Who's Your Teacher Now? Issues Surrounding the Dimensions of Hospitality Management Educators

Woods, Robert H.; Youn, Hye Won; Johanson, Misty M.

doi:10.1080/10963758.2008.10696929

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The hospitality education discipline brings in a layer of complexity that is not seen in more traditional academic subjects, mainly the industry work experience factor. Studies about faculty in hospitality education have focused on demographics (Woods, Youn, & Johanson, 2008), the impact of industry experience (Millar, Mao, & Moreno, 2010;Kalargyrou & Wood, 2012;Phelan, Mejia, & Hertzman, 2013;Phelan & Mejia, 2015), job satisfaction (Beck, La Lopa, & Hu, 2003;Chatfield, Meyer, & Fried, 2013), and issues related to program characteristics and quality (Assante, Huffman, & Harp, 2010;Lee, Dopson, & Ko, 2017;Pearlman, Ryu, & Schaffer, 2010;Schoffstall, 2015;Van Hoof, Wu, Zhang, & Mattila, 2013). With the focus more on the faculty member profiles and what this could mean for student learning, little has been written on the teaching development of current faculty members, and, more specifically, on their perceptions on what this means.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hospitality Faculty Member Perceptions of the Role of Faculty Development for Their Teaching

Plews

Zizka

2019

Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research note aims to explore hospitality faculty member perceptions on the purpose of faculty development while bringing increased awareness to the overall significance of educational development to the hospitality education discipline. The study examines the three dimensions of faculty developmentfaculty development, instructional development, and organizational development, in the context of data collected from a survey of hospitality management faculty members at one international hospitality management school in Switzerland. Analysis of the initial findings indicates that these faculty members view faculty development in the more traditional sense as a resource for supporting their teaching activities opposed to a strategic change agent within the institution. Areas for future research include expansion of the study to multiple institutions, the consideration of the needs of industry-centric and traditional academic faculty members, and shifting perspectives of stakeholders within the three dimensions of faculty development.

show abstract