Some basic points on Valachis’s article
Essential competencies for a hospitality management career: the role of hospitality management education by Ioannis Valachis is considered to be the article of the current analysis. The basic theme the author investigates in his work is the importance of hospitality management education. Generally, Valachis’ primary goal is to investigate whether competencies of the hospitality industry differ from the competencies of the educational organisations or no. The country of the current analysis is Greece. The author specifies that the Hellenic Republic can be regarded as the most appropriate place, which hospitality management education systems are properly developed. Thus, it becomes evident that Valachis considers hospitality management education as extremely important variable the success of travel business depends upon.
The most important components of the article, which should be critically analysed include the abstract, the introduction, the methodology, conclusions and recommendations. Some additional variables of the analysis involve a sense of objectivity, the author’s writing style and the summary of the major parts.
A critical evaluation of Ioannis Valachis’ article: the author’s arguments
When reading the introduction, one can probably notice that according to the author, coming up to a wide range of expectations of tourism is the key goal hospitality management education is to promote (Valachis 2). The abstract of the current article reflects the same idea; therefore, one can suppose that the author’s further arguments are to be consistent. Generally, at first sight, it seems that Valachis’s arguments are developed in a proper way: thus, the author provides readers with certain reliable data, which cannot be questioned. However, a deeper analysis of the author’s reasoning gives me an opportunity to conclude that Valachis is afraid of expressing his own opinion. As far as he relies on other researchers’ arguments all over (the author provides readers with opinions of such researchers as Fitzgerald and Cullen, Bell and Weitman, Goodman and Sprague Umbreit, Ross, Enz, Renaghan, and Geller, Baum and Nickson, Okeiyi, Finley and Postel, etc.), it becomes obvious that he does not confirm his own viewpoints with certain reliable data but just enumerates well-known facts. Moreover, the relation between the claim and the evidence Valachis introduces in his article is not strengthened; one can notice that the evidence is not integrated with the author’s own ideas, so, the use of most of the quotations can be regarded as ineffective (“Writing” par. 12).
In other words, the author’s article is devoid of newness. His every sentence is considered to be a fixed statement, which cannot be critically analysed, as it reflects the conclusions of other authors. That is to say, Valachis failed in his own judgment. The author’s inability to formulate hypotheses as well as prove or reject them means that readers are also unable to trace back the author’s ideas coherence. It is obvious that the article contains no subjective reasoning or at least some of the author’s personal suppositions. Objective assumptions are present; although they belong to other authors. For instance, Valachis states that according to Goodman and Sprague “hospitality management students need to receive basic knowledge in business principles, a liberal-arts education for general development and a semi-technical knowledge in addition to an application of business principles through the hospitality establishments” (66-69). In my opinion, the conclusion should be made by the author himself, as independent opinion can help readers understand the problem in detail. In other words, I can make a conclusion that when seeking evidence, Valachis went too far. The total number of sentences the introduction includes is 57. 45 sentences reflect certain conclusions, assumptions, and investigations of other authors, who were also interested in the similar problem (competencies for a hospitality management career, hospitality management human resources, the human resources available skills for the hospitality industry, the particular needs of the industry, etc.).
The author’s depiction of research methodologies
The methodology of the research the author describes in his work includes e-mail contact method. Generally, the part of the article seems to be well-developed as compared with the introduction, because Valachis also draws readers’ attention to a variety of limitations of the research. This observation is considered to be of particular concern, as the author’s analysis of the pros and cons of the chosen research methodology helps form readers’ general attitude to the article.
The way Valachis depicts the case study findings is rather stringent. The findings correspond to the general goal of the research and therefore, give readers an opportunity to comprehend how the primary values of hospitality management education affect the success of the hospitality industry. Despite the fact that a wide range of statistical data shows the author’s deep interest in the research; figures extravagances make the process of reading more complicated.
The evidence this part of the article includes is considered to be sufficient to support the arguments of the introduction. Thus, there are other authors’ conclusions Valachis provides readers with, which correspond to the case study findings. No errors in the author’s logic were found out. The arguments of the part of the article are convincing: the author represents not only theoretical knowledge development but also depicts experiential evidence.
So, keeping in mind the introduction and the research, one can conclude that the first part contains more weaknesses; while the second one is based on more strengths. This can be probably explained by different requirements different parts of the article are to satisfy. Valachis failed in the introductions but succeeded in conclusions and recommendations.
Some general observations on the article
The author’s writing style is recognised to be clear and comprehensive; although it does not address smoothness of expression because of a variety of other authors’ opinions. Summary sections Valachis introduces are considered to be quite effective, as the author provides readers with detailed descriptions of important conclusions. Despite the fact that Valachis relies on other researchers’ viewpoints all over, his conclusions of the major parts of the article can be regarded as independently developed.
The author spells out each word; as far as there are no contractions, one can conclude that the requirements for formal academic writing are met.
To provide a sense of objectivity, Valachis uses the third person. He minimises personal pronouns, which is important to emphasise the formal style of the article.
Additional materials the author uses help readers to become familiar with numerous details of the current investigation. Thus, the variables of the figure on theoretical knowledge development are important to understand certain statistical data.
Conclusion
Essential competencies for a hospitality management career: the role of hospitality management education by Ioannis Valachis is the article of critical evaluation. The current analysis allowed making the following conclusions:
- The author’s abstract is well-developed; it is accurate, specific and readable. In spite of the fact that it exceeds the accepted word count: it includes 230 words; although the range should vary from 75 to 150 words, the summary of the contents is recognised to be appropriate.
- The author’s introduction is considered to be of poor quality, as there are no descriptions of the problem and intended research methods. The author starts his introduction with a representation of certain facts, assumptions and conclusions which belong to other researchers; in other words, it seems the work is devoid of originality. The introduction does not leave readers with a precise understanding of what should be done and for what reason. The review of literature the introduction includes does not satisfy the required standards, as the author uses “references with only tangential or general significance” (“Guidelines for Academic Papers” 20), relevant methodological issues, in turn, are not highlighted. Valais does not comment on other author’s opinions, and therefore, it is unclear whether he agrees or disagrees with them. While “the way of presenting the information and arguing it does not differ from that of others” (“Academic Integrity at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology: A Handbook for Students” 3), it becomes evident that no new dimensions to the discussion are present. Thus, the information cannot be regarded as valuable.
- The author’s descriptions of the methodology are well-structured, as the contribution of the project, its limitations and preliminary assessment results are taken into consideration.
The author’s general conclusions and recommendations provide readers with a clear impression of what further steps are to be followed in order to improve the situation with the hospitality industry. Finally, the article leaves a positive impression and demonstrates the author’s great interest in the subject of discussion.
Works Cited:
“Academic Integrity at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology: A Handbook for Students.” Mit.edu. 2011. Web.
Goodman, Raymond and Linda Sprague. “The Future of Hospitality Education: Meeting Industry’s Needs.” The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 32.2 (1991):66-69.
“Guidelines for Academic Papers.” Regis.edu. 2010. Web.
Valachis, Ioannis. “Essential Competencies for a Hospitality Management Career: the Role of Hospitality Management Education.” University of Strathclyde. n.d. Web.
“Writing.” Indiana University. 2010. Web.