An Exploration of Experiential Education as an Instructional Methodology for Travel and Tourism

Abstract

Introduction Many of the curricula involved in travel and tourism on both national and international bases are constantly seeking new forms of instructional methodology to increase their effectiveness. (Koh, 1995; Everett, 1994; Schubert, 1996.) Many of the travel and tourism programs are located in a variety of academic disciplines and units. This makes any discussion of instructional methodology more difficult because of the indigenous nature of the methodology of the discipline where the travel and tourism program is housed. Another common element of travel and tourism academic programs is that there is usually a practical base to most instructional methodologies. (Koh, 1995; Ryan, 1996.) A common instructional methodology used is the case study. The case study and its effectiveness directly depends upon the quality of the text being used or the quality of the case study that has been developed by the instructor. (Ertmer and Russell 1995; Harrison, 1990.) The most common type of instructional methodology is that where a text is used as a basic guideline and modified by the instructor. In a few incidents, several instructors have developed their own case studies but because of the time involved, this is the least common methodology. (Ertmer, 1995.) The primary advantage of the case study methodology is the active participation of the student in formulating and synthesizing a position and having a standard by which to compare their synthesized position to the ultimate solution of a particular problem raised by the case study. An extension of the case study methodology is experiential education. In experiential education, the basic framework of the case study is used, but the classroom is abandoned for the real world laboratory. (Atkinson and Murrell, 1988; Washbourn, 1996.) Most case studies have finite limitations because they are in a university laboratory setting and do not allow the complexity found in the real world. The advantage of experiential education is that the real world, in fact, brings many different types of variables into the mix. This introduces a complexity not able to be replicated in the university setting. This complexity, even though it makes it very difficult as an instructional methodology, is dynamic. This type of dynamism helps to motivate the student because they can see the direct application of theory in the classroom to the real world. This motivation is the primary element because the excitement generates additional new ideas and calls for direct involvement of the student as well as the group in the problem-solving process. Experiential education, to be effective, needs some type of structure, either qualitative or quantitative, to provide the guideposts to develop problem solving skills. (Jessup 1995.) Effective learning must begin with qualitative guideposts that provide intense discussion and allows the student to draw conclusions. The most effective is the quantitative guidepost that allows the student to discriminate various levels of action. In addition the student develops the discussion using levels of data analysis to make definitive conclusions which are effective in problem solving. (Harich, 1995; Griffith and Laframboise, 1997.) These conclusions are related to various types of variables that can be used in experiential case studies to make definitive generalizations. Experiential education process has to be built on a sound theoretical foundation. (Michelson, 1996.) The student has to have a firm foundation in travel and tourism parent sciences in order to perform effectively in experiential education. (Kolb, 1984; Hooks, 1994.) This may require several foundation courses before experiential education can be effective. Experiential education may be more effective in graduate education because the foundations for content as well as the necessary quantification skills for the manipulation of data are part of the student's repertoire. (Parson and McKay, 1985. …