Report to The

Report to the

Faculty, Administration, and Students

of the

Cecil B. Day School of Hospitality Administration

in the

J. MackRobinsonCollege of Business

GeorgiaStateUniversity

an Evaluation Team

Selected by the Program Faculty and Administration of the University

The members of the team:

Dr. Lynn Huffman, Chairperson

TexasTechUniversity

Dr. Johnny Sue Reynolds

University of NorthTexas (Ret)

Dr. Richard Ghiselli

PurdueUniversity

This report represents the views of the evaluation team as interpreted by the Chairperson; it goes directly to the institutional program before being considered by the Commission. It is a confidential document prepared as an educational audit and a service for the benefit of the program. All comments in the report are made in good faith and are based solely on an educational evaluation of the program and of the manner in which it appears to be achieving its educational objectives.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

In considering the overall strengths and weaknesses of the Hospitality Administration program, the following comments are offered, referring specifically to each of the five areas in Section A.

Quality of Instruction

Academic quality of the unit’s instruction is very good. Faculty members are caring, committed teachers who receive good teaching evaluations. The undergraduate curriculum is interesting, creative, and appealing to students. Faculty members are very successful in engaging the dynamic Atlanta hospitality industry in their class activities.

The tenure track faculty members are involved in research activities. They serve as journal editors and reviewers for research conferences. They average 1.2refereed articles and 1.2 practitioner articles each year and write for the professional publications. They have completed four books over the last six years.

Faculty service is excellent. They are routinely involved in university and college committees/initiatives; community and industry activities; and in professional organizations where they serve in leadership roles.

While the undergraduate curriculum is broad and creative, it seems to lack depth. Very few courses have prerequisites. Though there are similar courses bundled together in career tracks, there is little logical progression of learning evident. Graduate instruction is not provided currently, with no organized classes offered since 2002. There is an effort underway to seek a new direction for the graduate program.

The Program’s research productivity may be hampered by the lack of a viable graduate program. It is often difficult to maintain a strong research program with no graduate students. The research productivity is a reflection of a program starved for tenure track faculty members. In order to cover undergraduate teaching demands, tenure-track lines have been converted to instructor positions. This has greatly limited the opportunity for faculty members to focus on the graduate program.

Centrality of the Program to the University

In considering the centrality of the Hospitality Administration program to GeorgiaStateUniversity, it seems clear that the program is anintegral contributor to the academic mission. The program’s strategic plan is closely aligned with that of the University.

The location of GeorgiaStateUniversity within the heart of a large and vibrant hospitality industry strengthens the need for a significant hospitality program within the University. The Hospitality Administration program meets those needs.

Viability of the Program

The location of the GSU Hospitality Administration program and the resulting opportunities available to students makes this program extremely viable. However, the site team is perplexed about the status of the Hospitality Administration program in the College and the University. With its location in such a strong hospitality industry, it seems both the undergraduate and graduate programs might be larger and/or more fully developed. Perhaps the Program has not been supported and marketed as completely as it should be.

The undergraduate program in Hospitality Administration is successful. Enrollment is robust, graduates are well placed, and resources seem available to support the program as it is currently configured. Faculty members are committed and congenial members of the university community, consistently complimented by students and other colleagues on campus. Student credit hour generation has grown significantly over the last six years.

There is apparently no demand for the graduate program in its current format. Enrollment in the Hospitality Administration MBA program has typically been rather low, but in recent years has declined further. The current effort to redesign the curriculum into a hotel real estate career track is difficult to assess. The new program has yet to be offered, so no data is available. Also, there is concern by the site team that this career niche may be too narrow for long-term viability.

Strategic Focus

The Hospitality Administration program moved into the Robinson College of Business in 1996. It seems to be a valued program in the College, with administrators speaking highly of the faculty members’ energy and can-do spirit.

The Program has been able to take strategic advantage of their location in a very strong hospitality industry destination. Industry support of the program is excellent. High-level guest speakers, access to exemplary facilities, and strong participation on the Program’s advisory board are just a few of the advantages gained through this relationship.

The undergraduate program is strong, with a robust enrollment of high quality, energetic students. Demand for graduates at this level is significant. The hospitality and tourism industry is the number one employer in the state of Georgia and is an important economic force in the entire nation. GSU graduates are placed in responsible positions at respected companies.

Because the hospitality program is housed in the College of Business and is in a research-based university, there is a strong feeling by the hospitality faculty members that the administration considers a graduate program is essential for the program to be taken seriously. The site team has no way of confirming this, but knows the faculty members voice that concern. The Hospitality MBA program is not functioning as currently constituted.The program is attempting to reconfigure it into a hotel real estate emphasis in conjunction with the Real Estate Department. It is very difficult to know whether this narrow industry niche will be of sufficient long-term interest to revitalize the program, or if the program should be completely revitalized. As the University is seeking to enhance its research reputation, careful consideration is needed regarding the balance between undergraduate demands and research expectations.

The Hospitality Administration program is working hard to be good University citizens and to accomplish their academic mandate. The site team feels strongly that if the university wishes this program to grow and thrive, enough support should be infused so that they can take advantage of the tremendous strategic location of the program.

Financial Resources

The Hospitality Administration program, as it is currently configured, has sufficient financial stability to enable it to continue to meet its contractual obligations and achieve its educational objectives over a reasonable future period. Currently the department budget supports six full time faculty members who administer the program, teach courses, and conduct career advising. There are also eight part-time instructors with considerable industry experience. The current financial situation appears to be sufficient to support the educational objectives of the program at existing student levels.

The site team has some worry that the current faculty resources may not be sufficient to successfully increase enrollment in the undergraduate program. Also, in order to maintain research productivity, expectations at the college level, additional financial support may be required if the program is to grow. There has been little apparent support from the university and college for the facilities currently being developed. Finally, there appears to be limited support for teaching and/or research assistantships to assist faculty members. If the undergraduate program continues to grow and/or if the MBA program grows, the program will quickly outstrip its personnel and financial resources.

The Hospitality Administration program along with administrators from the College of Business should decide priorities for the program in order to maximize the impact of available resources.

HISTORICAL AND CURRENT CONTEXT

The Hospitality Administration program has been an effective and efficient academic program. It is comparable to peer institutions and has a good reputation in the discipline. There are six full-time faculty members. Three are tenured, one is tenure-track, and two are instructors. Additionally, there are eight adjunct faculty members. Four of the full-time faculty members are female.

Faculty members typically teach three courses a semester. Research productivity is represented by a three-year average productivity of 1.2 refereed papers, 1.2 refereed professional/practitioner papers, and three non-refereed publications per faculty member. Over the last four years, two faculty members have written four books (total). Securing outside grant funding is difficult in hospitality. In talking with college and university administrators, it seems that publications are considered to be more important. The publication rate is suitable given the very heavy teaching and service roles filled by hospitality faculty members.

The Hospitality Administration program offers two degree programs, BBA in Hospitality Administration and the MBA with a concentration in Hospitality Administration. The undergraduate major is robust, with approximately 230 students. Over the last three years, the undergraduate program has graduated an average of 26 students per year. The MBA program is under revision, with essentially no students currently enrolled. Undergraduate student credit hour production has increased over 200% over the last few years.

It seems evident to the site team that the Hospitality Program is highly successful given the smallfaculty numbers. Professionals in the community express admiration for the program’s involvement in hospitality industry activities and the quality of students produced.

PROGRESS TOWARD GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Because this is the first time that Hospitality Administration has undergone a program review, the team is not able to report on their progress.

QUALITY OF THE CURRICULUM

In order to offer students options within the narrow number of courses, the Hospitality Administration program has developed numerous electives. These electives can be bundled with other similar courses to provide an area of focus. Work experience/internships can supplement that focus. As a plus, the hospitality program is the only one in the College that is allowed to require elective courses exclusively in the major.

Recently, Venue and Facilities Management and three aviation management courses have been included in the course inventory. The airport management direction is new to the program. It seems that the concept behind the Program’s strategic focus is to expose students to a wide variety of industry segments within the very limited number of hours available on the degree plan. While this attempt to serve students and the industry is very well-meaning, being all things to all people is likely beyond the capacity of the program. Offering so many widely-differing courses is a large load on the limited number of faculty members and dilutes opportunity for achieving curricular depth.

The curriculum is based on well considered learning outcomes. However, some of those outcomes could be refined as stated. It is expected that course objectives be written in measurable terms. Words such as appreciate and possess are not measurable. Also learning outcomes should reflect an appropriate learning expectation and a progression of learning across the curriculum. For example, words such as describe and explain are more appropriate for lower division courses. Upper division courses should have higher level course expectations such as evaluate and synthesize.

The site team members are concerned at the lack of focus for the undergraduate program. There are constraints placed on the program by the limited courses available and limited faculty numbers. While the elective courses are interesting and valuable, the department might consider honing in on fewer areas of hospitality rather than taking the broad-spectrum approach used now.

The institution of 12-hour certificate programs provides exposure to the hospitality industry to students in other majors and post-graduate students seeking professional development. Some of these students have changed their major based on their positive experience in these classes. However, the certificate program students, while an asset to the program in many ways, further strain the already limited faculty resources.

If the College and the Program choose to revitalize the graduate program, serious attention will be needed to plan a curriculum that is appealing to today’s student market. Care should be taken that the new graduate program has enough relevance that it will endure over time.

QUALITY OF STUDENTS

Quality of hospitality students can be determined in several ways. Input variables include SAT scores and Freshman Index Scores, which are equivalent to those of the university (though data for these measures are based on fewer than ten hospitality students each reporting year). Evidence of student learning is indicated by results of the senior exit exam, completion of courses that are based on well constructed learning outcomes, and time to graduation. An important additional outcome measure is placement of graduates with respected companies in responsible positions.

Hospitality professionals expressed to the site team their satisfaction with the quality of students in the program and the quality of the graduates working in the industry. Alumni were highly complimentary of their educational experience and their preparation for their professional placement.

QUALITY OF THE FACULTY

The preparation and qualifications of all members of the instructional staff are suited to the field and level of their assignments. Faculty members are caring, committed teachers who receive good teaching evaluations. The undergraduate curriculum is interesting, creative, and appealing to students. Faculty members are very successful in engaging the dynamic Atlanta hospitality industry in their class activities.

The tenure track faculty members are involved in research activities. They serve as journal editors and reviewers for research conferences. They average two refereed articles or practitioner articles each year and write for the professional publications. They have completed four books over the last six years.

Hospitality faculty members at GSU compare well to those at peer institutions. While research activities could be more extensive, performance in this area is likely at its maximum given the current teaching and service loads.

The site team wishes to commend the faculty members in Hospitality Administration. They each come with appropriate academic preparation and considerable industry experience, which is of great benefit to the program. Their commitment to the quality of instruction and to their students’ personal and professional growth is excellent. In addition, adjunct faculty members come from industry with stellar experience and insight. Students and graduates speak very highly of the faculty members and appreciate what they do.

RESOURCE ADEQUACY

The full-time faculty members in Hospitality Administration all have advanced degrees and experience in the hospitality industry. The faculty members include one professor, two associate professors, one assistant professor, one visiting professor, one instructor, and eight part-time instructors. All faculty members have professional teaching, industry and research experience. All faculty members meet qualifications. At the current time, the faculty members are numerically sufficient to achieve the current objectives of the program and to adequately perform the responsibilities assigned. However, the team would like to see the faculty make-up adjusted toward more emphasis on full-time faculty members. There are only six full-time faculty members, and only four of those are tenure track. Other courses are covered with adjunct faculty members. While these adjunct faculty members have exemplary industry backgrounds, they do not substitute for regular faculty members who can devote their entire time and attention to the students and the program. In addition, if the program continues to grow, covering courses and other responsibilities of the unit as presently organized will be very difficult.

Faculty members maintain a student/faculty ratio of 10.4:1. Student credit hour generation has increased over 200% in the last few years.

Support with resources of various types is adequate. Staff support is good, though an additional staff person dedicated to student activities would be very helpful. Technological resources, classroom space, and library resources are suitable. The one area that is lacking is laboratory resources. There is currently no dedicated laboratory space for food service management, a core area of the curriculum. While it appears the current borrowed facility may be appropriate for production, hands-on service opportunities are limited. Also, its location may be inconvenient to the faculty members and students. Lastly, it may not adequately reflect commercial industry environs. The Hospitality Administration program has developed a plan for renovating part of the Commerce Club to utilize in its food production and service course (the CulinaryLearningCenter). This facility would include a commercial kitchen and dining room and would provide students the opportunity for hands-on experience in a controlled quantity food setting. College and university administrators appear to recognize the program’s need for such facilities and are supportive of the plan in principle, though not financially.