The Teaching and Learning Innovation Digest - May 2023

THE ROLE OF
ASSESSMENT
In culinary labs and classrooms
Samuel Glass
Faculty Chef, School of Hospitality, Tourism, and Culinary Arts (SHTCA)
With the return
of on-campus
experiential
learning, we as
educators are once
again challenged
by the question
of what constitutes
assessment of practical
skills. During pandemic
times, I would argue
that to subjectively assess
practical skills through online
learning platforms was next to
impossible. Prior to the pandemic,
Ryll (2017) concluded that a required
practical internship, weekly work hours
under the supervision of an executive
chef, and a six-week externship are the most
recommended procedures to judge and critique the
quality of the food products prepared by online culinary
arts students. Objective assessment for those courses could
be done through tests and measurement. We need to reflect
on how we’ve assessed learning in the past, as well as the need to
adapt to the changing times.
What are the reasons for assessment in a culinary program?
Some include:
• Evaluation of essential skills and knowledge,
• Measuring improvements,
• Identifying student challenges,
• Reflectively evaluating teaching methods and course effectiveness,
• Chef instructors must require students to show what they can do and
assess the quality of their performances (del Villar, 2019).
At a recent faculty meeting, one of the
questions posed was “what constitutes 100
per cent in a practical setting?” Is perfection
possible in a practical application where the
assessment is subjective? That question has
caused myself and others to reflect on what
constitutes assessment for practical skills
and what methods can be used. I believe that
there are two categories of assessment related
to practical labs and classrooms: objective
and subjective.
Objective assessment, as related to practical
applications and evaluations, is either black
or white. There is no grey zone. Each task/
question has a single correct answer or
objective that needs to be met. For example,
if a student is required to cut a piece of
white turnip into a one-inch cube, it can be
measured. If that cube is 1”x1”x1”, then a
perfect grade is warranted. If the cube is
either larger or smaller, then it is not perfect
and does not meet the standard/grade, and
the grade for the imperfect one would reflect
that. Another example would be if a student
is required to cook a roast to an internal
temperature of 125˚F and ends up cooking it to
140˚F. The evaluator has an objective outcome
that has not been met and the student would
be graded accordingly.
Subjective assessment is based on the opinion
of the evaluator and often based on rubrics
and criteria being met. But what makes that
evaluator’s opinion valid? Is the evaluator
a subject matter expert or not? Is there a
difference between a faculty member new
to teaching and one with multiple years of
experience when it comes to an understanding
of assessment types and evaluation?
According to Eisner (1990), “the ability to make
fine-grained discrimination among complex and
subtle qualities is an instance of what I have
called connoisseurship. Connoisseurship is the
art of appreciation” (p. 63). Eisner continues:
“In its customary mode, connoisseurship
is concerned with matters of quality, in the
sense of value. Connoisseurs of wine [and
food], of art, of carpentry are typically those
who can discern the value of what they attend
to. They can often [and should be able to]
provide reasons for their judgment” (p. 69).
104
105