Learning Systems Design

Learning Design at the Systems Level

How learning functions across a whole organization

Practised · resource in development

Designing learning as an organizational system — governance, infrastructure, and sustainment — rather than as a set of isolated programs. It is the capstone that situates every other contribution inside the institution.

Grounding. Systems thinking; organizational learning

Sources

• Reference 1: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Organizational Learning Design — Systems · 1 shared source
• Change Management Through Learning Design — Systems · 1 shared source
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — Systems
• Learning Design for Emergent Learning — Systems
• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity — Systems · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation
• Change Management Through Learning Design

Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation

Diagnosing the problem before proposing a solution

Published resource

Entering an organization by asking the right diagnostic questions first — where intentions and outcomes have drifted apart — so design addresses the real problem. It is the organizational scale of learner research.

Grounding. Needs analysis; gap analysis

Read the Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation resource

Sources

• Reference 2: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems
• Organizational Learning Design — Systems
• Reading Demand as Diagnosis — Systems
• Learner Research: Human-Centred Design — Learner research
• The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument — 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level
• Learner Research: Human-Centred Design

Where this work leads

• Implementation Science Learning Design, on the Knowledge Mobilization page
• Policy & Public-Sector Knowledge Design, on the Knowledge Mobilization page

Change Management Through Learning Design

Moving organizations, not just running courses

Published resource

Designing learning as the mechanism of organizational change, for institutions navigating transformation with limited capacity to manage it well. It is a frequent, legible need in higher education and the public sector.

Grounding. Change management; implementation

Read the Change Management Through Learning Design resource

Sources

• Reference 3: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
• Reference 1: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems · 1 shared source
• Where Authority over Learning Sits — Systems · 2 shared sources
• Organizational Learning Design — Systems · 1 shared source
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For — Systems, Change
• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity — Systems · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level

Where this work leads

• Closing the Knowing–Doing Gap, on the Universal Design for Learning page
• Implementation Science Learning Design, on the Knowledge Mobilization page

Equity Evaluation Framework Design

Measuring equity, not only designing for it

Practised · resource in development

Frameworks that measure whether a design advanced equity, extending evaluation into territory organizations are increasingly accountable for. It belongs to the shared evaluation family across the practice.

Grounding. Equity evaluation; measurement

Sources

• Reference 4: Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Evaluation Framework Design — Evaluation
• Learning Design at the Systems Level — editorially linked
• Wellness-Integrated Learning Environment Design — Equity

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level

Where this work leads

• Equity-Centered Learning Design, on the Universal Design for Learning page
• Evaluating Whether Design Reduced Barriers, on the Universal Design for Learning page
• KMb Evaluation Design, on the Knowledge Mobilization page

Scenario-Based Learning Design for Complex Practice

Designing for judgment under real conditions

Practised · resource in development

Designing learning around realistic scenarios so practitioners build judgment for complex, ambiguous situations. It is widely applicable across professional practice in every target sector.

Grounding. Situated learning; case-based design

Sources

• Reference 5: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• The Workplace Partner Who Does Most of the Teaching — Capacity, Experiential · 1 shared source
• Experiential Learning Infrastructure — Experiential
• Learning Design at the Systems Level — editorially linked
• Organizational Learning Design — Capacity
• Teaching Technical Experts in Regulated Environments — Capacity

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level
• Experiential Learning Infrastructure

Storyboarding for Learning Design

Making the design visible before it is built

Practised · resource in development

A craft method for planning and communicating a learning experience before production, so decisions are deliberate and shared. It shows how the work is done, not only what it concludes.

Grounding. Storyboarding; design process

Sources

• Reference 6: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learner Research: Human-Centred Design — 1 shared source
• Curriculum Mapping Design — Alignment
• Learning Design at the Systems Level — editorially linked
• Designing for Error Tolerance — 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level

Where this work leads

• Backward Design in Practice, on the Learning Experience Design page

Wellness-Integrated Learning Environment Design

Designing for the conditions learning depends on

Practised · resource in development

Designing learning environments that account for the human conditions — including wellbeing and the social determinants of participation — that shape whether learning can happen at all.

Grounding. Wellbeing; social determinants of learning

Sources

• Reference 7: Fancourt, D., & Finn, S. (2019). What Is the Evidence on the Role of the Arts in Improving Health and Well-Being? WHO Regional Office for Europe, Health Evidence Network synthesis report 67.
• Reference 8: WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (2008). Closing the Gap in a Generation: Health Equity Through Action on the Social Determinants of Health. World Health Organization.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Design at the Systems Level — editorially linked
• Equity Evaluation Framework Design — Equity

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level

Where this work leads

• Equity-Centered Learning Design, on the Universal Design for Learning page

Learning Design for Emergent Learning

Structure for learning that cannot be fully pre-planned

Practised · resource in development

Designing for contexts where outcomes genuinely cannot be specified in advance, providing structure for learning that emerges through the work itself. It is the most exploratory contribution in the systems line.

Grounding. Complexity; emergent design

Sources

• Reference 9: Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making.” Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems
• A Risk Register for Knowledge-Building Institutions — Systems · 1 shared source
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — Systems
• Change Management Through Learning Design — Systems
• Organizational Learning Design — Systems

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level

Where this work leads

• Designing for Reflection & Transfer, on the Learning Experience Design page

Organizational Learning Design

Learning as an organizational capability

Published resource

Designing the structures, roles, and routines through which an organization learns as a whole — so capability is built into how the institution works, not left to individual programs.

Grounding. Organizational learning (Senge)

Read the Organizational Learning Design resource

Sources

• Reference 1: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems · 1 shared source
• Where Authority over Learning Sits — Systems · 1 shared source
• Reading Demand as Diagnosis — Systems · 1 shared source
• Change Management Through Learning Design — Systems · 1 shared source
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — Systems

Connected contributions

• Learning Design at the Systems Level
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page

Learning Evaluation Framework Design

Knowing whether learning worked

Published resource

Designing frameworks that measure whether learning achieved what it set out to — outcomes and impact, not only satisfaction — so decisions rest on evidence. It belongs to the shared evaluation family across the practice.

Grounding. Evaluation design (Kirkpatrick)

Read the Learning Evaluation Framework Design resource

Sources

• Reference 10: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Equity Evaluation Framework Design — Evaluation
• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — Systems
• Change Management Through Learning Design — Systems
• Learning Design for Emergent Learning — Systems

Connected contributions

• Equity Evaluation Framework Design

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• KMb Evaluation Design, on the Knowledge Mobilization page
• Evaluating Whether Design Reduced Barriers, on the Universal Design for Learning page

Curriculum Mapping Design

Coherence across a whole program

Published resource

Mapping outcomes, assessments, and experiences across an entire curriculum so a program holds together as a coherent whole rather than a set of disconnected courses. It is the program-scale companion to backward design.

Grounding. Curriculum alignment; backward design

Read the Curriculum Mapping Design resource

Sources

• Reference 11: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Storyboarding for Learning Design — Alignment
• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — Systems
• Change Management Through Learning Design — Systems
• Learning Design for Emergent Learning — Systems

Connected contributions

• Storyboarding for Learning Design

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Backward Design in Practice, on the Learning Experience Design page

Reading Demand as Diagnosis

What a long queue of requests describes

Practised · resource not yet written

A large and persistent volume of learning requests carries information beyond workload. Grouping incoming requests by the underlying situation — rather than by requester or date — surfaces the recurring conditions that people are asking learning to address, and often identifies a small number of structural changes that would reduce demand at its source.

Grounding. Performance analysis (Gilbert; Mager & Pipe); organizational systems (Rummler & Brache); organizational learning (Senge)

Sources

• Reference 12: Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)
• Reference 13: Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: Or, You Really Oughta Wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.
• Reference 14: Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
• Reference 1: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity — Governance, Systems, Process · 2 shared sources
• Organizational Learning Design — Systems · 1 shared source
• The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument — Governance, Process · 2 shared sources
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — Systems
• Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs — Systems

Connected contributions

• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation
• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity
• Organizational Learning Design

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Telling a Learning Need from a Performance Problem, on the Learning Design page

Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity

A published rule, applied consistently

Practised · resource not yet written

Where requests will always outnumber capacity, a written and shared allocation rule serves everyone better than sequence of arrival. Tiers of service — full design, consultation, template and self-serve — with stated criteria and expected timelines let requesters plan, make the reasoning reviewable, and give the team a defensible basis for what it takes on.

Grounding. Prioritization and portfolio management; exploration and exploitation (March); service tiering

Sources

• Reference 15: March, J. G. (1991). “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
• Reference 1: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
• Reference 14: Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Reading Demand as Diagnosis — Governance, Systems, Process · 2 shared sources
• The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument — Governance, Process
• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems · 1 shared source
• Where Authority over Learning Sits — Governance, Systems · 1 shared source
• A Risk Register for Knowledge-Building Institutions — Governance, Systems · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Reading Demand as Diagnosis
• The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Evaluating a Portfolio Larger Than Its Measurement Capacity, on the Evaluation page
• When the Consultation Is the Whole Intervention, on the Learning Design page
• Accessibility Triage for Existing Course Inventories, on the Accessibility page

The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument

What is asked at request time shapes what gets built

Practised · resource not yet written

The intake form is the first design decision in every project. Asking for the situation being addressed, who is affected, what has already been tried, who owns the content afterward and how success will be recognised moves the diagnostic conversation to the start, and gives the requester a clearer sense of what the work involves.

Grounding. Needs assessment (Rossett); scoping and staged decision-making; performance analysis

Sources

• Reference 2: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.
• Reference 13: Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: Or, You Really Oughta Wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.
• Reference 12: Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity — Governance, Process
• Reading Demand as Diagnosis — Governance, Process · 2 shared sources
• Where Authority over Learning Sits — Governance
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — 1 shared source
• A Risk Register for Knowledge-Building Institutions — Governance

Connected contributions

• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Telling a Learning Need from a Performance Problem, on the Learning Design page
• Scoping and the Decision Gate, on the Learning Design page
• Onboarding a Partner into Learning Design, on the Learning Design page

Where Authority over Learning Sits

Who decides, who advises, and who signs

Practised · resource not yet written

Institutions locate curriculum authority differently — in faculty governance, in a professional regulator, in an executive, or in the people delivering the work. Mapping where each decision is actually made, and what a designer can settle, recommend or escalate, allows the work to move without depending on informal influence, and makes handover to a successor straightforward.

Grounding. Curriculum governance; organizational learning (Senge); accreditation and approval processes

Sources

• Reference 1: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
• Reference 3: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
• Reference 16: Ramsden, I. (2002). Cultural Safety and Nursing Education in Aotearoa and Te Waipounamu. Doctoral thesis, Victoria University of Wellington.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Organizational Learning Design — Systems · 1 shared source
• Change Management Through Learning Design — Systems · 2 shared sources
• The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument — Governance
• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems · 1 shared source
• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity — Governance, Systems · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Organizational Learning Design
• The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Designing Where the Work Must Satisfy a Reviewer, on the Learning Design page
• Designing Inside a Research Culture, on the Learning Design page

A Risk Register for Knowledge-Building Institutions

Conditions to monitor, with indicators attached

Practised · resource not yet written

Institutions whose purpose is producing and holding knowledge carry a distinct set of risks: unverified material entering the evidence base, expertise held only in short-term roles, dependence on a single platform or vendor, decay of source records, and funding cycles shorter than the work. Recording these as a register with named indicators and review points allows them to be monitored, in the same way any other institutional risk is.

Grounding. Organizational learning (Senge); complexity and sense-making (Snowden); source and citation integrity

Sources

• Reference 1: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
• Reference 9: Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making.” Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76.
• Reference 17: Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). “Learning Analytics: Ethical Issues and Dilemmas.” American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510–1529.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Design at the Systems Level — Systems · 1 shared source
• Triage When Demand Exceeds Capacity — Governance, Systems · 1 shared source
• Where Authority over Learning Sits — Governance, Systems · 1 shared source
• Reading Demand as Diagnosis — Governance, Systems · 1 shared source
• Learning Design for Emergent Learning — Systems · 1 shared source

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Source Discipline in Knowledge Products, on the Learning Design page
• Designing for the Update Cycle, on the Learning Design page
• Learning Design Infrastructure, on the Learning Design page
• AI-Assisted Design, and Where It Fails, on the Learning Design page
• Knowledge That Was Never Produced, on the Epistemology page

Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone

The cluster anchor · design under physical consequence

Practised · resource not yet written

In laboratories, workshops, clinical settings, transport and utilities, the cost of an error is borne by a person. Design in these settings works to a different standard: performance demonstrated under realistic conditions rather than knowledge recalled, verification before independent work, and content maintained against the procedure it describes.

Grounding. Organizational accidents (Reason); high-reliability organizing (Weick & Sutcliffe); Safety-I and Safety-II (Hollnagel, Wears & Braithwaite)

Sources

• Reference 18: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
• Reference 19: Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
• Reference 20: Hollnagel, E., Wears, R. L., & Braithwaite, J. (2015). From Safety-I to Safety-II: A White Paper. The Resilient Health Care Net.
• Reference 21: Reason, J. (2000). “Human Error: Models and Management.” BMJ, 320(7237), 768–770.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs — Safety, Systems · 3 shared sources
• Competency Verification Before Authorization — Safety, Standards · 1 shared source
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For — Safety, Systems · 1 shared source
• Teaching Technical Experts in Regulated Environments — Safety, Standards · 1 shared source
• Designing for Error Tolerance — Safety · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Competency Verification Before Authorization
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For
• Designing for Error Tolerance
• Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Access in Clinical and Placement Education, on the Accessibility page

Competency Verification Before Authorization

The sign-off that permits independent work

Practised · resource not yet written

Authorization to operate equipment, handle material or work unsupervised rests on demonstrated performance, assessed against stated criteria by a named assessor and recorded with a review date. It differs from graded assessment in purpose and in consequence, and the design questions are what counts as sufficient evidence, who is qualified to judge it, and how currency is maintained.

Grounding. Cognitive task analysis (Clark et al.); competency assessment; performance under realistic conditions

Sources

• Reference 22: Clark, R. E., Feldon, D. F., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Yates, K. A., & Early, S. (2008). “Cognitive Task Analysis.” In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• Reference 18: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
• Reference 23: Messick, S. (1995). “Validity of Psychological Assessment: Validation of Inferences from Persons’ Responses and Performances as Scientific Inquiry into Score Meaning.” American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone — Safety, Standards · 1 shared source
• Teaching Technical Experts in Regulated Environments — Safety, Standards · 2 shared sources
• Designing for Error Tolerance — Safety
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For — Safety · 1 shared source
• Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs — Safety · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Studio and Workshop Pedagogy, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Writing Outcomes That Can Be Assessed, on the Learning Design page
• Quality Assurance as a Documented Practice, on the Learning Design page
• Access in Clinical and Placement Education, on the Accessibility page

Procedural Drift and What It Calls For

When practice and procedure separate over time

Practised · resource not yet written

Practice gradually adapts to conditions the written procedure does not describe, and the adaptation usually succeeds until circumstances change. The documented response is to examine the conditions that made the adaptation reasonable — time pressure, tooling, staffing, a procedure that no longer fits the work — and to revise the procedure or the conditions, with instruction addressing what remains.

Grounding. Normalization of deviance (Vaughan); organizational accidents (Reason); understanding human error (Dekker)

Sources

• Reference 24: Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.
• Reference 18: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
• Reference 25: Dekker, S. (2014). The Field Guide to Understanding ‘Human Error’ (3rd ed.). Ashgate.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs — Safety, Systems · 1 shared source
• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone — Safety, Systems · 1 shared source
• Change Management Through Learning Design — Change, Systems
• Competency Verification Before Authorization — Safety · 1 shared source
• Teaching Technical Experts in Regulated Environments — Safety · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone
• Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Designing for the Update Cycle, on the Learning Design page
• Telling a Learning Need from a Performance Problem, on the Learning Design page

Designing for Error Tolerance

Support at the point of action, not recall under pressure

Practised · resource not yet written

Where consequence is high, the reliable designs reduce what has to be remembered: checklists, forcing functions, sequenced prompts, clear labelling and equipment that resists being assembled incorrectly. Instruction then covers what these cannot — judgement, recognition of the unfamiliar, and the decision to stop — which is a smaller and more teachable set.

Grounding. Human error models (Reason); checklists (Gawande); job aids (Rossett & Schafer); design affordances (Norman)

Sources

• Reference 21: Reason, J. (2000). “Human Error: Models and Management.” BMJ, 320(7237), 768–770.
• Reference 26: Gawande, A. (2009). The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right. Metropolitan Books.
• Reference 27: Rossett, A., & Schafer, L. (2007). Job Aids and Performance Support: Moving from Knowledge in the Classroom to Knowledge Everywhere. Pfeiffer.
• Reference 6: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone — Safety · 1 shared source
• Competency Verification Before Authorization — Safety
• Storyboarding for Learning Design — 1 shared source
• The Intake Question as a Governance Instrument — Craft
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For — Safety

Connected contributions

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone
• Competency Verification Before Authorization

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• What to Build When the Answer Isn’t a Course, on the Learning Design page
• Information and Data Visualization for Learning, on the Learning Design page

Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs

What the record already contains

Practised · resource not yet written

Incident reports, near-miss logs and safety reviews are among the most specific accounts an organization holds of where practice meets difficulty. Reading them as design evidence identifies which situations recur and which supports would help, and the value of the record depends on reporting being straightforward and being seen to lead to change.

Grounding. Safety culture and reporting (Reason); high-reliability organizing (Weick & Sutcliffe); Safety-II

Sources

• Reference 18: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
• Reference 19: Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
• Reference 20: Hollnagel, E., Wears, R. L., & Braithwaite, J. (2015). From Safety-I to Safety-II: A White Paper. The Resilient Health Care Net.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone — Safety, Systems · 3 shared sources
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For — Safety, Systems · 1 shared source
• Reading Demand as Diagnosis — Systems
• A Risk Register for Knowledge-Building Institutions — Systems, Evidence
• Competency Verification Before Authorization — Safety · 1 shared source

Connected contributions

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For
• Reading Demand as Diagnosis

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Standing Up an Evaluation Function, on the Evaluation page

Teaching Technical Experts in Regulated Environments

Specialist knowledge, a regulator, and a shared record

Practised · resource not yet written

Research facilities, utilities and clinical services combine deep specialist expertise with external oversight and a training record that must satisfy a reviewer. The craft is drawing out what an expert knows procedurally, keeping the material accurate as procedures are revised, and producing evidence that is genuinely useful to the people doing the work as well as complete for audit.

Grounding. Cognitive task analysis (Clark et al.); working with subject-matter experts; regulatory training records

Sources

• Reference 22: Clark, R. E., Feldon, D. F., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Yates, K. A., & Early, S. (2008). “Cognitive Task Analysis.” In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (3rd ed.). Routledge.
• Reference 18: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
• Reference 28: Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone — Safety, Standards · 1 shared source
• Competency Verification Before Authorization — Safety, Standards · 2 shared sources
• Procedural Drift and What It Calls For — Safety · 1 shared source
• Incidents and Near-Misses as Design Inputs — Safety · 1 shared source
• Scenario-Based Learning Design for Complex Practice — Capacity

Connected contributions

• Learning Where Being Wrong Injures Someone

Where this work leads

• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page
• Working with Subject-Matter Experts, on the Learning Design page
• Designing Where the Work Must Satisfy a Reviewer, on the Learning Design page
• Designing Inside a Research Culture, on the Learning Design page

Experiential Learning Infrastructure

Learning by doing, built to last

Published resource

The conditions and structures that let adult learners practise, make consequential mistakes, and build capability through experience rather than exposure. It treats error as a designed source of feedback, not a failure of instruction.

A resource in two areas. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Learning Systems Design set.

Grounding. Experiential learning (Kolb); retrieval practice & desirable difficulties (Bjork)

Read the Experiential Learning Infrastructure resource

Sources

• Reference 29: Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
• Reference 30: Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2011). “Making Things Hard on Yourself, but in a Good Way: Creating Desirable Difficulties to Enhance Learning.” In Psychology and the Real World. Worth Publishers.
• Reference 31: Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). “Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention.” Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Scenario-Based Learning Design for Complex Practice — Experiential
• The Workplace Partner Who Does Most of the Teaching — Experiential

Where this work leads

• Learning Experience Architecture, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Designing for Reflection & Transfer, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Inclusive Facilitation & Capacity Building, on the Accessibility page
• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page

Learning Community Design & Facilitation

Peer learning and communities of practice

Published resource

Designing the social layer of learning — structured peer exchange, collaborative sense-making, and communities of practice that let expertise circulate rather than sit in silos. It is also the capability that sustains evidence use in knowledge mobilization.

A resource in two areas. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Learning Systems Design set.

Grounding. Zone of proximal development (Vygotsky); communities of practice (Wenger)

Read the Learning Community Design & Facilitation resource

Sources

• Reference 32: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
• Reference 33: Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
• Reference 5: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• The Workplace Partner Who Does Most of the Teaching — 1 shared source
• Scenario-Based Learning Design for Complex Practice — 1 shared source

Where this work leads

• Learning Experience Architecture, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Co-Production & Participatory Design, on the Knowledge Mobilization page
• Research-to-Practice Learning Systems, on the Knowledge Mobilization page
• Inclusive Facilitation & Capacity Building, on the Accessibility page
• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page

Learner Research: Human-Centred Design

Understanding learners before designing for them

Practised · resource in development · evidence in hand

UX research applied to learning — interviews, empathy mapping, personas, journey mapping, and synthesis — so programs are grounded in who learners actually are rather than who they are assumed to be. At organizational scale, the same inquiry becomes needs analysis.

A resource in two areas. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Learning Systems Design set.

Grounding. Human-centred design; UX research methods

Sources

• Reference 6: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Storyboarding for Learning Design — 1 shared source
• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation — Learner research

Connected contributions

• Needs Analysis for Organizational Transformation

Where this work leads

• Learning Experience Architecture, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Designing for Learner Variability at Scale, on the Universal Design for Learning page
• Learning Systems Design, on the Learning Systems Design page

The Workplace Partner Who Does Most of the Teaching

Supervisors as the largest and least supported teaching group

Practised · resource not yet written

In placements, co-ops and practicums the day-to-day teaching is done by workplace supervisors whose primary role is something else. Supporting them well is a design problem in its own right: a short and specific supervisor brief, a small number of structured moments in the placement, worked examples of useful feedback, and a named contact when a situation exceeds the brief.

A resource in two areas. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Learning Systems Design set.

Grounding. Work-integrated learning (Billett; CEWIL Canada); building design capability in non-designers

Sources

• Reference 34: Billett, S. (2009). “Realising the Educational Worth of Integrating Work Experiences in Higher Education.” Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.
• Reference 35: Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada (CEWIL Canada). Work-Integrated Learning definitions and quality principles.
• Reference 5: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

• Scenario-Based Learning Design for Complex Practice — Experiential, Capacity · 1 shared source
• Organizational Learning Design — Capacity
• Learning Community Design & Facilitation — 1 shared source
• Experiential Learning Infrastructure — Experiential

Connected contributions

• Organizational Learning Design

Where this work leads

• Learning Experience Design, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Placement Quality as a Design Variable, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Who Is Able to Take the Placement, on the Learning Experience Design page
• Building Design Capability in Non-Designers, on the Learning Design page