Revisiting Instructional Design: My Design Identity

My first introduction to instructional design was during my undergraduate studies in the mid-1990s. Returning to the subject now, almost thirty years later, I find it interesting to reflect on how much has changed and, at the same time, how much has remained the same.

Technology has undoubtedly transformed the possibilities for designing and delivering learning experiences. When I first studied instructional design, online learning was still in its early stages. Today, we have access to learning management systems, interactive multimedia, adaptive technologies, and artificial intelligence, all of which offer new possibilities for how people learn. Yet, despite these developments, many of the fundamental questions remain familiar: Who are our learners? What do they need to learn? How can we support their learning? And how will we know whether learning has occurred?

An (2020), in reviewing the history of instructional design, illustrates how the field has evolved alongside developments in technology and learning theories. Technological innovation has not eliminated the need for foundational design principles, of course, but it has expanded the possibilities available to designers while introducing new questions about how and when technology should be used.

What does it mean to think like an instructional designer? To me, it means looking beyond the content that needs to be taught and considering the learning experience as a whole. It involves questioning assumptions, understanding the context, identifying potential barriers, and making intentional decisions about how to support learning. It also means recognizing that the most technologically advanced solution is not necessarily the most educationally appropriate one.

Putting the Learner at the Centre

One principle that has been important to my experience as an instructional designer is the importance of recognizing learners as individuals. I believe learning experiences should be tailored, to the best of our abilities, to learners’ needs, backgrounds, experiences, and circumstances, which does not mean creating a completely different course for every learner, but acknowledging that people do not arrive at a learning experience with identical knowledge, abilities, motivations, or expectations. What is meaningful and challenging for one learner may be repetitive or overwhelming for another.

The Universal Design for Learning framework (CAST, 2024) highlights this perspective. Its emphasis on providing multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression encourages designers to anticipate learner variability without treating it as an exception.

However, I also recognize that learner-centred design involves more than offering choices or accommodating preferences. It requires understanding what learners already know, identifying what they need to develop, and ensuring that learning activities and assessments support those goals. Particularly in adult and professional learning, learners bring experiences that can be valuable resources, but those experiences may also shape their assumptions and reveal gaps that they have not yet recognized.

For me, the challenge is finding a balance between flexibility and structure: giving learners meaningful opportunities to influence their learning while ensuring that essential knowledge and competencies are developed.

Evolving Design Identity

I find it difficult to identify myself with a single instructional design theory or model. My understanding of learning has changed over time, influenced by my education, professional experiences, emerging technologies, and the different people and contexts I have encountered.

I see my design identity as a combination of perspectives rather than an allegiance to one particular approach. I value the structure and clarity associated with systematic instructional design, the active construction of knowledge emphasized by constructivist approaches, and the attention to individual experiences and agency found in learner-centred perspectives.

Dousay (2017) discusses how instructional design models provide different ways of organizing and approaching the design process. I see these models as frameworks that guide my thinking and can be adapted to different learning contexts and needs. Their usefulness depends on the learning problem, the environment, the learners, and the constraints within which we are working.

This is also where I see the importance of critical reflection. Heaster-Ekholm (2020) highlights the theoretical and cultural considerations associated with instructional design models, reminding us that design approaches might not be neutral or universally applicable.

Perhaps my design identity is best described as learner-centred, flexible, and continuously evolving. I value evidence and established principles, but I also believe that effective design requires curiosity, openness, and a willingness to question our own assumptions.

Returning to instructional design after so many years has got me reflecting about the tools available to us. Though they continue changing, the responsibility to understand and support learners remains central. I am interested in exploring how newer approaches and technologies can help us respond more effectively to individual learning needs without losing sight of the educational principles that have guided the field for decades.

As I begin this course, I am less interested in identifying one ideal instructional design model than in developing a deeper understanding of when, why, and for whom different approaches are most appropriate.

References

An, Y. (2020). A History of Instructional Media, Instructional Design, and Theories. International Journal of Technology in Education. DOI: 10.46328/ijte.35

CAST. (2024). CAST Universal Design for Learning guidelines version 3.0. 

Dousay. T. A. (2017). Chapter 22. Instructional Design Models. In R. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology (1st ed.). 

Heaster-Ekholm, K. L. (2020). Popular Instructional Design Models: Their Theoretical Roots and Cultural Considerations. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 16(3), 50–65.   

Msonde, S. E. (2023). Revisiting the Idea of Learner-Centered Pedagogy: The Theoretical Perspective. Journal of Education, 203(2), 468–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574211031970

AI Transparency Statement

I used Copilot to check for accuracy and coherence. All ideas are mine.