Instructional Approach
In safety-critical industries, it is not the number of training hours that decides a course’s impact, but a single question: do the learning objective, learning activity and assessment fit together?
If the learning objective, learning activity and assessment don’t fit together, a false sense of security arises – the company believes its people are qualified, even though something other than what the job actually needs was trained and tested.
My instructional basis for this is the principle of Constructive Alignment by John Biggs: learners actively construct their understanding through what they do themselves – not through what they are told. It follows that the learning objective, learning activity and assessment must be consistently aligned with one another. I call this principle the “alignment triangle”. For me it is not a model but a checking tool: before every course I ask what the participant should demonstrably be able to do, whether exactly that is practised, and whether the assessment tests exactly that.
Only when all three fit together is training effective.
At a glance
Select a corner to learn more.
Corner 1
What should the participant demonstrably know, be able to do, or do by the end? Defined via domain (knowledge, skill, competence), level (basic, intermediate, advanced) and a precise action verb.
The action verb is the link to the whole triangle: it defines at once what must be practised and what must be assessed.
Corner 1 in detail →Corner 2
How is the learning done? The method must match the action verb and level of the learning objective exactly – and put the participant, not the trainer, at the centre.
The method follows from the action verb, not from habit or convenience: lecturing produces almost only basic-level knowledge.
Corner 2 in detail →Corner 3
How is it checked whether the learning objective has been reached? Formative alongside the learning process, summative at the end – and always at the same level as the learning objective itself.
Summative assessment must take place in the same setting and structure as the preceding learning activity for it to be valid at all.
Corner 3 in detail →In detail
John Biggs describes Constructive Alignment as the interplay of two ideas: constructivism – learners build their understanding through their own doing, not through mere listening – and alignment – learning objective, learning activity and assessment must consistently refer to one another. The three corners form a closed cycle: the learning objective determines what must be practised. The learning activity puts exactly that into practice. And the assessment checks whether exactly what was practised has been achieved – no more and no less.
The classic mistake in training practice happens when one corner goes out of balance: a learning objective calls for “carry out independently” (skill level, intermediate to advanced), but the learning activity is a lecture, and the assessment is a multiple-choice test. Creating coherence means: before I build a course, I define the learning objective right down to the action verb. Only then do I choose the method and the form of assessment – never the other way round.
Corner 1
Taxonomy: According to Biggs, every learning objective needs an action verb that clearly sets the required depth of understanding or action – from simple reproduction to independent transfer to new situations.
Domain: Every learning objective belongs to one of three areas: knowledge (cognitive – understand, explain), skills (practical-motor or communicative – perform, apply) and competence (attitude and responsibility – act independently, guide others, take responsibility).
Action verb: The action verb is the link to the whole triangle: it defines at once what must be practised and what must be assessed. “Name” requires something different from “carry out” or “evaluate” – if these are confused, a mismatch arises.
| Level | What the participant shows | Example action verbs |
|---|---|---|
| Basic level | Recognises, names, describes or imitates a topic or an action. | name, recognise, describe, imitate, repeat |
| Intermediate level | Explains connections, applies tools/procedures in familiar situations. | explain, discuss, apply, distinguish, carry out |
| Advanced level | Evaluates situations, acts independently even in unfamiliar situations, takes responsibility. | evaluate, explore, select, adapt, supervise, take responsibility |
Example: a learning objective with the action verb “carry out” (skill, intermediate level) requires a practical exercise and a practical assessment – not a quiz.
Corner 2
Methods: The method follows from the action verb, not from habit or convenience. Basic level: quiz, imitation, short presentation. Intermediate level: guided practice, discussion, case study. Advanced level: simulation, role play, experiment, unguided project work.
Adult education (andragogy): Adults learn from experience and engage voluntarily when the practical relevance is clear. Pure theory without an application context quickly loses acceptance.
Participant-centred learning: The trainer shifts from a sender of information to a guide, questioner and feedback-giver. I follow Kolb’s learning cycle: active experimentation, experience, reflection, conceptualisation.
Barriers to learning: Typical obstacles are fear of mistakes and assessment, a lack of psychological safety, a practice environment too far removed from real working conditions, and a lack of time for reflection. Lecturing is therefore particularly problematic at higher levels: it produces almost only basic-level knowledge.
Corner 3
Formative and summative: Formative assessment accompanies the learning process and is complemented by guidance and feedback. Summative assessment measures the outcome at the end of a course – and must take place in the same setting and structure as the preceding learning activity for it to be valid at all.
Feedback methods: At basic level, correcting errors and encouragement are in the foreground. At intermediate level it is about pointers for extending understanding. At advanced level, feedback happens in dialogue, with exploratory questions instead of prescribed answers.
Motivation: It arises above all from three factors: a practice environment as close to reality as possible, genuine responsibility within the exercise, and feedback that is constructive rather than merely corrective.
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347–364. The domain/level structure (knowledge, skills, competences) is used as a practical application for the wind and maritime industries.