Nestlé Library
Hospitality Programs
Most of the article links appearing on the Hospitality Rankings web site are restricted to the Cornell community. See Using Library Resources Off-Campus for more information.
1) "An Analysis of Institutional Contributors to Three Major Academic Tourism Journals: 1992-2001". Jogaratnam, G., K. Chon, K. McCleary, M. Mena and J. Yoo.; Tourism Management. Vol. 26, Iss. 5. Oct, 2005. p. 641.
The purpose of this research is to replicate an earlier study that analyzed tourism research contributions during the decade of the 1980s (Sheldon, 1991) using a time frame of 1992-2001, the most recent ten-year period for which complete publication information was available. The three refereed travel and tourism journals, Annals of Tourism Research, Journal of Travel Research, and Tourism Management were the focus of analysis. The results of a productivity analysis pertaining to author affiliation, repeat authorship, and research contributions from different regions of the world are presented. There has been considerable movement in the ranking of employing institutions when compared to the decade of the 1980s as well as significant change in contributions from different regions of the world.
2) "Considering Specializations: An Alternative for Ranking Hospitality and Tourism Graduate Programs". Hu, C., S. Jang and B. Bai.; Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education. Vol. 16, Iss. 3. 2004. p. 18.
The rapid growth of the hospitality and tourism education has intensified a competition among national and international academic programs. Stakeholders in this competitive environment often seek benchmark information for their decisions to participate in the education system. Program/school rankings serve this purpose. However, the most popular and cited sources on such rankings as reported by Business Week and US News & World Report have not recognized hospitality and tourism disciplines in their annual ranking reports. Although some measures have been developed by academic researchers to assess the hospitality and tourism schools/programs, the results have raised much controversy. This paper suggests a need for better ranking systems and attempts to make further contributions in the context of the hospitality and tourism education. The purposes of this study were to (1) review past efforts of school ranking, (2) recommend an alternative approach to rank hospitality and tourism graduate programs by specializations, and (3) explore and suggest meaningful categories of ranking criteria for more effective ranking studies in the future.
(Paper copy only. Periodical room or stacks TX911.5 .H658).
3) "School Rankings Rankle Educators, Leave Hoteliers Wondering". Marshall, A.; Hotel and Motel Management. Vol. 217, Iss. 16. Sep 16, 2002. p. 10.
Comments on the reaction of school officials to the rankings of U.S. hospitality undergraduate programs. List of school rankings; impact of the choice of schools for recruiting; learnings from the international conference for the Council on Hotel, Restaurant, and Institutional Education.
4) "Ranking Of U.S. Hospitality Undergraduate Programs: 2000-2001". Brizek, M.G. and M.A. Khan.; Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education. Vol. 14, Iss. 2. 2002. p. 4.
Within the field of hospitality education, administrators and educators have been searching for and debating a means to compare their own resources and capabilities with those of their fellow peers. Previous research focused on the perception of individual hospitality programs. This study surveyed over 121 four-year hospitality institutions with a response rate of 39.7% in order to quantitatively rank programs based on five main criteria including curriculum, faculty, the student body, resources, and alumni/funding contributions. Results were measured using a predetermined quality point scale and the top 25 undergraduate hospitality programs were ranked according to their overall cumulative score.
(Paper copy only. Periodical room or stacks TX911.5 .H658).
5) "Exploring Hospitality Program Rankings". Gould, S.L. and D.C. Bojanic.; Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education. Vol. 14, Iss. 4. 2002. p. 24.
An increasing number of people in both the public and private sector are demanding that institutions of higher education ought to be held to higher levels of accountability and delivery of services. One of the most popular tools used to meet these demands has been the ranking of academic programs. This study explored the ranking of undergraduate hospitality programs as perceived by industry recruiters. The implications of utilizing rankings as decision-making tools were also researched. Based on the data gathered by surveying more than 100 hospitality industry recruiters, there are clear indications that program rankings would be more beneficial if used as ratings, not rankings, and tailored more to specific attributes of the program being rated. Other studies have demonstrated that results may vary by respondent. Future research should be conducted which tests the "ratings" approach with other industry stakeholders (e.g. academics, hospitality executives, etc.).
(Paper copy only. Periodical room or stacks TX911.5 .H658).
6) "Hospitality Program Rankings Revisited". Withiam, G.; Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. Vol. 38, Iss. 4. Aug, 1997. p. 13.
In December 1993, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly published the results of a survey of hospitality educators and industry executives in which the respondents were asked to subjectively rank the quality of the nation's hospitality programs. An updated listing is presented.
7) "Colleges' Hospitality Programs: Perceived Quality". Kent, W.E., K. Lian, M.A. Khan and Anene, J. O., Jr.; Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. Vol. 34, Iss. 6. Dec, 1993. p. 90.
The perceptions of deans, directors, and heads of hospitality programs and randomly selected hotel- and restaurant-company presidents and vice presidents concerning hospitality schools were examined and used to rank bachelor's, master's, and doctoral programs in the U.S. A reputational ranking was established by asking educators to complete a questionnaire about their own programs including the age and size of the program, the size of the institution, the size of the faculty, the areas of specialization offered, and the quality of the departmental facilities. They were then asked to list the top 10 bachelor's programs, the top five master's programs, and the top three doctoral programs. The hotel and restaurant executives were asked to rank schools on academic excellence, ability to produce effective hospitality executives and consultants, and the ability to produce top leaders in the industry. Industry executives were found to favor the old, traditional schools, while hospitality faculty members were more likely to aware of recent innovations or initiatives made by a particular program.