“Constructive alignment” tell us that the curriculum, its outcomes, the learning activities (teaching methods) and assessment activities all need be aligned to each other. It highlights the need for consistency in each of the different aspects of the curriculum, including in the enacted curriculum (curriculum as it is taught). Thus, when considering assessment, curriculum designers and facilitators need to ensure all forms of assessment (formative [assessment for learning], summative [assessment of learning] and sustainable [inclusive of assessment as learning]) align with the learning outcomes/competencies and the learning activities. 4.2.2 Feedback Feedback is an integral part of the learning process where learners are engaged in understanding how they could improve, and the strategies for moving forward. Feedback on assessment, when well designed and delivered in a timely manner, could contribute to improvement in subsequent performance. One of the main purposes of feedback is to reduce the gap between current performance and desired goal, and it requires the instructor to provide clarity about the goals, develop appropriate challenges and specific goals, and assist learners in achieving those goals. Effective feedback also promotes learner’s self-understanding, -evaluation and -regulation, and strategies such as peer- and selfassessment are commonly used in the process. Effective feedback addresses three main questions: “where am I going?” (feed up), “how am I doing?” (feedback), and “where to next?” (feed forward), and all these are not separate but “necessary characteristics” of feedback (Boud & Molloy, 2012). Some feedback strategies include the development of (new) feedback models (Boud & Molloy, 2013), and rethinking notions of feedback beyond its role as giving information to learners “but as a coproductive process in which both students and others have key roles to play” (Boud & Soler, 2016, p. 4). Our findings show that feedback is inherently dynamic and co-productive, and we shall examine in detail the ways feedback is used and implemented in some of the cases. In the F&B menu-change training, there are three different but intertwined purposes (of assessment) that shape what kind of feedback is given and if it is to be given at all. The three purposes are to enable accountability and compliance with company regulations; to help or enable workers improve and/or become better in their job; and the notion of “loss” of know-how and investments made in learning/training when a trained staff leaves the company. In this case, feedback might be used to communicate (to employees) the desired behaviour and corresponding rewards for performance and/or compliance, and it could also be used for learning. In a cooking/learning session, we found feedback provided by the development chef (instructorassessor) to be immediate and directed towards helping the cooks (learners) improve their techniques. The development chef coached the cooks by closely observing, correcting and reminding them on the spot as they were cooking, and sometimes by redemonstrating certain steps and techniques that the cooks might have done incorrectly. The nature of feedback in the F&B menu-change training is mainly corrective – addressing techniques and specific actions – rather than explanatory. This type of feedback may be limiting in a way: learners, especially novices, may know what to do but do not necessarily understand what they are doing or realise the impact and consequence of their actions. The way current assessment has been designed is such that feedback is triggered by mistakes the learners make, and the feedback only addresses immediate and visible errors and/or actions. Any “deep knowing” could only come with further practice and experience in the restaurant kitchen, and the onus is on cooks/learners to seek feedback rather than the instructors or assessors or peers to construct and provide feedback. Findings also show that there are multiple sources of feedback; many opportunities to give and receive feedback; and different ways to give feedback, including face to face, group and IT-enabled. In the
49
