CREATIVE APPROACHES TO TEACHING PROFESSIONAL ENGLISH TO TOURISM STUDENTS THROUGH THE INTEGRATION OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.62867/3007-0848.2026-3.10
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Mastery of professional vocabulary and grammar does not always ensure that tourism students are prepared to handle service-related communicative tasks in English. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of an eight-week program integrating digital technologies, professional situations, and experiential learning in comparison with traditional instruction. A quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design was used with two intact classes: an experimental group and a control group, each comprising 30 students (N = 60). The program covered hotel check-in, complaint handling, tour selection, tour guiding, restaurant service, intercultural interaction, destination promotion, and integrated customer service. Outcomes were assessed using a professional English test, a situational speaking task, and a final engagement questionnaire. The mean test gain was 14.62 points in the experimental group and 3.68 points in the control group; the between-group difference in gains was 10.94 points (p < 0.001; d = 2.50). Final speaking scores were 22.70 and 19.10 points, respectively (p < 0.001; d = 1.19). Final engagement in the experimental group was described across behavioral, emotional, and cognitive dimensions. The findings indicate an advantage of the integrated program within the studied sample. Non-random group assignment and the simultaneous use of several pedagogical components limit causal interpretation and the generalizability of the findings to other educational settings.