Culinary arts competencies in hospitality curriculum - RIT Scholar

Feb 7, 2001 ... Culinary arts competencies in hospitality curriculum. Thomas Smyth. Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.rit.edu/t...

3 downloads 488 Views 3MB Size
Rochester Institute of Technology

RIT Scholar Works Theses

Thesis/Dissertation Collections

2001

Culinary arts competencies in hospitality curriculum Thomas Smyth

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses Recommended Citation Smyth, Thomas, "Culinary arts competencies in hospitality curriculum" (2001). Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. Accessed from

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact [email protected].

CULINARY ARTS COMPETENCIES IN HOSPITALITY CURRICULUM

By

Thomas J. Smyth

A thesis

Faculty of the

school of

submitted

Hospitality and at

partial

fulfillment

Service Management

the

Rochester Institute

in

to the

of

Technology

of the requirements

Master

of Science

February 2001

for the degree

of

ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Hospitality and Service Management Graduate Studies

M.S. Service Management Presentation of ThesislProject Findings

Name: _ _.....:T~h~o~m~a~s~J.~S~m~yth~ Title of Research:

Date:

02/07/01

SS#

CULINARY ARTS COMPETENCIES IN HOSPITALITY CURRICULUM

Specific Recommendations: (use other side if necessary)

Thesis Committee: (1) _ _D_r_.J_am_e_s_Ja_c_o_bs

(2) OR (3)

(Chairperson)

Dr. Joseph LaLopa

-------------

Faculty Advisor: Number of Credits Approved:

2

Committee Chairperson's Signature

Date

Committee Signature

Note: This form will not be signed by the Department Chairperson until all corrections, as suggested in the specific recommendations (above) are completed. cc.

FORMT

Department Student Record File - Original

ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of HoSPiqhty aDO Service wianagewent Graduate Studies

M.S. Service Maoagemeut Statemenl Granti~ or Denying Pennission to Reproduce Thesis/Graduate Project The Author of a thesis Of project should complete one ofthe following statements and include this statement as the page following the title page.

Title of Thesislproject: C1R.INARY ARTS COMPETENCIES IN HOSPITALITY Cl TRRrcm.IJM

I, Thomas J. S m y t h , herebY~, deny) permission to the Wallace

Memorial Library ofR.I.T., to reproduce the document titled above in whole or pan. Any reproduction will not be for commercial use or profit.

OR

1,

,prefer to be contacted each time a request

for reproduction is made. I can be reached at the following address:

Datfk/: lirNO I )

Signature

Rochester

Institute

of

Technology

Abstract

CULINARY

BY

ARTS

THOMAS

JUDE

Chairperson Professor

COMPETENCIES

the

used

to

educators

industry

and

relative

that

confirmed

competencies,

dialogue

to

culinary

arts

great

to

and

curriculum

establish

to

apprise

does

each

a

for

of

educator

divergent

opinion

of

of

their

needs.

of

require

culinarians.

and

on

continued

industry

which

arts

professionals

value

voice

was

culinary

the

other

future

managers

These

objectives.

challenges,

prepare

industry

positions

exist

the

fifteen

of

objectives

the

affirming

faculty,

immediate

to

these

there

study

fifteen

and

Studies

Graduate

of

Delphi

instructional

while

Committee:

Department

two-round

identify

education

Supervisory

Jacobs

A modified

hospitality

CURRICULUM

SMYTH

of

Jim

HOSPITALITY

IN

Working

speaks

an

with

to

evolving

Culinary

Competencies

Arts

Ac knowl edgment s

I

am

have done

not

with

all

time

I

the

took

degree. the

I

times.

You

Lastly

I

In

a

from

of

are

whose

and

time

our

change

albeit

known

dreamer.

you

to

not

work

were

all

cut

I

in

forget

the

for

or

the

by

blessed

the

and

to

work

all

the

this

achieve

me

in

unwittingly

at

joining

experience.

unrealized

short

to

order

unwillingly

feel

place

quiet

could

and

very dedicated

two

of

colleagues

soon

to

a

study

for understanding

together

thank my

lives

for

Dan

also

sure

support

Shirley

trimmings

dedicate my

having

still

Aunt

opportunity to

the

without

you

would

process

friends

it

Thank

people.

for this

grateful

very

dreams

ravages

honored

of

of

my aids.

that

I

am

2

Culinary Table

Arts

Competencies

Contents

of

Abstract

1

Acknowledgement

2

Table

3

Contents

of

Chapter

I

4

-Introduction

Problem Statement

Purpose

6

Significance

7

Assumptions

7

Scope

8

Key

II-Review

Chapter

III

IV

Limitations

and

Terms

Chapter

Chapter

5

9

19

-Methodology

The

Sample

19

The

Procedure

21

-Results

and

Respondents

23

Gender

Profile

24

25

Range

Educational

Experience Educator

Combined

29

Competency Ranking

Competency Ranking

-Conclusions

.

.

30 31

33 and

Recommendations

35

39

Bibliography Letters

27

Profile

Discussion

Appendix:

26

Profile

Hospitality Industry Competency Ranking

V

23

Discussion

Survey

Age

Chapter

11

the Literature

of

and

Questionnaires

41

3

Culinary CHAPTER

Arts

Competencies

1

Introduction

There

hotels,

was

restaurants, recipes

menus,

trendsetters

benchmarks

culinary

arts

sum

of

The

food

Jewish

their

are

be

Industry change

Who

educated?

picture

and

power

their

is

own

and

in

which

the

dynamic

of

midst

renaissance

their

as

the

those

became but

whole

(with

caraway to

informed

well

rudiments

in

of

as

also

of

a

response

to

consumer

the

impetus

scan

questions

our

given

standard

lead

us

environment

a

tradition

similar

that

and

to

for

to

a

out

came

with

These

or

having become

now

new

salad

comes

of

point

are

the

it

hold the

and

educator

set

when

Caesar

a

seeds

the

foodstuffs "wow"

will

only

the

extravagances

products,

The

coupled

to

not

and

and

of

consumer

These

"cool"

demand.

drove

scale

legendary

creating

great

of

became

standards

in

was

service

parts.

bread

benchmarks.

The

that

when

caterers,

shows,

and

These

standards.

TV

with

food

of

industry

the

culture.

anchovies)

plethora

experienced

average

Rye

a

recognized

universally

chefs

chefs,

new

an

Imagine

years.

the

set

Economies

change.

the

and

for

in the hospitality industry

time

a

comes

how

are

consider

the

of

wishes.

time

of

with

they the

variables

to

total

that

4

are

most

future

hospitality

Particularly a

time

of

rapid

the

additional

new

frontiers

this

to

significant

by

required

students

and

of

to

One

to

germane

again

the

which

draws

into

us

the

objectives

closely

the

competencies

take

to

and

what

how

keen

A

on

is

understanding

of

culinary

look

forecast

arts

how

at

which

challenges

is

there

of

and

in

working

Also

economies.

requirements.

prepared

of

Internet,

examine

those

being

is

millennium

runaway

the

by industry today

presented

fact

this

hospitality industry

view

are

is

note

benchmarking. be

the

educators'

of

factor of

for

process

education

professionals.

change

will

study

the

Competencies

Arts

Culinary

in

the

this

are

new

the

value

of

is

being

challenged

study.

The

Problem

The

to

the

meet

the

hospitality industry.

industry'

change,

effective

means

is

certainly

not

Educators

entering

models.

are

academia

Industry

bottom

increasing

line

volume

system

education

some

problem

allow

arts

of

needs

this

effect

adopt

culinary

of

and

sharing this

outdated

executives

who

and

often

leave

in

needs

to

must

challenge.

industry

effective

segment

thinking to drive of

order

This

one-dimensional.

practitioners

with

educators'

In

often

teaching

training

expectations.

hospitality industry business

and

The

coupled

5

Culinary

with

a

substantial

timely, to

if

push,

educators

institutions

and

the

The

are

demand for is

the

to

vast

and

change.

where

educators

and

challenges

new

alike.

immediate.

Educational

in the

Somewhere

(leading

change

to

(leading

reflection

a

are

industry

middle

to

fade)

traditional

to

meet

must

lock

extremes.

Purpose This

Cornell

is

study

modeled

University.

competencies

a

professionals

of

curriculum

select

and

is

It

hypothesis

that

possibility

arts

industry The

provide

industry, needs,

and

inside

how

of

programs

expect

the

at

area.

the

examine

a

establish

at

what

hospitality industry

metropolitan

is

survey done

disconnect

data

in

find

to

the

post-secondary In

lieu

in

between

of

light

the

a

of

the

educator

agendas.

sampling

an

there

similar

educators

will

study

a

intended to

culinary

culinary

this

after

group

from the New York

level

and

slow

are

demand for immediate

the

stepping)

avoid

changes

professionals

Competencies

business

the

presents

which

shove,

industry

and

Industry

between

not

in

interest

student

Arts

of

expert

look

educators

create

at

the

see

empathy

opinion

needs

and

of

themselves

for

one

or

analysis

the

hospitality

responding

the

may

other.

to

those

6

Arts

Culinary The

Competencies

Significance is

It

in the

with

hospitality

opportunities

that

this

between taught

new

setting

is

the

opinion

analysis

objectives

In

for

may

likely

change

possible

is

gap

being this

that

event

industry

about

culinary

also

what

and

be

to

prove

is

significant

a

creating

students.

It

student.

of

new

creating many

industry

of

divergent

the

requirements,

is

pace

accelerated

culinary

expansion

culinary a

the

sector

requirements

reveals

study

for the

rapid

the

to

that

anticipated

arts

a

in

tool

useful

education.

Assumptions

Ideological

I

both

assume

industry

and

from

of

the

education

experiences

with

industry

that

bias

as

my

field

will

I

that

about

own

have

have

a

some

groups

a

and

will

have

with

practitioner

varying

bias

will

I

polling from

had varying

education.

who

experience

about

be

industry

of

has

I

also

from the

come

both.

assume

I

also

expectations

assume

and

bias

educator.

Procedural

The

open-ended

survey

instrument

its

ability

to

canvas

a

larger

has

area

been

of

chosen

opinion

because

with

the

of

7

Culinary result

it

that

establishes

negatively for its construction

the

groupings

round

of

look

anonymous

two

the

investment

the

of

pool

of

is however tedious

It

requirements.

a

second

round

at

what

one

of

round

responses

other

participants

or

viewed

often

the

With

this

in

inquiry

will

incorporate

time.

of

trends

needs

and

Competencies

Arts

allowing for

participants

will

be

asked

be

to

gain

have

to

mind

an

responded.

select

and

In

rank

twenty key issues.

Limitations The

focus

of

this

hospitality industry In

educators.

the

included chefs, The

caterers.

culinary New

York

The

broadest

to

professionals

educator

Metropolitan

for

basis

expert

the

of

have

extensive

practitioners

and

will

credit

input

from

arts

culinary

professionals

restaurant

consist

of

will

owners,

be

and

post-secondary in

the

capture

the

bearing institutions

area.

criteria

may

hoteliers,

group

from

and

hospitality

of

group

managers,

educators

perspective

due

will

study

sample

an

opinion

adverse

time

scope

selection

of

and

the

to

experience.

effect

commitment

were

on

the

required

inquiry.

This

response

from very

rate

busy

8

Competencies

Arts

Culinary Key Terms Academia

a:

place

life, Teaching

model:

-A

community,

body

to

of

kitchen

skill

or

-Acquired

skill

represents

dissemination

of

one

a

sets

of

or

relating to the

cookery.

mastery

knowledge base

of

and

or

sets.

Professional:

Hospitality Industry -

academic

world

which

the

the

knowledge

-Specific

Competencies:

or

methodology,

approach

Culinary Arts:

instruction b:

of

Persons

food,

of

in

working

beverage,

or

around

lodging,

the

business

travel

and/or

tourism

Stakeholders

:

Practitioners

claim

-To

:

-One

responsibility practices;

who

a

practices

Bottom

line:

-the

the

line

report

at

that

financial

or

or

most

or

loss)

:

ownership

especially:

one

who

profession.

essential

primary

and/or

the

salient

the

important

consideration

bottom

a

shows

the

of

net

considerations

the

point:

final

financial

profit

(as

result

cost

or

or

loss:

profit

9

Missing

Page

Culinary CHAPTER

Review

The

that

focusing

on

such

Literature

in the

evidence

suggests

and

present

institutions example

this

of

would

Real

Investor

challenges

presented

Travel

Tourism

and

what

of

the

ongoing

effort

and

industry.

to

the

expect

of

Issue

8

created

to

a

create

a

industry

and

the

the

the

Hospitality, of

need.

these

address

between

ties

stronger

realistic

One

National

the

plethora

interesting

industry

the

102-107)

to

met

are

community

University

by

pp.

of

strongly

professionals.

article

an

educators

including

within

York

expansion

Some

from the

New

the

field have

in

importance

the

by

and

education

be

40

(Vol.

leaders

an

hospitality

hospitality

1998. In

industry

issues

in the

train

which

literature

the

of

future planning

and

Conference

Estate

review

the dialogues

Hospitality

The

points

to

note

understanding career

were

of

mindedness

students.

an

article

on

Professors

Lefever

&

In

authors

11

2

the

of

Competencies

Arts

surveyed

on

their

or

competencies

curriculum

Withiam

industry

experience

as

might

at

Cornell

professionals

recognized

be

review

done

1998

University, to

experts,

considered

in

by the

determine, which

essential

for

based

issues the

and

Culinary training not

future

of

to

specific

culinary

basis

provided

the

academic

leaders

culinary

arts.

The

life

if

Industry view

to

creating

to

I'd

what

Withiam

the

level

1998,

requirements

with

of

the

in

very

both

expressed

concern

scholarly

that

dimension

73

of

while

the

move

well

is

of

in

quoted

in

enrollment

in

be

called

the "

and

these

and

hospitality to

business

life

stated

themselves

represent.

&

educators

academic

they

Academia

Ahit

a

(Lefever M.

.

meet

and

industry

hospitality

hospitality

lack

a

as

hospitality

nurturing the

by

shelf

unrealistic

They frequently find

leaders

of

an

years

needing to

and

limited.

is

might

ten

Similarly,

industry in the

watching

what

and

of

both

practitioners

five,

institutions

industry

as

Hotels

to

sent

process

and

to

still

75-76) a

due

graduates

industry.

instances

the

p.

business

hospitality

odds

of

two,

after

Hyatt

benchmark

to

incisive

of

in the

career

of

while

student

is

"Instead

deans,

want

find themselves

of

Hoover,

percentage

G.,

a

study,

apparently the

graduation

questionnaire

advised

graduates,

at

a

that

this

upon

This

competencies

hospitality

given

She

'

the

expect

Barbara

of

revealed

to

response

rate,

of

inquiry

Competencies 12

was

education,

topic

believe that

execs

industry.

1998.

the

study

will

arts

managers.

further

what

of

import

for

on

Cornell

you

hospitality

Arts

In

at

several

educators

legitimize was

putting

too

distance between the

much

Severe for

actually

the

realities

interesting school

to Walle

Conference

Research.

The

in business This

new

academic

.

educators,

in both There

popular

is

mutual

process

an

strive

which

the

student

the

on

is

same

and

that

debated

strategic

planning

are

both

the

professional

shared

industry

turned

which

a

and

insures

dedication

1996,

p

amongst

hospitality.

of

in

occurring

hospitality

students

interest

path

"(Walle,

other

suggest

is

practitioners

hand,

model.

school

the

being heavily

and

development

Much

one

at

Students

technically

and

writing

presented

business

middle

exist

business

for

a

the

the

too

need

where

on

there

Graduate

and

the

of

walk

to

evidence

and

model

university

historical

the

to

concerns,

of

was

hospitality

apparent

benefit

.

of

practitioners

process

paper

in business.

curriculum

education

of

II

of

out

respectability,

is

development

identifies

grew

"should

There

review

the

World War

after

practitioner

210)

to

Graduate Education

author

concept

educators

the

at

209-218),

PP

(1996,

conference

on

business

in the

a

individuals

skilled

to

in

leveled

industry.

the

of

parallels

model

was

13

industry.

the

and

practitioner

communicating effectively to the

not

According

the

in fact

criticism

Competencies

Arts

Culinary

hot

topics

The

present

journal.

vision

the

to

the

education

"In

of

place

curriculum

industry

review

1998,

Withiam

surveyed

determine

70)

p.

a

were

discussion

73

p.

keen

interest

in

The

is

point

legitimize

(i.e.

experience

literature

in

the

in

expectations.

quarterly

(Withiam,

industry

the

G.

the

to

In

editor

1998

leaders

p and

to

has

part

.

The

a

the

of

data

(Lefever

would

to

Withiam,

&

his

the

critical

of

on

down play

of

was

were

of

first is

There

has

created

the

Cornell

editorial

editor

to

effort

emphasis

this

issue

academicians

a

future

of

educator.

that

August

titles

80)

the

meant

indicate

the

it

been. in

that

education

Ph.D.)

of

sample

study

preparation

has

methodology

on

the

being generally

while

alluded

education.

sufficient

study.

successful

hospitality

credentials

hand

the

successful

get

to

study clearly demonstrated

This

hospitality leadership how

to

further

and

the

and

may have biased the able

2).

Exhibit

1998,

random

&

and

professionals

hospitality

views

not

(Lefever

Lefever

article

who

or

classroom

programs"

industry

of

were

professionals

they

same

with

contact

the

visit

the

industry

findings

that

warrant

In

.

sample

how the

their

industry

who

regular

in executive-education

Withiam

appear

involves

now

discussions,

panel

and

surveys,

representatives

participate

While

major

Competencies

Arts

Culinary

of

TWO

a

gap

SURPRISES

mind

further

a

much

that

along in

14

Culinary

a

joint partnership only to

hospitality

regards

requirements

curriculum

its

paradigm

circles

of

learners"

from

This

Industry

by

interests

the

individuals

A

practitioners.

impression

that

into

competing

look

at

these

the

snap the

demand

teach

but

not

to

lies

advent

point

the

as

what

only

a

of

of

rhetoric

takes

task

the

Herein

as

be

To

with

charged

have

we

know

future

the

business.

Organizations

of

business

hospitality

which

hospitality industry services

shot

of

business

special

learning.

not

does

education

a

calls

While

.

organizations

of

provide

who

to

dialogue

efforts

both

of

in

and

experience

Professional

ongoing

(1999)

Bosselman

educator

Bosselman

what

are

supply

hospitality

of

and

The

fueled

the

of

challenges

as

industry

education.

of

which

point

historical

an

hospitality

R.H.

faculty

from the

departure

obligation

the

excellence

boundaries

the

industry.

the

considerations

principle

guiding

exploring

and

represent

(Bosselman,

industry

of

"excellent

issues

unresolved

15

educators'

education

teaching competencies,

exclusive

Competencies

.

Within

research

find

Arts

this

of

interest

organizations

to

and

that

and

their

AKA

give

the

splintered

However,

missions

the

the

might

hospitality is groups.

represent

industry,

picture

is

a

close

demonstrates

Arts

Culinary

their

shared

(1999

p.

16

vision

)

holders.

They

individuals, is

important to

the

sphere

of

Institutional

Education

to

become

hot

a

the

topic

who

Not

these

the

of

is

the

know."

same

and

willingness

(Foucar-Szocki,

has

R

&

is

There

content

many benefits

true

practitioner

education

groups.

what

and

Association

bringing

on

of

Restaurant

Motel

and

It

and

groups

Restaurant

National

of

represent.

business

the

on

stake

these

of

surprisingly,

teaching

"One

the

a

belongs

of

being

of

colleagues

a

C.

Bolsing,

45)

p.

In

they

focused

are

is

,

Hotel

amongst

educator

what

share

1999,

in

curriculum.

hospitality to

few

a

Stutts

Alan

ideals

they

which

nature

(CHRIE)

together.

interest

keen

in

name

been

long

promote

Hotel,

on

American

(NRA)

industry

and

and

influence they have Council

what

representing the

the

understand

The

(AH&MA)

have

institutions,

hospitality.

Association

in

to protect

the

or

16

leadership."

industry

exist

and

service

organizations

this

of

customer

"service

calls

Professional

guardians

of

Competencies

the

industry.

literature

Coupled

for

skilled

has

been

has

that

see

low

a

with

personnel

suggested

we

rate

out

the

the

exponential

of

paced

growth

unemployment,

the

educators

of

the

availability.

should

teach

the

an

need

It

Culinary basic

skills

skill

training.

let

and

Educators

perhaps

necessarily

at

odds

this

review

of

the

level

there

is

a

needs

of

future

the

industry

their

see

the

with

fine

the

difference in

perception

that

not

some

at

future

the

of

and

however

service

how to best

and

community

17

specialized

indicate

would

Competencies

differently

charge

industry they

literature

hospitality

tune

Arts

prepare

leadership.

Summary The

business

most

are

aspects

the

issues

in

of

There

identifies

tucked

about

is

of

the

education.

that

a

gap

Certainly in

an

of

arts

to

of

of

an

appropriate

in

the

industry of

hospitality

and

the

places

culinary

equation.

a

often

and

is

education.

which

value

for

an

hospitality

of

is

hospitality

itself

of

about

economy.

topics

literature

thinking which

the

of

hospitality

the

in

done

been

education

envelope

approach

perhaps

hospitality

education

in

This

contribution

arts

little

absence

exists

the

sector

prominent

more

Culinary

the

of

writing has

growing

other

within

very

areas

culinary

broad-based

arts

business

fast

this

or

extensive

hospitality.

management's

the

and

many

stepchild

frequently

on

segments

discussion

However

more

various

indication

educators.

significant

variable

Culinary

culinary

within

value

the

operations

according to Nations

which, the

US

employment

exponential

effected

future

multiple

leaders

surveyed

of

the

persons

growth

perspectives

for

The

and

observations

literature

are

being

the

successful

explicit

preparation

students

culinary

and

of

for

of

cent

has

business

dialogues,

from this

labeled

perceptions.

They

implicit

requirements

for

entry

into

review

inclusive

students,

the

of

training

attitudes,

hospitality

the

.

the

gleaned

18

for

account

per

1999)

regarding

industry.

the

8

or

hospitality

of

opinions

represent

of

million

News,

(Nations Restaurant News,

workforce

The

10.2

of

Restaurant

Competencies

Arts

Culinary

business

of

hospitality.

In

the

previously perceptions

to

attempt

cited

of

to

successful

within

and

to

Lefever

significant

industry

replicate

professionals

surveyed

by

study

and

that

hospitality prioritize

was

The

of

culinary at

consensus

in

This

those

the

will

study

industry

common

arts

post

about

collected

participants

held

herein

(1998)

study using both

education

by

data

criteria

preparation

Withiam

practitioners.

educators.

identify

and

will

for

students

secondary criteria.

be

the

framed

institutions

Culinary

Arts

Competencies

19

3

CHAPTER

Methodology

The

Sample

The

criteria

from the Cornell

professionals

to

selected

with

the

completed

The

The

each

used

by

part

each

assigns

to

to

likeliness

the

of

which

evaluate

variable

is

were

be

the

the

support

of

Educators

region

same

who

bearing also

chosen

of

with

the

commitment

experience

influence

culinary

instructional

food

to

participants.

would

the

the

professional

relationships

would

variable

educators,

dependent

group

the

the

a

area.

serving the

professional

on

study

and

York

participants

increased

independent

professionals

standard

The

and

which

in

for

established

New

in

with

relationships

participation

metro

were

area

experience

in post-secondary degree

programs.

personal

their

on

institutions

from

students

researcher,

their

by

and

industry

of

metropolitan

direct working

in the

work

on

based

working

selected

based

from the New York

has been

were

section

adapted

were

study group

cross

which

organization

hospitality

A

study.

sector,

professionals

the

select

participate

hospitality

culinarians

to

used

relative

arts

of

the

the

students.

importance that

objectives

or

Arts

Culinary

The

competencies.

research

more

basis

in

accuracy than

accumulated

Delphi

education

1998;

is

reduces

dominant

a

(b)

eliminates

collection

of

input

from

impossible

to

bring

together

encourages

more

(Lloyd, The

of

the

time

La

J.,

J.

disadvantages

required

effort

and

to

group

(d)

M., of

the

administer

energy

required

the

part

of

the

disadvantage

is

that

it

becomes

out

which

interest

on

opinion,

understanding

experience

of

of

is based

education

education.

which

and

lie

that

Hence

anonymity

not

which

2000).

C.

in

the

(a)

data

the

a

high

and

level

Another

difficult

amount

(b) of

obvious

to

separate

currently held

is

past

by

participants.

maintaining

a

if

difficult

is

participants.

on

it

the

enables

collect

more

The

.

influence

peer

guarantees

Delphi

&

because a)

Braunlich,

and

studies

unnecessary

from the

response

candid

Lopa,

a

result.

1993)

Smith,

to

its

due to

(Lefever

tool

(c)

material

often

which

previous

&

conformity due

from the

success

formulated

a

review

forecasting

irrelevant

of

not

Simpson

1990;

of

personality,

conversation

curriculum

useful

incidence

the

and

influenced

experience

by

20

the

as

projection

successfully in

used

and

its

opinion,

statistical

Canterino,

method

expert

experience

has been

method

involving

of

chosen

was

derives

method

identification

bears

Withiam,

Technique

This

approach.

effective

This

Delphi

Competencies

previous

may

not

be

Culinary

best

the

by

metric

which

we

and

current

evaluate

Competencies

Arts

21

future

expectation.

Procedure

With

professionals

culinary in

May

the

2000,

of

Delphi

included titled

factors

these

which

Survey

of

and

was

after

patterned

Quarterly, format

on

of

inquiry

were

were

did

limit

not

arts

students

reference

to

the

to

all

responses

All

training

round

first

Many the

1998) to

those

train

nine

The

a

to

Cornell

wide

the

range

first

eliminated.

and

survey

open-ended

for

of

round

The

education

of

responding

and

culinary

included

resources

available

them.

Select

titled

culinary

responses,

The

the

requirements

questionnaire

into

.

areas

trainers,

which

questionnaire

in

express

many

the

of

Also

participate.

Educators.

responses

of

to

inquiry,

the

of

round

duplicates

and

regarding

similar

fell

to

study found

the

inclusive

alone.

second

them

introduction,

of

nature

and

Hospitality Industry

Withiam,

themselves

twenty key issues included

of

participants

grouped

very

the

was

letter

the

asked

similar

and

institutions,

The

The

a

topic.

the

experts

the

a

Hospitality Culinary

(Lefever

allowed

opinion

and

opinion

Professionals

sent

explained

letter

the

thirty hospitality

mind

were

methodology

with

in

which

specific

arts

and

rank

curriculum

were

areas

not

or

duplicative. themes

(1)

representing

(5)

environment

July

second

round

review

the

of

ratings

were

were

and

select

to

recorded.

to

the

years

one

broken

compare

to

and

were

and

generated

with

a

list

In

addition

age,

topics,

into

contrast

to

issue,

establish

participant

findings.

first

twenty

the

sent

of

round

the

education.

arts

in the business.

of

were

letter asking them to

rank

culinary

respondents

calculated

out

and

(7)

assessment.

respondents

sixty topics derived from the

specific

training

(9)

22

(4)

skills

communication

preparedness

questionnaire

significance

responses

data

trainer

(6)

food

(3)

service

2000 the thirty

of

questionnaire

order

experience

(8)

expectations

In

technology (2)

Competencies

Arts

Culinary

there

sex,

was

sixty The

included

also

education

and

inquiry

The

two

and

competencies.

ranking.

groups

round

The

separately

in

Mean

results

to

Culinary

CHAPTER

4

Results

Discussion

and

Arts

Competencies

Survey Respondents The

fell

22

hospitality

into

the

professionals

following

who

5

Food Wholesaler

1

Retail

1

Food

Dining

(food Service)

Room

the

survey

categories:

Restaurateurs

Private

completed

1

Caterer

1

Hotelier

1

Educators

Travel

1

Culinary

4

F&B

Of

the

Lodging the

returned

thirty

by

Gender, breakdown

respondents

twenty-two

study,

of

7

Operations

August

completed

8,2000.

This

education

age

and

the

responding

requested

to

participate

questionnaires

represents

identify

population.

the

a

in

were

73.3%

return.

demographic

23

Culinary

Gender

Competencies

Arts

Profile

The

combined

groups

professionals

resulted

participants.

However

educator

and

As

in

shown

educators

(32%)

1,

in

a

the

industry figure

of

educators

50/50

ratio

there

compared

to

were

male

of

ratio

changes

respondents

were

industry

and

to

male

when

slightly

more

educators

female

(23%)

.

industry 18%

male

industry 27%

female educators

32%

1-

Gender

Profile

of

Sample

the

separately.

examined

slightly

female

female

Figure

24

Culinary

Age

them

age

Competencies

Range

The

In

Arts

as

age

groupings

figure

of

Figure

the

of

35,

2-

2

we

Age

20

see

with

respondents

-

that

54%

Range

35

years

95%

of

between the

Profile

of

was

requested

ages

identify

35-45

and

over

45.

surveyed

are

over

the

of, age,

those

to

of

Sample

35

and

45.

25

Culinary

Arts

Competencies

Education

Figure

3

educated

group

degrees,

and

having

shows

the

survey

respondents

with

53%

having

completed

31%

with

advanced

completed

some

post-secondary

continuing

degrees.

to

be

a

highly

undergraduate

The

remaining

professional

or

education.

Continuing

Education

18%

Professional/ Vocational

29%

Undergraduate Graduate

31%

Figure

3

-

Education

Profile

22%

47%

26

Culinary

Years

of

The

that

of

years

responses

91%

in

in

the

survey

were

they had

worked

in

are

the

of

experience

industry

Competencies

charted

educators

hospitality

respondents

in

have

while

having

the

figures

at

a

4

figure

20

5.

and

5

of

industry.

Figure

twenty 100%

shows

years

the

indicate

hospitality

minimum

least

to

asked

4

shows

years

of

the

experience

hospitality.

less

than

ten ten

twenty

-

years

9%

twenty-twenty five

years

55%

Figure

4.

27

Experience

Participants number

Arts

Educators

Industry Experience

in

Culinary

less

than

Arts

Competencies 28

ten

years

ten

twenty

-

years

0%

twenty five

thirty

twenty-

-

years

five

55%

Figure

5.

The

the

In

was

of

45%

Industry

second

less

The

the

held

as

a

important

educator

to

the

round

established

the

Respondents

of

results

competencies

the

twenty

years

first be

round

Experience

questionnaire

to

significant

value

ranking

Work

rating of

for

the

the

importance

respondents.

competencies

and

elimination

competencies.

group

identified the

revealed

top twenty

Arts

Culinary

from the

competencies

1)

.

While

a

other

maturing

problem

education.

development

1.

An

as

as

education

of

Top Twenty

1

2.5

qualified

2

3.66

independent

3

5.14

food safety

4

6.5

technical

faculty

6.75

state

which

Ranked

Competency

6.5

study

skills mentors

the

art

6

7

seasonal

7.14

teamwork

8

8

peer

8

interpersonal

8

maturing

9

8.33

human

10

8.62

problem

8.62

professionalism

8.66

on

skills

foods

interaction skills

resources

the

solving job

experience

9

customer

9

team

9

communication

9

kitchen

13

9.16

critical

14

9.25

student

15

9.33

internship

12

for

at

service

teachers skills

language

thinking

skills

input programs

student

life.

Competencies

7

11

looks

educators

as

of

broad-based

preparation

Rank Mean

5

top twenty issues

more

experience

comprehensive

Educator

a

of

and

mentoring,

the

that

appears

with

peer

educators,

teamwork,

indicative

were

a

qualified

solving, It

processes.

educators

Table

such

highest

in the high ranking

significance

competencies

interaction,

for

is

ranked

29

table

(see

questionnaire

round

strong technical training

there

educators

second

Competencies

Arts

Culinary

The

16

9.4

shared

17

9.5

discipline

18

10

cultural

10

manners

10

staffing health

20

11

international

are

competencies

are

development.

In

such

Table

team

as

2

.

opportunities

to

the

in table 2.

skills.

with

Industry

the

at

employee

ten

retention

The

and

study abroad,

and

top

and

1

2

skilled

2

4

maturing

4

employee

retention

5

flexible

management

5

classical

5

manage

skills

4

5.55

technical

5

6

technology

6

shared

level

cooking

cooks

skills

passions

expectations

6.6

discipline

8

6.83

communications

9

7.33

qualified

10

7.83

food

11

8

front

8

manners

educators

safety line management

to

in

at

opportunities

Ranked

skills

6.5

the

rank

problem

people

6

resource

discipline

Competencies

7

ranked

human

learning

Top Twenty

line

round

competencies

Interpersonal

Participants

Rank Mean

top

non-traditional

teaching,

3

second

basic culinary training

looking

along

responses

represented

management

20

number

group

from

range

flexible

diversity

10.8

questionnaire

choices

passions

19

Industry

Competencies 30

solving.

Competencies

Culinary

8.57

problem

13

8.66

global

14

8.77

teamwork

15

9.16

cultural

16

9.33

service

17

9.45

international

opportunities

18

9.5

broad based

not

9.5

customer

9.5

cross

cultural

10

local

foods

20

the

mean

3

input

of

industry more

to

-

10.3

interpersonal

competency

note

within

skills

top twenty

competencies

is

on

and

the

exposure

language

derived

industry

little

that

segmented

service

top

preparation

basis

occurs

competencies

for

working

addressing in the

development

did

make

the

combined

ranking

3. Combined Educator

and

Industry

Participant

not

of

from the

shared

passions,

when

respondents.

deviation ten

the

Excepting

competencies

twenty

extracurricular

kitchen

educators

ranking

diversity -

team teachers

technical, "useful",

industry.

Table

each

solving

10.3

the

31

experience

10

represents

from both

Interesting

Competencies

12

19

Table

Arts

personal

of

the

top

competencies.

Competencies

Rank

Mean

Competencies

1

3.8

qualified

educators

2

5.69

technical

skills

3

6.13

classical

cooking

techniques

4

6.67

maturing

5

6.75

state

of

industry 6

7.6

the

art

skills

discipline

Expected

Culinary

7

7.8

teamwork

8

7.08

food safety

9

7.44

communications

10

8.33

cultural

11

8.4

work/study

12

8.5

independent

13

8.67

global

14

8.8

faculty

15

8.83

shared

16

9

interpersonal

17

9.07

professionalism

18

9.08

customer

19

9.25

manners

20

9.31

problem

Arts

diversity abroad

study

experience

as

mentors

passions skills

service

solving

Competencies

32

33

Competencies

Arts

Culinary

Discussion

Educator (table

2)

would

industry

3

table

picture

come

from

note

is

to

the

the

age

surveyed

these

statistics

career

in

practice

work

ethic

the

internet.

determines

(employment) It

seem

would

the

needs

Cornell

study

serving the that

the

to

very

a

well

comparing

is

One

in

a

clear

the

means

(Lefever

15

of

age

(prepare

good

view

Interesting 1998)

Withiam,

hospitality

note

it

was

of

the

expected

turn

competencies

it

to

is

the

end

.

as

that

in

noted

for

students

leads

result

generally led

students

expectations

in

the

employees)

to

the

which

a

education

candidate

high

was

changed

that

expectation

enthusiastic

However

as

anticipated

as

that

has

States

a

16

or

consider

also

respondents

&

Clearly

employment

current

United

changes

industry.

of

must

the

/employee.

inclined to begin the

at

to

gap between

generation

prepared

unrealistically

In

of

preparation

employment.

format

of

relative

experience,

the

to

in the

experience

student

less

are

industry

that

years

reflect

not

greater

There

of

years

95%

with

experience

of

potential

culture

with

significantly

point

20

historically.

of

Another

significant

students

apprentice

an

past

the

would

Culinary

background.

The

the

and

is

it

3

and

survey

35.

a

balanced

in this

years

least

at

very

In

material.

more

1,2

a

participants

and

indicate

those

the

a

figures

at

education

over

with

might

trends.

employee

range

participants

91%

good

that

note

age

achieve

looking

diverse

a

business,

of

In

The on

emphasis

an

combined

common

priorities.

for

are

responses

sharing

need

rankings

emerges.

interesting

the

the

when

while

high the

to

training

pragmatic

industry

and

clearly different

are

rates

group

1)

indicate that

seem

there

objectives;

(table

responses

a

seem

to

be

high turnover. perhaps

this

Culinary trend

intensive study it

this

These

where

a

it

identifies

new

is an

is

concern

similar

results

Withiam, 1998 )

their

It

were

The

prove

this

that

is

about

same

disconnect and

preparation

of

a

study

worth

of

business.

the

study

spectrum

as

seen

inclusion. generate

(Papiernik,

R.

,

in

the

note

&

of

felt

there

there

to

to

(Lefever

industry

slated

and

ineffective

to

of

which

literature

ties

one

data

industry

and

similar

closer

was

students.

significant

professionals

sentiment

arts

the

Cornell

to

guide

a

support

very

the

by

of

as

outdated

perhaps

surveyed

2001.)

the

In

demographic

the

to

seem

industry

News

a

more

expectations

for culinary

would

an

Restaurant

is

future

useful

in both

in

surprising billion

to

the

population

need

education.

responses

might

Industry in

their

key

a

employee.

there

for

push

34

students.

produced

which

professionals. students

provide

raised

models.

in

educators

interesting older

future

perhaps

curriculum

population

teaching

that

Management

findings

developing

educator

might

gap

Hospitality

and

to

respondents

the

of

proposed

industry

However,

industry

preparation was

between that

leads

which

Competencies

Arts

that through some

This over

of

not

399

Nation's

out

the

Arts

Culinary

Competencies

35

CHAPTER 5

Conclusions

and

Recommendations

Conclusion

The

purpose

this

of

instructional

objectives

germane

arts

education.

The

culinary

into their On

the

perspective

be

more

with

industry

tradition.

strongly

and

plug

perspective.

for

heavily

more

to

suited

pragmatic

very

human

new

resource

at

sector

Some

of

own

is

The

educators

masters

of

bulk

more

businesses.

in

industry

anticipated

in

recognize

food,

growth

wealth.

rooted

fast

a

knowledge

Perhaps

relationships

manager

industrial

an

of

impact that

the

creating

business

with

enough

cultivating

people.

hospitality industry

education

their

on

technology-based

crunching

arts

experienced

not

astute

hospitality

managers

teamwork

the

unawares

quite

having is

educator

a

about

conversation

a

employees

pushed

like

that

appear

culinary

are

from

the

.

would

the

to

industry

good

educators

technologies

development

ideas

hand

other

It

of

organizations

management

views

development

the

support

determine

to

was

study

of

and

the

or

needs

to

understanding

of

However,

the

it

is

a

hunter-gatherer

that

and

the

number

instant

food

will

Culinary

not

their

sustain

elasticity will

demand

of

augment

mindless

technologies, bigger,

the

faster

industry

sector

this

some

would

see

that

educators

are

still

fact that

confirm

the

teamwork

work

as

a

would

seem

to

confirm

also

international trend

towards

diverse

component

of

the

issue

discussion

concern

informed

with

well

future

health

consumer.

culinarian

as

the

to

genetic

at

This

on

in

place

much

the

the

of

teaching

of

developing

an

importance

fact

within

student's

It

organization.

of

confirming

experiences

or

experience,

which

at

to

exposure

an

the

apparent

the

very be

would

least

a

curriculum.

food safety is

of

about

work

student

member

In

abroad

work

of

The

valued

community.

kind

as

a

that

included in the top twenty

was

literature

current

ability to

the

learn

secure

to

other

unlike

will

money

paradigm.

The

some

always

interesting

and

Not

tasks.

of

amount

no

when

professional

better don't

is very

It

found

repetitive

culinary

or

market.

be

will

36

The

bottom line.

the

to

contribution

Competencies

Arts

and

all

germane

existing levels

places

benchmarks

a

manipulation

markets.

has

food

issues

as

industry

an

The

led the way

serious

hygene,

to many

challenge

and

drug

yet

not

apparent

to

an

before

standards

apparent.

Culinary The

subject

assigned

So

educators.

competencies

were

too

the

at

other

was

development to

than

it

opposite

intangible issues

the more

see

curriculum

any significance

qualified

we

of

Competencies

Arts

not

was

to

interesting the

of

end

as

such

clearly

value

place

37

on

see

which

There

spectrum.

and

personal

development.

professional

Recommendations

A

slightly different

if there

and

the

such

is

Another

of

did

be

confirm

of

most

that

qualified

of

would

arts

revealed

discussion

the

the

expectation

professionals

who

are

Further

be done to

I

see

competencies

would

how

here.

recommend

they

measure

that

a

see

economy

students

in

a

the

the

review

training

of

Perhaps

given

teaching.

study

against

at

respondents

contrary.

and

the

look

significant

However

to

doing

a

The

were

gap between

a

to

culinary

take

to

program.

literature

culinary

be

educators

arts

is

arts

culinary

educators.

culinary

there

side

supply

fraternal

a

of

a

undertaken

valuable.

recommendation

training culinary

component

the

input

The

would

organizations

area

disinterest

increasing

be

might

between

correlation

any

lifestyle.

a

inquiry

the

of

curriculums

top twenty

to

Culinary

Lastly

a

gathering

more

educators

and

Competencies

Arts

study using the interview format

in-depth data

industry

specific

personnel.

to

the

as

a

tool

expectations

38

for

of

Arts

Culinary

Competencies

39

BIBLIOGRAPHY

R.

Allen, foodservice a

job.

L.

(1999,

industry

NATIONS

March

offers

15).

RESTAURANT NEWS,

Berberoglu,

H.

From

students

p.

a

Bosselman, In

Hospitality NY:

Press

C.W.&

path,

just

restaurateur

Polytechnical

life

academic

of

hospitality

Bosselman

R.H.

&

(Ed.), Binghamton, 131-148)

(pp.

education

Hospitality

Barrows,

The

(1999) Barrows

management

Hayworth

management

W.

the

of

.

R.H.

C.

end, not

35.

The world (1978) (Unpublished Masters Thesis) , Ryerson Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

educators.

to

beginning

career

.

Press.

Bosselman, R.H., Ed. (1999). Hospitality Binghamton, NY: Hayworth Hospitality

education.

.

(1990).

J.T.

Canterino,

Necessary competencies and learning experiences for hospitality educators: a delphi study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University,

IA.

Ames,

Foucar-Szocki,

hospitality &

R.H.

(pp.

Hospitality Keyes,

Bosselman

131-148)

.

(1999).

E.W.

in

Journal

of

Linking In

C.

W.

in

characteristics

an

(Unpublished Masters

Technology,

of

M.

&

,

Rochester

J.,

La

Changes

New

Thesis) York,

Hong

Sovereignty Travel

,

Kong's

from

Research,

Curriculum

education.

M.

J.

Lopa, in

(1998).

G.

Withiam,

industry views hospitality 39_(4), 70-78.

Change

industry.

Leadership

how

Predicting

(1999)

,

NY.

Lefever,

Lloyd,

C.

to

(Ed.), Hospitality management Binghamton, NY: Hayworth

transformation.

Institute

Rochester,

Bolsing,

Press.

organizational

Rochester

&

programs

management

education

Barrows

R.

38,

and

CORNELL

QUARTERLY,

Braunlich,

Hotel

Britain

405-410.

Industry

to

China

review:

C.

(2000).

Given

in

the

1997.

Culinary

National

hoteliers

Real

mull

Estate

Ed.)

Sales

,

Restaurant News

Schultz,

H.

Pour

USA New York:

Hyperion.

Simpson,

&

for

competencies

study using the delphi 18, 133-146. A.

Stutts,

T.

(1999, July) RESTAURANT HOSPITALITY 83, p. 16. VanGundy,

A.B.

Problem Solving.

Walle,

A.

hospitality: IN

39,

H.

New

(1981) York.

(1996)

mating

.

The

.

Van

G.

(1999).

Two

Yang,

national

a

HIGHER

EDUCATION,

leadership.

service

of

Structured

Nostrand Reinhold.

education

and

scholarly HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM RESEARCH, p. 213.

Withiam, (4) p. 80.

(D.J.

Validating teaching

Techniques

Graduate

relevance

it

assistants:

Seeking

.

$399B.

hit

heart into

INNOVATIVE

method.

Top

102-107.

to

(1993).

teaching

graduate

.

40

1.

your

K.S.

Smith,

pp.

expected

35 no.l,

(1997).

R.D.

(1998, August)

industry's future,

over

Papiernik,R. (2001) Nation's

Investor.

Competencies

Arts

surprises.

and rigor.

CORNELL

ADVANCES

QUARTERLY

Culinary

Arts

Competencies

41

APPENDIX Letter

Introduction to Questionnaire One

of

May 5, 2000

Dear

:

The

attached questionnaire represents an

inquiry on my

behalf to

answer some

the culinary arts and education for my Rochester Institute Graduate key Project. In summary, my thesis is that there are specific competencies required of the questions about

culinary

arts student.

Student to join the me

Competencies

hospitality

work

represent acquired skills that

force. Research

and a prior

successfully prepare a Cornell study have given

the basis from which to focus in on the culinary arts education.

My request is questionnaire

attached,

24 hours. This e-mail)

and a

will

you

involved

that

present or past

for

be

a

Thank

education or

two-phase and

process.

ranking

you

for supporting this

Thomas Smyth

City Technical

College

Management Department

Hospitality 300 Jay Street

Brooklyn, New York 1 1201 Cunychef@,aol.com 716-292-4488

competencies.

it to my

attention via

A summary

of the

(Rochester)

720-222-0970 FAX

hospitality

Then FAX

review

top twenty

project and myself.

sector

the

or e-mail within

of phase one results

two.

Sincerely,

New York

training

complete and return

brief selection

constitute phase

to reflect on your own experience in the

(via

mail or

at your convenience will

Culinary

Questionnaire

Arts

Competencies

42

one

Survey of opinion of Hospitality Industry Professionals and Hospitality Culinary Educators Cornell (based on Study August

1998

What

the

are

Ways that

Curriculum Review)

key

issues in the

industry

hospitality education

The greatest strength(s) program is (are)

of a

sector

can prepare

culinary

(are) the greatest weakness (es) hospitality program?

What do

What

How

hospitality

could

hospitality faculty

relevant

is the typical

How important

are

What is the ideal

If

you were

educators

do

hospitality

graduating from

culinary

student

a

be:

hospitality

graduating from

improve?

curriculum

opportunities

student work or

Hospitality Czar,

of a

graduates would

right?

members

international

culinary

student

What is

today?

internship

what would

be

to culinary

for

industry

students?

requirement?

your

first

action?

needs?

a

Culinary letter for Questionnaire 2

Cover

August

Dear

RE:

Competencies 43

Arts

2000

6,

Colleague: Smyth

Thesis

-

Project

Questionnaire Thank

you

again

for

RIT

2

this

survey.

Your

responses

been

grouped

into

categories,

They

common.

topics

included

be

to

expect

are

in

the

taking

and

to

the which

issues,

and/or

time

to

first

questionnaire

hold

elements

which

covered

by

in

participate

your

have

in

colleagues

culinary

arts

education

in

an

academic

Please

key most

setting.

review

these

items

issues

and arts

regarding culinary important and 20 the least)

Thank

again

you

for

your

cooperation

Sincerely,

Thomas

J.

New

York

300

Jay

Smyth Technical

City

College

Street

Brooklyn,

New

Cunychef @aol

.

York

NY

11201

com

716-292-4488

(Rochester)

720-222-0970

FAX

select

rank

and

curriculum.

in

(1

this

twenty

being study.

the

Culinary

Arts

Competencies

Questionnaire 2 Select

and rank twenty key issues regarding culinary arts being the most important 20 being the least important) global experience technology

curriculum

(1

technical skills the art

state of skilled

industry skills

line level

classical

cooks

cross cultural exposure

expectations

internship

staffing real life experience

programs

cooking techniques

customer service

industry familiar links to industry

manage people

front line flexible

management experience

management

human resources peer

interaction

industry experience cultural diversity

nutrition

assessment

environmental awareness

communication skills

student

foods

the job experience

broad based

-

not segmented

input

interpersonal

hands

on operations

employee retention

intercultural experience

local foods

on

real world applications

food safety health

seasonal

internet business to business

international opportunities

of work experiences

survey

career path workweek

issues ( HOURS)

palate

skills

kitchen language teamwork

qualified educators

problem

team teachers

critical

shared passions

independent study

faculty

solving

thinking

skills

as mentors

professionalism

discipline professional

development

maturing manners service-

extracurricular

manage

profitability

outcomes assessment

Please

check one:

Total Years in

Age Range

Education

20-35

Professional/Vocational

less than ten

and

Training

35-45

Undergraduate

ten

45-65

Graduate

twenty

Male

Continuing

Education

-

Hospitality Sector

years

twenty years -

twenty-five years

twenty five thirty years -

44