Study Motivations and Study Preferences in the Korean Hospitality and Tourism Field

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 11 October 2014, At: 03:34Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Marketing for HigherEducationPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wmhe20

Study Motivations and StudyPreferences in the KoreanHospitality and Tourism FieldSamuel Seongseop Kim a , Myong Jae Lee b & KayeChon ca Department of Hospitality and TourismManagement , Sejong University , Seoul, Koreab The Collins College of Hospitality Management ,California State Polytechnic University Pomona ,Pomona, CAc School of Hotel and Tourism Management , HongKong Polytechnic University , Hong KongPublished online: 12 Dec 2008.

To cite this article: Samuel Seongseop Kim , Myong Jae Lee & Kaye Chon(2008) Study Motivations and Study Preferences in the Korean Hospitality andTourism Field, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 18:2, 216-239, DOI:10.1080/08841240802487395

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08841240802487395

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wmhe20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/08841240802487395

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08841240802487395

representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 18(2) 2008Available online at http://www.haworthpress.com© 2008 by The Haworth Press. All rights reserved.

216 doi:10.1080/08841240802487395

WMHE0884-12411540-7144Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 18, No. 2, October 2008: pp. 1–30Journal of Marketing for Higher Education

Study Motivations and Study Preferences in the Korean Hospitality and Tourism Field

Kim, Lee, and ChonJournal of Marketing for Higher Education Samuel Seongseop KimMyong Jae Lee

Kaye Chon

ABSTRACT. Many universities, two-year colleges, and graduate schoolsin Korea strive to increase the number of hospitality and tourism programsto accommodate the explosive popularity of the hospitality and tourismmanagement field. This study aims to identify reasons why students inKorea at both the undergraduate and graduate levels want to study hospitalityand tourism management and why they want to pursue such degreesabroad. The results of this empirical study of 540 Korean students majoringin hospitality and tourism management revealed that self-actualization,job opportunity, and overseas experience were major motivators for under-graduate students, while graduate students chose self-actualization andscholastic achievement as the two most important motivators. In the analy-sis of motivations to study hospitality and tourism management abroad,undergraduate students cited cultural experience as the main reason, whilegraduate students chose the desirable educational environment as the mainmotivator.

Samuel Seongseop Kim, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Hospitalityand Tourism Management, Sejong University, Seoul, Korea.

Myong Jae Lee, PhD, Assistant Professor, The Collins College of HospitalityManagement, California State Polytechnic University Pomona, Pomona, CA.

Kaye Chon, PhD, Director, School of Hotel and Tourism Management, HongKong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.

Address correspondence to: Myong Jae Lee, Collins College of HospitalityManagement, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA 91768(E-mail: [email protected]).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

Kim, Lee, and Chon 217

KEYWORDS. Study motivation, study preference, study abroad, hospitalityand tourism management (HTM)

INTRODUCTION

Higher education is vital to the hospitality and tourism industry; itprovides a foundation of knowledge and experience for those pursuing acareer in the industry and provides continuing professional developmentto those already employed in the industry (Cho & Kang, 2005; Kang, Wu, &Gould, 2005). As the hospitality and tourism industry in South Korea(hereafter, Korea) has grown rapidly, the need for an educated labor forcehas become evident. Coincidently, the popularity of hospitality and tourismmanagement (HTM) in the Korean higher education system has dramati-cally increased as many students choose HTM as their career path.

Hospitality and tourism management education in Korea has beendeveloping since the foundation of the first four-year undergraduate pro-gram offered at Kyonggi University in 1964, and the graduate programthat was initiated by Sejong University in 1967 (Cho & Kang, 2005). Aspresented in Table 1, there has been a substantial increase in the numberof institutions offering hospitality and tourism management degrees and thenumber of students majoring in HTM over the past decade (1995–2004). Asof 2004, there were 57 four-year universities and 118 two-year collegeswith 23,764 and 39,820 students, respectively (Korean National TourismOrganization, 2004). Furthermore, there were 2,019 master’s students and432 doctoral students in the HTM field across 42 universities in 2004(Ministry of Education Korea, 2004). The number of HTM educationalinstitutions and students increased 176% and 269% respectively over thepast 10 years (See Table 1).

Such a drastic evolution in the hospitality and tourism education inKorea has been in line with the growth of the hospitality and tourismindustry as well as its labor demands. Particularly, it is believed that Koreanpeople desire to continue their education for the professionalism, and inherentacademic enthusiasm has resulted in a rapid growth in graduate programs(Cho & Kang, 2005).

Furthermore, Korean students’ interest in getting HTM degrees inforeign countries has also dramatically increased. From the demand-sideperspective, there are many reasons why they want to study abroad,including learning a foreign language or culture, learning advancedknowledge, and increased job opportunities. In contrast, they have

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

218 JOURNAL OF MARKETING FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

become a target market for many Western universities seeking interna-tional HTM students from the standpoint of the foreign-students-acceptingcountries (Barron, 2002a, 2002b; Huang & Brown, 1996). For example,at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), boasts the largest HTMprogram in the United States, with an HTM student body of 2,192 under-graduate students and 120 graduate students in Spring 2006. Koreanstudents comprised 14% percent and 17.5% percent of undergraduate andgraduate enrolments respectively, becoming the largest ethnic group inthe HTM program (Karen Emptage, Personal Communication, May 22,2006). Also, at the University of Surrey, the largest HTM school in theUK with 1,237 HTM students as of spring 2005, Korean students made up0.074% and 7.2% of undergraduate and graduate enrolments, becoming thesecond largest ethnic group only after Chinese students (Andrew Williamson,Personal Communication, May 10, 2005).

The initiative of this study was derived from the fact that despite theobvious popularity of HTM programs in Korea and its important implica-tions, there has been limited research on the perceptions of Korean HTMstudents toward their study motivations and preferences. There are threemain objectives involved with this study. The first is to identify reasonswhy Korean students at both undergraduate and graduate level want tostudy HTM. With the Korean students’ sample, this study first identifiedmajor motivational factors to study HTM from both undergraduate andgraduate students groups through the principal component factor analysis.Also, study motivations between undergraduate and graduate students werethen compared using independent sample t-tests. The second objective was

TABLE 1. Hospitality and tourism education institutions in Korea

Category 2004 2000 1996

# of school Enrollment # of school Enrollment # of school Enrollment

PhD program 28 432 10 196 3 64Master’s

program42 2,019 32 1,568 27 487

Four-year university

57 23,764 55 16,352 42 9,191

Two-year college

118 39,820 88 38,810 NA NA

Total 245 66,035 185 56,926 +72 +9,742

Source: Korean National Tourism Organization (2001, 2004).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


to investigate the motivational difference between male and female stu-dents both in undergraduate and graduate levels in line with the results ofsome research (Aitchison, 2003; Schmidt, 2002) that suggested that the deci-sion to study HTM can be affected by demographic factors (e.g., gender).The third objective of this study was to examine reasons why studentswant to study HTM abroad. Thirteen motivation statements were refinedand used in the study to identify student motivations to study HTMabroad. Again, motivations for studying HTM abroad between undergrad-uate and graduate student groups were compared to provide usefulinsights on motivation patterns linked to gender. Furthermore, students’preferred countries for studying HTM abroad were identified in both theundergraduate and graduate levels.

LITERATURE REVIEW

This study is closely related to motivations of why students study HTMat the undergraduate and graduate levels in domestic and overseas areas.Until recently, there has been few studies examining HTM study motiva-tions. Although this issue is of significance in the hospitality and tourismacademia and industry alike, research on the motivations of why studentsdesire to study HTM is limited in scope with a limited number of studies(Airey & Frontistis, 1997; Bushell, Prosser, Faulkner, & Jafari, 2001;Hjalager, 2003; Huyton, 1997; Purcell & Quinn, 1996).

According to the results of a survey conducted for the study motivationof HTM masters’ students in Sweden, the three most important motivesidentified were (a) preference to work with people and/or communication,(b) work experience, and (c) the value of the masters’ programs in manytrades and industries (Hjalager, 2003). In particular, male students weremore highly motivated by previous experience in the industry than werefemale students. As one motivation for a higher education, the opportuni-ties to work with people and communication were found to be moreimportant for female than male students. The result is similar to those ofother studies that used different ethnic groups, including Australian, U.S.,and Greek students (Airey & Frontistis, 1997; Clark, 1993; Ross, 1997;Szivas & Riley, 1999; Tepeci & Bartlett, 2002). In addition, Hjalager(2003) found that male groups showed a higher level of motivation withopportunities for international careers than a female group, whereas thefemale group reported a higher level of motivation on a good salary than amale group.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Students’ motivation to study HTM may vary with national or ethnicbackgrounds (Airey & Frontistis, 1997; Cothran & Combrink, 1999).On the other hand, O’Mahoney, McWilliams, and Whitelaw (2001)indicated that Australian students choose HTM studies because of theirinterest in the hospitality and tourism industry and the influence of theirparents and career counselors. Huyton’s (1997) study concluded that therapid increase of HTM programs in China is consistent with the growthof the hospitality and tourism industry in China and, as a result, abun-dant job opportunities were the major motivators for HTM students.Zhao (1991) similarly demonstrated that Chinese students prefer HTMstudies because they believe that an HTM degree may lead to a respect-able career.

In a comparison of Greek and UK students’ perceptions on HTM studies,Airey and Frontistis (1997) identified that the Greek students had a morepositive view of job opportunities in the hospitality and tourism industrythan their UK counterparts. Aitchison (2003) introduced the concept ofgender difference in the hospitality and tourism field. In Aitchison’sstudy, motivation in HTM education is different across gender and socialcultural nexus. Thus the difference should be taken into account in thedevelopment of curriculum or administrative support. Overall, other studiesappear to agree that the motivation for HTM students tend to be vocationalrather than academic (Airey & Frontistis, 1997; Huyton, 1997; Purcell &Quinn, 1996; Zhao, 1991). Unfortunately, there has been no research onKorean students’ motivation for studying HTM.

There is a good match between demand (students) and supply (Westernuniversities) in a market of international students. From the perspective ofdemand, Barron (2002b) discussed that forces to study abroad by interna-tional students include economic, political, or organizational influences incertain Asian countries. In particular, Asian students believe that educa-tional institutions in Asian countries provide poor quality of programs,facilities, or faculty (Diaz & Krauss, 1996; Zhao, 1991). For example,Asian HTM schools are considered to have a large class size, authoritarianteaching environment, a one-way teaching flow rather than interactivediscussion between instructors and students, and insufficient facilities(Biggs, 1998; Pearson & Beasley, 1996). Thus, Western universitiesshould provide a guarantee of education quality, friendly atmosphere, andsatisfaction to international students (Khwaja & Bosselman, 1990; Niven,1987; Robertson, Line, Jones, & Thomas, 2000). These factors are likelyto affect the decision making in selecting a country of study by interna-tional students (Huang & Brown, 1996).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


In contrast, on the supply side of attracting demand for HTM studyabroad, Western universities need international students due to economicand political influences (Barron, 2002b). Thus the recruitment of foreignstudents is likely to fill a shortage of financial subsidies by government,prompting cultural diversity, an increase of residents, and revitalization ofthe local economy. Barron (2002a) reports that more universities inAustralia are keen to attract international HTM students and retain thembecause they can be good financial supporters who cover their full tuitionfees, which is almost double over domestic students for their tertiaryeducation.

Asian HTM students particularly tend to prefer Australia as a studyabroad country. The following reasons are suggested to explain whyAsian HTM student favor Australia for their study preference (Barron,2002a; 2002b; Lawley & Blight, 1997): First, Australia is geographicallylocated close to many Asian countries. Second, Australia shares manysocial and cultural exchanges with Asian countries since many immi-grants came from Asian countries. Third, higher education cost is rela-tively low when compared to other preferable countries such as the UKand the United States. Fourth, Australia has an advantage of climate andpersonal security with international students’ study environment whencompared to other countries. Thus the education field made up Australia’seighth largest export industry by recording AUS$3.15 billion in exportincome in session 1998–1999 (Davis, Olsen, & Bohm, 2000).

According to a number of researchers (Khwaja & Bosselman, 1990;Khwaja, Bosselman, & Fernsten, 1990; Malfroy & Daruwalla, 2000),HTM is an attractive field for international students who study in foreigncountries. In spite of an increase of foreign students’ demand in HTM,research efforts to identify students’ motivation to study HTM abroadhave also been limited to a few studies (Adams & Chapman, 1998; Diaz &Krauss, 1996; Hjalager, 2003; O’Mahony et al., 2001; Zhao, 1991). Amongthese students, some indicated differences of overseas study motivationacross national groups.

A study by Adams and Chapman (1998) found that Asian studentschoose foreign countries for their HTM studies mainly because of the lackof physical facilities and absence of capable faculty and staff members intheir own countries. Barron (2002b) added that a mixture of poor qualityof facilities and faculty, overriding demand and limited supply of educa-tional services, and career development opportunities motivates studentsto study HTM abroad. Similarly, Zhao (1991) demonstrated that Chinesestudents prefer to study HTM abroad because of the lack of high quality

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


tertiary education services in China. With regard to students’ preferredcountry of studying HTM, the United States, UK, and Australia have beenfrequently chosen as popular HTM study destinations by Asian students(Barron, 2002a, 200b; Formica, 1996; Jenkins, 2001).

Some studies indicated Asian students are passive, shy, and nonpartici-pative in class (Adam, Maxwell, Pooran, & Scott, 1999; Ballard &Clanchy, 1991, 1994; Burns, 1991). In a similar vein, Kember and Gow(1991) found that students from Hong Kong depended on rote learningand memorization, surface approach to learning, and were less interactivein their classes in a comparison of Western students. Asian students study-ing HTM abroad are likely to experience loneliness and unfriendlinessfrom the local community (Diaz & Krauss, 1996; Hsu, 1996; Malfroy &Daruwalla, 2000). In other ways, Asian students studying in Australiashowed concerns over the local environment, learning foreign languages,cultural difference, family dislocation, and racism during their educa-tional experience (Diaz & Krauss, 1996; Huang & Brown, 1996). Amongthe unfavorable conditions, it was suggested that the most frustratingaspect to Asian students is a lack of language proficiency (Hsu, 1996;Malfroy & Daruwalla, 2000).

However, despite these difficulties, some studies indicate that Asianstudents studying at universities in Western countries are more likelythan domestic students to complete their study programs (Burns, 1991;Dobson, Sharma, & Calderon, 1998). Findings of these studies are consis-tent with those of Niles (1995), which discussed that Asian studentswho study in Australia demonstrated a higher level of motivation thanAustralian students and had a tendency of using diverse strategies forlearning. In addition, their academic success is likely to result from a highlevel of motivation, concentration on their studies, effort to meet expecta-tion of family who support them financially, and harder working (Salili,1999). According to Robertson and colleagues (2000), international stu-dents strongly want their educational experience in foreign countries to behighly recognized from their origin countries.

As Hsu (1996) suggested, HTM administrative and academic staffshould take into consideration the meticulous concerns of overseas studentswith a HTM major so that the students are highly motivated and assimilatedin the study country’s culture. In addition, Hjalager (2003) found that regard-ing overseas study motivation, Sweden masters’ students preferred interna-tional job opportunities with a strong desire to work from country to country.

Barron and Arcodia (2002) found different types of learning stylesamong 16 different national student groups who are HTM majors in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Australia. An example of the findings indicate that Japanese, Korean,Vietnamese, and Chinese students showed a lack of pragmatist learning stylecompared to Malay, Indian, American, and European students. Foreignstudents were found to emphasize reputation of an educational institutionwhen they decide on a country destination for HTM study. Generally theytend to show a strong desire to pursue areas of HTM upon graduation.The results demonstrate an implication of motivational differences amongethnic groups. The information is likely to be needed to provide effectivelearning experiences, including curriculum design, counseling, or jobrecommendation to overseas students who are HTM majors in foreigncountries.

In summary, study motivations of those who major in HTM are likelyto vary across countries because the country situations reflect the educa-tion system. Similarly, in the middle of a trend of the HTM educationboom in Korea, students who major in HTM are likely to show peculiarmotivations for studying HTM. Furthermore, the motivations are likely tobe different between gender and educational level. Motivations for studyingHTM abroad seem to reflect Korean education consumers’ demands. Thisstudy’s efforts to identify motivations for studying HTM domesticallyand overseas are expected to provide a good insight of understandingKorean students’ preferences for studying HTM.

METHOD

Measurement Development

The population of this study consisted of HTM students at both theundergraduate and graduate levels. To assess students’ motivations forchoosing an HTM program, 23 motivation statements were identified fromprevious research on HTM study motivations and were refined through thefocus group of existing HTM students (Airey & Frontistis, 1997; Bushellet al., 2001; Hjalager, 2003; Huyton, 1997; O’Mahony et al., 2001; Purcell &Quinn, 1996; Tribe & Lewis, 2003). In addition, 13 motivation statementswere selected to measure the motivations of studying HTM abroad.Responses to all items were measured on a seven-point Likert-type scalewhere 1 = “strongly disagree,” 4 = “neutral,” and 7 = “strongly agree.”Initial measurements were refined through a pilot study of 25 HTM stu-dents. Results of the pilot study ensured that all questions were clearlyunderstood by participants and did not contain ambiguous sentences.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Data Collection

Universities offering undergraduate HTM degrees were divided intothree groups based on university entrance exam scores. Three universitieswere then randomly selected from each of the three groups. Forty-fivequestionnaires were distributed to undergraduate HTM students at each ofthe nine institutions. Out of 405 questionnaires distributed, a total of 364usable questionnaires were collected, resulting in a 89.9% usableresponse rate. For the graduate student survey, four major universitieswith the largest HTM graduate enrollment in Korea were chosen and 50questionnaires were distributed to graduate students at each institution.Out of 200 questionnaires distributed, 175 usable questionnaires werecollected, resulting in a 87.5% usable response rate. Surveys for bothundergraduate and graduate levels were administered and collected byHTM faculty members at each institution.

Data Analysis

Data analysis for this study used a three-step approach. First, descrip-tive statistics (means and frequencies) provided the ranking of the impor-tant motivators and preferred destination for overseas study as well as thedescriptive nature of the respondents. Second, collected data were factor-analyzed in order to delineate the underlying dimensions of HTM studymotivations. Based on Kaiser’s (1974) suggestion, only factors with aneigenvalue greater than 1 were accepted, and only items with factor load-ings and communalities of greater than .4 were included in the final factorstructure. In the factor analysis, reliability alpha within each domain werecomputed to confirm the factor’s internal consistency. In the last stage ofdata analysis, independent samples t-tests were conducted to examinethe statistically significant difference between undergraduate and gradu-ate student groups and between female and male student groups in termsof study motivations and location preference.

RESULTS

Demographic Profile of Respondents

Of the 365 undergraduate respondents, slightly more than 70% ofrespondents were female (N = 260), indicating the popularity of HTMprograms among female undergraduate students. Not surprisingly, 97%

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


were over 20 years of age. Freshmen and sophomores comprised approxi-mately 67% of respondents. For the respondents’ interest in studyingHTM abroad, 50% of respondents (N = 182) showed an interest in studyingabroad. Of the 175 master’s respondents, slightly more than 62% ofrespondents (N = 109) were female, and all respondents were over the ageof 23. For their interest in studying HTM abroad, 55% of respondents(N = 96) indicated their desire to study HTM aboard.

Motivation Factors for Choosing HTM

As indicated in Table 2, the principal component factor analysis of themotivational statements for choosing an HTM program resulted in sixfactor groupings with an eigenvalue greater than 1.0 and a relatively highreliability alpha coefficients ranging from .68 to .79. The delineatedfactors were labeled as follows: (a) “self-actualization” (13.21%), (b)“scholastic achievement” (12.21%), (c) “job opportunity” (10.6%),(d) “overseas experience” (9.82%), (e) “apparent attraction” (8.18%),and (f) “ease of study” (7.09%). Combined, these six factors explained61.11% of the variance. Each motivational item’s communality wasgreater or closer to .50, with most factor loadings over .55 indicating areasonably high correlation between the delineated factors and theirindividual items.

Comparison of Motivations between Undergraduate and Graduate Students

In order to determine if any statistically significant differences existedin six motivational factors between undergraduate and graduate students,independent sample t-tests were conducted. The test results are summa-rized in Table 3. The results showed significant differences at the alphalevel of .05 in all motivational factors except the “self-actualization” fac-tor. The undergraduate students group showed higher composite meanscores on the “job opportunity,” “overseas experiences,” and “apparentattraction” than those of graduate students group. This result revealed thatcompared with graduate students, undergraduate students were moremotivated with the fact that HTM could provide more job opportunitiesand overseas experiences such as the opportunity of contacting foreigners,foreign languages, and foreign cultures. Furthermore, undergraduatestudents tend to be lured by the apparent attractions in the field of HTMcreated recently by prevalent exposure in the media and entertainmentbusiness.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

226

TA

BLE

2. M

otiv

atio

nal f

acto

rs fo

r ch

oosi

ng a

n H

TM

pro

gram

Mot

ivat

ion

item

sF

acto

r lo

adin

gsC

omm

unal

ities

Mea

ns

(Gra

nd m

ean)

SD

Do

mai

n 1

: S

elf-

actu

aliz

atio

n (

eig

enva

lue

= 5.

22;

vari

ance

= 1

3.21

; re

liab

ility

alp

ha

= .7

5)T

his

field

sui

ts m

y ap

titud

e..7

49.6

365.

371.

33I w

ould

like

to g

ain

self-

actu

aliz

atio

n..7

47.6

354.

941.

49I h

ave

mor

e in

tere

st in

this

fiel

d, c

ompa

red

to o

ther

s..7

46.6

415.

691.

28I l

ike

to s

erve

oth

ers.

.596

.637

4.39

(5.

08)

1.45

Do

mai

n 2

: S

cho

last

ic a

chie

vem

ent

(eig

enva

lue

= 2.

49;

vari

ance

= 1

2.21

; re

liab

ility

alp

ha

= .7

8)I w

ould

like

to b

e an

exc

elle

nt s

chol

ar in

this

fiel

d..8

37.7

632.

881.

42I w

ould

like

to b

e a

theo

retic

al e

xper

t in

this

fiel

d..8

08.7

003.

201.

58I w

ould

like

to s

tudy

mor

e in

this

fiel

d..6

74.6

093.

621.

46C

ompa

red

to o

ther

fiel

ds, i

t is

easi

er to

get

a p

rofe

ssor

ship

in th

is fi

eld.

.596

.591

2.69

1.35

Com

pare

d to

oth

er fi

elds

, thi

s fie

ld p

rovi

des

mor

e op

port

unity

to b

e pr

omot

ed.

.558

.492

3.20

(3.

12)

1.24

Do

mai

n 3

: Jo

b o

pp

ort

un

ity

(eig

enva

lue

= 2.

23;

vari

ance

= 1

0.60

; re

liab

ility

alp

ha

= .7

3)I b

elie

ve th

at th

e pe

rcen

tage

of e

mpl

oym

ent i

s hi

gh a

fter

grad

uatio

n..8

38.7

334.

421.

42I b

elie

ve th

at th

ere

are

a va

riety

of j

ob o

ppor

tuni

ties.

.806

.709

4.56

1.40

I bel

ieve

that

the

leve

l of s

alar

y is

hig

h in

this

fiel

d.6

33.5

603.

641.

36I b

elie

ve th

at th

is fi

eld

has

a gr

owin

g po

tent

ial.

.574

.438

5.31

(4.

49)

1.33

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

227

Do

mai

n 4

: O

vers

eas

exp

erie

nce

s (e

igen

valu

e =

1.62

; va

rian

ce =

9.8

2;

relia

bili

ty a

lph

a =

.75)

I bel

ieve

that

I ca

n ha

ve th

e op

port

unity

to ta

ke m

ore

over

seas

bus

ines

s tr

ips.

.801

.744

4.73

1.46

Com

pare

d to

oth

er fi

elds

, it i

s po

ssib

le to

con

tact

fore

igne

rs a

nd fo

reig

n cu

lture

s..7

77.7

445.

031.

44I l

ike

fore

ign

lang

uage

s..5

65.4

063.

70 (

4.49

)1.

68

Do

mai

n 5

: A

pp

aren

t at

trac

tio

n (

eig

enva

lue

= 1.

35;

vari

ance

= 8

.18;

re

liab

ility

alp

ha

= .7

1)Jo

bs in

this

fiel

d lo

ok a

ttrac

tive.

.780

.663

4.00

1.39

Sce

nes

or p

ictu

res

of th

e ho

spita

lity

indu

stry

app

earin

g in

mov

ies

or T

V lo

ok

attr

activ

e..6

41.5

352.

641.

44

Wor

king

in th

is fi

eld

appa

rent

ly lo

oks

good

..5

61.4

643.

64 (

3.41

)1.

55D

om

ain

6:

Eas

e o

f st

ud

y (e

igen

valu

e =

1.16

; va

rian

ce =

7.0

9;

relia

bili

ty a

lph

a =

.68)

Com

pare

d to

oth

er fi

elds

, it i

s ea

sy to

stu

dy th

is fi

eld.

.690

.597

3.46

1.50

Thi

s fie

ld w

as r

ecom

men

ded

by o

ther

s (e

.g.,

pare

nts,

frie

nds,

or

teac

hers

).6

21.5

782.

921.

69I b

elie

ve th

at th

is fi

eld

is p

ract

ical

rat

her

than

theo

retic

al.

.615

.624

5.10

1.41

My

scor

e fo

r un

iver

sity

ent

ranc

e ex

am q

ualif

ied

me

for

this

maj

or.

.500

.559

3.02

(3.

64)

1.84

Not

e: S

even

-poi

nt L

iker

t-ty

pe s

cale

s w

ere

used

and

giv

en t

he f

ollo

win

g co

rres

pond

ing

valu

es:

stro

ngly

dis

agre

e (1

), n

eutr

al (

4),

and

stro

ngly

agre

e (7

).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


On the other hand, the graduate students group demonstrated highercomposite mean scores on “scholastic achievement” and “ease of study”than the undergraduate students group. Not surprisingly, graduate stu-dents’ scholastic desire to become an excellent scholar, expert or educatorin the field, was higher than undergraduate students’ scholastic desire.Also, graduate students tended to believe that their graduate HTM studieswere relatively easy compared to other disciplines. Overall, for bothundergraduate and graduate students, “self-actualization” was the mostimportant motivational factor (m = 5.05 and 4.95 respectively). For theundergraduate students, “job opportunity” (m = 4.49) and “overseas expe-riences” (m = 4.48) were relatively highly ranked motivational factors,while “scholastic achievement” (m = 4.30) was more important to thegraduate students’ decision making in majoring in HTM.

Gender Differences in Motivational Factors

Independent sample t-tests were conducted again to investigatewhether HTM study motivations were linked to gender difference in bothundergraduate and graduate levels. For the undergraduate students, thesignificant difference was found in four out of six motivational factors:“self-actualization,” “scholastic achievement,” “job opportunity,” and“overseas experiences.” Interestingly, in all four motivational factors,female students showed stronger motivations for studying HTM thanmale students. For graduate students, there was no significant differencethat existed in the six motivational factors between male and femalestudents (see Table 4).

TABLE 3. Comparison of motivations between undergraduate and master’s students

Motivation Factors Undergraduate Students (N = 365)

Master’s students (N = 75)

t-value P-value

1. Self-actualization 5.08 4.95 1.44 .1512. Scholastic achievement 3.11 4.30 12.65 .000*3. Job opportunity 4.49 3.95 5.46 .000*4. Overseas experience 4.48 4.22 2.39 .017*5. Apparent attraction 3.40 2.89 4.94 .000*6. Ease of study 3.64 3.97 3.86 .000*

*p < .05.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

229

TA

BLE

4. G

ende

r di

ffere

nces

in s

tudy

mot

ivat

ions

Mot

ivat

ion

Fac

tors

Und

ergr

adua

te s

tude

nts

(N =

365

)M

aste

r’s s

tude

nts

(N =

175

)

Mal

e (N

= 1

05)

Fem

ale

(N =

260

)t-

valu

eP

-val

ueM

ale

(N =

66)

Fem

ale

(N =

109

)t-

valu

eP

-val

ue

1. S

elf-

actu

aliz

atio

n4.

865.

172.

49.0

13*

4.96

4.94

.135

.893

2. S

chol

astic

ach

ieve

men

t2.

773.

254.

03.0

00*

4.32

4.28

.286

.777

3. J

ob o

ppor

tuni

ty4.

314.

562.

05.0

41*

4.10

3.86

1.38

.168

4. O

vers

eas

expe

rienc

e4.

104.

643.

79.0

00*

4.05

4.32

1.55

.121

5. A

ppar

ent a

ttrac

tion

3.22

3.47

1.98

.051

2.96

2.85

.616

.539

6. E

ase

of s

tudy

3.61

3.66

0.51

.614

3.99

3.94

.341

.734

*p <

.05.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Comparison of Motivations for Studying HTM Abroad

Another main objective of this study was to identify studentmotivations for studying HTM abroad from both undergraduate andgraduate students. The summary of motivations for studying HTMabroad for two different groups is presented in Table 5. Both under-graduate and graduate students groups showed relatively high meanscores on the better educational environment of foreign countries,such as “the foreign country has a higher education level than mycountry” (m = 6.03 and 5.67) and “the foreign country has betterfacilities than my country” (m = 6.02 and 5.81). Results of indepen-dent samples t-test revealed that significant mean differencesbetween undergraduate and graduate students group were found in11 motivational statements. Compared with graduate students,undergraduate students who showed their interest in studying HTMabroad demonstrated relatively higher mean scores on the new expe-riences in foreign countries, such as “opportunity to learn a foreignlanguage,” “experience a new culture,” “develop relationships withforeign friends,” and “live in a country that is not familiar with me.”On the other hand, graduate students who want to study HTM abroadwere more motivated with a better academic environment in foreigncountries, such as “to write a high quality thesis/dissertation,”“attain a teaching position easily in my country,” “work with famousprofessors,” and “opportunities to publish papers in internationaljournals.”

Preference of Foreign Country for Studying HTM

Table 6 presents students’ preferred countries for studying HTM.Both undergraduate and graduate students chose the United Statesas the most desirable country for studying HTM, followed bySwitzerland, and the UK. However, the concentration of the prefer-ence of a foreign country between the two groups is substantially dif-ferent. The majority of graduate students (87.5%) chose the UnitedStates for their study destination, while only 33.6% of undergraduatespreferred the United States as a destination to study HTM. Under-graduate students indicated that Switzerland (26%), UK (9.8%), andJapan (9.3%) were also favorably considered as attractive destina-tions to study HTM.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

231

TA

BLE

5.

Mot

ivat

ions

for

stud

ying

HT

M a

broa

d

Mot

ivat

ion

item

sU

nder

grad

uate

st

uden

ts m

ean

(N =

182

)

Mas

ter’s

st

uden

ts

mea

n (N

= 9

6)

t-va

lue

P-v

alue

1.I w

ould

like

to h

ave

an o

ppor

tuni

ty to

lear

n a

fore

ign

lang

uage

.5.

965.

235.

01.0

00*

2.I w

ould

like

to d

evel

op r

elat

ions

hips

with

fore

ign

prof

esso

rs a

nd fr

iend

s.5.

304.

952.

03.0

43*

3.I w

ould

like

to w

rite

a th

esis

or

diss

erta

tion

of h

ighe

r qu

ality

.3.

904.

784.

84.0

00*

4.I w

ould

be

able

to a

ttain

a te

achi

ng p

ositi

on e

asily

in m

y co

untr

y w

hen

I ret

urn

with

a d

iplo

ma.

3.86

4.96

5.61

.000

*

5.T

here

are

mor

e fa

mou

s pr

ofes

sors

, com

pare

d to

dom

estic

pro

fess

ors.

4.77

5.24

2.70

.007

*6.

I wou

ld li

ke to

hav

e m

ore

oppo

rtun

ities

to p

ublis

h pa

pers

for

inte

rnat

iona

l jo

urna

ls.

3.42

4.47

6.31

.000

*

7.I w

ould

like

to li

ve in

a c

ount

ry th

at is

not

fam

iliar

to m

e.4.

704.

132.

62.0

09*

8.I w

ould

like

to g

et a

bet

ter

job

or p

ositi

on in

my

coun

try

whe

n I r

etur

n w

ith a

di

plom

a.5.

615.

003.

55.0

00*

9.T

he fo

reig

n co

untr

y ha

s a

high

er e

duca

tiona

l lev

el th

an m

y co

untr

y in

this

fiel

d.6.

035.

672.

62.0

09*

10.

The

fore

ign

coun

try

has

bette

r fa

cilit

ies

than

my

coun

try.

6.02

5.81

1.69

.093

11.

I wou

ld li

ke to

gai

n a

job

in th

e fo

reig

n co

untr

y af

ter

I gai

n a

grad

uate

dip

lom

a.4.

774.

461.

59.1

1212

.I w

ould

like

to le

arn

mor

e pr

actic

al th

an th

eore

tical

per

spec

tives

for

my

care

er

deve

lopm

ent.

5.75

4.97

4.89

.000

*

13.

I wou

ld li

ke to

exp

erie

nce

a ne

w c

ultu

re in

the

fore

ign

coun

try.

5.92

5.47

2.82

.005

*

*p <

.05.

Not

e: S

even

-poi

nt L

iker

t-ty

pe s

cale

s w

ere

used

and

giv

en th

e fo

llow

ing

corr

espo

ndin

g va

lues

: str

ongl

y di

sagr

ee (

1), n

eutr

al (

4), a

nd s

tron

gly

agre

e (7

).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Preferred Field of Study or Major in Studying Abroad after Graduation

As Table 7 shows, the most preferred country in studying abroad aftergraduation from a four-year university for Korean undergraduate studentsranked the United States as the most preferred country, and they indicatedSwitzerland as the second preferred country. In addition, Koreanundergraduate students considered Australia to be the third preferredcountry. Almost half of the Korean master’s students responded that

TABLE 6. Students’ preference of foreign country for HTM study

Undergraduate students (N = 173)

Frequency (percent)

Master’s students (N = 88)

Frequency (percent)

1. United States 58 (33.6%) 1. United States 77 (87.5%)2. Switzerland 45 (26.0%) 2. Switzerland 5 (5.7%)3. UK 17 (9.8%) 3. UK 2 (2.3%)4. Japan 16 (9.3%) 4. Germany 1 (1.1%)5. France 13 (7.5%) 4. Japan 1 (1.1%)6. Australia 12 (6.9%) 4. Hong Kong 1 (1.1%)7. Canada 3 (1.7%) 4. Australia 1 (1.1%)8. Others 9 (5.2%)

TABLE 7. Preferred HTM field of study or major while studying abroad after graduation

Undergraduate students (N = 142)

Percent Master’s students (N = 80) Percent

1. Hotel management (including casino, convention)

59.9 1. Hotel management (including casino, convention)

47.5

2. Restaurant management and cooking

13.4 2. Tourism management and development

28.8

3. Tourism management and development

12.0 3. Leisure and recreation 8.8

4. Business management 6.3 4. Restaurant management and cooking

7.5

5. Leisure and recreation management

2.1 5. Business management 3.75

6. Others 6.3 6. Others 3.75

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


“hotel management” is the most preferred major, and “tourism manage-ment and development” and “leisure and recreation” the second and thirdpreferred majors.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The results depicted in Tables 2 to 6 demonstrate Korean students’motivations to study HTM, motivations to study HTM abroad, and theirpreference of a foreign country for their HTM education. With respect tothis research of motivations for HTM, six motivational factors wereidentified through the principal component factor analysis of 23 motiva-tion items. The six factors include “self-actualization,” “scholasticachievement,” “job opportunity,” “overseas experience,” “apparentattraction,” and “ease of study.” Out of the six motivational factors,undergraduate students chose “self-actualization” as the most importantreason to study HTM, followed by “job opportunity.” The results indicatethat students’ natural desire to pursue a career in the hospitality and tourismindustry along with a favorable job market affected their decision to pursuea HTM university qualification.

In a comparison of study motivations between male and female under-graduate students, female undergraduate students demonstrated a higherlevel of motivation in all six factors than male undergraduate students,and the difference was statistically significant in four factors (“self-actualization,” “scholastic achievement,” “job opportunity,” and “overseasexperience”). Combined with the growing popularity of HTM amongfemale students, this result tends to suggest that female students are moremotivated and more eager to study HTM than male students.

As reported earlier, “self-actualization” was also the most importantreason to study HTM for graduate students, and there was no statisticallysignificant difference in this motivational factor between undergraduateand graduate students. However, graduate students chose “scholasticachievement” as the second most important motivational, factor whileundergraduate students chose the same factor as the least importantmotivational factor. This difference was statistically supported. Withregard to the gender difference in the graduate students group, there wasno statistically significant difference found in all six motivational factorsbetween male and female graduate students, which is a somewhat differentpattern from the undergraduate students when evaluating motivational fac-tors and gender differences. Overall, the results of this HTM motivation

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


study revealed that the HTM field is attractive to undergraduate studentsmainly because of the opportunities of self-actualization, career develop-ment, and overseas experience, while graduate students choose this fieldbecause of self-actualization and scholastic purposes.

It is understandable that graduate students reported a high level ofmotivation on scholastic purpose due to the fact that they are obliged tocomplete a thesis or dissertation. Furthermore, there is a need to investigatewhether or not the findings of a high level of motivation on self-actualizationand scholastic purpose are consistent with other national groups’ motiva-tions of students majoring in HTM. If Korean students’ motivations onself-actualization and scholastic purpose are greater than those of othernational groups, it can be interpreted by a high educational fever and ahigh level of preference for the HTM field.

Another objective of this study was to identify student motivations atboth undergraduate and graduate levels for studying HTM abroad. Of allof the respondents, 50% of undergraduate students and 55% of graduatestudents showed their interest in studying HTM abroad. With thosestudents who are interested in studying HTM abroad, 13 motivation state-ments were used to measure both undergraduate and graduate groups’motivations. As expected, results of this research indicate that the twogroups have different motivation patterns for studying HTM abroad.Undergraduate students tend to be motivated to study HTM abroadbecause of the opportunity to learn a foreign language, culture, livingenvironment, and people living in other countries. These results areconsistent with those of other studies that identified HTM study abroadmotivation (Adams & Chapman, 1998; Diaz & Krauss, 1996; Hjalager,2003; O’Mahony et al., 2001; Zhao, 1991).

On the other hand, graduate students’ motivations to study HTMabroad are closely related to the academic purpose, such as a better educa-tional environment in foreign countries where they can efficiently achievetheir academic goals. This result corresponds to the majority of studiesthat have investigated students’ motivation of HTM study abroad (Adams &Chapman, 1998; Barron, 2002a, 200b; Black, 2004; Formica, 1996;Hjalager, 2003; Jenkins, 2001; Zhao, 1991). In terms of the preference of aforeign country for their HTM education, both undergraduate and graduatestudents chose the United States as the most preferred destination to studyHTM, followed by Switzerland and the UK. This result, with a particularlyheavy inflated preference for the United States (87.5%) among graduatestudents, seems to suggest that students believe studying HTM in theUnited States and thus getting a U.S. degree will benefit them in many

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


different ways. The results of this research are similar to those of otherstudies that found that Asian students studying HTM countries of prefer-ence were the United States, UK, and Australia (Barron, 2002a, 200b;Formica, 1996; Jenkins, 2001).

In addition, the results of this research found that Korean studentsat both the undergraduate level and master’s level showed the highestpreference for hotel management as a concentration or major among theother hospitality, tourism, or leisure fields of study. The result is similarto a number of other studies (Hjalager, 2003; O’Mahony et al., 2001) inthat a hotel career is more preferable compared to other hospitality ortourism business career paths. Thus this information is very helpful toWestern HTM schools because they can forecast an increase in Koreanstudents who want to major in hotel management. Interestingly, leisureand recreation management was not preferable to Korean undergraduatestudents. This may indicate that potential Korean students who desire tostudy HTM abroad would not choose educational institutions that focuson leisure and recreation; that is, it may lead to a decrease of Korean stu-dents in educational institutions concentrating in leisure and recreationmanagement.

The results of this study provide useful information to a number of stake-holders. First, the findings of this study may affect recruitment policy ofpotential HTM students by domestic and international universities target-ing Korean students. In order to be successful in competing for potentialKorean HTM students, both domestic and international HTM institutionsshould consider the perspectives and educational motivations of prospec-tive students and provide some guarantee of quality outcome and studentsatisfaction with a tailored curriculum and teaching program. Thissuggestion is consistent with those of other researchers (Aitchison, 2003;Black, 2004; Maher, 2004; O’Mahony et al., 2001; Robertson et al., 2000;Stuart, 2002).

Second, the results may help educational authorities understand theneed for HTM in higher education and, therefore, set up the correct direc-tion of future HTM education. University and college administration mayneed to reconsider the management and presentation of their resources inorder to include the wider marketplace of future HTM students.

Third, the results of this study can be used by hospitality and tourismindustry partners in their effort to build efficient recruiting policies. Studentsindicated that one of the major motivations in choosing HTM is because thehospitality and tourism industry provides better job opportunities for them incomparison with other industries. When the hospitality and tourism

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


industry recruits HTM students, it also accepts the responsibility toprovide continuous training and education for these recruits, thus makingthe HTM student graduates lifelong industry professionals. In doing so,the industry can remain attractive to potential HTM students with the cre-ation of a highly motivated and educated workforce.

Last, this study provides the backbone for researchers in various disci-plines who want to investigate students’ perceptions of study motivations.The motivational statements used in this study may be able to be adaptedfor use in other undergraduate/graduate majors or disciplines. In addition,the six motivational factors could be pilot tested, analyzed, and modifiedfor other specific fields. Furthermore, the results from modified factoranalyses could be used to steer other program’s marketing and promotionto boost enrollment.

The real value of student perceptions lies in its use in longitudinal studies(Kang et al., 2005). Given its purpose as a tool for the creation of tailorededucation for students, a longitudinal study should be followed to providecomparability across different students and over time. Also, this study canbe replicated for the use of cross-cultural studies.

REFERENCES

Adam, M., Maxwell, G. A., Pooran, J., & B. Scott (1999, April). South East Asian stu-dents learning styles. Paper presented at the CHME Hospitality Research Conference,Surrey, UK.

Adams, D. M., & Chapman, D. W. (1998). Education and national development in Asia:Trends and issues. International Journal of Educational Research, 29, 583–602.

Airey, D., & Frontistis, A. (1997). Attitudes to careers in tourism: An Anglo Greek com-parison. Tourism Management, 18(3), 149–158.

Aitchison, C. C. (2003). Exploring engendered education and research: Adapting modelsfrom the sociology of education for leisure, sport and tourism in higher education.Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 2(1), 93–104.

Ballard, B., & Clanchy, J. (1991). Teaching students from overseas: A brief guide forlecturers and supervisors. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.

Ballard, B., & Clanchy, J. (1994). Study abroad: A manual for Asian studies. Melbourne:Longman.

Barron, P. (2002a). Issues surrounding Asian students hospitality management in Australia:A literature review regarding the paradox of the Asian learner. Journal of Teaching inTravel & Tourism, 2(3/4), 23–45.

Barron, P. (2002b). Providing a more successful education experience for Asian hospitalitymanagement students studying in Australia: A focus on teaching and learning styles.Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 2(2), 63–88.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Barron, P., & Arcodia, C. (2002). Linking learning style preferences and ethnicity: Inter-national students studying hospitality and tourism management in Australia. Journal ofHospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 1(2), 15–27.

Biggs, J. B. (1998). Learning from the Confucian heritage: So size doesn’t matter? Inter-national Journal of Educational Research, 29(1), 723–738.

Black, K. (2004). A review of factors which contribute to the internationalization of a pro-gramme of study. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 3(1), 5–18.

Burns, R. B. (1991). Study and stress among first year overseas students in an AustralianUniversity. Higher Education Research and Development, 10(1), 61–77.

Bushell, R., Prosser, G. M., Faulkner, H. W., & Jafari, J. (2001). Tourism research inAustralia. Journal of Travel Research, 39(3), 323–326.

Cho, M, & Kang, S. (2005). Past, present, and future of tourism education: The SouthKorea case. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 5(1), 225–250.

Clark, M. (1993). Communication and social skills: Perceptions of hospitality managers.Employee Relations, 15(2), 51–60.

Cothran, C., & Combrink, T. E. (1999). Attitudes of minority adolescents toward hospitalityindustry careers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 18(2), 143–158.

Davis, D., Olsen, A., & Bohm, A. (2000, August). Transactional education providers,partners, and policy: Challenges for Australian institutions offshore. A Research studypresented at the 14th Australian International Education Conference, Brisbane.

Diaz, P. E., & Krauss, J. L. (1996). A needs analysis of and expanding hospitality market-Asian students. Hospitality Research Journal, 20(1), 15–26.

Dobson, I. R., Sharma, R., & Calderon, A. J. (1998, September). The comparative perfor-mance of overseas and Australian undergraduates. Paper presented at the 12th Austra-lian International Education Conference, Canberra.

Formica, S. (1996). European hospitality and tourism education: Differences with theAmerican model and future trends. International Journal of Hospitality Management,15(4), 317–323.

Hjalager, A. M. (2003). Global tourism careers? Opportunities and dilemmas facing higher edu-cation in tourism. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 2(2), 26–36.

Hsu, C. H. (1996). Needs and concerns of international students: What can educators do?Hospitality and Tourism Educators, 8(2), 68–75.

Huang, S. E., & Brown, N. E. (1996). First year international graduate students in hospi-tality programs: School choice, career expectations and academic adjustment. Hospi-tality Research Journal, 20(1), 109–117.

Huyton, J. R. (1997). The implications of cross-cultural communication in the hotel industry: AChinese case. Proceedings of 1997 National tourism and hospitality research confer-ence (pp. 158–165). Sydney: Bureau of Tourism Research.

Jenkins, A. K. (2001). Making a career of it? Hospitality students’ future perspectives: anAnglo-Dutch study. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,13(1), 13–20.

Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrica, 39(1), 31–96.Kang, S., Wu, C., & Gould, R. (2005). An exploratory study: Students’ perceptions of aca-

demic faculty and industry practitioner instructions. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure,Sport & Tourism Education, 4(2), 44–53.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Kember, D., & Gow, L. (1991). A challenge to the anecdotal stereotype of the Asianlearner. Studies in Higher Education, 16(2), 117–128.

Khwaja, H. S., & Bosselman, R. H. (1990). Cultural adjustment of international graduatestudents in American hospitality and tourism programs. Hospitality Research Journal,14(2), 75–82.

Khwaja, H. S., Bosselman, R. H., & Fernsten, J. A. (1990). Perspectives on hospitality andtourism graduate programs: The view from international students. Hospitality andTourism Educator, 2(3), 26–29.

Korean National Tourism Organization. (2001). Annual tourism report. Seoul, SouthKorea: Author.

Korean National Tourism Organization. (2004). Annual tourism report. Seoul, SouthKorea: Author.

Lawley, M., & Blight, D. (1997, September). International students: Reasons for choice ofan overseas study destination. Research paper presented at the 11th Australian Interna-tional Education Conference. Melbourne, IDP Australia, Canberra.

Maher, A. (2004). Learning outcomes in higher education: Implications for curriculumdesign and student learning. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Educa-tion, 3(2), 46–54.

Malfroy, J., & Daruwalla, P. (2000). Culture and communication in a postgraduate hospi-tality program. Australian Journal of Hospitality Management, 7(1), 27–34.

Ministry of Education Korea. (2004). Annual report of school statistics. Seoul, SouthKorea: Author.

Niles, F. S. (1995). Cultural differences in learning motivation and learning strategies:A comparison of overseas and Australian students at an Australian University. Interna-tional Journal of Intercultural Relations, 19(3), 369–385.

Niven, A. (1987). Salad days without the dressing? What British higher and further educa-tion institutions can do for their overseas students. Higher Education Quarterly, 41(2),144–161.

O’Mahony, G. B., McWilliams, A. M., & Whitelaw, P. A. (2001). Why students choose ahospitality-degree program. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,42(1), 92–96.

Pearson, C. L., & Beasley, C. J. (1996). Reducing learning barriers amongst international stu-dents: A longitudinal development study. Australian Educational Researcher, 23(2), 79–96.

Purcell, K., & Quinn, J. (1996). Exploring the education-employment equation in hospitalitymanagement: A comparison of graduates and HNDs. International Journal HospitalityManagement, 15(1), 51–68.

Robertson, M., Line, M., Jones, S., & Thomas, S. (2000). International students: Learningenvironments and perceptions: A case study using the Delphi Technique. HigherEducation Research and Development, 19(1), 89–102.

Ross, G. F. (1997). Hospitality/tourism job application and educational expectation. Inter-national Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 9(3), 124–127.

Salili, F. (1999). Accepting personal responsibility for learning. In D. A Watkins & J. B.Biggs (Eds.), The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological and contextual influences(pp. 85–105). Hong Kong: Center for Comparative Research in Education/Camber-well, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational research.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Schmidt, R. (2002) A student’s initial perception of value when selecting a college:An application of value added. Quality Assurance in Education, 10(1), 37–39.

Stuart, M. (2002). Critical influences on tourism as a subject in UK higher education: Lecturerperspective. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 1(1), 5–18.

Szivas, E., & Riley, M. (1999). Tourism employment during economic transition. Annalsof Tourism Research, 26(4), 747–771.

Tepeci, M., & Barlett, A. L. (2002). The hospitality industry culture profile: A measure ofindividual values, organizational culture, and person-organization fit as predictors ofjob satisfaction and behavioral intentions. The International Journal of HospitalityManagement, 21(2), 151–171.

Tribe, J., & Lewis, A. (2003). Attitudes of the young to careers in hospitality and tourism:Review and recommendation. In S. Kusluvan (Ed.), Managing employee attitudes andbehaviours in the tourism industry. New York: Nova Science.

Zhao, J. L. (1991). A current look at hospitality and tourism education in China’s collegesand universities. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 10(4), 357–367.

RECEIVED: 02/26/2007ACCEPTED: 11/08/2007

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

3:34

11

Oct

ober

201

4

Documents

Study Motivations and Study Preferences in the Korean Hospitality and Tourism Field