Project Application: Hospitality Operations Management

Final Case Study: June 2007.

Cycle 1: October 2005 – December 2005.

Cycle 2: October 2006 – December 2006.

School: School of Management

Module Tutors: Peter Alcott

1
Executive Summary

o The Hospitality Operations Management is a level 2 core module for students

studying International Hospitality and Tourism Management at undergraduate
level. The module precedes a placement year for many students.

o The module aims to increase student knowledge and understanding of

hospitality operations in particular food and beverage and project
management. The module focuses on key management tools such as
strategies, policies and a range of possible interventions will be discussed via
a series of lectures and tutorials. The course also provides an opportunity for
practical application via the Lakeside Restaurant and other suitable venues
throughout the university in the form of a one- off event.

o The event management component of the module is the primary focus of this
case study. Students work in small groups to conceive, plan, market and
implement a campus based hospitality event. The Module Tutor and L2L
Project Team worked through two module cycles of enquiry to enhance the
module, develop resources, provide training to students, observe and
evaluate the impact of the module changes.

o Enhancements include the introduction of weekly progress logs for students

to record, reflect and make sense of their emotional and behavioural
experiences in the module; training and materials on reflection for students;
review sessions between students and the Module Tutor to support students
in making make sense of their whole module experience and to consolidate
learning.

o Qualitative evaluation was conducted with a sample of students, the module

team and other key stakeholders.

Our analysis of this case suggests –

o The events management component of the module clearly lends itself to an

enquiry based learning (EBL) approach. The module design provides
considerable scope for students to exercise choice and creativity. There are
parameters given the higher education context, but the level of autonomy
seems to engage and motivate students to a high degree.

o The ‘teaching process’ takes the form of setting out the parameters of the
event task and is then a ‘hands off’ supportive role during the main part of
the module. Students have a substantial degree of autonomy and choice in
this module, and also have the support of the module tutor to refine their
project proposal/plan, think through and refine their plan; guidance in
encounters with internal and external stakeholders; guidance or support in
relation to interpersonal relationships; parameters of the project; university
policy; ethics. It is at the end of the module where the Tutor takes a
significant role in helping students to review, reflect on and consolidate their
learning from the module.

o The Module Tutors context specific knowledge experience and engagement in

the student learning process is highly valued.

2
 o Students are encouraged to reflect on the personal learning and transferable
skills in addition to subject specific knowledge. They are encouraged to ‘know
differently’ as well as to ‘know more’. There is evidence of transferable skills
development including team working; working with cultural diversity; learning
to learn.

o The group work process prepares students for practice placements. Students
engage with peers in a practical and time constrained activity, which mirrors
a practice setting. This brings to life the principles of interpersonal interaction
(group work) in the context of staging and managing an operational event
(professional practice).

o The module provides students with the opportunity to learn about working
with others. There is evidence from this case that students engage in an
extensive set of relations within this module - group work with their peers;
and others who are influential in the success of their event – both internal
and external to the university.

o The evaluation suggests that it was important to link the assessment process
to the introduction of student reflective logs as an incentive for students to
engage with the process.

o In the second year of L2L, the module was adjusted. The second component
of the Module was revised to feature a more appropriate emphasis on project
and operational management. The assessment strategy was also revised to
replace an exam with a practical assessment and reflective report based on
the lecture programme with improved links to the practical events
management aspect of the module. This seems to have facilitated a more
cohesive module and improved experience for students.

o The work on this project has impacted on professional development of the

Module Leader and on programme delivery. The Module Leader has been
awarded a SCEPTrE Fellowship1 and is currently exploring the enhancement
of level one and professional training year programmes through the
introduction of similar reflective processes to facilitate personal development
and awareness.

1
http://www.surrey.ac.uk/sceptre/fellowship.htm

3
Introduction
Funded by the HEFCE Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning (FDTL5),
the Learning the Learn project, which started in early 2005, promotes innovation in
educational practice through supported enquiry-based learning (EBL). It is based on
established postgraduate practices at UniS and it seeks to support related
developments in undergraduate programmes.

Within the context of the project, supported enquiry based learning is used as a
broad term which encompasses features of related approaches such as; reflective
practice, experiential learning, problem-based learning and action learning which are
already being used successfully in some undergraduate programmes within the
University. This project aims to seek out examples of existing creative and dynamic
teaching at UniS and then collaboratively using an EBL approach, further develop the
ways in which students are encouraged to enquire, thus supporting them as they
‘learn to learn’.

The Hospitality Operations Management module (HOMs) is one of five programmes

(or ‘project applications’) at Surrey in which `learning to learn’ will be embedded.
There is one further application in School of Management, one in the School of
Biomedical Sciences and two in European Institute for Health and Medical Science.
The project uses an enquiry-based approach to change, by working together with
course teams to support locally-owned developments. The project will develop
models of how to create educational innovation through incremental change.

The context of hospitality, tourism and business management education.

This project application is located in the School of Management at the University of
Surrey, which is an internationally renowned centre for undergraduate and post
graduate programmes in specialist fields of hospitality, food, and tourism, retail,
marketing and health care management. Undergraduate programmes in hospitality
management have developed an increasing emphasis on operational management
since the first programmes in higher education were developed in the 1960’s, moving
away from the origins of craft and practice based training. In 1998, a national
subject review was conducted by HEFCE in response to concerns that resource
pressures were threatening the quality of educational provision, especially with
regard to the practical training elements. The review identified that the relationships
between industry and HE should be strengthened and professional standards should
be created2.

Why use enquiry based learning in hospitality operations management and

what are the challenges?
A recent QAA subject review of hospitality, leisure, recreation, sport and tourism
stated that ‘Curricula are multidisciplinary flexible and coherent, with impressive links
to industry and the professions. The strong external influences are a pervasive
feature of the design content and delivery of programmes. The interrelationship
between theory and practice is a consistently strong feature, but there is a general
need to strengthen staff research and scholarly activity in the support of subjects’ ’3.
The national Learning & Teaching Support Network (LTSN) Generic Centre has been
involved with seven subject centres including Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism

2
Source: HEFCE April 1998. Review of Hospitality Management.
3
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/reviews/reports/subjectlevel/qo3_01_textonly.htm

4
(HLST), to investigate the link between teaching and research4. In a recent report
they identified that teaching learning and assessment in HLST featured many
successful initiatives, but that in 15% of reviews, student learning is insufficiently
challenging. Problem based or enquiry based learning is identified as a key aspect for
consideration, which could support the engagement of students in research activities
and development of research skills.

Hospitality Management undergraduate programmes have a core which addresses

management of food beverages and or accommodation in a service context.
Programmes traditionally have an emphasis on gaining a feel for the industry,
problem management and operations management5. Practical training is combined
with theoretical input and supervised work experience. This practical base is a
defining characteristic, which differentiates the subject from mainstream business
and management courses. For example: First year undergraduate students spend
one day a week in the university training restaurant – The Lakeside – in order to
learn operational and problem management skills6. Undergraduate programmes also
seek to develop transferable skills and self directed, active, reflective and research
based learners7. Undergraduate programmes commonly use problem based
approaches and group work, although they may not use the language of ‘problem
based learning’ or ‘enquiry based learning’.

Why use enquiry based learning in Hospitality Operations Management?

The Hospitality Operations Management is a core level 2 module, in the BSc (Hons)
International Hospitality Management and BSc (Hons) International Tourism and
Hospitality Management. It is an elective option in the BSc (Hons) Business
Management; BSc (Hons) Retail Management; BSc (Hons) Tourism Management.

The rationale for the module is to ‘increase student knowledge and understanding of
hospitality operations, in particular food and beverage and accommodation
operations’. The learning outcomes suggests that students should be able to -
o Understand and critically evaluate hospitality operations in both food and
beverage.
o Identify and evaluate key issues in the management of operations.
o Research and identify appropriate systems and procedures for the
operations within the wider social and economic context.
o Demonstrate an ability to work with a small group in the running of
operations.

o Demonstrate understanding of restaurant business concepts and operational

issues.
o Evaluate key aspects of the meal experience.
o Manage a simple food operation to set costs, sales and profit targets.
o Critically appraise key management skills when operating a food and
beverage outlet.

Students are also required to meet criteria relating to ethical understanding; analysis
and creativity; general transferable skills. The teaching and learning methods for this

4
http://www.hlst.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/linking.pdf
5
Source: Interview with Prof A Lockwood.
6
http://www.som.surrey.ac.uk/about/lakeside/studentsweek.asp
7
Source: Module Outline.

5
module include interactive lectures; key areas and signpost; small group work;
repetition and reinforcement; handouts; practical management of an event. The
assessment strategy consists of planning and managing an operational event (10
credit points) and an individual time constrained exam (10 credit points).

The module seeks to develop specific transferable skills. These are identified in the
module summary and include the ability to work as part of a team and to work
independently; capacity to learn unfamiliar areas of knowledge; communicate
effectively both written and verbal’ competence in researching information and
operational situations; operational problem solving; synthesis of new information;
training8.

How enquiry based learning is used in Hospitality Operations

Management?
The Hospitality Operations Management Module (HOMs) has been running in its
current configuration since 2004. The module is a 20 credit module, with 10 credits
allocated each for two components of the module. In the first year of the project
working with L2L, the first is planning and managing of an operational event (10%),
the second concerns a lecture programme on accommodation operations (10%).
There are two module tutors, one (PA) who leads on the hospitality operations and
the other (JvW) who leads on the accommodation operations.

In the second year working with L2L, based on an evaluation in year one, the
module was adjusted. The second component of the Module was revised to feature a
more appropriate emphasis on project and operational management. The
assessment strategy was also revised to replace an exam with a practical assessment
and reflective report based on the lecture programme (JvW), with improved links to
the practical events management aspect of the module (10%) (Appendix 3).

In the events management strand of the module students form a small group or
‘mini company’ to conceptualise, plan, market, manage and evaluate an operational
event. Within the group they must identify a Managing Director; Finance and
Marketing Lead. An initial plan must be presented to the Module Tutor in Week 4.
During the process students must conceive an idea, identify their market and plan
their event, they must also liaise with both internal and external colleagues in the
university in relation to the event. Having run and managed the event they must
complete a final group report and present this to the Module Tutor and the whole
cohort. 80% marks are awarded for small group assignment (the preparation of a
project plan, presentation and submission of a final group report). 20% of marks are
awarded to student on completion of the weekly reflective logs and a summary
statement of personal learning. This is a 20% pass/fail and assessment is made on
the basis of a meeting/discussion between the Module Tutor and individual students.

Who designed this module and what approach is taken?

The Module Tutor (PA) was aware from past experience that students were learning
a significant amount from the events management strand of the module, in addition
to the formal learning outcomes. He wanted to find a way to maximise student
learning and to capture some of the learning that students had been informally
expressing to him. Early in 2005, the L2L project was seeking undergraduate
programmes to work with. The intention of the project was to use an enquiry-based

8
Source: Module Outline, Hospitality Management.

6
approach to support locally-owned developments. The Hospitality Operations
Management (HOMs) programme became one of five project applications within the
university.

How enquiry based learning is introduced to students and how are they
supported and assessed?
In the first year of the project the Module Tutor (PA) and members of the L2L team
(PT&MD) agreed a strategy to enhance the HOMs module. This included the
introduction of ‘progress learning logs’ which students would complete weekly to
track their personal learning in the module; preparation and training for students in
reflection; logs would be linked to assessment to provide students with an incentive;
a sample of logs were to be reviewed and feedback provided; students were to
complete a summary of learning from progress logs at the end of the module.

The module commences in the autumn semester (Week 1). Training materials
developed by L2L Project Manager (MD) include team roles, skills matrix and sample
logs (Appendix 1). Training is provided to the student cohort by L2L Project Manager
(MD) (Week 2). The event management task process begins with students self
selecting into groups (7 groups of 12-13 students). Student groups have three weeks
to conceptualise and prepare a project plan for an event. The plan is presented to
Module Tutor (Week 4). Students begin to complete progress logs and to hand in
weekly (Weeks 2-13). It was proposed that a sample of progress logs would be
reviewed by the L2L Project Manager in order to assess the nature/quality of student
reflections half way through the semester and that feedback would be provided to
students. This was not possible in practice because of the turnover in the L2L Project
Manager role mid way through this programme application. The Events take place
(Weeks 8-12) – including the following – 2005 - Beer Fest; Fear Factor; Team
Macho; Wild West Party; At Your Service; West meets East; Every 60 Seconds’. 2006
– ‘Casino Royale’; ‘Superstar Night’; ‘Pimps & Prostitutes’;’ Back to School’;’ Retro
Night’; ‘Sound of Magic’. ‘Miss University’.

The groups present and submit their final report to the Module Tutor (Week 12).
Additional expertise is sometimes brought into presentations by Module Tutor at this
stage, to facilitate student learning in relation to any emergent issues which may
arise (for example: in 2005 ethics). Students complete all weekly personal progress
logs and summary and hand these in to the Module Tutor. A further enhancement
introduced by the Module Tutor in year 1 (2005), was a one to one session with each
students at the end of the module, to discuss personal learning and the progress logs
(Week13). In the second year this was revised and the Module Tutor met with each
group to receive a short appraisal of each individual’s role in the groups and to
review personal development. In both years, these sessions were observed by L2L
Project Manager (JMcD) and a series of personal progress logs reviewed. A summary
of themes was prepared and shared with students on Ulearn (Appendix 2). In the
second year we also reviewed assessment criteria for use with reflective writing,
developed in another L2L project application (Appendix 4).

The Tutor team and L2L project staff worked through two module cycles of enquiry
to observe and evaluate the impact of the enhancements.

7
Figure1: Events Management - Hospitality Operations Management Module.

Introduction events management

Week 1
Week 2 Input on personal progress logs
Students complete
weekly personal
progress logs
Week 3 Students self select into small
groups ( 12-13 students) -
Week 4
conceptualise, plan, market and
manage events
Project plan

Week 5
Week 6

Week 7

Week 8
Week 9 Events take place
Week 10
Week 11

Week 12 Small groups present final report

to Module Tutor

Week 13 Review Personal learning logs

with Module Tutor. 1:1 or in
small groups

Week 14
Students submit a practical
assignment and reflective report
linking lecture programme to
events management task.

8
L2L Evaluation and Methods
A key feature of the L2L project is a qualitative evaluation of each of the project
applications. Four domains have been outlined in the L2L projects evaluation
strategy; here we seek to inform our evaluation of two - student learning,
programme and module practice (the other two domains being institutional change;
regional and national impact). Our approach is constructivist, in that we are seeking
to understand the meaning attributed by different participants in this process to their
learning and experience of the module.

Evaluation of cycle one (October 2005 – December 2005) of this module includes a
reflective interview with Module Tutor (PA); six face to face interviews, one
telephone interview and one email with students; review of the management school
standard module evaluation; evaluative conversation with the other Module Tutor
(JvW) and Deputy Head of School (AL). Evaluation of cycle two (October 2006 –
December 2006) of this module includes a reflective interview with the Module Tutor
(PT); four face to face evaluative conversations with students; and a review of the
management school standard module evaluation. Students were selected on the
basis of 1) an open request sent to the cohort for participant to inform the evaluation
and 2) purposive selection by the Module Tutor, representative of a range of
assessment grades. Ethical approval was gained from University ethics committee
and consent from all students participating in evaluation interviews.

In both cycles we were able to review a sample of students’ personal progress logs
as a further source of data to inform the evaluation. The evaluative conversations in
themselves were an opportunity for students to reflect through dialogue on their
experience of the module. The standard student module evaluation uses a simple
statistical analysis. The reports for both 2005/2006 suggest that the module was
evaluated satisfactorily across a range of indicators. Free text comments were
supportive of the themes which emerged in this qualitative evaluation.

Evaluation - Module Tutor

The following insights emerged from our evaluative conversations with Module Tutor
and these are framed around evaluative questions which we continue to work with -

The Module Tutor had a clear intention to enhance and maximise student learning,
based on informal student feedback in previous years. The L2L project presented an
opportunity to enhance the module and access additional support to think through
the best ways to do this. Clearly, the Module Tutor reflects on the nature and
enhancement of student learning throughout the module. In a post module interview
he reported the following general observations – the module offers students an
opportunity to engage with others in planning, implementing and evaluating a real
life event. The process is highly engaging, challenging and emotional for some
students. Students have the opportunity to choose which kind of event they put on
and this allows for some creativity on their part, this generates high levels of
engagement and excitement on the part of some students.

The introduction of the progress logs enhanced the Module Tutors relationship with
students, increasing understanding and trust. The progress logs gave insights into
the nature of the student learning process, in particular the emotional process that
students go through during the management of the event. The progress logs gave
an opportunity for students to record and then reflect on themselves, how they work
with others and to think about working in new environments. There were fewer

9
group arguments than in previous years - this may be because the logs allowed
students to process some of their emotions about group work and ‘let off steam’.
The format of the learning logs seems to have worked well although the Module
Tutor observed that some questions were problematic for students. For example: the
last question relates to theory – what is the main lesson you learned this week? How
does this apply to theory? - The Module Tutor recognised that there needed to be a
link between the learning logs and assessment, because of student conceptions of
learning being instrumental and related to assessment.

Illustrative Quotes Module Tutor

‘The beauty of the logs were [that] they helped focus everything because the
students tend to write …as they feel it at the time, which is ..why I prefer the
hand written ones to the typed ones’

‘What I was hoping they would do… would be enjoy the journey and learn from
the journey… I think for some of them the logs made the journey a bit more
bearable’

‘ I suggested that [students] might be able to take personal nature out of the
problems and look at it as an academic problem, so in other words …[think
about] some sort of theory as to why that happens and what you could do about
it’

The one to one/group sessions offered to each student with the Module Tutor at the
end of the Module represented an opportunity for a dialogue to explore what
personal learning had taken place during the module. The introduction of this
enhancement shows the concern of the Module Tutor to facilitate a deeper personal
learning process for students. The Module Tutor himself found this a rewarding
process. In effect these sessions evolved in to ‘mini coaching’ sessions, as the Tutor
helped students reflect on their personal process and encouraged them to identify
strategies for future practice. This has particular relevant for those students entering
placements next year. This approach was demanding in terms of time and personal
resources for the Module Tutor and there was a move to a group process in the
second year.

The event management process and progress logs illuminated some specific
transferable skills including the capacity to ‘learn how to learn’. These include –
• Operational problem solving; working in teams.
• Ethical understanding; capacity to learn unfamiliar areas of knowledge.
• Managing Emotions.
• Ability to work in a team.
• Learning how to learn.
• Develop confidence; Ability to understand other people; transfer skills to
placement setting.

10
Illustrative Quotes Module Tutor
-Transferable Skills and ‘learning how to learn’ -

Operational problem solving working in teams

‘they’ve to put a plan into action, …they’ve got to start thinking about the nitty
gritty, and they also have to start really working with everybody, so they begin to
start going through a phase of thinking who they’ve got in the group, and
sussing out who’s going to take what role’

Ethical understanding/ Capacity to learn unfamiliar areas of knowledge.

‘Well people talk about ethics and I don’t think many people even think about
what they are or how it’s impacting. Certainly students don’t, it goes right over
their heads but then they actually have to debate it as part the fact that they’d
use sex as a sales tool or they were going to give people something [to eat] that
is not normally consumed in the way it was consumed’

‘That’s really bringing ethical issues to life isn’t it in a way that’s very engaging
for nineteen year olds!’

Ability to work in a team.

‘I realised there are were going to be a lot of group meetings … and I thought it
would be useful if they could recognise the fact that they’re dealing with different
personalities, different skills in the group, utilising different skills in the group’

Learning how to learn.

‘The value of it being written down [in progress logs], as opposed to last year
when it probably got lost in the ether, was that in three months time they would
be able to read it and think gosh that’s the trauma I went through for that!...you
know we reflect on things as a matter of course because we’re older, but you
don’t necessarily do that at nineteen’

Develop confidence/ Ability to understand other people/ Transfer skills to

placement setting.
‘I meet some students who are very uncertain about themselves as people …[we
need to give them something that] gives them a bit of insight because some of
them are very muddled and part of the trick of making a placement work is
actually being able to sum up the people you’re working with and responding’

‘We can actually enrich that a bit for them by starting them on track of working
with people and understanding what that’s really about’

11
Student Evaluation
The following insights emerged from our evaluative conversation with students. The
students are in their second year, some of them are likely to be going out on
placement next year. All the students are used to working in groups on module
assignments as this is a common feature in hospitality undergraduate programmes.

The module engenders excitement for its practical and project based design and also
the potential for creativity and autonomy. It is described as being quite dramatically
different to other modules that students have experienced because of its practical
and work based emphasis. It is a highly engaging module, which engenders a huge
emotional investment on the part of many students. Student projects may range in
their originality and complexity– in terms of their design, markets they approach and
the internal and external parties they engage in the process. The events
management process proved students with opportunities for new experiences such
as promoting their event on the radio; negotiating corporate sponsorship and
professional networking. The event provides students with feelings of contribution
and a sense of reward where they were able to donate profits from the event to local
charities.

Students were asked to complete a weekly reflective personal progress log

throughout the events management process. There are mixed feelings about the
completion of the logs. The logs provide a way for students to track their learning
through the project; to recognise personal and group progress and identify areas for
development. Reflective logs helped some students acknowledge which skills they
had and put them into action. Students also acknowledged the logs were useful in
processing their emotions about the group work. Not all students could see the value
of the logs at the time, but some acknowledged after the event that it had been a
useful process. The supported nature of the process (one to one/group review
session with the Module Tutor) facilitated this insight. The one to one/group session
also represented an opportunity for students to consolidate learning from the
process.

Students felt that the progress logs and one to one/groups discussion with the
module Tutor facilitated a better understanding for the Tutor, of the individual and
group learning process; this enabled more equitable allocations of marks and could
contribute to the future development of the module. Students perceive a higher
level of engagement of the part of the Module Tutor (PA) in the assessment and
review process. The support offered by the Module Tutor throughout is highly valued
by students, who acknowledge the high level of engagement with the Module Tutor.
The Tutors knowledge of other members in the small group work and of the overall
events meant that he can engage in a meaningful dialogue with students, a feature
of which was to offer challenge and support.

Student evaluations also illustrate that the event management process and progress
logs illuminated some specific transferable skills including the capacity to ‘learn how
to learn’. These include:

• Working as part of a team

• Working with cultural differences.
• Working with internal/external people to the university.
• Participation in the community
• Learning to learn

12
 • Develop confidence; awareness of self and impact on others.
• Managing emotions

The module is divided into two components; the first is planning and managing of an
operational event around which the evaluation has so far concentrated on. The
second concerns a lecture programme on accommodation operations assessed
through exam. Following the first cycle of work with L2L the second strand of the
module was revised based on student feedback and evaluation. Students used the
evaluation discussions to contrast the two different elements of the module. Students
find the practical and creative events management aspect of the module engaging9.
Students also commented that they found it difficult to make connections between
the two parts of the module in the first cycle. This improved in the second year
following adjustments made to the module design by the Module Tutors. The lecture
programme focused on project management which was more compatible with events
management and the assessment as changed from an exam to a practical
assignment and reflective report, which links the lecture programme to the events
management task (Appendix 3). Students commented in the second cycle with L2L,
that the lecture programme related more closely to the events management.
Improved guidance on the assignment would be appreciated by students.

Student evaluations opened up some issues that relate to the organisational context
– the School of Management - for this module. A positive aspect of the module from
the students perspective is that it offers a certain level of autonomy in designing and
managing an event. These are real events which students must plan, cost and
manage operationally including budgetary considerations. The Module Tutor provides
support for students costing and managing the finance of their event. The reality of
the financial aspect and the associated risk, it seems, makes the event a more
authentic business venture, thereby potentially engaging the students to a higher
degree. A consequence of this aspect of the module is that it provides students, an
opportunity to learn about risk and how to manage that risk. However, the
consequences of students’ not managing risk well, means that they must be
‘covered’ by the School of Management. This creates a tension and some
uncomfortable residue i.e. students expectation of raising money for charity,
following the end of the module.

9
This links to research into the learning styles of hospitality students by Lashley 1999. Hospitality students do not
naturally include preferences for theorist or reflective learning styles. Specific attention may be needed to focus on
development of these styles within the curriculum. Source: Lashley,C. 1999. On making silk purses: developing reflective
practitioners in hospitality management education. International Journal of Hospitality Management. Vol11.No4: 180-185.

13
Illustrative Quotes - students identify transferable skills

Working as part of a team

‘it developed my team working and team leading skills but then also, kind of,
confirmed, confirmed something and made me feel a lot more confident about being
a leader’ –

I’m very aware that lot’s of members of the group were [quiet] … in all group
projects there’s always someone that …..wont’ always speak up if they’re worried or
if they’re having stress. I just think it’s important that everyone has a say all
members of the groups have say because it’s really easy to overlook [people]’

Working with cultural differences.

‘We had a big breakdown [of communication in the group]’ - ‘ I think they [English
speaking students] saw it as that the quieter members [overseas students] weren’t
contributing because they didn’t want to but then if you think about it was because
maybe at the bigger meetings they were afraid to in case they got the answers
wrong’

Working with internal/external people to the university.

‘Like liaising with staff, we were sometimes working with difficult people as well, we
experienced [one university department]… one member of staff was quite rude and
slowly you know, you come up against barriers which kind of de motivate you a bit’

Managing emotions
‘I also didn’t know I could get so angry because there were many times when we’ll
go to meetings and someone will say something and it will trigger a whole chain of
events that will mean that you have a totally unproductive meeting …….. I got very
angry and ended up bottling it in I think I would be quite snappy taking my problems
home with me…’

Now I know if I have a problem I have to speak up about it, because when you’re
working with friends if you hold that tension will end up coming in the end breaking
up a friend ship so it’s very important to keep work related tensions to the work so
they’re not affecting other areas of my life

14
Discussion using ‘CHERRIES’ Framework
As part of the L2L project we have identified eight key characteristics that, in our
view help to make sense of enquiry based approaches10.

Conception - What is the conception of learning? (in-use not just espoused).

The framework of this module is defined by the Module Tutor and is in this sense
subject defined - but the module provides considerable scope for students (at the
module level), to exercise a choice and creativity in coming up with an idea for an
event, followed by a means for marketing and operationalising the event. There are
parameters given the higher education context, but the level of autonomy seems to
engage and motivate students to a high degree. In the cases where students have
come up against the constraints at the institutional level, this has caused frustration
and disillusionment. The ‘teaching process’ as such, takes the form of setting out the
parameters of the event task and is then a ‘hands off’ supportive role during the
main bulk of the module. It is at the end of the module where the Tutor takes a
more significant role in helping students to reflect on and consolidate their learning
from the module using the reflective logs as important source material. The Tutor
and student make sense of the learning process together. The Tutors context specific
knowledge and engagement in the student learning process is highly valued.
Students are encouraged to reflect on the personal learning and transferable skills in
addition to subject specific knowledge. They are encouraged to ‘know differently’ as
well as to ‘know more’. There was a tension between the two parts of the module
(event management vs accommodation operations) in the first year of the project, as
they are underpinned by vastly different conceptions of teaching and learning. This
was addressed in the second year of working with the L2L project and this seems to
have improved students perceptions of the module.

Holistic - How are `heart’ and `hands’ engaged as well as `head’?

This module represents a good example of a holistic learning process. Students have
the potential to become highly engaged – emotionally, cognitively and behaviourally
- in a task where they can play a major role in conception, design and
implementation. The head is engaged- thinking through the strategy for the event
and managing the implementation process. The hands are engaged - through the
practical activity of working in groups and with others to make the event happen.
The heart is engaged – students engage in the process emotionally when they
interact with others to achieve the task; when their values are engaged through
contributing to a local charity/community; and in pursuit of their education.

The group work process provides a setting for real engagement with peers in a
practical and time constrained activity, which mirrors an organisational setting. This
has the potential to bring to life the principles of interpersonal interaction (group
work) in the context of staging and managing an operational event (professional
practice). The introduction of the progress logs gave students the opportunity to
record, process, and make sense of their emotional and behavioural experiences in
the module (and to a lesser degree cognitive process). The review session with the
Module Tutor was an additional process, which allowed students to make sense of
the whole module experience and to consolidate their learning.

10
http://www.som.surrey.ac.uk/learningtolearn/documents/mappingEBL.pdf

15
Engagement - To what extent and in what ways does the Learner have influence
on/choices about learning in each phase of the cycle (especially in the being-
thinking-project phase)?

The student has choice about learning in each phase of the cycle. ‘Project’ - the
module offers students a defined task- to design, plan and implement an event –
which is context module/specific. The project design offered by the module has
parameters, but also allows sufficient scope for students to exercise a reasonable
amount of choice and creativity. To start students can immediately engage with
‘Being’ – as they are able to influence the type of event they choose to work on. This
may relate to some dimension of personal interest or passion, something that
students have an interest in or is significant to them (see example of events pg7). As
students cycle back and forth between the project and being phase – ‘thinking’ - they
have the support of the module tutor to refine their project proposal/plan, think
through and refine their plan, which is presented at an early stage in the module.
‘Encounter’- students then begin working on the plan- with a substantial degree
autonomy and choice. This involves not only group work with their peers but also
engagement with others who are influential in the success of their event – both
internal and external to the university. This includes university departments;
university venues; external suppliers; local charities and public services (for example:
fire service) and their customers ( in the main these are other students). Once again
Tutor support is available to guide students in these encounters. Support may
concern interpersonal relationships; parameters of the project; university policy;
ethics and so on. ‘Making sense’ – students make sense in several ways during this
project- individually and as a group. A final project report and presentation
represents the groups making sense of the whole event management process
(communication). This process meets the formal assessment outcomes and allows
for specific emergent issues to be opened up through discussion (for example:
ethics). Weekly progress logs are part of an ongoing sense-making process, the
review with Module Tutor at the end of the module represents an opportunity for the
student to reflect on and make sense of their personal process in relation to the
module and how they might take this forward to their placement year( Return to
‘Being’).

Relational - In what ways is learning relational rather than individual?

The module involves a high degree of relational learning. Students are engaged in
group work with their peers and also with others who are influential in the success of
their event – both internal and external to the university (see previous section). This
raises the potential for students to learn about working with others, progress logs
present an opportunity for students to capture and reflect on this process. There is
evidence from this case that students engage in an extensive set of relations within
this module. An important question is the extent to which they acknowledge and
make explicit the learning from this process much of which is likely to be social.

Groups may engage in a meta learning dialogue – how are we working/learning

together? But groups are not facilitated so this process is not overtly supported
during the module. Progress logs capture individual reflections on group process and
relations, and the review of personal learning with the module tutor is an example of
an explicit and facilitated process for learning.

Resource-matched - How well are resources matched to the type and extent of
intended enquiry?

16
The relation between the task and the time allowed for groups to conceptualise, plan
and implement an event seems to work well. The progress logs represent a huge
volume of material, there are resource implications for one Tutor to work
systematically work through and assess such a volume of work- in spite of it’s
richness. In seeking a way to assess the learning evident in the logs, the MT
committed to meet each student for a one to one/group session in which the logs
would be reviewed and a pass/fail mark allocated. The sessions became an important
part of the learning process as they provided an opportunity for the MT and student
to review and consolidate learning. The qualitative value to the student and MT is
evident in the evaluation. The time commitment on the part of the Module Tutor in
the first year was significant, alternative group strategies were adopted in the second
year which reduced the time commitment.

Intentional L2L - In what respect is there explicit, intentional learning about enquiry?
The Module Tutor was aware that a significant amount of learning was taking place
which was not formally recognised. In response to this enhancements to the module
were introduced, which concentrated on introducing a reflective progress log for
students to complete on a weekly basis. This is an example of how, within this
application, the process of learning was made explicit. Students were offered training
input prior to completing the logs and ideally would have been provided with
additional support (feedback on sample logs, assistance with a final summary report)
had project resources been available. The review session with the MT at the end of
the module represented a further attempt to engage students in dialogue about their
learning process – not only what they learnt but how they learnt it. Student
participation in the evaluation discussions is further evidence of engaging students in
this process. Could students say they have learned something about their learning
process? Certainly some students involved in the evaluation were able to talk about
significant learning for them in this process and the value of ‘completing the logs’ or
having a talk with the module Tutor. What is less clear is whether they recognised
the value of the process in more general terms. It is unlikely for example they would
now develop and integrate reflective practice as routine. Although group work is
common within this programme, the enhancements which students experienced are
not common practice.

Encoded - How is enquiry encoded in learning outcomes and recognised and

rewarded through assessment?
The formal module outline describes an intention to ‘increase student management
of learning’; the group learning process; and the potential for individual students to
develop their independent ‘research’ skills. In practice, the enhancements to the
module were made to formally recognise a wider range student learning which was
evident. The module is a 20 credit module, with 10 credits allocated each for the
events management and accommodation operations strands of the module. In the
accommodation operations strand of the module assessment is by individual time
constrained exam. Within the events management strand, 80% marks are awarded
for small group assignment (the preparation of a project plan, presentation and
submission of a final group report). 20% of marks were awarded to student on
completion of the weekly reflective logs and a summary statement of personal
learning. This was pass/fail and assessment was on the basis of a meeting between
the Module Tutor and individual students. The evaluation suggests that it was
important to link the assessment process to the introduction of student reflective logs
as an incentive for student to engage with the process.

17
Supported - How is all the above guided and facilitated?
Student learning process is guided, facilitated and supported throughout this module.
Although students have a substantial degree of autonomy and choice in this module,
they have the support of the module tutor to refine their project proposal/plan, think
through and refine their plan; guide students in encounters with internal and
external stakeholders; offer guidance or support in relation to interpersonal
relationships; parameters of the project; university policy; ethics. Group work is not
facilitated, but weekly progress logs are part of an ongoing sense-making process,
the review with Module Tutor at the end of the module represents a further
facilitation to support student learning.

18
Project Details:

FDTL5 funded Project: Learning to Learn through Supported Enquiry.

Web site: http://www.som.surrey.ac.uk/learningtolearn/

Project Director: Dr. Paul Tosey p.tosey@surrey.ac.uk

Project Managers: Juliet McDonnell j.mcdonnell@surrey.ac.uk

Mary Dickinson m.dickinson@surrey.ac.uk

Learning to Learn Office (56MS03)

School of Management
University of Surrey
Guildford
Surrey
GU2 7XH
+44 9(0) 1483 682003

Case study prepared by Juliet McDonnell, June 4th 2007.

19
Appendix 1: Team Roles; Skills Matrix; Sample Personal Progress Logs

Team Roles Hand out.

A. Task Roles: These roles are required in selecting or carrying out a group’s
task.
l. Initiator: Proposes solutions, suggests new ideas, gets the group started.
2. Fact Seeker: Seeks facts, clarifies values, goals or ideas.
3. Opinion Giver: Provides facts, opinions and information.
4. Evaluator: Compares and contrasts facts, pulls ideas together.
5. Recorder: Records the official actions of the group.
6. Spokesperson: Speaks the general opinion of the group to outsiders.

B. Group Building & Maintenance Roles: These roles strengthen group life.
1. Encourager: Friendly, warm, responsive to others, praises others and their
ideas.
2. Gatekeeper: Facilitates discussion, keeps group on task.
3. Compromiser: Seeks consensus and mutual agreement.
4. Harmonizer: Mediates differences, relieves tensions, clarifies differing
opinions.
5. Follower: Goes along with the group, supporter of the group’s actions.
6. Consensus Tester: Tests the opinions of the group.

C. Challenging Roles: These roles detract and challenge a group’s

development.
l. Aggressor: The person who threatens, blames or criticizes others.
2. Blocker: The person who constantly resists group actions.
3. Recognition Seeker: The person who attempts to direct attention to the self.
4. Dominator: The person who manipulates the group by showing authority.
5. Blamer: The person who blames others for difficulties and failures, but
excuses self from these instances.
6. Self-confessor: Expresses personal feelings and ideas which are not related
to the group.

The Office for student activities2005 http://ase.tufts.edu/

20
Skills Matrix

Communicating Speaking effectively Writing concisely

Listening attentively Expressing ideas Facilitating group discussion

Providing Negotiating Perceiving nonverbal

appropriate feedback messages
Persuading Reporting information Describing feelings

Self-motivation Creating ideas Identifying problems

Encouraging Identifying resources Gathering information

Solving problems Setting goals Extracting important

information
Setting and meeting Analyzing Developing evaluation
deadlines strategies
Time management Developing rapport Being sensitive

Accepting Organising Providing support for others

responsibility
Motivating others Sharing credit Leadership

Cooperating Managing conflict Representing others

Perceiving others Asserting Negotiation

feelings in situations
Initiating new ideas Handling details Coordinating tasks

Managing groups Delegating Promoting change

responsibility
Making decisions Cooperating Self- Control

Adapted from Transferable Skills Survey:

http://www.d.umn.edu/student/loon/car/self/career_transfer_survey.html

21
 WEEKLY PERSONAL PROGRESS LOG

Student
Name…………………………….URN……………………………………….

Date:………………………………………

1 How do you think this week’s work went? How did it make you feel?

2 What group roles from the sheet did you take and why?

3 What was the most challenging aspect this week and why?

4 What was the most satisfying aspect this week and why?

5 What skills from the matrix provided have you developed most this week?

6 Lessons Learnt?

a) What is the main ‘lesson’ you learnt this week?

b) How does this relate to a future career

c) How does this apply to theory?

Please ensure you have kept a copy of this sheet for your own records

Feedback comments provided overleaf

22
Appendix 2: Summary of Student Learning Themes from Personal Progress
Logs 2005.
Hospitality Operations Management – December 2005
School of Management, University of Surrey.

Background
This is an innovative module in which groups of students plan, promote, organise and
execute events on campus. This year’s events were as diverse as ever and included ‘the fear
factor’, wrestling, an Ann Summers party event, strippers and a family evening at the
Lakeside. A change to the module this year was that students completed weekly reflective
logs, to capture some of their more personal learning about the process of events
management. Having reviewed the learning logs we agreed with student to share some of
the important learning that took place.

The Journey
The reflective logs tell the story of student journeys through the event management module.
As the initial groups are put together there is often a phase of excitement, as the group gets
to know each other, the creative possibilities of this module are in the air, as the groups start
to think about what they could do. This is followed by a phase where the reality kicks in, this
group needs to start to work together and make a plan, and roles need to be allocated in a
democratic way. Sometimes there is a clash of ideas in the group and these need to be
worked out if the group is going to pull off their event successfully. When things don’t work
out, the groups need to reflect on why they chose people for roles they may not be suited to;
is everyone pulling their weight; just what is everyone contributing. Often a crisis brings the
group together, if tickets aren’t selling it may be time to review the sales strategy and pull
together. Sometimes another crisis can lead the groups to jell and start to work together. In
the end, the events all came off successfully due to the hard work of each of the groups and
a lot of learning was had along the way.

What did we learn?

• Learning about myself, what are my strengths and weaknesses what are my likes and
dislikes? How do I impact on others? What are other people’s perceptions of me?
How do I manage my emotions?
• What am I bringing from my background that will influence how I work and interact
with others? How will my background affect my relations with others in study or work

• What is power? What power do I have? What gives me power – age, status, cultural
background, gender?
• How did this project change me? Did I change my perception of myself in relation to
the world by taking a different role to that of a student?

• Learning about myself in relation to others. How do I work with others in a team?
• What is behind personality clashes? If someone is aggressive what does it tell me
about them? If someone is very quiet what does it tell me about them? How can
people who are so different learn to work together?

• How can I manage relations with people external to my organisation? Who is it I am

dealing with? What is their method of doing business? How do I protect the interests
of my host organisation?

• Is it ethical to use sex to sell or to ask people to do things that might harm them?
How do I feel about this? What is my own ethical viewpoint?
• Does writing and reflecting on the module process with Module Tutor help me
manage the group process/make the journey more bearable?

• It may not always have been smooth but its important to enjoy the journey

23
Appendix 3: Revised assessment for the second project management
strand of HOMs Module 2006.

Dear all, here is a reminder of what is expected from you for your second HOM
assignment. You are expected to write a report in two parts: the first part in
which you compare theory (as discussed in the lectures) and practice (as
experienced during your event), the second part in which you write your personal
experiences, and what you have learned. Let me emphasise once more that in the
first part where you compare theory with practice you must try and evaluate the
event against the theory. What I want to see is that I have not been doing all
those lectures in vain! So read the references and apply concepts from those
lectures to your event. Just in case you have not re-read the manual I include the
text under appendix B: An individual evaluation report which will include the
following: Section A ¿ the Event General overview of the days¿ event, successes,
achievements and possible failures Service value chain, organisational planning
and control including food production and service challenges, safety and security
Managing customers, relationships and staff, evaluation of training Performance,
financial evaluation and profitability, including a profit and loss account, menu
mix and menu- merchandising analysis (where appropriate) Marketing, capacity
and managing sales Supply Chain, outsourcing Quality and operational
improvement, customer feedback and way of measuring Overall conclusions,
whether objectives achieved Section B ¿ Self evaluation Personal Log This project
is a live process dealing with real situations, people and processes. It offers many
learning experiences beyond those outlined in the module and your personal
progress log is a good way to capture and identify this learning some of which
you may wish to use in your CV. Please write this up in a diary format noting the
occasion in which you experienced the learning, what you learnt and whether in
the light of this experience you would do things differently. This should be based
partly on notes taken at the time and partly as a reflective process. What did you
learn about the subject? What did you learn about yourself? What did you learn
about team working? Evaluate yourself under the following headings: Planning
and implementation: theory and effectiveness Supervision and communication:
ability to supervise and communicate effectively, to include briefing, training,
motivation and staff welfare Leadership style: see Managing Through
Organisation; Colin Hales (see Books) Teamwork /Commitment ¿ strengths and
weaknesses, influence of peers on performance Good luck, J.

24
25
Appendix 4: UGOC Guideline Criteria for Assessment 2006

UG Mark UG Reflective Report11

Range Description Essay (Generic School of Management Criteria
Critical Reflection An outstanding performance in which a student, at this level, demonstrates a superior grasp of the
Qualitative change in learning and understanding through subject matter and an ability to go beyond the given material in a critical, constructive or innovative
70-100 Excellent critical reflection. Ability to synthesise insightful, manner. The student demonstrates a high degree of creative and/or logical thinking, a superior
evidenced reflections on experience. Strong examples of ability to organise, to present, to analyse and to integrate ideas, and a thorough familiarity with the
potential applications of learning. relevant literature and techniques.
Reflection A more than adequate performance in which a student, at this level, demonstrates a thorough grasp
Strong examples of learning, with evidence. Repeated of the subject matter and an ability to organise, present and examine the material in a critical and
60-69 Good
evidence of ability to reflect on experience. Includes constructive manner. The student demonstrates a good understanding of the relevant issues and a
examples of potential applications of learning. familiarity with the relevant literature and techniques.
Description with some reflection
An adequate performance in which a student, at this level, demonstrates a generally adequate grasp
Examples of learning, with some evidence. Some evidence
of the subject matter and a moderate ability to organise, present and examine the material in a
50-59 Satisfactory of ability to reflect on experience. May include examples of
critical and constructive manner. The student displays an adequate understanding of the relevant
potential applications of learning.
issues and a general familiarity with the relevant literature and techniques.
Descriptive
Few or limited examples of learning, or examples with little A barely adequate performance in which a student, at this level, demonstrates a familiarity with the
reference to experience. Limited evidence of ability to subject matter, but whose attempts to organise, present and examine the material in a critical and
40-49 Pass
reflect on experience or to identify potential applications of constructive manner are only partially successful. The student displays some understanding of the
learning. Ideas expressed without questioning, and with relevant issues and some familiarity with the relevant literature and techniques.
little linking of ideas.
Inappropriate or very limited examples of learning, and/or A student, at this level, may have deficiencies in some of these identified areas: fails to
inadequate evidence of ability to reflect on experience. demonstrate clear familiarity with the subject matter, relevant literature and techniques; shows poor
30-39 Marginal Fail
or inappropriate presentation / organisation; relies on very limited and often irrelevant material;
provides weak or non-existent analysis and evaluation.
Major gap(s) in addressing the set task. A student, at this level, may have deficiencies in some of these identified areas: demonstrates very
<30 Fail little knowledge of subject matter; uses muddled or irrelevant material; presents or organises work
poorly with no attempt at analysis or evaluation. Work may contain significant errors.

11
Indicative features of content: better graded work is likely to include more evidence of (e.g.) self questioning (internal dialogue); deliberating between different views;
standing back from events; recognising personal capacity for change; exploring motives for behaviour; relating to different emotional states; changing views over time. After:
Moon, J. (2002) `The Module and Programme Development Handbook: a practical guide to linking levels, learning outcomes and assessment’, London: Kogan Page. Moon,
J. (2004) `A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory and Practice’, Abingdon: Routledge Farmer.

November 2006