See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281041597

Trends and Issues in Tourism and Hospitality Higher Education: Visioning the Future

Article  in  Tourism and Hospitality Research · July 2003

DOI: 10.1177/146735840300400409

CITATIONS READS
70 4,936

2 authors:

Marianna Sigala Tom Baum

University of South Australia University of Strathclyde
228 PUBLICATIONS   4,126 CITATIONS    206 PUBLICATIONS   4,197 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Social Media in Travel, Tourism and Hospitality; Theory, Practice and Cases View project

Smart tourism View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tom Baum on 23 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Trends and issues in tourism and hospitality
higher education: Visioning the future
Marianna Sigala and Tom Baum
Received (in revised form): 25th February, 2003
The Scottish Hotel School, University of Strathclyde, 94, Cathedral Street, Glasgow, G4 0LG,
Scotland, UK
Tel: +44 141 548 3949; Fax: +44 141 552 2870; E-mail: M.Sigala@strath.ac.uk; t.g.baum@strath.
ac.uk
Marianna Sigala is Lecturer in Hotel and
Hospitality Management in The Scottish
Hotel School, University of Strathclyde,
Glasgow, and her PhD involved a quantita-
tive assessment of the productivity impact
of Information and Communication Tech-
nologies (ICT) in the hotel sector. She is
currently the secretary of Euro-CHRIE. Her
interests include ICT applications, hotel
operations, productivity and performance
measurement and her work has been pub-
lished in several journals and international
conferences.
Tom Baum is Professor of International
Hospitality Management and Head of
Department in The Scottish Hotel School.
Tom Baum’s primary degrees are in edu-
cation and his PhD was a study of the inter-
national tourism labour market. He has
researched, taught and consulted on five
continents and is a specialist in HRM plan-
ning, education and training for hospitality
and tourism. He has written a wide range
of books and journal articles in this field.
ABSTRACT
KEYWORDS: education, hospitality, tour-
ism, trends, strategies
Changes in the higher educational environment
are having a tremendous impact on the educa-
Tourism and Hospitality Research Volume 4 Number 4
tion process, curricula, learning outcomes and
instructional practices. This paper aims to iden-
tify the challenges facing established universities
in tourism and hospitality education and to pro-
vide insight of how these could be managed in
the future. Five sources of change are identified:
the socio-economic and technological environ-
ment; global competition; the student market;
educators and teaching methods; and the tourism
and hospitality industry. The exploitation of
modern technologies and the development of
information literacy and knowledge management
skills are the two major issues that universities
need to consider in the future.
INTRODUCTION
Tremendous changes are taking place in
advanced industrial societies, caused by
intended and unintended consequences of
economic and technological development.
The education sector is not an exception
from such changes, since relevant develop-
ments pose several challenges for the trans-
formation of the whole educational
process, including educational curricula,
learning materials, instructional practices
and education stakeholders. Tourism and
hospitality, as a sector within the global
economy, has operating and human Tourism and Hospitality Research,
Vol. 4, No. 4, 2003,
resource characteristics that differentiate it pp. 367–376
# Henry Stewart Publications,
from other industrial sectors and these have 1467–3584
Page 367
Trends and issues in tourism and hospitality higher education: Visioning the future
direct consequences for the delivery of edu-
cation and training (Baum, 2001). The aim
of this paper is to identify and consolidate
opinions, arguments and evidence regard-
ing the specific challenges facing established
universities in tourism and hospitality
higher education and to provide some
insight into how these could be managed
in the future.
CHALLENGES FROM THE SOCIO-
ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL
ENVIRONMENT
It is widely argued throughout the social
sciences that during the past three decades
post-industrial societies have been under-
going a substantial process of structural
transformation. For example, despite their
divergent theoretical underpinnings, the-
ories such as the Post Industrial Society
(Bell, 1973), the Learning Society (Husen,
1974), the Knowledge Society (Steh, 1994)
and Reflexive Modernisation (Beck, 1994)
have all tried to grasp the essence of the
continuing and accelerating process of
change within societies that Guile (2001:
471) referred to as the ‘scientification’ of
society. Specifically, this concept is used in
order to denote the fundamental shift of
the production basis of society, whereby
knowledge has superseded the traditional
factors of production (ie land, capital and
labour), as a result of the increasing pene-
tration of scientific knowledge not only
into production but also into most spheres
of social and cultural life.
The increased importance of knowledge
in the process of production is evident in
the debate regarding the type of knowl-
edge that is deemed to be most important
to economic creation. Indeed, some writers
such as Bell (1973) stress that scientific
knowledge is the single most important
kind; other writers such as Drucker (1993)
argue that organisations must exploit the
tacit knowledge and information held by
workers, while Reich (1991) suggests that
Page 368
economic progress will evolve the combi-
nation of scientific and tacit knowledge.
This lack of consensus about the type of
knowledge that is central to economic
activity is also reflected in the wide range
of assertions about the main features of
knowledge economies. It has been argued
that knowledge economies will be charac-
terised by an ‘informational mode of pro-
duction’ (Castells, 1995), ‘innovation-
mediated production’ (Florida, 1995) and
‘knowledge-creating companies’ (Nonaka
and Takeuchi, 1995). On the other hand,
the increasingly vital role of ‘knowledge’
within today’s society and economy has
also been fuelled by the great potential of
the continually evolving information and
communication technologies (ICT) tools to
foster and support knowledge creation and
dissemination.
The tourism and hospitality industry is
not exempt from such changes. The infor-
mation intensiveness of the tourism and
hospitality product, the increasing sophisti-
cation and needs of guests and travellers as
well as the penetration of ICT in all
aspects of business operations and strategy
(Sigala, 2001) are intensifying the shift of
the industry towards the knowledge econ-
omy and transforming the type of knowl-
edge and skills required for work in civil
society. It is argued that tourism and hos-
pitality educational curriculum and deliv-
ery mechanisms should increasingly
nurture and instil the development of
information literacy and knowledge man-
agement competencies (Sigala, 2001 and
2002).
The attainment of such information lit-
eracy and knowledge management skills
means that students are able to: recognise a
need for information; identify and locate
appropriate information sources; know
how to gain access to the information con-
tained in those sources; evaluate the quality
of information obtained; organise and ana-
lyse the information; use the information

effectively; and share and disseminate infor-
mation sources for problem solving or
knowledge-creating activities. Such indivi-
dual abilities are deemed critical to educa-
tional and economic success, because
information-literate tourism and hospitality
graduates are better students, citizens and
workers.
At the same time, the structure and
organisation of tourism and hospitality as a
sector within the global economy poses
particular challenges with respect to the
development of intelligent technological
solutions to the sector’s learning needs.
Despite the growth of multinationals
within the tourism economy, tourism
remains an industry which is dominated by
small operating units (chain and/or inde-
pendent) which are widely dispersed geo-
graphically. The sector also subscribes to an
operating culture that provides limited
time for reflection, study or formal learn-
ing. From an educational perspective, tour-
ism and hospitality’s traditions lie in
practical and craft-based training (Gillespie
and Baum, 2000) and these origins con-
tinue to influence the culture of delivery.
The skills which tourism and hospitality
have traditionally coveted are those within
the technical domain (for job areas such as
chefs and airline pilots) or in what might
be called socio-emotional areas, principally
concerned with the delivery of quality ser-
vice (Baum, 2002). Recognition of the
need for wider management and informa-
tion handling skills is something which has
only recently dawned upon education pro-
viders for the sector (Christou and Eaton,
2000). Baum and Odgers (2001) demon-
strate the reality of tensions that continue
to exist in tourism and hospitality with
respect to these three skills dimensions.
What clearly emerges is that educational
provision continues to focus on traditional
technical skills while the reality of the
changing labour market means that
employers in the hospitality sector give
Sigala and Baum
priority to social, communicatory and ICT
skills when recruiting new staff (Christou,
1999).
Young (1998) identified another chal-
lenge posed by the changes taking place in
the knowledge society that also highlights
the need for the development of informa-
tion literacy and knowledge management
skills along with others. He argued that
the shift towards a knowledge economy
has made the traditional link between qua-
lifications and employment more proble-
matic, as employers are no longer using
qualifications to select individuals for fixed
and reutilised roles, nor stable employ-
ment. Moreover, given that knowledge
economies are characterised by increas-
ingly fluid occupational structures, they
are perpetually generating the need for
new types and combinations of knowledge
and skill.
Consequently, the key issue is the extent
to which people have already developed
the capability to innovate and contribute to
changing work processes, or whether they
are prepared to take responsibility for
working with others to develop the cap-
ability to do so. Specifically, within the
context of the inherently multinational and
multicultural tourism workplace (including
both colleagues and customers), Sigala
(2001) stressed that the acquisition of colla-
borative and communication skills attached
to social, multicultural abilities and quali-
ties becomes more critical for employees
working in the tourism and hospitality
sector, because the workplace requires a
knowledgeable workforce that can work
collaboratively irrespective of their spatial,
time and cultural differences. Earlier, Baum
(1990) emphasised that tourism and hospi-
tality graduates should have a multi-skills
base to allow them to be creative, flexible
and adaptable. Because adapting to a
rapidly changing work environment will
mean multiple career and job changes,
however, an early commitment to learning
Page 369
Trends and issues in tourism and hospitality higher education: Visioning the future
as a process and not as an end-product and
an emphasis on the role that information
literacy plays in this process will enable
tourism and hospitality graduates to see
these changes as transitional and not trau-
matic, while equipping them with the skills
to be continually flexible and creative.
These arguments indicate that education
systems and institutions must take the chal-
lenges of the knowledge economy ser-
iously. This would, however, include
restructuring the learning process to reflect
the use of information in the real world,
changing the role of the educator from
presenter of pre-packaged facts to facilita-
tor of active learning and transforming the
library specialist to an active collaborator
in curriculum planning for effective use
and availability of information resources.
Indeed, educators need to realise that teach-
ing is not telling, that learning is not
absorbing and that knowledge is not static
and, in turn, reflect these to their instruc-
tion mechanisms and student appraisal sys-
tems. Regarding instruction and delivery
mechanisms several authors (eg Sigala,
2001, 2002; McDonnell, 2000; Cho et al.,
2002) have argued the benefits of colla-
borative and constructivist learning envir-
onments for the development of
information literacy and knowledge man-
agement skills.
The internet and other ICT tools’ net-
working and interactive capabilities can be
further exploited in order to create
resource-based, collaborative and easily
accessible (at any time and place) learning
platforms and communities. ICT, however,
can be used either to automate or ‘infor-
mate’ teaching and learning practices.
Thus, universities can use ICT simply to
ensure that students have access to drill and
practice activities and canned knowledge,
so that they acquire narrowly conceived
‘information processing skills’. Alterna-
tively, universities can use ICT to recon-
ceptualise and transform their pedagogical
Page 370
models as well as to develop and foster col-
laborative learning communities for enhan-
cing students’ learning and support
experiences.
Unfortunately, although universities
appear to have recognised the need to pro-
vide students with access to ICT to prepare
them for the emerging demands of the
knowledge era, they do not appear to have
rethought the relationship with pedagogy.
Instead, many institutions seem to have
simply automated their existing approaches
to teaching and learning. In investigating
the use of internet tools for enhancing and
supporting tourism and hospitality educa-
tion in Europe, Sigala and Christou (2003)
found that internet exploitation for educa-
tional purposes is still at the first era of e-
learning pedagogy (Sigala, 2002). Since the
internet is mainly exploited as a mechanism
for information distribution and gathering,
it is argued that institutions need fully to
exploit the internet’s interactive and net-
working capabilities in order to extend its
role as a vital tool for continuous pedago-
gical innovation and improvement in
teaching and learning processes. To extend
the role and use of the internet beyond the
one of a page-turning device, however,
Sigala and Christou (2003) argued that first
the reported difficulties regarding the lack
of technological resources, technology and
educational support and skills must be
addressed.
CHALLENGES FROM INCREASING
GLOBAL COMPETITION
The higher education industry in devel-
oped countries has been under a great
restructuring and transformation process
driven by first, the introduction of corpo-
rate universities, for-profit universities and,
recently, of virtual universities. The latter,
by providing highly flexible and low-cost
educational alternatives and by reaching
markets far beyond their geographical lim-
itations, are challenging the monopoly and

power of conventional and traditional
bricks and mortar universities. As a result,
Duguet (1995) argued that the educational
sector has started to behave like any other
industry operating in an open competitive
market, potentially with international as
well as domestic ‘outlets’ and less like a tra-
ditional public sector giant.
The new educational providers have
risen in order to fill the undeniable demand
for open, flexible, distance and life-long
learning and include for-profit universities;
corporate universities (eg the Accor Uni-
versity, the Kellogg University, McDo-
nalds Hamburger University); virtual
universities (such as Universitas 21, a colla-
boration project of Thomson Learning and
Universitas 21, Singapore and eUniversity
in the UK, www.ukeu.com); and multina-
tional organisations such as Microsoft,
whose primary business is not education
but who control facilities central to it.
Virtual universities are based on the
cyberspace; an initial type of such organisa-
tions is already challenging established
tourism and hospitality higher education
institutions. International virtual universi-
ties will offer courses globally with high
‘brand’ recognition and may even enhance
their reputation by affiliating with estab-
lished universities. Hence, if established
universities are to survive, they can do so
by matching the multimedia sophistication
and global educational networking of the
virtual universities. Thus, traditional uni-
versities need to ensure that ICT are used
to inform and not automate educational
processes by continually exploiting ICT for
pedagogic innovation.
At the same time, they would need to
rethink their products, channels, customers
and portfolio. To achieve this, universities
may need to adapt and practise a partner-
ship-building theory (Weir and Smallman,
1998). Since in the new economy gaining a
sustainable advantage is no longer achieved
by addressing the power of competitive
Sigala and Baum
forces (eg Moore, 1993), but rather
through creating and maintaining strategic
alliances, sharing and combining core com-
petencies and resources even with competi-
tors (the competition model), universities
should consider forming partnerships with
industries and other universities. The devel-
opment of jointly designed and delivered
degrees and the share of resources are the
most evident collaborative activities that
can lead to efficient development of teach-
ing material and great accumulation of
knowledge and expertise from different
perspectives. Universities, however, should
not underestimate the problems that curri-
culum control issues may bring about.
Universities can also greatly benefit by
extending their partnership building and
collaborations to involve organisations out-
side the education industry. Given the fact
that expertise in new technologies and
instructional design is rare and not always
available in traditional universities, partner-
ship with media, technology and telecom-
munication companies can lead to
substantial cost savings and higher quality
when developing technology-based mate-
rial and delivery mechanisms (eg the part-
nership between Thomson Learning and
Universitas 21). Within the context of
tourism and hospitality education, partner-
ship with the industry is also required in
order to bring first-hand expertise and
knowledge into the traditional instructions.
Cho and Schmeltzer (2000) argued that the
involvement of professionals in virtual
classrooms would substantially enhance the
learning experience of tourism and hospi-
tality graduates.
CHALLENGES FROM CHANGES IN THE
STUDENT MARKET
Changes in the education sector as a
response to increasing and changing world-
wide demand for higher education do not
only cause the transformation of traditional
universities. The potential student market
Page 371
Trends and issues in tourism and hospitality higher education: Visioning the future
is increasing and its growth is to a great
extent due to the number of mature stu-
dents entering higher education (the Greek
Open University receives thousands of
applications for its programmes but it can
only accommodate a couple of hundred
mature students each year). The needs of
potential students are also being trans-
formed and enriched by the impact of ICT
and higher education institutions need to
be adaptable or their relevance and utility
alike will fade.
The emerging new breed of students is
aware of the growing importance attached
to education, both by individuals and by
society as a whole (Hague, 1999). Conse-
quently, more and more people want a flex-
ible education system, and full-time
enrolment in an academic institution does
not suit them. Flexible learning is also very
appropriate for full-time students, particu-
larly in the UK, who are taking on part-
time jobs and therefore require more flex-
ible learning and teaching processes.
The students of the multimedia genera-
tion will be empowered and aware consu-
mers, choosing their education from the
whole world’s offering. If universities
cannot deliver, then students can find an
alternative with a click of a mouse. As the
role of student is changing from one of
receiving to one of interacting and select-
ing, the attraction of more students would
become even more difficult.
These radical movements led to impor-
tant changes in the students’ demands,
which are advancing towards a totally con-
sumer-led market, a point which, accord-
ing to Hague (1999), many universities
have not realised. After recognising the
increasing power of students’ needs and
requirements, Sigala (2002) stressed the
need to move to a ‘third era’ of e-learning
pedagogy that would aim at the develop-
ment and delivery of one-to-one educa-
tional experiences to suit and match
students’ learning orientations.
Page 372
It is widely agreed that in order to fulfil
the needs of a student body growing in
both diversity and delivery, and to meet its
massive demands for increased amounts of
flexibility, new approaches must be made.
To that end, Pritchard and Jones (1996)
argued that universities should provide two
forms of flexibility:
— Flexibility in delivery, so that students
can learn when, where and at whatever
rate suits them
— Flexibility in content and outcome, so
that students can acquire qualifications,
or a particular skill and shape individual
outcomes through their choice and
adaptation of their studies.
To achieve these forms of flexibility and
develop student-centred learning environ-
ments, it is necessary that ICT tools and
capabilities are fully exploited. Despite the
apparent benefits of developing e-learning
environments underpinned by sound peda-
gogical models, however, a serious issue is
raised that students are not adequately
equipped to operate effectively in a techno-
logically mediated and collaborative teach-
ing and learning environment (Sigala,
2001). Crock (1996) argued that many stu-
dents approach university studies with the
traditional view of university study (eg one
of an expert, teacher-centred model of
teaching and learning), while Sigala’s
(2001) findings provided evidence that stu-
dents were transferring the method and
learning styles (eg memorising of canned
knowledge) adopted from previous educa-
tion in online learning environments. As a
result, the quality and effectiveness of stu-
dents to pursue and perform in self-direc-
ted and self-regulated online learning
experiences were questioned.
CHALLENGES POSED BY CHANGES TO
EDUCATORS AND TEACHING
The impact of technological implementa-

tions, changing student characteristics and
education sector structure (competition and
partnership/collaborations) might most
strongly be experienced by educators and
teaching styles alike. Stamps (1998) argued
that the structure of future universities
would be either fully or partially virtual
and consist of a network of links with sup-
pliers, leaving universities to concentrate
on their core activity: research and teach-
ing. Moreover, as technological inventions
have eliminated the barriers of time, place
and sequence, while fostering educational
innovation in instruction, they are leading
to both job creation and destruction.
ICT can be used to facilitate learning by
replacing the worst parts of lecturing (such
as disseminating and presenting lecture
notes and teaching material) and by filling
the resource and staff gaps in universities,
libraries and laboratories. Moreover, the
social interaction of good traditional teach-
ing can be facilitated technologically (inter-
active one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-
one, asynchronous or synchronous com-
munications), while the student interaction
with the content of the course is achieved
and enhanced through well-designed mul-
timedia materials. In other words, ICT
provides educators with the means by
which they can carefully assemble resources
and craft their presentations for duplication
instead of duplicating themselves in lecture
theatres.
The development and increasing use of
collaborative and constructivist e-learning
environments are also changing the role of
educators. The balance of educators’ tasks
moves from information delivery to man-
agement of educational opportunities and
experiences facilitated from students’ per-
spectives, through improved access, deliv-
ery and instruction options. As described
by Sigala (2001 and 2002), online instruc-
tors should increasingly facilitate, moderate
and direct, when necessary, online learning
experiences, as well as go beyond moderat-
Sigala and Baum
ing the learning process to engage in the
negotiation of meanings and become, along
with their students, knowledge builders. In
fact, a negotiator role requires educators to
collaborate with students to provide the
conceptual means of fine-tuning discussions
and to help them build an environment in
which higher-order argument and knowl-
edge building could take place. The notions
of the collective construction and co-con-
structing of a course should not be an
excuse for educators entirely to relinquish
their traditional role. According to Mason
(1998), there should always be a balance
between good presentation on the part of
educators and willingness to work quickly
and to adapt to the evolving group
dynamics in virtual classrooms. Thus, edu-
cators require a real understanding of the
purpose and learning outcomes of the
course and the ability to realise and achieve
these in the form of challenging online
activities and group processes. Therefore, as
online education delivery is not a technol-
ogy problem but a pedagogy problem,
educators need to strive continually to
develop and enhance their skills and com-
petencies in the latter field.
Martin et al. (1994) predicted that
because there is no need to be physically
present, educators would not be employed
by one single institution, but rather by a
number of different ones. This provides the
educator with a substantial amount of free-
dom — allowing him/her to work as little
or as much as desired for a selected group
of universities. Moreover, Martin et al.
(1994) envisioned that individual educators’
performance will be rated and evaluated by
the student and that future employment
would depend on that score. At the
extreme, celebrity, freelance professors,
with incomes and audiences comparable
with those of some entertainers, may
emerge, since technology would enable
them to reach large numbers of students.
These pose both management difficulties
Page 373
Trends and issues in tourism and hospitality higher education: Visioning the future
and opportunities for all players, or as
Daniel (1996: 145) argued ‘we are not
facing a time where lecturers are not
demanded . . .’, but a time where the role
of teaching will change and open up both
opportunities and threats for staff and insti-
tutions alike.
CHALLENGES POSED BY A CHANGING
TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY
In many respects, the parochial nature of
education for the tourism and hospitality
sector (Baum, 2001), notwithstanding the
global status of the industry itself, have
mitigated against the effective development
of new, e-technology driven initiatives on
a significant scale. Tourism and hospitality,
like all sectors of the global economy, is
currently undergoing a period of major
change. Outcomes of this change include:
— consolidation of providers, so that
small, independent operators are strug-
gling to offer generic services and
cannot survive without a clearly identi-
fied niche within which to operate
— standardisation of service offerings in
order to conform to customer expecta-
tions, restrictive consumer and safety
legislation as well as brand marketing
by global corporations
— a movement away from personalised
marketing and selling through a
network of agents to electronic direct
sell, which has an impact, in particular,
on those small businesses which survive
by providing new opportunities for
accessing their niche customer base
— continued mobility within the tourism
and hospitality workforce and the
consequent need to move away from
locally valid qualifications to modes of
study and certification which can be
accessed anywhere and which are valid
everywhere.
Not only industry changes, but also forces
Page 374
from academic circles, are fostering and
supporting the legitimising of tourism and
hospitality studies within the academy.
Indeed, efforts to increase the professional-
ism and status of tourism and hospitality
studies are reflected in initiatives, efforts
and educational networks such as the
Learning and Teaching Support Network
(LTSN) in hospitality, leisure, sports and
tourism education in the UK. Recent find-
ings (Stuart, 2002), however, reveal that a
‘two-faced’ curriculum situation still exists
in the UK, reflecting an ongoing debate
between the academic or vocational subject
of tourism studies. Unfortunately, such a
situation is also found in other countries,
eg Greece (Christou, 1999). In the future,
the status of tourism and hospitality studies
is unlikely to change unless both industry
and academia recognise and appreciate the
value of developing highly skilled and
competent tourism and hospitality man-
agers.
CONCLUSION
As a consequence of the changing environ-
ment within both the tourism and hospital-
ity sector and within educational providers,
it is argued that in order to address the
challenges and the needs of new students,
higher and established educational institu-
tions should follow a blended mix towards
education. A blending approach refers to
the use of ICT for enhancing and comple-
menting, rather than totally substituting
traditional teaching and learning practices.
By adopting such an approach, institutions
offering programmes in the tourism and
hospitality area should be equipped and
aim to achieve:
— lifelong learning, requiring both a will-
ingness to continue to learn on the part
of citizens and a commitment to
provide opportunities for this lifelong
learning
— a seamless web, in which all levels of

education not only become interrelated,
but blend together
— asynchronous (anytime, anyplace)
learning, breaking the constraints of
time and place to make learning oppor-
tunities more compatible with learning
lifestyles and needs
— affordable learning, within the resources
of all citizens, whether low cost or soci-
etal subsidy
— interactive and collaborative learning
appropriate for the digital, plug and
play generation
— information literate and knowledge
management oriented to develop the
knowledgeability qualities of students
that would enable them to be adap-
table, flexible and effective workers,
citizens and lifelong learners in the
knowledge era
— diversity, sufficient to serve an increas-
ingly diverse population with diverse
needs and goals.
It is, however, argued that to make this
transition it is necessary to shift the current
balance away from an educator-centred
model to a learner-centred model of ter-
tiary education skills and competencies.
Unfortunately, although ICTs are rapidly
being introduced into everyday teaching
and learning environments, there is still a
significant number of both students and
educators who are not adequately prepared
or equipped to operate efficiently in such
technology-mediated teaching and learning
environments. Universities should therefore
adopt a supportive approach to transfer
technology skills to students and educators.
Mason (1998) also highlighted that staff
training to learn to teach with new tech-
nologies should be followed by appropriate
reward structures to attract staff to adopt
new methods. Crucially, such change will
challenge a whole range of bureaucratic
procedures, the inflexibility of the aca-
demic world and the administrative inertia
Sigala and Baum
that would need to be overcome for the
re-engineering of the whole educational
process.
REFERENCES
Baum, T. (1990) ‘Competencies for Hotel
Management: Industry Expectations of
Education’, International Journal of Contem-
porary Hospitality Management, 2, 4, 13–16.
Baum, T. (2001) ‘Education for Tourism in a
Global Economy’, in Wahab, S. and
Cooper, C. (eds), ‘Tourism in the Age of
Globalisation’, Routledge, London, 198–
212.
Baum, T. (2002) ‘Skills and the Hospitality
Sector: a Review of Issues’, paper given
at the Labour Process Conference, Glas-
gow.
Baum, T. and Odgers, P. (2001) ‘Benchmark-
ing Best Practice in Hotel Front Office:
The Western European Experience’, Jour-
nal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and
Tourism 2, 3/4, 93–109.
Baum, T. and Sigala, M. (2002) ‘E-learning in
Hospitality and Tourism, Education’, Sin-
gapore’s Knowledge Industry Journal Maga-
zine, December 2001–January 2002, 32–34.
Beck, U., Giddens, A. and Lash, S. (1994)
‘Reflexive Learning’, Policy Press, Cam-
bridge.
Bell, D. (1973) ‘The Coming of the Post Indus-
trial Economy: A Venture in Social Fore-
casting’, Basic Books, New York.
Castells, M. (1995) ‘The Rise of the Net-
worked Society’, Blackwell, Oxford.
Cho, W. and Schmelzer, C. (2000) ‘Just in-time
education: tools for hospitality managers
of the future?’, International Journal of Con-
temporary Hospitality Management, 12, 1,
31–36.
Cho, W., Schmelzer, C.D. and McMahon, P.S.
(2002) ‘Preparing Hospitality Managers
for the 21st Century: The Merging of
Just-In-Time Education, Critical Think-
ing, and Collaborative Learning’, Journal
of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 26, 1,
23–37.
Christou, E. and Sigala, M. (2000) ‘Issues that
Influence the Use of Multimedia in Hos-
pitality Education in Europe: An Empiri-
cal Approach’, EuroCHRIE Spring
Page 375
Trends and issues in tourism and hospitality higher education: Visioning the future
Conference 2000, Dublin Institute of
Technology, Dublin, Ireland, 18–19 May.
Christou, E. and Eaton, J. (2000) ‘Management
Competencies for Graduate Trainees of
Hospitality and Tourism Programs’,
Annals of Tourism Research, 27, 4, 1058–
1061.
Christou, E. (1999) ‘Hospitality Management
Education in Greece: Overview and Qua-
litative Assessment. Tourism Management,
20, 6, 683–691.
Crock, M. (1996) ‘Evolving as a Fourth Gen-
eration University: A Case Study in Pro-
moting Change for Sustained Growth at
Central Queensland University, The Vir-
tual University?’, Symposium, Mel-
bourne, Australia, 21–22 November.
Daniel, J. (1996) ‘Mega Universities and
Knowledge Media, Technology Strategies
for Higher Education’, Kogan Page Lim-
ited, London.
Drucker, P. (1993) ‘The Post-Capitalist
Society’, HarperBusiness, London.
Duguet, P. (1995) ‘Education: Face to Face or
Distance?’, OECD Observer, 194, 4, June–
July.
Florida, R. (1995) ‘Towards the Learning
Region’, Futures, 27, 5, 527–536.
Gillespie, C. and Baum, T. (2000) ‘Innovation
and Creativity in Professional Higher
Education: Development of a CD-Rom
to Support Teaching and Learning in
Food and Beverage Management’, Scottish
Journal of Adult and Continuing Education,
6, 2, 147–165.
Guile, D. (2001) ‘Education and the Economy:
Rethinking the Question of Learning for
the Knowledge era’, Futures, 33, 469–482.
Hague, N. (1999) ‘Beyond Universities: A New
Republic of the Intellect’, in Fenn, D. (ed.),
‘Further and Higher Education’, UK
Master 55, Report Key Note, Hampton.
Husen, T. (1974) ‘The Learning Society’,
Methuen, London.
Martin, J., Darby, J. and Kjollerstrom, B.
(1994) ‘Higher Education 1998 Trans-
formed by Learning Technology: Report
on a Joint Anglo/Swedish Workshop’, in
the CTISS File, Issue 16, CTISS Publica-
tions, Oxford, January.
Page 376
Mason, R. (1998) ‘Models of Online Courses’,
Asynchronous Learning Networks Magazine,
2, 2, 9–19.
McDonnell, I. (2000) ‘An Electronic Tutorial:
A Teaching Innovation for Tourism
Management Studies’, International Journal
of Tourism Research, 2, 367–374.
Moore, J. (1993) ‘The Death of Competition’,
Harper, New York.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) ‘The
knowledge creating company’, Oxford
University Press, New York.
Pritchard, T. and Jones, D. (1996) ‘Open
Learning and/as the Virtual University,
University of Melbourne, The Virtual
University?’, Symposium, Melbourne,
Australia, 21–22 November.
Reich, R. (1991) ‘The Work of Nations’,
Simon and Schuster, New York.
Sigala, M. (2001) ‘Measuring students’ variables
for developing e-learning platforms’, 1st
National Conference on Open and Dis-
tance Education, Greek Open University,
Patras, Greece, 24–27 May.
Sigala, M. (2002) ‘The Evolution of Internet
Pedagogy: Benefits for Tourism and Hos-
pitality Education’, Journal of Hospitality,
Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education, 1, 2,
29–45.
Sigala, M. and Christou, E. (2003) ‘Enhancing
and Complementing the Instruction of
Tourism and Hospitality Courses through
the use of On-line Educational Tools’,
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education,
in press.
Stamps, D. (1998) ‘The For-profit Future of
Higher Education’, Training, 35, 8, 22–29.
Steh, N. (1994) ‘Knowledge societies’, Sage,
London.
Stuart, M. (2002) ‘Critical Influences on Tour-
ism as a Subject in UK Higher Education:
Lecturer Perspectives’, Journal of Hospital-
ity, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 1,
1, www.hlst.ltsn.ac.uk/johlste.
Weir, D. and Smallman, D. (1998) ‘Managers
in the Year 2000 and After: A Strategy
for Development’, Management Decision,
36, 43, 43–52.
Young, M. (1998) ‘The Curriculum of the
Future’, Falmer Press, Lewes.
View publication stats