today, faculty members insist upon a voice in the policy making process of the school. If this participation is to be meaningful, they must be kept informed by the administration so that they can take informed positions. Principal Principals are reputational leaders of their schools. Just as the effective principal is an instructional leader, so should he or she be a reputational leader (Stanford Educational Leadership Institute, 2005). This means alerting staff to the importance of PR/communications and providing staff development in PR as needed. Setting an example as a positive PR practitioner goes a long way in being the school’s reputational leader (Armistead, 2005). Principals are ideally seen to be the epitome of reputation in each of their respective schools not only as instruction leader (Armisted, 2005). One of his roles for that matter is to make the staff aware of the significance of public relations and to provide them with the necessary environment in order for them to develop in PR. They are also important because of their role as representatives of the school to the external constituencies. Yet some faculty members remain aloof, many merely indifferent and a few plainly hostile to assuming any role or responsibilities in effectively representing the school to external groups such as the media. For the context of university and colleges, the college and university president play an important role. People think in terms of people, the personal symbol, and the concrete. The personalities of people identified in the public mind with institution largely determine the kind of confidence and support the institution has. The personal symbol is particularly important for a college, whose leaders and teachers are constantly in the public spotlight, free to speak out as they see fit. The professors on the other hand, are a prolific source of news. Developing the staff of an institution into an effective team is the starting point of the program. The college/university president by reason of his position should be the leader. The president personifies the institution. A strong personality can bring prestige, stature and public confidence. A president whose mental radar is sensitive to public relations can contribute much to the development of the university. Members of the School Board In a stronger statement, the board is in a strategic position wherein they have great responsibility in public relations. They determine the educational policies upon which the program must be based. Composed of lay citizens who have accepted responsibility for public education in their communities, the board is the intermediary between the public and the professional administrators (Cutlip, 2001). It is essential that board members agree in adequate statement of public relations policy. The board must serve its function of interpreting the community to the school staff and in turn interpreting ideas and policies of the staff to the community. According to Sanchez ( 2002) an effective board serves as a heat shield. A strategic group, generally recruited from opinion leadership, trustees must be convinced of the need for giving consideration to public relations aspect of decision making. Influential, articulate members of the board can be a valuable asset to a school system. Self-seeking opinionated members can be harmful. In contrasting the articles, Oplatka (2005) came closest to portraying the other side of the coin, in his article; he came up with a study targeting teachers. In general, the conclusion of the result was that the teachers see public relations as a form of marketing and that they should not be part of it. From this article, one can see that not every school leader views public relations as good and helpful for the educational system as a whole. The teachers who participated in the study in a way failed to recognize the benefits of public relations which include more efficient student recruitment and image building for the school. They claimed that the most productive way of increasing the school image towards greatness was to teach effectively and developing their subjects and teaching them in other related events. Moreover, they also clarified that marketing, which includes public relations should be left on the shoulders of the school administrators (Oplatka, 2005). There is also a difference in opinion of which group is the most important. One argument was that the teachers have the biggest chunk of responsibility since they are in constant interaction with students who in turn give their feedbacks to their parents (Usdan, 2001). On the other hand, Armistead (2005) emphasized that the principal is seen as the most superior therefore he should be at the lead. And the others assumed that the members of the school board are the most influential since it is the most diverse group. All of the information then, which came from different authors, makes up the so called foundation of the study of the growing importance of public relations in education. References Armstead, L. (2005). Public Relations and the High School Principal. Retrieved August 27, 2008 from http://www.principalspartnership.com Cutlip, S. (2001). The Practice: Public Relations in Public Schools. In A. Center (Ed.), Public. Relations (pp.524-531). Madison: University Press DiRanna, K. & Loucks-Horsley, S. (2001). Designing programs for teacher leaders: The case of the California Science Implementation Network. In C. R. Nesbit, J. D. Wallace, D. K.Pugalee, A. -C. Miller, & W. J. DiBiase (Eds.), "Developing teacher leaders: Professional development in science and mathematics." Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education. [ED 451 031] Meyer, M & R. Macmillan. (2001). The Principals Role in Transition: Instructional Leadership Aint What It Used To Be. 13(5). http://www.ucalgary.ca/~iejll/volume5/meyer.html#toward Nel, J. (1995). The Professoriate’s Public Relations Role: A Critical Factor in Fostering School- University Collaboration. Retrieved August 27, 2008 from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal Oplatka, Izhar. (2006). Teachers perceptions of their role in educational marketing: Insights from the case of Edmonton, Alberta. Retrieved August 27, 2008 from http://www.umanitoba.ca Sanchez, C. (2002, May 12). Retired educator views important role of a school trustee. Laredo Morning Times. http://lmtonline.com/focus/archive/051202/focus3.pdf Stanford Educational Leadership Institute. (2005 Aug 8). Study identifies effective approaches for principal education (press release). Retrieved from http://seli.stanford.edu/ Usdan, M. (2001). Leadership for Student Learning: Redefining the Teacher as Leader. Retrieved from http://www.iel.org/programs/21st/reports/teachlearn.pdf. Wilder, I. (2000). Editorial: Public Relations in Education. New York State Journal of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 10(8). Read More