Didactic and Pedagogical Aspects of Tourism Training Programs in Portugal: Conceptual Analysis of Study Plans

Abstract

Higher education in tourism plays a pivotal role in the development of the tourism sector in Portugal—one of the country’s most vital economic pillars. In recent years, there has been growing interest in the adoption of innovative teaching methodologies by higher education institutions, aiming to foster more dynamic and student-centered learning environments. This article analyzes, through a qualitative approach grounded in educational and social science research, the main pedagogical and didactic strategies employed in leading tourism programs across Portugal. Drawing on a content analysis of curricular unit descriptions and all relevant public pedagogical information available on official institutional websites, this study provides a critical overview of current didactic practices. Finally, the research reflects on the degree to which innovative teaching and research practices are integrated and discusses their alignment with recognized international standards and best practices. This study contributes to bridging a significant research gap by systematically linking pedagogical practice in Portuguese tourism programs with global educational standards.

1. Introduction

Tourism is a vital sector in the Portuguese economy, contributing over 15% of the GDP (WTTC, 2023). In response to increasing industry demands, higher education institutions have significantly expanded their tourism programs. Yet tourism education must go beyond technical training, engaging with broader cultural, ethical, and civic dimensions (Tribe, 2002; UNESCO, 2015). This pedagogical challenge is intensified by rapid digitalization and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has, in many cases, displaced culturally grounded and socially engaged learning (Biesta, 2009; Salmon, 2002).

In Portugal, where tourism is a central component of the national economy and cultural identity, higher education institutions offer a diverse array of tourism programs at undergraduate and graduate levels. However, the pedagogical and didactic structures of these programs remain under-examined in the academic literature.

There has been a growing emphasis on the transformation of higher education through innovative pedagogical approaches, driven by the shift towards student-centered learning, technological integration, and the global recognition of education as a key driver for sustainable development (UNESCO, 2015). However, a significant challenge remains: the lack of pedagogical and didactic training among many higher education lecturers, particularly those coming from technical or scientific backgrounds, who may not have received formal preparation in education or instructional design. This gap often limits the implementation of learner-centered, interdisciplinary, and culturally responsive teaching strategies—especially crucial in tourism education (Urry & Larsen, 2011), which demands an integrative understanding of human behavior, cultural diversity, and ethical engagement (Fennell, 2006; Harland & Wald, 2018; OECD, 2019). In the context of tourism, this pedagogical shift is essential not only for professional training but also for fostering critical awareness of tourism’s cultural, environmental, and ethical dimensions (Franklin, 2002; Smith, 2009).

Despite the expansion of tourism programs, there is limited research on the pedagogical and didactic foundations of these curricula, particularly in Portugal. While the international literature addresses employability and curriculum content (Airey & Tribe, 2005; Dredge et al., 2012; Harland & Wald, 2018), few studies explore the actual instructional strategies employed or their alignment with frameworks such as UNESCO’s Education for Sustainable Development or UNWTO’s TedQual (Fidgeon, 2010; Carvalho et al., 2021).

This study addresses these gaps through a qualitative content analysis of study plans and course descriptions from Portuguese higher education institutions. It examines the implicit and explicit pedagogical orientations guiding tourism programs, with special attention to active learning methodologies (e.g., PBL, flipped classrooms, and gamification) and their relation to educational values (Kolb, 1984; McKeachie & Svinicki, 2013) such as interdisciplinarity, ethical engagement, cultural awareness, and tourism pedagogy (Carvalho et al., 2021). This study critically assesses the degree to which programs incorporate active learning approaches, such as problem-based learning (PBL), flipped classrooms, experiential learning, and gamification. These methodologies have been increasingly recognized for their capacity to foster engagement, critical thinking, and practical competencies among students (González, 2018; Salmon, 2002).

Theoretically, this research contributes to the understanding of tourism education as a site for critical pedagogy and epistemological development (Tribe, 2001; Biesta, 2009; Barnett, 2000; Dann, 2002). Methodologically, it proposes a replicable framework for identifying didactic intentions in curricula. Practically, it offers insight into institutional disparities in pedagogical innovation and provides recommendations aligned with international benchmarks.

Preliminary findings suggest that while some institutions demonstrate pedagogical innovation, the dominant trend continues to emphasize managerial and operational content, often through traditional lecture-based formats. As a result, tourism education in Portugal may risk failing to fully align with contemporary international practices that emphasize holistic, learner-centered approaches and the integration of historical, cultural, and social perspectives (Dann, 2002; Smith, 2009).

In Portugal, where tourism is both economically and culturally central, this study offers a timely reflection on how higher education institutions are responding (or not) to global calls for pedagogical renewal. By mapping current practices, it contributes to ongoing discussions on curriculum reform and educational quality in tourism training. It advocates for a renewed didactic paradigm that embraces interdisciplinarity, cultural reflexivity, and active learning to better equip future tourism professionals with the knowledge and adaptability needed in an ever-changing global landscape.

2. Literature Review

The literature on tourism education highlights the importance of active learning methodologies such as problem-based learning (PBL), experiential learning (Kolb, 1984), flipped classrooms (Salmon, 2002), and gamification (Buck, 2017), all of which promote student autonomy, engagement, and real-world problem-solving. These strategies are increasingly seen as best practices in international programs, particularly in countries like Finland, the Netherlands, and Australia, where tourism curricula are often interdisciplinary and aligned with global competencies (González, 2018; Pearce, 2002).

However, in the Portuguese context, few academic studies have systematically examined how these didactic and pedagogical approaches are implemented within tourism higher education. Most existing research in Portugal focuses on the economic performance of tourism or its socio-cultural impacts, rather than on educational practices and pedagogical innovation (Carvalho et al., 2021). This gap hinders a deeper understanding of how curricula and teaching strategies prepare students for the multifaceted challenges of the sector.

2.1. Tourism Education as an Academic and Curricular Field

Tourism education has undergone a profound transformation over the past four decades, evolving from a primarily vocational and industry-driven training model to a more critical, interdisciplinary, and pedagogically complex academic field. Initially rooted in hospitality management, business, and economics, early tourism programs emphasized employability and operational knowledge (Jafari & Ritchie, 1981), reflecting a strong instrumental orientation.

During the 1990s and early 2000s, scholars began to challenge the narrowness of this approach. Jafari’s (1990) “advocacy–knowledge spectrum” and Tribe’s (2002) concept of the “philosophic practitioner” were pivotal in reframing tourism education as a domain that must balance professional training with critical, ethical, and epistemological reflection. Tribe (2001) further argued that the field had become “bifurcated” between instrumental knowledge (focused on industry needs) and epistemic knowledge (concerned with deeper theoretical and social understanding).

This shift called for new pedagogical approaches that could support both dimensions. As Airey and Tribe (2005) observed, tourism curricula increasingly began to integrate content from sociology, anthropology, geography, environmental studies, and cultural theory, prompting a redefinition of what tourism education could and should encompass.

From a curricular perspective, this transformation is reflected in the dual mandate of tourism programs: to develop technical competencies required by the tourism industry, and to cultivate critical, reflective, and globally minded professionals. This duality creates tensions that are still evident today, as many institutions struggle to reconcile the demands of market-driven education with the need for academic and pedagogical depth (Cooper & Shepherd, 1997; Fidgeon, 2010).

More recently, pedagogical discussions in tourism have aligned with broader movements in higher education, such as the promotion of student-centered learning, experiential methodologies and education for sustainability, and global citizenship (Dredge et al., 2012; González, 2018; UNESCO, 2015). These shifts underscore the need for tourism curricula to go beyond content delivery and embrace more holistic, transformative, and inclusive teaching strategies.

In sum, tourism education has developed into a multifaceted academic field, shaped by ongoing debates about its purpose, epistemology, and pedagogical identity. The evolution from a training-based model to a more educationally conscious and culturally reflexive framework has profound implications for curriculum design, teaching methods, and the role of educators in preparing tourism professionals for a complex and globalized world.

2.2. Pedagogical Models in Higher Education and Active Learning Strategies in Tourism

Recent educational paradigms advocate for constructivist and experiential learning models, emphasizing the role of students as active participants in their own learning process. Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) is particularly relevant in tourism, where learning is deeply connected to practice, experience, and reflexivity. ELT highlights four stages—concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation—which together inform a holistic learning cycle.

Further reinforcing this paradigm is the concept of constructive alignment, proposed by Biggs and Tang (2011), which stresses the importance of aligning intended learning outcomes, teaching methods, and assessment practices. In tourism education, this alignment is critical to ensure that pedagogical strategies truly support competencies such as intercultural awareness, problem-solving, ethical judgment, and innovation.

Recent developments in educational theory and practice emphasize the critical importance of active learning in fostering student engagement, critical thinking, and real-world application of knowledge. Active learning encompasses a variety of student-centered pedagogical techniques that shift the focus from passive content delivery to the construction of knowledge through meaningful interaction and participation (Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Prince, 2004). Among the most frequently cited and empirically supported approaches are the following:

• Problem-Based Learning (PBL)—rooted in constructivist theory, PBL promotes inquiry-driven learning and collaborative problem-solving, developing students’ capacity for critical analysis and teamwork in complex real-life scenarios (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery, 2006).
• Flipped Classroom—this approach reconfigures the traditional classroom model by engaging students with content before class and using in-class time for applied learning activities, thus enhancing autonomy and deeper understanding (Bishop & Verleger, 2013; Abeysekera & Dawson, 2015).
• Gamification—incorporating game mechanics into educational contexts has been shown to increase student motivation, engagement, and persistence, particularly when aligned with well-defined learning outcomes (Deterding et al., 2011; Buck, 2017; Landers, 2014).
• Workshops and Field-Based Learning—in tourism education, experiential learning opportunities such as community engagement, site visits, and industry collaboration are essential for bridging theory and practice and developing socio-cultural sensitivity (Kolb, 1984; Zehrer & Mössenlechner, 2009; Tussyadiah et al., 2017).

Despite the increasing body of research supporting these methodologies, lecture-based instruction remains prevalent, particularly in contexts where faculty have limited pedagogical training or where institutional policies prioritize content coverage over learning outcomes (Falk et al., 2012; Postareff et al., 2007). This tension between innovative pedagogical intentions and traditional academic structures highlights a crucial challenge in advancing tourism education: the need for systemic faculty development, institutional flexibility, and a redefinition of what constitutes educational quality in the field.

2.3. International Trends and Best Practices in Tourism Pedagogy

At the global level, there has been increasing pressure to align tourism education with sustainable development goals, ethical tourism, and global citizenship. Institutions in countries like Finland, the Netherlands, Australia, and Canada have adopted progressive models combining interdisciplinarity, student-led projects, and industry co-creation of curricula (González, 2018; Jenkins, 2001).

The UNWTO’s TedQual certification serves as a global benchmark for quality assurance in tourism education, promoting the integration of academic content with industry needs while emphasizing social responsibility, intercultural understanding, and sustainability (UNWTO, n.d.). UNWTO’s TedQual certification system evaluates tourism education programs based on several key areas as follows:

(a)

Curriculum Coherence: Ensuring that the study plans are logically structured and aligned with industry needs.

(b)

Pedagogical Support and Infrastructure: Assessing the availability and quality of teaching resources and facilities.

(c)

Faculty Qualifications and Development: Evaluating the selection processes, qualifications, and ongoing professional development of academic staff.

(d)

Management and Administrative Support: Reviewing policies, tools, and mechanisms that support program administration

(e)

Alignment with Industry Needs: Ensuring that program content remains relevant to the evolving demands of the tourism sector.

(f)

Adherence to the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism: Promoting values such as sustainability, cultural respect, and social responsibility.

This framework emphasizes a student-centered approach, integrating academic knowledge with practical skills, and fostering ethical and sustainable practices in tourism. In Portugal, a limited but significant number of tourism programs—such as those offered by the Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra, Viana do Castelo, Escola Superior de Hotelaria e Turismo do Estoril (ESHTE), Universidade Europeia, and the network of 12 Tourism and Hospitality Schools under Turismo de Portugal—have achieved TedQual certification. These programs are recognized for aligning their curricula with the TedQual conceptual framework. However, despite these efforts, research continues to highlight the uneven implementation of such pedagogical models across the country, often constrained by structural limitations and resistance to pedagogical innovation (Carvalho et al., 2021). The UNWTO’s TedQual certification also promotes pedagogical quality and curriculum alignment with sustainable tourism goals.

Internationally, there has been a shift towards more holistic and interdisciplinary tourism curricula. In Northern and Western Europe—particularly in Finland and the Netherlands—programs emphasize project-based learning, intercultural competence, ethical reasoning, and sustainability (Dredge et al., 2012; González, 2018). Moreover, Australian universities have been recognized for embedding graduate attributes, research-led teaching, and critical reflection into their tourism programs (Pearce, 2002). These models serve as benchmarks against which other national systems—including Portugal’s—can be evaluated.

2.4. Recent Advancements and Emerging Trends (2023–2025)

To align this research with the current state of tourism pedagogy, we critically reviewed recent publications from 2023 to mid-2025 that explore contemporary educational trends and technological integration in tourism education.

2.4.1. Digital and Hybrid Pedagogies

Fernández-Villarán et al. (2024) highlight curriculum gaps in sustainability education, advocating for deeper integration of sustainability across tourism curricula. Wan et al. (2024) identify that while digitalization has improved accessibility, its pedagogical efficacy is hampered by a lack of empirical evaluation and insufficient faculty training. These findings are particularly relevant in the Portuguese context, where limited faculty development impedes effective hybrid learning implementation.

2.4.2. Emerging Technological Tools

de Almeida et al. (2025) conducted a systematic literature review on digital twins in cultural tourism, noting promising applications yet identifying a lack of pedagogically oriented empirical studies. Similarly, the Frontiers special issue on “Advancing Tourism Pedagogy in Times of Transformation” (2024) emphasizes the use of immersive (AR/VR), place-based learning, and community-industry collaboration for achieving SDG-aligned outcomes.

2.4.3. Experiential Learning and Employability

Chung-Ching et al. (2020) and the 2024 IJRSI study reinforce the effectiveness of simulations, role-play, and PBL in enhancing decision-making and employability. This underscores the potential educational gain of adopting such methodologies within Portuguese programs.

2.4.4. Leadership and Curriculum Quality

Martinez-Garcia et al. (2024) use bibliometric analysis to identify that leadership and governance are emerging as pivotal themes in tourism education research, aligning with the article’s findings regarding institutional innovation variance.

2.4.5. Thematic Synthesis: 2024–2025 Trends

Recent research indicates a clear trajectory towards incorporating digitally enhanced experiential learning, sustainability-focused pedagogy, immersive technologies, and institutional leadership in curriculum innovation. However, consistent concerns remain: the lack of empirical assessment on learning outcomes and limited systematic faculty training.

Considering these recent trends, our findings resonate strongly with the broader literature. The emergence of internationally recognized institutions in Portugal mirrors trends identified by Fernández-Villarán et al. (2024), yet limited faculty training (Wan et al., 2024) continues to hinder system-wide change. The exploration of digital twins (de Almeida et al., 2025) and immersive AR/VR tools (Frontiers in Education, 2024) suggests clear pathways for innovative pedagogy—pathways that are not yet widely adopted in Portugal.

The growing research focus on leadership in education (Martinez-Garcia et al., 2024) reflects the institutional divergence we observed. By integrating these updated references, the literature review frames your study as not only contextually grounded but also clearly positioned at the cutting edge of tourism education research.

3. Methodology

This study employed a qualitative content analysis approach to examine the pedagogical and didactic dimensions of tourism training programs across Portuguese higher education. This methodological framework enabled a rigorous and comparative analysis of pedagogical orientations across a diverse institutional landscape, offering insights into how tourism education is currently conceptualized and implemented in Portugal. This study employs a qualitative research paradigm, grounded in interpretivist epistemology, which seeks to understand the meanings, experiences, and contextual nuances behind educational practices (Walle, 1997).

Within this framework, this study adopts a qualitative content analysis methodology, which is particularly suitable for examining textual data such as curricular unit programs, study plans, and publicly available teaching materials from higher education institutions. Content analysis (Mayring, 2000) enables the researcher to systematically interpret the semantic patterns, key concepts, and pedagogical strategies embedded in course documentation, thereby uncovering implicit or explicit educational priorities and values (Mayring, 2000; Elo & Kyngäs, 2008). In the field of tourism studies, the use of qualitative approaches has gained prominence due to the inherently complex, multidisciplinary, and human-centered nature of the tourism phenomenon (Walle, 1997; Tribe, 2001). Unlike quantitative methods that emphasize measurement and generalization, qualitative research allows for a deeper exploration of pedagogical intentions, discursive practices, and curricular orientations within tourism education programs.

The sample was purposefully selected to ensure representativeness across different regions (North, Centre, Lisbon, Alentejo, Algarve, and Islands), types of institutions (public universities, private universities, and polytechnic institutes), and program levels (primarily undergraduate and integrated master’s degrees).

This methodological approach is appropriate for the present study, as it facilitates an in-depth examination of how tourism education in Portugal is structured, what teaching and learning paradigms are being promoted, and to what extent innovative, student-centered methodologies are integrated. Moreover, the qualitative lens permits critical reflection on cultural, social, and institutional factors influencing the pedagogical construction of tourism programs—issues that are central to both tourism and education research.

Inclusion criteria comprised programs officially listed under “Tourism” or equivalent fields (e.g., Tourism Management, Hospitality, and Tourism) on institutional websites, with publicly available curricular unit descriptions and full study plans. Programs lacking accessible or up-to-date documentation were excluded to ensure consistency in data collection and analysis.

To reduce the risk of common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003), several procedural remedies were adopted. First, the data sources were collected from multiple institutions and independently verified across different institutional websites to avoid mono-source distortion. Second, the content analysis was guided by both deductive categories (drawn from international pedagogical frameworks) and inductive coding (emerging from the dataset itself), ensuring triangulation within the coding process. Third, researcher reflexivity was maintained throughout the process to minimize interpretative bias.

In addition to conventional qualitative analysis procedures, this study employed OpenAI’s language model (ChatGPT) to assist in the synthesis, thematic organization, and interpretation of findings derived from curricular documents (OpenAI, 2025). The tool was used to support reflective analysis, triangulate emergent themes with the international pedagogical literature, and enhance the coherence of the discussion. This approach was implemented under the researcher’s full supervision, ensuring that human judgment remained central to all interpretative decisions. The integration of AI-assisted tools in educational research is increasingly recognized for its potential to augment qualitative reasoning, improve analytical clarity, and foster methodological innovation (van Dis et al., 2023; Lund & Wang, 2023). To maintain ethical transparency, all AI-assisted contributions were critically reviewed, contextualized, and validated within the scholarly framework of this study.

This article aims to address a qualitative content analysis of the curricular documents and teaching plans of selected tourism degree programs offered by both universities and polytechnic institutions across Portugal. The goal is to assess the extent to which innovative, student-centered pedagogies are integrated into the programs and how these align—or diverge—from international benchmarks and recognized educational frameworks.

This study is guided by the following research questions:

• What pedagogical and didactic approaches are most used in Portuguese tourism training programs?
• To what extent do these programs incorporate active and experiential learning methodologies?
• Are the Portuguese programs aligned with international best practices in tourism education?

By addressing these questions, the article seeks to contribute to the academic discourse on tourism pedagogy, highlighting both the strengths and areas for improvement in current practices. Ultimately, it argues for a renewed focus on pedagogical intentionality, interdisciplinary thinking, and educational innovation in the design and delivery of tourism curricula.

The research focuses on publicly available curriculum documents and course unit descriptions from both universities and polytechnic institutes across the country. Data collection was carried out through a systematic review of institutional websites between April and May 2025, and included bachelor’s programs explicitly focused on tourism. The sample includes degree programs from a representative selection of institutions that were selected based on regional diversity, public availability of curricular data, and inclusion in national education databases (

Table 1. Higher education institutions in Portugal that offer bachelor’s degrees in tourism (study plans accessed on 18 May 2025).

Institution	Degree Program	Link to Study Plan
University of Évora	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Catholic University of Portugal (Braga)	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
University of Algarve	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Universidade Lusófona (Lisbon)	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Polytechnic Institute of Castelo Branco	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
University of Maia (UMAIA)	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Universidade Portucalense Infante D. Henrique	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Polytechnic Institute of Viseu	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Universidade Lusíada (Lisbon)	Bachelor’s in Tourism Management	Study Plan
Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
University of the Azores	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Polytechnic Institute of Bragança	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
Universidade Europeia	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
University of Coimbra	Bachelor’s in Tourism, Territory and Heritage	Study Plan
Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan
ISMAT—Instituto Superior Manuel Teixeira Gomes	Bachelor’s in Tourism Management	Study Plan
ISCET—Instituto Superior de Ciências Empresariais e do Turismo	Bachelor’s in Tourism	Study Plan

):

Analytical Procedure

The analytical process was grounded in qualitative content analysis, following the systematic framework proposed by Elo and Kyngäs (2008), which is widely recognized for its rigor and adaptability in educational research. This methodology enabled a structured yet interpretative reading of the curricular documents, allowing for the identification of both explicit pedagogical strategies and implicit didactic orientations.

A combination of deductive and inductive coding was employed to analyze the content of the study plans and curricular unit descriptions from various Portuguese higher education institutions offering tourism degrees. The deductive codes were informed by established categories drawn from the international literature on tourism pedagogy, such as active learning, experiential methodologies, and digital education frameworks. Inductive coding allowed for the emergence of new, context-specific categories grounded in the actual data. Special attention was given to the presence (or absence) of the following key dimensions:

• Active learning methodologies (e.g., Problem-Based Learning [PBL], flipped classrooms, simulations, and gamification).
• Experiential learning practices (e.g., fieldwork, site visits, internships, and community engagement).
• Interdisciplinary, cultural, and historical perspectives integrated into course objectives or content.
• Digital and hybrid learning environments, including references to e-learning tools or blended modalities.
• Assessment methods, with a focus on whether strategies were student-centered, formative, or predominantly summative.

The analysis followed the stages proposed by Elo and Kyngäs (2008) for qualitative content analysis (Elo & Kyngäs, 2008):

• Preparation phase—Collection, selection, and thorough familiarization with the textual materials of each institution’s programs.
• Organization phase—Systematic coding and categorization of pedagogical strategies and didactic choices; this included identifying recurring keywords (e.g., “exam,” “project,” “report,” “discussion,” and “fieldwork”) and pedagogical verbs indicative of intended practices.
• Reporting phase—Synthesis of thematic findings across institutions, enabling comparative insights and identification of national patterns. The research also cross-referenced practices identified in Portuguese curricula with the international pedagogical literature to assess alignment with recognized best practices in tourism education globally.

To assess the alignment of Portuguese tourism programs with global standards, the results were cross-referenced with international pedagogical benchmarks and frameworks, including the UNWTO’s TedQual criteria, constructivist learning models, and student-centered paradigms widely recommended in the higher education literature (Biggs & Tang, 2011; Kolb, 1984; UNESCO, 2015). This methodological approach not only allowed for an in-depth exploration of pedagogical diversity within Portugal but also provided a foundation for critical reflection on how national practices compare with recognized international best practices in tourism education.

To enhance analytical clarity, this study incorporates percentage-based representations of pedagogical orientations across institutions. These figures were derived using a hybrid coding strategy that combined both institutional-level classification and thematic coding frequency.

First, each higher education institution in the sample (n = [insert total, e.g., 16]) was categorized based on the overall presence or absence of explicit references to innovative pedagogical practices (e.g., PBL, flipped learning, fieldwork, and gamification) in their curricular unit descriptors. Institutions that demonstrated consistent use of such approaches across multiple course units were classified as pedagogically innovative, while those relying predominantly on traditional lectures and summative assessments were marked as traditional. Second, the percentage values (e.g., 65% traditional vs. 35% innovative) reflect the proportional representation of institutions within each category, not merely the frequency of keywords or codes. This approach ensures that the analysis respects the institutional context as the primary unit of interpretation, rather than over-representing programs with more extensive documentation. A double-check procedure was applied, whereby the classification of each institution was validated by cross-referencing at least three different curricular units per program, ensuring internal consistency in the coding scheme.

This mixed coding procedure allows for a more nuanced interpretation of national trends, balancing quantitative clarity with the qualitative depth of content analysis.

4. Discussion

The analysis was based on an in-depth qualitative review of official course plans, curricular unit descriptors, and pedagogical documentation available on the websites of public and private universities and polytechnic institutes across Portugal. In addition to examining the internal structure of tourism programs, this study also cross-referenced institutional practices with international frameworks, including the UNESCO educational agenda, UNWTO. TedQual standards, and national policy guidelines from A3ES and CNIPES.

The analytical focus was structured around three central dimensions:

• Intentionality in Pedagogical and Didactic Methodologies—To what extent do curricular documents reflect coherent, deliberate pedagogical strategies beyond traditional lectures?
• Evidence of Innovative and Student-Centered Practices—Are there identifiable applications of contemporary teaching methods such as project-based learning, flipped classrooms, simulations, gamification, or micro-teaching?
• Alignment with International Educational Standards—Do the curricula demonstrate responsiveness to global benchmarks in tourism education, particularly in terms of cultural awareness, humanistic learning, and sustainability?

The following sections present a synthesis of the main findings, identifying both prevailing trends and institutional divergences across the national landscape:

4.1. General Pedagogical Orientation: Prevalence of Traditional Approaches

The analysis revealed a predominance of traditional pedagogical frameworks, with many courses emphasizing theoretical knowledge transmission through lectures and teacher-centered delivery. This finding supports previous critiques (Airey & Tribe, 2005; Fidgeon, 2010) that tourism curricula often lag in adopting innovative methodologies, despite being situated in a dynamic and applied professional field.

Frequent terms appearing in the curricular unit descriptions include “theoretical framework”, “overview”, “concepts”, “objectives”, “evaluation”, “exam”, “report”, and “written assignment”. This pattern reflects a predominantly teacher-centered approach, where the pedagogical process is largely oriented around the transmission of knowledge rather than fostering active student learning and engagement. Consequently, the focus tends to be on what is taught rather than on how students construct understanding or develop critical skills through experiential or participatory learning. These indicators also reflect a tendency toward content-based, summative evaluation practices.

4.2. Use of Active Pedagogies: Limited but Emerging

While still relatively marginal, there is a growing presence of active and student-centered methodologies in certain institutions. References to project-based learning (PBL), fieldwork, case studies, and simulation activities are more frequent in polytechnic institutions and some universities with international partnerships or tourism-focused departments. Examples include the following:

• The use of experiential learning and field visits at the Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo.
• Application of case studies and group projects at Universidade Europeia and University of Aveiro.
• Mentions of internships and real-world problem-solving components in Universidade Lusófona and Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra.

However, explicit references to gamification, flipped classrooms, or learning through digital platforms remain rare. These findings suggest a partial and uneven integration of contemporary pedagogical innovations, echoing Tribe’s (2002) concerns about the epistemological imbalance in tourism education.

4.3. Intentionality in Pedagogical and Didactic Methodologies

An extensive review of curricular unit programs across various Portuguese higher education institutions reveals a spectrum of pedagogical intentionality:

(a)

Traditional Lecture-Centric Approaches: Many programs predominantly describe content delivery through lectures, with limited elaboration on interactive or student-centered methodologies. This suggests a continuation of conventional teaching practices without explicit integration of modern pedagogical frameworks.

(b)

Explicit Pedagogical Strategies: Some institutions, however, articulate clear pedagogical intentions. For instance, the Universidade Lusófona’s “Academic and Professional Competences in Tourism” course outlines the use of flipped classroom methodologies, thematic seminars, and peer learning activities, indicating a shift towards more dynamic teaching practices.

(c)

Alignment with Bologna Process: The Polytechnic Institute of Castelo Branco implemented the “Construction of Learning” (ConstAp) project to align with the Bologna Process, emphasizing autonomous student work and innovative classroom methodologies. This reflects a strategic move towards enhancing pedagogical intentionality.

One significant result from the content analysis is the fragmentation between program objectives, teaching methods, and evaluation criteria—which indicates a lack of constructive alignment (Biggs & Tang, 2011). In many cases, curricular units state learning outcomes related to critical thinking, autonomy, or communication, yet propose assessments that rely mainly on written exams and memorization-based tasks.

This misalignment reveals a tension between the rhetoric of innovation and actual pedagogical practice, a finding also reported in the international literature (Dredge et al., 2012).

4.4. Reassessing Curriculum Priorities: The Neglect of Cultural and Humanistic Dimensions

One of the key findings of this study is the predominant emphasis on economic, managerial, and technical knowledge within the curricula of Portuguese tourism programs. Courses such as “Tourism Economics,” “Marketing,” “Business Management,” and “Strategic Planning” constitute core components, while historical, cultural, anthropological, and ethical perspectives are often peripheral, optional, or absent.

This trend reflects a broader vocational bias, described by Tribe (1997), that prioritizes market-oriented skills over the development of critical thinking, cultural awareness, and reflective engagement—competencies that are increasingly vital in a global and ethically complex tourism landscape. Such curricular orientations stand in clear contradiction with international educational frameworks, particularly those outlined by UNESCO in Rethinking Education: Towards a Global Common Good? (2015), which calls for a redefinition of education grounded in humanistic, intercultural, and transformative values. UNESCO advocates for an educational paradigm that promotes “learning to live together,” respect for cultural diversity, and the nurturing of ethical and responsible global citizens (Dredge et al., 2014).

By largely neglecting these dimensions, many tourism programs risk producing graduates who are technically competent but insufficiently equipped to understand or manage the cultural, historical, and social complexities of tourism practice. This omission not only weakens the epistemological foundation of tourism education but also undermines its potential contribution to sustainable development, cultural preservation, and social inclusion—core priorities in both national and international agendas.

Addressing this imbalance requires a curricular realignment that recognizes tourism not merely as an economic activity but as a profoundly human, cultural, and ethical phenomenon. Embedding these perspectives into the pedagogical core of tourism education is essential for cultivating professionals who are both competent and conscientious.

4.5. Evidence of Innovative Pedagogical Strategies

The incorporation of innovative teaching methods varies across institutions:

(a)

Project-Based Learning (PBL): The Polytechnic Institute of Leiria has integrated PBL into foreign language courses within tourism programs. This approach not only enhances language proficiency but also develops practical skills relevant to the tourism industry.

(b)

Experiential Learning Toolkits: The Polytechnic Institute of Porto developed an interdisciplinary toolkit to foster experiential learning in tourism education. This initiative supports educators in implementing simulations, role-plays, and field trips, thereby enriching the learning experience.

(c)

Flipped Classrooms and Peer Learning: As previously mentioned, Universidade Lusófona employs flipped classroom techniques and peer learning, promoting active student engagement and collaborative learning environments.

(d)

Simulation-Based Learning: The “Rota dos Sabores” project (Melo et al., 2023) exemplifies the use of simulation in tourism education, providing students with realistic scenarios to apply their knowledge and skills.

(e)

Co-Creation and Industry Collaboration: The Demola Portugal initiative involves students and industry partners in co-creating solutions to real-world challenges, fostering innovation and practical problem-solving skills.

4.6. Implications for Policy and Practice

The findings suggest that while there is growing awareness of innovative pedagogical approaches, their implementation remains inconsistent. To modernize and align tourism education in Portugal with contemporary educational paradigms, institutions should implement the following:

• Foster faculty development in pedagogy and instructional design.
• Encourage the adoption of student-centered and reflective learning environments.
• Integrate sustainability, ethics, and cultural heritage more systematically.
• Promote curriculum alignment with international standards (e.g., UNWTO, Bologna Process, SDGs).

The A3ES (Agência de Avaliação e Acreditação do Ensino Superior) has indeed underscored the necessity for pedagogical innovation and faculty development in its evaluation reports. Notably, the publication titled “Inovação Pedagógica no Ensino Superior: Cenários e Caminhos de Transformação” (A3ES, 2022) emphasizes the central role of faculty in driving pedagogical change and recommends institutional strategies to foster active learning environments. This document serves as a foundational reference for institutions aiming to align with international educational standards.

Moreover, specific evaluation reports, such as the one for the master’s program in Education and Pedagogical Innovation at the Polytechnic Institute of Leiria (A3ES, n.d.), highlight the importance of integrating innovative teaching methodologies and continuous faculty training. These reports often recommend aligning curricula with contemporary international benchmarks in tourism education.

In addition to the recommendations found in A3ES evaluation reports, it is important to highlight the creation of the National Council for Pedagogical Innovation in Higher Education (CNIPES) in Portugal. Established in 2021, CNIPES reflects a national-level commitment to promoting pedagogical transformation, faculty development, and the dissemination of innovative teaching practices across higher education institutions.

CNIPES operates as a collaborative platform involving public universities, polytechnic institutes, and other stakeholders, aiming to enhance teaching quality through shared knowledge, training, and strategic support for educational innovation (CNIPES, 2024). Its existence reinforces the view that innovation in tourism education must be part of a broader, systemic reform of pedagogical practices in Portuguese higher education, aligned with international quality standards and learner-centered paradigms.

This national initiative strengthens the institutional and policy framework necessary to support the integration of active learning, digital innovation, and intercultural competencies—key components for modern tourism training programs.

Additionally, scholarly analyses, like the study “A Avaliação e Educação em Turismo: Perspetivas no Ensino Superior Português” (Fernandes & Andrade, 2023), discuss the impact of A3ES evaluations on promoting pedagogical improvements in tourism programs. The study notes that A3ES assessments have contributed to enhancing the quality of education by encouraging the adoption of innovative teaching practices and aligning programs with global standards.

The findings of this study carry important practical implications for strategic planning within higher education institutions offering tourism programs. First, the analysis revealed a significant disparity between institutions adopting innovative pedagogical approaches and those maintaining predominantly traditional, lecture-based methods. This divergence highlights an urgent need for institutional leaders to systematically assess teaching practices and identify opportunities for pedagogical renewal.

One key implication concerns the integration of faculty development into institutional planning. Given the limited pedagogical training observed in many contexts, universities and polytechnics should prioritize continuous professional development (CPD) programs focused on active learning, curriculum design, and educational technologies. Establishing pedagogical innovation units or leveraging national frameworks—such as the CNIPES initiative—can provide structured support for faculty engagement with contemporary teaching methods.

Moreover, the findings call for a strategic revision of curriculum architecture, ensuring that program learning outcomes are aligned with constructivist, student-centered pedagogies and international quality standards, such as those set by UNESCO and UNWTO TedQual. Institutions are encouraged to foster curriculum co-design processes that involve both faculty and stakeholders from the tourism industry, thereby ensuring relevance, interdisciplinarity, and ethical depth.

In contexts where traditional methods remain dominant, change may require a phased implementation strategy, beginning with pilot programs that integrate flipped classrooms, project-based learning, or experiential modules. Such initiatives can serve as testbeds for innovation while also generating internal evidence of impact.

Finally, institutional leaders should ensure that quality assurance mechanisms extend beyond accreditation compliance and incorporate formative evaluations of teaching effectiveness, informed by student feedback, peer observation, and learning analytics. This shift from procedural evaluation to pedagogical strategy is essential for fostering a culture of innovation and reflective practice.

In sum, this study provides a framework for higher education institutions to strategically realign their pedagogical models, address existing imbalances, and position themselves as leaders in tourism education within a global and rapidly evolving academic landscape.

4.7. Synthesis and Implications

The analysis indicates a gradual but uneven adoption of innovative pedagogical strategies in Portuguese tourism higher education:

(a)

Progressive Institutions: Certain institutions demonstrate a clear commitment to pedagogical innovation, integrating methods like PBL, flipped classrooms, and experiential learning into their curricula.

(b)

Traditional Approaches Persist: Despite these advancements, many programs continue to rely heavily on traditional lectures, with limited evidence of adopting contemporary teaching methodologies.

(c)

Need for Systematic Implementation: To enhance the quality and relevance of tourism education, there is a pressing need for broader and more systematic implementation of innovative pedagogical practices across institutions.

A closer examination of the curricular unit programs reveals a clear divide between institutions that are actively engaging with innovative pedagogical practices and those that continue to rely primarily on traditional teaching models. Among the institutions demonstrating a stronger commitment to pedagogical innovation are the following:

(I)

Universidade Lusófona, with explicit references to flipped classroom models, peer learning, and project-based learning.

(II)

Polytechnic Institute of Leiria and University of Aveiro, both integrating experiential learning and collaborative industry-linked projects.

(III)

ESHTE—Escola Superior de Hotelaria e Turismo do Estoril, which, through its UNWTO.TedQual certification, promotes student-centered, practice-oriented learning.

(IV)

Turismo de Portugal schools, which emphasize real-world application, ethical reasoning, and sustainability across their network-wide certified programs.

In contrast, several institutions—including more traditional public universities and some polytechnic institutes—retain a predominantly lecture-based, content-heavy structure, with limited mention of active methodologies, digital pedagogy, or interdisciplinary approaches. In many of these programs, assessment remains heavily weighted toward summative exams and theoretical reports, with minimal evidence of constructivist or learner-driven strategies.

This institutional disparity illustrates the fragmented adoption of international best practices in tourism education across Portugal. While some programs exhibit substantial alignment with global trends, others appear to resist or lag pedagogical reform, highlighting the urgent need for national dialogue, faculty development, and curriculum redesign in the sector (

Table 2. Summary of key findings.

Dimension	Observation
Dominant Pedagogy	Lecture-based, theoretical, summative evaluation
Active Methodologies	Present but scattered (e.g., PBL, fieldwork, and projects)
Assessment Alignment	Often misaligned with intended learning outcomes
Disciplinary Focus	Predominantly economic/managerial, with limited socio-cultural content
Disciplinary Focus	Predominantly economic/managerial, with limited socio-cultural content
International Benchmarking	Rare integration of global best practices or certifications

). This distribution suggests that, while pedagogical reform is emerging, traditional methods still dominate the pedagogical landscape of tourism education in Portugal. The uneven implementation of active methodologies may reflect differences in faculty training, institutional priorities, or structural constraints—highlighting the need for more systemic integration of innovative pedagogical frameworks across the sector.

The present findings reaffirm Tribe’s (2001, 2002) concept of “bifurcation” in tourism education, which identifies a structural split between instrumental knowledge (focused on vocational and managerial training) and epistemological knowledge (oriented toward critical, cultural, and ethical inquiry). The relative neglect of humanistic, cultural, and historical content across many Portuguese tourism curricula is a tangible manifestation of this bifurcation. Despite institutional discourse around interdisciplinarity, curricula often privilege operational competencies over the cultivation of critical reflexivity, ethical reasoning, and socio-cultural awareness.

This imbalance is further exacerbated by systemic barriers that help explain resistance to pedagogical innovation. Root causes include the following:

(1)

Lack of formal pedagogical training among teaching staff, especially in programs where faculty are recruited primarily for technical or industry expertise.

(2)

Rigid accreditation and evaluation systems that continue to prioritize content coverage over student learning outcomes.

(3)

Institutional inertia, where change is discouraged by bureaucratic complexity, limited incentives, and a risk-averse academic culture.

To overcome these barriers, we propose several policy and curricular interventions:

• At the institutional level, higher education providers should implement pedagogical development frameworks that include regular faculty training in active learning, curriculum design, and digital pedagogy. These could be embedded within existing quality assurance structures or supported by national bodies such as CNIPES.
• Curricular reforms should promote balance and integration, combining technical content with epistemologically rich units focused on tourism history, anthropology, ethics, and sustainability. This calls for a redefinition of learning outcomes that values not only what graduates can do, but also how they think and why they act.
• Policymakers and funding agencies should incentivize pilot initiatives that model innovation in tourism pedagogy—such as simulation-based learning, intercultural fieldwork, and co-teaching models that pair academic and industry expertise.
• Finally, national agencies such as A3ES should expand their evaluation rubrics to explicitly include criteria on pedagogical intentionality, interdisciplinarity, and student-centered design, thereby encouraging institutions to move beyond compliance and toward meaningful educational transformation.

In this way, this study not only diagnoses pedagogical shortcomings but also offers a strategic roadmap for aligning Portuguese tourism education with contemporary global standards and humanistic principles.

5. Conclusions

This study provides a critical and evidence-based examination of the pedagogical and didactic orientations of tourism training programs across Portugal. Through qualitative content analysis of publicly available curricular unit descriptors and study plans, the findings reveal a clear imbalance between traditional and innovative educational practices.

Approximately 65% of the institutions examined continue to rely predominantly on lecture-heavy, content-driven pedagogical models, with summative evaluation methods such as written exams and theoretical reports. This proportion was derived by classifying institutions based on the prevalence of innovative teaching practices explicitly described in at least three curricular units per program, ensuring consistent institutional-level analysis. These findings point to a systemic dependency on transmissive teaching, which may inhibit deeper student engagement and the development of transversal competencies.

In contrast, the remaining 35% of institutions exhibit intentional integration of active learning strategies, including project-based learning (PBL), flipped classrooms, gamification, and field-based methodologies. These practices are particularly visible in institutions such as Universidade Lusófona, Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, and ESHTE, where course descriptions reference team-based problem-solving, experiential learning, and reflective evaluation.

However, while several programs demonstrate commitment to innovation, discussion of learning outcomes remains limited in most curricular documents. This lack of pedagogical transparency hinders an assessment of how such methodologies translate into student development, particularly in terms of critical thinking, ethical reasoning, and intercultural competence. This study thus identifies a missed opportunity to explicitly link teaching strategies with expected graduate attributes, a recommendation echoed in recent international research (e.g., Wan et al., 2024; Martinez-Garcia et al., 2024).

To address this, the paper suggests that institutions should not only adopt innovative teaching approaches but also embed clear indicators of student learning outcomes, aligned with international frameworks such as UNESCO’s Education for Sustainable Development and UNWTO’s TedQual certification criteria. Doing so would enable a more strategic and outcomes-oriented curriculum design process.

Ultimately, this study highlights both the fragmentation and the emerging potential of tourism education in Portugal. It calls for a paradigm shift in which pedagogical innovation is coupled with curricular transparency and outcome-based planning—essential conditions for preparing future tourism professionals in a complex, globalized, and culturally dynamic sector.

Notably, institutions such as Universidade Lusófona, Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, ESHTE, and the network of schools under Turismo de Portugal stand out for their innovative and pedagogically integrated curricula, in some cases supported by UNWTO. TedQual certification, the Bologna Process, and Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education). These programs reflect a growing awareness of the need to cultivate not only technical skills but also ethical reasoning, cultural sensitivity, and global competence in future tourism professionals.

However, the fragmentation in pedagogical practices across institutions remains a challenge. Many programs exhibit misalignment between intended learning outcomes and actual teaching and assessment strategies, often due to structural rigidity or a lack of faculty training in contemporary educational methodologies.

Nationally, there is growing momentum to address these gaps. The recommendations of A3ES, particularly concerning faculty development and the adoption of international benchmarks, point to the need for systemic pedagogical renewal. Furthermore, the recent creation of the National Council for Pedagogical Innovation in Higher Education (CNIPES) reinforces the strategic importance of innovation and collaboration in teaching across the higher education landscape.

Considering these findings, it becomes evident that tourism education in Portugal must evolve from a predominantly vocational paradigm to a more holistic, reflective, and pedagogically responsive framework. This transformation will require institutional commitment, professional development for educators, and a sustained effort to integrate active learning, interdisciplinarity, and ethical engagement into the curriculum.

By shedding light on the current state of pedagogical practices and their alignment with international standards, this study offers a foundation for further empirical research, national policy development, and curriculum reform efforts aimed at preparing tourism graduates for the complex realities of the 21st-century global tourism industry.

5.1. Critical Review in Relation to the Research Questions

1. 

What pedagogical and didactic approaches are most used in Portuguese tourism training programs?

The research effectively highlights that traditional lecture-based approaches remain predominant across many Portuguese tourism programs. Nonetheless, there is evidence of emerging adoption of more active pedagogical strategies, such as problem-based learning (PBL), flipped classrooms, and experiential learning activities. This response clearly addresses the first research question by identifying both the dominant and developing didactic practices.

2. 

To what extent do these programs incorporate active and experiential learning methodologies?

The results acknowledge the presence of active and experiential learning methodologies, including project-based work, simulations, and gamification. However, it also critically notes that these approaches are inconsistently applied and lack full integration into the curricula. Furthermore, limitations such as insufficient pedagogical training for teaching staff are emphasized, which constrain the effective and systematic incorporation of innovative methods. This provides a nuanced and comprehensive answer to the second research question.

3. 

Are the Portuguese programs aligned with international best practices in tourism education?

The conclusions recognize a gradual alignment with international best practices, particularly regarding student-centered learning and the inclusion of active methodologies. Yet, significant gaps remain, especially concerning the cultural, social, and humanistic dimensions of tourism education and faculty pedagogical preparation. This balanced reflection addresses the third research question by identifying both progress and areas for improvement.

In summary, this study reveals that Portuguese tourism education programs predominantly utilize traditional pedagogical methods yet show a growing, albeit uneven, incorporation of active and experiential learning strategies. Alignment with international best practices is emerging but remains partial, impeded by limited pedagogical training among faculty and insufficient emphasis on socio-cultural and humanistic perspectives. These findings underscore the critical need for enhanced teacher education and curriculum innovation to fully meet contemporary global standards in tourism education.

5.2. Limitations and Directions for Future Research

While this study provides valuable insights into the pedagogical and didactic orientations of tourism education programs in Portugal, it is not without limitations. First, the analysis was limited to publicly available curricular documents and course descriptions published on institutional websites. As such, it may not fully capture the nuances of actual teaching practices or the dynamics of classroom interaction, which often differ from what is formally stated in syllabi.

Second, this study focused primarily on undergraduate programs and did not conduct an exhaustive review of postgraduate tourism education, which may present different pedagogical profiles and methodological innovations. Moreover, the content analysis approach, while useful for identifying explicit references to teaching methods, may overlook implicit or informal pedagogical strategies employed by instructors.

Another limitation lies in the geographical and institutional scope. Although a wide range of universities and polytechnics were included, some programs may have undergone recent revisions that were not reflected in the publicly available data at the time of analysis.

Given these limitations, future research could adopt a mixed-methods approach, combining document analysis with empirical data collection through interviews, focus groups, and classroom observations. Such triangulation would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the actual pedagogical practices and their impact on student learning outcomes.

Additionally, comparative studies involving other countries or regions with similar tourism profiles could help situate the Portuguese case within a broader international framework. Further investigation into the role of digital technologies, gamification, and interdisciplinary learning in tourism education is also recommended, particularly considering the rapid transformation of the tourism sector and the evolving demands of the labor market.

Ultimately, ongoing critical reflection and empirical inquiry are essential to foster meaningful pedagogical innovation and ensure that tourism education in Portugal remains responsive, inclusive, and globally relevant.