Wine and Food Pairing

1.
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
Implementation
Plan
Renee
Kowalchik
May
2013

2. 1
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
-­‐
Implementation
Plan
Module
Overview
and
Description:
This
instructional
module
is
designed
to
teach
store
clerks
at
a
wine
retailer
how
to
help
customers
choose
a
wine
to
pair
with
a
meal.
This
module
will
not
make
the
clerks
expert
wine
sommeliers,
but
will
give
the
learners
the
tools
to
make
some
general
suggestions
to
help
customers.
Because
of
the
complexity
of
wine
tasting
and
pairing
in
addition
to
the
time
limit,
this
module
will
focus
on
learners
who
have
at
least
a
general
knowledge
of
wine
types
and
the
characteristics
used
to
describe
wine.
Learner
Analysis:
First,
the
learners
for
this
module
will
all
be
adults.
Because
this
employee
training
deals
with
an
alcoholic
beverage,
the
age
restrictions
imposed
by
the
government
will
only
allow
employees
over
the
age
of
twenty-­‐one.
Knowing
that
all
of
the
learners
will
be
adults
gives
the
designers
some
direction
for
structuring
the
training.
According
to
Knowles,
as
described
by
Mark
Smith
in
his
article,
adult
learners
are
self-­‐directed,
have
increased
background
and
life
experiences,
and
are
motivated
and
ready
to
learn
(Smith,
2002).
These
characteristics
may
apply
in
the
design
of
this
module
first
by
requiring
the
training
to
be
flexible
to
increase
the
learner’s
control
to
work
with
their
self-­‐directed
nature.
In
addition,
it
is
likely
the
adult
learners
will
appreciate
the
connections
to
life
experiences
and
the
direct
relationship
to
their
job
as
a
salesperson
for
the
wine
retailer.
Another
generalization
that
can
be
made
is
the
minimum
academic
level
of
the
learners.
Due
to
the
nature
of
the
job,
the
employer
only
hires
individuals
with
at
least
a
high
school
diploma
and
some
experience
in
a
retail
setting.
Because
of
these
requirements,
the
learners
all
read
at
a
minimum
of
an
eighth
grade
reading
level
and
have
some
experience
using
computers.
These
characteristics
are
a
consideration
when
designing
instruction
to
insure
that
the
text
is
readable
for
the
learner
and
multimedia
is
accessible
using
a
computer.
The
characteristics
of
the
actual
learners
participating
in
this
module
are
similar
to
each
other.
They
are
summarized
in
the
table
below.
It
is
suggested
in
the
text
that
instruction
be
designed
so
that
it
is
slightly
more
challenging
than
would
be
expected
for
the
average
learner
to
accomplish.
In
this
way,
supplements
or
strategies
in
course
structure
may
be
available
for
those
learners
who
are
struggling,
but
the
majority
of
learners
are
challenged
and
engaged
(Morrison,
Ross,
Kalman,
&
Kemp,
2011).
Audience
• Retail
store
clerks
General
Learner
Characteristics
• Age:
40-­‐
60+
• Gender:
Females
• Education:
Graduate
degree
• Work
Experience:
1-­‐30
years
• Ethnicity
–
White
Prerequisites
• All
are
familiar
with
general
types
of
wine
• All
are
familiar
with
different
types
of
foods
Prior
Experience
• All
have
experience
with
customer
service
• All
are
casual
wine
drinkers
who
understand
the
characteristics
used
to
describe
wine
Attitude
and
Motivation
• Being
only
casual
wine
drinkers,
these
participant
have
little
experience
pairing
food
and
wine
• All
participants
are
willing
to
learn
more
about
wine/food
pairing

3. 2
Instructional
Context:
The
learners
in
this
module
are
all
casual
wine
drinkers.
They
know
the
names
and
some
general
characteristics
of
different
types
of
wine.
They
also
have
a
basic
knowledge
of
food
and
food
preparation.
These
prerequisite
skills
and
knowledge
will
be
used
to
help
the
learner
understand
why
certain
wines
pair
well
with
specific
foods.
Being
able
to
successfully
pair
wine
and
food
will
help
the
store
clerks
improve
customer
service,
but
will
also
be
beneficial
in
their
personal
lives
as
all
of
them
drink
wine
at
least
occasionally.
Learners
build
personal
interpretations
of
the
world
based
on
individual
experiences
and
interactions.
(Ertmer,
Newby
1993)
From
Adult
learning,
learning
occurs
through
independent
action
of
the
learner,
when
life
experience
can
be
used
as
a
resource
for
learning,
when
learning
needs
are
closely
aligned
to
social
roles,
is
problem
centered
and
is
motivated
by
internal
factors.
(Conlan,
Grabowski,
&
Smith,
2003)
Keeping
these
points
in
mind,
the
instruction
focused
on
building
on
the
learners
prior
knowledge,
on
developing
their
interest
in
learning
about
wine
and
food
pairing,
and
on
improving
their
ability
to
help
customers.
The
instructional
module
will
be
a
blended
format,
some
of
the
information
is
presented
to
each
individual
in
a
multimedia
format
via
computer
and
other
parts
require
individual
and
large
group
instruction
by
a
facilitator.
Access
to
computers,
wireless
internet,
writing
implements
for
taking
notes,
and
a
large
workspace
on
which
to
place
several
wine
glasses,
food
dishes,
and
utensils
is
required.
Each
participant
will
need
a
“Participant
Guide”
which
should
be
printed
in
advance.
A
stove,
oven,
and
refrigerator
are
all
required
for
food
and
wine
storage
and
food
preparation.
Samples
of
various
foods
and
wine
described
later
in
this
module
are
required
for
each
participant.
The
foods
chosen
are
those
that
can
be
found
easily
pre-­‐made
in
most
grocery
stores.
This
will
keep
preparation
to
a
minimum.
Unit
Goals
and
Instructional
Objectives:
There
are
three
goals
for
this
instructional
module:
1. Explain
the
rules
for
pairing
wine
and
food
2. Match
food
with
an
appropriate
wine
3. Help
a
potential
customer
choose
a
wine
that
will
pair
well
with
their
meal
In
order
for
these
goals
to
be
met,
the
following
learning
objectives
must
be
completed:
1. Identify
wine
and
food
characteristics
that
affect
the
pairing
relationship
2. List
the
rules
for
pairing
wine
and
food
3. Group
wine
and
food
based
on
their
dominant
characteristics
4. Make
appropriate
connections
between
wine
and
food
based
on
their
characteristics
5. Suggest
appropriate
wine
using
customer
input
Instructional
Strategies:
Introduction
by
Facilitator
(5
minutes)
Hand
out
learner
packet.
Refer
learners
to
the
wine
guide
on
page
2
that
summarizes
the
characteristics
of
some
popular
types
of
wine.
Note
that
the
wines
used
in
this
module
are
highlighted.
Multimedia
Presentation
–
Rules
for
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
(10
minutes)
In
this
interactive,
multimedia
presentation,
the
learners
will
be
introduced
to
the
rules
for
how
to

4. 3
successfully
pair
wine
and
food.
This
part
of
the
instruction
will
be
computer-­‐based
with
a
graphic
organizer
located
in
the
learner
packet
on
which
participants
can
take
notes.
It
will
end
with
a
short
quiz
to
check
for
understanding.
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
(35
minutes)
The
participants
will
receive
samples
of
wine
and
food
to
test
the
rules
for
themselves.
Directions
for
this
activity
are
in
the
learner
packet
along
with
a
place
for
the
participants
to
take
notes
if
they
should
so
choose.
There
will
also
be
an
opportunity
to
try
some
of
the
wines
with
foods
that
do
not
pair
well.
Putting
it
All
Together
(10
minutes)
The
participants
will
complete
a
final
multimedia
activity
to
review
the
pairing
rules,
and
to
practice
helping
customers
choose
an
appropriate
wine.
This
is
in
the
form
an
computer-­‐based
quiz
to
assess
how
well
the
learner
can
pair
wine
and
food.
Learner
Assessment
Strategies:
The
overall
goal
in
training
and
educational
settings
is
to
determine
student
success
in
learning.
(Morrison,
G.
R.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
2011).
Formative
assessment
of
the
learner
will
take
place
throughout
the
module
as
the
facilitator
interacts
with
the
learners.
Asking
the
learner
questions
and
gauging
their
understanding
through
one-­‐on-­‐one
discussions
is
a
quick
and
easy
way
to
determine
learner
progress.
This
can
be
done
at
all
stages
of
the
module
for
all
of
the
learning
goals
and
objectives.
There
is
also
a
short
quiz
at
the
end
of
the
interactive
multimedia
presentation
on
the
rules
of
pairing.
This
quiz
will
allow
the
facilitator
to
determine
who
is
ready
to
move
on
to
the
actual
tasting
of
the
food
and
wine
pairs.
The
quiz
will
focus
on
the
rules
for
pairing
wine
and
food,
which
is
aligned
with
the
first
goal
of
this
module
–
“Explain
the
rules
for
pairing
wine
and
food.”
The
objectives
that
support
this
goal
and
are
tested
in
this
assessment
are
identifying
wine
and
food
characteristics
that
affect
pairing,
listing
the
rules
for
pairing,
and
grouping
the
food
and
wine
based
on
their
characteristics.
We
will
use
summative
evaluation
as
it
is
directed
toward
measuring
the
degree
to
which
the
major
outcomes
are
attained.
(Morrison,
G.
R.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
2011)
Summative
assessment
will
take
place
in
the
last
section
of
the
module
when
the
learner
completes
the
interactive
assessment
to
review
the
rules
and
suggest
wine
pairings
to
a
fictitious
customer.
Using
information
provided
by
a
customer,
the
learner
will
need
to
give
a
possible
wine
paring
that
will
complement
the
description.
In
this
way,
the
learner
will
show
that
they
are
able
to
successfully
help
customers.
This
assessment
measures
the
level
to
which
learners
have
met
the
second
and
third
goals
stated
earlier,
“Match
food
with
an
appropriate
wine”
and
“Help
a
potential
customer
choose
a
wine
that
will
pair
well
with
their
meal.”
The
learners
will
also
complete
a
short
survey.
This
survey
will
include
questions
about
whether
or
not
they
enjoyed
the
lesson,
if
they
would
like
more
information
on
the
topic,
and
what
they
thought
of
the
course
itself.
While
these
questions
are
not
directly
related
to
the
goals
of
the
course,
the
evaluation
will
help
to
determine
whether
or
not
the
learners
thought
that
the
lesson
was
beneficial,
and
if
there
are
changes
that
might
need
to
be
considered
if
the
lesson
were
to
be
used
again.
Summary
of
Modifications:
The
major
modification
made
was
focusing
the
goals
and
objectives
on
wine
and
food
pairing
only.
Because
the
learners
all
have
a
general
knowledge
of
wine,
there
is
no
need
to
instruct
on
the
characteristics
of
wine
and
wine
tasting.
This
will
also
solve
the
problem
of
the
module
being
too
long.
The
original
plan
had
expected
a
wide
variety
of
learner
characteristics
and
was
designed
based
on
the
large
range
of
prior
knowledge
a
varied
group
could
be
expected
to
have.
Because
the
actual
learners
for

5. 4
this
module
have
very
similar
characteristics
and
a
large
amount
of
prior
knowledge
about
wine
and
food,
the
instructional
materials
could
be
tailored
to
that
level.
The
learning
related
scheme
suggests
ways
to
sequence
content
based
on
learner
characteristics
identified
in
the
learner
analysis.
This
scheme
“considers
difficulty
of
material,
its
appeal
or
interest
to
the
learner,
prerequisite
information
and
the
learner’s
cognitive
development.”
(Morrison,
G.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
2011)
Because
the
learners
are
very
similar,
it
was
much
easier
to
focus
on
their
strengths
and
deficiencies
when
designing
the
instruction.
The
instructional
materials
were
revised
with
this
focus,
and
now
include
computer-­‐
based
segments
in
addition
to
facilitator
led
instruction.
The
other
major
modification
deals
with
the
level
of
proficiency
expected
as
a
result
of
the
instruction.
Because
of
the
complexity
of
the
topic
and
the
limited
amount
of
time,
the
process
of
food
and
wine
pairing
was
simplified
as
much
as
possible.
The
types
of
wine
used
in
the
module
were
limited
to
just
five
very
common
and
versatile
varietals,
so
that
while
the
learner
will
not
be
an
expert,
they
will
be
able
to
make
some
general
pairings
that
will
help
the
customers.
In
addition,
the
foods
chosen
to
do
the
tasting
portion
of
the
lesson
are
those
that
can
be
purchased
pre-­‐made
and
stored
and
heated
quickly
and
easily.
This
should
reduce
the
time
necessary
for
the
lesson,
but
still
give
the
learner
enough
experience
to
feel
more
comfortable
helping
customers
select
wine.

6. 5
REFERENCES
Conlan,
J.,
Grabowski,
S.,
&
Smith.
(2003).
Adult
Learning.
Emerging
perspectives
on
learning,
teaching
and
technology.
http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning
Ertmer,
P.A.
and
Newby,
T.J.
(1993).
Behaviorism,
Cognitivism,
Constructivism:
Comparing
critical
features
from
an
Instructional
Design
perspective.
Performance
Improvement
Quarterly,
6(4),
50-­‐72.
Morrison,
G.
R.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
(2011).
Designing
Effective
Instruction
(6th
ed.).
Hoboken,
NJ:
John
Wiley
and
Sons.
Smith,
M.
K.
(2002).
Malcolm
Knowles,
informal
adult
education,
self-­‐direction
and
andragogy.
The
encyclopedia
of
informal
education.
Retrieved
from
http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-­‐
knowl.htm#andragogy

7.
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
Participant
Guide

8.
1
Wine
Guide
Use
this
guide
as
a
reference
as
you
identify
the
characteristics
of
wine
that
affect
the
pairing
relationship.
The
wines
we
will
be
using
in
this
lesson
are
those
that
are
highlighted.
Full-­‐Bodied,
Rich
Wines:
Cabernet
Sauvignon:
(Red)
Full-­‐flavored,
fruity,
somewhat
tannic
wine.
Traditional
wine
for
formal
dinners,
works
well
with
rich
beef
dishes,
wild
game,
and
heavy
sauces.
Merlot:
(Red)
Softer
and
with
less
tannins
than
Cab
(above),
but
still
full-­‐flavored.
Very
versatile
–
works
with
most
red
meats,
mushroom
sauces,
and
other
strong,
rich
flavors.
Medium-­‐Bodied,
Fruity
Wines:
Chianti:
(Red)
Elegant,
medium
flavor
with
high
acidity.
Works
well
with
acidic
foods
like
tomatoes.
Chardonnay:
(White)
Rich,
full-­‐flavored
wine.
Very
versatile
and
pairs
well
with
foods
that
are
full
of
flavor
and
complex.
Gewurztraminer:
(White)
Full,
rich,
and
exotically
flavored.
Sometimes
described
as
spicy.
Because
of
this
is
works
well
with
foods
that
are
spicy
and
flavorful.
Light-­‐Bodied,
Crisp
Wines:
Sauvignon
Blanc:
(White)
Light-­‐flavored
and
crisp,
often
described
as
Chardonnay’s
lighter
cousin.
Works
well
with
delicately
flavored
foods
or
acidic
dishes.
Pinot
Grigio:
(White)
Light
with
citrusy
flavor.
Works
well
with
lean,
simple
dishes.
Medium-­‐Bodied,
Sweet
Wines:
White
Zinfandel:
(White)
Full
flavored
with
spicy
undertones
and
significant
tannins.
Works
well
with
full-­‐flavored
and
spicy
dishes.
Light-­‐Bodied,
Sweet
Wines:
Reisling:
(White)
Fruity
wines
with
crisp
finish.
Works
well
with
rich
flavors
and
spicy
sauces.
Information
obtained
from
the
following
websites:
http://foodandwinepairing.org
http://sutterhome.com

9.
2
Notes:
Rules
of
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
#1
Rule:
____________________________________________________________________
Guideline
Explanation
Examples

10.
3
Directions
for
Tasting
Food
and
Wine
Pairs
In
this
section
of
the
lesson,
you
will
taste
different
wines
and
foods
together
so
that
you
can
experience
first
hand
the
different
food
and
wine
pairs
that
follow
the
guidelines
you
just
learned.
Tasting
Process:
1. Collect
the
samples
of
wine.
There
are
5
different
wines
you
will
taste;
they
are
listed
in
the
chart
on
the
next
page.
2. Obtain
a
small
sample
of
the
first
food
to
pair.
Locate
the
wine
that
will
pair
well
according
to
the
guidelines.
3. Taste
the
wine
first
–
allowing
the
wine
to
coat
your
tongue
and
mouth.
Then
taste
the
food,
followed
by
another
sip
of
wine.
If
you
would
like
to
take
notes
on
your
experience,
you
may
do
so
on
the
chart
provided
or
on
the
back
of
the
paper
if
more
room
is
needed.
4. Cleanse
your
palate
by
eating
an
oyster
cracker
and
drinking
some
water.
5. Choose
another
wine
from
the
group
to
pair
with
the
food
you
just
tasted
and
repeat
steps
3
and
4.
6. Consider
the
following
questions:
Do
you
like
the
first
or
second
combination
better?
Did
you
expect
the
pair
to
work
–
why
or
why
not?
Again,
you
may
take
notes
if
you
choose
to
do
so.
7. Repeat
steps
3-­‐6
for
each
of
the
different
foods
and
wines
you
would
like
to
taste.
You
need
not
taste
every
food
or
wine,
if
there
is
something
you
do
not
care
for
you
may
skip
it.
8. When
you
have
tasted
all
of
the
pairs
you
would
like
to
experience,
you
may
dispose
of
any
leftovers
and
move
on
to
the
last
section
of
the
lesson
on
the
computer.

11.
4
Notes:
Tasting
Wine
and
Food
Pairs
Use
this
chart
to
make
notes
about
your
tasting
experience.
Those
combinations
marked
with
a
star
are
those
that
exemplify
the
pairing
guidelines
just
presented.
In
addition
to
tasting
those,
try
some
of
your
own
combinations
to
test
one
or
more
of
the
guidelines.
White
Wines
Red
Wines
Reisling
Sauvignon
Blanc
Chardonnay
Merlot
Chianti
Grilled
Beef
Pork
BBQ
Pork
Roast
Fried
Chicken
Chicken
Tacos
Shrimp
with
Cocktail
Sauce
Lemon-­‐Butter
Tilapia
Pasta
Alfredo
Lasagna

12.
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
Evaluation
Plan
Renee
Kowalchik
May
2013

13. Wine
and
Food
Pairing
Evaluation
Plan
Evaluation
Process
The
overall
goal
in
training
and
educational
settings
is
to
determine
student
success
in
learning.
(Morrison,
G.
R.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
2011).
Formative
assessment
of
the
learner
will
take
place
throughout
the
module
as
the
facilitator
interacts
with
the
learners.
Asking
the
learner
questions
and
gauging
their
understanding
through
one-­‐on-­‐one
discussions
is
a
quick
and
easy
way
to
determine
learner
progress.
This
can
be
done
at
all
stages
of
the
module
for
all
of
the
learning
goals
and
objectives.
There
is
also
a
short
quiz
at
the
end
of
the
interactive
multimedia
presentation
on
the
rules
of
pairing.
This
quiz
will
allow
the
facilitator
to
determine
who
is
ready
to
move
on
to
the
actual
tasting
of
the
food
and
wine
pairs.
The
quiz
will
focus
on
the
rules
for
pairing
wine
and
food,
which
is
aligned
with
the
first
goal
of
this
module
–
“Explain
the
rules
for
pairing
wine
and
food.”
The
objectives
that
support
this
goal
and
are
tested
in
this
assessment
are
identifying
wine
and
food
characteristics
that
affect
pairing,
listing
the
rules
for
pairing,
and
grouping
the
food
and
wine
based
on
their
characteristics.
We
will
use
summative
evaluation
as
it
is
directed
toward
measuring
the
degree
to
which
the
major
outcomes
are
attained.
(Morrison,
G.
R.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
2011)
Summative
assessment
will
take
place
in
the
last
section
of
the
module
when
the
learner
completes
the
interactive
assessment
to
review
the
rules
and
suggest
wine
pairings
to
a
fictitious
customer.
Using
information
provided
by
a
customer,
the
learner
will
need
to
give
a
possible
wine
paring
that
will
complement
the
description.
In
this
way,
the
learner
will
show
that
they
are
able
to
successfully
help
customers.
This
assessment
measures
the
level
to
which
learners
have
met
the
second
and
third
goals
stated
earlier,
“Match
food
with
an
appropriate
wine”
and
“Help
a
potential
customer
choose
a
wine
that
will
pair
well
with
their
meal.”
The
learners
will
also
complete
a
short
survey.
This
survey
will
include
questions
about
whether
or
not
they
enjoyed
the
lesson,
if
they
would
like
more
information
on
the
topic,
and
what
they
thought
of
the
course
itself.
While
these
questions
are
not
directly
related
to
the
goals
of
the
course,
the
evaluation

14. will
help
to
determine
whether
or
not
the
learners
thought
that
the
lesson
was
beneficial,
and
if
there
are
changes
that
might
need
to
be
considered
if
the
lesson
were
to
be
used
again.
Alignment
to
the
Five
Levels
of
Evaluation
Kirkpatrick’s
first
level
of
evaluation
deals
with
the
learners’
reactions
to
the
training.
This
level
of
evaluation
will
be
achieved
through
the
use
of
the
end
of
course
survey.
The
survey
includes
both
rating
scales
and
a
place
for
comments
to
gather
information
to
determine
not
just
“did
they
like
it?”
but
what
parts
could
have
been
improved.
In
the
article,
Levels
of
Evaluation:
Beyond
Kirkpatrick,
the
authors
suggest
that
level
1
of
the
evaluation
process
should
be
expanded
“to
include
the
valuation
of
resources.”
(Kauffman
&
Keller,
1994,
p.
377)
Questions
specific
to
the
usefulness
of
the
materials
are
included
in
the
survey
as
well.
Level
2
of
the
evaluation
process
determines
whether
or
not
the
participants
have
learned
the
material
that
was
presented.
There
are
two
short
quizzes
that
will
accomplish
this
level
of
the
evaluation.
The
first
is
at
the
end
of
the
Rules
for
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
part
of
the
lesson,
and
the
second
is
at
the
very
end
of
the
lesson.
These
simple
quizzes
assess
whether
the
participant
knows
the
rules
for
wine
and
food
pairing
and
if
the
participants
can
use
what
they
have
learned
to
suggest
wine
to
someone
else.
In
the
third
level
of
the
evaluation
process,
we
are
measuring
the
transfer
of
learning.
This
is
accomplished
through
the
summative
assessment
at
the
end
of
the
lesson.
In
order
to
suggest
a
wine,
the
learner
must
know
the
rules
and
be
able
to
apply
them
to
specific,
varied
situations.
The
questions
at
the
end
of
the
module
are
written
to
assess
whether
or
not
the
learner
can
transfer
the
knowledge
and
experiences
they
gained
in
the
lesson
to
a
real-­‐world
situation.
If
this
were
being
done
in
a
real
wine
shop,
this
assessment
could
be
extended
to
observing
the
participants
with
actual
customers
to
see
if
they
are
able
to
make
appropriate
suggestions
for
wine/food
pairing.
This
would
give
more
reliable
data
about
transfer,
but
is
not
possible
for
this
project.
The
level
four
and
five
of
the
evaluation
process
are
not
addressed
in
this
project.
If
this
were
an
actual
lesson
for
a
real
wine
shop,
then
these
two
steps
would
need
to
be
included.
For
level
four,
the

15. assessment
of
the
results
could
be
measured
through
observation,
as
described
above.
In
addition
to
observing
the
participants
working
directly
with
customers,
data
could
be
collected
through
customer
satisfaction
comments
and
surveys.
Hopefully,
as
a
result
of
this
training,
customer
satisfaction
would
increase
due
to
the
ability
of
the
sales
clerks
to
better
answer
the
most
common
question
of
how
to
pair
food
and
wine.
In
level
five,
the
return
on
investment
is
assessed.
This
could
be
accomplished
by
comparing
wine
sales
before
and
after
the
training,
both
volume
of
sales
and
returning
customers.
Sales
should
increase
due
to
the
fact
that
the
clerks
can
now
suggest
wines
to
the
customers,
and
if
it
is
done
correctly,
their
positive
experiences
could
bring
customers
back
for
more
wine.
Alignment
of
Unit
Goals
to
the
evaluation
process
Goal
#1
Explain
the
rules
for
pairing
wine
and
food
–
This
goal
is
evaluated
at
the
end
of
the
computer
module
“Rules
for
Wine
and
Food
Pairing”
using
a
short
multiple
choice
quiz.
Goal
#2
Match
food
with
an
appropriate
wine
–
This
goal
is
evaluated
at
the
end
of
the
lesson
using
a
short
quiz
of
multiple
choice
questions
about
specific
scenarios
that
would
be
examples
of
real-­‐
world
situations.
Observations
and
discussions
with
the
facilitator
can
also
be
used
as
a
less
formal
measure
to
determine
if
the
participants
have
reached
this
goal.
Goal
#3
Help
a
potential
customer
choose
a
wine
that
will
pair
well
with
their
meal
–
This
goal
is
evaluated
in
conjunction
with
goal
#2
in
the
quiz
at
the
end
of
the
lesson
Overall
satisfaction
with
the
lesson
is
measured
through
an
anonymous
survey
at
the
end
of
the
lesson.
Evaluation
Tools
and
Materials
There
are
three
evaluation
materials
used
in
this
lesson,
two
quizzes
and
a
survey.
The
first
quiz
is
at
the
end
of
the
rules
section
of
the
lesson.
Having
the
assessment
done
immediately
following
the
instruction
saved
time
and
also
then
uses
the
assessment
as
reinforcement
of
what
is
taught.
The
end
of
course
quiz
is
a
short,
multiple-­‐choice
quiz.
The
questions
were
created
to
mimic
the
types
of

16. conversations
the
clerks
are
likely
to
have
with
customers
in
the
store.
In
this
way,
the
assessment
can
determine
the
likelihood
that
the
participants
will
be
able
to
help
customers
with
their
wine
selections.
Finally,
the
end
of
course
survey
will
determine
the
participants’
satisfaction
with
the
lesson
and
give
them
the
opportunity
to
offer
suggestions
for
improvement
of
the
lesson.
A
rating
scale
was
used
to
simplify
the
process
for
the
participants,
but
there
is
an
area
for
the
learners
to
comment
on
their
experience.
Summary
of
modifications
The
modifications
were
made
based
on
the
changes
to
the
goals
of
the
module.
Because
the
goals
changed
rather
significantly
from
the
original
project,
it
was
necessary
to
change
the
evaluation
methods
as
well.
Time
was
another
significant
concern,
and
in
order
to
keep
the
whole
process
under
an
hour,
the
assessments
used
had
to
be
short
and
completed
quickly.
This
was
accomplished
using
multiple-­‐choice
questions
in
a
multimedia
format.
It
gives
enough
data
to
evaluate
the
learning,
but
uses
minimal
time
to
gather
the
information.

17. References
Kauffman, R., & Keller, J. M. (1994). Levels of evaluation: Beyond Kirkpatrick. Human Resource
Development Quarterly, 5, 371-380. Retrieved from www.ahrd.org
Morrison,
G.
R.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
(2011).
Designing
Effective
Instruction
(6th
ed.).
Hoboken,
NJ:
John
Wiley
and
Sons.
Simonson, M. (2007). Evaluation and distance education: Five steps. The Quarterly Review of Distance
Education, 8, vii-ix. Retrieved from www.infoagepub.com

18.
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
Implementation
and
Evaluation
Report

19. Implementation
and
Evaluation
Report
Module
Overview
and
Description:
This
instructional
module
is
designed
to
teach
store
clerks
at
a
wine
retailer
how
to
help
customers
choose
a
wine
to
pair
with
a
meal.
This
module
will
not
make
the
clerks
expert
wine
sommeliers,
but
will
give
the
learners
the
tools
to
make
some
general
suggestions
to
help
customers.
Because
of
the
complexity
of
wine
tasting
and
pairing
in
addition
to
the
time
limit,
this
module
will
focus
on
learners
who
have
at
least
a
general
knowledge
of
wine
types
and
the
characteristics
used
to
describe
wine.
Description
of
Implementation:
As
the
learners
arrived,
each
was
given
instructions
for
accessing
the
wireless
network
and
logging
on
to
the
course
and
a
copy
of
the
Participant
Guide
containing
necessary
handouts.
The
learners
proceeded
to
attempt
the
task
of
accessing
the
wireless,
however
a
lower-­‐case
letter
where
there
should
have
been
a
capital
in
the
password
initially
prevented
access.
The
error
was
found
quickly,
and
everyone
was
then
able
to
access
the
wireless
network
and
log
onto
the
course.
As
the
learners
waited
for
everyone
to
log
on,
they
perused
the
Participant
Guide
to
familiarize
themselves
with
the
course
materials.
Once
everyone
was
ready,
the
learners
began
the
first
section,
the
Rules
for
Wine
and
Food
Pairing
instructional
module.
The
learners
were
able
to
take
notes
and
read
through
the
materials
in
the
first
module
without
any
problems
and
were
successful
at
answering
the
questions
at
the
end
of
the
module.
The
only
issue
was
some
confusion
at
the
end
of
the
online
module,
even
though
the
directions
clearly
indicated
that
the
learner
should
move
to
the
food/wine
tasting
area,
because
the
“next”
button
on
the
screen
was
still
active.
The
facilitator
was
able
to
ease
the
transition
from
one
to
the
other
with
some
verbal
direction.
The
wine/food
tasting
also
went
very
smoothly.
The
participants
gathered
the
wines
and
food
they
wanted
to
sample
and
proceeded
to
use
the
hand-­‐out
in
the
Participant
Guide
to
take
notes
on
their
reactions.
There
was
some
excellent
discussion
about
the
rules
and
whether
or
not
the
expectations
of
good
or
bad
pairings
were
accurate.
Many
of
the
participants
also
realized
that
“Rule
#1
–
Drink
what
you
like!”
really
is
the
most
important
consideration
when
pairing
wine.
The
importance
of
this
section
was
obvious
as
the
learners
were
able
to
experience
for
themselves
what
worked
and
what
didn’t.
Learners
build
personal
interpretations
of
the
world
based
on
individual
experiences
and
interactions.
(Ertmer,
Newby
1993)
From
Adult
learning,
learning
occurs
through
independent
action
of
the
learner,
when
life
experience
can
be
used
as
a
resource
for
learning,
when
learning
needs
are
closely
aligned
to
social
roles,
is
problem
centered
and
is
motivated
by
internal
factors.
(Conlan,
Grabowski,
&
Smith,
2003).
The
learners
had
to
be
reminded
of
the
time
constraints,
and
the
facilitator
had
to
encourage
them
to
move
on
to
the
next
section.
Many
of
the
learners
wanted
to
continue
to
test
combinations
of
food
and
wine.
To
keep
to
the
time
limit
and
still
allow
those
who
wanted
to
continue
the
opportunity
to
do
so,
everyone
was
asked
to
move
on
to
the
assessment,
but
given
the
option
to
return
to
continue
tasting
if
they
wanted
to
do
so.
The
last
part
of
the
module
was
an
online
assessment
in
which
the
learners
were
tested
with
scenarios
similar
to
those
they
might
encounter
in
the
day-­‐to-­‐day
job
as
store
clerks.
The
multiple-­‐choice
questions
were
answered
with
an
average
of
92%,
the
highest
score
was
100%
and
the
lowest
score
was
an
80%.
Before
the
learners
left
they
completed
a
course
evaluation.
The
results
were
very
positive,
with
a
few
helpful
suggestions
for
future
implementation.
Overall,
the
implementation
was
successful.
The
one
challenge
was
the
time
limit.
An
hour
is
really
not
enough
to
allow
the
learners
to
taste
the
different
combinations
of
food
and
wine
and
to
grasp
the

20. different
pairing
relationships.
In
this
implementation,
the
time
was
limited
for
tasting,
however
those
learners
who
wanted
to
do
more
combinations
were
able
to
do
so
after
the
completion
of
the
module.
Analysis
of
Evaluation
Data:
The
learners
completed
two
assessments,
one
during
and
one
at
the
end
of
the
instructional
module.
In
addition,
they
completed
a
course
evaluation
at
the
end
of
the
module.
The
data
from
the
assessments
clearly
showed
that
the
learners
were
able
to
reliably
recommend
an
appropriate
wine
for
a
specific
food.
The
average
final
assessment
score
was
92%,
with
a
range
from
a
low
of
80%
to
a
high
of
100%.
Those
who
scored
in
the
80-­‐90%
range
felt
that
the
time
for
the
instruction
was
too
short,
as
indicated
on
the
course
evaluation.
The
following
graph
shows
the
individual
scores
and
their
rating
of
the
course
length.
Because
the
only
negative
comments
on
the
evaluation
had
to
do
with
the
length
of
time,
the
relationship
between
this
concern
and
the
final
assessment
scores
may
be
important.
There
seems
to
be
a
pattern,
those
who
scored
lower
felt
they
needed
more
time
to
learn
the
information.
Because
the
sample
size
is
small,
this
relationship
may
just
be
a
coincidence.
However,
it
should
be
monitored
in
future
Final
Assessment
Score
Rating
of
1
to
5
on
evaluation
question,
"Length
of
lesson
was
sufdicient
to
cover
all
material."
Learner
1
90
3
Learner
2
80
3
Learner
3
100
5
Learner
4
100
5
Learner
5
90
4
90
3
80
3
100
5
100
5
90
4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Evaluation
Data
Learner
1
Learner
2
Learner
3
Learner
4
Learner
5

21. implementations
to
see
if
this
relationship
remains
so
that
adjustments
may
be
made
if
it
does
continue.
Simply
adding
some
extra
time
could
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
learning
in
this
case.
Proposed
Revisions
and
Key
Points:
The
following
is
a
list
of
revisions,
some
that
have
been
made
and
others
that
are
proposed
for
future
implementations
of
this
module.
A
complete
review
of
the
items
on
this
list
with
explanation
may
be
found
here.
o Corrected
a
typographical
error
on
the
Rules
module
o Made
the
“Next”
button
inactive
on
the
last
page
of
the
interactive
modules
o Added
a
file
of
printable
labels
for
the
wine
cups
and
a
hand-­‐out
of
log-­‐in
instructions
o Could
have
saved
some
time
pre-­‐plating
food
and
pre-­‐pouring
wine
o Allot
more
time
to
the
module
–
increase
time
from
1
hour
to
1.5
hours.

22. REFERENCES
Conlan,
J.,
Grabowski,
S.,
&
Smith.
(2003).
Adult
Learning.
Emerging
perspectives
on
learning,
teaching
and
technology.
http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Adult_Learning
Ertmer,
P.A.
and
Newby,
T.J.
(1993).
Behaviorism,
Cognitivism,
Constructivism:
Comparing
critical
features
from
an
Instructional
Design
perspective.
Performance
Improvement
Quarterly,
6(4),
50-­‐72.
Morrison,
G.
R.,
Ross,
S.
M.,
Kalman,
H.
K.,
&
Kemp,
J.
E.
(2011).
Designing
Effective
Instruction
(6th
ed.).
Hoboken,
NJ:
John
Wiley
and
Sons.
Smith,
M.
K.
(2002).
Malcolm
Knowles,
informal
adult
education,
self-­‐direction
and
andragogy.
The
encyclopedia
of
informal
education.
Retrieved
from
http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-­‐
knowl.htm#andragogy