Embedding Trauma Literacy Into Curriculum: An Examination of the Attitudes of Australian and New Zealand Journalism Educators

Abstract

Australia and New Zealand have reputations as countries prone to catastrophic and frequent natural and man-made disasters. Therefore, it is no surprise that antipodean academics want trauma-informed education for their journalism students. This study presents the Australian-New Zealand results of a 2021 survey exploring educators’ attitudes toward embedding trauma literacy into journalism curriculum. It mirrors a survey from the UK-based Journalism Education and Trauma Research Group. The Australian-New Zealand results confirm that educators want more training to effectively embed trauma-informed reporting into their curricula. The discussion notes the availability of local, research-based teaching materials, and identifies barriers to implementation.

Introduction

Journalists are routinely exposed to potentially traumatizing events (PTEs) that can affect mental health and wellbeing. An established evidence base suggests that journalists are not immune from the emotional impact of covering these types of PTEs (Buchanan & Keats, 2011; Hill et al., 2020; Newman et al., 2003; Simpson & Boggs, 1999), with repeated exposure to traumatic imagery associated with more severe mental health injury (Feinstein et al., 2014), including posttraumatic stress injury (PTSI) (MacDonald et al., 2017). There is also a range of organizational implications that make the mitigation and management of trauma exposure pertinent to educators, managers, and organizations, For example, journalists personally exposed to physical danger may be less likely to perceive their employing organization as supportive (Beam & Spratt, 2009), which can be more debilitating than the primary trauma exposure (Smith et al., 2018).

The nexus between journalism and trauma is important for journalism students to understand because, aligned with the theory of trauma-informed care ( What is Trauma-Informed Care?, n.d. ), an approach in the human services field that recognizes failure to address the impact of trauma on individuals increases the possibility of triggering or exacerbating trauma systems and re-traumatization. Despite the documented risk to wellbeing, many young people begin studying journalism at university without fully appreciating the impact that trauma exposure can have, even while they are still studying (Wake, 2020). Their sense of purpose can be quickly tested when they learn that some 80-100 per cent of them will experience a PTE during the course of their work (Smith et al., 2015) and that they may be exposed to career-ending trauma (Wake & Ricketson, 2022). They may also underestimate the scope of trauma they will be asked to cover throughout their career, perhaps not fully understanding that reporting on death, serious injury and violence is a routine, and often repeated, part of reporting (O’Brien, 2022).

Trauma at Unexpected Moments

Trauma can also occur in a brutal and unexpected way, even when students are doing an internship as part of their studies (Wake, 2020). It’s also been noted that it was Fashion Week in the United States when the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks occurred in New York. Many fashion journalists suddenly found themselves working in unfamiliar roles as disaster reporters, documenting one of the most traumatic events the world has ever witnessed.

“When the planes hit the twin towers, I was a reporter covering New York Fashion Week, waiting for the first show of the day to begin at Bryant Park in midtown Manhattan . . . In the chaos, I . . .was forced to work alone, with a notepad, pen, and a cell phone that died that evening, though not before I’d relayed my notes to a night editor who was kind and patient and never made me feel unqualified.”—Jill Radsken (2021).

Bearing witness to trauma can cause psychosocial reactions that, if not appropriately mitigated or managed, can last an entire lifetime (Sonasundaram & van de Put, 2006). Even when crises last just a limited time, their impact can linger on journalists who have covered them, as well as the victims (Papadopoulou et al., 2022). This posttraumatic stress can also increase in the lead-up to, or on an anniversary of a traumatic event, or after a retraumatizing or triggering time. A key protective factor against the development of serious posttraumatic injury, like PTSI, is being trauma-informed and having training in trauma-informed literacy and resilience. By using a trauma-informed lens, journalists become more sensitive to the impact of trauma and adaptive coping mechanisms on both themselves and others. It promotes understanding and the use of trauma protection tools before, during, and after times of stress. It also requires system change to reduce re-exposure and retraumatization.

Trauma-Informed Professionals

To ensure that student journalists graduate as trauma-informed professionals, journalism education programs need to effectively embed trauma literacy content within the curriculum and normalize conversations about mental health (Seely, 2019). Trauma-informed reporting is an evolving field, but the international Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma says that appropriately prepared journalists need:

“. . . evidence-informed guidance on news choices, language usage and ethics in reporting on the impact of trauma on individuals, families and communities; recommendations for appropriate use of relevant psychological and scientific terminology; and special considerations when reporting on consequential trauma-laden issues such as racism and sexual violence” (Thompson, 2021).

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and the seemingly endless natural disasters being exacerbated by climate change, it has become increasingly clear to students that journalists must also understand the value of the work that they will do. There are particular risks for those journalists living in communities, and potentially losing their own homes and economic livelihoods, to floods, fires, or plague. There is also clear evidence that journalists do not need to be physically close to a traumatic event as digital access brings them face to face with distressing images or words, or to be threatened online and in social media (Posetti et al., 2020). In an article examining the reporting of COVID-19, Jukes et al (2022) provide an excellent overview of the current literature on journalism, emotion, and trauma, as well as emotional management in journalism. They consider moral injury, death knocks, and coping mechanisms for journalists as well as the prevalence of the pastoral role of media and the mission to inform. Jukes et al concluded that the reporting around the pandemic had given journalists a renewed sense of serving the public interest, a key factor for students to understand when considering their own resilience and recovery:

“The sense that they were performing a crucial civic role and fulfilling the public service duty of their profession seemed to afford them a sense of mission. In turn, these imperatives bestowed meaning on their own storied lives, forming an integral part of their emotional labour, which mitigated the potential trauma of reporting on and living in the story at the same time” (Jukes et al., 2022, p. 1011).

The objective of this research was not to revisit the excellent literature on trauma literacy but to explore the experience and attitude of journalism educators in Australia and New Zealand to occupational trauma exposure risk and the practicalities of embedding trauma-informed content into journalism education. The survey sought to create a baseline in knowledge of the level of trauma awareness among educators in Australia and New Zealand, so further educator education could occur, if necessary, and to compare with other international education systems.

The comparison survey used for this research was initiated by the Journalism Education and Trauma Research Group (JETREG), based at the University of Lincoln in the United Kingdom (UK), which has members that include journalism academics, scholars, and practitioners from universities across the world.

Methods

In January 2022, the survey was distributed to the heads of journalism programs in Australia and New Zealand identified by their membership of the Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia (JERAA). JERAA has members at all universities in Australia and New Zealand that offer journalism as a major within a three-year bachelor’s degree, graduate diploma, or master’s program.

The survey asked for either the head of the program—or someone within the teaching team—to complete the survey about awareness of trauma. Questions followed regarding attitudes to the inclusion and content of trauma literacy within the particular university’s journalism courses; challenges of inclusion; reflections; and personal/demographic information.

Some minor additions to the Australian-New Zealand survey occurred prior to its distribution, such as the extra labeling of Assistant Professor with appropriate Australian-New Zealand terminology, because some universities use the language associated with the American system (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor), while others use the system associated with English universities (Associate Lecturer, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Associate Professor, Professor). The main difference between the two classification systems is that the Assistant Professor role in the former encompasses Associate Lecturer, Lecturer and Senior Lecturer in the latter. The survey kept to the questions set by the UK researchers, even though the local researchers questioned how respondents in Australia and New Zealand might interpret some of the questions.

The survey comprised 37 questions that included open and closed questions, with opportunities for respondents to provide further detail at the end of the survey. The questionnaire was expected to take 10 minutes to complete. The survey was anonymous but was only distributed to heads of journalism programs or their nominee in Australia and New Zealand. Of those invited to participate, 23 responded to the survey, representing all the Australia and New Zealand universities that have multiple journalism subjects in their degree programs. The JERAA website has a list of tertiary education institutions that teach journalism: 28 in Australia; four in New Zealand, two in Papua New Guinea, and one in Fiji (https://jeraa.org.au/australian-tertiary-education-institutions-teaching-journalism/).

There was one question that was not asked by the international study that could be included for further iterations of this work, namely if the respondents had had their own experience of trauma, professionally or personally. The survey only asked if they knew of a journalist who had experienced trauma. In Australia and New Zealand, almost all of the educators teaching practical journalism classes have been working journalists, and all were expected to have been exposed to trauma in their work.

Results

A total of 23 heads of journalism programs—or their nominees—in Australia and New Zealand completed the survey. There are 32 universities in Australia that offer some journalism courses. Only 28 of them offer a major in journalism. A few universities offer specific, postgraduate degrees in journalism as well as their undergraduate courses. Among respondents, 52 per cent were female and 43 per cent were male, and one person did not answer this question. The highest level of education of the respondents was PhD (60 per cent), master’s (32 per cent) and bachelor’s degree (9 per cent). All respondents reported that they were based in either Australia or New Zealand, and 90 per cent were working as journalism educators full-time. Respondents self-reported as holding the academic positions of Associate Professor or Senior Lecturer (50 per cent), and Assistant Professor or Lecturer (40 per cent). The remaining 10 per cent did not answer the question. Respondents were experienced educators, with 76 per cent reporting they had more than 10 years’ experience in journalism education.

An overwhelming majority (96 per cent) of respondents reported that they knew at least one practicing journalist who had experienced adverse psychosocial responses attributable to exposure to PTEs, while 22 per cent strongly agreed and 61 per cent agreed that journalism educators understand the psychological toll of journalism practice.

Most respondents (96 per cent) identified that they had a good understanding of the risks arising from occupational exposure to PTEs; however, fewer than half (48 per cent) believed they had received adequate training on trauma or traumatic stress relevant to journalism education or were aware if their institution had guidelines on how to identify students who were experiencing difficulties attributable to exposure to PTEs. Just under half (48 per cent) of respondents believed that they had received adequate orientation and/or training to teach journalism students about PTEs, as well as the psychosocial reactions they can evoke.

All respondents acknowledged that it is common for journalists to experience emotional distress associated with the job (61 per cent strongly agreed; 39 per cent agreed), with 65 per cent reporting that they believed most journalists were exposed to traumatic events via social media; however, just over half of all respondents (57 per cent) did not believe that journalism students are well prepared to cope with the impact of exposure to PTEs.

Most respondents (96 per cent) were aware that the teaching materials utilized in their programs contained traumatic content and felt that the inclusion of appropriate content could help build student resilience and promote the adoption of healthy coping strategies for reducing the risk of adverse psychosocial reactions. The survey did not define traumatic content for the respondents.

Most (91 per cent) also felt that more attention should be given to building resilience in journalism students as a protective strategy for covering future PTEs. Reported barriers to the inclusion of this material in the curriculum included lack of time and resources, lack of specialist knowledge and training materials, accreditation and budget issues, and lack of scope within existing unit and course learning outcome objectives.

Based on present curricula utilized in their programs, all respondents reported that current content in journalism courses at their institution included teaching reporting with sensitivity and raising awareness about how to minimize harm to survivors and the community. Most respondents (96 per cent) indicated that their programs included teaching about how to avoid sensationalized reporting. While 60 per cent of respondents believed that their institution sufficiently embedded trauma literacy into journalism education, only 17 per cent of respondents reported that their current curriculum included role-play interviews with trauma survivors and only 22 per cent included traumatic accident simulations. When asked if they believed whether their journalism students were confident in interviewing survivors of trauma in a way that reduced the risk of evoking further emotional distress, only 23 per cent believed this to be true (5 per cent strongly agreed; 18 per cent agreed).

When asked how journalism curriculum can effectively incorporate trauma in a meaningful way for journalism students, key themes identified among open-ended answers included: the sharing of lived experience; the inclusion of role-playing and simulation; the development of relevant content on trauma, including online trauma and harassment; and the use of contemporary case studies and real-world examples where experienced journalists could share the lessons they have learned throughout their career and survivors of trauma could provide guidance on how students could conduct interviews in positive, empowering ways that avoid retraumatizing the person sharing their story. The dissemination of current, evidence-informed content was also identified as important, including reference to globally recognized guidelines and resources from organizations, including the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma, Mindframe, Our Watch, and the Butterfly Foundation. There are also many international guidelines available from international bodies such as Internews, Committee to Protect Journalists and the International Federation of Journalists, all of which provide guidance on safety and self-care when covering dangerous and difficult assignments.

Discussion

The survey results highlight the respondents’ firm belief in the need and value of including curriculum materials about reporting on traumatic events and issues. Educators show their desire for more comprehensive training on how to embed trauma and the impact of exposure to PTEs into the curriculum. That first finding is not surprising. Journalism educators in Australia have been aware of the need to include these curriculum materials for at least the past two decades since Australian academic Philip Castle, did a master’s thesis on the topic at the Queensland University of Technology and began presenting on the issue of trauma and journalism at the annual Australian journalism education conferences (Castle, 2002). This second finding is also not surprising but needs to be fleshed out or it risks wandering down the boulevard of broken (curriculum) dreams.

The notion of the crowded curriculum in primary and secondary (grade) schools has been a mainstay of public commentary in Australia for many years (e.g., see Medlen, 2010). The same is true for tertiary (university) education. Trauma-informed journalism must find its place in an increasingly crowded curriculum, not just for the benefit of the journalists but also for members of the wider community who can find value, understanding and resilience in the telling of their stories.

The pressure on journalism curricula has manifested itself in several ways. First, in introducing subjects to teach new communication technologies as they arose—first the internet in the 1990s, then social media in the 2000s—and then in shifting from giving students a choice to specialize in print or broadcast journalism to requiring them to be able to practice journalism across all media forms: text, online, audio, video, and social media. There may be principles common to all media forms, but there are also skills and facility with equipment that vary across media forms, all of which need to be taught and practiced.

The rise of the attention economy, originally theorized by economist Herbert Simon (1971), brought about by the proliferation of devices and information at our disposal, is mirrored by competition for attention in university journalism curricula. Where it was once acceptable to introduce students to the issues arising in reporting on traumatic events, there is now additional pressure on educators from various interest and support groups to include curriculum for a range of social issues. For instance, to provide guidance around reporting on, say, Islam or First Nations peoples, and dealing with the many specific issues raised when reporting on members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer/questioning, and asexual (LGBTIQA+) communities.

Australian-based resources have been provided for journalists online for all the aforementioned interest groups, with each further attempting in their own way to discuss intersectionality of these issues. For instance, the Australian Press Council—the self-regulatory body that hears complaints about print and (some) online journalism—devoted many months to consulting with representatives of these communities to develop suitably comprehensive and nuanced reporting guidelines (Australian Press Council, 2023). Educators face a choice of a once-over-lightly approach or engaging with an area in depth; neither feels entirely satisfactory. They also face shortened semesters, or even shortened programs. Where the 13-week semester was once the norm in Australia, a 12- or even 11-week semester is now commonplace. As there are no nationally agreed standards for journalists or journalism education in Australia or New Zealand, most universities have faced cuts to their journalism undergraduate offerings in recent years, with many rebranding and refocusing on more general communication degrees.

In the absence of a magic wand to make the problems of an overcrowded curriculum disappear, the intensifying competition for students’ attention underscores the need for educators to draw on good-quality curriculum materials. Educators are encouraged to develop these themselves but, because the modern academic is time-poor, it helps to know where to look for guidance on curriculum materials. There is no evidence in the survey to suggest it, but there may also be a reluctance of some educators to deal with some of the potentially more difficult parts of trauma-informed reporting where it leaks into potentially confronting issues, such as systemic racism. The Dart Centre Asia Pacific was launched in Australia in 2004 as the local arm of the US-based Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma and its Australian founding managing director Cait McMahon began providing journalism trauma training at the annual Journalism Education and Research Association conferences. Other Dart members have sporadically been invited to speak to journalism students across the nation. Dart draws upon the resources created by the US center; however, it has built a large collection of local resources for university educators. These are informed by events in the region, including a video entitled “Getting it Right,” which is focused on recording the experiences of a selection of Australians and New Zealanders who had come into contact with the news media in various ways, ranging from being a grieving parent to being at the scene of a disaster, to being wrongfully accused of killing their two young children. One of the interviewees, who experienced the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, was both a journalist and the partner of a person missing, feared dead during the tsunami (McMahon et al., 2014). The interviews provided vivid, sometimes confronting firsthand testimony about what it is like to be thrown into the media maelstrom. It was accompanied by a 19-page teaching notes document that provided the relevant background to each of the interviewees’ stories, classroom exercises, key tips for accurate, sensitive reporting, additional reading, and further resources (Ricketson et al., 2013). The Dart Centre Asia Pacific site has a range of materials that have been specifically created for educators in the region, including works that have been translated into other languages such as Korean, Chinese, Indonesian, and Japanese. Another significant Australian resource of particular use with postgraduate journalism students is the work on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s peer-support program. Its video—The Trauma Awareness: Peer Support—highlights the value of awareness, training, and peer support in the workplace for journalists covering traumatic events (Dart Centre Australasia, 2010). These Australian materials augment and, in some ways, extend the resources offered by the US-based organization.

Another significant resource for Australian educators is Everymind (previously the Hunter Institute of Mental Health), which was set up by the Australian government in 1999 and is funded to research media coverage of mental health and to advocate for improved reporting standards (Mindframe for journalism and public relations education, 2022). One of its first set of guidelines and associated teaching resources that focused on reporting suicide and mental illness, Mindframe for Journalists, acknowledged journalists can feel a responsibility to the bereaved, and that there was a responsibility to ensure that they do not spread the tragedy to others in the way they inform audiences about a death. Later, Everymind guidelines have dealt with a range of other potentially traumatizing stories, such as reporting on child sexual abuse, eating disorders, drug and alcohol abuse, and violent crime. Significantly, the Everymind offers in-person or online training for universities teaching journalism, and provides them with guidelines about the emotional and physical resources needed when witnessing trauma. They also point to the Dart Center’s self-care tips for media professionals:

“Reporting suicide can be distressing for the media, especially if they have been affected by suicide in the past. Journalists may report from sites where there is graphic evidence of a death, they may see and be affected by other people’s distress or may be required to interview people who have been bereaved or are in shock. It is important that you safeguard your well-being in these situations. Consider alerting a manager if you believe you will be adversely affected by covering a story. During or following a story, ensure you are aware of your emotional reactions and consider talking it over with someone you trust, or contacting one of the support services listed in the Mindframe resources” (Everymind, 2020).

Everymind also points journalism students to professional assistance, listing helplines for those reporting and those being reported upon.

The Everymind suicide reporting guidelines led to “positive trends in the use of more sensitive language about mental illness” according to Katrina Clifford, but have “not necessarily translated into the contextualisation of mental health issues in the media” (Clifford, 2021, pp. 61–62). Clifford’s work was published in a monograph as part of an international publisher’s series of books on police, media, and culture, and it is important for students to engage with scholarly literature such as this.

No less important is to point students to more accessible texts, such as the memoir of an Australian journalist, Lisa Millar, Daring to Fly (2021), which recounts her long and successful career in a personal, readable style. At one level, it is the story of a girl from country Queensland who lives her dream of becoming a foreign correspondent, but along the way Millar gradually reveals the toll taken on her, not only by the rigors of continually criss-crossing countries at all hours of the day and night to cover the latest big news story in her patch, whether the United States or Europe, but of covering traumatic events such as the hanging of a convicted drug smuggler in Singapore or interviewing the mother of a child murdered at Sandy Hook or a succession of terrorist attacks in London and Europe. Millar writes about how she has been deeply affected by the impact of reporting many traumatic events. As a Dart-Ochberg fellow, Millar has reflected on her experiences, has shared them with other journalists and students, and has encapsulated key lessons in the final chapters of her memoir.

Improving Trauma Teaching

Despite the clear availability of evidence-based teaching resources in Australia and New Zealand (outlined in the discussion) and accessible and local texts for students, more than half of all respondents (57 per cent) did not believe that journalism students were well prepared to cope with the impact of exposure to PTEs. Apart from improving educators’ knowledge of the resources available—and ensuring curriculum leaders acknowledge the need to prioritize trauma-informed reporting—educators can also help build resilience and promote good coping strategies. Self-care tips for student journalists are the same as working journalists, and need to be taught long before the reporting begins.

It should be noted that representatives from Mindframe and Dart attend the Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia conference each year. They collaborate on materials, make presentations, provide materials, and talk formally and informally to the delegates (who generally number more than 140). In some years, there have also be presentations from an organization that works in the area of domestic and family violence, Our Watch, as well as other associations representing potentially traumatizing workforces.

Educators who have lived experience of trauma-informed reporting can, if they feel comfortable, use their own experiences in the classroom. When reflecting on a career in the media, many journalists would acknowledge that among their most-important teachers were their colleagues and peers. This is undoubtedly true, but this aspect of learning has often been left to circumstance and not explicitly included in a systematic or adequately resourced way in journalism education programs.

Jha et al. (2009a) conducted a qualitative study exploring the views of both students and educators about the sharing of lived experience in medical education, identifying that the lived experience perspective offered a unique viewpoint that came from experiencing the health care system firsthand. Hearing from people who have directly experienced similar challenges as may be faced by journalism students could be particularly memorable and powerful, meaning that students were more likely to remember key messages and lessons. (Byrne et al., 2013) identified. The incorporation of lived experience into nursing curricula helped to challenge students’ preconceived ideas and encouraged more personal reflection on their approach to their professional practice. As it can be difficult to conceptualize and understand the experience of trauma, including experienced journalists who have lived experience of trauma exposure, makes it easier for students to connect and engage with the course content.

A common concern raised in the literature is that the repeated retelling and sharing of traumatic experiences could be distressing and potentially retraumatizing for those sharing their lived experience (Jha et al., 2009a, 2009b; Towle et al., 2010; Wykurz & Kelly, 2002). Felton and Stickley (2004) conducted interviews with university lecturers on mental health nursing programs. All 10 respondents suggested that the “attributes of people with mental health problems” might make it particularly challenging to step into a teaching role. They gave the example that mental health patients might find taking the lead in the classroom environment anxiety-provoking. Interestingly, in the introduction to their paper, the same authors highlight that a long-standing “occupational culture” has tended to downplay the capabilities of people with mental health difficulties, creating a barrier to increased patient involvement in teaching.

Another potential challenge is ensuring representativeness (Richards & Rose, 2021). While an advantage of incorporating journalists with lived experience into the journalism curriculum is that they can draw on their own experience, it is also important for students to understand that not all occupational experiences are the same (Felton & Stickley, 2004; Towle et al., 2010). Towle et al. (2010) suggest that educators can ensure broader representation from across the profession by implementing appropriate selection strategies when identifying a range of guest speakers that prioritize the inclusion of certain groups, experiences and skills. Tew et al. (2004) emphasized how certain groups tend to be particularly absent from educational programs, including younger people, older adults, and Indigenous, black, Asian, and other minority ethnic groups.

Despite these barriers, lived experience can be an effective and powerful educational tool and journalism educators should seek opportunities to work in collaboration with people who have trauma exposure lived experience in the delivery of journalism education. The involvement of people with trauma exposure lived experience in educational programs can provide unique and relevant learning opportunities as well as key lessons for both undergraduate and postgraduate journalism students.

Conclusion

Australian and New Zealand journalism educators acknowledge that journalists are routinely exposed to PTEs that can impact mental health and wellbeing, and they understand the need for trauma literacy to be effectively embedded within journalism curricula. While the authors acknowledge that individual journalists cannot do much on their own to solve the systemic problems of journalism (including constant deadlines and online harassment), they can learn about the value of journalistic work to society, how to advocate for themselves and for others, and to enhance their own resilience through healthy coping and peer-support strategies.

Our survey of Australian and New Zealand educators found there are regionally specific trauma-informed education resources available for use by academics, but there needs to be more awareness of, and comprehensive training in, effectively embedding trauma literacy into the curriculum. This includes training in resilience, particularly for journalists who are part of communities suffering from trauma (be that floods, fires, or systematic racism and abuse).

While trauma education has, to some extent, been offered at the annual journalism education conference in Australia since 2004, this work clearly has not reached all journalism academics, particularly casual teaching staff, who are often responsible for the bulk of the skilled-based journalism instruction, where issues around trauma can be embedded as part of the learning process. Finding a way of keeping academics, particularly casual academics, upskilled in this area needs to be considered, perhaps via online learning.

This survey has been useful to map the views of academic journalism staff in Australia and New Zealand at a particular point in time. However, further work is required to determine how students, and then graduates, use the trauma-informed resources presented to them in class once they begin their careers, and to determine if they continue to draw upon the lessons learned throughout their working lives.

The authors believe that, beyond any written curricula, one the most powerful ways for journalism educators to create trauma-informed journalists is to be open with students about the need for self-care, peer support, and to model behaviors, including help-seeking behaviors, which students can then take into the workforce.