Search results

This study aims to develop an educational tourism demand model, particularly in respect to dynamic effects, university quality (QU) and competitor countries. Educational tourism has been identified as a new tourism sub-sector with high potential, and is thus expected to boost economic growth and sustainability.

This study reviews the literature on the determinants of educational tourism demand. Even though the existing literature is intensively discussed, mostly focusing on the educational tourism demand from an individual consumer's perspective, this study makes an innovation in line with the aggregate demand view. The study uses data that consist of the enrolment of international students from 47 home countries who studied in Malaysia from 2008 to 2017. The study utilised the dynamic panel method of analysis.

This study affirms that income per capita, educational tourism price, price of competitor countries and quality of universities based on accredited programmes and world university ranking are the determinants of educational tourism demand in both the short and the long term. Also, a dynamic effect exists in educational tourism demand.

The results imply that government should take the quality of services for existing students, price decisions and QU into account to promote the country as a tertiary education hub and achieve sustainable development.

Research on the determinants of the demand for educational tourism is rare in terms of macro data, and this study includes the roles of QU, competitor countries and dynamic effects.

This uses quantitative and qualitative methods in assessing performance and process outcomes in a team lecture hybrid (TLH) instructional design applied in a public affairs course.

Within a non-experimental prospective design, individual and team outcomes were assessed as follows: survey of student perceptions of learning outcomes; comparison of individual and group scores on in-class case analyses using paired t-tests; external reviewers' observations of traditional lecture versus TLH activities; and analysis of students' reflections on team dynamics using a team process reflection tool adapted from four team development stages.

The following student learning outcomes results were observed: increased use of critical thinking; higher student interaction with other students and the instructor; higher student engagement in initiating or contributing to content or other learning activities; higher student enthusiasm; increased use of problem-solving skills; improved performance evidenced by quality of individual versus group products; evidence suggesting improvements in student learning outcomes when active learners and an active instructor interact in a learning environment.

Instructor practice tips were provided in the following areas: use of assessment methods; student engagement as an active instructor; motivational tips for classes with students from a variety of disciplines; and individual team member accountability.

This paper contributes to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL) by addressing limitations in both traditional and collaborative learning models and expanding holistic evaluations in SOTL.