Learning Design Specialization

A learning design practice, mapped

Five areas of expertise — learning experience design, universal design for learning, knowledge mobilization, learning systems design, and accessibility, disability and accommodation.

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 across five connected areas of expertise — each with its own node and its own page. Every contribution below sits in its home area and links to the others it draws on, because the areas are not separate skills but one body of work seen from different perspectives.

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

A small number of contributions belong to two areas at once. Each appears once here, under its home area, and states its second membership. An area page may therefore list more resources than this page groups under that area.

Contributions by area, and how many have a live page
AreaContributions in this setPublished
Accessibility214
Knowledge Mobilization103
Learning Experience Design103
Learning Systems Design147
Universal Design for Learning104

Counts include cross-listed resources, which is why the totals across areas exceed the number of distinct contributions on this page.

Section 2

The five areas

Each area has its own page. Accessibility holds both knowledge resources, published on andrearobin.com, and a service line offered through Accessible Learning Labs.

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 area 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 21 contributions below

Knowledge Mobilization

The design of how research and evidence reach the people who can use them, and change what they do. This area 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 10 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 area 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 10 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 area 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 14 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 area 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 home area, then given 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

18 contributions live in this area, and 3 more are shared with it from Universal Design for Learning. Visit the Accessibility page.

These resources are written for learning designers, faculty, and institutions. They are offered in support of the accessibility advisors, accommodation professionals, and disabled people whose expertise this field rests on — never as instruction to them, and never as a substitute for individual accommodation practice.

Why Universal Design Never Eliminates Individual Accommodation

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

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 1: 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 2: 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 3: 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 4: 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 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

The Duty to Accommodate in Learning Design

The legal frame, written for those who build and teach

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 3: 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 6: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
  • Reference 7: Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 8: Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 9: 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

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 4: 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 10: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  • Reference 3: 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

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 11: Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
  • Reference 12: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  • Reference 13: Titchkosky, T. (2011). The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. University of Toronto Press.
  • Reference 14: 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

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 15: Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
  • Reference 12: Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  • Reference 16: 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

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 17: Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.
  • Reference 1: 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 18: 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

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 mandatory and compliance training as the worked example.

Grounding. WCAG 2.2; EN 301 549; remediation prioritisation

Sources

  • Reference 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 20: 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

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 21: 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 22: 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 19: 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

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 20: ETSI/CEN/CENELEC (2021). EN 301 549 V3.2.1: Accessibility Requirements for ICT Products and Services. Harmonised European Standard.
  • Reference 23: Information Technology Industry Council. Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) and Accessibility Conformance Reports.
  • Reference 19: 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

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 24: 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 14: 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

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 25: 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 4: 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 3: 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

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 26: 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 27: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 5: 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

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 6: Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
  • Reference 8: Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  • Reference 28: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Reference 29: 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

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 30: 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 31: 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 32: 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 33: 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

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 18: 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 34: 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 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Accessibility Review

Service · Accessible Learning Labs

Published resource

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 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Inclusive Course & Curriculum Design

Service · Accessible Learning Labs

Published resource

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 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
  • Reference 10: 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

Published resource

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 27: Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  • Reference 35: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Also part of this area

Knowledge Mobilization

10 contributions live in this area. 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 34: 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

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 in this area, and shared with the wider evaluation family.

Grounding. KMb indicators; evaluation design

Read the KMb Evaluation Design resource

Sources

  • Reference 34: 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 36: 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 37: 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 38: 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 39: 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

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 40: Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.
  • Reference 34: 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

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 34: 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 35: 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

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 40: 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

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 27: 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

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.

This contribution is developed in consultation and relationship, not authored in isolation.

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

Sources

  • Reference 41: The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).
  • Reference 42: 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

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 34: 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

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 35: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 34: 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

Learning Experience Design

10 contributions live in this area. 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 in this area extends.

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

Read the Learning Experience Architecture resource

Sources

  • Reference 43: Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
  • Reference 44: 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

Designing for Motivation & Relevance

Why adult learners engage — or quietly disengage

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 45: 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

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 46: 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 47: 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 in two areas. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Learning Systems Design set.

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

Read the Experiential Learning Infrastructure resource

Sources

  • Reference 43: Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
  • Reference 48: 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 49: 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 in two areas. Its home is Learning Experience Design, and it is also part of the Learning Systems Design set.

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

Read the Learning Community Design & Facilitation resource

Sources

  • Reference 35: Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Reference 50: Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
  • Reference 51: 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

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 52: Flavell, J. H. (1979). “Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive–Developmental Inquiry.” American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
  • Reference 53: Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.
  • Reference 44: 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

In development

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

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

Grounding. Human-centred design; UX research methods

Sources

  • Reference 54: 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

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 10: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  • Reference 55: 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

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 10: 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

In development

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 56: Brooke, J. (1996). “SUS: A ‘Quick and Dirty’ Usability Scale.” In P. W. Jordan et al. (Eds.), Usability Evaluation in Industry. Taylor & Francis.
  • Reference 54: Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Learning Systems Design

11 contributions live in this area, and 3 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

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 29: 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

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 57: 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 28: Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Reference 29: 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

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 58: 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

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 51: 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

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 54: 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

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 59: 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 32: 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

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 60: 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 29: 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 36: 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 10: Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

Also part of this area

Universal Design for Learning

10 contributions live in this area. 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 in this area.

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

Read the Designing for Learner Variability at Scale resource

Sources

  • Reference 33: Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.
  • Reference 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.

Most related, by shared theory and theme

Connected contributions

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 61: Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
  • Reference 5: 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

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 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
  • Reference 45: 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 62: Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2000). The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action. Harvard Business School Press.
  • Reference 44: 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

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 5: 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

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 area, and to the service line offered alongside it.

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

Grounding. WCAG; UDL; inclusive design

Sources

  • Reference 19: W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
  • Reference 5: 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 in two areas. 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 4: 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 5: 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

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 63: 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

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 5: CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
  • Reference 47: 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

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 in two areas. 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 36: Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
  • Reference 5: 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 underpinning this work, 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. Inclusive design1. 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/
  2. Universal design2. 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.
  3. Human rights law3. 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
  4. Assessment4. 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.
  5. Universal Design for Learning5. CAST (2024). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 3.0.
    https://udlguidelines.cast.org
  6. Accessibility law6. Accessible Canada Act, S.C. 2019, c. 10.
    https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/a-0.6/
  7. Human rights law7. Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 210. Province of British Columbia.
  8. Accessibility law8. Accessible British Columbia Act, S.B.C. 2021, c. 19. Province of British Columbia.
  9. Accessibility law9. 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/
  10. Instructional design10. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
  11. Disability studies11. Oliver, M. (1990). The Politics of Disablement. Macmillan — the foundational statement of the social model of disability.
  12. Disability studies12. Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. University of Michigan Press.
  13. Disability studies13. Titchkosky, T. (2011). The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. University of Toronto Press.
  14. Disability studies14. Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press.
  15. Disclosure and stigma15. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Prentice-Hall.
  16. Information governance16. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 165. Province of British Columbia.
  17. Disability justice17. Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. University of California Press.
  18. Research ethics18. 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
  19. Accessibility standards19. W3C (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. W3C Recommendation.
    https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/
  20. Accessibility standards20. 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
  21. Assistive technology21. Zabala, J. S. (2005). Ready, SETT, Go! Getting Started with the SETT Framework — the Student, Environments, Tasks, Tools framework for assistive technology decision-making.
  22. Assistive technology22. 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.
  23. Accessibility standards23. Information Technology Industry Council. Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) and Accessibility Conformance Reports.
    https://www.itic.org/policy/accessibility/vpat
  24. Episodic disability24. 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.
  25. Health professions education25. 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.
  26. Behaviour change26. 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
  27. Adult learning27. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2015). The Adult Learner (8th ed.). Routledge.
  28. Change management28. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press.
  29. Organizational learning29. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday.
  30. Health literacy30. 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.
  31. Disability and health equity31. 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.
  32. Social determinants32. 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.
  33. Universal Design for Learning33. Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.
  34. Knowledge mobilization34. 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.
  35. Social learning35. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.
  36. Evaluation36. Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
  37. Implementation science37. 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
  38. Implementation science38. 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.
  39. Implementation science39. 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.
  40. Evidence use40. Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2007). Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services. Policy Press.
  41. Indigenous data governance41. The First Nations Information Governance Centre. The First Nations Principles of OCAP® (Ownership, Control, Access, Possession).
    https://fnigc.ca/ocap-training/
  42. Indigenous knowledge42. 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.
  43. Learning theory43. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (2nd ed., Pearson, 2015).
  44. Learning sciences44. 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
  45. Motivation45. 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
  46. Learning sciences46. 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).
  47. Learning sciences47. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  48. Learning sciences48. 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.
  49. Learning sciences49. Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). “Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention.” Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.
  50. Learning theory50. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
  51. Social learning51. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
  52. Metacognition52. Flavell, J. H. (1979). “Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive–Developmental Inquiry.” American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
  53. Reflective practice53. Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.
  54. Human-centred design54. Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things (Revised and Expanded ed.). Basic Books.
  55. Assessment55. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). “The Power of Feedback.” Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
  56. Usability56. Brooke, J. (1996). “SUS: A ‘Quick and Dirty’ Usability Scale.” In P. W. Jordan et al. (Eds.), Usability Evaluation in Industry. Taylor & Francis.
  57. Needs analysis57. Rossett, A. (1987). Training Needs Assessment. Educational Technology Publications.
  58. Equity evaluation58. Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press.
  59. Creative health59. 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.
  60. Complexity60. Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making.” Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76.
  61. Universal Design for Learning61. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
  62. Knowing–doing gap62. Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2000). The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge into Action. Harvard Business School Press.
  63. Culturally relevant pedagogy63. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.

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.