Organisational Change and faculty development: The Introduction of Problem Based Learning in Hospitality Management at the Central University of Technology, Free State, South Africa.
Corresponding author: Ms Magrieta Aletta de Wet
School of Tourism, Hospitality and Sport Central University of Technology Private Bag x20539 Bloemfontein 9301 South Africa Fax: +27 51 507 3293 Tel: +27 51 507 3276 Email: adewet@cut.ac.za
Prof. Frederick Johannes Veldman School of Health Technology Central University of Technology Private Bag x20539 Bloemfontein 9301 South Africa Fax: +27 51 507 3354 Tel: +27 51 507 3266 Email: dveldman@cut.ac.za
Mr Willem Adriaan Johannes Bouwer School of Teacher Education
Central University of Technology Private Bag x20539 Bloemfontein 9301 South Africa Fax: +27 51 507 3367 Tel: +27 51 507 3825 Email: wbouwer@cut.ac.za Mr Ike Mokhele
School of Teacher Education Central University of Technology Private Bag x20539 Bloemfontein 9301 South Africa Fax: +27 51 507 3367 Tel: +27 51 507 3368 Email: nmokhele@cut.ac.za
Organisational change and faculty development: The Introduction
of Problem Based Learning in Hospitality Management at the
Central University of Technology, Free State, South Africa
De Wet M.A., Veldman F.J., Bouwer W.A.J., Mokhele N.E.I.
Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein, 9301, Free State, South Africa (adewet@cut.ac.za) Abstract
Problem–Based Learning (PBL) is a learner-centred strategy that can be used to achieve the objectives of Outcomes Based Education (OBE). PBL’s effectiveness relies on problems based on real-life situations to start the learning process and depends on self-directed learning. Currently, there exists no fixed learner-centred didactic approach within the Hospitality Management program. Faculty therefore identified the need to address this shortcoming by considering PBL as a possible strategy that supports the basic principles of learner-centeredness. However, many questions were raised: Why PBL? Is PBL an appropriate approach for the Hospitality Management Program and whether it is subject-specific? Readiness of staff and learners for the implementation of PBL was also raised as a concern. Defining the characteristics of the curriculum required for the implementation of PBL deserves as much attention and when and how it should be implemented? This paper highlights these issues and documents the planning and consequent implementation of PBL in the Hospitality Management Program. The outcome shows that the implementation of PBL could serve to our benefit, but that available time within the program is a concern. It is envisaged that this project will provide clarity on designing a unique model of PBL for the Hospitality Management program.
Keywords: PBL, Hospitality Management, Self-directed Learning, Curriculum Development
1. INTRODUCTION
In light of the recurriculation process at the Central University of Technology, (CUT) Free State, a colleague and I were requested to investigate the implications of implementing PBL in Hospitality Management at the Hotel School, Central University of Technology, Free State. The author of this article just completed a Master in Problem Based Learning (MPBL) in January 2008 and a colleague with experience in applying PBL in teaching were tasked with the process. Besides all the advantages of PBL, it was chosen based on the fact that it is a learner-centered approach and learning strategy that addresses the shortcomings that the School has managed to identify. This request initiated many questions: Why PBL? Is PBL an appropriate approach for the Hospitality Management Program and is it subject specific? To what extent are staff and learners prepared for PBL? What are the characteristics of the curriculum when implementing PBL in the Hospitality Management program? When and how should PBL be implemented? The latter of which is discussed throughout the paper. We decided to host a workshop in which we discussed most of these questions with all academic staff at the Hotel School. A planning session was held to strategise for the implementation of PBL after which an experimental phase was decided upon. In this article, I intend to answer these questions by using and exploring the theory written by four Central University of Technology, Free State lecturers (Bouwer et al., 2007) in module 3 of our studies in the Master in Problem Based Learning program, and documenting our planning and progress from our workshop, planning session and experimental phase.
2. WHY PBL?
The South African society has experienced major political changes over the last 14 years which has led to social and economic transformation. With the economic growth, the work place, now more than ever, demands that graduates have good reasoning and communication skills. Therefore, the educational system had to be modified to suite the needs of the new society hence the Outcomes Based Education system.
According to the South African Higher Education Act, Critical Cross-Field Outcomes are set to be achieved for all curricula at any educational institution. PBL has been identified as one of the possible methods of learning and it is therefore so recognized at our Institution. In this policy, the first Critical Cross–Field Outcome (CO) to be reached is that teachers are to use the curricula to ensure that learners “identify and solve problems and make decisions using
critical and creative thinking”[1]. The principles of PBL are based on real-life problems and rely on learners’ self-directed learning styles to come up with the solutions. Through this process, it allows students to master the skills of higher order thinking in addition to process competencies. It is because of these skills gained, that PBL is a suited learning method in curricula throughout South Africa. These skills are transferable to any program. PBL has been proven successful in many higher educational institutions throughout the world in a variety of programs.
3. IS PBL AN APPROPRIATE APPROACH FOR THE HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM?
The design of the Hospitality management course is described in Table 1. National Diploma:
Hospitality Management
First Year Second Year Third Year B.Tech Hospitality Management Fourth Year (OPTIONAL)
First Semester Learners go out on
experiential learning (work-integrated learning) at a four or five star hotel in South Africa doing Culinary and Food and Beverage training
Learners continue their study full time at the school doing theory and practical subjects
Second Semester
The learner spends a full year at the school doing theory and practical subjects
Return for the last six months for further full time study at the school doing theory and practical subjects
Learners spend the last six months of this year at another hotel in South Africa doing experiential learning, this time focusing on
management training
Full time study for the entire year doing theoretical subjects with a research component, focusing on Research Methodology, Management, Hospitality Industry Law and Financial Management.
TABLE 1. Hospitality Management course layout
This course relies on the inputs of and experiences in industry, which makes it easy to use real life situations to write case studies or problem statements. The task of the lecturer is to ensure that learners are equipped to solve them. PBL has been used as the sole learning method for Hospitality Management at the Educational Institute for Service Studies (EISS) in Port Alfred, South Africa, serving as an indication that it is a suitable learning method to use in the Hospitality program in South Africa. According to an article published in the Sunday Times, research done by the Higher Education South Africa (HESA) showed that industry indicated that graduates lacked basic job skills. Graduates fell short when having to “find and use information; select appropriate information to solve problems; understanding economic and business realities and lacked openness and flexibility.”[2] The principles of PBL are a perfect match to assist in preparing graduates for the working world and its demands. Our intention is that together with Work Integrated Learning (WIL), learners will gain the necessary skills demanded of graduates by industry.
4. IS PBL SUBJECT SPECIFIC WHITHIN THE HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM?
In Hospitality Management, PBL is not necessarily subject-specific. It was applied to all subjects at EISS. But the question is, will work for all subjects at our school? Factors like resources, facilities, number of students and lecturers etc are different at our school compared to EISS. In our planning, we structured an ‘implementation phase’ within which we envisaged giving learners and staff the basic knowledge of the process of PBL so that they will gain the necessary skills, but it will not be specifically linked to one subject. We used generic problems – Problem 1 was based on ‘understanding presentations’ where learners were asked to follow the Maastricht 7 step model to reach the solution of understanding what makes good presentations etc. The second problem was based on ‘Motivation’, where learners were given a problem within which they had to reach the solution of understanding some of the theories and ways of motivating students at a Hotel School. So far, the timetable does not allow us to implement PBL within each theoretical subject, as the process of PBL takes time. It was decided that PBL will only be done partly within atheoretical subject, in the form of assignments using case studies based on the Hospitality industry. The assumption is that PBL is only applicable to theory subjects, but it does not limit the case studies to theory only. Problems identified within a case study, could be based on a problem within a practical subject like culinary studies kitchen practical.
5. TO WHAT EXTENT ARE STAFF AND LEARNERS PREPARED FOR PBL?
During the introductory workshop, lecturers were asked to share what they thought the goals of PBL would be. Most answered that PBL can be used to teach learners the skill of problem solving and for them to work effectively with group members. These are not the only goals we hope to achieve. We know that PBL also develops self-directed learning, leads to deep learning and increases learners’ motivation [3]. Lecturers found that many of them have already used some steps of the PBL process; did not document it in so much detail; and did not focus on self-directed learning. Lecturers have indicated that it will take time to make the mind shift towards a learner-centred approach. They find it difficult to place the learning responsibility on the learners and are fearful they will not be able to cover all the content. PBL allows for lectures and workshops to be given to learners before tackling a PBL problem. Because this will possibly take up more time than the previous teacher centred system it is creating many doubts in the success PBL due to timetabling. Yet, after the first session of the experimental phase, lecturers and learners became more aware of the advantages of PBL and especially impressed with the skills they realised they would gain. The phase had prepared lecturers and learners more on the principles and process of PBL and therefore seems to be the way to go if PBL is to be implemented at any school/ department / institution. Although the OBE system allows for group work, learners stated that they had never structured their groups so well and focussed on so many issues within group work when at school.
6. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CURRICULUM WHEN IMPLEMENTING
PBL IN THE HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM?
The syllabi should be “reflective of the outcomes of the subject / course” [4]. All lecturers at the CUT, are requested to re-curriculate their subject material, so that it is aligned (constructively) with the learner centred approach of teaching – that means that a teaching method (PBL) be chosen that will complement the content (curriculum) and ensure that the Critical Cross-Field and Developmental Outcomes are achieved. Constructive alignment ensures that the activities, tasks or assignments and assessment methods are aligned with the exit level outcomes.
6.1 Implementation of group work as means of learning
The question one might ask, is how group work differs when done in a PBL system compared to the OBE system? The difference it seems is that in the OBE system, very little is done to facilitate group dynamics, conflict handling and group roles. Group sizes are not always appropriate due to various reasons, but mostly because of the teacher: learner ratio. At the Hotel school, the first years were divided into groups of four or five. For the third year integrated assignment, group sizes varied according to each subject. The ideal is to have 4 – 5 [5, 6, 7] group members, but this is not always possible. Problems arise with the practical implementation of an event or a function – only so many students can work in a bar, kitchen or on the floor as waiters, Maitre D’s etc. Groups have to be bigger to accommodate the timetable and function dates. Group sizes will however not be greater than 8 members per group. In the PBL environment, group work is more ‘organised’- emphasis is placed on allocating group roles, (chairperson, secretary, board secretary and group members); an agenda and minutes to be taken at group meetings and clear delegation of tasks and responsibilities are done. The first years took some time to get used to all the responsibilities of each group role but quickly realised how this could improve their ability to work as a group. Learners realised the value of each person within the group and how, if one member does not fulfil his duties, the whole group suffers. Groups will also be mixed with regard to gender and culture to enhance the group dynamics. In a PBL environment, groups should have certain behavioural rules. According to the EISS PBL KIT [8], it states that group members should observe and follow the “rules of courtesy and guidelines for PBL behaviour when interacting with the tutor, chairperson, secretaries and other group members”. The question is, whether these will be the same for all learning environments? I think it is possible for each PBL model to have their own, based on the principles of PBL behaviour. But within the cultural diversity in S.A. caution should be practised and such rules should be implemented with care. This is why intercultural learning is so important to the South African student. Like our constitution, it supports the consideration and respect for one another’s backgrounds, ways of reasoning and opinions. By consulting learners, facilitators will find that some rules might be offensive to some cultures. For example, a lot of our black learners do
not want to speak up or ask questions in class, but will rather speak through a ‘mediator’. This is part of their culture. But ways should be found for learners to get involved within the classroom. PBL might nurture this and help learners to open up in class because they will become used to communicating with each other in groups. Also, when group roles are rotated, each learner will have the opportunity to be chairperson, secretary etc. so that shy learners will become comfortable in communicating and delegating. In a PBL environment, the learning process should lead to developing the competencies for learners to be able to solve problems and ensure deep learning. Kofoed, Hansen and Kolmos [9] wrote that process competencies are “not analytical, technical, or scientific abilities but rather expressions of the individual’s personal approach to learning and managing of the subject competencies along with a variety of other abilities, such as working co-operatively, communicating effectively, working independently, behavioural changes, planning and directing and self-evaluation.”
6.2 An active learner-centred approach which leads to self-directed learning
PBL ensures that you move away from only using content-based lectures and therefore increase opportunities for learners to find the resources themselves and come to the desired conclusion (self-directed learning). PBL is about more than curriculum; it strives to enhance the learning experience through deep learning and focuses more on the entire process of learning. Previously, learners did not have the opportunity to find the problem and the solution in this way. Tasks and assignments usually contained a lot of information and were not necessarily posed as a problem. Learners were then just asked to research the answer. PBL adds more responsibility and gives learners the opportunity to gain many life skills on their journey to find the answer. This might be familiar to teachers who believe in the theory of constructivism. PBL is very much in line with constructivism, as it allows for minimal teaching and more learning.
6.3 Using problem formulation in achieving learning outcomes
Part of establishing the course of action using PBL, is to decide on the type of problem to pose to the students. At our school it was decided that we will use the following types of problems: [10]
1. A Tightly structured problem: a case study is given in detail- all information needed to solve it is given to the student;
2. BIG (Beyond the Information Given): some facts are provided, but students have to find the rest;
3. WIG (Without the Information Given): ‘ill-defined’ problems present no data and it is entirely up to student to research the case and find the needed resource and information.
In OBE, the emphasis is on the outcome. In PBL, the emphasis is on the learning process and the problem which drives it. Yet, PBL is a method of learning that can be used to reach the desired outcome within the OBE system because you will still reach the outcome.
Lecturers have noted that it is a skill to write a case study in such a way, that you don’t give away the problem or the route to take to solve it. The type of problem of course will determine how much information is given. We had decided during that we will start the first years off with tightly structured problems so that they first get the hang of it and give them BIG problem types later in the year. This will also allow facilitators to become familiar with the concept first.
6.4 Facilitating interdisciplinary learning
PBL forces learners to find knowledge from various fields. This integration is a desired outcome for PBL. Because the third years had not gone through the PBL ‘experimental phase’, it was decided to give them an integrated assignment, based on some principles of PBL. What makes the assignment so exciting is that it combined the ‘content’ of five subjects namely: Events Management, Financial Management, Hospitality Management, Culinary Studies and Food and Beverage Studies. This will give learners the opportunity to bring all the departments together, and give them a holistic understanding of the industry. The assignment is based on the planning, organizing, leading, controlling, quality management and evaluating of a theme evening in a hospitality environment. Integration broadens the mind of the learner. This is confirmed by Christensen & Hendriksen: “The meaning of data, theory and method in the Problem-Based method enters into a complex mix of iterative processes of conceptualizations that entail reformulations of research problems and new connections between different fields of study, even cross-disciplinary connections.” [11] The lecturers simply took their assignments (as used previously within the teacher-centred environment) and combined it to incorporate PBL principles. They changed it so that it had a problem statement, a project format and to align their rubrics for assessment.
6.5 Defining the supervisors role
At our school the role of supervisor / facilitator is still rather new to most lecturers. It is a skill to become a facilitator, and takes practice. The role of the facilitator is to assist learners to “realize their capacity to learn”, and to make sure that they are “moving education from a delivery of static knowledge to a didactical relationship where knowledge is co-created.” [12] It entails the writing of problem statements or case studies, assessing, guiding individuals and assisting with group management. Facilitators can vary their facilitative styles towards a group depending on the group dynamics and the challenges it faces; three possible modes are: [13]
Hierarchical mode Co-operative mode Autonomous mode
The facilitator directs the learning The facilitator shares power over learning with the team
The facilitator respects total autonomy of the team TABLE 2. Facilitative modes
6.6 Assessment guidelines based on PBL principles
Formative and summative assessment strategies are in place for all the levels of the hospitality course. The practical subjects are continuously evaluated throughout the year, where most of the theoretical subjects are assessed summatively. Some problems identified during the planning of the integrated case study, was that some of the subjects marks have to be in earlier than others, due to them carrying out summative assessment. A solution to this would be to ensure that all subjects follow a formative assessment strategy. This will eliminate the issues of work to be completed before the exam dates, etc.
Some lecturers were confused as to how one will now assess the learning process. In PBL, you will assess the process of learning, the students’ group skills, their presentation of their findings, their time management, personal skills and their content. In the teacher centred approach, little effort was put in to assess or even consider group skills, time management and most importantly the process of learning. Lecturers were surprised to learn that formative assessment can still be done – most thought that this would fall away. Assessment is now also not the sole responsibility of the facilitator but also in the hands of the learners, their peers and the group.
7. CONCLUSION
To implement a new teaching and learning method, great teamwork is needed. Support from institutional departments like Curriculum Development, faculty and school management means that important decisions and implementation requirements do not go without insightful consideration. Staffs positive attitude and years of educational experiences will all add to the success of the implementation of PBL. I have found that: PBL is a very appropriate method for teaching and learning at our school and institution in light of the skills development needs of our country; that it is not subject specific; that staff and learners should be prepared for the implementation of PBL and that there are various characteristics that need to be focused on when implementing PBL. Lecturers had also been implementing PBL principles without knowing it! They noticed that problem solving can be dealt with in an organized manner and by doing so; much better results can be achieved. We have identified our biggest challenge: insufficient time for the full implementation of PBL. Our classrooms are still set up in a typical classroom style. (The tables and benches are fused to the ground and cannot be moved around). This will have to change – learners need to be able to form groups and use break away rooms for their planning and discussions. Also, technological improvements will ensure that learners have better access to information.
This paper opens up possible further research of whether or not PBL is more successful when used with work integrated learning? To me, the obvious is that it will be. Biggs writes that “If the aim is to be a doctor, then the best way of doing so is being a doctor – under the appropriate guidance and safeguards.” [14] Another area of study could be to evaluate whether Hospitality Management learners who have had training in a PBL environment perform better than those without? Little research and implementation of PBL has been done in South Africa. It is my hope that through our efforts to implement PBL at our institution, that we will pave the way towards a significant improvement in the skills development of the learners we send out into industry. The future leaders of South Africa will be borne from our educational system. Dahms, Du & Stentoft state that “education is aimed at both the individual personal development and the development of the society.” [15] It is our duty as educators to constantly reflect and improve our efforts, to ensure sustainable growth for a brighter future.
Acknowledgements
The following individuals are acknowledged for their support / contribution to this paper:
• The office of Dr. Chadinha, Chief Director and Mrs. G Rathbone, Secretary: Centre of Organisational Development, Central University of Technology, Free State, for financial and administrative support; • Prof. Mona Dahms (Aalborg University), our mentor, for her excellent guidance and personal support
during the MPBL course;
• Fellow MPBL group members, Prof. Derick Veldman, Riaan Bouwer and Ike Mokhele, for their commitment, moral support and sharing of knowledge;
• The Department of Curriculum Development: Prof Sechaba Mahlomaholo and Dr Ben Van der Merwe for their support
• The School for Tourism, Hospitality and Sport and its entire staff, more especially the Hotel school staff (Adv Manie Moolman and Ms Reneé Minnaar especially) for your support and advice.
References
1. South African Higher Education Act, 1997 (Act no. 101). Government Gazette, 19 December 1997. 2. Govender (2007) Graduates lack basic job skills: study. The Sunday Times, 16 December 2007.
3. Biggs, J. 2003. Teaching for quality learning at University. 2nd edition. SRHE and Open University Press. McGraw-Hill Education: Berkshire, UK. (p. 232, 234)
4. Bouwer, W.A.J., de Wet, M.A., Mokhele, N.E.I. and Veldman, F.J. 2007 Essential information and guidelines for the implementation of Problem-Based Learning at the Central University of Technology, Free State. Unpublished Report. June.
5. Cooper, J. 1990. "Cooperative Learning and College Teaching: Tips from the Trenches." Teaching Professor, 4(5):1-2.
6. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. and Smith, K. A. 1991. Cooperative Learning: Increasing College Faculty Instructional Productivity. ASHE-FRIC Higher Education Report No.4. Washington, D.C.: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University.
7. Smith, K. A. 1986. "Cooperative Learning Groups." (In S. F. Schmoberg (ed.) Strategies for Active Teaching and Learning in University Classrooms.) Minneapolis: Office of Educational Development Programs, University of Minnesota.
8. De Boer, M.R. 2007. PBL KIT: The Ins and Outs of Problem-Based Learning. Christeljke Hogeschool Nederland: Leeuwarden, The Netherlands. Educational Institute for Service Studies Port Alfred SA edition. (p. 20).
9. Kofoed, L.B., Hansen, S. and Kolmos, A.. 2004. Teaching process competencies in a PBL curriculum. The Aalborg PBL model – Progress, Diversity and Challenges. Kolmos, A., Fink, F.K. and Kogh, L. (eds). Aalborg University Press. (p. 331-332)
10. Biggs, J. 2003. Teaching for quality learning at University. 2nd edition. SRHE and Open University Press. McGraw-Hill Education: Berkshire, UK. (p. 234)
11. Christensen, O.R and Henriksen, L. 2007. Mathematics in Context – Learning Mathematics through Problems. Nordisk Matematikdidaktik in Press.
12. Light, G. and Cox, R. 2001. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education – The Reflective Professional. Paul Chapman Publishing.
13. Herron, J. 1989. The Facilitator’s Handbook. Kogan Page, London
14. Biggs, J. 2003. Teaching for quality learning at University. 2nd edition. SRHE and Open University Press. McGraw-Hill Education: Berkshire, UK. (p. 232)
15. Dahms, M., Du, X–Y and Stentoft, D. 2007. Power, Democracy and Problem-Based Learning. A paper presented at the International Problem-Based Learning Symposium 2007. “Re-inventing PBL”. Republic Polytechnic, Singapore, 7 – 9 March 2007. (p. 2).
