If you still think the education beat is where cub reporters cut their teeth, writing up summaries of tedious school board meetings and biding their time until something opens up on the metro desk, think again. This illuminating study by the Education Writers Association (EWA) and the Education Week Research Center suggests the beat is now more likely to be viewed as “a capstone, not a stepping stone” for journalists. Moreover, four out of five ink-stained wretches (a notoriously cranky lot) report that they are “very satisfied” or “fairly satisfied” with their jobs covering education. They even believe their reporting is “making a difference in their communities.”
The standard narrative holds that the typical education reporter is twenty-two years old with twenty-two minutes on the job. Not so. The four hundred respondents in the survey average thirty-six years of age with eleven years of experience. And if teaching is a “pink” profession, so is covering it: “Seventy-one percent of education journalists are female, compared with 38 percent of journalists as a whole,” the report finds. Also, one in five education journalists are non-white, “compared with 9 percent for the profession at large.” And—popular complaints notwithstanding—they actually talk to teachers. Asked to identify sources they turned to in the last month as part of their coverage of education, nearly nine out of ten answered “teachers and faculty members.”
Not every indicator is pointing up, however. Television coverage of education is singled out in the report as particularly weak, which is not entirely surprising. There’s not much of substance that can be conveyed in a short local TV package. Ed journos in our clickbait-driven media environment also say they want “more time for in-depth coverage and colleagues with more education expertise.” The top stories for the 2016–17 school year are testing and school finance; but asked to name the most under-covered issue in education, about 26 percent of respondents mentioned “inequality,” including segregation, achievement gaps, and poverty. Alas, fewer than 10 percent said curriculum, pedagogy, and instruction, which would be my response. In an increasingly choice-driven school marketplace, differentiation between various instructional models—not just school types (traditional, charter, parochial, etc.) is essential for parents (and reporters as their proxies) to understand. Also alarming, most reporters admit to getting their story ideas from news releases, news conferences, and PR people.
Finally, a note to school, district, and even state officials who complain about uninformed or biased coverage: One-third of education journalists say that it’s difficult to get in-person access to schools and campuses. That’s not merely odd; if accurate, it’s inexcusable. Public schools, including public charters, have an obligation to open their doors to legitimate, credentialed reporters to report on how the public’s money is being spent to educate children. It’s also an opportunity for schools and districts to enhance the sophistication and nuance of education reporting in their communities.
The bottom line is that education coverage, though far from perfect, appears to be trending smartly in the right direction. The enhanced status of the education beat can only help.
SOURCE: “The state of the education beat 2016: A field with a future,” Education Writers Association (May 2016).
