Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

ISSN 1990-9233
© IDOSI Publications, 2014
DOI: 10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2014.21.06.21570

Hospitality Student’s Industrial Training: Prevailing Practice

1
Hardaman Singh Bhinder and 2Anil Chandhok

1
Hospitality and Hotel Management Punjabi University, Patiala, India
2
M.M. University Mullana, India

Abstract: This research is an attempt to examine the prevailing practice of Industrial training practices among
various academic institutions in the region of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh. There are several human
resource problems that plague the tourism sector including low wages, high demand for staff flexibility, high
staff turnover and skill shortages. There is even a mismatch of tourism education with industry requirements,
as a result of which qualifications from the tourism sector are much appreciated by other fields and
qualifications from other sectors are useful for tourism. The first interaction of a hospitality management student
with the industry happens during the industrial training phase. This is the time when a student makes the
choice of whether the hotel is truly his/her calling or not. Majority of the properties do not have an organised,
monitored and measured training program rolled out. Things are left to chance and the mercy of circumstances
and people. While there is no perfect industrial training model for all hospitality education programs, quality
field experiences should reflect the program’s objectives within the parameters of the program, on the principle
that in order to implement a successful training program there should be a commitment from all the parties
involved - the university, the industry and the student. Based on the data analysis it was found that there is
no uniform practice of training exist among Universities in terms of time and Duration. A well- planned industrial
training program jointly developed by industry representatives, faculty members and students can maximize
the potential to successfully prepare high quality hospitality management graduates for the workplace.

Key words: The region of Punjab Interaction of a hospitality management Graduates for the workplace

INTRODUCTION tourism industry (WTTC, 2007) thus increasing the need

Hotel Industry: India has tremendous potential to become
a major global tourist destination and the tourism industry
is exploiting this potential. Tourism industry’s
contribution to Indian economy is immense. Travel and
tourism industry is already a large contributor to foreign
exchange earnings for India. The Ministry of Tourism is
the nodal agency for the development and promotion of
tourism in India. It has carried out the successful
"Incredible India" campaign Tourism industry provides
employment to millions of people in India both directly
and indirectly through its linkage with other sectors of the
economy. India is expected to grow at a rate of 8%, on an
average, in the next 10 years5. More than 700 million
Indians are estimated to be of working age by 2022. Out of
these, more than 500 million require some kind of
vocational or skill development training It is forecast that
by 2017, there will be a total of 262.6 million jobs in the
for more workers. However, there seems to be an
increasing imbalance between the global demand for and
supply of tourism workers due to a lack of response from
the labour market, particularly the school leavers and
university graduates (Choy, 1995). According to the
Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report 2011 by the
World Economic Forum, India is currently ranked 12th in
the Asia Pacific region and 68th overall in the list of the
world's attractive destinations. As per consulting firm
Cygnus’s report, by 2015 the Indian hotel industry is
expected to reach Rs 230 billion, growing at a robust
CAGR of 12.2 percent. Statistics also show that the total
number of hotel rooms in India will reach more than
180,000 within five years. Around 40 international brands
are all set to foray into the lucrative and promising Indian
hospitality segment (voyagers world). The year 2010/11
was a period of consolidation for the Indian hotel industry
however, 2010/11 witnessed slow but marginally improved

Corresponding Author: Hardaman Singh Bhinder, Hospitality and Hotel Management Punjabi University, Patiala, India.

879
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014
performance levels for the industry with overall
occupancies growing from a nationwide average of 59.9%
to 62.1% (FHRAI).
Human Resource Management: There are several human
resource problems that plague the tourism sector
including low wages, high demand for staff flexibility,
high staff turnover and skill shortages. There is even a
mismatch of tourism education with industry
requirements, as a result of which qualifications from the
tourism sector are much appreciated by other fields and
qualifications from other sectors are useful for tourism.
Many qualified employees leave the sector and many
trained tourism school graduates do not enter the sector,
leading to a sheer waste of resources and skills.
Numerous institutions have sprung up purporting to offer
courses at various levels in travel, tourism, catering, hotel
and institutional management across the country.
However, most of them lack basic training facilities and
not meet acceptable standards [1]. They spew out
graduates whose knowledge is questionable as there is
no centralized examination or certification. Training
curricula are often ill adapted to market demand and even
less to modern, diversified skills and training
methodologies; instructors may be few, ill-adapted and
ill-motivated, lack technical knowledge and expertise
in trainee counselling and in orienting training to
self-employment or market demand. In the face of such
expansion, questions have often been raised about the
level, scope and quality of tourism training and education
in the country. Thus there is a need to come up with a
uniform curriculum that is not only acceptable to all the
industry participants, but which is also competitive both
locally and internationally. The situation today is that just
like the industry itself still does not have a clear and
adequate operational framework, the training is largely
carried out in a haphazard and uncoordinated manner
Research Problem in Context: The first interaction of a
hospitality management student with the industry
happens during the industrial training phase. This is the
time when a student makes the choice of whether the
hotel is truly his/her calling or not. Majority of the
properties do not have an organised, monitored and
measured training program rolled out. Things are left to
chance and the mercy of circumstances and people. The
hospitality industry has to mature, learn to be responsible
and accountable for its human asset. There is a lot of
room for improvement and need for introspection.” There
has also been a growing noise about industrial trainees
880
being mistreated and underpaid. For many years,
hospitality programs have attempted to be prescriptive in
their efforts to find a common model for the industrial
training component of hospitality education. The success
of any course lies on its course curriculum and contents.
The changes in the hospitality industry are very fast and
the curriculum needs to be in accordance with the needs
of the industry. Unfortunately hospitality syllabus is not
uniform throughout the country. Lots of importance
needs to be placed on task based and management based
subjects. While there is no perfect industrial training
model for all hospitality education programs, quality field
experiences should reflect the program’s objectives within
the parameters of the program, on the principle that in
order to implement a successful training program there
should be a commitment from all the parties involved - the
university, the industry and the student. This study will
explore the current opinions of the industrial training
contribution towards employability in hotel industry from
the triangular partnership between education providers,
students and industry in order to understand student’s
career commitment after industrial training experiences.
When all three groups of stakeholders communicate the
aspects that they value most in an industrial training
experience and the goals that they wish to achieve, each
group can better understand the other
There are differences in the industrial training from
academic program to academic program.
The industrial training in the course curriculum of
Hotel management course is widely recognized beneficial
to all the stakeholders concerned. Students benefited by
working in the real life situation which cannot be created
in the classrooms where as industry professional could
identify potential employers by evaluating the
performances of the trainee’s.The academic institutions
by incorporating the industrial training in their course
curriculum leads to strengthen the employability skills of
the students provided it should be a win -win situation to
all concerned. However when stakeholders reveal their
perceptions of key factors of training experiences,
different aspects might exist which often leads to
challenge to all stakeholders involved in the training
process. When all groups of stakeholders communicate
the aspects that they value most in an industrial training
experience and the goals that they wish to achieve, each
group can better understand the other. Unfortunately,
little research on topic has been performed. Present
research is an attempt to find the contribution of training
towards employability by considering all aspects of
training such as right time and duration of training,
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014
outcomes as perceived important, training experience and
its effects on carrier commitment and framing strategies to
make it a win -win situation to all stakeholders concerned.
The first interaction of a hospitality management student
with the industry happens during the industrial training
phase. This is the time when a student makes the choice
of whether the hotel is truly his/her calling or not.
Majority of the properties do not have an organised,
monitored and measured training program rolled out.
Things are left to chance and the mercy of circumstances
and people. While there is no perfect industrial training
model for all hospitality education programs, quality field
experiences should reflect the program’s objectives within
the parameters of the program, on the principle that in
order to implement a successful training program there
should be a commitment from all the parties involved - the
university, the industry and the student. When all three
groups of stakeholders communicate the aspects that
they value most in an industrial training experience and
the goals that they wish to achieve, each group can better
understand the other
The Research Objective:
1: To examine the prevailing practice of industrial training
component in the course curriculum of various hotel
management institutions.
Ho: There are no significant differences in the practice of
industrial training component in the course curriculum of
various Hotel management institutions.
Limitation:
The present study is the self report nature of the
survey design. A response for each survey was
gathered under the assumptions that the individuals
were honestly reporting true information and
opinions.
The study was further limited to the data collected
through the utilization of the quantitative survey
questionnaire
Review of Literature: Most students in previous studies
felt confused on who should arrange the internships [2].
Asked who should be responsible for arranging their
internship placement, the majority of interns feel faculty
should work for their placement [3-4]. Previous research
studies also show that internship periods were too shot
and the majority of interns think that the most appropriate
881
internship period should be six months [5], Mihail, 2006).
Mihail (2006) also found in his study that most of the
interns preferred to have internship periods ranging from
six to nine months instead of three months. This indicated
that interns are willing to have a longer internship period
and believe that they can learn more within a six month
period. [5] remarks that the short amount of time an
internship lasts really never lets the student become a
fully functional employee because there is not so much to
take in for them. In their study of hospitality internships,
[6] expounded views of the industry and concluded that
more internship hours, better coordination and more
documentation in terms of both written and oral reporting
were needed. [7] conducted a study among 113 students
at Bilkent University’s School of Tourism and Hotel
Management in Turkey and suggested holding
orientation for students before undertaking their
placement, having a professional control system to
monitor the industrial training experience, holding mid-
term intern review to gauge the progress and reviewing
the grading system to emphasize the importance of
placement. [8-10] considered internship programmes as
unstructured and poorly organized and found that
students generally complain about the quality; and it
appears that many hospitality students, through exposure
to the subject and industry, become considerably less
interested in selecting hospitality as their career of first
choice. [11] stated “the relative endorsement of these
experiential factors supports the practice of exposing
students to career exploration activities (e.g. job
shadowing, internships, realistic job previews) that enable
them to clarify their interests, values and skills in relation
to particular occupational fields and work tasks”. [9]
conducted a study among students from four hospitality
schools and colleges in Hong Kong with a total of 307
usable questionnaires. The study found that all the
student perception scores about internship were lower
than expectation scores, implying that there is quality
shortfall in internship. The study made the point that
schools should involve students and employers to
participate in the planning stage by inviting them to sit in
meetings before consolidating a training programme for
students; and schools should collect information about
needs and interests of students as well as employers. Cho
(2006) conducted a study among students from seven
colleges in Korea and 285 completed surveys were
collected. The study concluded that there was a
significant level of discrepancy between satisfaction and
expectations indicating that expectations were not fully
met. The respondents were not satisfied with the quality
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

of the internship. [12] the students mentioned that often the region of Punjab,15 %(n=23) were from Haryana and
their opinions are not accepted by either the industry 35.5 %(n=35) were from Chandigarh city. Majority of them
mentors or academic instructors. They would like to know were from Punjab due to the fact that number of
about handling stress and felt they themselves should be institutions offering Hospitality courses are more in
open-minded, ask questions and express themselves. Punjab in comparison to Haryana and Chandigarh.
Through having to work shifts and long hours, they
discovered the true nature of a demanding and N=150
Faculty Members -------------------------------------------------------------
time-consuming workplace and that the real world is Region Punjab Haryana Chandigarh
different to what they had anticipated and far less Frequency 74 23 53
glamorous. Despite these harsh realities of the industry, % 49.5 15 35.5
the majority were of the opinion that the work-integrated
learning period had been a rewarding experience.

Survey Participants: The instrument was distributed

among 150 hospitality management faculty members
working in various academic institutions at designation
such as Principal, H.OD, Sr.Lecturer, Lecturer and
instructors in the region of Punjab, Haryana and
Chandigarh.

Variables: For the hospitality management faculty, the

independent variables included: designation, experience
and gender. The dependent variables included the
remaining variables which addressed structure of training
and its experiences
Demographic Descriptive Statistics
Faculty Members: This includes region, institution type,
experience and designation.
Region: Faculty members approached for survey were
working in different type of academic institutions, out of
total 49.5 %(n=74) were associated in the institutions in
Institution Type: Respondents comprises from different
Universities and affiliated colleges/institution in the
chosen area of the study.Out of total 48%(n=72) faculty
members were from State Universities, 9 % (n=13) were
from Deemed University, 22%(n=33) were from Private
Universities, 18 % (n=27) were from National Council
Hotel Management Institutions and remaining 3% (n=5)
from Central University.

N=150
Faculty Members --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institution Type State University Deemed University Private University National Council Central University
Frequency 72 13 33 27 5
% 48 9 22 18 3

(1=State,2=Deemed,3=Private,4=National Council,5=Central )

882
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

Experience: Further break up in terms of Experience wise, Duration: The Faculty members were asked about details
out of total 35 % (n=52)faculty members were having regarding the industrial training component in the course
experience in the range of 0-5 years, similarly 35% curriculum.The reason behind for asking only the faculty
(n=53)were in the range of 6-10 years,followed by 23%(34) members for collecting information about the prevailing
were in the range of 11-15 years and remaining 7%(11) practice of training due to fact that they are the one who
falls above 15 years. are following the guidelines as per their curriculum and
considered to more accurate and reliable in providing the
N=150 desired information,instead of asking the pre students
Faculty Members ------------------------------------------------------------------ who might not be aware about when and for how many
Experience 0-5 yrs 6-10 yrs 11-15 yrs Above 15 yrs
duration they are supposed to go for the industrial
Frequency 52 53 34 11
% 35 35 23 7 training in the course curriculum and where as the
industry professionals are absorbing students of various
institutions and might not be able to provide the accurate
information.Moreover the information provided by the
faculty members have been verified and cross checked
with the copy of syllabus.
Faculty members were asked for how many times
students go for Industrial training in the course
curriculum. For this question two options were given in
the instrument to select by the faculty members that is
once or twice Out of total responses, 84%(n=124)
institution stated that once students go for training in the
course curriculum and 16 %(n=24) institution revealed
that they have two time practice of industrial training
Designation: Faculty members were falls in different component in their course curriculum. Out of 16 % of two
designation levels, out of total 7.3% (n=11) were the time training practice, it is observed only 10 %(n=15) in
principal, 11.3% (n=17) were H.O.D, 19.3 %( n=29) were case of State Universities and 6 % (n=9)for private
working at Sr. Lecturer level, followed by 36 %(n=54) were universities and remaining Universities/academic
at Lecturer Level and remaining 26%(n=39) were institutions have one time training practice in their course
Instructors. curriculum. Twice students go for training is only
prevailing in the course curriculum of the state(15%) and
N=150 private universities (6%) curriculum, where as in case of
Faculty Members ------------------------------------------------------------------- Deemed,Central and National Council of Hotel
Designation Principal HOD Sr. Lecturer Lecturer Instructor
Frequency 11 17 29 54 39
Management institutions only one time students go for
% 7.3 11.3 19.3 36 26 training in the course curriculum
Table summarises the responses of faculty members
regarding prevailing practice of industrial training
component in the course curriculum.

Prevailing Training Practice%

For many times
students go for training
in the course curriculum One Time Two Time Total
Faculty 84 16 100
Designation Principal 5 2 7
HOD 9 2 11
Sr. Lecturer 16 3 19
Lecturer 32 4 36
Instructor 21 5 26
Total 84 16 100
SEX(1M,2F) Male 57 11 69
Female 27 5 31
Objectives Experience 0-5 yrs 29 6 35
Objective 1: To examine the prevailing practice of 6-10 yrs 31 4 35
11-15 yrs 19 3 23
industrial training component in the course curriculum of Above 15 yrs 5 3 7
various institutions.

883
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

Continue Prevailing Training Practice

Prevailing Training Practice% Once and Twice Basis
Region Punjab 43 6 49 Designation Chi-square 2.178
Chandigarh 15 1 15 df 4
Haryana 26 9 35 Sig. 0.703
State University 38 10 48 Sex Chi-square 0.062
Deemed University 9 0 9 df 1
Sig. 0.803
Private University 16 6 22
Experience Chi-square 4.366
National Council 18 0 18
df 3
Central University 3 0 3
Sig. 0.225
Region Chi-square 7.412
Pearson Chi -square statistics test reveals that there df 2
Sig. .025*
is significant difference in the frequencies of prevailing Type of Institute Chi-square 12.943
practice of industrial training component in course df 4
Sig. .012,*,
curriculum of Hotel management institutions, among
regions and institution level. As shown in Table
Further Faculty members were asked information on
statistically significant differences exist between regions
prevailing practice of industrial training component in
and type of institutions with p < 0.05.(p=.025,p=.012)This
their course curriculum in terms of duration (weeks) and
result indicates that there are unequal prevailing practice
time (in which semester students go for training).
of industrial training exit among regions and type of Respondents were provided with columns for both the
institutions options that are once or twice columns to fill in the
questionnaire.
Region X2(2, N=150) =7.41, p=.025 and type of institutions Table summarises in percentages the responses of
X2(4, N=150) =12.9, p=.012 faculty members regarding Prevailing practice of industrial
training Duration (weeks) in the course curriculum of
Pearson Chi-Square Test various Hotel Management Institutions.

Once( 1st )Time Twice (2nd )Time

Prevailing Practice Duration in Weeks Duration in Weeks
Duration (weeks) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------
Duration 17f % 18f % 20f % 22f % 24f % Total% N 20f % 24f % Total% N
Faculty 19 13 11 7 81 54 23 15 16 11 100 150 16 67 8 33 100 24
Total 19 11 81 23 16 100 16 8 24
Designation
Principal 0 0 2 18 4 36 2 18 3 27 100 11 1 33 2 67 100 3
HOD 2 12 0 0 10 59 4 24 1 6 100 17 3 100 0 0 100 3
Sr. Lecturer 3 10 5 17 14 48 5 17 2 7 100 29 4 80 1 20 100 5
Lecturer 7 13 2 4 32 59 6 11 7 13 100 54 3 50 3 50 100 6
Instructor 7 18 2 5 21 54 6 15 3 8 100 39 5 71 2 29 100 7
Total 19 -- 11 -- 81 -- 23 -- 16 -- 100 150 16 -- 8 -- 100 24
Sex
Male 9 9 9 9 61 59 13 13 11 11 100 103 11 65 6 35 100 17
Female 10 21 2 4 20 43 10 21 5 11 100 47 5 71 2 29 100 7
Total 19 -- 11 -- 81 -- 23 -- 16 -- 100 150 16 -- 8 -- 100 24
Region
Punjab 19 26 10 14 22 30 14 19 9 12 100 74 1 11 8 89 100 9
Chandigarh 0 0 1 4 20 87 2 9 0 0 100 23 1 100 0 0 100 1
Haryana 0 0 0 0 39 74 7 13 7 13 100 53 14 100 0 0 100 14
Total 19 -- 11 -- 81 -- 23 -- 16 -- 100 150 16 -- 8 -- 100 24
Type of institutions
Duration 17f % 18f % 20f % 22f % 24f % Total% N 20f % 24f % Total% N
State University 19 26 10 14 23 32 20 28 0 0 100 72 15 100 0 0 100 15
Deemed University 0 0 0 0 13 100 0 0 0 0 100 13 0 0 0 0 00 0
Private University 0 0 1 3 13 39 3 9 16 48 100 33 1 11 8 89 100 9
National Council 0 0 0 0 27 100 0 0 0 0 100 27 0 0 0 0 00 0
Central 0 0 0 0 5 100 0 0 0 0 100 5 0 0 0 0 00 0
Total 19 -- 11 -- 81 -- 23 -- 16 -- 100 150 16 -- 8 -- 100 24
Among the type of institutions it was found that Central, Deemed University and National Council of Hotel Management Institution have 20 weeks duration of industrial training in their course
curriculum and whereas it was found that State and Private Universities have different duration of training in their curriculum.

884
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

In Case of State Universities: First time duration : It was observed from the total responses that out of the total sample
32% (n=23) have 20 weeks duration,followed by 28% (n=20)have 22 weeks duration,followed by 26% (n=19) have 17
weeks duration and remaining 14% (n=10) have 18 weeks duration

Second Time Duration: It was observed that 100 %( n=15) have 20 weeks Duration.

In case of Private Universities: First time duration: It was observed from the total responses that out of the total sample,
48% (n-16) have 24 weeks duration,followed by 39 % (n=13) have 20 weeks duration,followed by 9% (n=3) have 22 weeks
duration and remaining 3%(n=1) have 18 weeks duration

Second Time Duration: It was found that 89 % (n=8) have 24 weeks duration,followed by 11%(n=1) have 20 weeks
duration.
Chi -square test applied and it reveals there are significant differences in the Duration of prevailing practice of
industrial training component in course curriculum of Hotel management institutions among regions and institution level.
Significance level p<.05 is for region that is p=.000 andfor type of institutions it is p=.000.

Region X2(8, N=150) =48.3, p=.000 and type of institutions X2(16, N=150) =126.09, p=.000

Pearson Chi-Square Tests

Prevailing Practice
Duration (weeks) Once( 1st ) Time Twice (2nd )Time
Region Chi-square 48.364 20
df 8 2
Sig. .000,* .000,*
Type of Institution Chi-square 126.097 20
df 16 1
Sig. .000,* .000,*

An ANOVA was performed on all five Universities responses regarding prevailing practice of training duration in
terms of weeks. Results are shown in Table. Significant differences were found between Universities regarding duration
of prevailing practice of industrial training in terms of weeks for one time F(4,145)=13.709, p=.000) and twice
F(1,22)=110.000, p=.000). Therefore, the probability of this result occurring by chance is very small.
Tukey HSD Post Hoc applied to determine significance differences among Pair wise comparisons were made between
Universities prevailing practice of training duration in terms of weeks. Table 10 shows these pair wise comparison results.
Table shows that there is significance difference in the mean difference between State and Private Universities (p=.000),
although difference is not significant between Deemed, National Council and Central University (p=.845,.651,.963).There
is significance in the mean difference between Deemed and Private Universities in terms of training duration (p=.002) and
difference is not significant between other universities. Whereas Private universities have significant difference between
State (p=.000), Deemed (p=.002) and National council (p=.000) and not significant between Central University. National
council has significant difference between Private universities and not with others. The difference is not significant
between Central and others universities.

Descriptive Statistics ANOVA

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Minimum Maximum F Sig.
1st Time Actual Value State 72 19.49 1.957 .231 17 22 13.709 .000
Deemed 13 20.00 .000 .000 20 20
Private 33 22.06 2.030 .353 18 24
National 27 20.00 .000 .000 20 20
Central 5 20.00 .000 .000 20 20
Total 150 20.21 1.933 .158 17 24
2nd Time Actual Value State 15 20.00 .000 .000 20 20 110.000 .000
Deemed 0 . . . . .
Private 9 23.56 1.333 .444 20 24
National 0 . . . . .
Central 0 . . . . .
Total 24 21.33 1.926 .393 20 24

885
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

Tukey HSD Post Hoc

Dependent Variable (I) inst type (J) inst type Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error P Value
1st Time Actual Value State Deemed -.514 .503 .845
Private -2.574 .351 .000
National -.514 .377 .651
Centre -.514 .772 .963
Deemed State .514 .503 .845
Private -2.061 .546 .002
National .000 .563 1.000
Centre .000 .878 1.000
Private State 2.574 .351 .000
Deemed 2.061 .546 .002
National 2.061 .433 .000
Centre 2.061 .801 .081
National State .514 .377 .651
Deemed .000 .563 1.000
Private -2.061 .433 .000
Centre .000 .813 1.000
Central State .514 .772 .963
Deemed .000 .878 1.000
Private -2.061 .801 .081
National .000 .813 1.000

Faculty
1st Time Actual Value Mean 20.21 Time: Similarly faculty members were asked to provide
Median 20.00
Mode 20.00 information regarding the time of the industrial training
Maximum 24.00 component in the course curriculum.The Time means in
Minimum 17.00
which semester students go for industrial training
Standard Deviation 1.93
Total N 150 component in the course curriculum. Respondents were
2nd Time Actual Value Mean 21.33 provided with the options in the questionnaire to fill their
Median 20.00 responses.Tables were provided with blank spaces where
Mode 20.00
Maximum 24.00
in faculty members filled their responses under once and
Minimum 20.00 twice options.
Standard Deviation 1.93 Table summarises the responses of the faculty
Total N 150
members regarding time (semester) students go for
training in the industry.
Findings -Duration: Based on the data analysis it was State universities -First Time: It was observed that
found that there is no uniform practice of training exist out of total responses 25%were sending students for
among Universities in terms of duration.Median andMode training in their third semester, 8% have training in fourth
value of training duration of all universities is 20 for both semester, 15% in sixth semester.Second Time: out of total
times that is first and second time students go for training responses 62 % were sending in Sixth semester.
in the course curriculum. It starts from 17 weeks and go
last to 24 weeks among various Universities for the one Deemed Universities: First time: It was observed that
time duration and 20 to 24 weeks for second time duration. training is in their third semester (9%).
At present different durations was found in the training
component of various universities. Similarity was Private Universities: First time: Out of total responses of
observed in the duration of Central, Deemed and National Private Universities, 3% were sending in third semester, 10
Council institutions that is of 20 weeks. Prevailing practice % have training in fourth semester, 5% have in Fifth
of industrial training vary in duration. However Amoah Semester and 3% in sixth semester. Second time: only 6%
and Baum (1997, p.6) highlighted that when there is no were sending in sixth semester.
consensus between the two features of tourism
environment and tourism education, problems arise for National Council: First time: It was observed that training
those on the receiving end of the tourism is in third semester13% and 5% in fourth semester.
education.Curricula should to some extent includes
training in specific skills and competencies that are vital Central University: First time: It was observed that
for the real working world and been shaped by the needs training is in their third semester (3%).
of the industry.

886
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

Two times (Twice) training practice is only exist in State and Private Universities.Second time training was observed
in both the Universities was in their sixth semester. Data collected reveals that there is no uniform practice of industrial
training exists in terms of time among Universities offering Hotel management course.

1st time Training (in Sem)% 2nd time Training (in Sem)%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage 1st Sem 2nd Sem 3rd Sem 4th Sem 5th Sem 6th Sem Total 1st Sem 2nd Sem 3rd Sem 4th Sem 5th Sem 6th Sem Total
Faculty 0 0 51 26 5 18 100 0 0 0 0 0 16 16
Designation Principal 0 0 3 0 1 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
HOD 0 0 7 3 0 1 11 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
Sr. Lecturer 0 0 9 3 1 6 19 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
Lecturer 0 0 17 13 2 4 36 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
Instructor 0 0 15 6 1 4 26 0 0 0 0 0 5 5
Total 0 0 51 26 5 18 100 0 0 0 0 0 16 16
SEX Male 0 0 35 17 4 13 69 0 0 0 0 0 11 11
Female 0 0 15 9 1 5 31 0 0 0 0 0 5 5
Total 0 0 51 26 5 18 100 0 0 0 0 0 16 16
Experience 0-5 yrs 0 0 19 9 1 5 35 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
6-10 yrs 0 0 19 10 2 5 35 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
11-15 yrs 0 0 10 6 1 6 23 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
Above 15 yrs 0 0 3 1 1 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
Total 0 0 51 26 5 18 100 0 0 0 0 0 16 16
Region Punjab 0 0 20 9 5 15 49 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
Chandigarh 0 0 7 6 0 2 15 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Haryana 0 0 23 11 0 1 35 0 0 0 0 0 9 9
Total 0 0 51 26 5 18 100 0 0 0 0 0 16 16
Type of institutions State 0 0 25 8 0 15 48 0 0 0 0 0 10 10
Deemed 0 0 9 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Private 0 0 3 10 5 3 22 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
National 0 0 13 5 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Central 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 0 51 26 5 18 100 0 0 0 0 0 16 16

Pearson Chi-Square Tests

1st time 2nd time
Training (in Sem) Training (in Sem)
Region Chi-square 31.517 .
df 6 .
Sig. .000,* .
Inst type Chi-square 84.021 .
df 12 .
Sig. .000,* .
Chi -square test applied and it reveals there are significant differences exist in the time (semester) of prevailing practice of industrial training component in course
curriculum of Hotel management institutions among regions and institution level. Significance level p<.05 is for region that is p=.000 andfor type of
institutions it is p=.000.
Region X2(6, N=150) =31.5, p=.000 and type of institutions X2(12, N=150) =84.0, p=.000
.he significance level is.000 and.000 both for region and institutions (p<.05)

An ANOVA was performed on all five Universities regarding prevailing practice of training time in terms of semester.
Results are shown in Table. Significant differences were found between Universities prevailing practice of training time
in terms of semester F (4,145) =7.345, p=.000). Therefore, the probability of this result occurring by chance is very small.
Tukey HSD Post Hoc applied to determine significance differences among Pair wise comparisons were made between
Universities prevailing practice of training time in terms of semester. Table 10 shows these pair wise comparison results.
Table shows that there is significance difference in the mean difference between State and Deemed Universities (p=.007)
and National Council (p=.006) although difference is not significant between Private and Central Universities.There is
significance in the mean difference between Deemed Private Universities and State Universities in terms of training time
(p=.007,p=.001) and difference is not significant between other universities. Whereas Private universities have significant
difference between National Council (p=.000), Deemed (p=.001) not significant between Central University and State.
National council has significant difference between Private universities and State Universities not with others. The
difference is not significant between Central and others universities.

887
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014

Descriptive ANOVA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Minimum Maximum F P Value
1st time Training (in Sem) State 72 4.08 1.330 .157 3 6 7.345 .000
Deemed 13 3.00 .000 .000 3 3
Private 33 4.39 .933 .162 3 6
National 27 3.26 .447 .086 3 4
Central 5 4.00 .000 .000 4 4
Total 150 3.91 1.131 .092 3 6
2nd time Training (in Sem) State 15 6.00 .000 .000 6 6 . .
Deemed 0 . . . . .
Private 9 6.00 .000 .000 6 6
National 0 . . . . .
Central 0 . . . . .
Total 24 6.00 .000 .000 6 6

Tukey HSD
Dependent Variable (I) inst type (J) inst type Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error P Value
1st time Training (in Sem) State Deemed 1.083 .315 .007
Private -.311 .220 .620
National .824 .236 .006
Central .083 .484 1.000
DEEMED State -1.083 .315 .007
Private -1.394 .342 .001
National -.259 .353 .948
Central -1.000 .550 .368
Private State .311 .220 .620
Deemed 1.394 .342 .001
National 1.135 .271 .000
Central .394 .502 .935
National State -.824 .236 .006
Deemed .259 .353 .948
Private -1.135 .271 .000
Central -.741 .509 .593
Central State -.083 .484 1.000
Deemed 1.000 .550 .368
Private -.394 .502 .935
National .741 .509 .593

1st time
Training (in Sem)
--------------------------
Faculty members Median Mode
3 3
FINDINGS -Time: Based on the data analysis it was
found that there is no uniform practice of training exist
among Universities in terms of time. Median andMode
value of training time of all universities is Third semester
for first time and sixth Semester for second time.
Ho: There are no significant differences in the practice of
industrial training component in the course curriculum of
various Hotel management institutions.
The framed hypothesis is rejected because there is
significant differences exist in the prevailing practice of
industrial training component in the course curriculum of
various hotel management institutions, in terms of
2nd time Duration and Time. Significant differences were found
Training (in Sem)
between Universities prevailing practice of training
----------------------------
Median Mode duration in terms of weeks for one time F (4,145) =13.709,
6 6 p=.000) and twice F (1, 22) =110.000, p=.000). Significant
differences were found between Universities prevailing
practice of training time in terms of semester F (4,145)
=7.345, p=.000). Based on the data analysis it was found
that there is no uniform practice of training exist among
Universities in terms of duration(Weeks) and
Time(Semester).Median andMode value of training
duration of all universities is 20 weeks for both times that
is first and second time students go for training in the
course curriculum. It starts from 17 weeks and go last to
24 weeks among various Universities for the one time
duration and 20 to 24 weeks for second time duration.
Median andMode value of training duration of all
universities is Third semester for first time and sixth
Semester for second time.

888
 Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 21 (6): 879-889, 2014
CONCLUSION
Current finding coincide with previous research
studies that training periods were too shot and the
majority of trainees think that the most appropriate
industrial training period should be six months (Oliver,
2010; Mihail, 2006). Mihail (2006) also found in his study
that most of the trainees preferred to have industrial
training periods ranging from six to nine months instead
of three months. This indicated that trainees are willing to
have a longer industrial training period and believe that
they can learn more within a six month period. Oliver
(2010) remarks that the short amount of time an industrial
training lasts really never lets the student become a fully
functional employee because there is not so much to take
in for them. In their study of hospitality internships,
Downey and DeVeau (1988) expounded views of the
industry and concluded that more internship hours, better
coordination and more documentation in terms of both
written and oral reporting were needed. This study made
the point that Hotel schools should involve students and
employers to participate in the planning stage by inviting
them to sit in meetings before consolidating a training
programme for students; and schools should collect
information about needs and interests of students as well
as employers.. A well- planned industrial training program
jointly developed by industry representatives, faculty
members and students can maximize the potential to
successfully prepare high quality hospitality management
graduates for the workplace (Pauze, Johnson and Miller,
1987).
REFERENCE
1. Ashraf, H. and P. Mathur, 2003. Human Resource
Development in Tourism Industry, Tourism Industry
in India, Excel Books New Delhi.
2. Gault, J., J. Redington and T. Schlager, 2000.
Undergraduate business internships and career
success: Are they related? Journal of Marketing
Education, 22: 45-53.
889
3. Tackett, J., F. Wolf and D. Law, 2001. Accounting
interns and their employers: Conflicting perceptions.
Ohio CPA Journal, 60: 54-56.
4. Maskooki, K., D.V. Rama and K. Raghunanandan,
1998. Internships in undergraduate finance programs.
Financial Practice and Education, 20: 94-102.
5. Oliver, D., 2006. An expectation of continued
success: the work attitudes of Generation Y. Labour
and Industry, 17(1): 61-84.
6. Downey, J.F. and L.T. DeVeau, 1987. Hospitality
internships: an industry view. The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 28(2): 33-41.
7. Collins, A.B., 2001. Gateway to the real world,
industrial training: dilemmas and problems. Tourism
Management, 23: 93-96.
8. Jenkins, A.K., 2001. Making a career of it? Hospitality
students’ future perspectives: an Anglo-Dutch
study. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 12(1): 13-20.
9. Lam, T. and L. Ching, 2006. An exploratory study of
an internship program: The case of Hong Kong
students. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 26: 336-351.
10. Lam, T. and L. Ching, 2007. An exploratory study of
an internship program: The case of Hong Kong
students. Hospitality Management, 26(3): 336-351.
11. Lent, R.W., S.D. Brown, R. Talleyrand, E.B. Mc Part
land, T. Davis, S.B. Chopra, et al ., 2002. Career
choice barriers, supports and coping strategies:
College students’ experiences. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 60: 61-72.
12. Jane Spowart, 2006. Hotel School Students Views of
their Preparation for Work-integrated Learning. An
Exploratory Study. Asia-Pacific Journal of
Cooperative Education, 7(2): 10-15.