Best Practices for Instructional Design

Evidence-based teaching strategies empower educators to design lessons that are both purposeful and impactful, grounded in research that supports student achievement and equity. By incorporating practices like scaffolding, modeling, and frequent checks for understanding, teachers can anticipate learning barriers and proactively address them, ensuring all students remain engaged and supported. Preparation becomes a form of advocacy when educators review prior learning, break down new material into manageable steps, and plan for guided and independent practice, they create a roadmap that builds confidence and retention. Effective communication and clear direction foster trust, reduce cognitive overload, and allow students to focus on meaning-making rather than guesswork. To best prepare, educators can start by identifying lesson objectives, mapping out scaffolds, scripting key questions, and rehearsing transitions that support flow and clarity. These intentional moves transform classrooms into inclusive, enriching environments where every learner feels seen, capable, and connected. 🧭 Steps for Strategic Preparation 1. Clarify the Learning Objective: Start with what students should know or be able to do. Use verbs from Bloom’s taxonomy to guide the level of rigor. 2. Map the Learning Sequence: Break the lesson into digestible chunks review, model, guided practice, independent practice, and reflection. 3. Design Scaffolds and Supports: Prepare visuals, sentence starters, anchor charts, or manipulatives that help all learners access the content. 4. Script Key Questions and Prompts: Plan open-ended questions that connect new material to prior learning and encourage metacognition. 5. Plan for Checks and Feedback: Decide when and how you’ll assess understanding thumbs up/down, exit tickets, think-pair-share, etc. 6. Rehearse Transitions and Timing: Practice how you’ll move between activities, manage materials, and maintain momentum. #TeachWithIntent

Users don't suck, but the information provided to them can. If your IFU reads like a legal contract, people won’t read it. Why? Because they’re confusing. Too wordy. Too complex. Too scattered. A great IFU should feel like having a clear-headed expert guiding you step by step. The user needs to know what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. Here's 20 recommendations/writing rules to improve your IFU↴ 1. Write procedures in short, identifiable steps, and in the correct order. 2. Before listing steps, tell the reader how many steps are in the procedure. 3. Limit each step to no more than three logically connected actions. 4. Make instructions for each action clear and definite. 5. Tell the user what to expect from an action. 6. Discuss common use errors and provide information to prevent and correct them. 7. Each step should fit on one page. 8. Avoid referring the user to another place in the manual (no cross-referencing). 9. Use as few words as possible to present an idea or describe an action. 10. Use no more than one clause in a sentence. 11. Write in a natural, conversational way. Avoid overly formal language. 12. Express ideas of similar content in similar form. 13. Users should be able to read instructions aloud easily. Avoid unnecessary parentheses. 14. Use the same term consistently for devices and their parts. 15. Use specific terms instead of vague descriptions. 16. Use active verbs rather than passive voice. 17. Use action verbs instead of nouns formed from verbs. 18. Avoid abbreviations or acronyms unless necessary. Define them when first used and stay consistent. 19. Use lay language instead of technical jargon, especially for medical devices intended for laypersons. 20. Define technical terms the first time they appear and keep definitions simple. Prioritize the user while ensuring MDR/IVDR compliance.

Training and coaching programmes in many workplaces are often seen as one-size-fits-all solutions. Its time for that to change, especially when it comes to leadership development. Too often, learning and development initiatives are decided without involving the people who are not actually taking part in them. Organizations make huge investment into programmes, without effective research into people's needs. They don't ask people what they want or need. They presume everyone's needs are the same. There are times where this might be ok....specific technical skills for example or simple standard work practices. But leadership development requires a different approach. To be honest, I used to deliver one-day trainings on leadership skills here and there. But I never felt good about it. I felt like I wasn't adding real value to anyone. I knew most people were likely to forget everything they learned. It seems like such a waste of time and money. Now, I largely provide a blend of training and coaching programmes. They include an assessment of participant needs. They have a measure of individual development over time. Each person's coaching programme is tailored to what they need. I communicate with my programme participant's managers, to support the continuation of coaching long after their initial coaching programme ends. I always think I can do better so I gather feedback from every participant and improve my programmes all the time. These are the best practices guidelines I follow and teach: 1️⃣ Assess participant needs and customize programmes 2️⃣ Clarify the measures of effectiveness that will be used. 3️⃣ Personalize learning paths- this is possible through blending training with 1:1 coaching programmes 4️⃣ Foster a culture of continuous learning where coaching and training is part of what people regularly give and receive. Ensure all managers have effective coaching skills 5️⃣ Evaluate and adjust all training and coaching programmes. Make improvements based on feedback and measures. ❓What else would you add to ensure training and coaching programmes are highly effective? #learninganddevelopment #employeedevelopment #leadershipdevelopment #traininganddevelopment #training #learning #coaching

💡 Are You a "Top Trainer" or Just a Trade Expert? I see incredible tradespeople being instantly labeled "top trainers" in the vocational sector. We celebrate their industry expertise, but often skip a crucial step: understanding how humans actually learn. My personal journey began back in 1997, when I started spending my own money - ultimately over £20,000 - to study educational psychology and instructional design. I became a dual professional, studying everyone from foundational theorists such as Piaget and Vygotsky to experts on multimedia learning like Richard E. Mayer. This investment taught me that even state-of-the-art simulated environments are only part of the solution. As David Hargreaves argued in 1996, we must adopt evidence-based practice - respecting both trade science and learning science. 🧠 Stage 1: Design Smartly (Mayer's Tips) You don't need to spend £20k to improve, just apply a few research-backed principles. Since almost everyone uses slides, make your PowerPoints and e-learning effective using principles from Mayer's Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML), which reduces cognitive load: 1. Stop Reading Your Slides (Redundancy Principle): Use images and graphics while you speak. Slides should complementyour speech, not duplicate it. 2. Cut the Clutter (Coherence Principle): Remove all decorative elements or text not essential to the core goal. If it doesn't support learning, delete it. 3. Put Graphics and Text Together (Contiguity Principle): Place labels, arrows, and key definitions immediately next to the relevant graphic. 📉 Stage 2: The Retention Crisis (Ebbinghaus's Reality) Even with perfectly designed slides, training often fails because we ignore the most fundamental reality of memory, researched over a century ago by Hermann Ebbinghaus (1885). Ebbinghaus's Forgetting Curve shows that unless knowledge is actively used or reviewed (as later explored by Bartlett), it dissipates dramatically within days. The problem with many courses is that students leave with a certificate but never engage in post-course practice. The knowledge is lost. The hallmark of a great engineer is continuous application and engagement with peers. Trainers must encourage all learners - including the 9,000 people tax payers have paid for to be lifelong learners by encouraging them to continually apply that knowledge. Being a true "top trainer" means respecting the learner's brain across the entire learning lifecycle. #EvidenceBasedEducation #VocationalTraining #InstructionalDesign #ForgettingCurve #LifelongLearning Charlotte Lee Alex Butcher Katy King Matt Isherwood Andrew Johnson Tom Arey John Hancock Madeleine Gabriel BPEC LCL Awards Dr Matthew Aylott Rhiannon de Wreede SNIPEF

Most instructional designers skip the hardest part. Not the tools. Not the authoring platform. Not even the storyboard. 👇 Understanding the content deeply enough to explain it simply. That's where learning breaks down long before the first slide is built. The Feynman Method was designed for learners. I adapted it for course designers. Here's how it works, and where AI fits in at every step: Step 1 — Map the expert's knowledge Interview your SME. Record it. Sort what you hear into facts, processes, and judgements. → AI can transcribe, cluster, and surface patterns you might miss. Step 2 — The content readiness test Explain the core concept out loud. No slides. No notes. If you can't do it clearly — the content isn't ready for design. → AI can be your first "explain it to me" audience. Ask it to challenge your explanation. Step 3 — The gap audit Every place your explanation broke down = a learning gap = a module. → AI can help you map gaps, suggest missing links, and flag assumptions. Step 4 — The anchor metaphor One strong analogy gives learners something to return to when they get lost. → AI can generate 10 metaphor options in 30 seconds. You pick the one that actually fits. But here's the thing about AI in this process: It can help you simplify, organize, and iterate faster. It cannot do the understanding for you. After all the prompts and iterations, it's still you who needs to be able to explain it clearly to another human. That's the test. That's the standard. 💬 What do you think — does an instructional designer need to truly master a topic before designing a course around it? Or is it enough to structure what the SME provides? #InstructionalDesign #LearningDesign #FeynmanMethod #LXD #ElearningDevelopment #AIinLearning #CourseDesign #LearningAndDevelopment

𝘓𝘦𝘵’𝘴 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭: Instructional Design is evolving—fast. AI isn’t just a tool anymore. It’s a collaborator. If you're still designing static courses in Storyline or obsessing over ADDIE without integrating AI, you're stuck in the old L&D model. That model is 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲-𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗮 𝗛𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻-𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗔𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝘁: 1️⃣ 𝗥𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 Stop thinking like a content creator. Start thinking like a 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘳. Ask: “How can I use AI to close performance gaps in real time?” 2️⃣ 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗻 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗽𝘁 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 (𝗗𝗲𝗲𝗽𝗹𝘆) Don't just “play” with ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, and Claude. Master how to: ▪️Structure prompts ▪️Chain prompts ▪️Design AI workflows ▪️Generate data-driven learning assets in seconds 3️⃣ 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗼𝘁𝘆𝗽𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗣𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 Share what you’re building. Post your AI-powered learning experiences on LinkedIn. Turn your process into 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧 of skill. 4️⃣ 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 “𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗲𝘀” 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 “𝗦𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀” Employees don’t need more content. They need performance systems: ▪️AI copilots ▪️Embedded nudges ▪️Just-in-time guidance You design the systems. AI delivers the scale. 5️⃣ 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗘𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗳𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗔𝗜 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁 Go task-by-task through your ID process. Ask: “𝘊𝘢𝘯 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳, 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳, 𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘭𝘺?” If yes—build the automation. You’re not just an Instructional Designer anymore. You’re the architect of 𝗛𝘂𝗺𝗮𝗻-𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗣𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲. Make the leap. Or risk being automated out of the equation. What part of your current workflow do you think AI could take over tomorrow? Drop it below. Let’s dissect it together.

🎓 Why I Stopped Designing Around “Learning Styles” This might surprise some people in L&D, but I used to be a big believer in learning styles. You know the idea — some people learn best by seeing, others by hearing, others by doing. It felt intuitive. It made sense. And it became a staple in how we thought about training design. But here’s the kicker: the science doesn’t back it up. Researchers have found no solid evidence that matching learning delivery to someone’s preferred “style” actually improves learning. What does matter is matching the method to the content — for example, using visuals for geometry, or discussion for leadership development. So, if learning styles aren’t the magic formula, what really makes a difference? Here’s what I’ve learned (and seen work time and time again): 💡 Structure building – helping learners connect the dots and see how new information fits into the bigger picture. 🧩 Rule learning – teaching people how to apply principles, not just memorize examples. 🚀 Active learning – using retrieval practice, spacing, and reflection so learning actually sticks. 🧠 Dynamic testing – focusing less on “what do I know now?” and more on “what can I get better at next?” It’s freeing, actually. We don’t need to label people. We need to design learning that stretches everyone — visual, verbal, hands-on, or otherwise. Real learning isn’t about preference. It’s about progress. What about you? Have you noticed a shift away from learning styles in your organization? #LearningAndDevelopment #LearningScience #InstructionalDesign #GrowthMindset

Here's something I've learned as an instructional designer - More interactivity doesn't necessarily equate to a more effective course... In the effort to create engaging content, it's easy to fall into the trap of equating busyness with learning. But let's be real - a course overloaded with clicks, games, and gimmicks might just be pretty packaging on a lackluster product. It may look fun, but if those elements don't align with the course's objectives, they're really just window-dressing. I'm a big believer in avoiding adding unnecessary fluff - words, images, sounds - that don't contribute to learning. These elements can increase cognitive load, leading to learner fatigue and diminished effectiveness. When considering interactive features like quizzes, simulations, or discussions, ask yourself: do they enhance the learning goals? Interactivity can be as simple and profound as fostering a community through discussion, promoting dynamic, peer-supported learning environments. So, here's the takeaway for all of us designing learning experiences... Align every element of your course with the intended learning outcomes. Evaluate the relevance and impact of interactivities. Resist the allure of interactivity for its own sake. Purposeful design is key. What strategies do you use to ensure your course interactivities are meaningful and effective? #eLearning #InstructionalDesign #InstructionalDesigner #LearningandDevelopment

It was beautifully designed. The voiceover was polished. The navigation was smooth. And the quiz? 100%. But… a week later, the learners were still doing things the old way. ⚠️ That’s the problem with “feel-good” learning. It creates the illusion of success - without actual behavior change. Here’s what we’ve learned from the science of learning: 👉 Engagement isn’t the same as effectiveness. 👉 Completion isn’t the same as comprehension. 👉 Satisfaction scores don’t always reflect what learners retained. So, how do we design courses that actually work? ✅ Focus on outcomes - what do learners need to do, not just know? ✅ Embed real-world practice - simulate the messy decisions they’ll make on the job ✅ Use retrieval, spaced learning, and feedback - not just flashy animations ✅ Prioritize what sticks, not what sparkles 💡 The best courses aren’t always the ones learners love in the moment. They’re the ones that change what happens after. What’s one thing you used to think was good learning design… that you now avoid? #InstructionalDesign #LearningEffectiveness #BehaviorChange #LXDesign #CorporateTraining #IDOLAcademy

Mastering an authoring tool does not make you an instructional designer. If you are going into the role of a digital learning developer, then having a sound knowledge of authoring tools is necessary. For instructional design you don't need to be the next Storyline whizz or Evolve expert, but having an awareness of authoring tools can help when mapping interactivity and understanding limitations. But... In my opinion, if you're looking to transition into the field of learning design I would focus more on the underlying skills you need, as opposed to acing a specific tool. Because don't forget that instructional design isn't limited to digital platforms. As an ID you need to have the necessary knowledge, skills and theory to create learning for a variety of methods. For example... Wearing my instructional design hat, I use these skills: ⭐ Client relationship management - to liaise with stakeholders and subject matter experts. ⭐ Project management - to manage timescales, milestones and keep everyone on track! (this is particularly crucial when it comes to gathering feedback and any necessary info from subject matter experts.) ⭐ Needs analysis - to identify the best method for the learning, based on the outcomes, audience and the client's current offering. ⭐ Creative copywriting - to ensure content delivers key messaging in a way that is clear, concise and keeps the learner engaged. ⭐ Content development - creating learning content, often in a storyboard format, based on key topics and learning outcomes. These are to name just a few... When I switch my hat to digital learning developer I use these skills... 🌟 Problem solving - not everything always goes to plan, sometimes the authoring tool simply won't play ball and a workaround is needed. 🌟 Agility and creativity - to bring written content to life in a way that supports the learning and does not detract from it. 🌟 Graphic design and editing - to create custom imagery and edit video and audio. 🌟 Quality assurance - testing and quality checking is key to ensuring a top notch finished product. 🌟 Accessibility in design - to ensure the finished product is accessible and functional. (these skillsets can overlap too) And whilst I do invest time in ensuring my knowledge of using functionality within authoring tools is top notch, it is my content development as an ID which makes the learning relevant and engaging. It's my agility and creativity as a developer which elevates this content and presents it in a way that supports the learning. Not the authoring tool alone. In reality, an authoring tool is just a vessel and a very small piece of the jigsaw. So think beyond the tech and get to the bottom of what it is that will make you a great learning designer. #learningdesign #instructionaldesign #elearning #digitallearning