Learning Design Specialization

A learning design practice, mapped

Much of what people need in order to act — on their health, their rights, their work — is not missing but unusable: built without them, for conditions that are not theirs. Learning design is where those choices are made. This practice develops knowledge through interaction with the people it concerns, and treats access as a condition of the work rather than a correction to it. This page sets out part of that practice: a trunk of shared craft, and ten branches of expertise.

Screen reader and keyboard optimised version. All content is presented in reading order, with no diagram, tabs, or scripting. An interactive map version is also available.

Section 1

How this map is organized

A single practice that designs how people and organizations learn, expressed as a trunk of shared craft and ten connected branches of expertise — each with its own node and its own page. The trunk is what everything else grows from: the diagnostic question asked before anything is built, the writing, the visual language, the review against shared standards, the ethical and legal obligations the work carries, and the practices that keep it checkable and current. Every contribution below grows on one branch and links to the others it draws on, because the branches are not separate skills but one body of work seen from different perspectives.

The interactive version arranges the same material two ways: by branch, which shows where each contribution grows, and by affinity, which repositions contributions by how alike they are, so relationships across branches become visible.

A small number of contributions grow on two branches at once. Each appears once here, under its home branch, and states its second membership. A branch page may therefore list more resources than this page groups under that branch.

Contributions in the trunk and on each branch, and how many have a live page
AreaContributions in this setPublished
Accessibility284
Epistemology120
Evaluation100
Health Workforce Education90
Human Rights Education70
Knowledge Mobilization143
The Trunk · Learning Design Craft370
Learning Experience Design193
Learning Systems Design267
Public Learning110
Universal Design for Learning104

Counts include cross-listed resources, which is why the totals across the rows exceed the 173 distinct contributions on this page. Every contribution on this page is practised; the status on each shows whether a public resource about it exists yet. The published resources and the case studies are the record of the practice; this page is its shape.

Section 2

The trunk and the ten branches

The trunk and each branch have their own page or, where a page is still in development, their own set of contributions below. The trunk is Groundwork, the learning design method. The Accessibility and Universal Design for Learning branches are developed further through Fieldwork, the research method practised at Accessible Learning Labs; Accessibility holds both knowledge resources, published on andrearobin.com, and a service line offered there.

Accessibility

Access understood at the level of the individual person and the obligation an institution holds toward them, alongside the proactive design that reduces how often that obligation must be invoked. This branch gathers knowledge resources written for learning designers, faculty, and institutions, offered in support of — never in place of — the accessibility advisors and accommodation professionals who carry this work day to day.

Grounding. Human rights and accommodation law; disability studies; accessibility standards; inclusive design

Visit the Accessibility page · Read its 28 contributions below

Epistemology

The conditions under which a knowledge claim is admitted, discounted, or never formed at all — the questions that arise before evidence is appraised rather than during it. This branch gathers the contributions that give a design process language for how it decides what will count as knowledge, and for what the exclusions cost. It supplies analysis; the standing commitments to communities and to Indigenous knowledge holders remain with the branches and instruments that carry them.

Grounding. Social epistemology; epistemic injustice; science and technology studies; socio-legal epistemology of evidence

Visit the Epistemology page · Read its 12 contributions below

Evaluation

The design of the evidence a learning programme produces about itself. This branch gathers the contributions that build measurement into practice from the first cycle rather than adding it at the end: what can be established when there is no baseline, what can be claimed at small numbers, how a portfolio is measured when capacity covers only part of it, and how findings are shaped so that a decision can rest on them. It draws on the evaluation contributions held elsewhere on the map and situates them in a shared method.

Grounding. Evaluation design; contribution analysis; utilization-focused evaluation; measurement validity

Visit the Evaluation page · Read its 10 contributions below

Health Workforce Education

The design of learning for everyone who delivers care — registered professionals, community health workers, peer workers, and volunteers. This branch gathers the contributions concerned with what a role can be prepared to do, what is held constant when a programme moves between settings, what supervision carries once initial training ends, and how a design stays usable where time, connectivity and resources are limited. It draws on the trunk for its craft, on Accessibility for how a programme meets the people it serves, and on Evaluation for the evidence it produces about itself.

Grounding. Health professions education (Frenk et al.); health workforce policy (WHO); task-sharing and non-specialist delivery; implementation fidelity and adaptation

Visit the Health Workforce Education page · Read its 9 contributions below

Human Rights Education

Education about, through and for human rights, as set out in the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training. This branch gathers the contributions that turn instruments into practice: the right to education itself as a design framework, the established models of human rights education and what each is for, the move from knowing a right to being able to invoke it, and the conditions under which serious harm can be taught well. It is the branch the accessibility and equity work draws its legal grounding from.

Grounding. United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training; the right to education (Tomaševski; CESCR General Comment 13); models of human rights education (Tibbitts; Bajaj)

Visit the Human Rights Education page · Read its 7 contributions below

Knowledge Mobilization

The design of how research and evidence reach the people who can use them, and change what they do. This branch gathers the contributions that turn knowledge into usable, evaluated, and sustained practice across sectors.

Grounding. Knowledge mobilization; implementation science

Visit the Knowledge Mobilization page · Read its 14 contributions below

The Trunk · Learning Design Craft

The shared craft of learning design, which every branch grows from and none of them owns. It runs from the first diagnostic question — whether this is a learning problem at all — through scoping, working with experts, writing, visual language and production, and out to the practices the field holds in common: quality assurance, source discipline, privacy, ethics, update cycles, and the case made for the resource in the first place.

Grounding. Performance analysis; adult learning; learning sciences; plain language and accessibility standards; research and privacy ethics

Visit the Learning Design page · Read its 37 contributions below

Learning Experience Design

The design of learning as it is actually experienced — how a learner moves through it, engages with it, and makes it their own. This branch gathers the contributions that shape the experience itself, from motivation through practice, reflection, and the journey that holds them together.

Grounding. Experiential learning; human-centred design

Visit the Learning Experience Design page · Read its 19 contributions below

Learning Systems Design

The design of learning as an organizational system — its analysis, infrastructure, evaluation, and change — rather than as isolated programs. This branch gathers the contributions that situate learning inside institutions and help them move.

Grounding. Systems thinking; organizational learning

Visit the Learning Systems Design page · Read its 26 contributions below

Public Learning

Learning designed for people who are not enrolled: visitors, community members, practitioners outside the academy, and anyone who arrives voluntarily and may leave at any moment. This branch gathers the contributions that address the encounter itself — attention, groups, objects, interpretation, and the public room — alongside the infrastructure that makes public learning possible, from access to the research literature to community-held records. Museums, science centres, galleries, libraries and public programmes are its settings.

Grounding. Free-choice learning; museum education; visitor studies; open access; public library and information literacy practice

Visit the Public Learning page · Read its 11 contributions below

Universal Design for Learning

Designing proactively for the full, predictable range of human variability, so learning fits diverse learners from the outset rather than being retrofitted. This branch gathers the contributions that reduce barriers and widen access without lowering rigour.

Grounding. Universal Design for Learning (CAST)

Visit the Universal Design for Learning page · Read its 10 contributions below

Section 3

Every contribution, in full

Contributions are grouped by trunk and branch, in alphabetical order, then given within each group in the order they appear on the map. Each states what it contributes, what grounds it, whether a live page exists, the contributions most like it, and the ones it connects to.

Accessibility

25 contributions grow on this branch, and 3 more are shared with it from Universal Design for Learning. Visit the Accessibility page.

Why Universal Design Never Eliminates Individual Accommodation

The anchor · why both are permanent, and both are skilled

Practised · resource in development

Individual accommodation is not a residue left behind by imperfect design. Human variability has no outer edge, some barriers are the very thing an assessment is meant to measure, and the duty is owed to a person rather than discharged by a process — which is why proactive design and individual accommodation remain complementary, and why the accommodation encounter is skilled professional practice rather than an administrative step.

Grounding. Inclusive design and one-size-fits-one; the duty to accommodate; construct validity

Sources

  • Reference 41: Inclusive Design Research Centre. The Inclusive Design Guide. OCAD University — the source of the one-size-fits-one principle and the inclusive design framework.
  • Reference 42: Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
  • Reference 43: British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.
  • 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.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Where this work leads

The Duty to Accommodate in Learning Design

The legal frame, written for those who build and teach

Practised · resource in development

The architecture within which access decisions are made and defended: the procedural and substantive duty, the unified bona fide requirement test, and accommodation to the point of undue hardship, set in the Canadian frame with the cross-border standards that vendor and partnership work require. It is offered as synthesis for designers, faculty, and institutions; determinations in individual cases rest with accessibility advisors and accommodation offices, and with legal counsel where a matter becomes contested.

Grounding. Meiorin and the BFOR test; Accessible Canada Act; BC Human Rights Code; Accessible British Columbia Act; ADA and Sections 504/508

Sources

  • Reference 43: British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.
  • Reference 44: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
  • Reference 45: Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 46: Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 47: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.; Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Sections 504 and 508, as amended.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Essential Requirements and the Limits of Flexibility

What a standard genuinely requires, articulated in advance

Practised · resource in development

The most demanding judgment in the field: when flexibility preserves what is being measured, and when it alters it. This resource supports programs in articulating their essential requirements before any dispute arises — separating what a standard genuinely requires from what it has inherited by convention — so that the reasoning is available to everyone who later needs it.

Grounding. Construct validity; constructive alignment; bona fide academic and technical standards

Sources

  • 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.
  • Reference 15: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  • Reference 43: British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Disability Studies for Learning Designers

The grounding that changes what a designer sees

Practised · resource in development

Social, medical, and interactional models of disability; ableism as institutional structure rather than individual attitude; disability as identity, culture, and political community. It is the grounding that allows a barrier to be named as a design failure rather than a learner’s deficit, and it is what distinguishes accessibility practice from compliance administration.

Grounding. Social model (Oliver); academic ableism (Dolmage); Titchkosky; Kafer

Sources

  • Reference 48: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
  • Reference 49: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  • Reference 50: Titchkosky, T. (2011). The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. University of Toronto Press.
  • Reference 51: Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing Out the Disclosure Requirement

Disclosure burden as a design variable

Practised · resource in development

Access that is gated behind disclosure asks a person to name a private matter to someone holding authority over them, and the documented costs of that request are real: anticipated stigma, delay, and for some, a decision not to ask at all. This resource treats disclosure burden as something design can measure and reduce — why a flexible deadline requiring an email is a disclosure event and a built-in buffer is not — while leaving the accommodation record itself where it belongs, with the office that holds it.

Grounding. Stigma and concealment (Goffman); academic ableism; BC information-governance requirements

Sources

  • Reference 52: Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
  • Reference 49: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  • Reference 53: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Partnering with Disabled People in Learning Design

Co-design without extraction

Practised · resource in development

Structuring lived-experience partnership so that it is compensated, early enough to shape decisions rather than ratify them, and accessible in its own conduct. It attends to the pattern in which technical expertise quietly eclipses lived experience, and favours partnership with disability-led organizations already doing this work over convening participants anew.

Grounding. Nothing about us without us (Charlton); inclusive design; TCPS 2 research ethics

Sources

  • Reference 54: Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.
  • Reference 41: Inclusive Design Research Centre. The Inclusive Design Guide. OCAD University — the source of the one-size-fits-one principle and the inclusive design framework.
  • Reference 55: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Accessibility Triage for Existing Course Inventories

A defensible order of work when everything cannot be fixed at once

Practised · resource in development

Most institutions hold thousands of documents, modules, videos, and pages built before anyone was checking, with no realistic path to full conformance. This resource offers a tiered protocol — what is remediated now, what is rebuilt at next revision, what is retired, and which standard applies to each tier — using high-volume required and compliance training as the worked example.

Grounding. WCAG 2.2; EN 301 549; remediation prioritisation

Sources

  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 56: ETSI/CEN/CENELEC (2021). EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility Requirements for ICT Products and Services. Harmonised European Standard.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing for the Assistive Technology People Actually Use

Why conformant content can still fail in practice

Practised · resource in development

Conformance and assistive-technology fluency are not the same thing, and the difference shows quickly in real use. This resource covers testing with actual assistive technology rather than automated checking alone, and the reasons technically conformant material can still obstruct — while leaving assessment, tool matching, and training to the assistive technology specialists and advisors whose professional work that is.

Grounding. SETT framework (Zabala); HAAT model (Cook & Polgar); WCAG 2.2

Sources

  • Reference 57: Zabala, J. S. (2005). Ready, SETT, Go! Getting Started with the SETT Framework — the Student, Environments, Tasks, Tools framework for assistive technology decision-making.
  • Reference 58: Cook, A. M., & Polgar, J. M. (2015). Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice (4th ed.). Elsevier — the source of the Human Activity Assistive Technology (HAAT) model.
  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Accessible Procurement and Vendor Accountability

The decisions made before anything is built

Practised · resource in development

An inaccessible platform, once purchased, sets the ceiling on everything designed inside it. This resource covers reading an accessibility conformance report critically rather than accepting it at face value, using recognised standards as procurement criteria, writing remediation commitments into agreements, and piloting with disabled users before signature.

Grounding. EN 301 549; WCAG 2.2; VPAT and accessibility conformance reports

Sources

  • Reference 56: ETSI/CEN/CENELEC (2021). EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility Requirements for ICT Products and Services. Harmonised European Standard.
  • Reference 59: Information Technology Industry Council. Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) and Accessibility Conformance Reports.
  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing for Episodic and Fluctuating Conditions

Program architecture for conditions that vary

Practised · resource in development

Attendance policy, deadline architecture, cohort progression, and leave-and-return pathways — the structural layer of a problem that individual accommodation handles with difficulty because most systems assume stable limitations. It is program and policy design, offered in the knowledge that disabled people and experienced advisors hold far more understanding of these conditions than the design literature yet reflects.

Grounding. Episodic disability framework (O’Brien et al.); disability studies

Sources

  • Reference 60: O’Brien, K. K., Bayoumi, A. M., Strike, C., Young, N. L., & Davis, A. M. (2008). “Exploring Disability from the Perspective of Adults Living with HIV/AIDS: Development of a Conceptual Framework.” Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 6:76.
  • Reference 51: Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Access in Clinical and Placement Education

Holding patient safety and access seriously at once

Practised · resource in development

Placement, simulation, precepting, and competency assessment are where essential requirements are most contested and where safety arguments can close conversations that deserve to stay open. This resource works through the design and assessment architecture that allows a program to protect genuine safety requirements while examining the ones it has never had reason to question.

Grounding. Technical standards in health professions education (Meeks & Jain); construct validity; duty to accommodate

Sources

  • Reference 61: Meeks, L. M., & Jain, N. R. (2018). Accessibility, Inclusion, and Action in Medical Education: Lived Experiences of Learners and Physicians with Disabilities. Association of American Medical Colleges.
  • 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.
  • Reference 43: British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Faculty Development That Changes Accessible Practice

From awareness to what instructors actually do

Practised · resource in development

Institutions have offered accessibility and inclusive design workshops for years, often with limited change in daily teaching practice. This resource diagnoses whether the gap is capability, opportunity, or motivation, then designs accordingly — point-of-need supports, discipline-specific exemplars, and department-embedded work — with any content on legal obligation delivered alongside the accommodation office rather than independently of it.

Grounding. COM-B and the Behaviour Change Wheel (Michie et al.); adult learning; UDL

Sources

  • Reference 62: Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). “The Behaviour Change Wheel: A New Method for Characterising and Designing Behaviour Change Interventions.” Implementation Science, 6:42.
  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Institutional Accessibility Planning as a Change Program

From a published plan to demonstrable change

Practised · resource in development

Statutory obligation produces an accessibility plan, a committee, and a feedback mechanism; it does not by itself produce sequencing, ownership, or capability. This resource brings systems design and change management to accessibility governance, and is written for a contributing role on an institutional plan rather than for authorship of an institution’s accessibility position.

Grounding. Accessible Canada Act; Accessible British Columbia Act; change management; systems thinking

Sources

  • Reference 44: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
  • Reference 46: Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 36: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Reference 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Accessible Health and Patient Education

Access beyond the learner, to the person receiving care

Practised · resource in development

Health literacy, plain language, communication access, and accessible patient education and informed consent, set against the documented health disparities disabled people experience. It is the point at which accessible learning design reaches materials intended for patients and the public rather than for students and staff.

Grounding. Health literacy (Nutbeam); disability health disparities (Krahn et al.); social determinants of health

Sources

  • Reference 63: Nutbeam, D. (2000). “Health Literacy as a Public Health Goal: A Challenge for Contemporary Health Education and Communication Strategies into the 21st Century.” Health Promotion International, 15(3), 259–267.
  • Reference 64: Krahn, G. L., Walker, D. K., & Correa-De-Araujo, R. (2015). “Persons with Disabilities as an Unrecognized Health Disparity Population.” American Journal of Public Health, 105(S2), S198–S206.
  • Reference 39: 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.
  • Reference 18: Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Accessible Research Participation and Knowledge Products

Who can take part, and who can read the findings

Practised · resource in development

Consent materials, participant-facing instruments, plain-language summaries, and accessible dissemination — increasingly expected by research ethics boards and funders, and rarely designed for. It sits at the junction of knowledge mobilization and accessibility, where a study’s reach is set as much by its materials as by its recruitment.

Grounding. TCPS 2 (2022); knowledge mobilization; WCAG 2.2

Sources

  • Reference 55: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).
  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.
  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Models of Disability as Design Decisions

The frame chosen before any design decision is made

Practised · resource in development

Medical, social, biopsychosocial, economic, functional solutions, social identity or cultural affiliation, and charity — seven models in active circulation, each of which settles in advance what counts as the problem and who is obliged to act on it. This resource sets them beside one another with their strengths and their costs, and treats the choice of model as a design decision rather than a philosophical preference, because the model implicit in a project brief is usually the model that shapes what gets built.

Grounding. ICF (WHO, 2001); social model (Oliver); Retief & Letšosa; Shakespeare

Sources

  • Reference 65: World Health Organization (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO — the source of the biopsychosocial model of disability.
  • Reference 48: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
  • Reference 66: Retief, M., & Letšosa, R. (2018). “Models of Disability: A Brief Overview.” HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, 74(1).
  • Reference 67: Shakespeare, T. (2013). Disability Rights and Wrongs Revisited (2nd ed.). Routledge — a critical reassessment of the strong social model.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Disability Categories and the Barriers People Meet

The reference layer, written barrier-first

Practised · resource in development

Visual, auditory, deafblind, speech, mobility and body structure, cognitive and learning, seizure, and psychological disabilities, each set against the barriers people actually encounter in digital and physical environments. It is written barrier-first rather than diagnosis-first, so that a designer reaches for the environmental change rather than the label — and it is the reference layer that the more argumentative resources on this branch quietly assume a reader already holds.

Grounding. ICF (WHO, 2001); WCAG 2.2; disability studies

Sources

  • Reference 65: World Health Organization (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO — the source of the biopsychosocial model of disability.
  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 48: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Assistive Technology and Adaptive Strategies

What exists, and what it does for a person

Practised · resource in development

Screen readers, magnification, speech input, alternative pointing, augmentative and alternative communication, hearing technologies, and the low-technology and adaptive strategies used at least as often — described by what they accomplish for a person rather than by product name, and paired with the frameworks that structure a selection decision. It is the survey that has to precede the harder question of why conformant content still fails against the technology people actually use.

Grounding. HAAT model (Cook & Polgar); SETT framework (Zabala); WHO assistive technology guidance

Sources

  • Reference 58: Cook, A. M., & Polgar, J. M. (2015). Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice (4th ed.). Elsevier — the source of the Human Activity Assistive Technology (HAAT) model.
  • Reference 57: Zabala, J. S. (2005). Ready, SETT, Go! Getting Started with the SETT Framework — the Student, Environments, Tasks, Tools framework for assistive technology decision-making.
  • Reference 68: World Health Organization & UNICEF (2022). Global Report on Assistive Technology. World Health Organization.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Disability Data and the Limits of Prevalence Figures

Why the numbers disagree, and how to use one honestly

Practised · resource in development

Measurement by diagnosis, by function, or by self-identification produces materially different populations, which is why global and national prevalence figures diverge so widely and why the choice of instrument is never neutral. This resource covers the major global and Canadian sources and their known undercounts, and how to carry a number into a business case or a funding application without asking it to bear more weight than it can.

Grounding. WHO World Report on Disability; WHO Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities; Canadian Survey on Disability; ICF

Sources

  • Reference 69: World Health Organization & World Bank (2011). World Report on Disability. World Health Organization.
  • Reference 70: World Health Organization (2022). Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities. World Health Organization.
  • Reference 71: Statistics Canada. Canadian Survey on Disability — the national source for disability prevalence in Canada.
  • Reference 65: World Health Organization (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO — the source of the biopsychosocial model of disability.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Disability Etiquette and Communication in Learning Environments

Professional practice, not a list of prohibitions

Practised · resource in development

Person-first and identity-first language and why the choice belongs to the person rather than the institution; addressing someone directly rather than their interpreter or support worker; offering assistance without presuming it is wanted or acting before it is accepted. It is written for facilitators and instructors as professional communication practice, on the understanding that the failures that matter in a learning room are rarely failures of intention and almost always failures of default behaviour under time pressure.

Grounding. Disability etiquette guidance (United Spinal Association); CRPD; disability studies

Sources

  • Reference 72: United Spinal Association. Disability Etiquette: Tips on Interacting with People with Disabilities.
  • Reference 73: United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
  • Reference 54: Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

International and Regional Disability Rights Instruments

The layer above domestic duty

Practised · resource in development

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its General Comments, and the Marrakesh Treaty, together with the regional instruments — the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the Inter-American Convention. It explains why accessibility obligations converge across jurisdictions rather than arising independently in each, and supplies the vocabulary required to work with partners outside Canada.

Grounding. UDHR (1948); CRPD (2006); Marrakesh Treaty (2013); regional human rights instruments

Sources

  • Reference 74: United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Reference 73: United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
  • Reference 75: World Intellectual Property Organization (2013). Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled.
  • Reference 76: European Union (2012). Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2012/C 326/02.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Accessible Physical and Hybrid Learning Environments

The part of universal design most often handed to facilities

Practised · resource in development

The seven principles of universal design as they were originally written — for buildings, spaces, and products — and what they require of a classroom, a laboratory, a placement site, and the hybrid arrangements that now carry a large share of teaching. It is the part of universal design that learning designers most often hand to facilities management, and the part that determines whether a person can be present in the room at all.

Grounding. Principles of Universal Design (Connell et al., 1997); CSA B651; Accessible Canada Act

Sources

  • Reference 42: Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
  • Reference 77: CSA Group. CSA B651: Accessible Design for the Built Environment. Canadian Standards Association.
  • Reference 44: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Accessibility Review

Service · Accessible Learning Labs

Offered as a service

A rigorous review of learning environments that holds four interconnected bodies of knowledge in view at once, producing findings a surface-level compliance check cannot. It is offered as a specific, scoped service.

Grounding. WCAG; UDL; disability studies; systems knowledge

Read the Accessibility Review resource

Sources

  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Where this work leads

Inclusive Course & Curriculum Design

Service · Accessible Learning Labs

Offered as a service

Inclusive design of courses and curricula for faculty, designers, and curriculum committees — integrating design frameworks, pedagogy, and the systems knowledge that makes change endure. It is offered as a specific service.

Grounding. UDL; backward design; assessment equity; systems knowledge

Read the Inclusive Course & Curriculum Design resource

Sources

  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
  • Reference 15: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Inclusive Facilitation & Capacity Building

Service · Accessible Learning Labs

Offered as a service

Facilitation understood as a professional stance shaped by how power, identity, and legitimate knowledge are held — and the building of others' capacity to facilitate inclusively. It is offered as a specific service.

Grounding. Power-aware facilitation; adult learning; equity

Read the Inclusive Facilitation & Capacity Building resource

Sources

  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 9: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Making Accessibility More Than Compliance

Access as design quality, not a checklist

Practised · resource in development

Treating accessibility as a dimension of good design rather than a minimum legal standard met at the end. It is the conceptual bridge from inclusive learning design to the accessibility, disability and accommodation branch, and to the service line offered alongside it.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.

Grounding. WCAG; UDL; inclusive design

Sources

  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Eliminating Construct-Irrelevant Barriers in Assessment

Measuring capability, not obstacles

Published resource

Removing features of an assessment that get in the way of demonstrating mastery without being part of what is measured, so results reflect capability rather than incidental barriers. It works alongside assessment designed as experience.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.

Grounding. Construct validity; UDL action & expression

Read the Eliminating Construct-Irrelevant Barriers in Assessment resource

Sources

  • 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.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluating Whether Design Reduced Barriers

Closing the UDL cycle with evidence

Practised · resource in development

Measuring whether an inclusive design actually lowered barriers, rather than assuming that it did — ending on rigor rather than aspiration. It belongs to the shared evaluation family that runs across the practice.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.

Grounding. Evaluation design; Universal Design for Learning

Sources

  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Epistemology

11 contributions grow on this branch, and 1 more is shared with it from Learning Experience Design. Visit the Epistemology page.

What a Sound Knowledge Process Looks Like

The entry node · the standard the rest of the branch measures against

Practised · resource not yet written

Four conditions rendered for design work: real avenues through which criticism can travel while a decision can still change, demonstrable uptake of that criticism, standards of evidence agreed before evidence is gathered, and authority that tracks relevant knowledge rather than rank. They are necessary rather than sufficient — they make error detectable, not absent — and the fourth cannot be self-certified, which is why it is written as an arrangement a process submits to rather than a check it performs on itself.

Grounding. Critical contextual empiricism (Longino); strong objectivity (Harding); veritistic social epistemology (Goldman)

Sources

  • Reference 112: Longino, H. E. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.
  • Reference 115: Harding, S. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism. Cornell University Press.
  • Reference 116: Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Where this work leads

When Testimony Becomes Evidence

The criterion an evidence hierarchy cannot supply

Practised · resource not yet written

What makes a firsthand account count as evidence, and equally what makes a claim fail regardless of who holds it. It is the contribution that keeps a widened set of knowers from becoming an unlimited set of claims, and it leaves appraisal discipline — distinguishing a robust finding from folklore — fully intact.

Grounding. Epistemology of testimony (Coady; Lackey); epistemic dependence (Hardwig); testimonial injustice (Fricker)

Sources

  • Reference 117: Coady, C. A. J. (1992). Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 118: Lackey, J. (2008). Learning from Words: Testimony as a Source of Knowledge. Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 119: Hardwig, J. (1985). “Epistemic Dependence.” The Journal of Philosophy, 82(7), 335–349.
  • Reference 113: Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

The Invisible Rules of Admissibility

The diagnostic · specifiable rules rather than bias

Practised · resource not yet written

Sequencing, genre, the credential gate, proxy substitution, small-n erasure, safety closure, and the upstream lock: named filters that settle what enters a record before anything in it is weighed. Naming them as rules rather than as bias is what makes them examinable, and correctable, by the room that has just applied one.

Grounding. Epistemic injustice (Fricker; Dotson); socio-legal work on admissibility, expert qualification, and burden of proof

Sources

  • Reference 113: Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 120: Dotson, K. (2011). “Tracking Epistemic Violence, Tracking Practices of Silencing.” Hypatia, 26(2), 236–257.
  • Reference 121: Jasanoff, S. (1995). Science at the Bar: Law, Science, and Technology in America. Harvard University Press.
  • Reference 122: Twining, W. (1990). Rethinking Evidence: Exploratory Essays. Basil Blackwell (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2006).
  • Reference 123: Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) — the admissibility standard for expert evidence in United States federal courts.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Knowledge That Was Never Produced

The absence that leaves no trace

Practised · resource not yet written

Questions never funded, populations never studied, outcomes never defined. Nothing was excluded because nothing was submitted, which makes non-production the likeliest reason an evidence base looks thin and the hardest thing to detect from inside a literature search.

Grounding. Agnotology (Proctor & Schiebinger); structured ignorance (Mills); Tuana

Sources

  • Reference 114: Proctor, R. N., & Schiebinger, L. (Eds.). (2008). Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance. Stanford University Press.
  • Reference 124: Mills, C. W. (2007). “White Ignorance.” In S. Sullivan & N. Tuana (Eds.), Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance. State University of New York Press.
  • Reference 125: Tuana, N. (2006). “The Speculum of Ignorance: The Women’s Health Movement and Epistemologies of Ignorance.” Hypatia, 21(3), 1–19.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Experience Without Language

Hermeneutical injustice · when the account cannot be formed

Practised · resource not yet written

Nobody is disbelieved and no claim is rejected: the concept required to state the experience does not yet exist in the shared interpretive resource. It leaves no trace in a consultation record, so a process that measures only what was said will read it as an absence of concern.

Grounding. Hermeneutical and contributory injustice (Fricker; Dotson); idioms of distress (Nichter); Kleinman

Sources

  • Reference 113: Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 120: Dotson, K. (2011). “Tracking Epistemic Violence, Tracking Practices of Silencing.” Hypatia, 26(2), 236–257.
  • Reference 126: Nichter, M. (1981). “Idioms of Distress: Alternatives in the Expression of Psychosocial Distress.” Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 5(4), 379–408.
  • Reference 127: Kleinman, A. (1977). “Depression, Somatization and the ‘New Cross-Cultural Psychiatry’.” Social Science & Medicine, 11(1), 3–10 — the source of the category fallacy.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Making as Knowing

Whether knowing-how is knowledge in the same sense

Practised · resource not yet written

The form of knowledge most present in craft, facilitation, and clinical practice, and least legible to a hierarchy built for claims. Elicitation methods presuppose an answer to this question and rarely state it, which is the point at which a tacit account is either carried into a design or lost at the interview.

Grounding. Knowing-how (Ryle); tacit knowledge (Polanyi; H. Collins); reflective practice (Schön)

Sources

  • Reference 128: Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson — the source of the knowing-how and knowing-that distinction.
  • Reference 129: Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.
  • Reference 130: Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. University of Chicago Press.
  • Reference 13: Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Warranted Trust and the Division of Cognitive Labour

When deference is well-grounded rather than deferential

Practised · resource not yet written

Nobody verifies most of what they know, so dependence is the ordinary condition of expertise rather than a lapse in it. This contribution sets out the grounds on which trust in an expert, a source, or a community is warranted, alongside the documented cases in which expertise established outside formal credentials has held up against expertise inside them.

Grounding. Epistemic dependence (Hardwig); epistemology of expertise (Goldman); interactional expertise (Collins & Evans); civic epistemology (Jasanoff)

Sources

  • Reference 119: Hardwig, J. (1985). “Epistemic Dependence.” The Journal of Philosophy, 82(7), 335–349.
  • Reference 116: Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 131: Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2007). Rethinking Expertise. University of Chicago Press.
  • Reference 132: Epstein, S. (1996). Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge. University of California Press.
  • Reference 133: Wynne, B. (1992). “Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science.” Public Understanding of Science, 1(3), 281–304 — the Cumbrian sheep farmers study.
  • Reference 134: Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press — the source of civic epistemology.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing Under Disagreement

Deciding and building when knowledgeable people conflict

Practised · resource not yet written

Disagreement between well-informed people working inside a single framework, where a decision still has to be made and something still has to be built to a deadline. It covers what the disagreement is itself evidence of, and which deliberative arrangements produce a defensible decision rather than the loudest one.

Grounding. Peer disagreement (Feldman & Warfield); deliberative method (Fishkin; Landemore); participatory design (Ehn)

Sources

  • Reference 135: Feldman, R., & Warfield, T. A. (Eds.). (2010). Disagreement. Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 136: Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 137: Landemore, H. (2013). Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. Princeton University Press.
  • Reference 138: Ehn, P. (1988). Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Arbetslivscentrum.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

When Integration Becomes Assimilation

Where synthesis is the wrong instrument

Practised · resource not yet written

Two knowledge systems can answer the same question incompatibly, and integrating them under unequal power absorbs one into the other. Holding the conflict open is an arrangement to be maintained rather than a deliverable to be produced. This contribution coordinates with the Indigenous-led work held elsewhere on the map and does not stand in for it.

Grounding. Ethical space (Ermine); Two-Eyed Seeing (Bartlett, Marshall & Marshall); legal pluralism

Sources

  • Reference 102: Ermine, W. (2007). “The Ethical Space of Engagement.” Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193–203.
  • Reference 33: Bartlett, C., Marshall, M., & Marshall, A. (2012). “Two-Eyed Seeing and Other Lessons Learned within a Co-Learning Journey of Bringing Together Indigenous and Mainstream Knowledges and Ways of Knowing.” Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 2(4), 331–340.
  • Reference 122: Twining, W. (1990). Rethinking Evidence: Exploratory Essays. Basil Blackwell (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2006).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

The Construct Inside the Measure

How an instrument decides which outcomes become visible

Practised · resource not yet written

An instrument encodes a construct, and choosing it settles in advance what will be able to register as an outcome. Where the construct does not hold in the setting, the measure returns nothing on something that worked, or an effect on something nobody intended.

Grounding. Construct validity (Messick; Borsboom et al.); category fallacy (Kleinman); idioms of distress (Nichter)

Sources

  • 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.
  • Reference 139: Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2004). “The Concept of Validity.” Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061–1071.
  • Reference 127: Kleinman, A. (1977). “Depression, Somatization and the ‘New Cross-Cultural Psychiatry’.” Social Science & Medicine, 11(1), 3–10 — the source of the category fallacy.
  • Reference 126: Nichter, M. (1981). “Idioms of Distress: Alternatives in the Expression of Psychosocial Distress.” Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 5(4), 379–408.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

The Designer’s Own Position

The assumptions a method cannot catch on its own

Practised · resource not yet written

No method examines the assumptions it was built on, and elicitation presumes a neutral extractor. The correction is criticism from a differently positioned knower holding authority to overrule — an arrangement submitted to rather than a process run — which applies to the designer the same condition a sound knowledge process is asked to meet.

Grounding. Strong objectivity (Harding); situated knowledges (Haraway); Wylie; Hill Collins; Longino

Sources

  • Reference 115: Harding, S. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism. Cornell University Press.
  • Reference 140: Haraway, D. (1988). “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.
  • Reference 141: Wylie, A. (2003). “Why Standpoint Matters.” In R. Figueroa & S. Harding (Eds.), Science and Other Cultures: Issues in Philosophies of Science and Technology. Routledge.
  • Reference 142: Collins, P. H. (1990). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Unwin Hyman.
  • Reference 112: Longino, H. E. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing For and Within Practice-Based Research

When the work made is part of the finding

Practised · resource not yet written

Research-creation and practice-led inquiry produce knowledge through making, which changes how a project is scoped, supervised, documented and examined. Designing learning in these settings means building documentation into production rather than reconstructing it afterwards, and making the criteria for a practice-based contribution explicit to everyone assessing it.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Epistemology set.

Grounding. Practice as research (Barrett & Bolt); knowing-how (Ryle); tacit knowledge (Polanyi; Collins)

Sources

  • Reference 148: Barrett, E., & Bolt, B. (Eds.). (2010). Practice as Research: Approaches to Creative Arts Enquiry. I.B. Tauris.
  • Reference 128: Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson — the source of the knowing-how and knowing-that distinction.
  • Reference 129: Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.
  • Reference 130: Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. University of Chicago Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluation

9 contributions grow on this branch, and 1 more is shared with it from Public Learning. Visit the Evaluation page.

Standing Up an Evaluation Function

The first cycle, before there is anything to compare against

Practised · resource not yet written

Establishing evaluation in an organization that has not carried it before: deciding what can be instrumented immediately, what is worth waiting a cycle to measure well, and what can be reconstructed from records already held. The sequence matters, because the first cycle sets the baseline every later cycle will read against, and because consent, retention and reporting arrangements are easier to establish at the outset than to retrofit.

Grounding. Evaluation design; programme theory; baseline and instrumentation planning

Sources

  • Reference 165: Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  • Reference 167: Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.
  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluating at Small Numbers

Sound inference without a comparison group

Practised · resource not yet written

Most evaluation method assumes a scale that many learning programmes will never reach. Single-case and n-of-1 designs, contribution analysis, most-significant-change, and information power as an alternative to a target sample size each support a defensible claim from a single cohort. The corresponding discipline is knowing which claims the design can carry and stating the rest as description.

Grounding. Contribution analysis (Mayne); single-case design (Kazdin); information power (Malterud); most significant change (Davies & Dart)

Sources

  • Reference 166: Mayne, J. (2012). “Contribution Analysis: Coming of Age?” Evaluation, 18(3), 270–280.
  • Reference 168: Kazdin, A. E. (2011). Single-Case Research Designs: Methods for Clinical and Applied Settings (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 169: Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). “Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power.” Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760.
  • Reference 170: Davies, R., & Dart, J. (2005). The ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluating a Portfolio Larger Than Its Measurement Capacity

A stated rule for where the evidence effort goes

Practised · resource not yet written

When an organization runs more programmes than it can evaluate, measurement is tiered rather than uniform: full evaluation for a named few, a single agreed signal for many, and periodic sampling across the rest. Setting the tiering rule in advance, and recording it, makes the coverage legible to everyone whose work sits inside it and gives the portfolio a defensible account of what it knows and where.

Grounding. Evaluation planning; portfolio sampling; exploration and exploitation (March)

Sources

  • Reference 165: Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  • Reference 153: March, J. G. (1991). “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Reporting to Funders Alongside Learning from the Work

Two purposes, each served properly

Practised · resource not yet written

Accountability reporting and improvement evaluation answer to different readers and reward different things, and a single instrument asked to do both tends to serve one well. Designing them as a related pair — shared data collection, distinct analyses and outputs — lets a grant report stand up to scrutiny while the programme retains evidence it can act on. It also keeps what is promised in an application within what the design will be able to evidence later.

Grounding. Accountability and organizational learning (Ebrahim); measurement effects on programmes (Campbell)

Sources

  • Reference 171: Ebrahim, A. (2005). “Accountability Myopia: Losing Sight of Organizational Learning.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56–87.
  • Reference 172: Campbell, D. T. (1979). “Assessing the Impact of Planned Social Change.” Evaluation and Program Planning, 2(1), 67–90.
  • Reference 165: Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing Evaluation Backwards from the Decision

Naming the decision each measure informs

Practised · resource not yet written

Evaluation earns its cost when each measure is attached to a decision someone is already committed to making, with the threshold agreed in advance and the route to acting on the result identified before data collection begins. Utilization-focused design starts from intended use by intended users, which places the question of who will act, and on what, at the beginning rather than at the report stage.

Grounding. Utilization-focused evaluation (Patton); evaluation use (Weiss)

Sources

  • Reference 165: Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  • Reference 167: Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Theory of Change and Logic Models as Design Artifacts

The causal chain, written down and open to test

Practised · resource not yet written

A logic model sets out inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes; a theory of change states the reasoning connecting them and the conditions each link depends on. Written at the design stage rather than for a report, it names what would have to be true for the programme to work, which lets the measurement plan follow from the reasoning instead of the reverse, and gives a later reader a specific claim to examine.

Grounding. Programme theory (Funnell & Rogers); logic model development (W. K. Kellogg Foundation); utilization-focused evaluation (Patton); contribution analysis (Mayne)

Sources

  • Reference 205: Funnell, S. C., & Rogers, P. J. (2011). Purposeful Program Theory: Effective Use of Theories of Change and Logic Models. Jossey-Bass.
  • Reference 206: W. K. Kellogg Foundation (2004). Logic Model Development Guide. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.
  • Reference 165: Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  • Reference 166: Mayne, J. (2012). “Contribution Analysis: Coming of Age?” Evaluation, 18(3), 270–280.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Cost as an Evaluation Question

What a programme takes, alongside what it returns

Practised · resource not yet written

Cost per participant, cost per completion, and the resources a programme needs in order to continue are answerable from records the work already produces. Economic evaluation methods in health and in education set out how these are assembled — the ingredients counted, the perspective declared, the time horizon stated — so that a comparison between options rests on one basis and the reader can see what was included and what was left out.

Grounding. Economic evaluation of health care programmes (Drummond et al.); economic evaluation in education (Levin et al.); utilization-focused evaluation (Patton)

Sources

  • Reference 207: Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (2015). Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Reference 208: Levin, H. M., McEwan, P. J., Belfield, C., Bowden, A. B., & Shand, R. (2018). Economic Evaluation in Education: Cost-Effectiveness and Benefit-Cost Analysis (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  • Reference 165: Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Choosing and Using Validated Outcome Measures

What an established instrument offers, and what it asks in return

Practised · resource not yet written

An established measure brings comparability, published psychometric properties, and a body of prior results to read against; it also brings its own construct, the population it was developed with, and its administration and licensing requirements. Measurement standards set out the properties to look for and the evidence supporting each, which turns the choice between adopting an instrument and developing one into a documented decision rather than a default.

Grounding. COSMIN taxonomy (Mokkink et al.); health measurement scales (Streiner, Norman & Cairney); construct validity (Messick; Borsboom)

Sources

  • Reference 209: Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., et al. (2010). “The COSMIN Study Reached International Consensus on Taxonomy, Terminology, and Definitions of Measurement Properties for Health-Related Patient-Reported Outcomes.” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737–745.
  • Reference 210: Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (2015). Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • 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.
  • Reference 139: Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2004). “The Concept of Validity.” Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061–1071.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluating for Harm

Unintended effects, anticipated in advance and looked for

Practised · resource not yet written

Programmes produce effects beyond the ones they intend, and those effects are found reliably only where they have been anticipated and measured. Dark logic models set out plausible harmful pathways at the design stage in the same form as the intended ones; conceptual frameworks for adverse effects supply categories to look across, including opportunity cost and effects on people the programme did not reach. Recording what was examined, including where nothing was found, is part of the result.

Grounding. Dark logic models (Bonell et al.); adverse effects framework (Lorenc & Oliver); programme theory (Funnell & Rogers); research ethics (TCPS 2)

Sources

  • Reference 211: Bonell, C., Jamal, F., Melendez-Torres, G. J., & Cummins, S. (2015). “‘Dark Logic’: Theorising the Harmful Consequences of Public Health Interventions.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 69(1), 95–98.
  • Reference 212: Lorenc, T., & Oliver, K. (2014). “Adverse Effects of Public Health Interventions: A Conceptual Framework.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 68(3), 288–290.
  • Reference 205: Funnell, S. C., & Rogers, P. J. (2011). Purposeful Program Theory: Effective Use of Theories of Change and Logic Models. Jossey-Bass.
  • Reference 55: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluating an Anonymous Encounter

No roster, no follow-up, and evidence all the same

Practised · resource not yet written

Public settings rarely permit named participants or later contact, so evaluation is built from what can be observed and asked in the moment: tracking and timing, structured observation, brief exit conversations, and repeat cross-sectional sampling across a season. Each method answers a narrow question well, and stating which question it answers keeps the resulting claims proportionate.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Public Learning, and it is also part of the Evaluation set.

Grounding. Tracking and timing (Serrell); visitor studies methods; informal learning evaluation

Sources

  • Reference 177: Serrell, B. (1997). “Paying Attention: The Duration and Allocation of Visitors’ Time in Museum Exhibitions.” Curator: The Museum Journal, 40(2), 108–125.
  • Reference 174: National Research Council (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. National Academies Press.
  • Reference 166: Mayne, J. (2012). “Contribution Analysis: Coming of Age?” Evaluation, 18(3), 270–280.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Health Workforce Education

9 contributions grow on this branch. Visit the Health Workforce Education page.

Designing for the Non-Specialist Workforce

The anchor · what a protocol can carry, and what judgment carries

Practised · resource not yet written

Care reaches most people through practitioners whose preparation is measured in weeks rather than years, and the design question is which decisions a written protocol can carry, which call for judgment developed through supervised practice, and which are referred onward. Trials of lay-counsellor-delivered treatment describe programmes built from a small set of specified elements, a decision aid used at the point of contact, and structured supervision running alongside delivery. Naming those three parts separately, and stating what each is responsible for, is what makes the design reviewable by the service that will hold it.

Grounding. Task-sharing evidence (Singla et al.; Patel et al.; Rahman et al.); mhGAP Intervention Guide (WHO); community health worker programme guidance (WHO)

Sources

  • Reference 216: Singla, D. R., Kohrt, B. A., Murray, L. K., Anand, A., Chorpita, B. F., & Patel, V. (2017). “Psychological Treatments for the World: Lessons from Low- and Middle-Income Countries.” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 13, 149–181.
  • Reference 217: Patel, V., Weobong, B., Weiss, H. A., et al. (2017). “The Healthy Activity Program (HAP), a Lay Counsellor-Delivered Brief Psychological Treatment for Severe Depression, in Primary Care in India: A Randomised Controlled Trial.” The Lancet, 389(10065), 176–185.
  • Reference 218: Rahman, A., Malik, A., Sikander, S., Roberts, C., & Creed, F. (2008). “Cognitive Behaviour Therapy-Based Intervention by Community Health Workers for Mothers with Depression and Their Infants in Rural Pakistan: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial.” The Lancet, 372(9642), 902–909.
  • Reference 219: World Health Organization (2016). mhGAP Intervention Guide for Mental, Neurological and Substance Use Disorders in Non-Specialized Health Settings, Version 2.0. Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • Reference 215: World Health Organization (2018). WHO Guideline on Health Policy and System Support to Optimize Community Health Worker Programmes. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Teaching Mental Health Without Causing Harm

Content whose subject may be the participant’s own experience

Practised · resource not yet written

Material about mental health reaches participants for whom the subject is present rather than academic, and the design decisions that follow are specific: how a topic is introduced, what is described and in what detail, where someone can step out and return without account, and what the facilitator is prepared and authorised to do. Established safe-communication guidance, together with the distinction between teaching about a distressing subject and teaching in a way that accounts for distress, gives these decisions a documented basis that can be reviewed before delivery.

Grounding. Trauma-informed educational practice (Carello & Butler); SAMHSA framework; safe communication guidance (WHO); adverse effects framework (Lorenc & Oliver)

Sources

  • Reference 162: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2014). “Potentially Perilous Pedagogies: Teaching Trauma Is Not the Same as Trauma-Informed Teaching.” Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 15(2), 153–168.
  • Reference 160: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.
  • Reference 161: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884.
  • Reference 220: World Health Organization (2023). Preventing Suicide: A Resource for Media Professionals, Update 2023. Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • Reference 212: Lorenc, T., & Oliver, K. (2014). “Adverse Effects of Public Health Interventions: A Conceptual Framework.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 68(3), 288–290.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Fidelity, Adaptation and the Active Ingredient

What holds constant, and what may flex

Practised · resource not yet written

A programme that travels well states in advance which components carry its effect and which may vary with local conditions. Fidelity frameworks separate adherence, dose, quality of delivery and participant responsiveness so that each can be observed on its own; adaptation frameworks record what was changed, by whom, when, and for what reason. Documenting both as a programme moves lets a later reader distinguish an intended adaptation from unintended drift, and gives the next site something specific to work from.

Grounding. Implementation fidelity (Carroll et al.); FRAME (Wiltsey Stirman et al.); implementation frameworks (CFIR; EPIS)

Sources

  • Reference 221: Carroll, C., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J., & Balain, S. (2007). “A Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity.” Implementation Science, 2, 40.
  • Reference 222: Wiltsey Stirman, S., Baumann, A. A., & Miller, C. J. (2019). “The FRAME: An Expanded Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-Based Interventions.” Implementation Science, 14, 58.
  • Reference 27: Damschroder, L. J., et al. (2009). “Fostering Implementation of Health Services Research Findings into Practice: A Consolidated Framework for Advancing Implementation Science (CFIR).” Implementation Science, 4:50.
  • Reference 28: Aarons, G. A., Hurlburt, M., & Horwitz, S. M. (2011). “Advancing a Conceptual Model of Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors (EPIS).” Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 38(1), 4–23.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing Supervision and Case Consultation

The structure that carries competence once training ends

Practised · resource not yet written

Initial training establishes a starting point; supervision is where practice is observed, discussed and refined over time. Apprenticeship models in global mental health pair a short course with continuing group consultation, direct or recorded observation, and a competence scale applied consistently, so that capability is described rather than assumed. Designing supervision means settling its frequency, who provides it, what is reviewed, how the record is kept, and what happens when a practitioner asks for more support.

Grounding. Apprenticeship model (Murray et al.); competence rating in global mental health (Kohrt et al.); evidence-based clinical supervision (Milne); training transfer (Beidas & Kendall)

Sources

  • Reference 223: Murray, L. K., Dorsey, S., Bolton, P., Jordans, M. J. D., Rahman, A., Bass, J., & Verdeli, H. (2011). “Building Capacity in Mental Health Interventions in Low Resource Countries: An Apprenticeship Model for Training Local Providers.” International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 5, 30.
  • Reference 224: Kohrt, B. A., Jordans, M. J. D., Rai, S., et al. (2015). “Therapist Competence in Global Mental Health: Development of the ENhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic Factors (ENACT) Rating Scale.” Behaviour Research and Therapy, 69, 11–21.
  • Reference 225: Milne, D. (2009). Evidence-Based Clinical Supervision: Principles and Practice. BPS Blackwell.
  • Reference 226: Beidas, R. S., & Kendall, P. C. (2010). “Training Therapists in Evidence-Based Practice: A Critical Review of Studies from a Systems-Contextual Perspective.” Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 17(1), 1–30.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Cascade and Train-the-Trainer Design

What each generation of trainers carries forward

Practised · resource not yet written

Cascade models extend reach by preparing trainers who in turn prepare others, and the design question is what each successive generation is equipped to convey. Materials that carry their own structure, observation at every level, and a competence measure applied the same way throughout give the cascade something firm to hold to. Where a component depends on the judgment of the original trainer, the design either makes that judgment explicit and teachable or keeps the component with specialist staff.

Grounding. Apprenticeship and cascade training (Murray et al.); competence rating (Kohrt et al.); community health worker programme guidance (WHO); training transfer (Beidas & Kendall)

Sources

  • Reference 223: Murray, L. K., Dorsey, S., Bolton, P., Jordans, M. J. D., Rahman, A., Bass, J., & Verdeli, H. (2011). “Building Capacity in Mental Health Interventions in Low Resource Countries: An Apprenticeship Model for Training Local Providers.” International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 5, 30.
  • Reference 224: Kohrt, B. A., Jordans, M. J. D., Rai, S., et al. (2015). “Therapist Competence in Global Mental Health: Development of the ENhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic Factors (ENACT) Rating Scale.” Behaviour Research and Therapy, 69, 11–21.
  • Reference 215: World Health Organization (2018). WHO Guideline on Health Policy and System Support to Optimize Community Health Worker Programmes. Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • Reference 226: Beidas, R. S., & Kendall, P. C. (2010). “Training Therapists in Evidence-Based Practice: A Critical Review of Studies from a Systems-Contextual Perspective.” Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 17(1), 1–30.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Peer and Lived-Experience Delivery Roles

Preparation, scope and support for a distinct contribution

Practised · resource not yet written

Peer roles bring a form of knowledge the rest of a team does not hold, and they are strengthened by the same infrastructure any role requires: a described scope, preparation matched to it, supervision, and terms of employment. Trial evidence on peer-delivered support is developing and varies by model, which places the specification of the role — what it offers, and what it is expected to achieve — inside the design work rather than after it.

Grounding. Peer support literature (Repper & Carter); trial evidence (Lloyd-Evans et al.); community health worker programme guidance (WHO); testimony as evidence

Sources

  • Reference 227: Repper, J., & Carter, T. (2011). “A Review of the Literature on Peer Support in Mental Health Services.” Journal of Mental Health, 20(4), 392–411.
  • Reference 228: Lloyd-Evans, B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Harrison, B., et al. (2014). “A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials of Peer Support for People with Severe Mental Illness.” BMC Psychiatry, 14, 39.
  • Reference 215: World Health Organization (2018). WHO Guideline on Health Policy and System Support to Optimize Community Health Worker Programmes. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

A Programme That Sits Beside Therapy, Not Inside It

Naming the boundary, and holding it in the design

Practised · resource not yet written

Structured group programmes that are educational or creative rather than therapeutic occupy a defined position beside clinical services, and the design states that position plainly: what the programme offers, what it does not, how a participant is supported toward clinical care when that is what is needed, and what the facilitator’s role includes. Group practice literature supplies the craft of holding a room; the boundary itself is held by the written description, the referral route, and the qualification the facilitator names.

Grounding. Group practice (Yalom & Leszcz); creative health evidence (Fancourt & Finn); trauma-informed educational practice (Carello & Butler); scope of practice

Sources

  • Reference 229: Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2020). The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy (6th ed.). Basic Books.
  • Reference 38: 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 160: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Cultural Adaptation of a Programme

Surface and deep structure, and who holds the decision

Practised · resource not yet written

Adaptation ranges from language, examples and imagery through to the model of distress a programme assumes and the outcomes it treats as good. Frameworks developed for psychosocial interventions distinguish these levels and set out a process — consultation, revision, testing — in which the people the programme serves hold the decisions about what changes. Recording the adaptation alongside the original allows both versions to be read together, and gives the next adaptation a place to start.

Grounding. Ecological validity model (Bernal et al.); cultural adaptation review (Chowdhary et al.); FRAME (Wiltsey Stirman et al.); category and idiom of distress (Kleinman)

Sources

  • Reference 230: Bernal, G., Bonilla, J., & Bellido, C. (1995). “Ecological Validity and Cultural Sensitivity for Outcome Research: Issues for the Cultural Adaptation and Development of Psychosocial Treatments with Hispanics.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 23(1), 67–82.
  • Reference 231: Chowdhary, N., Jotheeswaran, A. T., Nadkarni, A., et al. (2014). “The Methods and Outcomes of Cultural Adaptations of Psychological Treatments for Depressive Disorders: A Systematic Review.” Psychological Medicine, 44(6), 1131–1146.
  • Reference 222: Wiltsey Stirman, S., Baumann, A. A., & Miller, C. J. (2019). “The FRAME: An Expanded Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-Based Interventions.” Implementation Science, 14, 58.
  • Reference 127: Kleinman, A. (1977). “Depression, Somatization and the ‘New Cross-Cultural Psychiatry’.” Social Science & Medicine, 11(1), 3–10 — the source of the category fallacy.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing for Low-Resource and Low-Connectivity Delivery

Paper, shared devices, intermittent power and short preparation time

Practised · resource not yet written

Where connectivity is intermittent, devices are shared and preparation time is short, the design carries its own conditions: a job aid that works on paper, a session that runs without a projector, a sequence that survives an interruption, and materials that can be reproduced locally at low cost. Digital components are chosen where they add something the paper version cannot, and the paper version stays complete on its own.

Grounding. Digital interventions for health system strengthening (WHO); mhGAP Intervention Guide (WHO); performance support (Gottfredson & Mosher)

Sources

  • Reference 232: World Health Organization (2019). WHO Guideline: Recommendations on Digital Interventions for Health System Strengthening. Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • Reference 219: World Health Organization (2016). mhGAP Intervention Guide for Mental, Neurological and Substance Use Disorders in Non-Specialized Health Settings, Version 2.0. Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • Reference 85: Gottfredson, C., & Mosher, B. (2011). Innovative Performance Support: Strategies and Practices for Learning in the Workflow. McGraw-Hill.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Human Rights Education

7 contributions grow on this branch. Visit the Human Rights Education page.

The Right to Education Itself

The anchor · available, accessible, acceptable, adaptable

Practised · resource not yet written

The 4-A scheme developed by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to education, and affirmed in General Comment 13, sets out what states owe: that education exists, that people can reach it, that its form and content are acceptable to those receiving it, and that it adapts to their circumstances. Read as a design framework it gives learning design a vocabulary drawn from international law for questions it already asks, and connects each to an established obligation.

Grounding. 4-A scheme (Tomaševski); CESCR General Comment 13; UDHR Article 26; ICESCR Article 13; CRC Articles 28–29; CRPD Article 24

Sources

  • Reference 187: Tomaševski, K. (2001). Human Rights Obligations: Making Education Available, Accessible, Acceptable and Adaptable. Right to Education Primers No. 3. Novum Grafiska, Gothenburg — the source of the 4-A scheme.
  • Reference 189: UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1999). General Comment No. 13: The Right to Education (Article 13 of the Covenant). E/C.12/1999/10.
  • Reference 74: United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Reference 190: United Nations (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Article 13.
  • Reference 191: United Nations (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. Articles 28 and 29.
  • Reference 73: United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Models of Human Rights Education

Awareness, accountability, transformation — and choosing between them

Practised · resource not yet written

Three widely used models describe what a human rights education programme is actually for: building shared values and awareness, equipping professionals to meet obligations they already hold, and supporting people affected by rights violations to act. Each implies different learners, content and evidence of success. Identifying which model a request belongs to, early, is what allows a programme to be designed and evaluated coherently.

Grounding. Models of human rights education (Tibbitts); ideology, location and approaches (Bajaj); World Programme for Human Rights Education

Sources

  • Reference 188: Tibbitts, F. (2002). “Understanding What We Do: Emerging Models for Human Rights Education.” International Review of Education, 48(3–4), 159–171.
  • Reference 192: Bajaj, M. (2011). “Human Rights Education: Ideology, Location, and Approaches.” Human Rights Quarterly, 33(2), 481–508.
  • Reference 193: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and UNESCO (2006). Plan of Action: World Programme for Human Rights Education, First Phase. United Nations.
  • Reference 186: United Nations General Assembly (2011). United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training. Resolution 66/137, A/RES/66/137, 19 December 2011.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Rights That Can Be Used, Not Only Known

From the instrument to the claim a person can make

Practised · resource not yet written

Knowing that a right exists and being able to invoke it are separate capabilities, and the second is where most programmes have room to grow. The design work is concrete: which body receives the claim, what a complaint contains, what timelines apply, what support exists, and rehearsal of the request itself — so that the learning ends closer to action than to awareness.

Grounding. Education for human rights (UN Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training); transformative agency (Bajaj); critical pedagogy (Freire)

Sources

  • Reference 186: United Nations General Assembly (2011). United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training. Resolution 66/137, A/RES/66/137, 19 December 2011.
  • Reference 192: Bajaj, M. (2011). “Human Rights Education: Ideology, Location, and Approaches.” Human Rights Quarterly, 33(2), 481–508.
  • Reference 194: Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Herder and Herder (30th anniversary ed., Continuum, 2000).
  • Reference 45: Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Teaching About Serious Harm

Content whose subject is present in the room

Practised · resource not yet written

Some rights content concerns events that participants, their families or their communities have lived through, and the alternative to teaching it carries its own costs. The design commitments are stated in advance and hold throughout: what will be covered and when, pacing that can be adjusted, participation that does not require anyone to account for their own experience, and a route out of the room that costs nothing to use.

Grounding. Difficult knowledge (Britzman); pedagogy of discomfort (Boler); trauma-informed educational practice (Carello & Butler); SAMHSA framework

Sources

  • Reference 195: Britzman, D. P. (1998). Lost Subjects, Contested Objects: Toward a Psychoanalytic Inquiry of Learning. State University of New York Press.
  • Reference 196: Boler, M. (1999). Feeling Power: Emotions and Education. Routledge.
  • Reference 160: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.
  • Reference 161: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884.
  • Reference 106: Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Rights Education Inside the Duty-Bearing Institution

When the organization teaching the right also owes it

Practised · resource not yet written

Workplace and institutional rights education is usually delivered by the body that holds the corresponding obligation. Designing it well means naming that position openly, giving accurate routes to internal and external recourse including those outside the organization, and separating the record of who attended from anything that could identify what an individual disclosed.

Grounding. Duty-bearer obligations (UN Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training); human rights codes and complaint procedures; privacy in learning records

Sources

  • Reference 186: United Nations General Assembly (2011). United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training. Resolution 66/137, A/RES/66/137, 19 December 2011.
  • Reference 45: Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 44: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
  • Reference 53: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Human Rights in Public Interpretation

Rights content in a gallery, a memorial or a public programme

Practised · resource not yet written

Public settings reach audiences that no course reaches, and increasingly carry rights content: contested collections, memorials, and exhibitions on histories of harm. The interpretive questions are who narrates, what the visitor is told about provenance, and how a self-directed visitor of any age and background is supported through material of this weight in a short, unsupervised encounter.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Human Rights Education, and it is also part of the Public Learning set.

Grounding. Difficult heritage (Macdonald); interpretation (Serrell); Calls to Action (TRC); museum education (Hooper-Greenhill)

Sources

  • Reference 181: Macdonald, S. (2009). Difficult Heritage: Negotiating the Nazi Past in Nuremberg and Beyond. Routledge.
  • Reference 180: Serrell, B. (2015). Exhibit Labels: An Interpretive Approach (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Reference 106: Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action.
  • Reference 175: Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2007). Museums and Education: Purpose, Pedagogy, Performance. Routledge.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Selection, Identification and the Right to Education

How places are allocated, and who is identified for them

Practised · resource not yet written

Streaming, enrichment placement, admissions screens and eligibility criteria distribute educational opportunity, and the acceptability and adaptability obligations apply directly to them. Documenting the criterion actually used, who is identified by it and who is not, and what alternative routes exist, brings selection into the same evidentiary frame as any other design decision.

Grounding. 4-A scheme (Tomaševski); CESCR General Comment 13; construct validity (Messick); equity evaluation (Mertens)

Sources

  • Reference 187: Tomaševski, K. (2001). Human Rights Obligations: Making Education Available, Accessible, Acceptable and Adaptable. Right to Education Primers No. 3. Novum Grafiska, Gothenburg — the source of the 4-A scheme.
  • Reference 189: UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1999). General Comment No. 13: The Right to Education (Article 13 of the Covenant). E/C.12/1999/10.
  • 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.
  • Reference 37: Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Knowledge Mobilization

14 contributions grow on this branch. Visit the Knowledge Mobilization page.

Research-to-Practice Learning Systems

The master framework for moving evidence

Published resource

The conceptual architecture for how research and evidence reach the people who can use them, and change what they do. It is the centrepiece the other knowledge-mobilization contributions instantiate in specific contexts.

Grounding. Knowledge mobilization; implementation frameworks

Read the Research-to-Practice Learning Systems resource

Sources

  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Where this work leads

KMb Evaluation Design

Did the evidence change practice?

Published resource

Measurement built for knowledge mobilization specifically — indicators of uptake and changed practice, not only satisfaction or reach. It is referenced by every other contribution on this branch, and shared with the wider evaluation family.

Grounding. KMb indicators; evaluation design

Read the KMb Evaluation Design resource

Sources

  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.
  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Implementation Science Learning Design

Translating implementation frameworks into design

Published resource

Turning established implementation-science frameworks into concrete design decisions, giving change and needs work a theoretical backbone. It is a shared language among senior practitioners in health and the public sector.

Grounding. CFIR; EPIS; PARIHS

Read the Implementation Science Learning Design resource

Sources

  • Reference 27: Damschroder, L. J., et al. (2009). “Fostering Implementation of Health Services Research Findings into Practice: A Consolidated Framework for Advancing Implementation Science (CFIR).” Implementation Science, 4:50.
  • Reference 28: Aarons, G. A., Hurlburt, M., & Horwitz, S. M. (2011). “Advancing a Conceptual Model of Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors (EPIS).” Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 38(1), 4–23.
  • Reference 29: Kitson, A., Harvey, G., & McCormack, B. (1998). “Enabling the Implementation of Evidence Based Practice: A Conceptual Framework (PARIHS).” Quality in Health Care, 7(3), 149–158.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evidence Brief & Knowledge Product Design

Research outputs practitioners actually use

Practised · resource in development

Designing the artifacts that carry evidence — briefs, summaries, and tools — so they are usable by the people they are meant for. It is concrete, demonstrable, and widely hired for.

Grounding. Knowledge translation; information design

Sources

  • Reference 30: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.
  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Co-Production & Participatory Design

Designing with knowledge users, not for them

Practised · resource in development

Involving the people who will use knowledge in designing how it moves — the integrated approach many research funders now expect. It draws directly on community design and facilitation.

Grounding. Integrated knowledge translation; participatory design

Sources

  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.
  • Reference 9: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Policy & Public-Sector Knowledge Design

Rapid evidence to policy

Practised · resource in development

Designing evidence for the realities of policy process and the people who work within it, so research can inform decisions on the timelines government actually runs on.

Grounding. Evidence-informed policy; knowledge mobilization

Sources

  • Reference 30: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Researcher Capacity Building

Helping researchers mobilize their own knowledge

Practised · resource in development

Building researchers' capability to carry their own work into practice — the skillset behind the emerging research-impact roles in universities and research institutes.

Grounding. Capacity building; adult learning

Sources

  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Indigenous & Equity-Centred KMb

Power-aware, community-led knowledge movement

Practised · resource in development

Mobilizing knowledge in ways that respect data sovereignty, plural ways of knowing, and the communities knowledge comes from. It is developed in relationship and with care, not as token coverage.

Grounding. OCAP®; Two-Eyed Seeing; equity-centred design

Sources

  • Reference 32: The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).
  • Reference 33: Bartlett, C., Marshall, M., & Marshall, A. (2012). “Two-Eyed Seeing and Other Lessons Learned within a Co-Learning Journey of Bringing Together Indigenous and Mainstream Knowledges and Ways of Knowing.” Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 2(4), 331–340.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Digital & AI-Enabled KMb

AI-assisted access to evidence

Practised · resource in development

Using digital and AI tools to widen access to evidence and support its use, grounded in real knowledge-mobilization practice rather than novelty. It shares its production questions with scalable personalization.

Grounding. Learning technology; responsible AI

Sources

  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Communities of Practice Design for KMb

Peer structures that sustain evidence use

Practised · resource in development

Designing the peer-learning structures — communities of practice — that keep evidence in use over time rather than letting it fade after a single push. It is the knowledge-mobilization application of community design and facilitation.

Grounding. Communities of practice (Wenger)

Sources

  • Reference 9: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Arts-Based Knowledge Products

Creative form as a route for evidence

Practised · resource not yet written

Exhibitions, performance, illustration, film and printed objects reach audiences that reports do not, and can hold complexity that a summary compresses. Designing them as knowledge products means keeping the underlying evidence traceable, stating what the work does and does not claim, and evaluating reach and use as with any other output.

Grounding. Arts-based research practice (Leavy); arts and health evidence (Fancourt & Finn); knowledge product design

Sources

  • Reference 152: Leavy, P. (2020). Method Meets Art: Arts-Based Research Practice (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
  • Reference 38: 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 30: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Creative Practice as Inquiry with Knowledge Users

Making together as a method of finding out

Practised · resource not yet written

Structured making — mapping, model-building, drawing, object work — allows groups to express understanding that interviews reach less readily, and gives participants a shared artefact to reason from. Used within co-production it produces analysable material alongside the relationship, provided consent, authorship and the destination of the work are settled in advance.

Grounding. Arts-based research (Leavy); participatory design (Ehn); integrated knowledge translation; research ethics (TCPS 2)

Sources

  • Reference 152: Leavy, P. (2020). Method Meets Art: Arts-Based Research Practice (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
  • Reference 138: Ehn, P. (1988). Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Arbetslivscentrum.
  • Reference 26: Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.
  • Reference 55: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evidence Synthesis as a Design Input

Reading, commissioning or conducting the review a design rests on

Practised · resource not yet written

Where a design rests on a body of evidence, the quality of that reading sets the limit on what the design can claim. Systematic review method — a stated question, a documented search, applied inclusion criteria, appraisal, and transparent reporting — is what distinguishes a synthesis from a selection. Registering the protocol before the search begins, and reporting to an established standard, lets an independent reader follow the same path and reach the same set of studies.

Grounding. Cochrane Handbook (Higgins et al.); PRISMA 2020 (Page et al.); introduction to systematic reviews (Gough, Oliver & Thomas)

Sources

  • Reference 200: Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.). (2019). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Reference 201: Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., et al. (2021). “The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews.” BMJ, 372, n71.
  • Reference 202: Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An Introduction to Systematic Reviews (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Spread Beyond the Pilot, and De-implementation

What institutionalizing asks for, and what stopping asks for

Practised · resource not yet written

Moving from a successful pilot into routine practice is its own piece of design work: the innovation is specified, the organizations that will hold it are identified, and the budget, policy and training arrangements that sustain it are put in place. The same discipline applies to withdrawal — where a practice has been superseded, an explicit process for removing it, with its own communication and support, keeps the old and the new from running side by side.

Grounding. Scaling-up strategy (WHO & ExpandNet); de-implementation (Prasad & Ioannidis); implementation frameworks (CFIR); exploration and exploitation (March)

Sources

  • Reference 203: World Health Organization & ExpandNet (2010). Nine Steps for Developing a Scaling-Up Strategy. Geneva: World Health Organization.
  • Reference 204: Prasad, V., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2014). “Evidence-Based De-Implementation for Contradicted, Unproven, and Aspiring Healthcare Practices.” Implementation Science, 9, 1.
  • Reference 27: Damschroder, L. J., et al. (2009). “Fostering Implementation of Health Services Research Findings into Practice: A Consolidated Framework for Advancing Implementation Science (CFIR).” Implementation Science, 4:50.
  • Reference 153: March, J. G. (1991). “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

The Trunk · Learning Design Craft

37 contributions make up the trunk — the shared design craft the ten branches all grow from. Visit the Learning Design page.

Inner ring · making the work

Telling a Learning Need from a Performance Problem

The question asked before anything is designed

Practised · resource not yet written

A request for training usually arrives attached to a problem training cannot fix — unclear expectations, missing tools, broken incentives, understaffing, a marking load nobody costed, a prerequisite that quietly stopped being taught. Diagnosing which is which, before any design begins, changes the outcome more than any later decision will. It is also the step most often skipped.

Grounding. Behaviour engineering (Gilbert); performance analysis (Mager & Pipe); Rummler & Brache

Sources

  • Reference 78: Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: Or, You Really Oughta Wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.
  • Reference 79: Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)
  • Reference 80: Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  • Reference 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Scoping and the Decision Gate

Correcting while correction is still cheap

Practised · resource not yet written

Designs get built well past the point where changing them stops being affordable. A named milestone, a defined output, and a structured reassessment before more is committed — whether what is being committed is a budget or someone’s unpaid hours — is what keeps a project correctable rather than merely finishable.

Grounding. Project scoping and staged decision-making

Sources

  • Reference 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.
  • Reference 14: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Working with Subject-Matter Experts

Surfacing what an expert can no longer see

Practised · resource not yet written

Drawing out tacit knowledge, running review cycles that converge, and holding design integrity when the expert is also the partner who approves the work. Experts forget what was once hard for them, and cannot tell you what they have stopped noticing. Getting that knowledge out takes a deliberate method, not a good conversation.

Grounding. Cognitive task analysis; expert blind spot (Nathan & Petrosino)

Sources

  • Reference 81: 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 82: Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. (2003). “Expert Blind Spot Among Preservice Teachers.” American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 905–928.
  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Onboarding a Partner into Learning Design

How someone learns to commission this work

Practised · resource not yet written

Few partners know what to ask a learning designer for, what they will be asked to supply, or what good looks like when it arrives. That holds for an organization with a procurement process and for a single person with a course, a deadline, and no budget line at all. The intake, the shared vocabulary, and the first engagement are design problems in their own right.

Grounding. Developed in practice; client intake and needs assessment

Sources

  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Minimum Viable Content

Deciding what to cut, before anything is built

Practised · resource not yet written

The instinct to cover everything is the most reliable source of bloated, unfinishable learning. Deciding what genuinely must be present is an editorial judgment made before design begins — distinct from cognitive load, which is a limit on what working memory can hold once material is in front of someone.

Grounding. Editorial scoping before design; cognitive load (Sweller)

Sources

  • Reference 5: Sweller, J. (1988). “Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning.” Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. See also Sweller, Ayres & Kalyuga, Cognitive Load Theory (Springer, 2011).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Modality and Technology Selection

The tool decision comes after the analysis, not before it

Practised · resource not yet written

Modality follows from what the analysis found — who the learners are, what the constraint is, where the work happens. Tool-first decisions, where a platform is procured or centrally supported and then filled, are endemic in large institutions and produce design choices nobody made deliberately.

Grounding. Media selection; analysis before tooling

Sources

  • Reference 6: Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.
  • Reference 83: Clark, R. E. (1994). “Media Will Never Influence Learning.” Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. See also Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016), e-Learning and the Science of Instruction (4th ed.), Wiley.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

AI-Assisted Design, and Where It Fails

What the tool is good for, and what it invents

Practised · resource not yet written

Where generative tools genuinely accelerate design work — outlining, variant generation, first-pass drafting — and the failure modes that make unreviewed output unusable: fabricated citations, plausible-sounding pedagogy with no evidence behind it, and quiet homogenisation of everything it touches.

Grounding. Developed in practice; documented failure modes in generative tools

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing Under Constraint

What good looks like when there isn’t enough

Practised · resource not yet written

Budget, timeline, and capacity are the actual conditions of the work, not deviations from it — and where the partner is a volunteer, the scarcest of them is their attention. What to protect and what to let go when the ideal method is unavailable, which is the honest counterpart to every best-case process on this map.

Grounding. Developed in practice

Sources

  • Reference 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

What to Build When the Answer Isn’t a Course

Support placed at the moment the work happens

Practised · resource not yet written

Job aids, checklists, decision aids at the point of care, protocol cards, a worked-example set, a rubric released before the work starts, a clearer brief, a page that answers the question forty people are about to ask. Support available at the moment the task is performed rather than instruction delivered weeks earlier and expected to survive until it is needed — frequently where the measurable effect actually is.

Grounding. Behaviour engineering (Gilbert); job aids (Rossett & Schafer); moments of need (Gottfredson & Mosher); checklist literature

Sources

  • Reference 79: Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)
  • Reference 84: Rossett, A., & Schafer, L. (2007). Job Aids and Performance Support: Moving from Knowledge in the Classroom to Knowledge Everywhere. Pfeiffer.
  • Reference 85: Gottfredson, C., & Mosher, B. (2011). Innovative Performance Support: Strategies and Practices for Learning in the Workflow. McGraw-Hill.
  • Reference 86: Gawande, A. (2009). The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right. Metropolitan Books.
  • Reference 78: Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: Or, You Really Oughta Wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Information and Data Visualization for Learning

Making structure visible so it gets read

Practised · resource not yet written

Complex technical content and evaluation findings arrive as prose and spreadsheets and stay unread. Process maps, decision trees, comparative frames, and results a governance or curriculum committee can take in within a minute. Wherever decisions are made by a committee reading on short time, this is often the whole deliverable rather than a garnish on one.

Grounding. Graphical excellence (Tufte); multimedia principles (Mayer); Cairo

Sources

  • Reference 87: Tufte, E. R. (2001). The Visual Display of Quantitative Information (2nd ed.). Graphics Press.
  • Reference 6: Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 88: Cairo, A. (2012). The Functional Art: An Introduction to Information Graphics and Visualization. New Riders.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Visual Language and Design Systems for Learning Programs

Making consistency economical instead of heroic

Practised · resource not yet written

Materials produced by many hands drift — inconsistent, off-brand, and inaccessible in the same recurring ways. Templates, type and colour decisions with contrast decided once, a media library, and a house style are what let quality hold without a specialist reviewing every artefact.

Grounding. Design systems practice; WCAG contrast requirements

Sources

  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 87: Tufte, E. R. (2001). The Visual Display of Quantitative Information (2nd ed.). Graphics Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Plain Language and Writing for Learning

Reading load as a design decision

Practised · resource not yet written

How hard something is to read is usually the biggest barrier to understanding it, and it has nothing to do with the subject itself. It is also the barrier designers most often leave to chance. Reading load decides whether a patient follows their discharge instructions, whether a public notice meets its plain-language duty, whether a researcher can actually use a method someone has described, and whether a student can tell what an assignment is asking them to do.

Grounding. ISO 24495-1; health literacy (Nutbeam)

Sources

  • Reference 89: ISO 24495-1:2023, Plain language — Part 1: Governing principles and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
  • Reference 63: Nutbeam, D. (2000). “Health Literacy as a Public Health Goal: A Challenge for Contemporary Health Education and Communication Strategies into the 21st Century.” Health Promotion International, 15(3), 259–267.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Motion, Video and Multimedia Production

When moving image earns its cost

Practised · resource not yet written

The production craft — scripting, shot planning, capture, edit, captioning and audio description as part of production rather than remediation — and the judgment about when video is the right answer rather than the expected one.

Grounding. Multimedia learning principles (Mayer)

Sources

  • Reference 6: Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

How Learning Works, and Who Can Act on It

Told plainly to learners, and built into the design

Practised · resource not yet written

Most learners have never been told how consolidation works, why re-reading feels productive and isn’t, or that difficulty is often the signal rather than the failure. This makes that knowledge available in plain language as something offered rather than assigned, and builds the regulating into the design — spacing in the schedule, retrieval in the activity, requirements stated plainly — because every strategy in this literature presupposes conditions that unequal circumstances do not distribute equally.

Grounding. Learning How to Learn (Oakley & Sejnowski); desirable difficulties (Bjork); retrieval practice (Roediger & Karpicke); co-regulated and socially shared regulation (Hadwin & Järvelä); scarcity and bandwidth (Mullainathan & Shafir)

Sources

  • Reference 90: Oakley, B., Sejnowski, T., & McConville, A. (2018). Learning How to Learn. TarcherPerigee.
  • Reference 7: 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 8: Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). “Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention.” Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.
  • Reference 91: Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2018). “Self-Regulation, Co-Regulation, and Shared Regulation in Collaborative Learning Environments.” In Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 92: Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2013). Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much. Times Books.
  • Reference 12: Flavell, J. H. (1979). “Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive–Developmental Inquiry.” American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Writing Outcomes That Can Be Assessed

Holding outcome, evidence and activity in one line

Practised · resource not yet written

Most outcomes state an aspiration no assessment can reach — appreciate, understand, be aware of — and most activities drift from whatever is finally marked. Naming what someone will be able to do, choosing the evidence that would show it, and building the activity that gets them there is the most-performed move in the craft and the one most often made by habit. It is also what makes a design reviewable by anyone who was not in the room when it was decided.

Grounding. Constructive alignment (Biggs); backward design (Wiggins & McTighe); construct validity (Messick)

Sources

  • Reference 93: Biggs, J. (1996). “Enhancing Teaching Through Constructive Alignment.” Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364.
  • Reference 15: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  • 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.
  • Reference 16: Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). “The Power of Feedback.” Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Assessment When the Answer Can Be Generated

Designing tasks a model cannot sit in for

Practised · resource not yet written

Detection is unreliable, adversarial, and falls hardest on the people least able to contest it. The durable answers are in the task itself: work anchored to a particular context, a process that leaves a trail, evidence gathered in person at the points where it genuinely matters, and stated expectations about permitted use rather than a blanket prohibition nobody can enforce. The prior question is which capability a task is protecting, and whether it is worth protecting there.

Grounding. Assessment security (Dawson); permitted-use scales (Perkins et al.); construct validity (Messick)

Sources

  • Reference 94: Dawson, P. (2021). Defending Assessment Security in a Digital World: Preventing E-Cheating and Supporting Academic Integrity in Higher Education. Routledge.
  • Reference 95: Perkins, M., Furze, L., Roe, J., & MacVaugh, J. (2024). “The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A Framework for Ethical Integration of Generative AI in Educational Assessment.” Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(6).
  • 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.
  • Reference 15: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

When the Consultation Is the Whole Intervention

One conversation, and no project behind it

Practised · resource not yet written

A great deal of this work is not a project. It is an hour with someone who has a course, a deadline, and the option of simply not writing back. What can be diagnosed, decided, and left behind in a single conversation is a different craft from running a scoped build, and it is where most of a practice’s actual reach lives. Designing that hour — what to ask, what to skip, what to leave in their hands — deserves the same attention as designing anything else.

Grounding. Reflective practice (Schön); needs analysis (Rossett); adult learning (Knowles)

Sources

  • Reference 13: Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.
  • Reference 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.
  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Outer ring · what the work answers to

Quality Assurance as a Documented Practice

Accountable, recorded, and repeatable

Practised · resource not yet written

Review against instructional and accessibility standards, with the criteria written down, the reviewer named, and the result recorded. Distinct from remediating a legacy inventory: this is the check that runs before anything ships.

Grounding. Standards-based review against instructional and accessibility criteria

Sources

  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
  • Reference 56: ETSI/CEN/CENELEC (2021). EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility Requirements for ICT Products and Services. Harmonised European Standard.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Reading Learning Science Without Neuromyths

Telling the evidence from the folklore

Practised · resource not yet written

Learning styles, the retention pyramid, left-brain and right-brain, and the attention-span figures that circulate without a source. Reading primary evidence well enough to tell what is supported from what is merely widespread is a professional obligation, and the myths are most persistent precisely where budgets are decided.

Grounding. Learning styles evidence (Pashler et al.); neuromyth prevalence (Dekker et al.; Howard-Jones)

Sources

  • Reference 96: Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). “Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.
  • Reference 97: Dekker, S., Lee, N. C., Howard-Jones, P., & Jolles, J. (2012). “Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions among Teachers.” Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 429.
  • Reference 98: Howard-Jones, P. A. (2014). “Neuroscience and Education: Myths and Messages.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(12), 817–824.
  • Reference 1: Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Expanded ed.). National Academy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Source Discipline in Knowledge Products

Can an independent reader confirm this?

Practised · resource not yet written

Citation integrity, fact-checking, and the verifiability test applied to learning materials rather than to research papers. The standard is whether a reader can confirm a claim without contacting the author — which most learning content, including most well-intentioned learning content, cannot meet.

Grounding. Developed in practice; citation integrity and verifiability

Sources

  • Reference 30: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Supporting Indigenous-Led Learning Design

A settler designer’s role, named at its actual size

Practised · resource not yet written

Design craft placed in service of Indigenous-led education and directed by Indigenous knowledge holders — never a claim to Indigenous knowledge, which is held in relationship and community and does not transfer to a portfolio. The scholarship belongs to Ramsden, Kirkness and Barnhardt, Archibald, Battiste, Ermine, and Tuhiwai Smith; what is offered here is process, plain language, accessibility, and production discipline in support of work whose direction is not the designer’s to set.

Grounding. Cultural safety (Ramsden); the Four R’s — respect, relevance, reciprocity, responsibility (Kirkness & Barnhardt); Indigenous Storywork (Archibald); ethical space of engagement (Ermine); Decolonization Is Not a Metaphor (Tuck & Yang). Instruments: TRC Calls to Action 23 and 24; UNDRIP; BC’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act; the First Nations principles of OCAP®; FNHA cultural safety and humility commitments.

Sources

  • Reference 99: Ramsden, I. (2002). Cultural Safety and Nursing Education in Aotearoa and Te Waipounamu. Doctoral thesis, Victoria University of Wellington.
  • Reference 100: Kirkness, V. J., & Barnhardt, R. (1991). “First Nations and Higher Education: The Four R’s — Respect, Relevance, Reciprocity, Responsibility.” Journal of American Indian Education, 30(3), 1–15 (May 1991).
  • Reference 101: Archibald, J. (Q’um Q’um Xiiem) (2008). Indigenous Storywork: Educating the Heart, Mind, Body, and Spirit. UBC Press.
  • Reference 102: Ermine, W. (2007). “The Ethical Space of Engagement.” Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193–203.
  • Reference 103: Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). “Decolonization Is Not a Metaphor.” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.
  • Reference 104: Battiste, M. (2013). Decolonizing Education: Nourishing the Learning Spirit. Purich Publishing.
  • Reference 105: Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (2nd ed.). Zed Books.
  • Reference 106: Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action.
  • Reference 107: United Nations (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. General Assembly resolution 61/295.
  • Reference 32: The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing for the Update Cycle

Who owns this after handover

Practised · resource not yet written

Content decays, and sustainment is usually retrofitted or never happens at all. Update triggers, review cycles, version control, and a named owner decided during design rather than discovered two years later when the material is quietly wrong.

Grounding. Sustainment planning; knowledge management practice

Sources

  • Reference 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
  • Reference 30: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing Where the Work Must Satisfy a Reviewer

The tension between defensible and effective

Practised · resource not yet written

Required training, audit trails, accreditation evidence, and curriculum approval — and the real craft problem underneath, which is that review-driven design usually optimizes for the record rather than the learner. The reviewer may be a regulator, a professional accrediting body, an ethics board, or a curriculum committee. The pressure each puts on the design is the same, and so is the way out of it.

Grounding. Regulatory and accreditation frameworks; competency assurance practice

Sources

  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
  • Reference 44: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
  • Reference 53: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Learner Data, Privacy and Analytics Ethics

What the learning function is actually allowed to hold

Practised · resource not yet written

Platform records, completion tracking, dashboards that identify individuals by accident, retention schedules, and what privacy law requires of a learning function that is usually not staffed to know. It also covers the assessment a third-party tool has to pass before anyone can be required to use it, and the alternative that has to exist when it has not. The default position — collect everything, decide later — is not lawful and not neutral.

Grounding. FIPPA; PIPEDA; PHIPA; privacy impact assessment; learning analytics ethics (Slade & Prinsloo)

Sources

  • Reference 53: Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 108: Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c. 5 (Canada).
  • Reference 109: Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004, S.O. 2004, c. 3, Sched. A (Ontario).
  • Reference 110: 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

Connected contributions

Ethics and Consent in Learner Research

What may be published, and on whose say-so

Practised · resource not yet written

Consent that is informed rather than assumed, anonymization that actually anonymizes in small populations, and a clear line about what may be quoted or published from research with participants. The line matters most when the participants are colleagues.

Grounding. TCPS 2; research ethics practice

Sources

  • Reference 55: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).
  • Reference 32: The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Multilingual Design and Localization

The difference between translated and designed

Practised · resource not yet written

Plain language before translation, terminology decided once, cultural adaptation rather than substitution, and the recognition that a translated course carries the structural assumptions of the original. A live requirement wherever services, research, or study run across languages — Canadian health and federal contexts, and any room where much of the group is working in an additional language.

Grounding. ISO 24495-1; localization practice

Sources

  • Reference 89: ISO 24495-1:2023, Plain language — Part 1: Governing principles and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
  • Reference 63: Nutbeam, D. (2000). “Health Literacy as a Public Health Goal: A Challenge for Contemporary Health Education and Communication Strategies into the 21st Century.” Health Promotion International, 15(3), 259–267.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Facilitation and Live Delivery Craft

What happens in the room

Practised · resource not yet written

Technique, timing, group dynamics, reading a room that has gone quiet, and recovering a session that is not working — where most public-sector and higher-education learning still actually happens, and the part least often written down.

Grounding. Adult learning practice (Knowles); facilitation craft

Sources

  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 9: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Learning Design Infrastructure

What a practice needs in order to exist

Practised · resource not yet written

Templates, source libraries, a media gallery, working groups, and standards documented where someone other than their author can find them. The scaffolding that decides whether a design practice is a person or a capability.

Grounding. Developed in practice; organizational learning (Senge)

Sources

  • Reference 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
  • Reference 30: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Building Design Capability in Non-Designers

Helping SMEs and faculty make decent materials

Practised · resource not yet written

Most learning content in any institution is made by people whose job is something else. Giving them a small number of decisions that matter, in a form they will actually use, does more for quality at scale than any single well-designed course. Where a small team supports a large institution, this is not a secondary mode of delivery. It is the main one.

Grounding. Adult learning practice (Knowles); behaviour change (Michie)

Sources

  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 62: Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). “The Behaviour Change Wheel: A New Method for Characterising and Designing Behaviour Change Interventions.” Implementation Science, 6:42.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Competency Development for Learning Designers

What the work requires, on a scale you can use

Practised · resource not yet written

An eight-competency framework with a four-level scale, written for self-review, hiring, and team capability mapping. Peer-facing, and the kind of artefact the field mostly keeps in private documents rather than publishing.

Grounding. Developed in practice; competency frameworks and self-assessment

Sources

  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Arguing for the Work Before the Constraint Is Set

Making the case while there is still something to decide

Practised · resource not yet written

Cost, effort, and how the work is justified — sometimes to somebody holding a budget who has seen learning functions produce very little, and sometimes to a partner being asked for hours already owed to research, teaching, and service. The second argument is the harder one, because there is no line item to point at. Distinct from designing well inside a constraint: this is the case made before the constraint exists, and its strongest version includes recommending against building a course.

Grounding. Evaluation and impact frameworks (Kirkpatrick); practice-derived

Sources

  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
  • Reference 79: Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Reading Course Signals Without Overreading Them

Feedback, evaluations, and platform data

Practised · resource not yet written

Learner feedback, end-of-term evaluation instruments, and platform analytics each answer a narrower question than they appear to. Evaluation instruments carry documented bias by instructor gender; platform data records activity rather than learning; open comments are a self-selected sample in which the unhappy are overrepresented. Knowing what each signal can and cannot support is the difference between a revision that helps and one that chases the loudest few.

Grounding. Bias in student ratings of teaching (MacNell et al.); learning analytics ethics (Slade & Prinsloo); construct validity (Messick)

Sources

  • Reference 111: MacNell, L., Driscoll, A., & Hunt, A. N. (2015). “What’s in a Name: Exposing Gender Bias in Student Ratings of Teaching.” Innovative Higher Education, 40(4), 291–303.
  • Reference 110: Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). “Learning Analytics: Ethical Issues and Dilemmas.” American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510–1529.
  • 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.
  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing Inside a Research Culture

No authority, and a partner whose first obligation is elsewhere

Practised · resource not yet written

In institutions built around producing knowledge, the person being designed with is an expert in their own field first, holds more standing in it than the designer does, and is taking part voluntarily. Nothing can be required. The evidence has to meet the standard they apply to their own discipline, which is higher than the one most learning content is written to. And the design has to survive a term in which teaching is one obligation of three. The craft is influence without authority, and evidence good enough for a sceptical expert.

Grounding. Adult learning (Knowles); expert blind spot (Nathan & Petrosino); evidence use (Nutley)

Sources

  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 82: Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. (2003). “Expert Blind Spot Among Preservice Teachers.” American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 905–928.
  • Reference 30: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.
  • Reference 13: Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Participation Without Required Disclosure

Taking part without having to account for oneself

Practised · resource not yet written

Activities that ask participants to draw on personal experience place an uneven cost on the people with the most at stake. Offering worked examples, composite cases and observed scenarios as full alternatives, and setting depth of contribution as the participant's choice, keeps the learning available to everyone present without anyone being asked to supply the material.

Grounding. Trauma-informed educational practice (Carello & Butler); SAMHSA framework; stigma and disclosure (Goffman)

Sources

  • Reference 160: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.
  • Reference 161: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884.
  • Reference 52: Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Supporting a Participant in Difficulty

What the facilitator does, and where the role ends

Practised · resource not yet written

A facilitator's responsibilities are noticing, adjusting pace, offering a break that anyone may take without explanation, and providing accurate information about the support available. Referral to qualified support is part of the role; assessment and care are not, and knowing exactly where that line falls is what allows a facilitator to respond promptly and well.

Grounding. Trauma-informed educational practice (Carello & Butler); SAMHSA framework; facilitation practice

Sources

  • Reference 160: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.
  • Reference 161: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884.
  • Reference 31: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Describing Practice Within the Designation Held

Claiming the training one has, precisely

Practised · resource not yet written

Terms drawn from clinical and therapeutic practice describe regulated competencies, and using them to describe learning design invites reliance the role cannot support. Naming the actual qualification, describing the design commitments concretely rather than by label, and citing the framework being applied gives participants an accurate basis for the trust they extend.

Grounding. Teaching trauma and trauma-informed teaching distinguished (Carello & Butler); scope of practice; professional designations

Sources

  • Reference 162: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2014). “Potentially Perilous Pedagogies: Teaching Trauma Is Not the Same as Trauma-Informed Teaching.” Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 15(2), 153–168.
  • Reference 160: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.
  • Reference 161: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Sustaining the People Who Deliver Demanding Content

A scheduling and staffing decision

Practised · resource not yet written

Facilitators and designers who work repeatedly with accounts of harm carry a documented cumulative load. The effective responses are structural: rotation across a roster, limits on consecutive sessions, co-facilitation, scheduled debriefs, and access to support arranged before a programme begins rather than after a difficult session.

Grounding. Compassion fatigue and secondary traumatic stress (Figley); vicarious exposure in practice; psychological safety (Edmondson)

Sources

  • Reference 163: Figley, C. R. (Ed.). (1995). Compassion Fatigue: Coping with Secondary Traumatic Stress Disorder in Those Who Treat the Traumatized. Brunner/Mazel.
  • Reference 164: Edmondson, A. (1999). “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
  • Reference 160: Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Learning Experience Design

19 contributions grow on this branch. Visit the Learning Experience Design page.

Learning Experience Architecture

The five-phase rhythm — Why · See · Try · Share · Reflect

Published resource

The end-to-end arc a learner moves through, designed as one coherent journey rather than a sequence of modules. It is the organizing spine of the experience work, and the frame every other contribution on this branch extends.

Grounding. Experiential learning (Kolb); the Why→See→Try→Share→Reflect rhythm

Read the Learning Experience Architecture resource

Sources

  • Reference 2: Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
  • Reference 1: Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Expanded ed.). National Academy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Where this work leads

Designing for Motivation & Relevance

Why adult learners engage — or quietly disengage

Practised · resource in development

Anchoring learning to a learner's real circumstances and existing expertise before content is introduced, so relevance and autonomy carry the motivational work. It addresses the most common reason programs fall short: attention and completion that quietly decline.

Grounding. Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci)

Sources

  • Reference 3: Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). “Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being.” American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Managing Cognitive Load

Learning that working memory can hold

Practised · resource in development

Chunking, sequencing, worked examples, and multimedia principles that keep dense material within the limits of attention and memory. It matters most where content is genuinely complex, as in research and health settings.

Grounding. Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller); Multimedia Learning (Mayer)

Sources

  • Reference 5: Sweller, J. (1988). “Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning.” Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. See also Sweller, Ayres & Kalyuga, Cognitive Load Theory (Springer, 2011).
  • Reference 6: Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 2: Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
  • Reference 7: 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 8: 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

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 9: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 10: Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
  • Reference 11: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing for Reflection & Transfer

Making learning adapt to new situations

Practised · resource in development

Reflection and metacognition designed in, so learners can make what they have learned their own and re-deploy it in situations the designer could not anticipate. It is the experience-level form of closing the distance between knowing and doing.

Grounding. Metacognition (Flavell); reflective practice (Schön); Bransford et al.

Sources

  • Reference 12: Flavell, J. H. (1979). “Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive–Developmental Inquiry.” American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
  • Reference 13: Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.
  • Reference 1: Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Expanded ed.). National Academy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 14: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Assessment & Feedback as Experience

Feedback that drives learning, not anxiety

Practised · resource in development

Designing assessment and feedback as part of the learning itself — authentic tasks, timely formative feedback, and productive challenge — rather than as a terminal measurement. It works alongside barrier removal, but is a distinct concern.

Grounding. Authentic assessment (Wiggins & McTighe); feedback research

Sources

  • Reference 15: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  • Reference 16: Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). “The Power of Feedback.” Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Backward Design in Practice

Aligning outcomes, assessment, and activity

Practised · resource in development

Holding a single learning experience coherent by starting from the intended outcome, then the evidence of it, then the activity — so nothing in the experience is arbitrary. It answers a recurring need in program and accreditation contexts.

Grounding. Backward design (Wiggins & McTighe)

Sources

  • Reference 15: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Testing & Iterating the Experience

Usability methods for learning

Practised · resource in development · evidence in hand

Treating a learning experience as something to be tested with real learners and improved — usability testing, beta cycles, and quality assurance — before and after it is delivered. It is the formative counterpart to downstream impact evaluation.

Grounding. Usability testing; System Usability Scale

Sources

  • Reference 17: Brooke, J. (1996). “SUS: A ‘Quick and Dirty’ Usability Scale.” In P. W. Jordan et al. (Eds.), Usability Evaluation in Industry. Taylor & Francis.
  • Reference 14: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Studio and Workshop Pedagogy

Teaching in a space where the work is made

Practised · resource not yet written

Learning organized around production in a shared, equipped space: demonstration, supervised practice, progressive release of independence, and authorization to work unaccompanied once competence is shown. It is among the oldest teaching structures in the professions, and the reflective practicum was theorised from it, yet little of its method has been carried into mainstream design practice.

Grounding. Reflective practicum (Schön); signature pedagogies (Shulman); cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown & Newman); craft (Sennett)

Sources

  • Reference 143: Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. Jossey-Bass.
  • Reference 144: Shulman, L. S. (2005). “Signature Pedagogies in the Professions.” Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59.
  • Reference 145: Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). “Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Crafts of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics.” In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, Learning, and Instruction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Reference 146: Sennett, R. (2008). The Craftsman. Yale University Press.
  • Reference 11: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

The Critique as an Assessment Form

Public, spoken feedback, designed well

Practised · resource not yet written

The critique gives feedback in front of peers, in the presence of the work, and develops the ability to discuss one's own practice — something no written rubric produces. Designing it well means stating the criteria beforehand, structuring who speaks and in what order, protecting time so later work is heard as fully as earlier work, and providing a written record so the session is usable afterwards.

Grounding. Art and design pedagogy (Orr & Shreeve); feedback (Hattie & Timperley); construct-irrelevant barriers (Messick)

Sources

  • Reference 147: Orr, S., & Shreeve, A. (2018). Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education: Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum. Routledge.
  • Reference 16: Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). “The Power of Feedback.” Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
  • 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

Connected contributions

Materials, Tools and Equipment as Access Variables

What the work costs to make, and who can operate the machine

Practised · resource not yet written

In making-based programmes the material budget, the studio timetable and the physical demands of equipment shape who can fully take part. Costed material kits, consumable pools, timetabled access that accommodates commuting and caregiving, and equipment selected for reach, force and seated operation are the design responses, and they belong in the programme plan rather than in individual accommodation.

Grounding. Universal design (Center for Universal Design); scarcity and cognitive bandwidth (Mullainathan & Shafir); accessible environments

Sources

  • Reference 42: Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
  • Reference 92: Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2013). Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much. Times Books.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing For and Within Practice-Based Research

When the work made is part of the finding

Practised · resource not yet written

Research-creation and practice-led inquiry produce knowledge through making, which changes how a project is scoped, supervised, documented and examined. Designing learning in these settings means building documentation into production rather than reconstructing it afterwards, and making the criteria for a practice-based contribution explicit to everyone assessing it.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Epistemology set.

Grounding. Practice as research (Barrett & Bolt); knowing-how (Ryle); tacit knowledge (Polanyi; Collins)

Sources

  • Reference 148: Barrett, E., & Bolt, B. (Eds.). (2010). Practice as Research: Approaches to Creative Arts Enquiry. I.B. Tauris.
  • Reference 128: Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson — the source of the knowing-how and knowing-that distinction.
  • Reference 129: Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.
  • Reference 130: Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. University of Chicago Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Partnered Studio and Client Projects

An external partner, a live brief, and learners in the middle

Practised · resource not yet written

Projects run with an industry, community or institutional partner give learners real constraints and real audiences. Holding the educational purpose steady alongside the partner's needs calls for an agreement settled in advance: scope and timeline, ownership of what is produced, consent and credit for participants, and a defined position if the brief changes mid-project.

Grounding. Work-integrated learning (Billett); situated learning; research ethics (TCPS 2)

Sources

  • Reference 149: Billett, S. (2009). “Realising the Educational Worth of Integrating Work Experiences in Higher Education.” Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.
  • Reference 11: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 55: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 149: Billett, S. (2009). “Realising the Educational Worth of Integrating Work Experiences in Higher Education.” Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.
  • Reference 150: Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada (CEWIL Canada). Work-Integrated Learning definitions and quality principles.
  • Reference 11: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Placement Quality as a Design Variable

What distinguishes a strong placement from a filled one

Practised · resource not yet written

Placement quality can be specified rather than hoped for: identified learning outcomes, graduated responsibility, scheduled feedback, exposure to more than one task, and a documented review at the midpoint while the term can still be adjusted. Making these explicit at the point of agreement gives every party the same expectations and gives the institution something to review against.

Grounding. Work-integrated learning quality principles (CEWIL Canada); Billett; constructive alignment (Biggs)

Sources

  • Reference 150: Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada (CEWIL Canada). Work-Integrated Learning definitions and quality principles.
  • Reference 149: Billett, S. (2009). “Realising the Educational Worth of Integrating Work Experiences in Higher Education.” Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.
  • Reference 93: Biggs, J. (1996). “Enhancing Teaching Through Constructive Alignment.” Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Who Is Able to Take the Placement

Unpaid and unfunded experience as an access question

Practised · resource not yet written

Where placement is required for a credential and unpaid or unfunded, participation depends on financial circumstance, caregiving, transport and immigration status as much as on capability. Paid and funded placements, part-time and local options, remote arrangements and clear accommodation routes widen who can complete the requirement, and tracking who withdraws makes the pattern visible.

Grounding. Unpaid internships and access (Perlin); placement access (Meeks & Jain); equity-centred design

Sources

  • Reference 151: Perlin, R. (2011). Intern Nation: How to Earn Nothing and Learn Little in the Brave New Economy. Verso.
  • Reference 61: Meeks, L. M., & Jain, N. R. (2018). Accessibility, Inclusion, and Action in Medical Education: Lived Experiences of Learners and Physicians with Disabilities. Association of American Medical Colleges.
  • Reference 24: Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing for Embodied and Somatic Learning

The body as a site of the learning, not only its vehicle

Practised · resource not yet written

Some learning is held in movement, handling and sensation before it becomes available as description, and the design decisions follow from that: the room, the materials, the pacing, and how much is asked to be put into words at all. Work on grounded cognition, on the tacit dimension of knowing, and on what making does for thought gives this a basis, and connects the studio contributions on this branch to the trauma-informed practices held in the trunk.

Grounding. Grounded cognition (Barsalou); phenomenology of perception (Merleau-Ponty); tacit knowing (Polanyi); the arts and the creation of mind (Eisner)

Sources

  • Reference 197: Barsalou, L. W. (2008). “Grounded Cognition.” Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.
  • Reference 198: Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of Perception (D. A. Landes, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1945.)
  • Reference 129: Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.
  • Reference 199: Eisner, E. W. (2002). The Arts and the Creation of Mind. Yale University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Learning Systems Design

22 contributions grow on this branch, and 4 more are shared with it from Learning Experience Design. Visit the Learning Systems Design page.

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

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Where this work leads

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 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 36: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Reference 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 37: Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 38: 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 39: 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

Connected contributions

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 40: 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

Connected contributions

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

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 79: Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)
  • Reference 78: Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: Or, You Really Oughta Wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.
  • Reference 80: Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  • Reference 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 153: March, J. G. (1991). “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
  • Reference 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
  • Reference 80: 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

Connected contributions

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 35: Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.
  • Reference 78: Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: Or, You Really Oughta Wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.
  • Reference 79: Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
  • Reference 36: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Reference 99: 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

Connected contributions

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 34: Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
  • Reference 40: Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making.” Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76.
  • Reference 110: 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

Connected contributions

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 154: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
  • Reference 155: Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  • Reference 156: Hollnagel, E., Wears, R. L., & Braithwaite, J. (2015). From Safety-I to Safety-II: A White Paper. The Resilient Health Care Net.
  • Reference 157: Reason, J. (2000). “Human Error: Models and Management.” BMJ, 320(7237), 768–770.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 81: 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 154: 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

Connected contributions

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 158: Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.
  • Reference 154: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
  • Reference 159: Dekker, S. (2014). The Field Guide to Understanding ‘Human Error’ (3rd ed.). Ashgate.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 157: Reason, J. (2000). “Human Error: Models and Management.” BMJ, 320(7237), 768–770.
  • Reference 86: Gawande, A. (2009). The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right. Metropolitan Books.
  • Reference 84: Rossett, A., & Schafer, L. (2007). Job Aids and Performance Support: Moving from Knowledge in the Classroom to Knowledge Everywhere. Pfeiffer.
  • Reference 14: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 154: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
  • Reference 155: Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  • Reference 156: 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

Connected contributions

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 81: 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 154: Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
  • Reference 129: Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 2: Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
  • Reference 7: 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 8: 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

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 9: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 10: Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
  • Reference 11: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 14: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 growing on two branches. 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 149: Billett, S. (2009). “Realising the Educational Worth of Integrating Work Experiences in Higher Education.” Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.
  • Reference 150: Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada (CEWIL Canada). Work-Integrated Learning definitions and quality principles.
  • Reference 11: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Public Learning

10 contributions grow on this branch, and 1 more is shared with it from Human Rights Education. Visit the Public Learning page.

Learning Nobody Is Required to Do

The entry node · attention as the working budget

Practised · resource not yet written

Without enrolment, completion or consequence for leaving, continuation is granted moment by moment and every element has to earn it again. Studies of visitor time establish that most people spend well under half an hour in an exhibition and stop at a minority of what is available, which sets an honest ceiling on what a single encounter can be designed to achieve and directs the design toward interest, orientation and a reason to return.

Grounding. Free-choice learning (Falk & Dierking); visitor time and attention (Serrell); Learning Science in Informal Environments (NRC)

Sources

  • Reference 173: Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from Museums: Visitor Experiences and the Making of Meaning. AltaMira Press (2nd ed., Rowman & Littlefield, 2018).
  • Reference 177: Serrell, B. (1997). “Paying Attention: The Duration and Allocation of Visitors’ Time in Museum Exhibitions.” Curator: The Museum Journal, 40(2), 108–125.
  • Reference 174: National Research Council (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. National Academies Press.
  • Reference 178: Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2002). Lessons Without Limit: How Free-Choice Learning Is Transforming Education. AltaMira Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Designing for Groups Who Arrive Together

The conversation is where the learning travels

Practised · resource not yet written

Families, school groups and pairs of friends arrive as a unit, and the accompanying adult interprets while also learning. Research on museum conversation shows that what people say to each other in front of an exhibit is a principal route through which understanding forms, which makes the design object the exchange rather than the individual: prompts that give an adult something to ask, and content that supports several reading levels at one label.

Grounding. Learning conversations in museums (Leinhardt, Crowley & Knutson); sociocultural learning (Vygotsky); free-choice learning

Sources

  • Reference 179: Leinhardt, G., Crowley, K., & Knutson, K. (Eds.). (2002). Learning Conversations in Museums. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Reference 10: Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
  • Reference 173: Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from Museums: Visitor Experiences and the Making of Meaning. AltaMira Press (2nd ed., Rowman & Littlefield, 2018).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Interpretation Bound to an Object and Its Provenance

What the collection holds, and how it came to be held

Practised · resource not yet written

In collection-based settings the content available is the content the institution holds, and the history of how each object arrived is part of what the label is answering for. Interpretation is therefore developed with the communities to whom the material belongs and whose knowledge it carries, with authorship, protocol and the terms of display settled alongside the text rather than after it.

Grounding. Interpretation (Serrell); difficult heritage (Macdonald); ethical space (Ermine); OCAP® principles

Sources

  • Reference 180: Serrell, B. (2015). Exhibit Labels: An Interpretive Approach (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Reference 181: Macdonald, S. (2009). Difficult Heritage: Negotiating the Nazi Past in Nuremberg and Beyond. Routledge.
  • Reference 102: Ermine, W. (2007). “The Ethical Space of Engagement.” Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193–203.
  • Reference 32: The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Making the Case for Public Learning Outcomes

Interest, identity and participation, evidenced

Practised · resource not yet written

Public learning produces outcomes that arrive slowly and diffusely — interest, confidence, a sense that a field is open to the person standing in it — while funding decisions often expect the shorter, school-shaped kind. The strands of informal science learning set out in the National Research Council synthesis give these outcomes a documented structure, which supports proposals and reports that describe what public programmes genuinely do and evidence it on its own terms.

Grounding. Strands of informal science learning (NRC); free-choice learning; evaluation of public programmes

Sources

  • Reference 174: National Research Council (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. National Academies Press.
  • Reference 178: Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2002). Lessons Without Limit: How Free-Choice Learning Is Transforming Education. AltaMira Press.
  • Reference 171: Ebrahim, A. (2005). “Accountability Myopia: Losing Sight of Organizational Learning.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56–87.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Delivery by Volunteers and Casual Teams

Designed to hold in the hands of a short-notice team

Practised · resource not yet written

Much public programming is delivered by volunteers, students and casual staff who join for a season and receive a short orientation. The design response is to decide deliberately what is fixed and what is left to the person: a small number of well-rehearsed moves, prompts and worked examples in hand, and a clear account of what to do when a question runs past the brief.

Grounding. Legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger); job aids and performance support (Rossett & Schafer)

Sources

  • Reference 11: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 84: Rossett, A., & Schafer, L. (2007). Job Aids and Performance Support: Moving from Knowledge in the Classroom to Knowledge Everywhere. Pfeiffer.
  • Reference 85: Gottfredson, C., & Mosher, B. (2011). Innovative Performance Support: Strategies and Practices for Learning in the Workflow. McGraw-Hill.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Access in a Public Room

The building, the crowd, and who is able to come

Practised · resource not yet written

Public settings add conditions that a document-centred approach to accessibility does not reach: sound levels, crowding, sightlines, seating, reach and operating force at an interactive, and the sensory load of a busy gallery. Alongside these sit the conditions that determine attendance at all — admission cost, transport, opening hours and distance — so that scheduled low-sensory times and subsidised access are programme decisions as much as facilities ones.

Grounding. Universal design (Center for Universal Design); accessible physical environments; CRPD Article 30

Sources

  • Reference 42: Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
  • Reference 73: United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Access to the Evidence Itself

Whether the reader can open what the work cites

Practised · resource not yet written

Practitioners, community organizations and independent researchers frequently work outside the subscriptions their evidence base sits behind. Designing for this means citing what the reader can reach, using open-access versions and repository copies where they exist, and treating access arrangements — community borrower programmes, open licensing, deposit practice — as part of the knowledge product rather than as someone else's concern.

Grounding. Open access (Suber; Budapest Open Access Initiative); public library mandate (IFLA-UNESCO)

Sources

  • Reference 182: Suber, P. (2012). Open Access. MIT Press.
  • Reference 183: Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002). Budapest Open Access Initiative Declaration.
  • Reference 176: IFLA and UNESCO (2022). IFLA-UNESCO Public Library Manifesto 2022.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

The Reference Encounter as Teaching

One conversation, an unknown starting point, no second session

Practised · resource not yet written

A staffed desk in a library or learning centre delivers a large share of an institution's teaching, one enquiry at a time, to people whose prior knowledge is unknown and who may not return. The established reference interview — establishing the actual question, negotiating scope, and closing by checking that the answer was usable — is a compact instructional method, and it pairs with information literacy frameworks to make a single encounter transferable rather than transactional.

Grounding. Reference interview (Ross, Nilsen & Radford); ACRL Framework for Information Literacy

Sources

  • Reference 184: Ross, C. S., Nilsen, K., & Radford, M. L. (2019). Conducting the Reference Interview (3rd ed.). ALA Neal-Schuman.
  • Reference 185: Association of College and Research Libraries (2015). Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. American Library Association.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Community-Held Records and Community-Led Digitization

Capability transferred, and the files kept where they belong

Practised · resource not yet written

Community archives and digitization initiatives are strongest when the institution supplies equipment, training and standards while the community holds the material, the decisions and the resulting files. Toolkits, workshops and documented workflows are the design deliverables; ownership, control, access and possession of the records remain with the community throughout.

Grounding. OCAP® principles (FNIGC); ethical space (Ermine); Indigenous storywork (Archibald)

Sources

  • Reference 32: The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).
  • Reference 102: Ermine, W. (2007). “The Ethical Space of Engagement.” Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193–203.
  • Reference 101: Archibald, J. (Q’um Q’um Xiiem) (2008). Indigenous Storywork: Educating the Heart, Mind, Body, and Spirit. UBC Press.
  • Reference 107: United Nations (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. General Assembly resolution 61/295.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluating an Anonymous Encounter

No roster, no follow-up, and evidence all the same

Practised · resource not yet written

Public settings rarely permit named participants or later contact, so evaluation is built from what can be observed and asked in the moment: tracking and timing, structured observation, brief exit conversations, and repeat cross-sectional sampling across a season. Each method answers a narrow question well, and stating which question it answers keeps the resulting claims proportionate.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Public Learning, and it is also part of the Evaluation set.

Grounding. Tracking and timing (Serrell); visitor studies methods; informal learning evaluation

Sources

  • Reference 177: Serrell, B. (1997). “Paying Attention: The Duration and Allocation of Visitors’ Time in Museum Exhibitions.” Curator: The Museum Journal, 40(2), 108–125.
  • Reference 174: National Research Council (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. National Academies Press.
  • Reference 166: Mayne, J. (2012). “Contribution Analysis: Coming of Age?” Evaluation, 18(3), 270–280.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Human Rights in Public Interpretation

Rights content in a gallery, a memorial or a public programme

Practised · resource not yet written

Public settings reach audiences that no course reaches, and increasingly carry rights content: contested collections, memorials, and exhibitions on histories of harm. The interpretive questions are who narrates, what the visitor is told about provenance, and how a self-directed visitor of any age and background is supported through material of this weight in a short, unsupervised encounter.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Human Rights Education, and it is also part of the Public Learning set.

Grounding. Difficult heritage (Macdonald); interpretation (Serrell); Calls to Action (TRC); museum education (Hooper-Greenhill)

Sources

  • Reference 181: Macdonald, S. (2009). Difficult Heritage: Negotiating the Nazi Past in Nuremberg and Beyond. Routledge.
  • Reference 180: Serrell, B. (2015). Exhibit Labels: An Interpretive Approach (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Reference 106: Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action.
  • Reference 175: Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2007). Museums and Education: Purpose, Pedagogy, Performance. Routledge.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Universal Design for Learning

10 contributions grow on this branch. Visit the Universal Design for Learning page.

Designing for Learner Variability at Scale

The thesis the other UDL work inherits

Published resource

Designing from the outset for the full, predictable range of human variability, so the environment fits diverse learners rather than a mythical average one. It is the worldview that grounds every other contribution on this branch.

Grounding. Universal Design for Learning (CAST; Rose & Meyer)

Read the Designing for Learner Variability at Scale resource

Sources

  • Reference 18: Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Where this work leads

From Accommodation to Proactive Inclusive Design

The field's defining reframe

Published resource

Shifting from retrofitting access for individuals after the fact to designing inclusively from the start, so fewer barriers are ever built in. It states the paradigm shift the field rests on, plainly.

Grounding. Universal Design for Learning; inclusive design principles

Read the From Accommodation to Proactive Inclusive Design resource

Sources

  • Reference 20: Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Engaging Voluntary & Cautious Adult Learners

The engagement principle in practice

Practised · resource in development

Designing multiple pathways into motivation for learners who arrive with very different reasons for being there, including those who would rather not be. Where engagement is not solved, little downstream can land.

Grounding. UDL engagement principle; adult learning

Sources

  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
  • Reference 3: Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). “Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being.” American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Closing the Knowing–Doing Gap

From understanding to changed practice

Published resource

Designing for the distance between what learners understand and what they actually do — the transfer problem seen through an inclusive lens. It shares its machinery with reflection at the experience level and with change at the systems level.

Grounding. Transfer research; Universal Design for Learning

Read the Closing the Knowing–Doing Gap resource

Sources

  • Reference 21: Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2000). The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Reference 1: Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Expanded ed.). National Academy Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Onboarding Across Wide Experience Ranges

Multiple entry points and pathways

Practised · resource in development

Designing entry so newcomers and experienced practitioners can each begin where they are, without boring the one or losing the other. It is a representation-principle problem common to every sector.

Grounding. UDL representation principle

Sources

  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Making Accessibility More Than Compliance

Access as design quality, not a checklist

Practised · resource in development

Treating accessibility as a dimension of good design rather than a minimum legal standard met at the end. It is the conceptual bridge from inclusive learning design to the accessibility, disability and accommodation branch, and to the service line offered alongside it.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.

Grounding. WCAG; UDL; inclusive design

Sources

  • Reference 22: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Eliminating Construct-Irrelevant Barriers in Assessment

Measuring capability, not obstacles

Published resource

Removing features of an assessment that get in the way of demonstrating mastery without being part of what is measured, so results reflect capability rather than incidental barriers. It works alongside assessment designed as experience.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.

Grounding. Construct validity; UDL action & expression

Read the Eliminating Construct-Irrelevant Barriers in Assessment resource

Sources

  • 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.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Equity-Centered Learning Design

The social and cultural layer over everything

Practised · resource in development

Attending to power, culture, and whose knowledge is treated as legitimate across the whole design, rather than as a separate module. It connects directly to equity evaluation and to equity-centred knowledge mobilization.

Grounding. Equity-centred and culturally responsive design

Sources

  • Reference 24: Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Scaling Personalization Without Scaling Cost

The production economics of flexibility

Practised · resource in development

Making multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression economically feasible at scale, increasingly with AI-assisted production. It is the meta-capability that makes the rest affordable to deliver.

Grounding. Learning technology; AI-assisted design

Sources

  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
  • Reference 6: Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Evaluating Whether Design Reduced Barriers

Closing the UDL cycle with evidence

Practised · resource in development

Measuring whether an inclusive design actually lowered barriers, rather than assuming that it did — ending on rigor rather than aspiration. It belongs to the shared evaluation family that runs across the practice.

A resource growing on two branches. Its home is Universal Design for Learning, and it is also part of the Accessibility set.

Grounding. Evaluation design; Universal Design for Learning

Sources

  • Reference 25: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
  • Reference 19: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Section 4

References and resources

The theory, law, and standards this practice is rooted in, listed once and cited by number on each contribution above. Peer-reviewed, statutory, and institutional sources link directly. Books, reports, and legislation are cited in full so they can be found in any library catalogue or official register.

  1. Learning sciences1. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Expanded ed.). National Academy Press.
    https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/9853/how-people-learn-brain-mind-experience-and-school
  2. Learning theory2. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
  3. Motivation3. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). “Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being.” American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
  4. Neuroscience of learning4. Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). “We Feel, Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education.” Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3–10.
  5. Learning sciences5. Sweller, J. (1988). “Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning.” Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. See also Sweller, Ayres & Kalyuga, Cognitive Load Theory (Springer, 2011).
  6. Learning sciences6. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  7. Learning sciences7. 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.
  8. Learning sciences8. Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). “Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention.” Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.
  9. Social learning9. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
  10. Learning theory10. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
  11. Social learning11. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
  12. Metacognition12. Flavell, J. H. (1979). “Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive–Developmental Inquiry.” American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
  13. Reflective practice13. Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.
  14. Human-centred design14. Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.
  15. Instructional design15. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  16. Assessment16. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). “The Power of Feedback.” Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
  17. Usability17. Brooke, J. (1996). “SUS: A ‘Quick and Dirty’ Usability Scale.” In P. W. Jordan et al. (Eds.), Usability Evaluation in Industry. Taylor & Francis.
  18. Universal Design for Learning18. Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.
  19. Universal Design for Learning19. CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
    https://udlguidelines.cast.org
  20. Universal Design for Learning20. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
  21. Knowing–doing gap21. Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2000). The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action. Harvard Business School Press.
  22. Accessibility standards22. W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
    https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/
  23. Assessment23. 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.
  24. Culturally relevant pedagogy24. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.
  25. Evaluation25. Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
  26. Knowledge mobilization26. Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., & Robinson, N. (2006). “Lost in Knowledge Translation: Time for a Map?” Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.
  27. Implementation science27. Damschroder, L. J., et al. (2009). “Fostering Implementation of Health Services Research Findings into Practice: A Consolidated Framework for Advancing Implementation Science (CFIR).” Implementation Science, 4:50.
    https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50
  28. Implementation science28. Aarons, G. A., Hurlburt, M., & Horwitz, S. M. (2011). “Advancing a Conceptual Model of Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors (EPIS).” Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 38(1), 4–23.
  29. Implementation science29. Kitson, A., Harvey, G., & McCormack, B. (1998). “Enabling the Implementation of Evidence Based Practice: A Conceptual Framework (PARIHS).” Quality in Health Care, 7(3), 149–158.
  30. Evidence use30. Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.
  31. Adult learning31. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  32. Indigenous data governance32. The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).
    https://fnigc.ca/ocap-training/
  33. Indigenous knowledge33. Bartlett, C., Marshall, M., & Marshall, A. (2012). “Two-Eyed Seeing and Other Lessons Learned within a Co-Learning Journey of Bringing Together Indigenous and Mainstream Knowledges and Ways of Knowing.” Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 2(4), 331–340.
  34. Organizational learning34. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
  35. Needs analysis35. Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.
  36. Change management36. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
  37. Equity evaluation37. Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press.
  38. Creative health38. 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.
  39. Social determinants39. 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.
  40. Complexity40. Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making.” Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76.
  41. Inclusive design41. Inclusive Design Research Centre. The Inclusive Design Guide. OCAD University — the source of the one-size-fits-one principle and the inclusive design framework.
    https://guide.inclusivedesign.ca/
  42. Universal design42. Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Center for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
  43. Human rights law43. British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v. BCGSEU, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3, 1999 CanLII 652 (SCC) — the “Meiorin” decision, establishing the unified bona fide requirement test and accommodation to the point of undue hardship.
    https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1999/1999canlii652/1999canlii652.html
  44. Accessibility law44. Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
    https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/a-0.6/
  45. Human rights law45. Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
  46. Accessibility law46. Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  47. Accessibility law47. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.; Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Sections 504 and 508, as amended.
    https://www.ada.gov/
  48. Disability studies48. Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
  49. Disability studies49. Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  50. Disability studies50. Titchkosky, T. (2011). The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. University of Toronto Press.
  51. Disability studies51. Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.
  52. Disclosure and stigma52. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
  53. Information governance53. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.
  54. Disability justice54. Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.
  55. Research ethics55. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (2022). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans — TCPS 2 (2022).
    https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique_tcps2-eptc2_2022.html
  56. Accessibility standards56. ETSI/CEN/CENELEC (2021). EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility Requirements for ICT Products and Services. Harmonised European Standard.
    https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/301500_301599/301549/03.02.01_60/en_301549v030201p.pdf
  57. Assistive technology57. Zabala, J. S. (2005). Ready, SETT, Go! Getting Started with the SETT Framework — the Student, Environments, Tasks, Tools framework for assistive technology decision-making.
  58. Assistive technology58. Cook, A. M., & Polgar, J. M. (2015). Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice (4th ed.). Elsevier — the source of the Human Activity Assistive Technology (HAAT) model.
  59. Accessibility standards59. Information Technology Industry Council. Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) and Accessibility Conformance Reports.
    https://www.itic.org/policy/accessibility/vpat
  60. Episodic disability60. O’Brien, K. K., Bayoumi, A. M., Strike, C., Young, N. L., & Davis, A. M. (2008). “Exploring Disability from the Perspective of Adults Living with HIV/AIDS: Development of a Conceptual Framework.” Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 6:76.
  61. Health professions education61. Meeks, L. M., & Jain, N. R. (2018). Accessibility, Inclusion, and Action in Medical Education: Lived Experiences of Learners and Physicians with Disabilities. Association of American Medical Colleges.
  62. Behaviour change62. Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011). “The Behaviour Change Wheel: A New Method for Characterising and Designing Behaviour Change Interventions.” Implementation Science, 6:42.
    https://implementationscience.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1748-5908-6-42
  63. Health literacy63. Nutbeam, D. (2000). “Health Literacy as a Public Health Goal: A Challenge for Contemporary Health Education and Communication Strategies into the 21st Century.” Health Promotion International, 15(3), 259–267.
  64. Disability and health equity64. Krahn, G. L., Walker, D. K., & Correa-De-Araujo, R. (2015). “Persons with Disabilities as an Unrecognized Health Disparity Population.” American Journal of Public Health, 105(S2), S198–S206.
  65. Disability classification65. World Health Organization (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO — the source of the biopsychosocial model of disability.
    https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/international-classification-of-functioning-disability-and-health
  66. Disability studies66. Retief, M., & Letšosa, R. (2018). “Models of Disability: A Brief Overview.” HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, 74(1).
  67. Disability studies67. Shakespeare, T. (2013). Disability Rights and Wrongs Revisited (2nd ed.). Routledge — a critical reassessment of the strong social model.
  68. Assistive technology68. World Health Organization & UNICEF (2022). Global Report on Assistive Technology. World Health Organization.
    https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451
  69. Disability data69. World Health Organization & World Bank (2011). World Report on Disability. World Health Organization.
  70. Disability and health equity70. World Health Organization (2022). Global Report on Health Equity for Persons with Disabilities. World Health Organization.
  71. Disability data71. Statistics Canada. Canadian Survey on Disability — the national source for disability prevalence in Canada.
  72. Disability etiquette72. United Spinal Association. Disability Etiquette: Tips on Interacting with People with Disabilities.
  73. International instruments73. United Nations (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
    https://social.desa.un.org/issues/disability/crpd/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-crpd
  74. International instruments74. United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
    https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
  75. International instruments75. World Intellectual Property Organization (2013). Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled.
  76. Regional instruments76. European Union (2012). Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 2012/C 326/02.
  77. Built environment77. CSA Group. CSA B651: Accessible Design for the Built Environment. Canadian Standards Association.
  78. Performance analysis78. Mager, R. F., & Pipe, P. (1997). Analyzing Performance Problems: Or, You Really Oughta Wanna (3rd ed.). Center for Effective Performance.
  79. Performance analysis79. Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human Competence: Engineering Worthy Performance. McGraw-Hill. (Tribute edition, Pfeiffer, 2007.)
  80. Performance analysis80. Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. (1995). Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  81. Design method81. 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.
  82. Learning sciences82. Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. (2003). “Expert Blind Spot Among Preservice Teachers.” American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 905–928.
  83. Design method83. Clark, R. E. (1994). “Media Will Never Influence Learning.” Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. See also Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016), e-Learning and the Science of Instruction (4th ed.), Wiley.
  84. Performance support84. Rossett, A., & Schafer, L. (2007). Job Aids and Performance Support: Moving from Knowledge in the Classroom to Knowledge Everywhere. Pfeiffer.
  85. Performance support85. Gottfredson, C., & Mosher, B. (2011). Innovative Performance Support: Strategies and Practices for Learning in the Workflow. McGraw-Hill.
  86. Performance support86. Gawande, A. (2009). The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right. Metropolitan Books.
  87. Visual communication87. Tufte, E. R. (2001). The Visual Display of Quantitative Information (2nd ed.). Graphics Press.
  88. Visual communication88. Cairo, A. (2012). The Functional Art: An Introduction to Information Graphics and Visualization. New Riders.
  89. Standards89. ISO 24495-1:2023, Plain language — Part 1: Governing principles and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
  90. Learning sciences90. Oakley, B., Sejnowski, T., & McConville, A. (2018). Learning How to Learn. TarcherPerigee.
  91. Learning sciences91. Hadwin, A. F., Järvelä, S., & Miller, M. (2018). “Self-Regulation, Co-Regulation, and Shared Regulation in Collaborative Learning Environments.” In Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  92. Behavioural science92. Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2013). Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much. Times Books.
  93. Instructional design93. Biggs, J. (1996). “Enhancing Teaching Through Constructive Alignment.” Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
  94. Assessment94. Dawson, P. (2021). Defending Assessment Security in a Digital World: Preventing E-Cheating and Supporting Academic Integrity in Higher Education. Routledge.
  95. Assessment95. Perkins, M., Furze, L., Roe, J., & MacVaugh, J. (2024). “The Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS): A Framework for Ethical Integration of Generative AI in Educational Assessment.” Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 21(6).
    https://doi.org/10.53761/q3azde36
  96. Learning sciences96. Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). “Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x
  97. Learning sciences97. Dekker, S., Lee, N. C., Howard-Jones, P., & Jolles, J. (2012). “Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions among Teachers.” Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 429.
  98. Learning sciences98. Howard-Jones, P. A. (2014). “Neuroscience and Education: Myths and Messages.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(12), 817–824.
  99. Cultural safety99. Ramsden, I. (2002). Cultural Safety and Nursing Education in Aotearoa and Te Waipounamu. Doctoral thesis, Victoria University of Wellington.
  100. Indigenous education100. Kirkness, V. J., & Barnhardt, R. (1991). “First Nations and Higher Education: The Four R’s — Respect, Relevance, Reciprocity, Responsibility.” Journal of American Indian Education, 30(3), 1–15 (May 1991).
    https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ438242
  101. Indigenous education101. Archibald, J. (Q’um Q’um Xiiem) (2008). Indigenous Storywork: Educating the Heart, Mind, Body, and Spirit. UBC Press.
  102. Indigenous education102. Ermine, W. (2007). “The Ethical Space of Engagement.” Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193–203.
    https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/ilj/article/view/27669
  103. Indigenous education103. Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). “Decolonization Is Not a Metaphor.” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.
  104. Indigenous education104. Battiste, M. (2013). Decolonizing Education: Nourishing the Learning Spirit. Purich Publishing.
  105. Indigenous education105. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (2nd ed.). Zed Books.
  106. Policy instrument106. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action.
  107. Policy instrument107. United Nations (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. General Assembly resolution 61/295.
  108. Privacy law108. Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c. 5 (Canada).
  109. Privacy law109. Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004, S.O. 2004, c. 3, Sched. A (Ontario).
  110. Learning analytics110. Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). “Learning Analytics: Ethical Issues and Dilemmas.” American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510–1529.
  111. Evaluation111. MacNell, L., Driscoll, A., & Hunt, A. N. (2015). “What’s in a Name: Exposing Gender Bias in Student Ratings of Teaching.” Innovative Higher Education, 40(4), 291–303.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-014-9313-4
  112. Social epistemology112. Longino, H. E. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.
  113. Epistemic injustice113. Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.
  114. Agnotology114. Proctor, R. N., & Schiebinger, L. (Eds.). (2008). Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance. Stanford University Press.
  115. Standpoint theory115. Harding, S. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism. Cornell University Press.
  116. Social epistemology116. Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford University Press.
  117. Epistemology of testimony117. Coady, C. A. J. (1992). Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford University Press.
  118. Epistemology of testimony118. Lackey, J. (2008). Learning from Words: Testimony as a Source of Knowledge. Oxford University Press.
  119. Epistemology of testimony119. Hardwig, J. (1985). “Epistemic Dependence.” The Journal of Philosophy, 82(7), 335–349.
  120. Epistemic injustice120. Dotson, K. (2011). “Tracking Epistemic Violence, Tracking Practices of Silencing.” Hypatia, 26(2), 236–257.
  121. Socio-legal epistemology121. Jasanoff, S. (1995). Science at the Bar: Law, Science, and Technology in America. Harvard University Press.
  122. Socio-legal epistemology122. Twining, W. (1990). Rethinking Evidence: Exploratory Essays. Basil Blackwell (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2006).
  123. Evidence law123. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) — the admissibility standard for expert evidence in United States federal courts.
  124. Agnotology124. Mills, C. W. (2007). “White Ignorance.” In S. Sullivan & N. Tuana (Eds.), Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance. State University of New York Press.
  125. Agnotology125. Tuana, N. (2006). “The Speculum of Ignorance: The Women’s Health Movement and Epistemologies of Ignorance.” Hypatia, 21(3), 1–19.
  126. Construct validity126. Nichter, M. (1981). “Idioms of Distress: Alternatives in the Expression of Psychosocial Distress.” Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry, 5(4), 379–408.
  127. Construct validity127. Kleinman, A. (1977). “Depression, Somatization and the ‘New Cross-Cultural Psychiatry’.” Social Science & Medicine, 11(1), 3–10 — the source of the category fallacy.
  128. Epistemology of practice128. Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson — the source of the knowing-how and knowing-that distinction.
  129. Epistemology of practice129. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.
  130. Epistemology of practice130. Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. University of Chicago Press.
  131. Sociology of expertise131. Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2007). Rethinking Expertise. University of Chicago Press.
  132. Science and technology studies132. Epstein, S. (1996). Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge. University of California Press.
  133. Science and technology studies133. Wynne, B. (1992). “Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science.” Public Understanding of Science, 1(3), 281–304 — the Cumbrian sheep farmers study.
  134. Science and technology studies134. Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press — the source of civic epistemology.
  135. Peer disagreement135. Feldman, R., & Warfield, T. A. (Eds.). (2010). Disagreement. Oxford University Press.
  136. Deliberation136. Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford University Press.
  137. Deliberation137. Landemore, H. (2013). Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. Princeton University Press.
  138. Participatory design138. Ehn, P. (1988). Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Arbetslivscentrum.
  139. Construct validity139. Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2004). “The Concept of Validity.” Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061–1071.
  140. Standpoint theory140. Haraway, D. (1988). “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.
  141. Standpoint theory141. Wylie, A. (2003). “Why Standpoint Matters.” In R. Figueroa & S. Harding (Eds.), Science and Other Cultures: Issues in Philosophies of Science and Technology. Routledge.
  142. Standpoint theory142. Collins, P. H. (1990). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Unwin Hyman.
  143. Reflective practice143. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. Jossey-Bass.
  144. Professional education144. Shulman, L. S. (2005). “Signature Pedagogies in the Professions.” Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59.
    https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015
  145. Situated learning145. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). “Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Crafts of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics.” In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, Learning, and Instruction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  146. Craft146. Sennett, R. (2008). The Craftsman. Yale University Press.
  147. Art and design pedagogy147. Orr, S., & Shreeve, A. (2018). Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education: Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum. Routledge.
  148. Practice-based research148. Barrett, E., & Bolt, B. (Eds.). (2010). Practice as Research: Approaches to Creative Arts Enquiry. I.B. Tauris.
  149. Work-integrated learning149. Billett, S. (2009). “Realising the Educational Worth of Integrating Work Experiences in Higher Education.” Studies in Higher Education, 34(7), 827–843.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070802706561
  150. Work-integrated learning150. Co-operative Education and Work-Integrated Learning Canada (CEWIL Canada). Work-Integrated Learning definitions and quality principles.
  151. Work-integrated learning151. Perlin, R. (2011). Intern Nation: How to Earn Nothing and Learn Little in the Brave New Economy. Verso.
  152. Arts-based research152. Leavy, P. (2020). Method Meets Art: Arts-Based Research Practice (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
  153. Organizational learning153. March, J. G. (1991). “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.” Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
    https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  154. Safety science154. Reason, J. (1997). Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents. Ashgate.
  155. Safety science155. Weick, K. E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
  156. Safety science156. Hollnagel, E., Wears, R. L., & Braithwaite, J. (2015). From Safety-I to Safety-II: A White Paper. The Resilient Health Care Net.
  157. Safety science157. Reason, J. (2000). “Human Error: Models and Management.” BMJ, 320(7237), 768–770.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7237.768
  158. Safety science158. Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.
  159. Safety science159. Dekker, S. (2014). The Field Guide to Understanding ‘Human Error’ (3rd ed.). Ashgate.
  160. Practice framework160. Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2015). “Practicing What We Teach: Trauma-Informed Educational Practice.” Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 35(3), 262–278.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08841233.2015.1030059
  161. Practice framework161. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884.
  162. Practice framework162. Carello, J., & Butler, L. D. (2014). “Potentially Perilous Pedagogies: Teaching Trauma Is Not the Same as Trauma-Informed Teaching.” Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 15(2), 153–168.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15299732.2014.867571
  163. Practitioner sustainability163. Figley, C. R. (Ed.). (1995). Compassion Fatigue: Coping with Secondary Traumatic Stress Disorder in Those Who Treat the Traumatized. Brunner/Mazel.
  164. Team learning164. Edmondson, A. (1999). “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
  165. Evaluation165. Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  166. Evaluation166. Mayne, J. (2012). “Contribution Analysis: Coming of Age?” Evaluation, 18(3), 270–280.
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389012451663
  167. Evaluation167. Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall.
  168. Research design168. Kazdin, A. E. (2011). Single-Case Research Designs: Methods for Clinical and Applied Settings (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
  169. Research design169. Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). “Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power.” Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760.
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
  170. Evaluation170. Davies, R., & Dart, J. (2005). The ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use.
  171. Accountability171. Ebrahim, A. (2005). “Accountability Myopia: Losing Sight of Organizational Learning.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56–87.
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764004269430
  172. Evaluation172. Campbell, D. T. (1979). “Assessing the Impact of Planned Social Change.” Evaluation and Program Planning, 2(1), 67–90.
  173. Free-choice learning173. Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from Museums: Visitor Experiences and the Making of Meaning. AltaMira Press (2nd ed., Rowman & Littlefield, 2018).
  174. Informal science education174. National Research Council (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. National Academies Press.
    https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/12190/learning-science-in-informal-environments-people-places-and-pursuits
  175. Museum education175. Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2007). Museums and Education: Purpose, Pedagogy, Performance. Routledge.
  176. Public libraries176. IFLA and UNESCO (2022). IFLA-UNESCO Public Library Manifesto 2022.
  177. Visitor studies177. Serrell, B. (1997). “Paying Attention: The Duration and Allocation of Visitors’ Time in Museum Exhibitions.” Curator: The Museum Journal, 40(2), 108–125.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.1997.tb01292.x
  178. Free-choice learning178. Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2002). Lessons Without Limit: How Free-Choice Learning Is Transforming Education. AltaMira Press.
  179. Free-choice learning179. Leinhardt, G., Crowley, K., & Knutson, K. (Eds.). (2002). Learning Conversations in Museums. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  180. Interpretation180. Serrell, B. (2015). Exhibit Labels: An Interpretive Approach (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
  181. Difficult heritage181. Macdonald, S. (2009). Difficult Heritage: Negotiating the Nazi Past in Nuremberg and Beyond. Routledge.
  182. Open access182. Suber, P. (2012). Open Access. MIT Press.
  183. Open access183. Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002). Budapest Open Access Initiative Declaration.
  184. Library instruction184. Ross, C. S., Nilsen, K., & Radford, M. L. (2019). Conducting the Reference Interview (3rd ed.). ALA Neal-Schuman.
  185. Information literacy185. Association of College and Research Libraries (2015). Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education. American Library Association.
  186. International instruments186. United Nations General Assembly (2011). United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training. Resolution 66/137, A/RES/66/137, 19 December 2011.
    https://www.ohchr.org/en/resources/educators/human-rights-education-training/11-united-nations-declaration-human-rights-education-and-training-2011
  187. Right to education187. Tomaševski, K. (2001). Human Rights Obligations: Making Education Available, Accessible, Acceptable and Adaptable. Right to Education Primers No. 3. Novum Grafiska, Gothenburg — the source of the 4-A scheme.
    https://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org/files/resource-attachments/Tomasevski_Primer%203.pdf
  188. Human rights education188. Tibbitts, F. (2002). “Understanding What We Do: Emerging Models for Human Rights Education.” International Review of Education, 48(3–4), 159–171.
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020338300881
  189. Right to education189. UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1999). General Comment No. 13: The Right to Education (Article 13 of the Covenant). E/C.12/1999/10.
  190. International instruments190. United Nations (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Article 13.
  191. International instruments191. United Nations (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. Articles 28 and 29.
  192. Human rights education192. Bajaj, M. (2011). “Human Rights Education: Ideology, Location, and Approaches.” Human Rights Quarterly, 33(2), 481–508.
    https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2011.0019
  193. Human rights education193. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and UNESCO (2006). Plan of Action: World Programme for Human Rights Education, First Phase. United Nations.
  194. Critical pedagogy194. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Herder and Herder (30th anniversary ed., Continuum, 2000).
  195. Difficult knowledge195. Britzman, D. P. (1998). Lost Subjects, Contested Objects: Toward a Psychoanalytic Inquiry of Learning. State University of New York Press.
  196. Difficult knowledge196. Boler, M. (1999). Feeling Power: Emotions and Education. Routledge.
  197. Embodied cognition197. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). “Grounded Cognition.” Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
  198. Embodiment198. Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of Perception (D. A. Landes, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1945.)
  199. Arts and cognition199. Eisner, E. W. (2002). The Arts and the Creation of Mind. Yale University Press.
  200. Evidence synthesis200. Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.). (2019). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
  201. Evidence synthesis201. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., et al. (2021). “The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews.” BMJ, 372, n71.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  202. Evidence synthesis202. Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An Introduction to Systematic Reviews (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  203. Scale-up203. World Health Organization & ExpandNet (2010). Nine Steps for Developing a Scaling-Up Strategy. Geneva: World Health Organization.
    https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/44432
  204. De-implementation204. Prasad, V., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2014). “Evidence-Based De-Implementation for Contradicted, Unproven, and Aspiring Healthcare Practices.” Implementation Science, 9, 1.
    https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-1
  205. Programme theory205. Funnell, S. C., & Rogers, P. J. (2011). Purposeful Program Theory: Effective Use of Theories of Change and Logic Models. Jossey-Bass.
  206. Programme theory206. W. K. Kellogg Foundation (2004). Logic Model Development Guide. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.
  207. Economic evaluation207. Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (2015). Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  208. Economic evaluation208. Levin, H. M., McEwan, P. J., Belfield, C., Bowden, A. B., & Shand, R. (2018). Economic Evaluation in Education: Cost-Effectiveness and Benefit-Cost Analysis (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  209. Measurement209. Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., et al. (2010). “The COSMIN Study Reached International Consensus on Taxonomy, Terminology, and Definitions of Measurement Properties for Health-Related Patient-Reported Outcomes.” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737–745.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006
  210. Measurement210. Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (2015). Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  211. Adverse effects211. Bonell, C., Jamal, F., Melendez-Torres, G. J., & Cummins, S. (2015). “‘Dark Logic’: Theorising the Harmful Consequences of Public Health Interventions.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 69(1), 95–98.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2014-204671
  212. Adverse effects212. Lorenc, T., & Oliver, K. (2014). “Adverse Effects of Public Health Interventions: A Conceptual Framework.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 68(3), 288–290.
    https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2013-203118
  213. Health professions education213. Frenk, J., Chen, L., Bhutta, Z. A., et al. (2010). “Health Professionals for a New Century: Transforming Education to Strengthen Health Systems in an Interdependent World.” The Lancet, 376(9756), 1923–1958.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5
  214. Health workforce policy214. World Health Organization (2016). Global Strategy on Human Resources for Health: Workforce 2030. Geneva: World Health Organization.
    https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241511131
  215. Health workforce policy215. World Health Organization (2018). WHO Guideline on Health Policy and System Support to Optimize Community Health Worker Programmes. Geneva: World Health Organization.
    https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/275474
  216. Task-sharing216. Singla, D. R., Kohrt, B. A., Murray, L. K., Anand, A., Chorpita, B. F., & Patel, V. (2017). “Psychological Treatments for the World: Lessons from Low- and Middle-Income Countries.” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 13, 149–181.
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-045217
  217. Task-sharing217. Patel, V., Weobong, B., Weiss, H. A., et al. (2017). “The Healthy Activity Program (HAP), a Lay Counsellor-Delivered Brief Psychological Treatment for Severe Depression, in Primary Care in India: A Randomised Controlled Trial.” The Lancet, 389(10065), 176–185.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31589-6
  218. Task-sharing218. Rahman, A., Malik, A., Sikander, S., Roberts, C., & Creed, F. (2008). “Cognitive Behaviour Therapy-Based Intervention by Community Health Workers for Mothers with Depression and Their Infants in Rural Pakistan: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial.” The Lancet, 372(9642), 902–909.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61400-2
  219. Task-sharing219. World Health Organization (2016). mhGAP Intervention Guide for Mental, Neurological and Substance Use Disorders in Non-Specialized Health Settings, Version 2.0. Geneva: World Health Organization.
    https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241549790
  220. Safe communication220. World Health Organization (2023). Preventing Suicide: A Resource for Media Professionals, Update 2023. Geneva: World Health Organization.
    https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240076846
  221. Implementation fidelity221. Carroll, C., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J., & Balain, S. (2007). “A Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity.” Implementation Science, 2, 40.
    https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-40
  222. Adaptation222. Wiltsey Stirman, S., Baumann, A. A., & Miller, C. J. (2019). “The FRAME: An Expanded Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-Based Interventions.” Implementation Science, 14, 58.
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-019-0898-y
  223. Supervision223. Murray, L. K., Dorsey, S., Bolton, P., Jordans, M. J. D., Rahman, A., Bass, J., & Verdeli, H. (2011). “Building Capacity in Mental Health Interventions in Low Resource Countries: An Apprenticeship Model for Training Local Providers.” International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 5, 30.
    https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-4458-5-30
  224. Competence assessment224. Kohrt, B. A., Jordans, M. J. D., Rai, S., et al. (2015). “Therapist Competence in Global Mental Health: Development of the ENhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic Factors (ENACT) Rating Scale.” Behaviour Research and Therapy, 69, 11–21.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2015.03.009
  225. Supervision225. Milne, D. (2009). Evidence-Based Clinical Supervision: Principles and Practice. BPS Blackwell.
  226. Training transfer226. Beidas, R. S., & Kendall, P. C. (2010). “Training Therapists in Evidence-Based Practice: A Critical Review of Studies from a Systems-Contextual Perspective.” Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 17(1), 1–30.
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01187.x
  227. Peer support227. Repper, J., & Carter, T. (2011). “A Review of the Literature on Peer Support in Mental Health Services.” Journal of Mental Health, 20(4), 392–411.
    https://doi.org/10.3109/09638237.2011.583947
  228. Peer support228. Lloyd-Evans, B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Harrison, B., et al. (2014). “A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials of Peer Support for People with Severe Mental Illness.” BMC Psychiatry, 14, 39.
    https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-14-39
  229. Group practice229. Yalom, I. D., & Leszcz, M. (2020). The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy (6th ed.). Basic Books.
  230. Cultural adaptation230. Bernal, G., Bonilla, J., & Bellido, C. (1995). “Ecological Validity and Cultural Sensitivity for Outcome Research: Issues for the Cultural Adaptation and Development of Psychosocial Treatments with Hispanics.” Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 23(1), 67–82.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01447045
  231. Cultural adaptation231. Chowdhary, N., Jotheeswaran, A. T., Nadkarni, A., et al. (2014). “The Methods and Outcomes of Cultural Adaptations of Psychological Treatments for Depressive Disorders: A Systematic Review.” Psychological Medicine, 44(6), 1131–1146.
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291713001785
  232. Digital health232. World Health Organization (2019). WHO Guideline: Recommendations on Digital Interventions for Health System Strengthening. Geneva: World Health Organization.
    https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550505

Back to contents

Every contribution on this page reflects applied work carried out with learners, design teams, and partner organizations, and is grounded in the scholarship listed above. An interactive version of this map presents the same content as a navigable diagram.