Values, emancipation, and the role of knowledge in tourism education. A critical realist perspective

ABSTRACT

Values are important in education and their role in university studies is central in tourism teaching as well. How values are communicated to students is an important aspect of our axiological approach. In order to promote a fruitful approach to values in the students, this conceptual paper discusses the role of theoretical knowledge in achieving empowerment for the students based on the tenets of critical realism and on Gramsci’s philosophy. As students acquire disciplinary theoretical knowledge, they also develop the tools to make ethical evaluations. Knowledge is meant as the best possible understanding that we have of the world at the moment and it is always possible to achieve a better explanation of a phenomenon. Through an approach based on theoretical knowledge integrated with other creative ways to teach, the students can develop an ethical sensitivity and a flexible set of skills for both the workplace and academia.

KEYWORDS:

• Values
• tourism education
• critical realism
• knowledge
• emancipation

Introduction

In her article about the “moral turn” in tourism research, Kellee Caton (2012) discussed different philosophical approaches, including Gramsci’s philosophy, to argue for the importance of a moral reflection in tourism research and education. Values are also an integral part of the Tourism Education Futures Initiative (TEFI), which has done extensive work to integrate its values in tourism education (P. J. Sheldon et al., 2011; Manley et al., 2015; P. Sheldon et al., 2008). The TEFI values are stewardship, mutuality, ethics, knowledge and professionalism (P. J. Sheldon et al., 2011). These values are not mutually exclusive and often overlap. As a novice tourism educator, teaching values can seem to be an overwhelming task. What is our role as university educators and how values are involved in our teaching of tourism? Caton (2012) argued that our position as educators warrants a reflection about our purpose and the good that we can do for the world. Especially, I am interested in how we convey knowledge because of its prominent role in education, but the other TEFI values will also be part of the discussion.

What do we talk about when we discuss values? Lincoln and Guba (1985) explain that there are different kinds of values. The connotation can refer to substance, function, or an expression of preference. Values are also related to a specific philosophical direction in research, which is axiology; not even positivist research is completely value-free. In this instance, Lincoln and Guba (1985, p. 160) mean value as “arbiters of preference or choice.” The consequences of claims regarding value-free research could potentially lead to a choice of method that may not be suitable for a study or that coherence is imposed on a research project. Furthermore, Lincoln and Guba (1985) argue that moral decisions are involved in all phases of a study and do not only emerge from its results. There are also political consequences to a claim to be free from values. These are related to the results of a research project as well as the fact that some important points of view may be missed or disregarded. The discussion is concluded with the obstacles that are created by consciously conducting research that is based on specific ideological values, will the findings be the result of a subconscious direction given to an inquiry?

The role of values in the pursue of research projects outlined by Lincoln and Guba (1985) and by Caton (2012) constitutes a meaningful way to start this discussion. As we need to reflect on our own position and our own values in research as part of our axiological approach, the same has to be done in our role as educators. It may be tempting to announce that we should transmit values to students so that they can focus on certain aspects of tourism that may be otherwise disregarded because this is what we focus on in our research. In this conceptual paper, I argue that the communication of values between a lecturer and a student in the university context should be done in a way that promotes knowledge acquisition, critical thinking, empowerment and emancipation. The philosophical thought of Gramsci and the theoretical bases of critical realism are the grounds of the discussion.

Critical realism

Critical realism is a realist philosophical approach, which has been pioneered by philosopher Roy Bhaskar. The basic tenets of critical realism are ontological realism and constructivist epistemology. This implies that reality is independent of our thoughts and perceptions, although the latter are very important aspects, especially in the social sciences. The two aspects that are ontologically real and the ones that are constructed are defined as transitive and intransitive dimensions of reality. The latter is not changed by our perceptions or opinions, while the former is influenced by them. This is the case of scientific advancements (Danermark et al., 2019; Fletcher, 2017).

When investigating a phenomenon based on critical realism, the goal is to discover the mechanisms that are the cause of what is observed. Critical realism is based on a stratified ontology, which implies that reality is constituted by different levels that the researcher must investigate to uncover the mechanisms that cause the phenomenon. The different levels are both related to reality and to the investigation (Bhaskar et al., 2018; Fletcher, 2017). As far as ontology is concerned, the level that is defined as “the real” and which is what researchers aim at accessing, is the domain that is farthest from human experience. This is followed by “the actual,” which is the level in which real mechanisms may manifest themselves to us or may not. The last level, “the empirical” is the level of our human experiences. Critical realist investigation is about accessing knowledge of the mechanisms in the domain of the real through the empirical and the actual (Fletcher, 2017). To provide an example, when the steam emanates from the pot as the water boils is a manifestation of the molecules moving faster and transitioning from liquid to gas state. This is an empirical manifestation of hidden mechanisms that are not directly experientable to us. When it comes to the effects of climate change, these may be more difficult for us humans to experience and the experiments more difficult to perform. When dealing with the social sciences, the practical effects of a policy may be directly visible, such as the support provided by Finland’s maternity grants and maternity package which were established due to a low birth rate and high mortality among infants (Kela, n.d.). Other kinds of policies, such as the creation of a citizen salary or the establishment of a 6-hours workday may take a deeper investigation to establish if any effect, positive or negative, was derived by such policies.

Furthermore, in relation to different levels of investigation, critical realism also implies that the researcher may have to investigate a phenomenon from different perspectives to achieve an explanation of the phenomenon that is under investigation. The levels go from the sub-individual, which is concerned with for example, medicine and genetic conditions that may affect a phenomenon, up to the planetary level, in which a phenomenon can be studied from a global perspective (Bhaskar et al., 2018). The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic is a good example of a phenomenon that can be studied from the medical point of view up to the planetary one depending on the aspect that is relevant to investigate.

Critical realism is an emancipatory philosophical approach, which aims at bettering the situation of groups in a disadvantaged position. This is for instance, the case with studies concerning women and indigenous populations. The book written by Smallwood (2015) focuses on this aspect and how critical realism can be used as an emancipatory philosophy to support Indigenous interests. The book is also used to discuss the role of knowledge in education. In the case treated here, the critical realist philosophy is used as a basis to discuss how it is possible for tourism education to be an emancipatory tool and the role played by knowledge in achieving emancipation.

Critical realism, knowledge, and education

The problem of knowledge and how it is gathered through scientific enquiries has been discussed at length in philosophy of science and especially in critical realism. In this case the issue is more connected to knowledge intended as what we pass to students when we teach. As mentioned by Corson (1991, p. 235)

in education we are involved in ‘knowledge questions’ in many different forms, concerning: the content of the curriculum; the model of discovery for use in pedagogy; the theoretical foundation of educational administration and practice; the basis for policy development and analysis; and the mode of educational enquiry itself.

According to Wheelahan (2010), knowledge is also important because society is becoming more and more complex, while on the other hand education has become increasingly specific and vocational.

Corson (1991) argues that critical realism is a fruitful approach to education for several reasons. Critical realism sees society as an open system, the process of discovery is ongoing and can always be changed or replaced if a better discovery comes along. When a better explanation becomes available, the knowledge conventions may change and so does what is taught to students. However, this does not mean that there is no knowledge that can be passed to students. Scott (2010) talks about arbitrary and non-arbitrary knowledge. Approaches such as social constructionism argue that knowledge is arbitrary. Since reality is constructed, knowledge about reality is also the result of a social construction (Scott, 2010). As argued by Scott (2010), it is nevertheless possible to have non-arbitrary knowledge. As the structures in which we are embedded as members of society, knowledge also has an historical component. However, to base new knowledge on previous knowledge is not enough to make it non-arbitrary. Knowledge should provide better explanations of the world or more coherence in our knowledge of the world. Moreover, it should be a better resource for society. Disciplines also support the development of non-arbitrary knowledge (Scott, 2010) and underpin students’ understanding of “the boundaries between different kinds of knowledge” (Wheelahan, 2010, p. 68).

Critical realism also advocates for interdisciplinarity, but as the dialogue between disciplines is very productive, it is important to keep disciplinary expertise (Bhaskar et al., 2018; Wheelahan, 2010). Interdisciplinarity is also considered to be a fruitful approach in tourism research (Tribe, 2002) and, in order to achieve sustainability, both social and natural sciences are important and should be integrated (Wheelahan, 2010). However, research stemming from the social sciences cannot be reduced to the natural sciences. While social sciences help us understand the deep connection between society and nature, natural sciences can support our understanding of how nature changes depending on historical, geographical, and social contexts (Huckle, 2004). Furthermore, it is also relevant to include other approaches to knowledge, especially regarding sustainability. In this context, Indigenous perspectives are very important (Stevens et al., 2019).

Social reality is something that pre-exists us. It is already there when we are born and it is still there after we die. This does not mean that the structures of social reality are permanent and immutable, even though changes take a long time to take roots (Huckle, 2004). Disciplines can also be the result of power relations, but it is possible to distinguish between knowledge developed this way and knowledge that has developed independently. This is presented for instance, in Smallwood’s (2015) book about historical accounts regarding the First Australians that she discusses and refutes. Although knowledge is produced in social contexts, it does not mean that non-arbitrary knowledge cannot be achieved. Non-arbitrary knowledge should also include several approaches to knowledge. Smallwood’s (2015) account supports the inclusion of Indigenous perspectives in the educational system.

Scott (2010) mentions values and the possibility to have independent values from power struggles or that values cannot be time- and place-bound as well as relative. This also does not mean that knowledge cannot transcend time and place. Other criteria to assess non-arbitrary knowledge is the fact that it has been repeatedly tested. The difference between arbitrary and non-arbitrary knowledge is also related to a difference between the focus of disciplines on objective aspects of knowledge and more arbitrary aspects (Wheelahan, 2010). The intention behind the production of knowledge and the possibility for knowledge to transcend a particular context are also very important (Scott, 2010).

The concept of alethic truth

In this context, I will not dwell too much on the concept of truth, but I will define the concept according to critical realism as it will be mentioned in relation to non-arbitrary knowledge. Establishing truth is not an easy task and the way in which Bhaskar set criteria for establishing truth has been criticised even in critical realism (Groff, 2004).

There are four criteria to establish truth. First truth is about trusting the person who told you something (normative-fiduciary concept). Then truth is also relative from an epistemological viewpoint. Our previous knowledge helps us assess if there may be some truth in a certain statement. Furthermore, since truth is relative, the investigation of several levels of reality may reveal that what we believed to be true is actually untrue (adequating concept). Truth also refers to something out there, external to language. This is the referential-expressive concept. Finally, at the alethic level, we know the reason for something to be true. If someone tells us that the grass is green, first we may trust that person to tell us something true. Then, since all knowledge is relative, we investigate more to understand if there may be some instances in which the grass is not green. This statement also refers to the grass out there, which exists and we can see is green. However, the alethic truth of the grass being green is the explanation related to the reflection of the light (Bhaskar, 2008; Smallwood, 2015).

Knowledge that is established and based on alethic truth can be used as a good basis to construct the part of the teaching curriculum that deals with non-arbitrary knowledge. This type of knowledge can also help in upholding general important principles for ethics in relation to host-guest relations, sustainability, and environmental damage. These adopted principles will hold until more knowledge is gathered. As previously mentioned, critical realism is based on a conceptualisation of scientific discovery which implies that knowledge can always be improved (Danermark et al., 2019).

Values in critical realism

Before discussing knowledge and emancipation, it is important to discuss how values are conceptualised in critical realism. While some argue for objective values rooted into the intrinsic goodness of humans (Collier, 2005) others maintain that values are socially produced (Elder-Vass, 2010). The latter is the position taken here, but both are presented and analysed.

Collier (2005) based his argument on human nature and on how we interact with others and with other creatures. This discussion is based on two main assumptions. One is that we can understand other people’s values even if they are different from our own and since we are higher beings, our needs are higher in the hierarchy of human nature. Furthermore, Collier (2005, p. 7) argues that we can uphold values even though they are not directly connected to the well-being of our species. We can override such values if it is necessary and the “conception of our good […] includes the good of other beings” (emphasis in the original). The conception that values are independent of us is related to the fact that we can uphold values that do not directly benefit us and what is good for us can be the good of other beings. This means that we can promote values for other beings. We are also capable of recognizing things that are good in general, such as the importance of nature, although it does not benefit us directly. Subjectivist positions, which argue that what is important is exclusively our own experience, will not agree with this view (Collier, 2005). Collier (2005) further grounds his discussion in Spinoza’s and Saint Augustine’s philosophy. The final argument is that historical changes in values are the transitive dimension of morality, but they are connected to an intransitive dimension, which is

the intrinsic worth of beings, whether they are beings specific to a given society, or common to all societies, or independent of human society altogether: people and animals, buildings and plants, landscapes and heavenly bodies, mice and cheese and fleas and money. (Collier, 2005, p. 61)

To base values on human nature is problematic in several ways. Values are highly dependent on several factors, from cultural to historical. Values change over time and although we can understand other people’s values, it does not mean that we tend to adopt them or to further them.

The other argument put forward in critical realism is that values are socially constructed. Bhaskar discussed moral realism at length (e.g., Bhaskar, 2008). The core argument is that there are aspects of morality that are objective and independent of people’s perception (Elder-Vass, 2010). This is the same basis for arguing for an alethic truth (Bhaskar, 2008). The difference between a moral stance from a realist viewpoint and one that is anti-realist lies in how values are created and perceived. From an anti-realist point of view, moral values are the product of the combination of certain individual and social characteristics, while from a realist viewpoint moral values are independent from what an individual or a group may uphold as a belief. In the latter case there are then objective values (Elder-Vass, 2010).

Elder-Vass (2010) explains that to maintain that values are objective, their ontological nature needs to be established. Both personal and social values are dependent on people to exist and especially there is a need for a communication system between social animals. If values cannot exist without people, then their objective existence is in question. Although we can accept the argument that values are not materially real, they can still be placed in the domain of the real. This makes it complicated to solve how values interact with the real world. Even if we can argue that a certain way to think will remain even when the person thinking that way is not there anymore because someone else can think in the same way, values are still not objectively right. Bhaskar developed basic and dialectical critical realism in what is called transcendental realism, but Elder-Vass (2010, 2019) argues that this does not solve the problem of the objectivity of values.

As critical realism is a realist philosophy, non-objective values open the door to constructivist and postmodern views on values. One stance on morality is then not more valid than another (Elder-Vass, 2010, 2019). To solve this Elder-Vass (2010, 2019) explains that we can reach consensus on certain principles by basing them on basic human needs as well as certain principles of a moral debate. Such principles have been elaborated by Habermas and maintain that processes are conducted honestly with open participation of affected parties as well as they are not distorted by parties’ power (Elder-Vass, 2010). For what it concerns the basic principles, humans should be provided with several capabilities. Nussbaum (2000, pp. 78–80, as cited in Elder-Vass, 2010, p. 54) lists such capabilities as “life, health, bodily integrity, senses, imagination and emotions.”

The objectivity of values is very important in the context of communicating the “notion that all human beings belong to a shared moral community” (Phi & Waldesten, 2021, p. 10) to achieve sustainability. The point is how we get to the part in which we share moral values. Rather than assigning the objectivity of values to human nature, agreed principles, truth and non-arbitrary knowledge should be the preferred approaches.

Values and value(s) education

The focus of value(s) education is to promote certain societal values, the definition is “the promotion and development of values in the context of education as a lifelong process, to help individuals develop as responsible caring persons and live as participating members of a pluralist society” (Taylor, 1995, p. 24, as cited in Halstead, 1996, p. 8). The values that are stressed are social, moral, democratic but also cultural diversity, cultural identity, human rights, environmental values, gender equality and so on (Densford, 1961; Halstead, 1996). The goal of value education is “to strengthen the transfer of values in education” (Veugelers, 2000, p. 37). There is a certain overlap with the TEFI values, which stress principles such as responsibility, community service, inclusion and transparency (P. J. Sheldon et al., 2011).

There is of course a difference in teaching in primary and secondary school and teaching at university. When the students reach the university level, they have already spent considerable time in school and have been exposed to quite many different values on the way. As mentioned by Densford (1961, p. 92), “The system or institution of education is a major instrument for reflecting the values cherished by a given society.” Any educational system is based on a certain philosophical framework, including beliefs about ontology and epistemology (Densford, 1961; Veugelers, 2000). These beliefs will influence how, and which knowledge is conveyed, which is the expression of what he calls value-theory.

Values are taught in different ways. Moscardo and Murphy (2011) mention that values can be inculcated, freely developed (as proposed here), values can be approached critically and then there are postmodern approaches to values. While some approaches to value education focus on transferring values, critical thinking focuses on developing the ability to reflect on values. Moral development focuses instead on cognitive development and the acquisition of the skills necessary to reflect on values. Veugelers (2000) discusses how and which values teachers communicate and their reflection on their own values and how they are included in the curriculum. In the context of tourism, it has been argued that values would provide a good ground for taking decisions in an ethical manner (Gretzel et al., 2011). Values can be taught through moral dilemmas (Berkowitz, 2011; Veugelers, 2000) and cooperative learning, in which students discuss topics on small groups (Berkowitz, 2011). In the context of the TEFI work with education, approaches to teach tourism informed by TEFI values have resulted in different practical techniques such as the cases described by Gretzel et al. (2011) and Canziani (2014).

To promote moral development and critical thinking, it is important to provide the students with theoretical knowledge to be able to make judgements about certain topics and to evaluate and produce knowledge. Bloom’s taxonomy shows how the memorization of basic knowledge is followed by steps related to processing knowledge up until the students can produce own knowledge (Armstrong, 2010; Reeves, 1990). This presupposes some facts to be memorized first. Different subjects require different degrees of memorization, but theoretical knowledge as well as basic principles are important for the students to be able to develop critical thinking and to be able to make informed decisions regarding ethical principles.

Gramsci’s pedagogical thought

Antonio Gramsci is an Italian philosopher who discussed hegemony and the struggle of the working class, but also values and pedagogic activities. Gramsci talked about the school system in Italy and how he would prefer to see it organised. He thought that the separation between the Liceo and university was too pronounced, and he argues for a smoother transition between the two levels. Liceo is one of the options in Italian general upper secondary education with different curricula and foci (Eurydice, 2020). Liceo is more focused on theoretical knowledge rather than practical. Gramsci (1975a, p. 486) writes

And so in the unitary school the high school phase has to be conceived as the most important transitory phase in which the school aims at creating the fundamental values of “humanism,” the intellectual self-discipline and the moral autonomy that is necessary for additional specialisation, both if the latter is intellectual in character (university studies) or directly practical-productive (industry, exchange organisation, bureaucracy etc.).

In this quote Gramsci expresses the idea that the high school would be a good phase to teach students values, among which moral autonomy. The focus on the possibility to convey humanistic values (although at the university level), specifically in tourism education, is also advocated by Boluk and Carnicelli (2019) in the context of Freirean philosophy. According to Gramsci, culture as well as education should be a way for young people to develop “a critical consciousness of their historical world, conceived in its totality, but then also of their historical roots and perspectives” (Fusaro, 2017, p. 82). Fusaro (2017) also argues that universities are increasingly becoming a place of indoctrination producing workforce for precarious employment, rather than being places that foster human beings. This is one of the reasons why, as argued in the next section, some separation between the place of education and the place of work is necessary.

Gramsci discusses the role of intellectuals and what he calls “organic intellectuals”. There are many universities who perpetuate dominating ideas, furthering the interests of capitalist powers (Holst & Brookfield, 2017). Organic intellectuals should actively work to achieve political independence of the working class and this should also be done in the realm of pedagogy. This is what constitutes “the dialectical relationship between theory and practice” (Holst & Brookfield, 2017, p. 212). Furthermore, Holst and Brookfield (2017) argued that it is a hope of many educators that students will acquire critical and independent thinking from the classes they attend. In relation to this

educators strive to provide their students with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to be able to think for themselves and to be able to assess situations and draw their own conclusions, so that they will not fall victim to the imposition of others’ ideas which may not be their own (Holst & Brookfield, 2017, p. 198)

This is what Holst and Brookfield (2017) call empowerment. Gramsci’s philosophy is strongly based on the concept of empowerment and the possibility to fight hegemonic powers for the working class to achieve independence. Empowerment is seen here as a precondition to achieve emancipation, which is one step further.

Gramsci thought that classical education as it was organised in Italy was mostly aimed at perpetuating the dominance of the bourgeoisie. This is especially expressed in his criticism of how Latin was taught (Pizzolato & Holst, 2017). Gramsci believed that there should not be any separation between high culture and pop culture, both are considered important. History provides people with an understanding of their past. There should be a mutual exchange between the teacher and the pupil rather than a hierarchical relationship, although he argued that discipline was important (Fusaro, 2017; Pagano, 2017). For Gramsci it is also important to foster creativity and free activity, theory and practice should be connected and while students should first be taught the basics, so that they can develop later creative thinking but also moral autonomy (Pagano, 2017). Gramsci is also keen on seeing values transmitted between generations in different ways and across the entire society so that the transmission of hegemony can be monitored and critiqued (Pizzolato & Holst, 2017; Gramsci, 1975b, p. 1331). Gramsci’s philosophical views on education can also be linked to other ways of constructing knowledge, such as the previously mentioned Indigenous perspectives. For instance, to transmit values and practices between generations is very important in Indigenous cultures (Wachowich, 2001).

Gramsci’s philosophy can be connected to Bloom’s taxonomy (Armstrong, 2010) and the idea that memorizing facts is then followed by the possibility to analytical and even produce new knowledge, which is what university students have to achieve when writing their theses. This also links Gramsci to what I have previously argued. The importance of theoretical knowledge should not be overplayed, and a good balance with other activities is important for the students to gain a complete set of skills.

Knowledge, education, and emancipation

Wheelahan (2010) argues that education has increasingly changed so that curricula are more vocational and are directed to giving workplace-specific knowledge. This is also the case of tourism and it is not uncommon to find discrepancies in goals such as a desire to have a highly educated and yet young workforce (Padurean & Maggi, 2011). It is important for the students to be given access to de-contextualised knowledge as well as to let them understand different kinds of knowledge and their limits. As previously mentioned, knowledge can be tested and can be judged for its soundness. The same is true for a teaching curriculum and the knowledge contained in it (Wheelahan, 2010). Furthermore, if adopting a relativistic stance implies that any discourse is valid, critical realism allows for discourses to be evaluated and dismissed (Olvitt, 2015).

Theoretical knowledge helps the students to apply the knowledge they acquired to the specific contexts in which they will be working. Furthermore, it allows students to evaluate and produce knowledge (Wheelahan, 2010). Knowledge is skills, critical thinking, and creativity (Padurean & Maggi, 2011), but also what is known in the context of a specific field as well as familiarity gained from experience (Barber, 2011). “Knowledge is more than data (summary descriptions of parts of the world around us) and more than information (data put into a context)” (P. J. Sheldon et al., 2011, p. 10) and is considered an important value in tourism education (P. Sheldon et al., 2008). Furthermore, as mentioned throughout the paper, knowledge can be of different kinds, such as Indigenous knowledge (Stevens et al., 2019). Knowledge should also be presented as disciplinary:

Students need access to the disciplines so they can abstract from events and experiences to understand different structured entities and the emergent properties that result as a consequence of their interaction. This provides them with access to understanding what happens, what does not happen and what potentially could happen. (Wheelahan, 2010, p. 68)

This will also allow the students to be able to participate in society and about its future. Disciplinary knowledge is powerful knowledge and can help all kinds of students, but can always be revised (Wheelahan, 2010). The process of understanding knowledge from the perspective of disciplines is the same process of abstraction that is part of the critical realist investigation. Critical realism is especially positive for the treatment of complex problems (Price, 2016) such as sustainability. Especially in the case of tourism, interdisciplinarity can very be beneficial (Mair, 2006), the same can be argued for theoretical knowledge. Critical realism is seen as a good approach to both teaching (Corson, 1991) as well as achieving sustainability (Wheelahan, 2010).

This account of knowledge is different than the one criticised my Gramsci. He criticised how the bourgeoisie structured knowledge to keep it from the working class (Pizzolato & Holst, 2017). The approach described by Wheelahan (2010) is meant to be empowering, and consequently emancipating, for all students, regardless of their background. This is also an important aspect of Gramsci’s thought. Wheelahan (2010) argues that there has been an increasing conflation between general and academic education. An additional conflation is the one with generic skills expressed in a more vocational education. This is not to say that vocational education is not relevant, but disciplinary knowledge should be important as well together with important soft skills such as communication, problem-solving, leadership (Wesley et al., 2017) and communication (Wheelahan, 2010). These skills are also expressed in the TEFI values (P. J. Sheldon et al., 2011) and TEFI-related activities (Canziani, 2014). However, workplace and place of education should be separate (Wheelahan, 2010) to preserve the independence of education, as previously mentioned. This does not mean that the two should not interact, as also argued later in this section. Internships and other programs are very productive activities for both the students and tourism stakeholders (Sonnenschein et al., 2019). Moreover, focus on more reflective approaches to education is also seen as important in vocational contexts (Morgan, 2004).

Theoretical knowledge can be made more dynamic and flexible. This is not very different from the “philosophical” practitioner described by Tribe (2002, 2005), which ideally is placed in the middle in between more vocational and more liberal stances on education. The latter focuses on “freedom of thought about tourism” (Tribe, 2002, p. 340). This is especially important in relation to the previously mentioned power and discourses. A curriculum that has a strong basis in theoretical knowledge also facilitates power critique and the possibility to achieve emancipation as discussed by Boluk and Carnicelli (2019). A similar argument is also put forward by Fullagar and Wilson (2012) regarding critical pedagogies. The authors advocate for an approach combining both theoretical and practical knowledge as well as a reflection on different aspects of tourism, such as the fact that tourism is defined as a monolithic “industry”. However, Fullagar and Wilson (2012) also argued that tourism should be edgy and post-disciplinary, and this is bound to lead to the dangers of relativism. Some examples of these are the impossibility “to tell the truth” but also to argue against “those who say that testimonies are not objective enough to convey the truth” (Smallwood, 2015, p. 16).

Truth is fundamental to find the mechanisms that are behind inequality as well as more serious issues (Smallwood, 2015). Part of the struggle is related to be proud of Indigenous culture and to demand “its rightful place in the education system” (Smallwood, 2015, p. 118). It is important to stress that my focus on non-arbitrary knowledge also includes a variety of approaches and therefore Smallwood’s (2015) account is very important. Education should not return to a model in which students are passive receivers of knowledge that they are not able to apply to real-world situations (Wesley et al., 2017). Theoretical non-arbitrary knowledge should be accompanied by a meaningful dialogue with different actors operating in tourism regarding important skills (Rodríguez-Antón et al., 2013), eye-opening activities such as fieldtrips (Grinfelde & Veliverronena, 2021) and problem-solving exercises (Şeremet et al., 2021) as well as different perspectives such as Indigenous voices (Stevens et al., 2019).

Discussion and conclusions

The purpose of this paper has been to outline a conceptualisation of values in higher education that is based on the tenets of critical realism and on Gramscian philosophy. Critical realism is a postpositivist approach to the philosophy of science that is based on a realist ontology and a constructivist epistemology. To uphold that there is a reality independent of our thoughts even though our perceptions are very important means that there are different concepts in critical realism that are discussed objectively. Objectivity does not mean to uphold one position over another in a normative manner asserting some sort of power as it is more a way to hold fast to something that has passed several tests until a better explanation comes along. The implications for educators, in tourism especially, are that the students should be provided with enough non-arbitrary knowledge of tourism so that they can process this knowledge, apply it, critique it, and find better solution that will ensure that the tourism system is more ethical in the future. In this process, students will also acquire tools for empowerment and emancipation. There are many ways to convey knowledge to the students and this also includes how values are communicated.

Values are a heterogeneous word with a few different meanings. When values are discussed in education, it is usually a reference to the values of the teacher and consequently what is passed onto the students and how. This discussion has outlined an approach to the transmission of values that is indirect, to foster the moral growth of the students. As outlined in the section about values in critical realism, values can be either be conceptualised as objective or as subjective. A subjective conceptualisation of values does not imply that values are relativistic, but that values should be based on general basic human needs and on a discussion aimed at reaching a consensus. The argument put forward by Smallwood (2015) regarding human rights is also based on certain general principles and so is the conceptualisation of alethic truth. These universal assumptions are the basic tenets that support a meaningful dialogue about ethics and about how tourism should move forward. To understand the importance of these general principles and to develop an informed moral stance, students need to have a well-developed non-arbitrary knowledge about different topics. Sustainability, climate change and host-guest relationships at the global level are so-called wicked problems (Şeremet et al., 2021), which require a good basis to make sound decisions in a future occupation as tourism manager or other tourism- and hospitality-related occupations. Tourism in general, which involves many “double-edged sword” dilemmas, will benefit from an integration of theoretical knowledge, interdisciplinarity and the incorporation of both soft skills and other approaches to knowledge such as Indigenous perspectives.

Furthermore, access to knowledge is also seen as an empowering and consequently emancipating tool. As argued in Gramscian philosophical thought as well as indirectly by Smallwood (2015), knowledge is a way to critique the current hegemonic structures and power relations from an informed position. This will allow the students to be equipped to act ethically and make a change in the world for themselves and for others from a stronger standpoint.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).