Learner-Centric Course Design

Most learning experiences fail. Not because they lack content. Not because they aren’t engaging. But because they confuse motion with action. - Learners finish an interactive course—but can’t apply a single concept. - Employees earn certifications—but their performance stays the same. - Teams attend workshops—but nothing changes in how they work. Your beautifully designed courses might be keeping learners busy without moving them forward. The difference between motion and action explains why so many well-designed learning experiences fail to create real change. Motion 🔄 vs. Action 🛠️ in Learning Design Motion is consuming information—watching videos, reading content, clicking through slides. Action is applying knowledge—practicing skills, making decisions, solving problems. Motion FEELS productive. Action IS productive. ❌ What doesn’t work: - Content-heavy modules with no real-world application - Knowledge checks that test memory, not mastery - Gamification that rewards progress, not proficiency - Beautiful interfaces that prioritize scrolling over doing ✅ What works instead: - Micro-challenges that force immediate application - Project-based assessments with real-world constraints - Deliberate practice with quick feedback loops - "Demo days" where learners publish/present their work 3 Common Motion Traps 🪤 1️⃣ The Endless Content Cycle Overloading learners with information but giving them no space to apply it. A 40-page module doesn’t drive change—practice does. 2️⃣ The Engagement Illusion Designing for clicks, badges, and completion rates instead of real skill-building. Just because learners show up doesn’t mean they’re growing. 3️⃣ The Passive Learning Trap Building "Netflix for learning" experiences that entertain but don’t transform. Learning feels good—but does it change behavior? What to Do Next? 💡 - Audit your learning experience. Calculate the ratio of consumption time vs. creation time for your learners. - If learners spend more than 50% consuming, redesign for action. The best learning designers don’t create the most content. They create the most transformation. Are you designing for motion or action?

Here's what I've never told anyone about adult learning... Most of it fails before anyone opens the course. Not because the content is bad. Not because people don't want to learn. But because we design for the wrong human. We design for the motivated morning version. The one with a fresh coffee and blocked calendar. The one who chose to be there. But that's not always who shows up. Who really does? - The overwhelmed manager squeezing training between fires - The skeptic who's seen five "transformational" programs fail - The parent who's been up since 4am with a sick kid - The introvert dreading another breakout room - The expert who thinks they already know everything I learned this during a massive leadership program rollout. Beautiful content. Expert facilitators. Leadership buy-in. And... crickets. Until I started designing for reality, not ideal. Here's what actually works: ✅ Design for the 3pm slump, not the 9am energy If it requires peak performance to understand, it's already failed. Make it work when their brain is at 40% capacity. ✅ Honor their skepticism "I know you've heard this before" beats "This will change your life." Meet them where they are, not where you wish they were. ✅ Make the first win happen in 5 minutes Not 5 modules. Not 5 hours - 5 minutes. One tiny insight they can use immediately. Momentum builds from micro-wins. ✅ Stop pretending they have time They're not dedicating 2 hours of deep focus. They have 15 minutes between meetings. Design for their reality. ✅ Let them skip what they know Forcing experts through basics isn't thorough. It's disrespectful. Give them control. ✅ Build in recovery time After something heavy, add something light. After vulnerability, add reflection. Energy management is learning management. ✅ Make it feel human Not perfect. Not polished. Just real, relatable, and grounded in how people actually learn. Connection drives retention more than any script ever could. The uncomfortable truth? Your learners aren't empty vessels waiting to be filled. They're overwhelmed humans trying to survive. They don't need more information. They need transformation that fits in the margins of their life. The best learning doesn't feel like learning. It feels like finally understanding something you always knew but couldn't articulate. So before you design your next program, ask: Will this work for someone having their worst day? Because that's who needs it most. 💭 What's the most realistic learning experience you've ever had?

“Our classes are built for working adults.” “We understand the needs of nontraditional learners.” We hear these statements all the time. But too often, they sound supportive while staying vague. But the harsh reality is that support without specificity doesn’t actually move the needle on retention or engagement. It just checks a box. Even the so-called “traditional” student has changed. They’re often working, commuting, caring for others, or questioning whether college is worth it. We can’t keep designing for yesterday’s student and expect today’s to thrive. This week, I’ll be sharing five posts focused on curriculum strategies for specific groups of learners. But first, let’s start with a practice that should be at the core of every course design process: Student-informed learner personas. A strong persona doesn’t just describe a demographic; it brings your actual students to life. Here’s what that can look like: Meet Susan. She’s a student mom balancing two young children, which is a job that doesn’t always respect her class calendar. Her kids sicknesses don’t fall perfectly in line with due dates. Susan isn’t an outlier. At [institution name], 65% of our students are parents. Or: Meet Jamal. He’s a full-time warehouse supervisor finishing his degree after stopping out years ago. He engages mostly at night and his lunch breaks and values clear expectations and meaningful assignments that respect his limited time. Jamal represents 56% of our students who work full-time. These personas should be built from real data. Not guesses. These personas should include things like: - Full-time vs. part-time employment - Parenting and caregiving responsibilities - Transfer or re-entry status - Career goals at enrollment - Time of day they’re most active in the LMS - Devices they use to access class - Barriers to engagement (tech, mental health, housing, etc.) - Competing priorities And here’s a new standard for your courses: At the end of a course build, you should be able to justify every major design decision based on the students you serve. Not just “best practice,” but actual alignment: “This assignment is chunked into 3 stages because 73% of our students are parents and this will help them jump in and out of the classroom easier.” “This course avoids Sunday deadlines because 62% of our students work weekends.” “This early certificate is embedded because 41% are changing careers and need immediate ROI.” This isn’t about adding bells and whistles. It’s about building with care and clarity. Because the student has changed. And the curriculum should show it. Tomorrow: We’ll dive into specific strategies for supporting working adult learners. Those balancing careers and coursework all at once. #TheStudentHasChanged #Retention #CurriculumDesign #InstructionalDesign #StudentSuccess #LearnerPersonas #ModernLearner #HigherEd

When you align learning strategy with how the brain actually learns you'll find that performance improves. In many organisations, learning still means content delivery - I battle this challenge regularly. L&D teams measure outputs like number of courses, completions, attendance rather than outcomes. But humans don’t learn by consuming information. They learn by connecting ideas, making meaning, and putting their knowledge and skills into practice over and over again until their brains physically change. If you want to genuinely change behaviour and performance in your organisation then your whole strategy needs to be designed with the brain in mind. Here are three practical principles to share with your design and delivery teams: 🧠 Space, don’t cram Learning needs time to settle. Encourage teams to design experiences that build over time rather than delivering everything in one go. The return on retention is remarkable. 💡 Engage peoples emotions People remember what feels relevant and real. Challenge your designers to stimulate learners emotions with hooks like stories, challenges and personal connections. Don't just design pretty slides. 🔄 Practice and retrieval Learning journeys, rather than one off events, give people time to apply, reflect, and test new skills where it matters - on the job. This doesn't mean repetition for its own sake; it's simply how neural pathways are strengthened. When your learning strategy aligns with how the brain naturally works key metrics like engagement, performance and business impact improve. How do you enable your teams to bring brain science into the way they design and deliver learning?

Gagné’s Nine Events of Instruction was revolutionary in its time. But that time was nearly 80 years ago. It was built for military training—linear, rigid, objective-driven. It assumes the designer controls everything, the learner starts from zero, and outcomes are best achieved by following a prescribed sequence. That’s not how learning works anymore. Modern learners are rarely blank slates. They come with prior knowledge, personal context, and the ability to access what they need on demand. They’re not sitting passively, waiting for content to be “presented.” They’re navigating ambiguity, asking questions, collaborating, and applying knowledge in complex, unpredictable environments. That’s why I’ve moved away from traditional instructional design models like Gagné—and toward frameworks that reflect how people actually learn. I draw from Learning Experience Design (LXD), which blends learning science, user experience, and accessibility to create more engaging and emotionally resonant learning. I also pull from the 5E model, which prioritizes inquiry and exploration, and Universal Design for Learning (UDL), which builds flexibility and inclusivity into every part of the design. Models like Design Thinking and Agile Learning Design keep me grounded in iteration, learner feedback, and real-world relevance. And Bob Mosher’s Moment of Need Model reminds me that not all learning happens during training—it often happens in the workflow, under pressure, when support is needed most. I don’t follow any of these models religiously. I use what fits. Because the moment we box ourselves into one system, we stop designing for people and start designing for process. Gagné made sense in a world of chalkboards and overhead projectors. Today, we’re designing for mobile, social, immersive, and AI-powered experiences. That requires more flexibility, more empathy, and a willingness to break the mold when it no longer fits. Models are helpful. Dogma is not.

Ever feel like your instructional design project is *almost* great - but something’s missing? That elusive piece might be learner empathy. Too often, we design for what *we* think learners need. But when we pause to understand how they *feel* - their frustrations, motivations, and real-world contexts - we create learning that actually works. I once spent weeks perfecting a microlearning series. It looked amazing, hit every learning objective... and still flopped. Why? I designed for content, not the learner experience. After reworking the course with real learner input, engagement soared, and so did results. 📌 The takeaway: Instructional design isn’t just about knowledge transfer. It’s about connection. #InstructionalDesign #LearningAndDevelopment #LearnerExperience #IDTips #CorporateTraining #EmpathyInDesign

In the age of tech-driven L&D, McDonald's proves that people-first strategies still lead the way. No business exemplifies this more than McDonalds. I recently spoke with Lan Tran, Director of Learning Design and Technology at McDonalds. We talked about McDonald's people-first L&D strategy.  McDonald's is one of the biggest employers in the world, with 2M employees, so the stakes are high. For Lan, L&D is strongly tied to the bottom line because when people are happy, it creates a positive and productive culture. It comes from the top down. Lan shared that at the annual convention, one of the first keynote speakers was the Chief People Officer, whereas, in most companies, it would be the Chief Marketing or Product Officer. Lan's global design team creates custom courses for corporate and restaurant staff on topics ranging from leadership to making french fries. Lan and her team have a deep empathy for their learners. She shared, "You can't create for humans unless you think about them and what they struggle with." It's no surprise that Lan's team takes the same annual restaurant training that every employee takes. Furthermore, many on her team started as restaurant employees and have been with McDonald's for over 20 years! Despite that experience, they start with 1st principles questions: ❓What is their day-to-day? ❓What do they struggle with? ❓What motivates them? ❓What keeps them engaged? There is a high degree of customization to serve the global employee population. McDonald's L&D is a federated (mix of centralized and decentralized) strategy and has all the bells and whistles you can think of: 🧠 Customization to reflect local language, culture, menu, and technology preferences.  🧠 Assessment and recommendation component to cover the varying needs of a diverse workforce. 🧠 Simulation to provide a proxy for the real-life environment.  🧠 Gamification to cater to a young workforce. But the most genius element of McDonald's L&D program… 🤔Reflection. Too often, we focus on the course material and completions. We provide training and set the learner loose for a trial-by-fire learning experience. Reflection allows the learner to process what they've learned. It's the most human-centered element of learning. Learning happens in those reflective aha moments when we learn from a mistake or when 'everything clicks.' How can I apply what I've learned? What am I missing? Maybe the learner has questions for the manager or is ready to try out what they've learned, but they can only get there with some reflection.    It gets the learner to where they need to be quicker and makes L&D more efficient. We should all be taking this card from McDonald's L&D playbook. What's your take on making learning people-first?

The Inconvenient Truth About Learning Design: From Content to Context As we delve deeper into the realms of education and professional development, there is an undeniable shift taking place. Many organizations still cling to the age-old idea that providing an abundance of content equates to effective learning. However, the inconvenient truth is that this approach is no longer sufficient. It’s time to move from content saturation to context-driven learning! The crux of effective learning design lies not just in the "what" but in the "how" and "why." Here are a few key insights on how this paradigm shift can redefine our strategies: 1. Understanding the Learner's Journey: Contextual learning begins with understanding the backgrounds, experiences, and challenges learners face. Tailoring content to real-world scenarios allows for a deeper connection and better retention. 2. Emphasizing Application Over Memorization: In a world filled with information, the capacity to apply knowledge in practical ways is paramount. When learning experiences are grounded in relevant contexts, they become not just theoretical but transferrable to real-life situations. 3. Creating Collaborative Environments: A learning design focused on context encourages interaction and collaboration. By facilitating a space where learners can share experiences and insights, we promote a richer, more diverse learning ecosystem. 4. Measuring Impact, Not Just Engagement: It's not enough to just collect data on how many people viewed your content. The real metric of success is the transformation that occurs— how the knowledge is applied and what changes result from it. 5. Iterative Learning Experiences: The journey of context-driven learning should be continuous. Regular feedback and refinement help ensure that learning experiences constantly evolve to meet the dynamic needs of learners. The future of learning design isn’t just about filling minds with information; it’s about creating meaningful, contextual experiences that inspire change. As we embrace this shift, let us challenge ourselves: how can we design learning experiences that go beyond content and truly resonate with our audiences? I invite you to share your thoughts below on how we can move from content to context in our learning approaches. Your insights could be the catalyst for someone else's journey! #LearningDesign #ContextOverContent #Education #ProfessionalDevelopment #LifelongLearning #LearningStrategies

Ever watch your learners' engagement gradually fade in a digital experience, despite compelling content? It’s a common frustration, but often the solution lies in a fundamental human need: a true sense of control. That feeling hit me yesterday on a long bike ride around the island I live on, gazing across the bay at San Francisco in the distance. That expansive view, with its implied freedom to choose any path towards that distant goal, powerfully mirrors the allure of well-designed exploratory experiences. It’s this spirit of exploration and self-directed discovery that games like the recent Zelda titles capture so brilliantly. As I explored in a previous article for UX of EdTech on how games create deep flow (link in comments), a key is empowering users: "Instead of the game dictating where you go and what you do, it offers a vast, interactive world and the tools to explore it freely... empower[ing] you to define your own goals, experiment with solutions, and ultimately control your own adventure." This principle is deeply rooted in motivational psychology. Self-Determination Theory, for instance, highlights that fostering a sense of autonomy (or control) is critical for intrinsic motivation and deep engagement. When individuals feel they have meaningful choices and can direct their own path, their persistence and mastery skyrocket. For EdTech and learning platforms, this means designing experiences that provide learners with genuine options to exercise autonomy – perhaps through choices in learning methods, tools, resources, or allowing them to set their own pace and goals. It’s about shifting from dictating a path to providing a landscape for supported discovery. How are you empowering your users with a sense of control? What does their adventure look like? #UserEngagement #EdTech #LearningDesign

AI in Education Design Princples As we build out CyberScholar (an all-new version of CGScholar, with embedded AI), we've been pondering design principles for AI in education. Here's our first draft - feedback welcome! 1. Cyber-Social Relations AI and humans are always in dialectical relation, two fundamentally different kinds of intelligence interacting. There should be no AI without human moderation. For instance, AI feedback must be accompanied by metacognitive self review and reflection on the differences between the knowledge creator’s human perspective and AI perspectives. 2. Learner Differences AI education systems should be tuned to learner differences, changing the register of their interactions with learners according to learner responses, and over time developing a finely calibrated understanding the learner’s interest, needs, and potential learning trajectories. 3. Deep Thinking Teaching with AI should be oriented to complex epistemic performance—not the factoids, yes/no answers, or the low-level memory horizons of select response tests. Learning requires the construction of holistic knowledge artifacts. For instance: a science project report, literary interpretation, historical explanation, makerspace design, worked math problem, etc. 3, Multimodality Student knowledge representations should demonstrate capacities for transposition of meanings between text, image, space, object, body, sound, and speech. For instance, all visual or video media must be accompanied textual labels and/or exegesis both to reveal thinking and for AI analysis 4. Collaboration AI collaboration should be complemented by human-human collaboration such as peer feedback and/or teacher presence. In the case of asynchronous learning, this will require a social threading architecture where students interact with people who have recently reached the same point in a learning progression or soon will. 6. Hybrid Delivery In-person, online, synchronous, and asynchronous delivery formats should all be based on the same principles and grounded in shared architectures, supporting “hyflex” movement across delivery modes. 7. Co-Design Teachers, learners, and the pedagogical and collective intelligence curated in AI become co-designers (always!) of new knowledge. 8. Model Declaration With each student-created artifact, systems should automatically declare both to the student and the teacher: a) specialized Knowledge Base for RAG/CAG; b) Rubric Agents; c) Foundation Model. Just reached the LinkedIn word limit (ugh!), so see the remaining three principles and a video overview of CyberScholar alpha v. 0.5.1 here: https://lnkd.in/g8Qcthus