CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

4MAT-ting Teaching for Multiple Learning Styles

Alexandros Paraskevas
School of Hotel and Restaurant Management
Oxford Brookes University
Gipsy Lane Campus, Headington
Oxford OX3 0BP
United Kingdom
Tel: ++44-1865-483835
Fax: ++44-1865-483878
E-mail: aparaskevas@brookes.ac.uk

Dr Marianna Sigala
The Scottish Hotel School
University of Strathclyde
94 Cathedral Street
Glasgow, G4 0LG
Scotland, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 0141 5483949
Fax: +44 0141 552 2870
E-mail: M.Sigala@strath.ac.uk

Abstract

Successful teaching is the provision of a learning experience that is accessible to all students
regardless of their individually favoured learning preferences or styles. Learning styles are
concerned with a number of heterogeneous issues involving cognition, conceptualisation, affect
and behaviour. They are also related to the way the learner's brain operates. This paper presents
the application of McCarthy's 4MAT model which enables the educator to design a lecture in a
balanced manner giving the students the opportunity to learn in their preferable way, stimulating
both their brain hemispheres, helping them acquire the ability to strengthen weaker areas of
their learning process and adapt to other learning styles. Two practical teaching applications in
two different universities are presented. Implications of this approach to teaching in hospitality
and tourism and suggestions for further research are provided.

1
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

4MAT-ting Teaching for Multiple Learning Styles

1. Introduction

One of the major challenges presented to hospitality educators is the teaching of theoretical
courses (full of models and concepts). This is because, more often than not, students perceive
hospitality management courses as 'hands-on', practical courses and anecdotal evidence suggests
that a significant number of them find serious difficulties in conceptualising their learning.
Successful teaching is the provision of a learning experience that is accessible to all students
regardless of their individually favoured learning preferences. These preferences, "the different
ways in which children and adults think and learn" are defined by Litzinger & Osif (1992: 73)
as "learning styles". Potentially then, the problem of teaching theoretical courses can be
overcome by adopting a lecture planning and delivery technique which aims at accommodating
all learning styles and enables students to advance and nurture their intellectual capabilities.
This article illustrates the use and appropriateness of such a technique in Hospitality and
Tourism education. Two cases of different courses taught in two different UK universities are
presented in order to overcome limitations regarding the generalisation of the instruction
technique due to contextual factors. The first case refers to a lecture in Hospitality Operations
Management, an advanced stage course in the School of Hotel and Restaurant Management of
Oxford Brookes University and the second to a lecture in Information Technology Applications
in the Hospitality and Tourism Industries, an advanced stage course in the Scottish Hotel School
at the University of Strathclyde.

2. Learning Styles and Teaching

Experiential learning theory (ELT) defines learning as “the process whereby knowledge is
created through the transformation of experience. Knowledge results from the combination of
grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, 1984, p. 41). The learning model portrays two
dialectically related modes of grasping experience - concrete experience (CE, getting involved)
and abstract conceptualization (AC, creating an idea) - and two dialectically related modes of
transforming experience – reflective observation (RO, listening and observing) and active
experimentation (AE, making decisions). According to Kolb's (1984) conceptual model on
learning, effective learning should involve all four previous phases.

However, an individual’s preferred way of resolving these two dialects will determine their
individual learning style. Kolb (1984, p. 63) argued that learning styles are the "result of our
hereditary equipment, our particular past life experiences and the demands of the present
environment", but learning styles are not only concerned with heterogeneous issues involving
cognition (how one acquires knowledge) and conceptualisation (how one processes
information). Guild & Gerger (1985) argued that issues regarding affect (people's motivation,
decision making styles, values and emotional preferences) and behaviour have a major impact
on learning styles. Recent research based on a learning orientation approach (Martinez, 1999;
Martinez & Bunderson, 2000) proved the dominant power of emotions and intentions on
guiding and managing cognitive processes. Therefore, it should not be surprising that each
student has their own learning style and in order to successfully deliver any course, all learning
styles should be equally considered.

According to Kolb's (1984) conceptual model on learning, effective learning consists of four
modes:
 Concrete Experience (getting involved)
 Reflective Observation (listening and observing)
 Abstract Conceptualisation (creating an idea)

2
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

 Active Experimentation (making decisions)

Some students are better at some of these modes and it is proven (Keefe, 1982; Herrmann,
1990; Lumsdaine & Lumsdaine, 1995) that their brains behave differently (right/left
hemispheric processing) as far as learning is concerned: this is how their 'favoured' learning
style is developed. However, the question that may arise here for a lecturer is 'Do I teach trying
to adapt all the students to my preferred teaching (learning) style or I am trying to help the
students learn through their own styles?'. In a one-to-one situation adapting teaching to the
student's own learning style may be possible but what happens in small or larger groups
situations? The question is rhetoric but the problem still exists.

ELT suggests that these learning styles represent very specific and limited ways of learning and
so, instructions focusing on accommodating individual styles cannot be beneficial to the
learner’s development. In the same vein, taking into account Jung’s (1931) notion that adult
development moves from a specialised way of adapting toward a holistic integrated way,
development in learning sophistication is seen as a move from specialisation to integration.
Integrated learning is a process involving a creative tension among the four learning modes that
is responsive to contextual demands. This is portrayed as an idealised learning cycle or spiral
where the learner ‘touches all bases’ – experiencing, reflecting, conceptualising and
experimenting – in a recursive process that is responsive to the learning situation and what is
being learned.

A number of different approaches might facilitate integrated learning:

 utilising holistic, complex tasks,
 adding alternatives, and
 completing learning cycles that incorporate all styles.

The first approach requires the teacher to incorporate in their teaching activities around complex
projects demanding that students address a topic using multiple skills. They have to accept that
there are many starting points and a number of acceptable ways for successfully completing the
activity. This approach would be more suitable for "integrative" courses, which draw
information from other courses and lend themselves to groupwork.

The add-on approach requires the teacher to think of multiple activities on the same topic or
concept that will allow different students to find the one most appropriate to their learning style.

A teaching approach designed to suit most (if not all) learning styles would help not only
students to learn but challenges them to develop and strengthen weaker areas of their learning
process (whether in Kolb's model or in the hemispheric process).

An interesting technique which incorporates both Kolb's model and the findings on the human
brain's learning process is McCarthy's (1980) 4MAT model. According to McCarthy there are 4
major types of learner, each or which asks different questions and displays different strengths
during the learning process: innovative, analytic, common sense and dynamic (see Table 1).

3
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

Table 1: Bernice McCarthy's Four Learning Styles

Type 1: Innovative Learners are primarily interested in personal meaning. They need to have reasons
for learning--ideally, reasons that connect new information with personal experience and establish that
information's usefulness in daily life. Some of the many instructional modes effective with this learner
type are co-operative learning, brainstorming, and integration of content areas (e.g., science with social
studies, writing with the arts, etc.).

Type 2: Analytic Learners are primarily interested in acquiring facts in order to deepen their
understanding of concepts and processes. They are capable of learning effectively from lectures, and
enjoy independent research, analysis of data, and hearing what "the experts" have to say.

Type 3: Common Sense Learners are primarily interested in how things work; they want to "get in
and try it." Concrete, experiential learning activities work best for them--using manipulative, hands-on
tasks, kinaesthetic experience, etc.

Type 4: Dynamic Learners are primarily interested in self-directed discovery. They rely heavily on
their own intuition, and seek to teach both themselves and others. Any type of independent study is
effective for these learners. They also enjoy simulations, role play, and games.

Source: http://www.aboutlearning.com

Each learning style is associated with both left- and right-brain learners. Left-brain learners are
logical, rational, sequential, serial, verbal learners. Right-brain learners are intuitive, emotional,
holistic, parallel, and tactile learners. The two hemispheres differ in terms of the way they
process information. Due to this difference they share equal importance in learning. Thus,
stimulation of both the left and right hemispheres in a lecture promotes more meaningful
learning for students. Techniques aiming at this end are incorporated into each quadrant of the
4MAT-model. The model helps the lecturer design a lecture in a balanced manner giving the
students the opportunity to learn in their preferable way, stimulates both brain hemispheres and
also helps them acquire the ability to adapt to other learning styles.

McCarthy's model - shown in Fig.1 - is represented by a wheel (like any other learning cycle)
which is divided in 4 quadrants leading students from concrete experience to reflective
observation to abstract conceptualisation and finally to active experimentation (from Kolb's
model):
 Motivation
 Concept Development
 Practice
 Application

McCarthy concluded that the full cycle of a lecture should include eight activities,
accommodating each of the four types of learning using both left and right dominance in each
quadrant.

4
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

Figure 1. The 4MAT System: Teaching To Learning Styles With Right/Left Mode Techniques

N
IO

1.
M
T
D o it a n d s h a r e C r ea te th e

O
IC

T
w it h o t h e r s e x p e r ie n c e

IV
L
( R ig h t M o d e ) (R ig h t M o d e )

PP

A
T
A

IO
4. D e v e lo p a p l a n

N
R e f le c t o n
f o r a p p ly in g n e w th e e x p e r ie n c e
co n ce p ts R R (L eft M o d e)
(L e ft M o d e ) L L

R R I n t e g r a t e R e f le c t io n s
P e r s o n a lis e t h e
in f o r m a t i o n
L L in t o c o n c e p t s
(R ig h t M o d e ) ( R ig h t M o d e )

T
N
PM T
P r a c tic e P resen t a n d

E
L EP
a n d r e in f o r c e d e v e lo p t h e o r ie s
3.

V NC
PR

n e w m a te r ia l a n d co n ce p ts

O
(L e ft M o d e ) (L eft M o d e)

O
A

E
C
C
T

2.
E
IC

D
E

Adapted from McCarthy (1980)

Looking at the model, one may see that the innovative learners (type one) will be stimulated in
the Motivation quadrant as they prefer to perceive new information by sensing and feeling and
then reflect on what they have just experienced. Analytical learners (type two), who perceive by
watching and thinking and then develop theories based on what they observed, will be more
engaged in the quadrant of Concept Development. The common sense learners (type three)
conceptualise and develop theories but then they must test out their theories to make sure they
work and therefore they will be actively involved in the Practice quadrant. Finally, the dynamic
learners (type four) who learn best by sensing and feeling and then experimenting with the new
information in different ways will be more involved in the last quadrant (Application). The
similarities to Kolb's model are obvious, however, McCarthy goes one step further introducing
strategies in each quadrant which engage both brain hemispheres of the students. The 4MAT
learning cycle can be used several times in the same session (like Kolb's cycle) and is intended
to stimulate students' participation and enhance their learning.

3. Research aims and methodology: 4MAT-ting the Lecture

The aim was to reformat instruction methods and content in order to make them accessible,
fruitful and pedagogically equilibrium for all types of learners. To that end, the benefits and
learning outcomes of pedagogical models and theories have been reviewed and analysed for
identifying the use of appropriate instruction methods. Specifically, the advantages of
McCarthy's model have been debated and so, this model was used as the basis for the planning
of a lecture on Capacity Management as part of the teaching of Hospitality Operations
Management (HOM) course in Oxford Brookes University and a lecture on Customer
Relationship Management as part of the teaching of Information Technology Applications in the
Hospitality and Tourism Industries (ITA) course in University of Strathclyde. The lectures were
given to 146 and 93 students respectively. The structure of the lectures is given in Appendix 1
and 2. The following section analyses the rationale, planning and reformatting of the lectures
based on the proposed framework by Morris & McCarthy (1990). Finally, findings regarding
students’ informal and formal feedback and students’ experience of the lectures as well as the
implications of the study for further research are also provided.

5
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

The lecture plan starts with the ‘scene setting’ as the students enter the lecture theatre (Stage 1).
In both cases a slide presenting the lecture topic is already on screen. The ground rules of this
‘special’ lecture are explained.

3. 1 Motivation: Stage 2 of lecture

R. Create the Experience (Right Mode Strategy)

HOM: The lecturer displays the slide with Slack's Model of Operations Management and gives
an example of a simple catering operation describing its location, premises, products and service
style (outputs) and its resources (inputs).

ITA: The lecturer starts by presenting Kalakota and Robinson’s CRM model adapted to the
tourism and hospitality industry and provides an example of CRM application in
travelocity.com by reviewing its business model and explaining its customer-centric practices.
In both cases, students are asked to look at the model and make links to the description that the
lecturer is giving. This activity catches the attention of all students and enables to focus on the
topic.

L. Reflect on the Experience (Left Mode Strategy)

HOM: The lecturer now asks the students to imagine that they are managing this catering
operation. He then asks the students to think for one minute or two what are the transformation
processes that take place in this operation.

ITA: Similarly, the lecturer asks the students to imagine that they are managing travelocity.com.
She then asks them to think for one minute or two what are the possible customer interactions
with this company and how technology can influence them.

3.2 Concept Development: Stage 3 of lecture

R. Integrate Reflections Into Concepts (Right Mode Strategy)

HOM: Each student will relate the catering operation's inputs with its outputs in order to
identify all the possible transformation processes. This relation will, either automatically or with
the lecturer's directed questioning, lead to the relation of quantity of outputs produced by inputs
used and the total possible outputs to be produced with given quantities of inputs.

ITA: Students will start to sense key issues that travelocity.com needs to be implementing in
three major areas, namely, knowledge management, ICT management and relationships
management. Lecturer’s input in directing and influencing students’ thinking is crucially
important in this stage.

L. Present and Develop Theories and Concepts (Left Mode Strategy)

The lecturer defines the new concept (capacity / Knowledge-based CRM) and gives industry-
related examples. The concept definition is also displayed on a slide.

3.3 Practice: Stage 4 of lecture

L. Practice and Reinforce New Information (Left Mode Strategy)

At this stage, students are presented with new information but they are asked to take some
action to grasp it.

HOM: Students are now asked (question displayed on a slide) "How does productivity relate to
capacity? What is the difference between the two terms?".

ITA: The question is set as: “What is the relation between CRM and customer lifetime value?
How can the latter be measured?”.

6
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

Students think on their own but they have to discuss the question within their group (group
formation and size is explained later) while the lecturer goes around and probes/facilitates the
discussion.

R. Personalise the Experience (Right Mode Strategy)

Before presenting the answers, each group is encouraged to also provide industry-related
examples drawing from the students' experience during their industrial placement or work
experience. This group activity gives the students an opportunity to link on their own
experiences and share them with the other members of the group.

3.4 Application: Stages 5 and 6 of lecture

L. Develop A Plan for Applying New Concepts (Left Mode Strategies)

HOM: The answers on capacity will lead to the concept of Utilisation and a slide will show a
graph pointing out the Best Operating Level, the Overutilisation area and the Underutilisation
area. Students are now asked to find a way of applying the concept in a restaurant context with
the use of the graph displayed on the slide.

ITA: Answers on the customer lifetime value will lead to the identification of several revenue
and expense elements as well as of financial and mathematical techniques for measuring
customers’ profits. Students will be asked to think of different metrics for a specific resort hotel
(characteristics given on slide) and report them to the lecturer who records them on an overhead
transparency.

R. Do It and Share It with Others (Right Mode Strategies)

The students are now ready to share their view with the other members of their groups and the
class. All members of the group will have the opportunity to interact with each other by asking
questions and expressing possible concerns. They will this way verify their understanding of the
concepts introduced up to this moment.

Stage 7 of the lecture

The learning cycle starts again with the lecturer describing a resort hotel giving exact details of
location, capacity, services offered, etc. and on the ITA side, a hotel chain, its target market,
ICT capabilities, relationship management challenges and opportunities. The lecture will
continue with the presentation of the new concepts related with the topic and go through the
different modes again and again.

3.5 Student Contact

Gibbs & Jenkins (1984) argue that student learning in lectures can improve if each period of
listening by students is no more than 20 minutes. The introduction of well- defined interactive
tasks will create an environment in which students have the opportunity to share views with one
another, asking questions, clarifying issues, and re-stating points of view on the concepts
presented during the lecture. These interactive tasks will engage the students in developing
thinking skills as analysing, explaining, synthesising, and elaborating on management theory
and practice. Both lectures were planned to include three interactive tasks plus a final
evaluation.

The time allocated for the tasks was 20 minutes, leaving 20 minutes of lecturing time and 5
minutes for the introduction to the topic and the lecture ground rules. Students were requested to
undertake the tasks in groups of 5-6 that would be formed as the students were seated in the
lecture theatre, with the three in front turning to face the three behind. During the tasks the
lecturer made sure that nobody was left in "a no man's land". The discussions would stop as
soon as the lecturer would raise his/her right hand or switch on and off the overhead projector

7
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

(Jenkins, 1992, pp. 63-77). During the discussions the lecturer moved around the lecture theatre
listening to groups, and occasionally dropped into a group and participated in the discussion for
a while (McKeachie, 1999, pp. 160-161).

Handouts of the PowerPoint slides with space for further notes to be written were provided to
the students as they entered the lecture theatre alongside a handout to be used in the final task
(lecture’s evaluation).

4. Reflecting on the reformatted type of instruction

4.1. Student Feedback

Student feedback was received after the lecture at both institutions, in the course's evaluation
but also a term later in private conversations, and gave a clear message: the technique was
unanimously excellent in that it stimulated them and engaged them all in the tasks set. Students
also stated that this involvement in the learning process yielded higher understanding of the
concepts and retention of the material learned. Students appreciated that the technique 'made
them think' and helped them understand 'complex ideas'. This is consistent with Astin (1996)
quoting Pascarella & Terenzini's conclusion in a survey summary of a number of pedagogic
studies: "The studies show clearly that the greater the student's involvement, the greater the
learning and personal development."

In the student evaluation that followed the lectures, a high percentage (over 92% of the
participants in both institutions) stated that they prefer this teaching method over the traditional
lecture. These results are consistent with the student evaluation carried out by Charman &
Fullerton (1995) after an interactive lecture in a study of a geographical concepts course. Their
findings also revealed a high degree of student satisfaction, as only 3% felt that they preferred
the more traditional lecture format.

4.2 Why Interactive Lecture?

By its nature, 4MAT requires a more interactive teaching method. The name of the game is the
stimulation of all learners in all their hemispheric modes and it is well documented that
traditional lectures do not facilitate such task. For example, one National Institute of Education's
report on American higher education, clearly states that:
"traditional classroom teaching favours the assertive student. But our analysis
indicates that instructors should give greater attention to the passive or reticent
student..."
(Cooper et al., 1990)

Learning according to McCarthy has been viewed as a four-step process: experiencing,

reflecting, experimenting and acting. In the traditional lecture theatre the experience is the
lecture itself, reflection and experimentation is done privately, and the action is the
examination. However, ancient wisdom purports that "I hear and I forget, I see and I remember,
but I do and I understand" (Confucius) which is consistent with well-proven research findings
that student involvement leads to most effective learning. Student involvement may be
accomplished using many techniques, including collaborative learning, student-centred learning,
student-centred approach, student-clustered learning, group learning, group dynamics, student
tutoring, student discussion groups, learner-centred activities, problem-based learning, the
Socratic method, and action learning (Fogarty & Bellanca, 1992; Sigala, 2002a and 2000b,
Paraskevas & Wickens, 2002).

The technique used in the above lecture focuses on the student/topic/lecturer interaction. The
flow of interaction is lecturer-student (brief lecture), student-student (activity), and student-

8
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

concept(s) (reflection and understanding of the concepts, experimenting and planning of

application).

5. Implications for research and practice in hospitality and tourism education

The main aim of the 4MAT technique is to enhance and support student learning and
intellectual growth. The underlying hypothesis has been that students possess some adaptive
flexibility which, under proper conditions (a 4MAT-style interactive lecture), can help them
move from their preferred learning style to others and back in a continuous dialectic with the
lecturer, their classmates and themselves. More specifically, research (Mainemelis et al., 2001)
has shown that: “individuals with learning styles that balance experiencing and conceptualising
respond more flexibly in adapting to experiencing and conceptualising learning situations”
(p.22). Pedagogical practices aiming at integrating learning styles are increasingly important
given the impact that adaptive flexibility can have on managers’ ability to respond effectively to
the rapidly changing requirements of jobs and work environments (Pulakos et al., 2000; Thatch
& Woodman, 1994) as well as on employees’ creativity (Stenberg et al., 1997; Ayman-Noley,
1999). Given the globalisation and dynamic changes within the tourism and hospitality industry,
job performance and retention is ever more dependent on the ability of managers to disengage
from preferred ways of thinking and adapt to uncertain environmental conditions, changing
technologies, corporate restructuring, mergers or culturally diverse markets and work contexts
(Sigala, 2002c; Christou, 2000). The 4MAT teaching technique stimulates this creative
adaptation, and prepares students for their future.

However, this very hypothesis is also the main limitation of this study as it does not address the
case of students that may not possess this adaptive flexibility. Coupled with the fact that very
limited research exists on the relation between balanced learning profiles and adaptive
flexibility (Mainemelis et al., 2001), further research could focus on investigating the
educational as well as methodological (e.g. construct operationalisation and validity) aspects of
this issue.

Scholars could also seek to extend the study of integrated learning and adaptive flexibility in
other areas of educational research. A topical and interesting research direction is the
investigation on how newly attempted pedagogical innovations such as 'e-learning' can
accommodate different learning styles. Sigala (2002b) highlighted that as long as these
pedagogical innovations are unbalanced and emphasise one dominant learning mode they are
doomed to undermine the learning opportunities of students who are not flexible in that learning
style. Valcke (1999) defined the inconsistency between the demands of the 'e-learning'
environment and the actual learning styles of the students as the “congruency problem of e-
learning", which can in turn crucially affect the effectiveness of the latter. These and other
studies (e.g., Shellens & Valcke, 2000) provided evidence that the failure of innovative 'e-
learning' environments is substantially attributed to the fact that they are built upon wrong
expectations as to students’ learning styles. It would be interesting to see how effective a
4MAT-ted "e-learning" environment could be.

Finally, given the relationships amongst creativity, flexibility and integrated learning styles,
future research could focus on identifying the specific individual characteristics, skills and
attributes that relate to adaptive performance and so need to be nurtured.

6. Conclusion

McCarthy proposes that lecturers are generally excellent at catering for one specific learning
style but as a result of this the learning styles of approximately 75% of students are neglected.
This is why her 4MAT Wheel, representing one of the four main learning styles, is so helpful in
designing a lecture following some tested structure.

9
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

However, this may not always be possible as not all topics/subjects or teaching situations offer
opportunities for the 4MAT implementation. In these cases (like the one-on-one situation),
lecturers have to develop the student-lecturer interaction in the most appropriate for the student
way.

Despite some educators' objections, as for example Race (1993), who claim that human brains
are much more sophisticated than merely to perform sequential operations in any particular
order, the 4MAT system was proven successful in most cases in Higher Education. Stice (1987)
and Harb et al. (1993) who evaluated student feedback in the College of Engineering and
Technology at Brigham Young University where most of the courses were redesigned in an
attempt to reach the full spectrum of learning styles, report excellent results.

It must be noted, however, that there have been situations where students did not respond as
expected. The authors believe that the main reason for this is that some students may feel
uncomfortable when they are required to "function" in a style other than their preferred one.
However, the value of this technique lies on the idea that gradually students will be forced to
move from their preferred "mode" and be able to learn in different than their usual way. So far,
the results from the students' course evaluations suggest that teaching to the full spectrum of
learning styles improves students' learning and satisfaction with their instruction, and increases
their self-confidence.

References

Astin, A. W., (1996). Involvement in Learning Revisited: Lessons We Have Learned, Journal
of College Student Development, 37(2), (March/April), 123 -134.

Ayman-Noley (1999). A Piagetian Perspective on the Dialectic Process of Creativity.

Creativity Research Journal, 12, 267 – 275.

Charman, D.J. and Fullerton, H. (1995). Interactive Lectures: A Case Study In A

Geographical Concepts Course, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 19(1), 57-68.

Christou, E. (2000). Management Competencies For Graduate Trainees Of Hospitality And

Tourism Programs, Annals of Tourism Research, 27(4).

Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., and Mueck, R. (1990). Cooperative Learning
and College Instruction, Trustees of the California State University.

Cross, P.K. (1998). What We Know About Student's Learning and How We Know It?, paper
presented in AAHE's 1998 National Conference on Higher Education.

Fogarty, R., and Bellanca, J. (1992). The New School 'Lecture' Cooperative Interactions that
Engage Student Thinking, Enhancing Thinking Through Cooperative Learning, New York:
Teachers College Press, 84- 100.

Gibbs, G. and Jenkins, A. (1984). Break Up Your Lectures: Or Christaller Sliced Up, Journal
of Geography in Higher Education, 8(1), 27-39.

Gibbs, G., Habeshaw, S. and Habeshaw, T. (1984). 53 Interesting Ways to Teach Large
Classes, Bristol: Technical and Educational Services.

Guild, P.B. and Gerger, S. (1985). Marching to Different Drummers, Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Harb, J.N., Durrant, S.O. and Terry, R.E. (1993). Use of the Kolb Learning Cycle and the

10
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

4MAT System in Engineering Education Journal of Engineering Education, 82(2), 70-77.

Herrmann, N. (1990). The Creative Brain. Lake Lure, NC: Brain Books.

Jenkins, A. (1992). Active Learning In Structured Lectures, in G. Gibbs and A. Jenkins (Eds.)
Teaching Large Classes in Higher Education, London: Kogan Page, 63-77.

Jung, C.G. (1931). Foreward and Commentary, in Wilhelm, R. (trans.) The Secret Of The
Golden Flower. New York: Harcourt Brace and World.

Keefe, J. (1982). Student Learning Styles and Brain Behaviour: Programmes,

Instrumentation, Research, Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary Schools.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and
Development, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Lumsdaine M. and Lumsdaine, E. (1995). Thinking Preferences of Engineering Students:

Implications for Curriculum Restructuring. Journal of Engineering Education, 84(2), 193-
204.

Mainemelis, C., Boyatzis, R. and Kolb, D. (2002). Learning Styles and Adaptive Flexibility:
Testing Experiential Learning Theory, Management Learning, 33 (1), 5-33.

Martinez, M. (1999). Research Design, Models and Methodologies for Examining How
Individuals Successfully Learn on the Web, Special Research In Technical Communication,
46 (4), 470-487.

Martinez, M. and Bunderson, C.V. (2000). Building Interactive Web Learning Environments
to Match and Support Individual Learning Differences, Journal of Interactive Learning
Research, 11 (2), 77-93.

McCarthy, B. (1980). The 4MAT System: Teaching to Learning Styles with Right/Left Mode
Techniques, Barrington, IL: Excel.

McKeachie, W. (1999). Teaching tips (10th ed.), Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath, 158-166.

Morris, S. and McCarthy, B. (eds.) (1990). 4MAT in Action II: Sample Lesson Plans for Use
with the 4MAT System, Barrington, IL: Excel.

Paraskevas, A. and Wickens, E. (2002). Andragogy and the Socratic Method: The Adult
Learner Perspective, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education,
(forthcoming).

Pulakos, E.D., Arad, S., Dovonan, M.A. and Plamondon, K.E. (2000). Adaptability in the
workplace: Development of a Taxonomy of Adaptive Performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 85 (4), 614-624.

Race, P. (1993). Never Mind The Teaching - Feel The Learning, SEDA Paper No. 80, Chapter
1, Birmingham: SEDA Publications.

Shellens, T. and Valcke, M. (2000). Re-engineering Conventional University Education:

Implications for Students’ Learning Styles, Distance Education, 21 (2), 361-384.

Sigala, M. (2002a). The Evolution of Internet Pedagogy: Benefits for Tourism and Hospitality
Education, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sports and Tourism Education, 1(2), [On line]:

11
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

http://www.hlst.ltsn.ac.uk/johlste/vol1no2/academic/contents.html.

Sigala, M. (2002b). Evaluating the Effectiveness of E-Learning Platforms in Tourism and

Hospitality Education, International Council for Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional
Education, (CHRIE), Orlando, USA, 5-8 August, 2002.

Sigala, M. (2002c). Trends and Issues in Tourism and Hospitality Education: Visioning the
Future. International Council for Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Education, (CHRIE),
Orlando, USA, 5-8 August, 2002.

Stenberg, R.J., O’ Hara, L.A. and Lubart, T.I. (1997). Creativity As Investment, California
Management Review, 40, 8 – 21.

Stice, J.E. (1987). Using Kolb's Learning Cycle to Improve Student Learning, Journal of
Engineering Education, 77, 291-296.

Thatch, L. and Woodman, R.W. (1994). Organisational Change and Information Technology:
Managing on the Edge of Cyberspace, Organizational Dynamics, 23(1), 30- 46.

Valcke, M (1999). Educational Re-Design of Courses to Support Large Groups of University

Students by Building Upon the Potential of ICT. In D’ Hollander, E., Kerre, E.,
Vanwormhoudt, M., Vervenne, D. and Vandamme, F., (eds) Information Technology for
Teaching and Training, Communication and Cognition, Ghent: Ghent University.

12
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

Appendix 1. Lecture Plan: Capacity Management Course: Hospitality Operations

Management (adapted from Gibbs & Jenkins, 1984; Jenkins, 1992):
Stages Time Activity
1 5 All: Lecture topic slide is displayed while students enter and sit down.
mins Lecture ground rules are explained.
2 3 Lecturer: A revision slide is displayed on Slack's Model. Lecturer gives a
mins brief revision on previous lectures and introduces today's learning
outcomes.
3 3 Lecturer: defines the concepts of capacity and productivity giving
mins industry-related examples.
4 6 Students: display the questions "How does productivity relate to
mins capacity? What is the difference between the two terms?" Students
discuss the question in small groups.
5 4 Lecturer: based on the student answers, gives short talk on set questions
mins introducing "capacity utilisation" and "BOL".
6 3 Students: a new task is set employing the graph displayed on the screen in
mins a hospitality context.
7 3 Lecturer: summarises using feedback from some student groups and
mins continues with the 3 Alternative Capacity Plans.
8 7 Students: set a harder task applying "flexible capacity" methods in a
mins hotel.
9 1 Lecturer: answers part of the question leading to a more advanced issue -
min balance between capacity and quality.
10 2 mins Students: continue to work in groups.
11 4 mins Lecturer: complete the analysis in short lecture.
12 2 min Lecturer: summarises and suggests sources for further reading.
13 2 mins Students: Time for questions and final task of lecture's evaluation.

13
 CHME – 12th Research Conference, Sheffield, 23-24 April 2003

Appendix 2. Lecture Plan: Customer Relationship Management Course: Information

Applications in the Hospitality and Tourism Industries (adapted from Gibbs & Jenkins, 1984;
Jenkins, 1992)
Stages Time Activity
1 5 All: Lecture topic slide is displayed while students enter and sit down.
mins Lecture ground rules are explained.
2 4 Lecturer: Presents Kalakota and Robinson’s CRM model adapted to the
mins tourism and hospitality industry. Reviews travelocity.com’s business
model and explains its CRM application and customer-centric practices.
3 3 Lecturer: defines the concepts of knowledge-based CRM and customer
mins lifetime value linking them with travelocity.com and giving other
industry-related examples.
4 6 Students: Lecturer displays the questions "What is the relation between
mins CRM and customer lifetime value? How can the latter be measured? ".
Students discuss the question in small groups.
5 4 Lecturer: records students’ answers on a transparency and based on those
mins introduces the idea of CRM metrics giving one or two examples.
6 5 Students: a new task is set for students to propose a set of CRM metrics
mins that a resort hotel could use. Information on the characteristics of the
resort hotel are provided on a slide. They are also asked to identify the
various sources of information that would be used to compose these
metrics.
7 3 Lecturer: summarises eliciting answers from some student groups and
mins continues presenting research evidence that often CRM systems fail.
Presents on a slide the main reasons for failure suggested by researchers.
8 2 Students: are now asked to work in their groups to suggest a step-by-step
mins design process of a CRM system for the resort of the previous task.
9 1 Lecturer: reveals the ‘recommended’ first step of the process and directs
min the group discussion to the next one.
10 5 mins Students: continue to work in groups.
11 3 mins Lecturer: in an interactive session reveals the rest of the steps and
concludes by emphasising that CRM is a mindset that reshapes the whole
approach of sales, customer service and analytics and requires a cultural
shift.
12 2 min Lecturer: summarises and suggests sources for further reading.
13 2 mins Students: Time for questions and final task of lecture's evaluation.

14