Does tenure matter? HTLP evaluation criteria and programme quality among the United States faculty

Danny Woosik Choi, Kurt Stahura

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine programme quality and perceptions of evaluation criteria of hospitality, tourism, and leisure programmes (HTLPs) among full-time faculty based on tenure status (i.e., non-tenure, tenure-track, and tenured) in the United States. The MANOVA (multivariate analysis of variance) analyses found that non-tenure track faculty score significantly lower in strategic planning, curriculum and instruction, resources, administrative management, and programme quality than tenure-track and tenured faculty do. The OLS (ordinary least square) analysis found that non-tenure track faculty are less concerned with administrative elements affecting the quality of the programme. The 2SLS (two-stage least square) analysis confirmed the group invariance of the OLS model. The analyses' results provide implications for developing inclusive HTLP evaluation criteria, combining elements from different models to measure subjective views, and adopting a mixed methodology to understand views of different faculty groups to develop more efficient HTLP evaluation criteria.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)51-69
Number of pages19
JournalAsia-Pacific Journal of Innovation in Hospitality and Tourism
Volume7
Issue number1
StatePublished - Mar 2018

Keywords

  • Evaluation criteria
  • HTLP
  • Programmeme quality
  • Stakeholder
  • Tenure

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Does tenure matter? HTLP evaluation criteria and programme quality among the United States faculty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this