Applying Dialogic Public Relations Theory to Public Relations Education

This article compares and contrasts theories of dialogic pedagogy with Kent and Taylor's (2002) dialogic public relations model. Several possible explanations are offered to explain the lack of research on dialogic pedagogy among PR scholars and educators. Dialogic public relations is proposed as a helpful approach to make PR education more relational and student-centered. Practical ideas are suggested for applying dialogic PR principles to classroom teaching.Keywords: dialogue, dialogic pedagogy, dialogic public relations, public relations educationKnowing what a person means by the term, "dialogic," is not always easy. Although the word clearly refers to a dialogue, or conversation of some sort, it takes on different connotations within different academic disciplines. According to Cissna and Anderson (1994), dialogue means one thing when talking about knowledge, and something else in the context of relationships. Dialogue also has specialized meanings for conversation analysts, ethnomethodologists, and literary critics; therefore, when scholars use "dialogue" or "dialogic" to describe education (Freire, 1970/2006), public relations (Kent & Taylor, 2002), mentoring (Bokeno & Gantt, 2000), or religion (Keaten & Soukup, 2009), confusion can arise.This article argues that principles of dialogue can enhance public relations (PR) education. Some PR educators may be using dialogue in their classrooms already, but there is a lack of scholarly work connecting dialogue with PR education. One reason may be that "dialogic pedagogy"-the approach to dialogue most prevalent in education scholarship-comes from an understanding of dialogue that is problematic for some PR training. Fortunately, PR has its own model of dialogic public relations, based on a different approach to dialogue, which can be extended to PR education. This article will briefly describe dialogic pedagogy, explaining why this approach is often less than ideal for PR education. Then, Kent and Taylor's (2002) dialogic theory of public relations will be discussed, along with two reasons this approach to dialogue should be applied to PR training.Finally, several suggestions will be offered for how PR instructors might adapt and apply Kent and Taylor's theory to their classrooms.What is Dialogic Pedagogy?As with dialogue, itself, no single definition of dialogic pedagogy exists. Dialogic pedagogy has been used to identify a set of classroom techniques, as well as a fundamental approach to the construction of knowledge. Burbules (1993) focused on dialogue as both a theory and a practice, suggesting, "Dialogue is guided by a spirit of discovery, so that the typical tone of a dialogue is exploratory and interrogative" (p. 8). Burbules also distinguished between teleological and nonteleological views of dialogue. Teleological dialogue, according to Burbules, has "a definite, predetermined end point" (1993, p. 5). That is, teleological dialogue is a conversation designed to arrive at a specific truth. A prime example is the Socratic method. An instructor uses questions to engage students and make them think, but the instructor already has some idea where the conversation should go. In contrast, nonteleological dialogue involves setting aside dogmatic positions and simply exploring ideas without a preconceived destination in mind.Arnett (1992) emphasized the role of values and character development in dialogic pedagogy. He argued that sharing information is not enough. Rather, students must be encouraged to think about how they will use what they learn in the context of civil society. For Arnett, "Dialogic education is a form of communicative praxis inviting conversation about ideas and between people, while asking value questions of how and why particular information will be put into action" (1992, p. 18).The dominant approach to dialogic pedagogy seems to view dialogue as an entire epistemological approach, rather than a mere classroom technique. …