Educational Communications and Technology:
Issues and Innovations

Roderick Sims

Design
Alchemy
Transforming the way we think
about learning and teaching

Educational Communications and Technology:
Issues and Innovations

Series Editors
J. Michael Spector
M.J. Bishop
Dirk Ifenthaler

For further volumes:
http://www.springer.com/series/11824

ThiS is a FM Blank Page

Roderick Sims

Design Alchemy
Transforming the way we think about learning
and teaching

Roderick Sims
Knowledgecraft
Woodbum, NSW
Australia

ISBN 978-3-319-02422-6
ISBN 978-3-319-02423-3 (eBook)
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3
Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013956604
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or
information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts
in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being
entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication
of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the
Publisher’s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from
Springer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center.
Violations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of
publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for
any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein.
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

for Johanna
who taught me place
for Geoff
who captures suns
for Elle
who beams magic

ThiS is a FM Blank Page

Foreword

The sad fact is, much of our formal learning, both face to face and online, is broken.
The evidence is ubiquitous, from poorly designed corporate training to some of the
education my offspring are experiencing in school. The reasons are many, but one
of the necessary components is a design process grounded in enlightened principles
and structured to support a strong likelihood of an engaging and effective design.
Existing design processes are mired in traditional or, worse, outdated models of
learning. While cognitive science has progressed to situated cognition, design
models can still be grounded in behaviourist or information-processing approaches.
Social constructivism is recognised as a viable approach, but as yet there is not a
systematic design process.
The recognition of the need is growing, exemplified by a resurgence of new
design processes incorporating various methods to support successful design,
including Michael Allen’s Successive Approximation Method to support iteration
and David Merrill’s Pebble in a Pond approach to more problem-centred
learning. I, too, wrote a screed advocating an activity-based curriculum as a way
to avoid a content-dump pedagogy.
Many years ago now, I had the pleasure of getting to know Rod Sims when I
resided for a while in Australia. He was part of a vibrant community of learning and
technology there, and I interacted with him in events both at home and abroad. He
combined a cheery manner with a passion for understanding. While I left the
wonderful Land Down Under, the internet allowed me to remain aware that he
continued his academic work, such as through ITFORUM, a discussion group for
those of our ilk. So when he offered the chance to write this foreword, I was
honoured and thrilled to see where his thinking had gone. In the context of the
above, what a delight it is.
What Rod Sims has done here is link his decades of practical experience with his
rich academic background and synthesise a wide variety of models into a coherent
whole. His playful conceptualisations and thoughtful discussion make a task that
can be challenging into a systematic process that makes sense and yields inspired
learning.

vii

viii

Foreword

His core foci on problems, learners and contexts echoes the best understanding
of what matters in creating persistent and meaningful skills. Rod has found a very
pragmatic and accessible way to convey the appropriate approach, making the
process manageable. And yet the robustness of his approach incorporates working
backwards from the need, motivating learners and focusing on creative output.
Rod brings his ideas to life with examples both from his own work and work he
has inspired. It is too easy to fall into pedestrian approaches, and the documented
creativity helps inspire moving beyond the ordinary, as I similarly attempted to
convey in Engaging Learning (Quinn, 2005). He also provides templates to support
design practice. While seemingly focused on higher education, the principles Rod
espouses will carry over to all formal learning, whether K12 or corporate.
Alchemy may not have worked to turn lead into gold, but it produced many
scientific advances. Here, Design Alchemy integrates research-based elements into
one coherent approach that can turn learning from lead into gold. I implore you to
read this book and create better learning designs. The benefits are desperately
needed.
Quinnovation, Walnut Creek, CA

Clark Quinn

Reference
Quinn, C.N. (2005). Engaging Learning: Designing e-Learning Simulation Games. Pfeiffer.

Preface

This book describes the origins, metamorphosis and application of a holistic,
eclectic framework for the design and development of educational spaces in
which students are engaged and teachers excited. Known as Design Alchemy, the
framework is effective and efficient, achieving program and course design goals
without compromising quality and providing an integrated set of strategies and
principles based on both theory and practice. Design Alchemy extends educational
design traditions through defining a practical method by which designers can
transform learning and teaching experiences. While primarily directed towards
learning and teaching online in the higher education sector, the concepts of Design
Alchemy are relevant for all sectors and delivery modes.
But why another book on educational design? Aren’t there enough interpretations of instructional design, learning design and curriculum development to meet
the needs of those involved in creating intentional teaching and learning experiences? My response is ‘not yet’! Learning, teaching and design are dynamic, not
static, elements, dependent on the complex and changing world in which they are
applied. More importantly, over the past 35 years, I have encountered numerous
computer-based products and practice-based strategies that claimed they would
revolutionise educational practice, and yet they have not succeeded. Learners and
teachers and designers continue to struggle with those very products and strategies,
especially those engaged with online education. This book is therefore for all those
who are curious learners, creative teachers and innovative designers. For readers
new to the field, Design Alchemy provides a practical and effective means to
creative online learning and teaching environments that maximise the educational
experience. For those more experienced, the concepts and suggestions inherent
within Design Alchemy will not only confirm their personal practice but also
provide triggers for thinking differently about design.
The book is divided into four parts, with each chapter title represented by a
question, designed to focus attention on the ideas addressed in the narrative.
Preceding Part I, the introductory chapter provides an overview of the reasons
why the ancient art of alchemy provides a valuable metaphor for educational
design. The first part then examines the emergence of the Design Alchemy
ix

x

Preface

framework based on my own research and practice followed by an analysis of its
alignment with key theories, models and practices and an assessment of paradoxes
which can constrain rather than enhance design practice. Having established a
rationale for Design Alchemy, the second part addresses the three major elements
of the framework: pedagogy (the mix of theories which inform successful learning), practice (the five steps needed to complete a course design) and assets (the
factors that impact on design strategy). To provide a focus on the practice of
Design Alchemy, the third part presents a series of case studies, from program to
course to activity, which demonstrate application of the method. The final part
provides a self-service selection of resources designed to assist develop understanding of the practice of a design alchemist, including a manifesto of heuristics
and ideas.
In conducting research for this book, I used, where accessible, the primary
sources of key researchers and theorists in the field. However, as one of the
recommended elements of Design Alchemy is to utilise open resources, I have
also used reference points such as Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_
Page) as resources for definition, analysis and demonstration. Because this content
is under a Creative Commons licence, it allows, with attribution, the option to both
use and modify that content to support arguments within the narrative. With respect
to language, this book is broadly about design for learning and teaching with
computer-based technology, and where I use the word technology without qualification, it should be read to refer to computer-based and/or network hardware and
software deployed to support learning and teaching.
My journey in learning, teaching and design has been long and varied, and I am
eternally grateful for the many encounters and interactions I have experienced with
colleagues, friends and other luminaries along the way. Although some of these
exchanges have been with people I have only read or listened to, all in their own
way have helped me form these ideas and encouraged me to bring them together
and champion the role of the design alchemist, the person who will make learning
engaging, teaching exciting and design rewarding. I would like to thank Allan Ellis,
Barbara Grabowski, Belinda Tynan, Bob Spence, Clark Quinn, David Crosby,
David Jonassen, David Merrill, Deborah Jones, Douglas Adams, Elena Kays,
Stephen Alessi, Jackie Dobrovolny, Kay Tydeman, Laurie Gillespie, Tim Hand,
Jan Herrington, Jim Klein, John Hedberg, Kate Sumner, Kit McSwiney, Michael
Allen, Michael Spector, Neil Young, Stanley Trollip, Tim Spannaus, Tom Reeves
and Tom Robbins.
A very special thank you to Sharon Kensinger. It was only through your support
and generosity that I could complete this manuscript. I’m eternally grateful for the
quiet space, beautiful surroundings and ambience.
Korinderie Ridge, NSW, Australia
October 2013

Roderick Sims

Contents

1

Why Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Design Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Design: Science, Art or Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Why Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Part I

.
.
.
.
.

1
2
4
9
10

Design Alchemy: Emergence and Alignment

2

Why Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Finding Magic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Finding or Losing Design? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology or Pedagogy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Why Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.

13
13
15
18
23
24

3

How Did Design Alchemy Emerge? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Morphic Resonance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alchemy Emerging 1: The Art of Interactivity (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alchemy Emerging 2: Proactive Evaluation (2002) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alchemy Emerging 3: Three-Phase Design (2003) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alchemy Emerging 4: Design for Learning (2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alchemy Emerging 5: Proactive Design for Learning (2012) . . . . . . .
Elements of Design Alchemy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
How Did Design Alchemy Emerge? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25
25
26
28
33
36
39
42
47
47

4

Which Learning Theories? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Philosophy or Theory? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
What Is Knowledge? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
What Is Learning? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Constructivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

49
49
50
51
52

.
.
.
.
.

xi

xii

Contents

Social Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Situated Cognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Experiential Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Connectivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Which Learning Theories? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.

54
55
57
58
59
60

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Defining Instructional Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Traditions of Instructional Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Models of Instructional Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Challenging Instructional Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reflections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Instructional Design or Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

63
63
64
69
73
74
76
76

6

Learning Design or Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Why Learning Design? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Universal Design for Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Learning Designs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Teaching as Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Constructive Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Open University Learning Design Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lanarca Declaration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Learning Design or Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

79
79
80
82
83
84
88
89
90
90

7

Insight or Distraction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology, Tool or Trauma? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
To Be, or Not To Be, Credentialed? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Collaboration or Collusion? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Information or Interaction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
To Listen or to Perform? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Design Distractors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Insight or Distraction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

93
94
98
101
103
106
110
116
116

What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Design Alchemy Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Inclusive Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Active Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Problem-Solving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contextual Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Social Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

121
121
126
128
130
133
135

Part II
8

Design Alchemy: The Framework

Contents

xiii

Creative Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Emergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

137
138
141
141

9

How Does the Design Alchemist Practice? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
What’s in the Name? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Practice in Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Step 1: Knowledge Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Step 2: Learning Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Step 3: Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Step 4: Learning Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Step 5: Learning Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
How Does the Design Alchemist Practice? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

143
143
144
145
147
151
156
158
159
159

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assets in Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
People as Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Process Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

161
161
163
165
170
173
175
177
178
180

Part III

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

Design Alchemy: In Practice

11

Transforming Programs and Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Health Technologist Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fraud and Corruption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corporate Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Science and Mathematics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.

183
183
186
190
193
196

12

Activities and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Discussion or Role-Play? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Which Assessment Type? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Design Alchemy Online . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Activities and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

197
197
204
208
210
210

Part IV
13

Design Alchemy: Self Service

Design Alchemy: Self-Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Syllabus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Being a Design Alchemist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.

213
213
217
224

xiv

Contents

14

Design Alchemy Templates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Knowledge Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Learning Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assessment, Learning Activities, and Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Design Alchemy Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Course Syllabus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

229
229
230
230
234
239

15

Design Alchemy: A Manifesto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Design Alchemy: The Manifesto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Imagination and Memories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

243
243
244
246

.
.
.
.

Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247

Chapter 1

Why Alchemy?

Abstract Now, perhaps more than any time in the last four decades, the influence
of technology on how we learn and teach is challenging and changing traditional
design practices and models. There have been significant changes in how people
communicate, how they complete financial and business transactions and how they
access and transmit information. Accompanying this change has been an increase in
courses available online, offered not only by new online institutions but also
through traditional face-to-face schools, colleges and universities. Now more
students opt to study online, taking advantage of learning ‘anytime, anywhere’,
and more teachers have been hired to meet the growing student demand. However,
these teachers are often being asked to design these courses as well as teach them,
whether or not they have prior knowledge and skills in design practice, and these
students do not always have prior experience learning online. And even though
there are many experienced educational designers employing established design
models and theories, the quality of the new courses being developed remains varied.
To provide a rigorous yet practical and efficient method to cater for this
changing educational environment, this book introduces a practice known as
Design Alchemy. To provide a context for the design framework, this chapter
introduces the challenges which triggered its development and demonstrates why
the ancient art of alchemy is an appropriate metaphor for the design skills needed
today to achieve engaged learning and motivated teaching. Through this introduction, a foundation is provided for the elaboration of Design Alchemy presented in
Chaps. 2 and 3.
The world we have created is a product of our thinking; it cannot be changed without
changing our thinking.1
The world is changed, I feel it in the water. I feel it in the earth. I smell it in the air
(Galadriel, Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring)2

1
2

Attributed to Albert Einstein (Source: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein).
Source: http://www.tk421.net/lotr/credits.html.

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_1,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

1

2

1 Why Alchemy?

Fig. 1.1 Transformation of the classroom

Design Challenges
Design for Change
Before considering the argument for alchemy as a metaphor of design practice, it is
important to review the current educational context and environment and how it
compares with its predecessors. A classical representation of the traditional model
of education is one where the school was embedded in the community; students
from that community enrolled in that school, and teachers, also part of that
community, interacted with those students. Apart from the school or local library,
the teacher was a primary source of information based on their own knowledge and
their personal library. This is represented on the left side of Fig. 1.1.
Reflecting on my own experiences, this ‘traditional’ model was still well
entrenched in higher education until the mid-1990s, when the Internet became an
alternative means for accessing information and triggered profound changes in the
dynamics of learning and teaching.
One major change over the last two decades has been the fragmentation and
dispersion of the classroom. Students and teachers can choose, for personal or
economic reasons, a school outside their community or even country, and the
people they interact with can be equally diverse and dispersed. Similarly, the
resources required to complete courses are accessible from anywhere the Internet
is available. This transformation is illustrated on the right side of Fig. 1.1, where the
different experiences of students (S), teachers (T) and the resources (R) they
interact with are represented; the new online environments may also integrate
other participants (P) into the educational process through social network connections. As such the classroom can be seen as having permeable if not missing walls.
And while educational institutions remain very much visible within local communities, the impact of communications technology on those institutions has been
equally significant for learning and teaching. The student who studies online,
despite connections to people and places, is effectively studying independently,

Design Challenges

3

and it is incumbent upon designers to ensure those students know why they are
studying and what they should produce as a result of that study. Technology has
changed the dynamic of the classroom, the connection between participants and the
availability of and access to information. Consequently, design practices must cater
not only for those who are learning and teaching in the virtual space but also for
those who are integrating those virtual spaces into the face-to-face classroom.

Design for Diversity
The increasing opportunity for flexible access to courses has resulted in more
diversity between students within any given class, particularly in terms of their
experience and interests, which in turn prompts designers to privilege the individual
student. However, diversity amongst students is not a new phenomenon, and not
everyone experiences education in the same way, as the prominent software
engineer Alan Kay remembers:
By the time I got to school, I had already read a couple hundred books. I knew in the first
grade that they were lying to me because I had already been exposed to other points of
view. School is basically about one point of view—the one the teacher has or the textbooks
have. They don’t like the idea of having different points of view, so it was a battle.3

This reflection raises an issue (addressed in Chap. 7) concerning actual or
perceived conflict between the individual student and educational systems that
can demand compliance and conformity, and which has been magnified with the
growth of the Internet. People now connect differently, and with free access to
reliable information and learning resources, those connections can provide students
with different and even broader perspectives than their teachers. Consequently,
there is an imperative for designers to adapt to this increasing diversity by privileging the individual student rather than the whole course.

Design for Quality
In addition to change and diversity driving the imperative to modify design
practice, the growth of learning opportunities also demands that courses exhibit
educational quality. With the growth and maturity of online learning environments,
the issue of quality for these environments becomes even more critical because that
growth has resulted in a significant increase in those working in the field as teachers
and designers, but whose knowledge of learning and design theories is limited. This
phenomenon was addressed by Merrill (2007, p. 337) who discussed the emergence
of the (instructional) designer-by-assignment:
3

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Kay.

4

1 Why Alchemy?
Today you are an engineer but your company needs a course in their latest product, so
tomorrow you are an instructional designer because you are assigned to be an instructional
designer, not because you were trained as an instructional designer. You are a designer-byassignment.

More recently, Conole (2013, p. 102) confirmed this trend by observing that ‘a
key issue is that teachers do not know how to design, mainly adopting an implicit
approach based around prior experiences and practices’, which reinforces the
importance of making those who are responsible for educational design perform
that practice effectively.
Elaborating on this issue, I have observed, and many of my students and
colleagues have commented, that the education and training courses they participate in lack a sense of design quality; the courses provide little more than information transmission and do not integrate tasks that align learning activities with the
prescribed outcomes and assessment items. These observations suggest this may be
a result of the limited knowledge designers had of the design process, despite the
extensive theories of design (instructional design, learning design) available to the
practitioner (teachers, instructional designers, educational designers, learning
designers). This also raises the possibility that the methods and practices we use
for educational design, and which are taught to those who wish to practise as
designers, do not consistently align with a world of communication, collaboration,
digital technology, networks, information, open resources and mobility.
Given the continued importance of design for change, diversity and quality, it is
timely to consider alternative ways to transform how designers think about learning
and teaching and the environments in which learners and teachers engage. The
following section provides a synthesis of approaches which can provide the transformation of design practice.

Design: Science, Art or Alchemy?
Given the need for educational design to address change, diversity and quality, it is
important for designers to identify with an approach that is not only founded on
established theory and practice but also focused on those needs. With the numerous
design models available, it is not surprising that there are many different ways the
design process is conceptualised and implemented, founded on experience and
philosophy. For example, I trace my own design philosophies to early experiences
with magic and transformation, which introduces this section, which is followed by
a synthesis of different approaches to design practice.

Design: Science, Art or Alchemy?

5

Growing Up
While my own memories of school are far less traumatic than those of Alan Kay, in
growing up I recall two specific events that influenced me and provided the
foundation for the ideas presented in this book. Both relate to transformation
through illusion and magic:
On the streets of Port Said, Egypt . . .
It was a balmy evening, in 1961, when strolling through the sandy grey-brown streets of
Port Said our family was confronted by two men in long flowing robes, one of whom
proceeded to pull an egg out of my ear! The magic fascinated me, but as he tried the same
trick with my more conservative father, we moved on.

In the Australian outback . . .
Towards the end of high school, I vividly recall the astounding sights of inland Australia
and the emu-dance performed by a local Aborigine. Here was a man in old baggy pants,
jacket festooned in badges, tilted army hat and a weathered, bristly face who magically
transformed into a desert bird, hunting and pecking through the scrub.

I learned through experience that there is magic, and in context I learned how
oral traditions and performance can act as teachers. These ideas have remained with
me to this day and continue to influence how I think about design and how people
learn.

Design as Science
So if learning and teaching is to be transformed through design practice, what
approach should be taken? With respect to design as science, Merrill, Drake, Lacy,
Pratt, and the ID2 Research Group Utah State University (1996, p. 3) made the
following pronouncement:
Too much of the structure of educational technology is built upon the sand of relativism,
rather than the rock of science. When winds of new paradigms blow and the sands of old
paradigms shift; then the structure of educational technology slides toward the sea of
pseudo-science and mythology. We stand firm against the shifting sands of new paradigms
and “realities.” We have drawn a line in the sand. We boldly reclaim the technology of
instructional design that is built upon the rock of instructional science.

A recent communication from Professor Merrill indicated that he essentially
maintains this position (Personal Communication, September 15, 2013), with
rigour in design practice critical for successful learning. Because science is
described as ‘a systematic enterprise that builds and organises knowledge in the

6

1 Why Alchemy?

form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe4, it supports a
design practice that aims to enhance both understanding of existing knowledge and
the generation of new knowledge.
However, the way in which technological change has impacted on the experience of learning, teaching and design leads to questions as to whether instructional
science embraces all the necessary elements to cater for the changes being experienced. How does the rigour expected from a scientific approach align with the
emergence of open learning and the diversity of student characteristics? Can the
variables of educational design (course, outcomes, student characteristics, knowledge domain) be fully addressed by a scientific approach? Can design as science
cater for the blurring and interchangeable roles of learner, teacher and designer
(Sims & Jones, 2003) which emerge through online interactions and connections?

Design as Art
As an alternative to a scientific approach to design, what is the perspective when
design is viewed as an art? Can the creation of learning and teaching environments
also be an artistic expression? Bruno Munari, an Italian artist, designer, inventor
and author of Design as Art (1966), is reported5 to have insisted that design be
beautiful, functional and accessible, and his views provide a fascinating perspective
of design thinking:
A designer is a planner with an aesthetic sense.6
Only he who has a different visual opening can see the world in another way and can pass
on to his neighbour the information required to broaden his field of view. . .let us get used to
looking at the world through the eyes of others.7
Thus our task is to make a new kind of artist, a creator capable of understanding every kind
of need: not because he is a prodigy, but because he knows how to approach human needs
according to a precise method. We wish to make him conscious of his creative power, not
scared of new facts, and independent of formulas in his own work. (Murani, 1966)

Each of these quotes places the designer into quite a different mind-set compared
to that of the scientist, and these sentiments also align with my own approach to
design, especially with respect to learner-centred strategies: ‘viewing the world
through the eyes of others’ and ‘knowing how to approach human needs’. An
artistic approach to design can therefore involve creating learning experiences
which focus on both the visual experience of the environment and the aesthetics
of the interactions made available through the technology.

4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science.
http://www.amazon.com/Design-As-Art-Bruno-Munari/dp/0141035811.
6
http://designwashere.com/80-inspiring-quotes-about-design/.
7
http://proeme.wordpress.com/2012/10/27/bruno-munari/.
5

Design: Science, Art or Alchemy?

7

Fig. 1.2 Exploring the firmaments (Original black and white image of The Flammarion Woodcut)
(Colour version attributed to Hugo Heikenwaelder, Austria, http://www.heikenwaelder.at)

Design as Alchemy
Instructional Design is the art and science of creating an instructional environment and
materials that will bring the learner from the state of not being able to accomplish certain
tasks to the state of being able to accomplish those tasks. (Siemens, 2002).

The more I considered science and art as frameworks for design, it became evident,
as Siemens (2002) described, that design for education involves both. However,
based on engagement and observation in the field, my conclusions are that design
practice tends to be more often scientific, focusing on method, process and results,
than artistic. In searching for means to integrate these two approaches, the ancient
practice of alchemy presented a perfect metaphor, integrating science and art while
also working to uncover the mysteries and workings of the universe (Fig. 1.2).
The link between science and art is made even clearer when the essential
features of alchemy are considered:
Alchemy contributed to the development of modern chemistry and medicine and represents
a philosophical tradition whose practitioners claim profound powers. The defining objectives of alchemy typically include the creation of the fabled philosopher’s stone; the ability
to transform base metals into gold or silver and the development of an elixir of life, which
confers youth and longevity. While alchemists developed basic laboratory techniques that
are still recognizable today, it differs significantly from modern science by including
practices related to mythology, magic, religion and spirituality.8

8

Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy.

8

1 Why Alchemy?

The design alchemist therefore embraces the science available (what is known
about teaching, learning and design) as well as using creative ways of thinking to
tap into human spirituality and diversity. Given the need to design for change,
diversity and quality, the concept of the design alchemist is perfect, because their
focus is on transforming all courses into learning and teaching ‘gold’.

Design as Transformation
Two examples from personal practice, one from the 1980s and the second as
recently as last month, demonstrate the thinking behind and the practice of the
design alchemist. The first relates to a Bank Teller Training task where trainees
were learning how to correctly cash a cheque using six specific steps, and the
second addresses the practice of issuing students within schools with an iPad.

Bank Teller Training: Cashing a Cheque
At the end of the module where the six steps to cash a cheque were covered, trainees
were asked to ‘list the six steps required to cash a cheque’. Successfully listing the
steps was considered evidence that the trainee would be able to complete the task
correctly when working as a teller. As I reflected on this strategy, which remains
common in training programs today, it became evident that ‘information’ (in this
case the six steps) was not necessarily the same as ‘applying acquired knowledge’.
Banks do not want trainee tellers to be able to list these steps; they want them to
correctly cash the cheque by applying the process adopted by the bank.
Examples such as this provide an opportunity to transform training through
design thinking. Rather than focusing on the relevant content (subject matter), the
designer focuses on the desired performance: successful completion of a simulated
task that requires the use of the six steps. By completing the task, the trainee
provides evidence of being able to apply the six steps.

iPads in Schools
While there are many reasons an institution may issue tablets to students, the
reasons cited at one school were to enable students to learn about the technology
and to reduce the weight of their school bags, because textbooks could be loaded
onto the iPad. While a fantastic way to introduce students to contemporary technology, the real affordances of iPads are not only for content access but also for
learning experiences to be personalised. Having instant access to textbooks is

Why Alchemy?

9

clearly valuable, but from the perspective of the design alchemist, the emphasis is
misplaced. Doesn’t valuing access to a text mirror the observations of Kay and the
narrow views of teaching and education that can be associated with the textbook?
Rather than highlighting digital books, the iPad could be presented as a learning
tool, designed to capture and exhibit evidence of learning outcomes with the text
acting as one possible resource to help achieve those outcomes. In this way the
tablet can be viewed as true mobile learning device where students go into the
world, record their impressions and understanding of that world and return to the
classroom to share those impressions. The design alchemist therefore works to
make technology a ‘golden’ learning tool, not simply a means to take the ‘leaden’
load from children’s shoulders.

Why Alchemy?
Alchemy ignites both the scientific and artistic attributes of design to transform how
we think about learning and teaching, to generate environments that are both
flexible and sustainable and to empower the learner to apply knowledge and
understanding in the world in which they live. Alchemy is a way to capture more
of the richness and diversity that all course participants bring to the classroom,
wherever that class is situated. Alchemy is a way to design for change, for diversity
and for quality and provides the underpinning philosophy for the Design Alchemy
framework.
The words from a Neil Young song Be the Rain, a call to respect the environment, resonates with embracing such a holistic approach to design, and I have taken
the liberty to rework the lyrics to reflect the responsibility the design alchemist has
to transform and enhance learning and teaching:
Be the ocean when it meets the sky
Be the magic in the northern lights
Be the river as it rolls along
Be the rain you remember fallin’
Be the rain, Be the rain
Young (1996)
Be the learner where they live and play
Be the teacher in their knowledge domain
Be the resource as it opens and blooms
Be the knowledge in a brand new tune
Be the design, Be the design

10

1 Why Alchemy?

References
Conole, G. (2013). Designing for learning in an open world (Explorations of the learning sciences,
instructional systems and performance technologies, Vol. 4). New York: Springer.
Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., Pratt, J., & The ID2 Research Group Utah State University.
(1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5–7.
Merrill, M. D. (2007). The proper study of instructional design. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey
(Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 336–341). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Munari, B. (1966). Arte come mestiere [Design as Art]. Laterza.
Siemens, G. (2002, September 30). Instructional design in elearning. Retrieved October 5, 2013
from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/InstructionalDesign.htm
Sims, R., & Jones, D. (2003). Where practice informs theory: Reshaping instructional design for
academic communities of practice in online teaching and learning. Information Technology,
Education and Society, 4(1), 3–20.
Young, N. (1996). Be the rain. On Greendale [CD]. Reprise Records.

Part I

Design Alchemy: Emergence and
Alignment

Chapter 2

Why Design Alchemy?

Abstract In 2001, I had the opportunity to present at the EdMedia Conference in
Finland, where I argued that the conversion of face-to-face courses to an online
medium can result in worse, rather than better, learning and teaching experiences.
In describing this transformation, I suggested it was in effect the opposite of the
popular view of alchemy, with face-to-face ‘gold’ being transformed into online
‘lead’. Twelve years on this original concept has been developed into a comprehensive framework called Design Alchemy, which retains the original ideas of
transforming ‘leaden’ educational resources into ‘golden’ learning moments. This
chapter builds on the introduction in Chap. 1 to provide a synthesis of personal and
career events which inform the Design Alchemy framework. The chapter commences by reinforcing the magic that computer technology can bring to learning
and teaching and continues by exploring the persistence and latency of design
knowledge, the separation of design practice from technology and the librettos
(texts) that inform design practice. The analysis of these four factors provides a
response to the primary question posed by the chapter: why Design Alchemy?

Finding Magic
The delight on a student’s face as concepts become clear and understanding dawns
is the greatest reward for a teacher, and this delight reminds me of the awe and
wonder experienced when watching magicians perform. In the same way that a
handkerchief magically transforms into a dove, so the designs created to support
learning and teaching can, almost magically, transform both the learner’s and the
teacher’s experience.

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_2,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

13

14

2 Why Design Alchemy?

Magic with Computer Code
In 1971, the first year of undergraduate studies, I met my first computer, an IBM
1480 that processed program instructions on punchcards. One of my subjects was
computer programming, with the major assignment to write, using the FORTRAN
IV language, a Computerised Crook-Catching program. As data we were given
records of both witness descriptions and known criminals, and our task was to write
a computer program that would produce a list of likely suspects based on matching
witness data with the characteristics of the criminals (e.g. eye colour). I was
confident I had completed the task correctly, having produced a list of the three
most likely suspects, and showed it to one of the other students in the noisy room
where we punched the program cards. My peer examined the printout and observed
that the solution was not complete; there were actually three suspects who had
scored as third most likely. Consequently, I re-examined the code, thought through
the logic, rewrote the program taking account of equal suspect scores and completed the assignment.
This collaborative encounter is addressed further in Chap. 7, but this experience
with computer programming was life changing with respect to the conditions that
can make learning a magical experience. In the case of the assignment, the use of an
authentic, problem-based task etched into my psyche that learning can be engaging,
motivational and effective because the activity focused on the application of the
knowledge and skills covered in the course. Learning can therefore be demonstrated
more effectively through well-crafted learning activities, such as the Computerised
Crook-Catching task, which required the application of knowledge rather than a
formal examination of that same knowledge base.
Through these events, I also learned much about both the power and beauty of
the technology: computers and the programs they processed were not just an
abstract set of concepts relating to files, data and commands, but in unison a tool
to support organisational demands, a tool that could transform data into information
that had specific and authentic use. In the same way that a person could, according
to their cultural traditions, magically transform into a bird (see Chap. 1), this
encounter with computer programming was the genesis of understanding the
computer as a transformational tool for learning and teaching. As an aside, the
same process of data analysis used over 40 years ago to catch criminals is now
being used in data analytics, the ‘discovery and communication of meaningful
patterns in data1’. In the educational sector specifically, data extracted from university records is being analysed to determine the ‘most likely suspects’ in terms of
students who are likely to fail or become a statistic of attrition (Yasmin, 2013).

1

Source from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytics.

Finding or Losing Design?

15

Magic at the Tip of a Finger
Some years later, having gained a qualification as a primary school teacher, I
changed careers to become a computer programmer and began working for a
large computer company. It was there, in 1977, I watched a video of Dr Donald
Bitzer (the designer of PLATO: Programmed Learning for Automated Teaching
Operations) speaking at the 1976 Australian Computer Society conference in Perth,
Australia. During that presentation, I experienced for the first time the true magic
and power that computers could bring to learning and teaching. This is how I
expressed it my doctoral dissertation (Sims, 2000, p. 2):
Of particular fascination was the moment when Dr Bitzer, by touching the display, was
moving bees from one screen location to another. During this demonstration he paused to
make observations to the audience but was interrupted by the computer saying “Dr Bitzer—
you still have a bee on your finger”!

This was a defining moment for me, an epiphany. From one brief interaction, I
perceived the potential for communication and interaction between computer and
human that would engage, humour and educate. The universe of possibilities for
designing learning experiences opened instantly, the connections between computer, programs, interaction and learning coalescing into a meaningful whole. In
1979 Control Data introduced PLATO to Australia, and since then, the effective
application of computer technology to education has been my passion. I strive to
transform learning and teaching experiences through design practices that maximise the magical potential of computer-based learning environments. Based on this
vision, I contend that designers must view themselves as magicians or alchemists,
creating and/or transforming courses to achieve intentional learning outcomes
through ‘golden’ engaging and motivational experiences.

Finding or Losing Design?
Despite these aspirations, over the past 40 years, the quality of computer-based
learning and teaching resources has taken a roller-coaster ride, with magical peaks
and disastrous lows. In this section the focus is on design and technology innovation, and the extent to which the knowledge needed to effectively cater for technological change, even though established and accessible, is not always utilised by
those responsible for the design effort.

Cycles of Forgetfulness
The Hype Cycle (Gartner, 2013) is one representation of technological innovation,
and how it is adopted within a user community, that provides a useful model to

16

2 Why Design Alchemy?

Fig. 2.1 The Gartner Hype
Cycle (Gartner, 2013; Used
with permission)

assess educational technology, its associated pedagogy and related design practices.
As illustrated in Fig. 2.1, following a trigger of technological innovation, once that
technology is released, it is first received with high expectations, followed by
periods of disillusionment, enlightenment and ultimately ongoing acceptance and
productivity.
As an example, the ability to use the CD-ROM for multimedia applications
emerged in the 1990s, the innovation triggering high expectations that the integration of high-quality images, audio and video would provide teachers and learners
with new educational experiences and cater for a range of learning styles and
preferences (Alessi & Trollip, 2000; Clark & Mayer, 2002). This was followed
by a period of disillusionment when the costs for media, production and computer
programming became too exorbitant for small projects; however, as production
processes became more economical and the design of interface and learning
activities matured, organisations began to see the value of multimedia (enlightenment), and applications became widely used across educational sectors
(productivity).
While the Hype Cycle (Fig. 2.1) neatly mirrors the application of multimedia in
education, there is more to the impact of technology in education. The sophistication of multimedia products reached its zenith about the same time as network
technologies reached a trigger state, and the potential for collaborative education
through online courses (which stand-alone computers and CD-ROMs could not
provide) soon replaced the established benefits of multimedia resources. Rather
than maintaining a plateau of productivity, multimedia applications began to
disappear on a slope of forgetfulness (Fig. 2.2).
Based on involvement in educational technology and design since the early
1980s, it appears that this slope of forgetfulness of educational technology innovation occurs every 10 years (Fig. 2.3). Beginning in the 1960s with teaching
machines that delivered programmed instruction (based on Skinner, 1968), the
next trigger came in the 1970s with computer-assisted instruction, such as the

Finding or Losing Design?

17

Fig. 2.2 Slope of
forgetfulness

Basic Skills curricula marketed by Control Data,2 and continued into the 1980s and
1990s with hypermedia and multimedia, respectively. As networked communications matured, this was followed by the emergence of e-learning or online learning
in the 2000s. Currently, we are in a phase of personalised learning that, based on the
growth of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs3) and Open Educational
Resources (OERs4), is likely to evolve into more open and individual learning
opportunities by the end of the decade.
In parallel with the cyclical nature of innovations in educational technology, the
design practices that coincided with those cycles appear to have attached themselves to that technology as it disappeared from view down the slope of forgetfulness. Consequently, as a new generation of early adopters embraced the next
innovation with inflated expectations, rather than building on established design
theory and practice, it was common for design practice to be relearned and linked to
the new technology, but in a diluted form, creating in effect a half-life of design
knowledge.
On reflection, as technology plays more and more a significant role in educational delivery, it appears not enough emphasis is placed on design for pedagogy
and far too much on design for technology. This is typified by scheduled 6-monthly
upgrades to learning management systems; while they provide a livelihood for
network and technical specialists, the teaching programs these systems are designed
to support experience regular, and often frustrating, interruptions to their practice.
Despite the accompanying rhetoric on the advantage such upgrades bring, the
reality is that while this practice may enhance the technological and administrative
components of education, the benefits to learning and teaching are questionable.
The design alchemist must therefore practice with a focus on the learner and
learning; the technology will inform this practice, but not determine it.

2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO_(computer_system).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_open_online_course.
4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_educational_resources.
3

18

2 Why Design Alchemy?

Fig. 2.3 Cycles of educational technology innovation

Technology or Pedagogy?
To examine the links between technology innovation and design, I will use as an
example the award-winning multimedia application Stage Struck (Wright,
Hedberg, & Harper, 1998), which allows users to ‘explore backstage, try
scriptwriting, design sets, rehearse actors, meet performing artists’ (NIDA, 1998).
From a pedagogical perspective, Stage Struck uses a combination of presentational
(watching reading listening), discovery (exploring, testing) and creative (designing,
rehearsing) strategies. From the technology perspective, the application not only
integrates audio, video, animation, text and graphics (multimedia) within the user
interface (graphic design) but also provides a set of tools (stage, sound tracks, sets,
actors) that can be used to design and create a performance (interactive design). A
sample of a unique design users can create is shown in Fig. 2.4.

It’s the Pedagogy
While this application represents a very sophisticated integration of computer
programming and multimedia, combining alternative delivery options into a single
resource, the pedagogy is not unique to the multimedia CD-ROM and could have
been applied:
• If students planned to tour a theatrical company and interact with the performers
• To a computer-based learning course developed in the 1980s, even though the
fidelity of the graphics and animations would have been low, and there would
have been no audio of video
• To an online or virtual reality environment
The point to emphasise is that the same pedagogy and learning outcomes can be
achieved through a design that focuses on those elements; technology does not and
should not determine the pedagogy. Design must be considered as independent

Technology or Pedagogy?

19

Fig. 2.4 User-generated scenario

from technology because a strong pedagogy can embrace any technological
innovation.

Can Technology Compromise Quality?
Is it possible therefore that, from a design perspective, pedagogy and technology
have been linked too closely and that this association might be partly responsible
for the variations observed in the quality of educational resources? In contemplating this question, a comparison with motor vehicle manufacturing rose. Over the
past decades, the visual appearance of cars has changed, and the controls and
options available for driver and passengers have changed; yet the primary design
of body, wheels and engine has remained constant. Cars consistently take their
passengers to the destination. Based on my experience and encounters with many
teachers, learners, applications, technologies and resources, if educational design
had been applied to cars, we would see more broken down and dysfunctional
vehicles than those on the road!
So why is it that design practices are not more consistently conceptualising and
creating learning and teaching resources that achieve their goals efficiently and
transparently?
• Is technology innovation being privileged over the importance of a strong design
ethos and pedagogy?
• Are programs that teach educational design focused more on technology than
pedagogy?

20

2 Why Design Alchemy?

• Are graduate students ignoring the research foundations that inform the field?
• Is design for learning considered less important than design for media?
• Do development projects emphasise project management and compliance over
learning outcomes?

Design Librettos
Whether one or more of these possibilities is accurate, there is a further option to
consider: that the texts (librettos) we use to support design (the established theories,
models and practices) do not yet provide a complete design framework to both
achieve learning outcomes and integrate appropriate learning technologies. Novelist Tom Robbins (1994) wrote a perfect analogy for challenging existing paradigms
(librettos) of design:
Sarah Bernhardt was such a powerfully popular, awe-inspiring actress that when she
toured in North America her performances invariably sold out, even though she spoke
hardly a word of English. Whatever play she did, Shakespeare, Moliere, Marlowe, or
whatever, she did in French, a language few nineteenth-century Americans could comprehend. Theatergoers were provided with librettos so that they might follow the action in
English. Well, on at least a couple of occasions, ushers passed out the wrong libretto, a text
for an entirely different drama than the one that was being staged. Yet from all reports, not
once did a single soul [. . .] ever comment or complain. [. . .]. We modern human beings are
looking at life, trying to make some sense of it; observing a ‘reality’ that often seems to be
unfolding in a foreign tongue—only we’ve all been issued the wrong librettos. For a text,
we’re given the Bible. Or the Talmud or the Koran. We’re given Time Magazine and
Reader’s Digest, daily papers, and the six-o-clock news; we’re given schoolbooks, sitcoms,
and revisionist histories; we’re given psychological counseling, cults, workshops, advertisements, sales pitches, and authoritative pronouncements by pundits, sold-out scientists,
political activists, and heads of state. Unfortunately, none of these translations bears more
than a faint resemblance to what is transpiring in the true theater of existence, and most of
them are dangerously misleading. We’re attempting to comprehend the spiraling intricacies of a magnificently complex tragicomedy with librettos that describe barroom melodramas or kindergarten skits.

Informing Texts
To explore the idea of whether the librettos we have are appropriate, the text that
informed my early practice as an educational analyst was based on the model shown
in Fig. 2.5. At the time, the perceived value of this cyclical approach was that the
process of analysis-design-development-implementation would itself result in the
creation of effective learning resources, and over the years, this general instructional design approach has become well established, although with different representations of the process (e.g. Dick & Carey, 1996; Morrison, Ross, & Kemp,
2006). So while we have access to librettos addressing topics such as design for

Technology or Pedagogy?

21

Fig. 2.5 Instructional design process (Adapted from Control Data Australia, 1984)

successful learning (Allen, 2007), design for how people learn (Dirksen, 2011),
instructional design (Smith & Regan, 2004) or rapid instructional design (Piskurich,
2006), the question remains as to whether they are complete enough to enable the
desired learning and teaching experiences in a world that is more and more social,
more and more complex and more and more open.
There are many thousands of online educational resources and courses to support
design, and there are hundreds of documented design approaches, and yet educators
and educational administration still fail to focus on the potential of learners by
developing educational experiences that lack interaction, engagement, collaboration, personalisation or relevance (Robinson, 2013).
This leaves the question hanging: are the texts we have the right ones to achieve
the design goals for an effective educational experience?

Design Quality
While the librettos for educational design should ensure quality in the resources
developed, the growth of agencies devoted to quality assurance and accreditation
(e.g. Quality Matters, 2013; The Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency,
2013; The Higher Learning Commission, 2013) suggests otherwise. Why are
external quality agencies required when design practice should ensure quality?

22

2 Why Design Alchemy?

One possible reason is that despite the foundations of theory and practice, when
the range of learning and teaching resource are considered, their characteristics
reflect design practices that range from the inspired (capturing a combination of
creativity, innovation and art) to the structured (reflecting strict adherence to a
specific design model), to the informal (where the resources are more ad hoc and
just in time) and to the uninformed (resources reflect none of the accepted theory
and practice). The inspired designs are rare but generate what I believe
Csikszentmihalyi (1998) refers to as flow, where ‘a person performing an activity
is fully immersed in a feeling of energised focus, full involvement, and enjoyment
in the process of the activity5’, and which were observed to some extent in the
findings of Sims (2000) and are further elaborated in Chap. 7. The structured
designs are those that follow a prescribed, predefined pattern, such as ADDIE
(analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation), and which in practice
often focus on the sequencing and presentation of subject matter. The informal
designs reflect those created by the self-motivated learner who decides on a certain
learning outcome and, being motivated, works to achieve that goal through trial and
error and interaction with people and resources as required.6 The uninspired designs
represent those where education and training are presented as ‘digital paper’ or
where the complexity of the resource and technology used shows little understanding of learning, teaching and design.
For the design alchemist, therefore, the aim is to implement inspired levels of
design, using a combination of science (the structured approach) and art (the
creative, innovative approach) to transform educational environments into quality
learning experiences.

Have We Got Design Right?
As we move into a period where, with the right infrastructure, we can learn
anywhere and anytime, it becomes critical that we embrace design architectures
or frameworks that ensure the focus is on learning, and not on content access to,
which underpins Design Alchemy. It is my contention that the ideas and approaches
that many use in our field are predicated on misconceptions of teaching and learning
through technology, and it is therefore timely to reassess design and rethink the
meaning of learning and teaching.

5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology).
I evidenced this process many years ago when my son, interested in astronomy, wanted to take
night photographs of the sky by having a camera that could track the movement of the stars. He
researched the process and, on the Internet, found plans for a manual tracking system and
proceeded to build the device and take successful photographs. While I am sure we all have
similar anecdotes, this struck a chord with me—if we have a learning goal and basic literacy skills,
the ‘web’ can provide all the guidance we need to achieve a learning goal.
6

Why Design Alchemy?

23

Fig. 2.6 Elements of
Design Alchemy

Design Alchemy is proposed as a framework that extends current approaches,
providing a complete and comprehensive approach to design practice.

Why Design Alchemy?
The basic architecture of Design Alchemy, consisting of three major components, is
represented in Fig. 2.6. The additional but unnamed elements emphasise that the
framework must be viewed as dynamic; research and practice will continue to
inform our field, and therefore, the models and practices must be open to modification and revision. In brief, these three components focus on:
1. Pedagogy, the underpinning learning theories and strategies that inform the
practice of the design alchemist and the structure of learning activities (see
Chap. 8)
2. Practice, the essential steps that provide a practical and effective way to design
and implement new or revised programs and courses (see Chap. 9)
3. Assets, the different factors that influence and inform the overall design process
(see Chap. 10)
Chapter 1 argued that the artistic and spiritual attributes associated with
alchemy, when combined with the more formal scientific elements of learning
and instructional theory, provide a valuable metaphor for the practice of design
which has been further elaborated in this chapter. Computers have the potential to
be magical in their ability to process instructions and respond to learner interaction,
and yet technological innovation appears to have diminished rather than enhanced
this potential. In parallel the design practices used to create learning and teaching
environments have not always achieved designs that achieve ‘flow’ for the individual learner.

24

2 Why Design Alchemy?

In response to this conundrum, Design Alchemy provides a framework where
design alchemists create environments in which all participants interact to achieve
learning outcomes relevant to their own needs and context and which harness the
power of the technology to support those interactions.

References
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (2000). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (3rd
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Allen, M. W. (2007). Designing successful e-Learning, Michael Allen’s online learning library:
Forget what you know about instructional design and do something interesting. San Francisco,
CA: Pfeiffer.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines
for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Control Data Australia. (1984). An introductory seminar on computer based training. Student
notes. (Personal Digital Copy). Control Data Australia Pty Ltd.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1998). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life.
New York: Basic Books.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The systematic design of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Harper
Collins.
Dirksen, J. (2011). Design for how people learn. New York: New Riders.
Gartner. (2013). Research methodologies. http://www.gartner.com/technology/research/methodol
ogies/hype-cycle.jsp.
The Higher Learning Commission. (2013). Retrieved October 5, 2013 from http://www.ncahlc.
org/
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2006). Designing effective instruction (5th ed.).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
National Institute of Dramatic Art (NIDA). (1998). Stage Struck. [CD-ROM].
Piskurich, G. M. (2006). Rapid instructional design: Learning ID fast and right. San Francisco,
CA: Pfeiffer.
Quality Matters. (2013). Retrieved October 5, 2013 from https://www.qualitymatters.org/
Robbins, T. (1994). Half asleep in frog pajamas. New York: Bantam Books.
Robinson, K. (2013). How to escape education’s death valley. http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_
robinson_how_to_escape_education_s_death_valley.html
Sims, R. (2000). Learners as actors: Strategies for computer-enhanced learning encounters.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Wollongong University.
Skinner, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2004). Instructional design (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley/Jossey-Bass.
Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA). (2013). Available from http://www.
teqsa.gov.au/. Accessed October 5, 2013.
Wright, R., Hedberg, J., & Harper, B. (1998). Learner construction of knowledge: Using StageStruck to develop a performance. In R. M. Corderoy (Ed.), Flexibility: The Next Wave?
(Proceedings of the 15th annual conference of the Australasian Society for computers in
learning in tertiary education (ASCILITE), pp. 673–679). Wollongong, NSW: University of
Wollongong.
Yasmin. (2013). Application of the classification tree model in predicting learner dropout behaviour in open and distance learning. Distance Education, 34(2), 218–231

Chapter 3

How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Abstract As presented in Chaps. 1 and 2, the relevance of Design Alchemy is
based on integrating the scientific and artistic approaches to design (alchemy),
recapturing the engagement potential of computers and learning (magic),
rediscovering the value of design traditions (quality) and differentiating design
practice for technological innovation (pedagogy). The purpose of this chapter is to
introduce five specific areas of research which have informed the development of
the Design Alchemy architecture: the art of interactivity, proactive evaluation,
three-phase design, design for learning and proactive design for learning. Each of
these reveals nascent elements of the framework and explains the evolutionary
process from which the main components and elements of Design Alchemy
emerged. Together these provide the background for the final section of the chapter,
which articulates the major components of Design Alchemy.

Morphic Resonance
Before the formal analysis, it is important to take a detour. During my career in the
design and development of learning and teaching resources, I have worked with
different models and strategies, attended numerous conferences, presented workshops and engaged with researchers and practitioners. On one such occasion, a
colleague referred to the concept of morphic resonance (Sheldrake, 2011, p. 1):
All humans too draw upon collective memory to which all in turn contribute.
If this view of nature is even approximately correct, it should be possible to observe the
progressive establishment of new habits as they spread within the species. For example,
when people learn something new, such as wind-surfing, then as more people learn to do it,
it should trend to become progressively easier to learn, just because so many other people
have learned to do it already.

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_3,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

25

26

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

While Sheldrake’s ideas are considered by some to be pseudoscience or magical
thinking,1 it seems that the concept of Design Alchemy has emerged as more and
more knowledge on design processes and practices has filtered into our collective
experience and practice. It is therefore important to acknowledge the inspired
efforts of my colleagues and peers, that collective wisdom which has infused the
academy and informed not only the design of learning and teaching environments
but my own practice as a designer. In the (revised) words of Bilbo Baggins
(Tolkien, 1954),
I haven‘t cited half of you half as much as I would like
I honour less than half of you half as well as you deserve

Design Alchemy represents a synthesis of my own experience and the complex
set of theories and models that have emerged over that same period. Readers may
find similarities with other approaches they are familiar with, and that is not
surprising. Researchers and practitioners have worked tirelessly to explain the
relationship between learning, teaching and computer technology. And even though
Design Alchemy was conceived independently based on my own research, more
and more I sense that morphic resonance has been at play through the alignment of
the Design Alchemy architecture with other initiatives and innovations.

Alchemy Emerging 1: The Art of Interactivity (1997)
Interactions between people, ideas and resources are a critical element of learning,
especially when mediated through or with computers. Analysis of interactivity
between humans and computers for educational purposes is extensive, exemplified
by Jonassen (1988) who identified five levels of interactivity: the modality of
response, the nature of the task, the level of processing, the type of program and
the level of design intelligence, proposing that the level of interactivity would affect
whether surface or deep learning would result. For the designer, it was therefore
critical to understand not only the affordances of the technology (program,
processing) but also the pedagogy (response, task, intelligence). Schwier and
Misanchuk (1993) extended this taxonomy, suggesting that interactivity was
based on three dimensions: levels (reactive, proactive, mutual), functions (confirmation, pacing, navigation, inquiry, elaboration) and transactions (keyboard, touch
screen, mouse, voice). In this case the levels and functions focused on pedagogy,
while the transactions the technology. From my perspective, however, the most
important of these factors related to levels, which had previously been defined by
Rhodes and Azbell (1985) as reactive (stimulus and response), proactive (construction and generative activity) and mutual (virtual reality) interactions.
Rather than the technology being the driver, successful interactivity must be
driven by learning needs and together these concepts led to my proposal that

1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake.

Alchemy Emerging 1: The Art of Interactivity (1997)

27

Table 3.1 Levels of interactivity (Based on Sims, 1997)
Level
Linear/object
Hierarchical
Support
Update
Construct
Reflective
Simulation
Hyperlinked
Non-immersive
contextual
Immersive virtual

Description
Forward or backward navigation
Choice of options in tree structure
Assistance through reaction to inquiry
Feedback conditional on learner response
Learner uses elements to build model or representation
Learner response compared with alternative options to enable
reflection
The learning takes place with a simulated environment
Access to external resources
Environment contextual but learning and learner an external operator
Learner part of computer-generated environment

designers needed to view interactivity as an art (Sims, 1997). The essence of this
analysis was that while each level has a role in computer-based learning applications,
the impact of each level of interactivity on learning can vary, and the art of design
involves integrating those levels to create interactions that are engaging and meaningful for the learner. The revised set of levels were described as shown in Table 3.1.
Understanding the different ways learners interact with computers and other
participants enables us to create learning and teaching environments that are more
likely to generate a state of flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1998). As an illustration of the
application of interaction levels, Farrow and Sims (1987) designed an application
where a VCR player was connected to a microcomputer which allowed occupational therapy students to view video sequences of people lifting (linear, hierarchical interactivity) and develop a clinical response (construct interactivity) before
comparing their analysis to that of an expert practitioner (simulation interactivity)
and receiving feedback on the accuracy of their clinical analysis (reflective, update
interactivity). A second project adopted the same design strategy for a course
focused on ‘win-win negotiations’, where students had to develop a proposed
negotiation strategy (construct interactivity) and compare that with the responses
of other users as well as that of a recognised text (reflective, update interactivity). A
sample of the screen design and interaction from this second example is illustrated
in Fig. 3.1.

Emergent Alchemy 1
As demonstrated by the application of levels of interactivity to course design, the
differentiation of these levels illustrates how design for learning focuses on different interactions than design for interface and navigation (elements that were the
focus of my doctoral research reported in Sims, 2000). For Design Alchemy, this
formative research reinforces not only the importance of pedagogy but also the way

28

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Fig. 3.1 Reflective interaction

in which we conceptualise and design the activities and interactions that take place
within the learning environment.

Alchemy Emerging 2: Proactive Evaluation (2002)
In typical instructional design practice, even though the process is iterative, the
evaluation of the resultant application is positioned as the final step (e.g. Dick &
Carey, 1996). In response, and to challenge the role and positioning of evaluation in
the design process, Sims, Dobbs, and Hand (2002, pp. 136–137) published a
framework known as Proactive Evaluation with these proposed benefits:
As an extension to established forms of evaluation, and to provide specific support
(scaffolding) for the planning and creation of online materials, this paper argues for
proactive evaluation to be integrated into this phase of the production process. Through
the proactive evaluation framework, the production team will focus on the criteria by which
the environments and resources might normally be evaluated, thereby ensuring that all
factors associated with a successful evaluation are addressed during the planning phase.
This process will also pre-empt the possibility of critical, negative formative and summative
evaluation. Using proactive evaluation therefore, environments created by inexperienced
people will be more likely to achieve their educational and learning goals as this online
pedagogy is integral to all facets of the design, development and implementation process.

The critical argument supporting a Proactive Evaluation approach was that by
deploying a design system that prioritised the essential elements of best practice,
the resultant product would be both functional and effective. In particular, the
Proactive Evaluation strategy articulated six factors that were considered critical
to effective design and the integrity of the resources produced through that design
process.

Strategic Intent
The importance of strategic intent was to ensure a course development project was
initiated as a result of learning and teaching needs, and that the rationale for the
course was consistent with the environment and technology being considered. This

Alchemy Emerging 2: Proactive Evaluation (2002)

29

idea has evolved into the initial and critical step of Design Alchemy practice, where
course coordinators are asked to articulate why the course is part of the program and
what students will be able to do on completion of the course; this represents an
expression of the knowledge students will be able to apply on completion of the
course.

Content
How subject matter or content is perceived is critical to the success of Design
Alchemy. While predefined subject matter is an integral component of course
design, the Proactive Evaluation strategy also proposed options for:
• Learner contributed content, where learner additions and contributions enhance
the resource base.
• Captured dialogue content, where through collaborative endeavours, content
material is added to the overall resource base for the course.
• Constructed content, which is created through participant collaboration and
interpretation of available resources.
As a foundation for Design Alchemy, identifying the dynamic nature of subject
matter for a course triggered questions on the purpose of design: was learning about
demonstrating an understanding of knowledge already documented, or does it also
encompass options to construct new knowledge? While both are important, how the
designer approaches this question can significantly impact the way a course presents to the participants.
This perspective on subject matter or content, where course participants can
create and modify knowledge, provided the forerunner for the emergent element of
the Design Alchemy pedagogy, as well as viewing the subject matter required to
complete course learning activities as a resource to inform learning activities. As
noted by Sims et al. (2002, pp. 138–139),
Implicit in this framework is the assumption that content can no longer be seen as being
“owned” by the teacher or discipline, but rather as an information base that can be
perceived and worked with in many different ways.

Learning Design
As discussed in Chap. 6, the concept of learning design is considered a field in its
own right (Lanarca Declaration, 2012); however, at the time of writing, learning
design was seen more as a practical component, with design for learning considered
to ‘force designers to conceptualise the development process from the learner’s
perspective rather than that of the content or the teacher’ (Sims et al., 2002, p. 140).
Linked to this concept is the interaction and alignment between pedagogy, learning

30

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Fig. 3.2 Early alignment model [Adapted from Sims et al. (2002)]

outcome and resources (subject matter) as illustrated in Fig. 3.2. While the concept
of alignment is considered in more detail in Chap. 6, the focus on separating
resources (the way they are used and accessed) from outcomes (and the strategies
used to achieve those outcomes) and pedagogy (in terms of approaches to the
online medium) was an important step towards rethinking design in terms of
learner and learning outcomes.

Interface Design
Another driver for Proactive Evaluation was the need to rethink design practice for
online learning. Given that the primary interaction in this mode is between human
and computer, a critical component of the design process therefore involves the
interface. At the time of writing, the field of computers and learning had reached a
maturity in interface design with CD-ROM products such as Stage Struck (NIDA,
1998), while online courses were emerging that were limited to presentation of text
and simple graphics. At the same time, research on cognitive load (initiated by
Sweller, 1988) was being used to assess limitations and restrictions to learning
generated by the interface.
To maximise the effectiveness of the online environment, Sims et al. (2002)
proposed that the interface could be viewed as a continuum ranging from:
•
•
•
•

Non-contextual (learner as observer) to
Contextual (learner as participant) to
Narrative (learner as contributor) and to
Theatrical (learner as actor).

To create an interface and environment with learner as contributor or learner as
actor meant significant knowledge and skills with the technology and computer
programming to present the narrative or performance space required. However, as
noted in Chap. 2, design can be viewed as independent from technology, and each
of these learner roles can be achieved without resorting to expensive and complex
computer-generated environments.

Alchemy Emerging 2: Proactive Evaluation (2002)

31

In terms of the Design Alchemy framework, the concept of a continuum of
participant roles aligns with the pedagogy which promotes both active and contextual learning activities. While the use of contemporary learning management
systems has tended to ‘dumb down’ or sanitise learning opportunities, designers
can still be creative and transformative in the way tools from those systems can be
used to create simulated experience such as role-plays (see Chap. 12 for a detailed
implementation of this strategy). In the same way that a novelist can engage and
capture the attention and imagination of the reader through narrative, so the design
alchemist must transform the role of learner from observer to active performer.

Interactivity
Interactivity is not simply a function of computer-based transactions, but a fundamental
success factor for teaching and learning, especially when implemented in an online context.
In most cases, regardless of any virtual community that exists, the learner will be working
independently and therefore the effectiveness of those communications (interactions) will
ultimately determine the effectiveness and efficiency of the learning environment. (Sims
et al., 2002, p. 143)

As noted in the section on the ‘Art of Interactivity’, while there are many facets of
interaction that can take place between the human and the computer, or facilitated
by that technology, the critical elements of interactivity for learning, compared to
access to resources, are where the student is either interacting with software aimed
to facilitate learning (such as a simulation) or interacting with other people (collaboration). As a concept, interaction is critical for successful learning in computermediated environments and identifies with learners being active and creative
within the Design Alchemy pedagogy.

Assessment
The assessment element of Proactive Evaluation focused on the shift from teacherspecified assessment to alternative options, such as peer directed and student
directed. These align with the analysis presented by Earl (2013), which differentiates, amongst other factors, assessment as, for and of learning. Underpinning this
approach to assessment was the growing focus on reflection and self-assessment
(Morgan & O’Reilly, 1999), and the understanding that as students became more
separated from the institution by time and space, then assessment would need to be
more relevant to them as individuals. For Design Alchemy, this has evolved to a
strategy whereby the situated activities that learners participate in will generate the
assessment items, making them relevant in terms of measures of outcome, and the
subsequent ability to apply acquired knowledge.

32

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Student Support
The Proactive Evaluation framework also considered the support students require
within the online environment and the utility of content, the extent to which the
wealth of online materials could be accessed and repurposed given the emergence
of both copyright requirements and open resources.2 The support for online students
can be implemented through embedding ‘teaching’ into the actual design (the
interactions and information within the computer-based environment) as well as
through clear communication of participant expectations and roles. Within the
Design Alchemy framework, these concepts informed the learner-centred
approach, which ensures that support and communication is prioritised, while
utility of content is catered for through the identification of appropriate resources
to support learning activities.

Emergent Alchemy 2
Revisiting the Proactive Evaluation framework identified the elements of Design
Alchemy that were emerging at the time; based on this summary, the following
observations are pertinent to effective design practice:
• Determining why a course is being held can generate clearer perspectives of
what knowledge students will gain as a result of completing the course.
• By using the principles articulated in Proactive Evaluation, the design process
will generate properties of quality learning; in effect evaluation is embedded
within design activities and not considered post-design. Within Design
Alchemy, the proactive option evaluation is integrated as an asset that enables
continuous improvement and sustainability.
• The subject matter or content of a course is not static; the potential to introduce,
modify and create subject matter is a critical element of learning and teaching
and must be integrated with design practice.
• While pedagogy, outcomes and resources (content) can be considered separately, a critical element of design is to align each with the associated learning
activities and assessment.

2
In 2001 Creative Commons was formed (http://creativecommons.org/about/history) with the aim
of enabling the sharing and use of creativity and knowledge through free legal tools.

Alchemy Emerging 3: Three-Phase Design (2003)

33

Fig. 3.3 Three-phase design [Adapted from Sims and Jones (2003)]

Alchemy Emerging 3: Three-Phase Design (2003)
The value of a Proactive Evaluation approach could only be realised however if the
development process was consistent with the technological infrastructure and
delivery environment. The proposal for a three-phase process (Sims & Jones,
2003) was based on a continuous improvement model of ‘build, enhance, maintain’
which encouraged a team-based approach, including representation from all relevant stakeholders to ensure a shared understanding of the learning environment and
the project deliverables for the lifetime of the course (Fig. 3.3).

Blurring Roles
Conceptualising design as continuing through the course lifetime is critical; a
course of study will always require enhancement based on the experience of
offering the course, changes in the domain of study and changes in technology.
With respect to this, one of the concepts integral to Three-Phase Design is that
learners, teachers and designers have roles that can potentially interchange and that
each could therefore contribute to enhancement. This view of design, which
involves ongoing relationships and interaction between designer, learners and
teachers, is elaborated in Table 3.2. Design is a collaborative experience between
all stakeholders (Sims & Hedberg, 2006) and without input from those stakeholders, the strategies will be incomplete.

34

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Table 3.2 The changing roles of participants
Learner
Learner

Teacher

Teacher
Designer
Based on factors such as
Based on their experience
experience, context or
in the course, the learner
research, the learner can
can advise on strategies
assume the role of the
to enhance the educateacher when their
tional experience
knowledge is
recognised
Based on their experience
in the course, the
teacher can introduce or
experiment with strategies to enhance the
educational experience

By privileging the experience and context students bring to the
course, teachers can
become learners by
enhancing their understanding of the ways
others view the domain
of study
Designer Through having a presence Based on their experience
in the design and delivwith design, the
ery process, the
designer can become a
designer can learn more
teacher in the course—
about what learning
explaining why differmeans and involves and
ent or repurposed stratenhance their practice
egies may be more
accordingly
effective in terms of the
desired outcomes

Sustainability
A second feature of Three-Phase Design was the emergence of ideas relating to
course sustainability. I have participated in and observed many course development
projects where the design and development process focused largely on the
re-creation of subject-matter resources that could have been accessed elsewhere
and the integration of technology innovations. However, when the time came to
update those materials, there were no financial resources to enable enhancement,
and such projects were often shelved. This is one reason for emphasising build
(pedagogical structure using minimal technology) before enhance (revised pedagogy with more sophisticated technology features)—to ensure pedagogy is
prioritised before technology.
Another issue related to sustainability is a tendency for designers and developers
to include repurposed subject matter in the syllabus and course materials, exemplified by a recent workshop where a course coordinator demonstrated a well-designed
HTML page addressing ‘interview techniques’ that had been integrated into an

Alchemy Emerging 3: Three-Phase Design (2003)

35

Fig. 3.4 Unsustainable vs. sustainable design

online course. When queried about creating content rather utilising open resources,3
the presenter replied that they were a content expert, not an online expert. This
demonstrates the need for all course designers and developers to understand the
affordances of technology, design and the available resources, and the implications
of this design practice are illustrated in Fig. 3.4.
The image on the left shows a course where customised subject-matter (content)
resources have been embedded into the course and, when changes are required, that
resource would have to be modified and the course syllabus and student guide
updated. The image on the right illustrates the same course, but with the subject
matter made available through Open Educational Resources (OERs) which are not
only freely available but potentially modifiable (subject to the attribution licensing).
The time and effort to create customised resources is not sustainable and should be
replaced by focusing on the learning; while the differences may be subtle, the value
to sustainability and cost cannot be ignored. In terms of what the student might see,
the following example (Table 3.3) provides an illustration of the differences
between sustainable design and one more open to ongoing modification effort,
such as when a textbook changes. While this may seem a straightforward solution,
the time spent in creating unnecessary subject matter and embedded time-stamped
material remains a critical issue for design.

Emergent Alchemy 3
The key elements of Three-Phase Design are continuous improvement and sustainability, aspects not only associated with the implementation and development of the
design but also essential to the maintenance of the integrity of the product. These
elements are integrated within Design Alchemy, considered as assets to the overall
design practice (see Chap. 10).
3
A search of Google for ‘interview techniques’ revealed 108,000,000 hits and a search for ‘oer
interview techniques’ 86,000 hits including open courses.

36

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Table 3.3 Sustainable vs. unsustainable design
Unsustainable
Please read the Interviewing Techniques page
(James, 2001, pp. 25–37) and respond to the
following question

Sustainable
Please access the Interviewing Techniques
resources and use them to respond to the
following question

Alchemy Emerging 4: Design for Learning (2006)
Design by Heuristics
With the Design for Learning approach, a set of metrics was identified to assist in
assessing the quality of learning within the online or self-paced environment. The
aim of these metrics was to ‘assess the extent to which the interactions in a course of
study will effectively engage the learner with the purpose and value of the course
outcomes’ (Sims, 2006, p. 4). In re-examining these metrics, it can be more
appropriate to view them as design heuristics, and the following exposition provides a summary of their key characteristics in the context of Design Alchemy.

Learning Styles
The preferences and cultural background a learner brings to a course of study
provide richness of experience and diversity. However, rather than designing for
an assumed learner preference, the designer’s role is to design so the learner is free
to integrate their individual preferences or culture into the learning environment: ‘It
is not for the designer to try and design for a specific culture, as that is likely to be
fraught with assumptions. Instead, the design must allow for the learner to adapt
and contextualise the content and outcomes to their own environment’ (Sims, 2006,
p. 5).
Learning styles and other preferences or characteristics are a subject in their own
right, and knowing that these individual differences exist is critical for the designer.
However, as noted in Chap. 7, these factors can be approached in such a way that
they become a distraction to design practice. The design alchemist avoids such
distractions and caters for the diversity of individual learners through an inclusive
ethos that is enabled in the learning activities.

Course Completion
How students complete a course is dependent on the design applied. As presented in
Chap. 11, there are instances where courses using computer-based delivery can be

Alchemy Emerging 4: Design for Learning (2006)

37

completed with the learner’s eyes closed! As noted by Sims (2006, p. 6), ‘for a
course to be truly interactive, the learner must not be able to complete the course
unless they have successfully undertaken an activity or problem that allows them to
proceed to the next stage’. In this way course completion itself can be an indication
of having achieved the relative outcomes, with the implication that assessment
results from activities the learner completes. Rather than viewing a course as being
a series of learning activities followed by assessment, it is a case of a learning
activity creating the assessment. A core strategy within Design Alchemy is that
completion is seen as a process: the completion of a learning activity creates an
artefact which is submitted for assessment; when the artefact is said to meet the
criteria for success, the activity is considered complete, and the associated learning
outcomes will be deemed to have been met.

Cognitive Activity
An interesting exercise for a designer is to ensure that at any point in a course the
student is engaged in a learning activity, and this activity needs ‘to test assumptions
(hypothesise), construct solutions (manipulate), adjust variables (experiment)
and/or introduce content (modify) within that environment. By promoting cognitive
activity and engagement . . . the learner will be consciously engaged with the
interplay between content, context and situation’ (Sims, 2006, p. 5). Within Design
Alchemy, this is built into the activities and enabled through the associated
pedagogy. The role of the designer, especially when creating online environments,
is to ensure the learner is engaged in an activity that involves creative production of
course artefacts.

Roles
As introduced through the concepts within Proactive Evaluation, conceptualising
the classroom as a performance space where participants have roles can be a useful
metaphor for the designer. Using the notion of computers as theatre (Laurel, 1991),
by viewing the learner as a performer acting out a script (design specifications),
with opportunities to rehearse and improvise with fellow performers (participants),
the designer has the opportunity to conceptualise quite different learning activities
than those that the traditional classroom conjures. The idea of role also extends to
other course participants such as the teacher and designer and the potential for those
roles to interchange (Sims & Jones, 2003). When adopting this strategy, a critical
element of design is to ensure all participants understand the expectations of
their role.
While not explicit in the Design Alchemy framework, the concept of role
remains significant, as it is embedded with the learner-centred ethos and ‘acted

38

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

out’ through the various activities in which a student may engage—not just in
formalised role-play activities (see Chap. 12) but in the informal and potentially
alternating roles of learner, teacher or designer.

Interface and Media
As with Proactive Evaluation, with any course that is taken online or has online
components, the student encounters that course through a computer interface.
While the branding of the interface will typically comply with accepted humancomputer interaction principles, the actual course materials can be the responsibility of the course teaching team, and all too often these lack understanding of the
basics of screen and graphic design, which prescribe the use of elements such as
fonts, colour, white space and media (e.g. Pannafino, 2012; Pratt, 2012). While
interface design is largely beyond the scope of Design Alchemy, as it relates to
development and implementation, the output of the design process does provide a
structure for the learning environment which will support an interface that is
intuitive through the alignment of activity, outcome, assessment and resources.

Feedback
Two options for feedback to learners are that it can be generic (every student gets
the same feedback for a task) or individual (the content of the feedback is contingent on the response of the student). Through the pedagogy of Design Alchemy,
designers invest considerable effort, ensuring that learning activities are inclusive
and contextual, and therefore, the feedback based on the assessment criteria will
be individualised. While this feedback may in theory be generic, in practice the
learner experiences personalised feedback through an illusion the design alchemist
creates. The wording of feedback can be structured in such a way that it is perceived
as individual; and where automated grading rubrics are used, the feedback provided
can be even more individualised, using conditional and adaptive processes to
modify feedback based on the learner’s response.

Emergent Alchemy 4
The Design for Learning approach emerged as a response to the variable quality
observed in computer-based or online applications. Design for Learning focuses
specifically on creating environments where learners are provided the best opportunities to learn and reminds the design alchemist to practice with a clear pedagogy
in order to achieve a truly learner-centred environment.

Alchemy Emerging 5: Proactive Design for Learning (2012)

39

Alchemy Emerging 5: Proactive Design for Learning (2012)
The final iteration preceding the elaboration of Design Alchemy was articulated
through Proactive Design for Learning (Sims, 2009, 2012) which incorporated
elements of Proactive Evaluation and Three-Phase Design and extended to include
emergence (Irlbeck, Kays, Jones, & Sims, 2006; Kays & Sims, 2006). The model
identified the critical design strategies for success in online learning and teaching,
based on the concept of alchemy where the designer would use those elements in
creating ‘gold’—whether from existing courses already ‘golden’ or from those
considered ‘leaden’. As illustrated in Fig. 3.5, the concept of proactive design
embraced six strategies driven by the Three-Phase Design ‘engine’. The underlying
philosophy of Proactive Design for Learning (PD4L) was that if each of these
strategies were addressed within the design process, the resultant courses would
evidence the essential characteristics of quality. While researchers and theorists
may be familiar with these strategies, those who are new to design practice will find
they provide supports or scaffolds to assist in the design process.
While different from Design Alchemy in representation, the PD4L framework
represents the emergence and coalescence of interactivity, Proactive Evaluation,
Three-Phase Design, and design for learning. The following provides a brief overview of the six strategies within PD4L and their relationship to Design Alchemy.

Theoretical
Practitioners may be aware of the importance of theory, but unsure how it applies
specifically to their educational design requirements. By highlighting the key
theories of social learning, constructivism, situated learning and connectivism
(as elaborated in Chap. 4), the PD4L model proposed that designers create strategies which relate to a pedagogy of situated (contextual) learning based on connections between people and resources and the construction (production) of
artefacts for assessment.

Contextual
This strategy relates to the individual in terms of their personal characteristics
(e.g. culture, experience, motivation) and the situation in which the learning takes
place. Emphasising the importance of context, the Design Alchemy framework
views information about the learner as an asset to the design process, whereas the
individual experience and capabilities they bring to the learning environment are
integrated through the learning activities and informed by a pedagogy of
inclusivity.

40

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Fig. 3.5 Proactive design for learning (Based on Sims, 2012)

Interactive
The importance of interactivity has been emphasised throughout this chapter and
was the focus of my early research (Sims, 1997, 2000). From this initial assessment,
the concept has evolved to become part of the active and social (collaborative)
components of the learning activities. Within the Design Alchemy framework, the
learner being active remains critical, even more so where the engagement of the
learning experience involves technology, as the quality of the human-computer
interface and the associated interactions must align with the learning activities and
outcomes. The designer has the responsibility to ensure that primary function of
interaction is to generate knowledge acquisition.

Innovative
The suggestion that design be innovative was proposed in order to emphasise three
mind-sets for the designer (Sims, 2012, p. 34):

Alchemy Emerging 5: Proactive Design for Learning (2012)

41

1. Research: to ensure familiarity with emerging frameworks, practices and analyses and the accompanying debates.
2. Challenge: to examine the research, including institutional practices, in order to
identify both enhancing and inhibiting factors.
3. Test: to experiment and assess potential options and being open to alternative
ways to support learners achieve outcomes.
These elements are integrated to the Design Alchemy framework through an
ethos that each participant has the potential to play the role of designer or learner or
teacher as well as through emergence, which privileges the formation of alternative
and new perspectives of knowledge.

Collaborative
Consistent with social learning and social constructivist learning is the value placed
on the interactions and connections we have with other people, ideas and objects.
Through these connections and the associated interactions that take place, learning
can be facilitated, knowledge acquired, artefacts created and outcomes manifested
through assessment. The importance of learning through collaboration is critical to
the success of any learning and teaching environment, although one of the challenges the designer faces is the competition to collaboration through the (perceived?) need for testing individual learners.

Emergent
The final strategy within PD4L is emergence, a concept that identifies the value and
potential of new knowledge emerging from the learning process (Kays & Sims,
2006; Irlbeck et al., 2006). Emergence relates to how the designer, and the design,
relates to and presents knowledge and information:
1. If a design approach structures activities around a text (or other resource) and
measures learning in terms of formative or summative assessment, then emergence is unlikely to occur.
2. If a design focuses on learning outcomes through learning activities informed by
resources and which promotes the value of new (emergent) knowledge, then
emergence is likely to occur.
The concept of emergence is critical to the practice of Design Alchemy and can
be seen to differentiate it from other design approaches.

42

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Emergent Alchemy 5
The most important aspect of Proactive Design for Learning (PD4L) is that while
the strategies integrated the critical elements of successful design, the framework
was not contextualised in such a way that it could be easily deployed in practice.
However, through ongoing research and analysis, experience in online teaching, the
professional development of academic staff and the design and development of
online learning environments, the architecture of Design Alchemy emerged and is
introduced in the following section.

Elements of Design Alchemy
The concept of Design Alchemy emerged not only through my own research and
practice but also from the research and practice in educational design and
computer-based learning that spans many decades. Given the different studies
from which Design Alchemy emerged, the following section focuses on the key
components of the architecture, beginning with the language specific to the practice
of Design Alchemy and articulating the essential elements of its pedagogy, practice
and assets.

What Is the Language of Design Alchemy?
To practise Design Alchemy effectively, a common language is required; education
is a complex field replete with different terms that can describe the same or similar
objects and events. The important terms and how they are used throughout this
narrative are shown in Table 3.4.

The Design Alchemy Framework
To be a designer of learning and teaching spaces in today’s world of technology and
education requires knowledge and skills that extend the traditions of instructional
design to a multidisciplinary integration of ideas, concepts and approaches. This
extension involves the practice of Design Alchemy (Fig. 3.6) and three integrated
components:
(a) The pedagogy details the critical theoretical principles that will enable the
creation of meaningful, motivational and engaging learning and teaching experiences through the integration of specific learning theories and strategies.

Elements of Design Alchemy

43

Table 3.4 Design Alchemy terminology
Term
Design

Alchemy
Design
alchemist
Pedagogy
Learner
Teacher
Outcome
Assessment
Activity
Topic
Module
Course
Program
Subject matter
Resources

Course
coordinator
Syllabus

Explanation
The process of conceptualising environments to support learning and teaching
and providing specifications by which those environments can be
implemented
The transformation of courses
A person with the capacity to transform the way we think about learning and
teaching and who creates ‘golden’ courses from ‘leaden’ information and
resources
A philosophy of and approach to learning and teaching
A participant in an educational environment who aims to achieve a set of
learning outcomes in order to apply knowledge and/or skills
A participant in an educational environment with the responsibility to mentor
learners and confirm the attainment of learning outcomes
A statement of what the learner will be able to achieve on completion of a course
The protocol that will be adopted to determine whether or not outcomes have
been achieved
A task in which learners and teachers interact with the aim of producing a
specified assessment artefact
A set of one or more activities
A set of topics
A set of modules
A set of courses resulting in an award
The content or knowledge domain on which a course is focused (e.g. psychology,
education, statistics, nursing)
The set of materials (people, research, media, ideas) that relate to one or more
attributes of the subject matter and which are pertinent to an activity, topic,
module, course or program
The person, or persons, responsible for the management, delivery and knowledge
domain of a course
A course outline that specifies the providers commitment to the learner; the
syllabus does not contain full details of assessments or learning activities

(b) The practice involves the essential steps a design alchemist and the course
stakeholders must complete in order to generate a course design structure which
provides the framework for detailed specification of learning activities, assessments and resources.
(c) The assets refer to those factors which inform all intentional learning environments, such as professional standards or a learning management system.
Together these components define the Design Alchemy framework, and the
following sections provide an overview of each component. A full analysis of
Design Alchemy is documented in Part II.

44

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Fig. 3.6 The integrated
components of Design
Alchemy

What Is the Pedagogy of Design Alchemy?
The first component of Design Alchemy relates to the pedagogy required to enable
active learning and the achievement of learning outcomes. The pedagogy
synthesises and integrates seven different theories of practice into a comprehensive
whole (Fig. 3.7). Based on the principles of learner-centred education, the pedagogy embraces inclusive learning, active learning, problem-based learning, contextual learning, social learning, creative learning and emergent learning through
the creation of artefacts. Prioritising the learner is critical to Design Alchemy,
because the need to privilege the teacher as the one who can provide all necessary
knowledge no longer holds true. The role of learner, and teacher, can be played by
any and each course participant.
The seven components with contribute to the Design Alchemy pedagogy are
viewed as integrated and inter-related in a learner-centred environment and can be
explained through the following design points:
• Course participants engage in learning activities that create artefacts (models,
objects, ideas) which form an assessment item.
• The activities are situated within the learner’s own context, or context of choice,
and privilege their personal characteristics through inclusivity.
• The activity involves developing a response or solution to a problem, challenge
or issue, through collaboration, manifested in the resultant artefact.
• As part of the process of creating the artefact, participants encouraged to propose
alternatives to current practice, principles and theories and, through emergence,
generate new knowledge.

Elements of Design Alchemy

45

Fig. 3.7 Elements of the
Design Alchemy pedagogy

What Is the Practice of Design Alchemy?
As illustrated in Fig. 3.8, the practice of Design Alchemy involves a five-step
process which provides a practical and efficient means to design any educational
experience, from a single learning activity to a complete program of study. The
relationship this process has with other design methods is explored in the following
chapters, and based on a range of course development projects in which this
practice has been deployed, it will be welcomed by course participants because it
is both logical and effective and results in designs which are relevant to learners and
manageable for teachers.
The five steps of Design Alchemy practice involve a sequence which results in:
1. The definition of knowledge application, a statement of what students will be
able to do on completing the course and which provides a clear representation of
why someone should study the course.
2. The specification of learning and professional outcomes, the essential skills or
attributes the student will be able to demonstrate and confirm their readiness to
apply the stated knowledge and skills.
3. The alignment of assessment items and criteria with learning outcomes.
4. The alignment of learning activities with learning outcomes and assessment
which, when completed, produce artefacts that form all or part of an
assessment item.
5. The identification of the learning resources (research, media, information,
people) that will enable completion of each learning activity.

46

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Fig. 3.8 The Design Alchemy process

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?
The third component of Design Alchemy identifies the assets or environmental
factors that can impact on the design of the learning experience and which include
national and international standards of quality, institutional requirements for programs and courses and the sustainable strategies and practices deployed for the
creation and maintenance of those programs and courses, such as Three-Phase
Design (Fig. 3.9).
As an overview, the following explains the meaning and importance of each of
these assets to the design process:
• Standards: acknowledging the expectations for quality and consistency of
courses defined by national, state or local agencies as well as the institution
offering the course
• Programs: understanding the relationship between and within programs and
their constituent courses as well as the informing domain and discourse
• Evidence: using evidence-based practice to inform design decisions
• Process: implementing sustainable and continuous improvement components
into design activities
• People: recognising and utilising the array of people who impact on the creation
and delivery of a course
For the experienced designer, these assets will generally be understood and can
be integrated during the design practice. For those less familiar with educational
design, it can be useful to identify the impact of these assets on the design space
before commencing the design practice.

Synthesising Practice, Pedagogy and Assets
Compared to traditional approaches to design which embraced the ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, evaluation) cycle, Design Alchemy
effectively integrates each of these steps through creating, practically and efficiently, a course design which is functional, pedagogical and sustainable. Together
the three components of Design Alchemy provide a logical and informed approach
for design practice, an approach that is not only efficient in terms of time but also
effective through integration of assets and the application of a comprehensive
pedagogy.

References

47

Fig. 3.9 The influences of Design Alchemy

How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?
In response to the question posed by this chapter, the Design Alchemy framework
emerged from specific research endeavours in interactivity, Proactive Evaluation
and Three-Phase Design as well as extensive design and development practice. The
Design Alchemy approach is effective because it is practice based and founded on
theory and results in efficient, practical and sustainable course designs.
In the following chapters, the alignment of Design Alchemy are addressed from
the perspective of learning theory (Chap. 4), instructional design (Chap. 5) and
learning design (Chap. 6). This is followed by an assessment of factors which can
operate as distractors to effective design practice (Chap. 7).

References
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1998). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life.
New York: Basic Books.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The systematic design of instruction (4th ed.). New York, NY:
Harper Collins.

48

3 How Did Design Alchemy Emerge?

Earl, L. M. (2013). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student
learning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Farrow, M., & Sims, R. (1987). Computer-assisted learning in occupational therapy. Australian
Occupational Therapy Journal, 34(2), 53–58.
Irlbeck, S., Kays, E., Jones, D., & Sims, R. (2006). The phoenix rising: Emergent models of
instructional design. Distance Education, 27(2), 171–185.
Jonassen, D. (Ed.). (1988). Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kays, E. & Sims, R. (2006). Reinventing and reinvigorating instructional design: A theory for
emergent learning. In L. Markauskaite, P. Goodyear, & P. Reimann (Eds.) Proceedings of the
23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary
Education: Who’s Learning? Whose Technology? (pp. 409–412). Sydney: Sydney University
Press.
Lanarca Declaration. (2012). Lanarca declaration on learning design. Available from http://
larnacadeclaration.wordpress.com/full-document/. Accessed September 10, 2013.
Laurel, B. (1991). Computers as theatre. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Morgan, C., & O‘Reilly, M. (1999). Assessing open and distance learners. London: Kogan Page.
National Institute of Dramatic Art (NIDA). (1998). Stage struck. [CD-ROM]. Australia on CD
Program.
Pannafino, J. (2012). Interdisciplinary interaction design: A visual guide to basic theories, models
and ideas for thinking and designing for interactive web design and digital device experiences.
USA: Assiduous Publishing.
Pratt, A. (2012). Interactive design: An introduction to the theory and application of user-centered
design. Beverly, MA: Rockport Publishing.
Rhodes, D. M., & Azbell, J. W. (1985). Designing interactive video instruction professionally.
Training and Development Journal, 39(12), 31–33.
Schwier, R. A., & Misanchuk, E. (1993). Interactive multimedia instruction. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Educational Technology.
Sheldrake, R. (2011). The presence of the past: Morphic resonance and the habits of nature.
London: Icon Books.
Sims, R. (1997). Interactivity: A forgotten art? Computers in Human Behavior, 13(2), 157–180.
Sims, R. (2000). Learners as actors: Strategies for computer-enhanced learning encounters.
Unpublished Ph.D., thesis, Wollongong University.
Sims, R. (2006). Beyond instructional design: Making learning design a reality. Journal of
Learning Design, 1(2), 1–8. (Keynote Paper) Available from http://www.jld.qut.edu.au/.
Accessed May 16, 2006.
Sims, R. (2009). From three-phase to proactive learning design: Creating effective online teaching
and learning environments. In J. Willis (Ed.), Constructivist instructional design (C-ID):
Foundations, models, and practical examples (pp. 379–391). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Sims, R. (2012). Reappraising design practice. In D. Holt, S. Segrave, & J. Cybulski (Eds.),
Professional education using e-simulations: Benefits of blended learning design. Hershey, PA:
IGI Global.
Sims, R., Dobbs, G., & Hand, T. (2002). Enhancing quality in online learning: Scaffolding design
and planning through proactive evaluation. Distance Education, 23(2), 135–148.
Sims, R., & Hedberg, J. (2006). Encounter theory: A model to enhancing online communication,
interaction and engagement. In C. Jawah (Ed.), Interactions in online education: Implications
for theory and practice. London: Routledge Education.
Sims, R., & Jones, D. (2003). Where practice informs theory: Reshaping instructional design for
academic communities of practice in online teaching and learning. Information Technology,
Education and Society, 4(1), 3–20.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science,
12, 257–285.
Tolkien, J. R. R. (1954). The fellowship of the ring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Chapter 4

Which Learning Theories?

Abstract The ultimate focus of all educational design endeavours is student
learning; however, as documented in the previous chapters, there are quite different
perspectives in practice which can impact on the dynamic of learning and teaching.
The key factors underlying those differences relate to epistemology (how we view
knowledge), learning (how we transform information into knowledge) and process
(the journey we undergo to achieve learning and the people and practices with
whom we interact). This chapter provides an overview of the first two factors,
epistemology and theories of learning, to introduce the philosophies and theories
that underpin Design Alchemy. How we learn has been the subject of research and
debate for centuries, and each theory has its own extensive research base; the
purpose of this chapter is to identify, rather than analyse, those theories which
have particular relevance to Design Alchemy. The identification of these theories
and models provides a basis for a pedagogy to inform design and in doing so
addresses the question guiding this chapter: which learning theories?

Philosophy or Theory?
How we learn and the education we need to enable that learning has been debated
for centuries; over that time, different approaches to learning and teaching have
emerged, often a function of sociopolitical and economic circumstances. As a
practitioner in the field, I have developed a particular philosophy towards learning
and teaching, and the following quotes reinforce the importance of knowing our
individual philosophy towards knowledge and education, as this is a critical influence on how we approach design and determines the nature of the dynamic
established between course participants:
I believe that all education proceeds by the participation of the individual in the social
consciousness of the race. (Dewey, 1940, p. 3)

In reading Dewey’s Pedagogic Creed (originally published in 1897), we have a
glimpse of an approach to education that is (surprisingly?) reflective of today’s
R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_4,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

49

50

4

Which Learning Theories?

online world: terms such as participation, individual and social resonate with the
tenets of higher education, especially in terms of online learning environments. In
the same way, the role of the individual learner within and through their social
connections is critical to the ethos of Design Alchemy and to the broader development of knowledge and understanding.
The more I reflect on design for learning and teaching, the clearer it becomes that
Design Alchemy aligns with what have been called ‘alternative’ schools, such as
the one proposed by Steiner (1919, p. 3):
The Waldorf School will be a primary school that teaches its students through basing its
educational goals and curriculum on insight into the nature of the human being, an insight
that must be alive in each teacher.

Apart from the emphasis placed on the energy of the teacher, the concept that
learning must revolve around the whole human being is important because it
acknowledges the different dimensions of humanity: physical, intellectual, emotional, social and spiritual. Too often it seems education and educational design
practice focus on the intellectual and physical only, which may explain the reasons
why commentators (e.g. Robinson, 2013) have championed the case for educators
to focus more on creativity, diversity and imagination.
The views of A. S. Neill and the Summerhill School also provide insight into
Design Alchemy, because the focus is on an individual learner who is perceived to
have the capacity for wisdom and self-development:
When (we) began the school, we had one main idea: to make the school fit the child—
instead of making the child fit the school . . . My view is that the child is intimately wise and
realistic. If left to himself without adult suggestion of any kind, he will develop as far as he
is capable of developing. (Neil, 1969, p. 4)

As designers, do we try to make the design fit the learner, or are we intent on
making the learner fit the design? In a nutshell, this encapsulates the philosophy
underpinning Design Alchemy—that design must focus on creating environments
through which the individual learner can flourish and grow. This extends to a
broader philosophy towards learning and teaching that can be expressed as
The individual learner is empowered with creativity and imagination that through interaction with people and ideas can transform their understanding and enable the emergence
of new knowledge.

What Is Knowledge?
Different approaches to design, learning and teaching often manifest in different
ideas about knowledge and how it is acquired. As introduced in Chap. 3 (and
elaborated in Chap. 9), a key element of Design Alchemy practice is identifying
and stating the knowledge we wish learners to apply on completion of the course—
not always as easy as it might appear. This expression is particularly important,
because it focuses on the individual applying knowledge (the ability to complete

What Is Learning?

51

Table 4.1 Defining epistemology
Epistemology
(From the Greek ēpistemē, meaning ‘knowledge, understanding’, and logos, meaning ‘study of’)
The branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge, questioning what
knowledge is and the extent to which knowledge pertinent to any given subject or entity can be
acquired.
[Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology]

cognitive, affective or psychomotor tasks) rather than reciting or recalling that same
knowledge through discrete summative assessment. While a detailed study of
knowledge is for philosophers, designers must be able to express their individual
approach to knowledge (Table 4.1).
My personal understanding of knowledge is that it represents a model or schema
internal to the learner and which is constructed by the individual in order to make
meaning within their own situation or context. From an educational perspective,
therefore, the resources learners encounter (people, ideas, objects) provide information, and it is then the role of the designer to create an environment in which that
information can be transformed into knowledge. For example, as the author of this
text, I am presenting my knowledge, synthesised from research and people and
events I have encountered. However, for the reader, the narrative at first represents
only information, after which it can be used to construct or deconstruct and
reconstruct current understandings of design for learning and teaching, dependent
on the experience, philosophy or practice of the reader.

What Is Learning?
Given that designers have a philosophy of education and a view of knowledge, how
do these relate to learning? Theories as to how and why humans learn are extensive,
ranging from the biological to the psychological to the social, and each has its own
traditions and extensive research base. To provide a context for this section,
definitions of learning (see Table 4.2) provide representations of approaches
adopted within Design Alchemy.
Based on the first definition, learning can be seen as goal directed, which links to
the extent to which a learner is motivated to achieve that goal; the activities
provided to learners must therefore support and promote individual motivation.
This is where well-established approaches to motivation, such as Keller’s (2010)
Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction (ARCS) model, can inform design
practice. ARCS represents a problem-solving approach to learning, and therefore,
the principles can be applied when devising problem-based activities to support the
learning process. From the designer’s perspective, if an activity is defined as
problem based, it will support learner motivation.
As noted in the previous section, knowledge is a critical element of learning, and
the second definition (Table 4.2) reinforces what needs to be measured in terms of

52

4

Which Learning Theories?

Table 4.2 Defining learning
Learning
a) Learning is a goal-directed act.
b) Learning is acquiring new, or modifying and reinforcing, existing knowledge, behaviours,
skills, values or preferences and may involve synthesising different types of information.
c) Learning is contextual; it does not happen all at once but builds upon and is shaped by what we
already know.
d) Learning may be viewed as a process, rather than a collection of factual and procedural
knowledge.
(Summarised and edited from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning)

learning: the knowledge to be applied and the associated learning outcomes.
Equally important is that learning can be viewed as contextual (the third definition)
and a process (the fourth definition), emphasising the importance of designing so an
individual can make sense of the information they encounter through a process that
privileges their own situation and experience.
As a designer, therefore, it is essential to adopt an open and eclectic approach to
learning, as different instances of learning align with different theoretical
approaches. For example, experiencing (learning) that a flame hurts and burns the
skin and then responding by avoiding the flame aligns with a behaviourist approach
to learning (e.g. Skinner, 1969). Alternatively, learning how to perform a song on
stage can be aligned to social learning theory, where learning is viewed as a process
whereby behaviour is modelled based on observations of others (Bandura, 1977).
Understanding that both can be useful, rather than prioritising one over the other, is
crucial to design success.
The design alchemist does not align with any single learning theory, viewing
learning as a process and based on a pedagogy that integrates interaction, creativity
and problem-solving in order to acquire knowledge and even generate new knowledge. Through the process of design, the learning activities created will integrate a
range of learning theories and strategies which are consistent with the philosophy,
the epistemology and the learning domain. To elaborate on this, the following
sections provide an overview of selected theories and how they inform the practice
of Design Alchemy.

Constructivism
A summary of constructivism as a learning theory (see Table 4.3) is that individuals
construct their view of the world through processing information received and then
constructing, deconstructing and reconstructing mental models or representations
of that information. For example, I recall an anecdote where a teacher unequivocally stated to his class that cars had to have an equal number of cylinders in order to

Constructivism

53

Table 4.3 Defining constructivism
Constructivism
Constructivism explains how knowledge is constructed in the human being when information
comes into contact with existing knowledge that had been developed through experiences.
Constructs are the different types of filters we choose to place over our realities to change our
reality from chaos to order.
Discovery, hands-on, experiential, collaborative, project-based and task-based learning are strategies that base learning and teaching on constructivism.
[Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(learning_theory)]

run; when confronted with a three-cylinder vehicle, such as the Suzuki Alto,1 that
teacher’s model of a functional engine had to be deconstructed and reconstructed to
cater for the new information.
Perhaps of all the learning theories, constructivism has generated the most
critical attention within the field, and there have been numerous debates between
‘instructivists’ and ‘constructivist’ as to relative merits of the respective approaches
(e.g. Merrill, Drake, Lacy, Pratt, & The ID2 Research Group Utah State University,
1996). Duffy and Jonassen (1992) considered these differences in terms of the
objectivist and constructivist traditions:
Instructional design, and indeed instruction in general in the United States, emerged from
an objectivist tradition. Objectivism holds that the world is completely and correctly
structured in terms of entities, properties, and relations (Lakoff, 1987, p. 159). Experience
plays an insignificant role in the structuring of the world; meaning is something that exists
in the world quite aside from experience . . . The goal of instruction is to help the learner
acquire the entities and relations and the attributes . . . to build “the” correct propositional
structure. (pp. 5–6)
Constructivism provides an alternative epistemological base . . . Constructivism, like
objectivism, holds that there is a real world we experience. However the argument is that
meaning is imposed on the world by us, rather than existing independently of us.

Duffy and Jonassen (1992, p. 2) also noted that ‘our designs are not just objective
descriptions of the instructional sequence, but rather they are an implicit expression
of our theory of learning’. This attitude aligns explicitly with Design Alchemy; the
approach is not only about the micro-level of learning activities and learning
outcomes (which in itself presents a different perspective to instructional sequence)
but also a total expression of a theory of learning specifically, but not uniquely,
focused on technology-enabled and online environments.
Within the Design Alchemy framework, integrating the constructivist learning
theory means focusing on the individual learner, the meanings they apply to the
world and specifying activities from which they can engage in critical thinking. In
particular the constructivist approach aligns with the learner-centred and contextual
components of the pedagogy: the individual learner creates meaning based on their
personal circumstances and situation. And this meaning is enabled through a cycle
of constructing, reconstructing and deconstructing the models we have of our
world.

1

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Alto.

54

4

Which Learning Theories?

In conducting the research for this book, I have undergone a process of not only
constructing the Design Alchemy framework but also reconstructing my existing
models of instructional design. Although the objectivist traditions can still be seen
as being implemented in ways that do not reflect best practice, I also have
reconstructed my internal schema of the myriad of design models available.
While I’ve not had to undergo a major deconstruction such as the mechanic teacher,
being aware of the models and schema that inform our practice, and being open to
reconstructing them, remains a critical element of design success. To use an
analogy, rather than viewing the different models as different cakes, I see them
all as chocolate cakes which use different recipes. However, the question raised
throughout this exposition of Design Alchemy is whether we fully understand and
have identified the full set of ingredients, and their quantities, to bake a real
chocolate cake.

Social Learning
The value of learning with our networks of peers and colleagues cannot be
underestimated, as learning about our world from and with our own family and
community has been successfully practised for centuries. Bandura (1977, p. 39)
considered that
Most human behaviour is learned observationally, through modelling: from observing
others one forms an idea of how new behaviours are performed, and on later occasions
this coded information serves as a guide for action . . . another influential source of social
learning is the abundance and varied symbolic modelling provided by television, films, and
other visual media.

Based on this perspective, our interaction with people and the artefacts of our
culture are integral to learning, to developing knowledge and to understanding the
way the world operates. The growth and maturity of the Internet as a learning place
and space has seen more and more value placed on that interaction or collaboration
(e.g. Roth & Lee, 2006); in recent years this has extended to include assessments of
the value of using of social media and networks, such as Facebook or Twitter, to
enhance learning in the classroom (e.g. Benson & Koster, 2011). However, as
emphasised in Chap. 3, if the design process starts by considering how a technology
might be used for learning and teaching, the priorities are misplaced. If design
focuses on pedagogy, identifying the desired outcomes and knowledge application,
then the value of the available technologies to those outcomes will be evident, and
selections made accordingly.

Situated Cognition

55

Social Constructivism
When social learning theory and collaboration is applied to educational design, it
does not necessarily imply group assignments, but rather the importance of other
people and events contributing to the learning experience. If design practice adopts
an ethos that values the individual student being separated from their peers, and
monitored to ensure they do not cheat or collude, it is inconsistent with the Design
Alchemy philosophy. In fact the growth of services to provide surveillance and
monitoring of students during assessment appears to align institutions which support that practice with a penitentiary rather than a place of learning.
Maintaining the position that learning is enabled when working with peers or
observing peers, the synergy between constructivism and social learning describes
the theory of social constructivism which refers to situations where ‘a social group
constructs knowledge for the individual members, which also involves collaboratively creating a culture of shared artefacts with shared meanings2’. This also links
to the early work of Vygotsky (1978)3 who considered that reasoning emerged
through practical activity in a social environment.
Based on this summary, learning can be viewed not only as a process of
(internally) constructing models of knowledge and its meaning but also as the
result of observing the world in which we live (individually) as well as through
our interactions with other people (as part of a group). Together these represent
elements of what I refer to as a pedagogy (see Chap. 8), and when applied to the
practice of Design Alchemy, explicit links can be seen between these theories and
the learning environment: the activities result in the creation of assessment artefacts
(constructivism) that are developed through contextual (social learning) and collaborative endeavours (social constructivism). Through this application of an
eclectic set of learning theories, the ability to acquire and apply knowledge is
enhanced.

Situated Cognition
The principle of situated cognition (see Table 4.4) was elaborated by Brown,
Collins, and Duguid, (1989, p. 38) who proposed a model of cognitive apprenticeship which ‘attempts to promote learning within the nexus of activity, tool, and
culture . . . learning, both outside and inside school, advances through collaborative
social interaction and the social construction of knowledge’. A significant component of this model embraced the notion of authentic learning (the ordinary practices
of the culture; Brown et al., 1989), which emphasised the importance of learning in
2

Text adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_constructivism.
Lev Vygotsky was a Russian psychologist who died in 1934. This publication represents a
collection of his works.
3

56

4

Which Learning Theories?

Table 4.4 Defining situated cognition
Situated cognition
Knowing is inseparable from doing: all knowledge is situated in activity bound to social, cultural
and physical contexts.
[Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situated_cognition]

a relevant context such that the knowledge and skills acquired can be applied and/or
adapted to that situation. This perspective of learning and authenticity and situation
was also elaborated by Norman (1993, p. 4) who proposed that
Human knowledge and interaction cannot be divorced from the world. To do so is to study a
disembodied intelligence, one that is artificial, unreal, and uncharacteristic of actual
behavior. What really matters is the situation and the parts that people play. One cannot
look at just the situation, or just the environment, or just the person. To do so is to destroy
the very phenomenon of interest. After all, it is the mutual accommodation of people and the
environment that matters, so to focus upon only aspects in isolation is to destroy the
interaction, to eliminate the role of the situation upon cognition and action.

Clancy (1997) also promoted the value of situated cognition, focusing on the
ways artificial intelligence could support of human performance, emphasising that
The theory of situated cognition . . . claims that every human thought and action is adapted
to the environment, that is, situated, because what people perceive, how they conceive of
their activity, and what they physically do develop together. (pp. 1–2)

The relationship between situated cognition theory and contemporary learning
and teaching is significant. As discussed in Chap. 1, the traditional classroom was
an integral part of a local community, and the learning and teaching activities were
bound within that community. However this environment has changed significantly. Students are no longer bound to learning at a time and place defined by an
educational institution, and the emergence of the online classroom has increased the
diversity of student cohorts in terms of age, location, experience and motivation. It
thus becomes critical for the designer to focus more on the context and situation in
which the individual student chooses to be in order to ensure that the learning
activities they experience are related to, and situated within, their own experience
and align with their specific interests.
Because of this shift, students are now more focused in learning within their own
environment and using the acquired knowledge to meet personal goals. In this case,
the teacher, whose experience may relate to a quite different situation or context,
may not be equipped to teach to that learning goal. However they do have the option
to transform their role from teacher to a participant who can act as elder and mentor.
As an example, if a course on How to be an Effective Manager accepted enrolments
from students around the world, the design for that course should focus on students
being effective managers within their own chosen workplace situation and which
would involve demonstration of the associated learning outcomes in that context.
The teacher would use their own situated knowledge to compare and contrast those
different expressions of management. While such scenarios have been used extensively, they also contrast those courses where the design is based on a fixed set of

Experiential Learning

57

Table 4.5 Defining experiential learning
Experiential learning
The process of making meaning (learning) from direct experience.
Experiential learning focuses on the learning process for the individual.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiential_learning]

resources and outcomes, without consideration of the application of the knowledge
base to different situations or cultures.
The learner’s location, context or situation makes the situated cognition theory
relevant to design practice, with the added proviso that location can apply equally to
a virtual place (anywhere) as to a physical place (somewhere).

Experiential Learning
A theory of learning aligned with situated cognition is the idea that the individual
learns through actual (or virtual) engagement with the task being learned, referred
to as experiential learning (see Table 4.5). For example, rather than reading about
stellar constellations, it is clearly preferable to go out on a clear night and view the
actual sky.
A cyclical model utilising experiential learning was proposed by Kolb and Fry
(1975) which identified four component elements: concrete experience, observation
and reflection, forming abstract concepts and testing new concepts. While this
model can be framed at the micro-level of prescribing individual activities within
a lesson, it also implies that experiential learning could result in the generation of
new knowledge through the testing of ideas and concepts in different situations.
This provides insights into the ways that a learning experience enables emergence,
a key element of the Design Alchemy pedagogy.
A second consideration of experiential learning relates to the ways in which
assessment is perceived and implemented. Within the framework of Design
Alchemy, assessment items are viewed as outputs and creations of the learning
activities, which are contextualised within real-world experiential contexts through
simulations, scenarios and role-plays. In effect the learning activity is the assessment task, as it produces artefacts that allow a determination of whether the
learning outcome has been achieved. Conceptually, the designer visualises the
learner in their own context, participating actively in a real-world experience,
which allows them to generate understanding of the ways in which the subject
matter being studied applies to their own situation, and expressing that in the
artefact created. This extends the interrelationship between learning and assessment
expressed by Earl (2003):
• Assessment of learning: a summative approach where teachers are responsible
for creating and marking tests
• Assessment for learning: where teachers collect data to modify student activities

58

4

Which Learning Theories?

• Assessment as learning: which is learner focused and involves self-monitoring
and adjustment
However, these individual expressions of assessment do not explicitly align with
the Design Alchemy approach. While the designer (or teacher) creates the assessment criteria, and may well collaborate with other participants to adapt the learning
activities (the real-time application of three-phase design discussed in Chap. 3), the
learner is also responsible for defining the context in which those assessment items
are positioned. It is more a case that all of these expressions are relevant, which
requires a variation to Earl’s (2003) analysis:
• Assessment is learning: The experience of completing activities within context
creates the assessment artefact.
Using the experiential approach, learning can be viewed as resulting from the
participation in and completion of tasks; and learners will learn better when they
complete tasks which are based on real-world experiences. For example, being able
to recall the five steps of the Design Alchemy framework is not the same as
practising and applying those same steps to an actual course design and development project.

Connectivism
Siemens (2005) popularised the concept of connectivism in the field of educational
technology by emphasising the extensive connections emerging through social
networks, arguing that because of these networks we now have ‘a model of learning
that acknowledges the tectonic shifts in society where learning is no longer an
internal, individualistic activity’. However, as shown in the definitions of
connectivism (Table 4.6), the concept was well established before these remarks
were made, and the essence of the theory integrates elements of social and experiential learning. From a personal perspective, I do believe the power of connections
and the knowledge that can arise from those connections may be changing the very
concept of learning (Webb & Sims, 2006). Rather than learning being something
the individual does, learning becomes something the group generates. For the
designer, therefore, it is both the concept of connections and their potential impact
on what learning represents that is crucial to their practice.
Being connected to more people and information through social networks has,
for many, changed the way the world is perceived and the way the mind works. For
an individual, knowledge is no longer something that needs to be stored within the
brain; it can be contained in huge storage drives which archive digital memories
(documents, media), in the research databases and in the worldwide networks of
colleagues, friends and information. The connections enabled by this vast network
in effect represent an extension of our own memory, bringing humans into a
collective whole that could trigger phenomena such as morphic resonance

Which Learning Theories?

59

Table 4.6 Defining connectivism
Connectivism
A theory of learning which emphasises the role of the social and cultural context opposed to a more
essentialist notion which foregrounds the individual.
Connectivism is often associated with and proposes a perspective similar to Vygotsky’s zone of
proximal development (ZPD), an idea later transposed into Engeström’s activity theory.
Central to connectivism is the relationship between work experience, learning and knowledge, as
expressed in the concept of connectivity.
The add-on ‘a learning theory for the digital age’, which appears in Siemens’ paper, indicates the
emphasis it gives to how technology affects how people live, how they communicate and how
they learn.
(Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connectivism)

(Sheldrake, 2011). Designers must therefore enable learning activities to acknowledge and tap into this connected, global consciousness in order to enable connect
learning and the generation of emergent knowledge.

Which Learning Theories?
The preceding summary has identified five learning theories that inform the practice
of Design Alchemy, and these are represented on the right-hand side of Fig. 4.1.
Together these theories merge (construct) and then separate (deconstruct) into the
five elements of the Design Alchemy pedagogy, as shown on the left side of
Fig. 4.1. The practice for the designer therefore is not to align with one or more
learning theories, but to understand their practice as the layering of a pedagogy over
the learning and teaching environments they envision.
It is therefore not so much which learning theory, but rather what approach is
adopted for learning. This eclectic or consolidated strategy was well illustrated by
Alexander and Boud (2001, p. 7–8) who identified five propositions for educational
practice, and to which are added, in parentheses, the relevant pedagogical elements
of Design Alchemy:
1. Experience is the foundation of, and the stimulus for, learning. All learning
builds on what has gone on before; a new experience is understood in what has
gone on before (contextual learning through culture and experience).
2. Learners actively construct their own experience. Learning is never a passive
act. It involves active construction and reconstruction of ideas and experience
. . . Learning can be enjoyable and engaging, but only when the learner is
substantially involved (active learning; creative learning; problem-solving).
3. Learning is a holistic process. Learning is never solely cognitive . . . (it) involves
the emotions and the will. Satisfaction derives from engaging the whole person
(inclusive learning, contextual learning through culture).

60

4

Which Learning Theories?

Fig. 4.1 Learning theory and Design Alchemy pedagogy

4. Learning is socially and culturally constructed. Learning does not occur in
isolation. In order to learn, we all need interventions from outside ourselves
(social learning).
5. Learning is influenced by the socio-emotional context in which it occurs. The
extent to which we are motivated to learn depends as much on the context of
learning as it does on intrinsic interest in the object of study (contextual
learning).
It is not logical or feasible to support a single learning theory as a designer of
learning and teaching environments, and so it is with Design Alchemy. The
framework is predicated on a set of learning theories which provide the basis for
a learner-centred approach to course design, and provides an evidence-based
strategy by which these learning theories together are integrated through a pedagogy that informs the design of the learning environment and the learning activities
in which participants engage.

References
Alexander, S., & Boud, D. (2001). Learners still learn from experience. In J. Stephenson (Ed.),
Teaching & learning online: Pedagogies for new technologies. Lodon: Kogan Page.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.

References

61

Benson, K. J., & Koster, J. A. (2011). Social networks: Pedagogical tool or pedagogical threat? In
T. T. Kidd & I. Chen (Eds.), Ubiquitous learning: Strategies for pedagogy, course design, and
technology. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, S. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
Clancey, W. J. (1997). Situated cognition: On human knowledge and computer representations.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dewey, J. (1940). Education today. New York: Greenwood Press.
Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (Eds.). (1992). Constructivism and the technology of instruction:
A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximise student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model
approach. New York: Springer.
Kolb, D. A., & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper
(Ed.), Theories of group process. London: Wiley.
Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., Pratt, J., & The ID2 Research Group Utah State University.
(1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5–7.
Neil, A. S. (1969). Summerhill: A radical approach to education. London: Victor Gollancz.
Norman, D. A. (1993). Cognition in the head and in the world: An introduction to the special issue
on situated action. Cognitive Science, 17(1), 1–6.
Robinson, K. (2013). How to escape education’s death valley. http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_
robinson_how_to_escape_education_s_death_valley.html.
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, Y.-J. (2006). Contradictions in theorising and implementing communities in
education. Educational Research Review, 1(1), 27–40.
Sheldrake, R. (2011). The presence of the past: Morphic resonance and the habits of nature.
London: Icon Books Ltd.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved September
9, 2013, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement: A theoretical analysis. New York:
Appleton.
Steiner, R. (1919). The pedagogical basis of the Waldorf School (Translated by Catherine
E. Creeger). In Rudolf Steiner in the Waldorf School: Lectures and Addresses to Children,
Parents, and Teachers 1919–1924. New York: Anthroposophic Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Webb, R., & Sims, R. (2006). Online gaming and online gaming communities: Ten reasons why
they matter. In A. Treloar & A. Ellis (Eds.) Making a difference with web
technologies. Proceedings of AusWeb06, the Twelfth Australian World Wide Web Conference. Noosa Heads, QLD: Southern Cross University. http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw06/papers/
refereed/webb/index.html

Chapter 5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

Abstract Chapters 3 and 4 focused on the research that led to the emergence of the
Design Alchemy framework and the importance of learning theories to the way we
practise design. Given this background, this chapter examines how Design
Alchemy fits and aligns within instructional design, a practice which has been
adopted extensively as a de facto for the design, development and implementation
of learning and teaching resources and environments. It is important to note that this
chapter is not about instructional design; rather it is a presentation of selected
aspects of the instructional design tradition to illustrate the ways in which it informs
and aligns with Design Alchemy. To assess this alignment, the chapter introduces
the foundations and traditions of instructional design, followed by an examination
of three different design models, including an alternative design strategy which
presents a link between instructional design and learning design (see Chap. 6).
Despite the extensive use of instructional design, the practice has generated both
critique and challenge which are raised in the final section of this chapter. This
analysis demonstrates how Design Alchemy aligns with the traditions of instructional design and yet offers an alternative to best meet the needs of contemporary
learning and teaching.

Defining Instructional Design
Instructional design represents the primary tradition for the production of educational resources, and numerous texts and other media describe and support variants
of the process. To provide a general overview and context for the chapter, this
section presents relevant definitions and establishes an alignment with the practice
of Design Alchemy.
As a base to understand the role of instructional design, Reigeluth (1987, p. 1)
proposed that its purpose was ‘to provide educators and trainers with prescriptions
for making their instruction more effective and appealing . . . Prescriptive instructional theories offer . . . optimal combinations of strategy components for different
R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_5,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

63

64

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

Table 5.1 Defining instructional design
Instruction: the action, practice, or profession of teaching
(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/instruction)
Instructional Design is the practice of creating instructional experiences which make the acquisition of knowledge and skill more efficient, effective, and appealing.
(modified from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructional_design)

Table 5.2 Differentiating Design Alchemy
Instructional
Design
Design
Alchemy

The practice of creating teacher-focused experiences which make the acquisition of knowledge and skill more efficient, effective, and appealing
The practice of creating learner-centred environments which result in the
situated application of knowledge and skills through the interaction of
participants

situations’. Based on this definition and those presented in Table 5.1, there is a clear
relationship between instruction (teaching) and the acquisition of knowledge
(learner), even though the word ‘learner’ is not used.
However when compared with the concepts of Design Alchemy introduced in
Chap. 3, there are subtle differences in the language which differentiates the mindset of the two practices. This is represented in Table 5.2, which has adapted the
definition of instructional design (Table 5.1) to reveal a difference in terms of
participant roles; instructional design privileges the teacher, whereas Design
Alchemy privileges the learner.
A critical issue for design is therefore how the environments are conceptualised
and how the roles of course participants (teachers and learners) are constructed.
While it is acknowledged that all educational design practices seek to achieve
quality learning outcomes, the very fact that the various models can be contrasted
and even challenged raises questions relating to which process or practice has the
right recipe and the right ingredients.

Traditions of Instructional Design
While differences in definition are important to understand the various practices of
educational design, it is also essential to acknowledge the traditions of the field and
how they have informed those practices. In this section the contributions of Gagné
(1965), Dick and Carey (1996) and Merrill (2002) are presented to highlight their
foundational work and to assess those contributions in terms of Design Alchemy, a
new and emergent design practice.

Traditions of Instructional Design

65

Robert Gagné
Considered as the father of instructional design, Robert Gagné (1965, p. 23) said of
learning and teaching:
There are many aspects of the personal interaction between a teacher and his students that
do not pertain, in a strict sense, to the acquisition of skills and knowledge that typically
form the content of a curriculum. These varieties of interaction include those of motivating,
persuading, and the establishment of attitudes and values.

This encapsulates the importance of learning and teaching being not only about
the subject matter but also the dynamic between course participants; equally
important is the emphasis of knowledge acquisition, a common expectation of
design models. However, one of the major contributions Gagné (1965) made was
the specification of conditions of learning, and the role planning (design) plays in
creating these conditions:
A student is ready to learn something new when he has mastered the prerequisites; that is,
when he has acquired the necessary capabilities through preceding learning. Planning for
learning is a matter of specifying and ordering the prerequisite capabilities within a topic
to be learned, and later perhaps among the topics that make up a “subject”. (Gagné, 1965,
p. 25)

As illustrated by this perspective, one of the assumptions was that design is
primarily aimed at a teacher who would work with students as they progressed
through a course at a relatively constant pace. While a prerequisite structure is an
important sequence in education, enabling learning by moving from the known to
the unknown, it is now far more complex because of the diversity and distribution
of students as well as the emphasis placed on personalised learning. In comparison,
when Gagné (1965, p. 26) considered the conditions for learning in detail, they were
viewed as more generic than individual:
Instructing means arranging the conditions of learning that are external to the learner . . . it
is extremely difficult to do well with a group . . . it is easier to accomplish under the rare
conditions in which a single teacher communicates with a single student.

This is contrary to a practice that aims to meet individual and situational needs
rather attempting to represent the conditions of instruction externally, independent
of students. In addition, the notion that groups may not work has been superseded
by the potential for learning that can emerge through connections made within
social media networks.
A further issue Gagné (1965, p. 27) commented on was the extent to which
formal education resulted in knowledge generalisation:
Knowledge transfer is frequently emphasised as a purpose of education. It is said that
education should be concerned not simply with the acquisition of knowledge, but more
importantly with the use and generalisation of knowledge in novel situations. First of all, it
is evident that knowledge transfer cannot occur if the knowledge itself has not initially been
mastered . . . there is an important question of what conditions of instruction are required to
encourage generalisation of knowledge.

66

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

This illustrates how different ways of thinking can change educational concept.
Gagné (1965) notes the importance of mastering knowledge before it can be
generalised and also the nature of conditions that might lead to transfer. As this
approach to design is still evident in areas of practice, there is a suggestion that
strategies designed to achieve generalisation are not consistently successful. However the Design Alchemy pedagogy addresses both these issues; as it is assumed
learners have both experience and knowledge, from this they will be able to resolve
problem-solving activities through collaboration and critical thinking. This in turn
will generate new knowledge and enable generalisation, as the experiences of the
different participants will identify and demonstrate the different options for
application.
Nevertheless, the conditions of learning, which focus on how a teacher might
manage learning in the classroom, provide insights for all learning environments.
The nine conditions specified by Gagné (1965) and their alignment with terms from
the Design Alchemy framework are presented in Table 5.3 and highlight the
similarities even though the language and approach may differ.
The conditions of learning, even though specified five decades ago, retain their
relevance as long as they are contextualised within a framework, such as Design
Alchemy that captures the complexity of the current learning and teaching environment where openness, connections and personalisation dominate the discourse.

Dick and Carey
A major element supporting instructional design practice has been the specification
of processes designed to support both the educational elements of design and those
related to project development. The work of Dick and Carey (1996), whose model
is represented in Fig. 5.1,1 is seminal in this area, and when compared with the
practice of Design Alchemy, the five central elements (see Chap. 8) align precisely,
even though the terminology reflects the different periods in which these models
were developed.
Despite this alignment, one of the major differences is that instructional design
models are typically predicated on what should be taught and how that teaching
should be delivered (the ‘traditional’ approach discussed further in Chap. 6). On the
other hand, Design Alchemy focuses on what will be learned and how that learning
will be applied. In recognising these are not mutually exclusive, the critical issue
relates to how the different models are interpreted and practised, rather than the
actual structure and mechanics of the process.

1
The seventh edition of this text was published in 2001, representing its longevity and recognition
in the field.

Traditions of Instructional Design

67

Table 5.3 Conditions of learning and Design Alchemy (Based on Gagné, 1965)
Condition
Gain attention

Description
Present stimulus to ensure
reception of instruction
Tell the learners the
What will the pupil gain from
learning objective
the instruction?
Stimulate recall of prior Ask for recall of existing relelearning
vant knowledge
Present the stimulus
Display the content
Provide learning
Support the students
guidance
Elicit performance
Learners respond to demonstrate knowledge
Provide feedback
Give informative feedback on
the learner’s performance
Assess performance
More performance and more
feedback to reinforce
information
Enhance retention and Ensure knowledge can be
transfer to other
generalised
contexts

Design Alchemy
Provide a problem or challenge to
resolve
Align learning outcomes
Use current experience, knowledge,
networks and context
Provide access to resources
Make clear participant roles
Create assessment artefact
Align elements of the artefact with
assessment criteria
Align elements of the artefact with
assessment criteria
Achievement of learning outcomes
demonstrates ability to apply
knowledge

Fig. 5.1 Instructional design process (adapted from Dick & Carey, 1996)

David Merrill
The contribution made by David Merrill to instructional design has been significant,
and this section provides a brief assessment of selected elements of his work. As an
example, Merrill et al. (1996, p. 2) observed that
Students are persons who submit themselves to the acquisition of specific knowledge and
skill from instruction, learners are persons who derive meaning and change their behavior
based on their experiences. All of us are learners, but only those who submit themselves to
deliberate instructional situations are students.

68

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

While recognising this observation was made almost 20 years ago, it highlights
the different perspectives researchers present. There appears to be a major conceptual difference between a student ‘submitting to instruction’ and a learner ‘engaged
in learning activities’ (which represents part of the Design Alchemy pedagogy). As
language is critical, and the educational landscape changing, is it necessary to
differentiate learner from student? Contrary to the ethos of Design Alchemy, my
concern is that by doing so, we may privilege the teacher over the student/learner.
Taking a more recent perspective, Merrill (2002, 2012) proposed the First
Principles of Instruction, with the first principle focusing on learning that is
‘promoted when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems’ (p. 45).
This is completely consistent with both the Design Alchemy pedagogy and other
practices which promote problems as a central driver for learning (e.g. Barrett &
Moore, 2010). However when compared in terms of the remaining principles, there
are differences in not only the ‘how’ but also in the underlying epistemology.
Whereas Merrill (2002, p. 45) appears to view knowledge (and skill) as something
that can be taught so it will be acquired by the learner, the Design Alchemy
approach views knowledge as internal to the learner and acquired through a
combination of contextual, collaborative problem-solving activities. Even though
this language is clearly different, the question remains: is this simply a different
representation of the same strategy, or does it represent a fundamental difference
in design philosophy and epistemology? To further highlight the alignment,
a comparison of the remaining First Principles and Design Alchemy is presented
in Table 5.4.

Traditions in Review
When compared to the traditions of instructional design, the affordances of Design
Alchemy are alike, and yet unalike. To consider this from a different perspective,
just as the same songs aren’t performed the same way by different singers, so
classes aren’t taught the same way by different teachers; there are no doubt as many
teaching styles as there are teachers. Some of those teachers will manage the
learning process as a shared experience, while others will view the process as
delivery of information. The design (song) may be seen as a constant, but it is the
practice or delivery (the performance) that is critical. The value of instructional
design is that it generates prescriptions for teaching, but if the teacher does not align
with or support those prescriptions, the results will be unpredictable if not unacceptable. Where Design Alchemy adds value is through a focus on the learner and
learning, which is especially important in the online environment; because the
teacher may not be present, a design with embedded ‘best-practice teaching’ and
which blurs the roles of learner and teacher will maximise the opportunity for
learning outcomes to be achieved. Using the same approach will also minimise the
options for teachers to affect the design, because their role changes.

Models of Instructional Design

69

Table 5.4 Design Alchemy and First Principles (Merrill, 2002)
First Principles
Activation: learning is promoted when relevant
previous experience is applied
Demonstration: learning is promoted when the
instruction demonstrates what is to be
learned rather than merely telling information about what is to be learned
Application: learning is promoted when learners
are required to use their new knowledge or
skill to solve problems
Integration: learning is promoted when learners
are encouraged to integrate (transfer) the
new knowledge or skill into their everyday
life

Design Alchemy
Learning is activated through problem-solving
Learning outcomes (what is to be learned) is not
necessarily fixed—emergence allows for
different elements to be introduced to the
field of knowledge
Learners use existing knowledge to solve problems and through that process generate new
knowledge
Learning is completed when knowledge can be
applied in context

Models of Instructional Design
Even though there are strong traditions of instructional design, a search from the
Internet will reveal hundreds, if not thousands, of models representing developments and variations to the originating concepts. The purpose of this section is to
examine three of those models to provide examples of the range of options available
to practitioners and to elaborate on their alignment with Design Alchemy.

Pregent (1994)
The first model represents one selected randomly from a library shelf in order to
compare and assess a practice with which I was unfamiliar. Figure 5.2 represents
the structure and process sequence presented by Pregent (1994), which compares
with other models that aim to achieve effective teaching and successful learning.
For example, on examination the model aligns with that of Dick and Carey (1996),
with the word evaluation used in place of assessment, and extends the model
through specific emphasis on teaching in a face-to-face classroom.
This raises the question as to whether a different design model is required for
different access modes. Surely design models can be generic, with the environment
in which the course operates (face-to-face, online, distance) viewed as an asset to
the design process. And yet practitioners (designers or teachers) often see the need
to create new models or variants of existing models, rather than rely on those more
established. One reason for this may be that the models available to practitioners are
not generic enough for them to use, and so they adapt them. Because Design
Alchemy has been developed to be generic rather than specific, its application is
likely to obviate some of the need for alternative models, even though I

70

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

Fig. 5.2 Typical instructional design model (after Pregent, 1994)

acknowledge the beauty of working in a field which supports the exploration of new
ways of learning and teaching and the potential to generate new designs.

The 4C/ID Model
The instructional design enterprise is a bit like an ocean liner—huge, slow, ponderous, and
requiring large amounts of energy and a great deal of time to move it even one degree off its
current path . . . Future design theory should support the development of training programs
for learners who need to learn and transfer highly complex cognitive skills or “competencies” to an increasingly varied set of realworld contexts and settings. (van Merrienboer,
Clark, & de Crook, 2002, p. 39)

In presenting an alternative model for instructional design, van Merrienboer, Clark
and de Crook (2002, p. 39–40) suggested there were three gaps inherent within
existing instructional design models that the four-component instructional design
(4C/ID) system could address: (a) a focus on knowledge types, context or media
rather than performance or task-specific skills; (b) a lack of distinction between
supportive and just-in-time (JIT) information; and (c) a focus on part-task or wholetask rather than a blend that reflects complex learning. The authors continued to
promote the need for alternative models when they claimed:
Most design models emphasize instruction in relatively simple learning tasks and assume
that a large, complex set of interrelated tasks are achievable as “the sum of the parts”—by
sequencing a string of simplified, component task procedures until a complex task is
captured. There is overwhelming evidence that this does not work (van Merrienboer
et al., 2002, p. 40)

The essence of the 4C/ID model was to separate key elements of the learning
process, enabling the designer to emphasise those tasks deemed to be complex.

Models of Instructional Design

71

These ideas resonate with the principles of Design Alchemy, through a focus on
knowledge application (the task).
From another perspective the authors note that the model aims to support the
development of training programs that address complex skills and transfer of
learning and which could extend from weeks to months or longer. This introduces
the concept of granularity and the extent to which a design model is aimed at the
micro (concept, topic, module) or macro (course, program) level, or whether it is
generic. Conole (2013) cited Falconer and Littlejohn (2008) who reported that the
typical design process focused on a lesson plan covering one–two hours; this is
quite different from the weeks or months considered when 4C/ID was implemented.
Based on practical implementation, the Design Alchemy framework is not affected
by course duration; at one level it can create the specifications for a course
(operating over a semester) and at a different level can detail the nature of the
associated learning activities (completed over periods between one hour and
one week).
Apart from addressing a specific learning need (complex tasks), the value of the
4C/ID model is that it demonstrates the research-based efforts that are invested into
creating models aimed to address perceived deficiencies with existing models, and
which provide solutions not overtly available through other practices or processes.
This is precisely what Design Alchemy sets out to achieve while acknowledging the
input to quality practice that strategies such as 4C/ID can provide.

Understanding by Design
As an alternative option, there are models that present as a link between instructional design and learning design (Chap. 6). One specific example is the Understanding by Design approach developed by Wiggins and McTighe (2005), which is
also referred to as Backward Design2 because the major steps appear to reverse
those recommended by instructional design. The essence of the model is a threestep waterfall sequence represented in Fig. 5.3, and unlike many ‘traditional’ design
practices which initially focus on a deconstruction of the content into logical
clusters and sequences, this backward approach focuses on the learner (results or
outcomes), the evidence that those results have been achieved (assessment) and the
associated learning experiences and instruction (activities).
While Design Alchemy differs in terms of the description of the instructional or
teaching component, emphasising a mentorship and scaffolding rather than didactic
presentation, the similarities are significant as the basic process mirrors that of
learning outcomes, assessment and activities (see Chap. 8). The backward design
approach also aligns with the constructive alignment model of Biggs (2003) and
Biggs and Tang (2011) referred to in Chap. 6.

2

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_design.

72

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

Fig. 5.3 Backward design
(based on Wiggins &
McTighe, 2005, p. 18)

In developing this model, Wiggins and McTighe (2005, p. 14) noted that good
design ‘is about learning to be more thoughtful and specific about our purposes and
what they imply’ with the added emphasis that a course of study needs to have a
specific and guiding intellectual purpose. This is consistent with the Proactive
Evaluation component of strategic intent (Sims, Dobbs, & Hand, 2002) and the
knowledge application step of Design Alchemy. Each of these demands that a
course have a clear representation of its purpose, its role in the program and what
students will achieve by completing the course (knowledge as internal). When the
design of a course is structured around content matter, these perspectives are rarely
articulated in this manner, as students are more likely to be advised what the course
is about (knowledge as external).
Addressing whether a course should focus on content structure or learning
outcomes, Wiggins and McTighe (2005, p. 41) noted the importance of doing to
achieve understanding:
Knowledge and skill, then, are necessary elements of understanding, but not sufficient in
themselves. Understanding requires more: the ability to thoughtfully and actively “do” the
work with discernment, as well as the ability to self-assess, justify and critique such
“doings”. Transfer involves figuring out which knowledge and skill matters here and
often adapting what we know to address the challenge at hand.

This aligns directly with the pedagogy of Design Alchemy and the specification
of learning activities, which not only aim to enable knowledge acquisition but also
transfer of that knowledge to other situations by using a combination of problemsolving, situated activities. By integrating six factors (explanation, interpretation,
application, perspective, empathy and self-knowledge) into the design, Wiggins
and McTighe (2005, p. 51) concluded that understanding would best be acquired by
a process of ‘uncovering’ (responses developed inductively and co-constructed by
learners) and ‘doing’ (using ideas in realistic settings and with real-world problems). This explanation reveals another aspect of alignment between the models;
Design Alchemy addresses understanding through collaboration and construction
of problem solutions that are contextualised within the learner’s situation.

Challenging Instructional Design

73

Comparing Models
Through the above analysis, when any two design models or practices are compared, it can be argued that they have identical characteristics, even if the language
or terms are different. On the other hand, as discussed in Chap. 4, it can be argued
that the different models exhibit quite different epistemologies and design
approaches. As I construct and reconstruct my ideas about the similarities and
differences between other models and Design Alchemy, one specific conceptual
difference emerges. The majority of instructional design models encountered
assume that there will be a teacher playing a leading role in the learning environment. However, in an online environment, where the student is working alone, and
there is no teacher, the design practice must find strategies to embed the teacher into
the design with which the learner interacts. Otherwise the interaction will be little
more than between the learner and static content. A further outcome is that
strategies that have evolved from design as teacher thinking (see Chap. 6) have
the potential to be relevant across all learning and teaching environments, regardless of access mode. As representing this mode of thinking, Design Alchemy
therefore has the potential to transform learning anywhere and anytime.

Challenging Instructional Design
Even though instructional design has been championed by many, it has also been
the subject of challenge and criticism. For example, Gordon and Zemke (2000)
accused the process of being (a) too slow and clumsy, (b) a technology when it is
not, (c) producing bad instruction and (d) out of touch with current training needs.
As noted elsewhere in this chapter and throughout the text, it remains uncertain
whether it is instructional design that has inherent problems as a design method or
whether the problems and issues emerge from misinformed practice.
A different challenge was raised by Michael Allen, developer of the Control
Data PCD3 authoring system, and its more well-known successor Authorware, who
wrote a book with the subtitle “Forget What You Know About Instructional Design
and Do Something Interesting” (Allen, 2007), suggesting that the practice of
instructional design does not create interesting learning and teaching resources. A
similar approach was taken by Cathy Moore (2008),3 an e-learning consultant
whose by-line reads “Let’s save the world from boring training”. Both these titles
underpin an essential question facing educational design: if we are not getting
educational designs right, is instructional design the right framework? Even more
perplexing is that boring or uninteresting programs are being created. Why does this
happen when so much is understood about design?

3

The blog presented by Cathy Moore remains active as of 8 October 2013.

74

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

Action Mapping
In response to boring or uninteresting training, Moore (2008) described the Action
Mapping process as a means to create engaged training. The primary focus of this
approach was to identify the training goal (as with the knowledge application
component of Design Alchemy) and the activities required to reach that goal (see
Fig. 5.4). Equally important for the design process is to ensure that only the
information necessary to complete the goal is included; for Design Alchemy, this
represents the way the resources are identified and deployed. Moore (2008) also
notes that a characteristic of organisational training is ‘information dumps’ that
result from a design practice which places emphasis on content before performance.
This approach suggests that success in design may be more about how the designer
thinks than the practice the designer applies.

Process or Improvisation?
This sense of design thinking also relates to the rigour expected of design practice;
must each step be followed according to a script, or is improvisation or innovation
more appropriate? The thoughts of Cross (2006) and Rees (2010) highlight this
perspective and provide a more pragmatic view of design:
In short, there is no simple passage in learning from ‘easy’ to ‘difficult’; mastery of a
threshold concept often involves messy journeys back, forth and across conceptual terrain.” (Cross, 2006, p. 6)
I often come across heated discussions about the merits of ADDIE and using “traditional”
instructional design approaches in a world of just-in-time, rapid elearning. I think these
discussions are useful when they stimulate critical thinking about processes but I confess I
rarely share in the emotions that these discussions seem to provoke. In my view, the
approach you take is context-dependent, always subject to improvisation, and never
one-size-fits-all. Models are simply that–useful ways of thinking about things, not rigid
prescriptions for actions. (Rees, 2010)

The Design Alchemy approach is adaptable because it is action based not
content based. While there are specific steps and templates that can support its
practice, these essentially add value to the design process because they represent
scaffolding for the designer.

Reflections
To provide a synthesis of both the traditions and models of instructional design, it
appears that the models and practices in themselves are not problematic, but that
quality issues emerge because of confusion as to what instructional design

Reflections

75

Fig. 5.4 Action mapping (from blog.cathy-moore.com with permission)

represents and how it is practised. This raises questions as to the credentials of the
practitioner. If there was a need to hire a nurse or a doctor or an accountant or a
pilot, the selection can be based on professional criteria with confidence based on
the tasks they would accomplish (caring for the sick, treating injuries, managing
finances, flying a plane). Unfortunately the same does not hold true when instructional design is considered; while the expected outcome from applying the practice
is the same (creating effective learning environments), the competencies employed
and required to achieve that outcome are not consistent, and the result is that
learning cannot be guaranteed. A logical conclusion to this dilemma is to advocate
formal credentialing for instructional designers, as is required for teachers. However this remains contentious (e.g. Kuhlmann, 2013), and even though many
graduate programs focus on instructional design and technology, the qualifications
assume the capability to design effectively but cannot guarantee that outcome. Does
quality in learning depend solely on credentials and design practice, or does the
very complexity of learning prevent good practice from achieving consistent
results? One solution is to ensure the models and practices adopted (the librettos
discussed in Chap. 3) will ensure as good an outcome as a formal credential; based
on application in the field and the evidence presented in this text, Design Alchemy
can achieve that goal.

76

5

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?

Instructional Design or Design Alchemy?
The purpose of this chapter has been to consider the extent to which models and
practices of instructional design align with Design Alchemy. The more models we
encounter, and the more we review the historical developments of design frameworks, the more they appear similar, simply because the underlying aim of each is
to enable learning. Based on the analysis presented, Design Alchemy has strong
connections with the traditions and models of instructional design. Nevertheless,
two issues emerge that reinforce the importance of continuous improvement of
these models. First, the environment for which instructional design was originally
targeted has changed significantly to one that is more open, more personalised and
more learner centred. While designers can adapt any model to address these
changes, there is an advantage in using a model and practice created specifically
for the conditions of this changed environment. Second, the way that instructional
design is practised has an impact on the quality of the learning environment and the
learning outcomes achieved. Utilising a model that focuses on the learner and
which embeds good practice (qualifications) through its process will have the effect
of offering both quality and credentials to design practice. This is what Design
Alchemy sets out to achieve through an integrated pedagogy that enables the
creation of learner-centred environments, learning outcomes and knowledge
acquisition.

References
Allen, M. W. (2007). Designing successful e-Learning, Michael Allen’s online learning library:
Forget what you know about instructional design and do something interesting. San Francisco,
CA: Pfeiffer.
Barrett, T., & Moore, S. (2010). New approaches to problem-based learning: Revitalising your
practice in higher education. New York: Routledge.
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: McGrawHill and Open University Press.
Conole, G. (2013). Designing for learning in an open world (Explorations of the learning sciences,
instructional systems and performance technologies, Vol. 4). New York: Springer.
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. London: Springer.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The systematic design of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Harper
Collins.
Falconer, I., & Littlejohn, A. (2008). Representing models of practice. In L. Lockyer, S. Bennet, S.
Agostinho, & B. Harper (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning design and learning objects.
Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Gagné, R. M. (1965). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gordon, J., & Zemke, R. (2000, April). The attack on ISD. Training, 37, 43–53.
Kuhlkmann, T. (2013, September 17). Do you really need an instructional design degree?.
Available from http://www.articulate.com/rapid-elearning/do-you-really-need-an-instruc
tional-design-degree/. Accessed October 8, 2013.

References

77

Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., Pratt, J., & The ID2 Research Group Utah State University.
(1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5–7.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology, Research and
Development, 50(3), 43–59.
Merrill, M. D. (2012). First principles of instruction. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Moore, C. (2008, May 12). Be an elearning action hero. Available from http://blog.cathy-moore.
com/. Accessed October 8, 2013.
Pregent, R. (1994). Charting your course: How to prepare to teach more effectively. Madison, WI:
Magna Publications.
Rees, D. (2010, August 29). Merrill’s pebble-in-the-pond approach to ID. Retrieved from http://
instructionaldesignfusions.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/merrills-pebble-in-the-pond-approachto-isd/. Accessed October 8, 2013.
Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.). (1987). Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected
theories and models. Hillsdake, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sims, R., Dobbs, G., & Hand, T. (2002). Enhancing quality in online learning: Scaffolding design
and planning through proactive evaluation. Distance Education, 23(2), 135–148.
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E., & de Croock, M. B. M. (2002). Blueprints for complex
learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 50(2),
39–64.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Chapter 6

Learning Design or Design Alchemy?

Abstract Having examined how Design Alchemy aligns with the broad field of
instructional design (Chap. 5), this chapter examines the framework in terms of a
range of practices and models grouped collectively under the term learning design.
The discussion commences with an overview of design for learning and continues
with an assessment of the alignment of Design Alchemy with seven different
learning design initiatives: Universal Design for Learning, learning designs, teaching as design science, constructive alignment, the Open University Learning Design
Initiative and the Lanarca Declaration. Importantly, this analysis does not aim to
fully document each of these initiatives, but rather identify salient aspects from
each in order to highlight similarities and differences with the Design Alchemy
framework. Through this analysis, Design Alchemy is shown to fit clearly within
the concepts and practices of learning design.

Why Learning Design?
One way to encapsulate the differences between instructional design (see Chap. 5)
and learning design is through the subtlety of definition; the former focuses on
designing instruction, while the latter focuses on design for learning. While the
expected outcomes from both these fields of practice are for learning and knowledge acquisition, it is the mind-set towards education that differentiates the two.
As an example, Beetham and Sharpe (2013) edited a wonderful set of articles
which focused on design models and practices for learning. In setting the context
for the analysis, and emphasising the learner rather than the teacher, design was
considered to represent ‘an intentional and systematic, but also a creative approach
to the encounter of learners with subject matter and task requirements’ (p. 76),
reinforcing the artistic elements of design practice. The specific phrase design for
learning was defined as ‘the process by which teachers—and others involved in the
support of learning—arrive at a plan or structure or designed artefact for a learning
situation or setting’ (p. 5). One of the emphases of Design Alchemy is that with
R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_6,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

79

80

6 Learning Design or Design Alchemy?

online learning many activities are often completed independently, and therefore
the embedding of the teacher within the design becomes a critical component of the
practice.
In comparison, Beetham and Sharpe (2013) describe the discipline of learning
design as a process which focuses not only on the learning activity itself but also
describing and sharing learning activities. And a range of articles addressing the
field of learning design and design for learning span the theoretical, such as the
concept of defining a notation for design (Lanarca Declaration, 2012); the practical,
such as models of design (e.g. Conole, 2013); and the practice, such as recommendations for domain-specific applications (e.g. Ellaway, 2013).
Such a diversity of approaches, similar to that evidenced with instructional
design, demonstrates the complexity of the field and the importance of the efforts
being made to better understand learning and teaching. There remains a sense
however that we have yet to achieve the potential of effective integration of design,
learning, teaching and technology. Beetham (2013) emphasises this uncertainty in
terms of factors which continue to influence and affect design practice, such as
technology, the individual, politics and economics, globalisation, the workplace,
the environment and educational legitimacy, each of which are addressed within the
Design Alchemy practice. Beetham (2013) also notes the shift to learning as a form
of connectivity, and the increased value placed on the use of open resources to
personalise learning in diverse settings, as another factor contributing to the complexity of contemporary learning and teaching.
Apart from these challenges, there is also the case that design practice is in need
of further development, as expressed through the Lanarca Declaration (2012):
Describing teaching and learning activities—what educators and learners actually do in
classrooms and online—is less developed. In many school contexts there is a tradition of
written lesson plans, and individual educators in universities and vocational training may
write down activity plans for tutorials and practical workshops. But there is no generally
agreed notational system for educational activities that has the expressiveness or widespread adoption of music notation.

Although the Design Alchemy framework does not focus on a notation for
educational activities, it does, however, through integrating pedagogy, practice
and assets, present a model which aligns with the design for learning ethos and
which can help describe learning activities. To explore this potential further, the
following sections assess specific learning design initiatives to provide a means to
compare concepts and approaches.

Universal Design for Learning
One practice that is consistent with the design for learning approach is Universal
Design for Learning (UDL), introduced in 1998 by the Center for Applied Special
Technology (CAST), which in 1984 had been established to focus on ways that
computer technology might enhance learning for students with learning disabilities

Universal Design for Learning

81

(CAST, 2012). Reinforcing observations about the focus of design practice made
throughout this book, the UDL framework aims to overcome ‘the primary barrier to
fostering expert learners within instructional environments: inflexible, ‘one-sizefits-all’ curricula’ (National Center on Universal Design for Learning, 2013) and
provides ‘a set of principles for curriculum development that give all individuals
equal opportunities to learn’ (CAST, 2012).
Reflecting its clinical origins, the UDL framework is based on three principles
associated with brain networks:
1. Recognition networks or the ‘what’ of learning, acknowledging the different
ways learners perceive and comprehend information
2. Strategic networks or the ‘how’ of learning, acknowledging the different ways
learners approach learning
3. Affective networks or the ‘why’ of learning, acknowledging the different ways
learners are motivated to learn
In terms of these principles, it is pertinent to demonstrate how they inform the
design alchemist’s practice. Considering the ‘what’ of learning, it is common for
designers to believe they can manage different learner perceptions by taking
account of factors such as learning styles (e.g. Honey & Mumford, 2006), multiple
intelligences (Gardner, 2011) or culture (e.g. Rogers, Graham, & Mayes, 2007).
However, as elaborated in Chap. 7, in the emerging world of the distributed learner,
designers cannot assume they can design for individual differences because there is
little clarity in the make-up of the different learner cohorts. Rather designers need to
practise in such a way that it is the individual learner who chooses the preferred
formats and resources to support their learning. With respect to the ‘how’ of
learning, the practice of Design Alchemy does not assume that learners will
approach the learning environment or activities in any particular way, other than
their own. As such the designs privilege that individuality and in so doing address
the third principle relating to motivation, or the ‘why’ of learning. If students are
able to frame (contextualise) the learning within their own environment, situation
and experience, then their motivation to learn will increase because of the enhanced
relevance the design activities afford.
Although the origins of Universal Design for Learning were associated with
learning disabilities, its focus on the individual learner (not teacher) has specific
relevance to the ever-increasing online learning environments. As detailed in the
Design Alchemy pedagogy (see Chap. 8), the designer needs to privilege the learner
as an individual who approaches learning with their own specific needs. Design
Alchemy therefore aims to be an approach for all learners regardless of their
abilities, with supportive frameworks such as UDL providing specific guidance
for the creation of the learning activities.
The principles of UDL align closely within the learner-centred pedagogy that
Design Alchemy embraces. Both practices privilege the learner by ensuring the
activities, interactions and resources that make up the learning and teaching environment are driven by the individual needs of learners rather than those of a text,
teacher or certifying board.

82

6 Learning Design or Design Alchemy?

Learning Designs
Highlighting the different perspectives on which design can be focused, one of the
early projects to address learning designs was commissioned by the Australian
Universities Teaching Committee (AUTC) in 2000, with project management
provided through the University of Wollongong, Australia (2003a). The broad
aim of the project was
To explore the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to facilitate
flexible learning opportunities for students by identifying learning designs that have been
demonstrated to contribute to high quality learning experiences and determining which
learning designs may be redeveloped in a more generic form.

Of particular relevance is the definition of the term learning design:
A variety of ways of designing student learning experiences, that is, the sequence of
activities and interactions. The scope of a learning design may be at the level of a course
or program components. This project focuses on learning designs implemented with the use
of ICT and how flexible learning opportunities for students can be afforded through the use
of such technologies.

The emphasis on the use of information and communication technology (ICT)
reflects the emergence of technology into mainstream higher education at the time
the project was active. Ultimately however, the proposed design frameworks that
emerged from the project were based on a pedagogy that emphasised activity and
interaction in terms of what learners were trying to accomplish and who they were
working with to achieve that goal. This reinforces the point that when the focus of
design is on pedagogy, the relevant and current technology will find a place to
support that design.
The outcome from the AUTC project was the identification of a series of generic,
reusable designs (accompanied by comprehensive explanations and resources) that
provided guidance for the design of learning activities (University of Wollongong,
2003b). The classification of these designs, including (in parentheses) the link to the
Design Alchemy pedagogy, is shown as follows:
1. Collaborative: interacting and collaborating with peers to facilitate the construction of knowledge (social, creative)
2. Concept/procedure development: understanding and/or consolidating student
learning about concepts and/or procedures (creative, problem-solving)
3. Problem-based learning: learners solving a real-world problem (problem-solving, context)
4. Project/case study: creating a product or artefact; supported by materials to
distil/abstract lessons learned to apply to new project situations (creative,
assessment artefacts)
5. Role-play: ‘walking in the shoes of others’ (problem-solving, inclusivity,
context)
Elaborating each of these guides, the project generated graphical representations
of the designs, with an example depicted in Fig. 6.1. The recognition that tasks

Teaching as Design

83

Fig. 6.1 Learning design (Adapted from University of Wollongong, 2003c)

(activities) must be separated from resources aligns with the approach of Design
Alchemy but also to other approaches such as constructive alignment (Biggs, 2003)
which is discussed in this chapter as well as the 4C/ID model (van Merriënboer
et al., 2002) introduced in Chap. 5.

Teaching as Design
There are numerous recommendations as to how the design of educational materials
should be approached. One of the more recent is the analysis by Laurillard (2012)
who posits that teaching itself is a design science which
builds design principles rather than theories, and the heuristics of practice rather than
explanations . . . it uses what has gone before as a platform or inspiration for what it
creates. (p. 1)

In addition to aligning the teacher with design, Laurillard (2012) also suggests
that at some stage, the designer, having taken account of the student voice and
catered for diversity and individualisation, must release responsibility for learning,
as ultimately it is for the learner to choose whether or not they will pursue the
learning opportunities provided. This is particularly important for the online environment, as the presence of the teacher within that environment does not always
match the presence of the learner.
Examining the concept of teaching as a design science, Laurillard (2012, p. 1)
points out that ‘the imperative for teaching is that learners develop their personal
knowledge and capabilities’ and that ‘teaching is about moving minds . . . to change
those minds into independent thinkers who will not necessarily bend to the will of
the teacher’ (p. 5). This perspective has potential implications for design in the

84

6 Learning Design or Design Alchemy?

asynchronous online learning context. Because the teacher may not be present when
the student is online, even though they have a role of elder and mentor, the design
(or the output of the design process) must embed elements of teaching. Laurillard’s
(2012) comments might therefore be repurposed to state
The imperative for design is that learners develop their personal knowledge and capabilities . . . design is about moving minds . . . to encourage those minds to be independent
thinkers who will not necessarily bend to the design itself”.

Patterns for Learning
A practical outcome of the study of teaching as a design science was the specification of learning patterns (Laurillard, 2012) and the availability of tools to support
the design and modification of those patterns (Personal Pattern Collector (PPC), n.
d.). The representation in Fig. 6.2 shows the structure for the Guess my X: ProcessObject Relationship pattern which has the generic learning outcome of Generate a
theory from observations.
Each of the four steps of the pattern is expressed in terms of teaching and
learning activities (TLAs) accompanied by a design practice which prioritises the
learner, integrates the teacher and achieves outcomes through collaboration.
The screen image shown in Fig. 6.3 illustrates the options provided should a
designer wish to modify the pattern, including the scaffolding (support) that is
provided to explain the optional strategies. The Personal Pattern Collector is viewed
not only as a pattern creator but also as a means to collaborate and disseminate
designs, and thereby contribute to the openness of those creations. Although
Laurillard (2012) expressed her ideas as a science, the overall approach is more
consistent with design as an art through the expression of modifiable and adaptable
patterns (heuristics), which also align with the concepts of alchemy and
transformation.

Constructive Alignment
Unlike many other models and theories of educational design, the constructive
alignment approach proposed by Biggs (2003) and elaborated by Biggs and Tang
(2011) has only a short entry in Wikipedia:
A principle used for devising teaching and learning activities, and assessment tasks, that
directly address the learning outcomes intended in a way not typically achieved in
traditional lectures, tutorial classes and examinations1.

1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_alignment.

Constructive Alignment

85

Fig. 6.2 The Guess my X: Process-Object Relationship (Adapted from PPC, n.d.)

Fig. 6.3 Pattern modification using the PPC (PPC, n.d.)

One interesting point emerging from this is the use of the word ‘traditional’;
based on both my observations and those from studies reported in this narrative,
design practices continue to promote this ‘traditional’ approach which reflects the
objectivist traditions referred to by Duffy and Jonassen (1982). This suggests that
the variation observed in learning and teaching application is less about the model
or field and more about epistemology, philosophy and tradition. It is clear that
approaches such as constructive alignment and Design Alchemy are working to

86

6 Learning Design or Design Alchemy?

break free of those traditions because of the belief that learning and teaching works
differently from those ‘traditional’ practices.
The original framework and principles documented by Biggs (2003), which are
the focus of this analysis, triggered different ways of approaching design and which
directly align with principles that inform Design Alchemy, and which emerged at
approximately the same time (see Chap. 3). As an example of this alignment, Biggs
(2003, p. 11) argued that ‘learning is constructed as a result of the learner’s
activities. Activities that are appropriate to achieving the curriculum objectives
result in a deep approach to learning’ and concluded ‘learning is thus a way of
interacting with the world’ (p. 13). While the constructive alignment and Design
Alchemy approaches were developed independently, the fact that the ideas have
emerged over the same period prompts the thought that some form of morphic
resonance was at play (see Sheldrake, 2011).
In addition, Biggs proposed (p. 13) four conditions under which educational
conceptual change takes place, and these have been annotated (in parentheses) with
the aligning principles from Design Alchemy:
1. When it is clear to students (and teachers) what is ‘appropriate’, what the
objectives are and where all can see where they are supposed to be going
(knowledge application and learning outcomes).
2. Where students experience the felt need to get there, the art of good teaching is to
communicate that need where it is initially lacking and motivation is a product of
good teaching, not a prerequisite (problem-solving, inclusivity, context).
3. When students feel free to focus on the task, not on watching their backs.
Attempts to create a felt need to learn by the use of ill-conceived and urgent
assessments are counterproductive. The game then becomes a matter of dealing
with the test, not engaging with the task deeply (learning activities, creating
assessment artefacts).
4. When students can work collaboratively and in dialogue with others, both peers
and teachers. Good dialogue elicits those activities that shape, elaborate and
deepen understanding (social and emergent learning).
The constructive alignment model (Fig. 6.4), which Biggs (2003, p. 13) determined contained ‘a wealth of implication for the design of teaching’, shows the
interrelationship of teaching, learning outcomes and assessment.
Illustrating the importance of both ‘constructive’ and ‘alignment’, Biggs (n.d.)
described the two essential elements of the model in this way:
The ‘constructive’ aspect refers to the idea that students construct meaning through
relevant learning activities. That is, meaning is not something imparted or transmitted
from teacher to learner, but is something learners have to create for themselves. Teaching
is simply a catalyst for learning
The ‘alignment’ aspect refers to what the teacher does, which is to set up a learning
environment that supports the learning activities appropriate to achieving the desired
learning outcomes. The key is that the components in the teaching system, especially the
teaching methods used and the assessment tasks, are aligned with the learning activities

Constructive Alignment

87

Fig. 6.4 Constructive alignment (Adapted from Biggs, 2003)

assumed in the intended outcomes. The learner is in a sense ‘trapped’, and finds it difficult
to escape without learning what he or she is intended to learn.

Biggs (n.d.) also represented this as a schematic to illustrate the relationship
between the teacher’s and the learner’s perspectives (Fig. 6.5). Given that in online
environments the teacher will not always be present when the learner plans to
participate, the designer needs to merge these perspectives (Fig. 6.6); in this way the
design takes on the role of teacher, mentor or elder as well as providing the
alignment between outcomes, activities and assessment.
However, similar ideas about design for learning and teaching are not new; Tyler
(1949, p. 63), for example, concluded that ‘learning takes place through the active
behaviour of the student: it is what he does that he learns, not what the teacher

88

6 Learning Design or Design Alchemy?

Fig. 6.5 Constructive alignment (Adapted from Biggs, n.d.)

Fig. 6.6 The Design Alchemy alignment

does’. Biggs (2003, p. 25) responded to this with some anguish: ‘Here was constructive alignment. Thousands of education students and in-service teachers had
read about it, no doubt passed their exams about it—and nothing has changed. Tyler
might just as well have been farming sheep’. This is a clear reality check for all the
work that is done to achieve effective design practice. The ideas have clearly been
articulated, but how to get the diversity of designers and teachers in the field to
listen remains a mystery.

Open University Learning Design Initiative
Developing understandings for best practice in design was also the focus of the
Open University Learning Design Initiative (OULDI) project which commenced in
2007 and was subsequently funded by JISC (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/). The key aims
of the project (OULDI, 2013) were to:
• Assess ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of time spent designing
learning
• Capture and represent practice, especially innovative practice

Lanarca Declaration

89

• Provide ‘scaffolds’ or support creating learning activities which draw on good
practice and make effective use of tools and pedagogies
• Identify the characteristics of quality design processes
The major outcomes from this project were a set of resources in different formats
designed to support the individual teacher or designer in the creation of effective
learning experiences. Together these resources reflect the essence of the design for
learning discourse (Beetham & Sharpe, 2013) and the importance of alignment
between outcomes, activities and assessment (Biggs, 2003; Biggs & Tang, 2011).
This is well illustrated by one of the support tools created, CompendiumLD (Open
University, n.d.), a modified mind-mapping software tool for designing a range of
learning activities, such as:
• A Learning Outcomes view to map relationships between learning outcomes, the
activities which learners will participate in to reach those learning outcomes and
the evidence that learners produce that may be assessed
• A Sequence Map view, representing the sequences of tasks that a learner and
teacher follow to enable the learner to reach some desired learning outcome,
including the tools and resources for specific tasks
• A Task Times view, where the expected time learners and teachers will take to
perform tasks in the design can be assigned
The CompendiumLD tool also provides similar design support options as does
the Personal Pattern Collector (n.d.), and the emergence of these tools reinforces
not only that design practice has a strong evidence base but also the importance of
support for teachers and designers. Although Design Alchemy is not automated, the
results of its practice generate similar specifications and the underpinning resources
developed by OULDI (2013) align neatly with its framework.

Lanarca Declaration
However despite the extensive work undertaken in the field over the past three
decades, from Universal Design for Learning (CAST, 2012) to OULDI (2013), and
the on-going efforts of teachers and designers across the globe to enhance the
learning experience, more work is required to enhance the effectiveness of design
efforts. The Lanarca Declaration (2012) emerged from a meeting of learning design
specialists, and their deliberations reflect the same issues and conditions that have
contributed to the development of Design Alchemy, as illustrated in the following
observation:
Education faces many challenges in the changing modern world. Learners are changing in
their approaches to education—they use digital technologies, they multi-task, they collaborate and they are becoming less patient with teacher-centric styles of education. Educators face many changes—such as expectations of adopting innovative teaching approaches,
alignment of teaching to external standards, growing requirements for professional development and difficulties in balancing a complex range of demands from different

90

6 Learning Design or Design Alchemy?
stakeholders. Government and educational institutions also face many changes, such as the
rise of the knowledge economy and the need for different kinds of graduates, a shift from
knowledge scarcity to abundance, and the impact of technology—especially the internet via
open sharing of educational resources and massive open online courses. (Lanarca Declaration, 2012)

In response to this the observation was made that ‘the new field of learning
design contributes to the central challenge of improving teaching and learning . . .
and can assist educators to describe effective teaching ideas so that they can be
shared with, and adapted by, other educators’ (Lanarca Declaration, 2012). It is this
challenge that Design Alchemy responds, as it provides the essential elements of
design for learning within a practical and efficient framework.

Learning Design or Design Alchemy?
Through this overview of different learning design initiatives, it is clear that the
components of Design Alchemy and the thinking behind its practice are consistent
with both a design for learning approach and the broader, emergent field of learning
design. As more and more emphasis is placed on the quality of the learning
experience and more and more institutions embrace the online environment, more
and more teachers and trainers will be employed and more and more learners
enrolled. To cater for this growth and to enable quality, a range of tools and models
are required. The Design Alchemy clearly aligns with the principles and practices
of learning design and provides a means to develop designs based in a practical,
efficient and evidence-based manner.

References
Beetham, H. (2013). Design for learning in an uncertain future. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.),
Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (2nd ed.). New
York: Routledge.
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2013). An introduction to rethinking pedagogy. In H. Beetham &
R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning
(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Biggs, J. (n.d.). Aligning teaching for constructing learning. The Higher Education Academy,
Available from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/resources/database/id477_
aligning_teaching_for_constructing_learning.pdf. Accessed October 9, 2013.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university. Maidenhead: McGrawHill and Open University Press.
CAST (2012). CAST timeline: One mission, many innovations, 1984-2010. Available from http://
www.cast.org/about/timeline/index.html. Accessed October 9, 2013.
Conole, G. (2013). Designing for learning in an open world (Explorations of the Learning
sciences, instructional systems and performance technologies, Vol. 4). New York: Springer.

References

91

Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (Eds.). (1982). Constructivism and the technology of instruction:
A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ellaway, R. H. (2013). Activity designs for professional learning. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe
(Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (2nd ed.).
New York: Routledge.
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (3rd ed.). New York:
Basic Books.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (2006). The learning styles questionnaire, 80-item version. Maidenhead: Peter Honey Publications.
Lanarca Declaration (2012). Lanarca declaration on learning design. Available from http://
larnacadeclaration.wordpress.com/full-document/. Accessed September 10, 2013.
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning
and technology. New York: Routledge.
National Center on Universal Design for Learning. (2013). The concept of UDL. Available from
http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatisudl/conceptofudl. Accessed October 9, 2013.
Open University Learning Design Initiative. (2013). About the project. Available from http://
www.open.ac.uk/blogs/OULDI/. Accessed September 9, 2013.
Open University. (n.d.). CompendiumLD learning design software. http://compendiumld.open.ac.
uk/index.html
Personal Pattern Collector. (n.d.). http://193.61.44.29:42042/ODC.html
Rogers, P. C., Graham, C. R., & Mayes, C. T. (2007). Cultural competence and instructional
design: Exploration research into the delivery of online instruction cross-culturally. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(2).
Sheldrake, R. (2011). The presence of the past: Morphic resonance and the habits of nature.
London: Icon Books Ltd.
Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
University of Wollongong. (2003a). Learning designs. Available from http://www.
learningdesigns.uow.edu.au/project/index.htm. Accessed October 9, 2013.
University of Wollongong. (2003b). Exemplars by focus access list. Available from http://www.
learningdesigns.uow.edu.au/exemplars/index.html. Accessed October 9, 2013.
University of Wollongong. (2003c). Explore, describe, apply. Available from http://www.
learningdesigns.uow.edu.au/guides/info/G4/more/02Context.htm. Accessed October 9, 2013.
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E., & de Croock, M. B. M. (2002). Blueprints for complex
learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology, Research and Development., 50(2),
39–64.

Chapter 7

Insight or Distraction?

Abstract The preceding chapters have not only focused on the practice of alchemy
as a metaphor for the role of the designer of learning and teaching environments but
also the alignment of Design Alchemy with different theories of learning and the
fields of instructional design and learning design. The conclusion determined in the
previous chapter is that Design Alchemy manifests and aligns with the ethos of
learning design. However, before providing a detailed elaboration of the Design
Alchemy framework (Part II), it is important to consider a range of factors such as
learning styles, generations and open resources to assess the extent to which they
represent key insights for the designer or whether they act as a distraction to the
design practice. As an observer of the field over four decades, I have seen these and
other factors presented as a solution to educational needs or problems, and clusters
of advocates develop as a result. However, as a designer, how these factors are
interpreted can result in design being either confused or compromised, which
causes a paradox for the designer: do they embrace these factors or are they a
distraction to the real purpose of design? In this chapter a series of paradoxes are
posed, extending selected issues identified in earlier chapters, to focus attention on
whether these factors represent innovation or distraction. In discussing these paradoxes, it is important to emphasise that the various factors themselves remain
important to better understanding learning and teaching, but they are not necessarily an imperative for design.

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_7,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

93

94

7 Insight or Distraction?

Technology, Tool or Trauma?

Paradox
According to the theory and exemplar practices, the use of computer technology in education should have caused a revolution and transformation in
how we learn and how we teach.
And yet the revolution appears to have resulted in constraints and limitations rather than empowerment and freedom.

Database, Manager or Tool?
When I began to define Design Alchemy, my assumption was that it was a system to
support the ever-growing online learning environments, specifically in higher
education, as that was where my background lay. However working with different
academic staff and organisations, it became apparent that the ideas were not
specifically tied to online learning and teaching, but to all educational environments. The reason for this is that Design Alchemy represents an approach to
learning and teaching that is independent of any specific technology, and yet can
integrate technology in all its forms where appropriate. Given this background it is
useful to provide a brief overview of the state of technology, specifically with
respect to the higher education sector.
The role of technology can be represented on a continuum in terms of relevance to
learning, teaching and design (Fig. 7.1). The learner is able to access information
from a range of databases, have their progress managed or participate in a simulation
with each action using computer technology. The teacher is able to research
information, monitor student progress and create engaging activities
(e.g. simulations) all utilising computer technology. The designer is able to conceptualise courses in which learners and teachers can access information, participate
in activities and have their progress captured for access. This is not a new phenomenon, but rather an innate capability of the technology; and even though technology
has changed significantly, the affordances of information access, management and
learning tool have not. However what is critical is the shift over the last 30 years
(Fig. 7.1); in the mid-1980s (then) the focus was on the computer as a learning tool,
whereas the emphasis now is more on information and resources. It is no wonder that
technology is not serving learning and teaching well when it is too frequently used
administratively rather than a tool to support the learner and teacher.

Technology, Tool or Trauma?

95

Fig. 7.1 Computers for
Education Continuum

Empowering or Constraining?
Pick any decade in the history of computers and education and you will find
research, editorials and marketing brochures proclaiming the characteristics and
value of computers for education. For example, the Blackboard (2013) Learning
Management System describes its collaborate platform as offering
A more collaborative, interactive, and mobile learning experience that constantly evolves,
and you’ll keep everyone engaged like never before. That’s what the Blackboard Collaborate™ online collaboration platform is all about. Helping you create virtual classrooms,
offices and meeting spaces that open more possibilities to more students, wherever they are.
Offering exciting new approaches to learning while involving each student on an individual
level.

The critical issue is that the technology (in this example a learning management
system) cannot, as a software application, achieve any of its claims without people
defining how that application should work. Without effective design practice,
courses developed will fall into the ‘now’ of the continuum shown in Fig. 7.1.
Even though the software developers clearly understand the potential value of their
applications, that potential can only be realised through effective design practice.
This was well illustrated by Coomey and Stephenson (2001, p. 49) who noted that
‘the technology of online learning appears to facilitate a migration from traditional
didactic modes to more learner-managed modes if teachers and designers wish to
make that journey’.
While there is an underpinning assumption that technology will be used to
support the implementation of Design Alchemy, the value of computers for education has continued to be questioned. As I write, a Google search for ‘benefits of
computers for learning’ revealed 130,000,000 hits which identified resources covering not only benefits and advantages but also disadvantages, challenges and
hindrances. Goodson, Knobel, Lankshear, and Mangan (2002, p. 1) provide a
perspective on the perceived value of computers as a transformational tool:
The formally well-delimited social spaces of classrooms and schools are rapidly being
incorporated into the cyber spaces associated with computer programs, word processing,
the internet, and the World Wide Web. This book attempts to come to terms with this
transformation as something more than technological change. We will examine it here as
primarily a social and cultural phenomenon.

While the language reflects the technology of the day, the underlying issues are
even more critical today. If education is being transformed, then we cannot rely on
pre-transformation approaches to teaching and learning, as they reflect social and
cultural norms of the past, rather than today, and tomorrow. This is why a Design
Alchemy philosophy is so important; it provides a means to position educational

96

7 Insight or Distraction?

environments within current and future sociocultural contexts, embracing diversity,
the individual and the effective application of knowledge through technology.
Goodson et al. (2002, p. 2) also provide a useful summary of the nature of
research into the field at the time:
The new discipline of educational computing has produced a considerable literature . . . the
majority focusing on assessing the success of the adoption of computers . . . the results also
frequently provided grounds for exhorting or encouraging teachers to emulate educational
practice . . . On the whole, most of these investigations have produced results that are
largely inconclusive . . . and fit in with a long tradition of “techno-utopianism” and
optimistic predictions for the technological reform of education . . . Of course, there were
a few dissident voices, notably Theodore Rosak (1986) and Douglas Noble (1991), who saw
dangers inherent in the technologization of education: the degradation of traditional
literacies, for instance, or the overwhelming of alternative modes of education by an
instrumentalist model derived from military training. However such voices were usually
drowned out by excited predictions about enhanced academic achievement and the like,
thanks to the introduction of digital technologies in the classrooms.

This observation reflects the work of Russell (2001) who documented numerous
studies which had found no significant difference where technology was used for
education.1 It was curious that Goodson et al. (2002) referred to educational
computing as ‘new’, as at the time of publication, the field had undergone 30–40
years of development. However, the fears of the degradation of traditional literacies
remain topical; are literacies constant or a function of the changing socio-technical
context?
A further issue addressed by Goodson et al. (2002, pp. 8–9, citing Hudas, 1993)
was the debate as to whether the introduction of computers into educational
institutions was evidencing more support for power structures than learning
outcomes:
A technology that reinforces existing lines of power and information is likely to be adopted
(a management decision) but may or may not be implemented (a classroom level decision).
The divergence of interests between managers and workers, and the potential implementation fissures along these lines is a source of much of the implementation of widely-touted
“advances”.

From my observations power reinforcement is becoming more the norm and the
implementation of learning management systems becoming the domain of information technology, rather than learning and teaching, with students and teachers
viewed as users of a system determined to meet administrative and legislative
priorities rather than educational needs. Education appears to be viewed by
decision-makers as a process which can be made more and more efficient, with
efficiency becoming a measure of pedagogical success. This was recently
reinforced when I heard a university president ask teaching staff to become more
productive and efficient, as if education is a manufacturing process! This attitude is
reflected in departments where teachers allocate so many minutes per student per
week, and if those minutes are exceeded, the teacher ceases student consultation.
The result is at times a sense of chaos, the educational technology industry
1

This work is now accessible online at http://www.nosignificantdifference.org/.

Technology, Tool or Trauma?

97

floundering in a maelstrom of history, rhetoric, pedagogy and power. Sir Ken
Robinson (2013) expressed this situation eloquently:
There is wonderful work happening in this country (America). But I have to say it’s
happening in spite of the dominant culture of education, not because of it. It’s like people
are sailing into a headwind all the time. And the reason I think is this: that many of the
current policies are based on mechanistic conceptions of education. It’s like education is an
industrial process that can be improved just by having better data, and somewhere in, I
think, the back of the mind of some policy makers is this idea that if we fine-tune it well
enough, if we just get it right, it will all hum along perfectly into the future. It won’t, and it
never did. (Extract of transcript)

Constraint or Freedom?
So while we continue to witness incredible changes in technology, we have not
necessarily used that technology to its best advantage, which is why critiques of the
field provide useful insights into the reality of education and technology. For
example, Goodson et al. (2002, pp. 138–151) propose five paradoxes with respect
to the introduction of educational computing, and while directed to the schools
sector, remains relevant to all sectors:
1. More produces less—the art of subtracting value: The addition of further
technological and support resources actually can subtract value from learner
and related purposes, which suggests that those resources are not being
implemented appropriately or that users are not informed as to how technology
can be applied effectively. This reinforces the notion of knowledge half-life (see
Chap. 2).
2. Increased space leads to confinement: The emergence of ‘limitless’ Internet
space has resulted in learners being confined and subjected to surveillance. This
issue is one of the most curious and contentious; while technology has opened up
the world to collaboration and communication, that same freedom has been seen
as a threat. The notion of surveillance is inextricably entwined with the enforcement of standards, assessment and conformity.
3. Change leads to sameness, the future points to the past: The tendency of schools
to maintain their established ways in the face of technological change. When
computers and learning were first introduced, it was very much seen as a tool to
support learning (cf. Taylor, 1980), but as noted in Chap. 2, there is a sense that
this understanding has more and more been forgotten or misunderstood, with the
computer more often viewed as a smart textbook than a learning tool.
4. Freedom generates constraint: ‘The potential for various kinds of enlarged
personal and social freedoms regular associated with the internet and mature
computer use . . . have often materialized in practice as new form of constraint
impinging on students, teachers, and schools’ (Goodson et al., 2002,
p. 148–149). This also echoes the observations of Robinson (2013), with a

98

7 Insight or Distraction?

critical issue being the emerging administrative priorities of surveillance, security or monitoring supported by companies such as Kryterion (n.d.).
5. Enlarged freedom leads to greater discipline: It has been observed that students
branded as ‘troublemakers’ find themselves as mentors to other students (and
teachers) because they have a particular knowledge (e.g. web design). While
anecdotal, it appears this knowledge emerges from communications and collaboration outside the formal school sector, emphasising a conundrum where the
educational system constrains, the social-network system empowers.
Based on this analysis, the prioritisation of standards and compliance, despite a
rhetoric embracing flexibility and personalisation, may be the very barrier to the
innovations institutions profess to support. While promoting an environment
privileging the individual learner and the freedoms on online access, students
remain subjected to standardised tests and poorly designed online courses that do
not acknowledge diversity, trigger curiosity or enable creativity.

Resolution
The past 12 years have witnessed incredible investments in schools and universities, under the assumption the ‘if we install it, they will learn’. I can only reaffirm
that technology does not, in itself, do anything; while it may not need to be
programmed in the same way that was necessary in the 1970s and 1980s, without
an environment that integrates software with learning activities that are consistent
with both the institutional mission and the learning outcomes, we will see continued
critique, inappropriate expenditure, constraining administration and, worst of all, a
degradation in learning and teaching quality. The solution to these issues is to
utilise a design practice that is pedagogically driven and technology enabled. An
informed design practice such as Design Alchemy will provide the means to realise
the benefits technology can bring to learning and teaching.

To Be, or Not To Be, Credentialed?

Paradox
There are well-documented and validated competencies that inform courses
to educate designers of learning and teaching environments.
And yet in practice those competencies are not always valued or
recognised as critical to design success.

To Be, or Not To Be, Credentialed?

99

What Are the Credentials for Design?
The progression from programmed instruction to online and open education has
been full of remarkable stories, of success and failure, of change and reluctance to
change, of acceptance and rejection. And while those who identify with the theory
and practice of computers and education may be in general consensus as to design
approaches that make learning and teaching effective and engaging, we fail to
consistently reach the potential of quality education because of inconsistent design
practices and misunderstandings of the environments we create.
As discussed in Chap. 5, Instructional Design has a long and well-established
heritage, with the International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and
Instruction (n.d.) having developed and validated a series of competencies for the
field, including those for the Instructional Designer, as documented in Table 7.1.
As a past director of ibstpi, I had many debates with my colleagues as to the
relevance and alignment of these competencies and associated performance statements with practice in the field. The outcome of those debates was that the
competencies maintained their validity, but the extent to which they were understood and applied effectively in practice remained an issue. This is best illustrated
by the credentials now being sought for Instructional Designers, as shown from a
synthesis of recent advertisements.
The advertisement shown in Table 7.2 appears to view technology as a key skill
for the Instructional Designer, even though the relationship between self-paced
tools (e.g. YouTube,2 Articulate3) and instructor-led training is unclear. The key
requirement missing is a demonstrated understanding of how people learn and
evidence of success in achieving learning outcomes. Too often instructional design
is viewed as creating content and media rather than learning experiences. This
raises the question as to whether employers actually want designers for education or
designers of content.
The second example (Table 7.3) also emphasises skills of video production and
graphic design rather than those of ‘true’ instructional design. While the field of
practice has one view of design competencies, employers, at least from the corporate sector, have quite a different view. The result is that people with the advertised
technical skill-set are being employed, even though they do not necessarily have the
qualifications (competencies) or experience expected of designers who can enable
knowledge acquisition and learning.
It is interesting that a recent blog (Kuhlmann, 2013) questioned the need for
instructional design degrees, suggesting that experience may be just as good as a
qualification and that a critical component of success was the knowledge available
through community connections. While the source of the original expertise within
such a community remains unclear, this argument clearly underpins the changing
2
A popular resource to load and share personal as well as branded corporate sites to upload and
share videos (http://www.youtube.com/).
3
A set of software tools designed to create e-learning courses (http://www.articulate.com/).

100

7 Insight or Distraction?

Table 7.1 The ibstpi Instructional Designer Competencies (Reprinted with permission from the
International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and Instruction. See ibstpi.org for a
complete set of the Instructional Designer competencies with the accompanying performance
statements)
Professional foundations
1. Communicate effectively in visual, oral and written form
2. Apply research and theory to the discipline of instructional design
3. Update and improve knowledge, skills and attitudes pertaining to the instructional design
process and related fields
4. Apply data collection and analysis skills in instructional design projects
5. Identify and respond to ethical, legal and political implications of design in the workplace
Planning and analysis
6. Conduct a needs assessment in order to recommend appropriate design solutions and strategies
7. Identify and describe target population and environmental characteristics
8. Select and use analysis techniques for determining instructional content
9. Analyse the characteristics of existing and emerging technologies and their potential use
Design and development
10. Use an instructional design and development process appropriate for a given project
11. Organise instructional programs and/or products to be designed, developed and evaluated
12. Design instructional interventions
13. Plan non-instructional interventions
14. Select or modify existing instructional materials
15. Develop instructional materials
16. Design learning assessment
Evaluation and implementation
17. Evaluate instructional and non-instructional interventions
18. Revise instructional and non-instructional solutions based on data
19. Implement, disseminate and diffuse instructional and non-instructional interventions
Management
20. Apply business skills to managing the instructional design function
21. Manage partnerships and collaborative relationships
22. Plan and manage instructional design projects

Table 7.2 Sample Instructional Designer position (1)
Instructional Designer
Our client is seeking an Instructional Designer to work with content specialists to repurpose the
company’s compliance program. In this role you will develop instructor-led training, create
assessment questions and build activities. A significant portion of the content is documented
Experience
2–4 years as an Instructional Designer
Design and development of instructor-led training
Digital media and video creation and production
Creating training with YouTube
Developing e-learning using Captivate and Articulate
Using learning management systems
Knowledge of social media technologies
Working in a technology company
Additional
Background in media or advertising
Creating assessment questions

Collaboration or Collusion?

101

Table 7.3 Sample Instructional Designer Position (2)
Instructional Designer
Job description • Work with sales and marketing managers to produce e-learning courses for a
global audience
• Bachelor’s degree in related field and 3–5 years experience in instructional
design, education or interaction design
• Create graphic elements for branding, posters and PowerPoint
• Work with text, graphic and image assets
• Experience in needs analysis and project management of training resources
Skills
Adobe Premiere, After Effects, video presentation tool
Media formatting
Content and learning management systems

perceptions of how we acquire design knowledge and skill, not only from an
educational system but also through the dynamic and emergent communities in
which we engage and interact.

Resolution
To enable learning in an education or training context, designers with the requisite
knowledge, skills and capacity to create effective learning experiences are essential. The design alchemist meets this requirement, as their focus and passion is the
creation of learning spaces where knowledge application, learning outcomes,
assessment, learning activities and resources merge into meaningful and engaging
learning experience for all participants. The design alchemist can also leverage
technology and media to support the transform of the learning environment, not
through a personal ability to develop media or write software, but through an
understanding of the ways in which technology can support the achievement of
learning outcomes through focused learning activities.

Collaboration or Collusion?

Paradox
We have technology that promotes and enables collaborative endeavours,
and a pedagogy that promotes social learning.
And yet educational systems appear intent on caging the individual student, using fear through surveillance to ensure the individual integrity of
their work.

102

7 Insight or Distraction?

In Chap. 2 I recounted the story of my first encounter with the ability of computers
to process and transform data, which involved an assignment to write a
Computerised Crook Catching program. A major outcome from this activity was
developing an understanding of the value of peer relationships and interaction to the
learning process, as observations from a fellow student had helped me rework my
original program. On reflection, some might argue the information received and
used was an example of collusion or cheating, because a colleague triggered the
idea of a different, correct answer. Others however might view the exchange as a
perfect example of collaboration and social learning, where the additional insights
allowed me to reflect on the nature of logic, assumptions, computer programming
and the properties of data. It would have been cheating had I simply copied the code
of my fellow student and submitted that as my own; however that was not the case.
With the new information I set about understanding the logic and the necessary
code to cater for the matching scores of those fictitious criminals. The experience
demonstrated the value of collaboration and the potential for such interaction to
result in increased motivation to participate, learn and produce. As Wenger (1998,
p. 5) commented: ‘to assess learning we use tests with which students struggle in
one-on-one combat, where knowledge must be demonstrated out of context, and
where collaboration is considered cheating’.
Jumping forward to 2013, educational systems appear more ambiguous and
paradoxical. While on the one hand online learning is considered valuable because
of the collaborative opportunities it brings to learning and teaching, on the other
hand there is a fear that students will cheat the system, giving prominence to
organisations such as Kryterion (n.d.) who promote themselves as
A full-service test development and delivery company that provides world-class online
testing technology integrating item banking, test delivery and real time reports; while
leveraging a global network of testing centers. Kryterion is the market leader in live Online
Proctoring, which utilizes remote video monitoring to observe test takers where they live,
learn or work (Kryterion, n.d.)

This sadly reflects a broader shift in local and national government from valuing
trust and integrity to supporting a culture of suspicion and surveillance. How can
effective learning take place when the integrity of students is constantly under
scrutiny? Rather than educational intuitions being a place for learning and innovation, they at times seem to reflect an educational prison, where students are
considered cheats, colluders and miscreants. Unfortunately it is not the student
who is at fault, it is the system, and it is only through design practice will this trend
change.

Resolution
I believe in the integrity of the student and that with carefully designed courses and
assessment items we will have less need for surveillance, giving more time for

Information or Interaction?

103

debate, discussion and reflection. Humans will always find a way to beat ‘the
system’; if an educational environment can be beaten, students will find a way.
However if designers make learning attractive, relevant, independent and collaborative, the learning and teaching experience will be more motivating and enjoyable,
obviating the need for surveillance. Design Alchemy aims to provide such an
environment through carefully sculptured activities that enable the individual
learner to achieve learning and acquire knowledge in a contextual, relevant and
safe environment.

Information or Interaction?

Paradox
We claim that using computers in education enables interactivity which
benefits learning.
And yet the more we progress the more applications have become electronic page turners and administrative supports.

To Flow or Stagnate?
To extend the discussion on design for effective learning with technology, it is
important to focus on the value of self-paced, adaptive modules where students can
interact with carefully designed resources to engage with the subject matter of their
course. The example of Dr Bitzer and the bees (Chap. 2) is a prime example of that
adaptation; however, that form of computer-based learning has been surpassed by
online learning, typically delivered through learning management systems and
supported by open and closed resources. One reason for this shift is that support
teams and designers no longer have specialist skills in computer programming;
even though that expertise is within the domain of information technology departments, it is not typically utilised for the development of learning resources but
rather the administrative applications which support education. Fortunately there
appears to be an increasing demand for ‘apps’ to support online coursework, and
this augers well for the ways in which technology will be implemented and used.
There is a clear case that we need to recapture the power of the computer to
provide tools for learning. To address this I will highlight one component of my
doctoral research (Sims, 2000) which identified and analysed the interactivity
profiles of students as they worked through different interactive multimedia
CD-ROMs (see Figs. 7.2 and 7.3). While acknowledging this resource has now
largely been outmoded, the results have particular relevance because they identify
factors relevant to design for learner engagement.

104

7 Insight or Distraction?

Fig. 7.2 Interactivity profile 1

Fig. 7.3 Interactivity profile 2

The two profiles plot a user moving through an application, differentiating the
interaction types being used (presentation, navigation, exploration, involvement,
manipulation, accidental, reflection). The profile shown in Fig. 7.2 represents a user
who spent most of the time exploring the product rather than engaging in any
meaningful way. In contrast, the profile shown in Fig. 7.3 reflects a user integrated
with the application, using all the available interactions interchangeably to create an
ongoing, engaging experience. This aligns and connects with the work of
Csikszentmihalyi (1998) and the concept of flow:
Completely focused motivation; a single-minded immersion which possibly represents the
ultimate experience in harnessing the emotions in performing and learning. In flow, the

Information or Interaction?

105

emotions are not just contained and channelled, but also positive, energized, and aligned
with the task at hand. The hallmark of flow is a feeling of spontaneous joy, even rapture.4

As designers, to what extent are the designs focused on creating learning and
teaching activities in which participants experience flow?

Which Level?
A second explanation as to why information access is more prevalent than interaction for learning is that designers, especially within the business community, build
computer-based learning or online learning applications based on levels of interactivity (expressed differently to those defined by Sims, 1997); in effect, the lower the
level of interactivity, the cheaper the development cost. While descriptions of these
levels vary, those defined by the United States Department of Defense (1997, p. 43)
provide a benchmark, and numerous consulting firms also use these levels to
support their business.5
There are however critical problems with adopting this ‘level’ approach to
design, because interactivity is about learning, not information access. Based on
the levels shown in Table 7.4, the first two relate to the computer being used as a
resource, not for learning. Learning cannot be seen as economical; if there are
specific learning outcomes to be achieved, they must be the priority, and the
resultant design may or may not require the integration of complex interactions.
Design for e-learning using only levels one and two would not represent a learning
application, but rather an information resource which informs rather than defines a
learning event. To maximise learning efficiency through interaction, only levels
three and four are relevant and it is these that a designer must address when
considering the nature of the learning activities.

Resolution
While these issues emerged when computer-assisted learning and multimedia were
predominant (see Chap. 2), the focus of design must be on learning and therefore
the issues of interaction, flow and development remain current. If technology is to
be embraced as a major component of the learning and teaching dynamic, then its
primary affordance as a tool for learning through interaction must be acknowledged. Access to information and resources must be viewed as a secondary
affordance. To achieve this primary state, the design alchemist is tasked with
transforming an educational environment from one that privileges content to one
4
5

Modified from the text available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology).
For example, InxSol http://www.inxsol.com/cbtlevels.aspx.

106

7 Insight or Distraction?

Table 7.4 Levels of interactivity (Department of Defense, 1997)
Level
1: Passive
2: Limited participation
3: Complex participation
4: Real-time participation

Characteristic
The student acts solely as a receiver of information
The student makes simple responses to instructional cues
The student makes a variety of responses using varied techniques
in response to instructional cues
The student is directly involved in a lifelike set of complex
cues and responses

where engagement between participants is defined through learning activities
which generate flow through interaction and the production of assessment artefacts.

To Listen or to Perform?

Paradox
The technology of computers within education allows for a range of roles that
all course participants can take.
And yet all too often learners, and to some extent teachers, are left as
passengers as the educational express moves through course after course.

Learner: Actor or Audience?
As a result of the research identifying interactive profiles, Sims (2000) proposed
that better learner engagement would be achieved if designers viewed the learner as
an actor in an educational performance, and not a passive member of the audience,
watching that same performance. In using the analogy of the learner as actor, the
language of the theatre (e.g. Grandstaff, 1995) is helpful:
• The learner as actor requires a deal of effort on behalf of the learner; actors must
be able to be heard and to use their voice expressively, emphasising the importance of acknowledging experience.
• Rehearsing, getting it right, relates to the introductory encounter between course
and learners, with the rehearsal providing the opportunity for the learner to
achieve an appropriate interactive balance to meet their current needs.
• In a theatrical performance, the audience and other players are aware of the actor
playing the lead role. In the case of learning environments, the audience can be
perceived as the connections established by course participants with external
networks. In a performance, success is demonstrated by audience acclaim; with
learning, success is through achieving the learning outcomes and gaining recognition from the ‘audience’.

To Listen or to Perform?

107

The concept of learner as actor therefore extends the way in which design
can be conceived. In the same way that an actor puts their personality into their
stage role, so the individual learner can act out within an educational performance.
By adopting a learner-centred ethos and promoting contextual, problem-based
activities, Design Alchemy can create environments where all participants can be
actors.

Where’s the Magic?
The history of computers and education has resulted in outstanding examples of
applications which enhance the learning experience and motivate the learner; in
addition countless conferences and workshops have promoted the value of different
technologies to support learning and teaching. However, the potential digital and
network technology can bring to learning and teaching has not been consistently
realised. In the film Bagdad Café (Adlon, 1988), a rundown truckstop and café was
transformed, through nightly performances of magic, into a mecca for the truck
drivers, until the law intervened and the star performer was deported. When one of
the drivers returned and found the café quiet, he asked ‘where’s the magic?’ to
which the server replied ‘the magic’s gone’. The majority of computer-based
(online) educational environments have also lost their magic, and the reason is
straightforward. The design has been influenced by technology not pedagogy, with
the result that administrative aspects of education (learning management systems)
now predominate, and options for learners to interact given less priority. To
illustrate this, the following examples demonstrate what computer-based learning
and interaction can be like, and promote a design ethos which is as relevant today,
where the learner is an active participant (actor) within the course.

What’s Wrong with the Manual
One of the defining moments for me in designing and creating computer-based
learning environments came when asked to develop a course for a company
introducing a proprietary email system into its operations. The tools I had to
work with were the email system itself, a printed manual for the email system
and a proprietary authoring tool designed to produce computer-based training
courses.
The initial discussions with the project sponsor recommended that the course
would be titled ‘Introduction to Email’, and I began to examine the resources to
develop a course structure. An initial inspection of the manual determined that its
contents were sequenced according to the menu items of the email system. However, when the activities associated with sending mail or including an attachment
were deconstructed, there was no relationship between the activity and the manual.
This was a critical moment, as it changed my view of education forever: content

108

7 Insight or Distraction?

Fig. 7.4 Screen capture—Have You Read Your Mail Today?

(or subject matter) is often presented in a way that has no relationship to the
performance associated with that content.
With this revelation in mind, and following further discussion with the project
sponsor, the true rationale for the course was determined; the organisation did not
want to teach their staff about the email system, i.e. the functionality of each
discrete menu item; they wanted their staff to use the system. Consequently the
course was renamed ‘Have You Read Your Mail Today?’ (a sample screen is shown
in Fig. 7.4) which, by title alone, provided a focus on the reason the course was
being offered. This transformation represents the genesis of the knowledge application component of Design Alchemy and the design of informing learning activities; education is about the application of content, not the content, and this is where
design practices have repeatedly failed.
This way of thinking transformed the course design, which was constructed as a
series of contextual, time-related scenarios in which the student completed simulated email exchanges, sending and receiving of mail over a period of time and
integrating tasks such as attaching documents, copying and forwarding.

How Observant Are You?
Some years later, I worked as a consultant on a project to develop training for the
hospitality sector. Under the broad name of HotTrain, the modules focused around
a series of scenarios in which the learner worked through a sequence of jobs
(e.g. Working in the Kitchen shown in Fig. 7.5) and responds (unprompted) to a
set of visual cues (e.g. spilt water). The feedback provided was both conditional and
corrective, highlighting the potential consequences of the learner’s actions.

To Listen or to Perform?

109

Fig. 7.5 HotTrain sample screen

Resolution
Both these examples illustrate options for ensuring the learner is part of the desired
outcome by making the experience active and contextual. This approach is integral
to the practice of Design Alchemy, where learners are constantly active through
interaction with people, ideas and objects as well as producers of artefacts to
support the achievement of learning outcomes. Through engagement with problems
or challenges relevant to both the context of the course and the learner’s own
situation, the learner will not only have a lead role in the educational performance
but also experience the magic of immersion in relevant learning activities.

110

7 Insight or Distraction?

Design Distractors

Paradox
Through research and practice we have generated extensive knowledge about
learning, teaching and design.
And yet that knowledge is compartmentalised such that individual elements can distract the designer from the true purpose of their work.

What Are the Distractors?
Before discussing the role of the design distractors, it is important to emphasise that
the following analysis is not a criticism of the research or its value to better
understanding the teaching and learning dynamic. As a field we cannot do without
that research and knowledge. The purpose of the discussion is to highlight the ways
in which certain factors, such as learning styles, open resources or generations, can
potentially affect the quality of the design by acting as a distractor.
By way of further background, over the years I have worked in the field, many
trends and fads (librettos perhaps) have emerged. Whether models proposed
decades ago such as Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956), the rise of
virtual environments such as Second Life (Linden Research, 2013) or more recent
phenomena such as Massive Open Online Course (MOOC6), these concepts tend to
infiltrate existing educational practice and gain prominence before fading away as
their value becomes uncertain, as considered in Chap. 2 with respect to cycles of
forgetfulness. In the following discussion a range of factors are identified which can
impact on the success and integrity of design.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism
The wrongful appropriation and/or purloining and publication of another
author’s “language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions”, and the representation
of them as one’s own original work.
[Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism]

6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_open_online_course.

Design Distractors

111

Since the turn of the century, we have found ourselves in a world where the
interaction of information access and copyright has become both complex and
confusing. It is now a simple task for those with computer literacy to locate an
item on the Internet and copy it to their own personal device, whether or not that is
legal. As a consequence it becomes all too easy to copy or access another student’s
work when asked to complete an assignment. At the same time, based on anecdotal
evidence, instructors encourage their students to contact a specific person who, for a
fee, will complete their assignments. Not only can we copy material and make it our
own, we can buy that material and claim it as our own. Students are potentially
graduating without having acquired the knowledge the qualification is supposed to
assure.
Plagiarism therefore remains a critical issue for the whole educational community. However to prioritise student integrity over learning, and implement surveillance and monitoring systems, is contrary to the human spirit and the perceived
value of learning through connections and social networks. A designer cannot
prevent a student from plagiarising, but they can conceive strategies that will
minimise the options and opportunities for plagiarism. When education is viewed
as a process through which students demonstrate knowledge by completing essays
and reports, that environment is ripe for plagiarism. However if education is
designed from a learner-centred perspective, the resulting activities and assessments will require an individual response making plagiarism unnecessary.
Designers have the responsibility to devise activities and assessment tasks that
focus on creation not remixing; in this way the need to plagiarise is removed
because learners must rely on their own innovation and creativity to complete
the task.

Digital Whispers
A second distractor relates to concerns about the reliability and validity of resources
available to students. Teachers will ask, quite rightly, ‘how will my students know if
the information is any good?’ If the response is to assign a textbook, then the design
process has experienced a distraction because the advantages that can be gained
from the wealth of legitimate and freely available resources have been overlooked.
How then does a designer assess information on the Web? The more we delve
into the resource base available, we not only find ideas considered novel had their
genesis decades or even centuries earlier but also that humans have the amazing
capacity to replicate, repurpose or restructure that information. As an example, an
Internet search for any concept (e.g. instructional design) will generate access to
hundreds of images which give a sense of digital whispers . . . the concepts change
as more and more people repurpose and remix the original source. While this
phenomenon is considered part of the knowledge generation process, there is
value in being able to discern the value of these resources. Certainly in this text I
have worked either to include material from primary sources or to use open
resources that have allowed me through Creative Commons licensing to adapt or

112

7 Insight or Distraction?

Fig. 7.6 No attribution. Source: http://ci484-learning-technologies.wikispaces.com/What+is
+Instructional+Design%3F

remix that content in order to emphasise a point. As an aside, as part of the research
for this book, I came across a representation of my own work (Sims, 2012 and
Fig. 7.6) which had been included in a personal blog without explanation or
attribution.
Digital whispers are truly active, creating almost too many variants of models
and concepts for the learner, teacher or designer to comprehend. However, rather
than viewing this as a problem (reliability, validity) and a distraction to design, this
diversity of expression can be used as an asset for learning and teaching. Because
the design alchemist focuses on interaction and alignment between activity, assessment and outcome, a variety of resources become legitimate as input. It is the
boundaries established by the assessment criteria which provide a way to effectively discern the legitimacy and value of a resource to its respective learning
activity.

Design Distractors

113

Flipped Classrooms

Flip teaching
Also called the flipped classroom, a form of blended learning in which
students learn new content online by watching video lectures, usually at
home, and what used to be homework (assigned problems) is now done in
class with teacher offering more personalized guidance and interaction with
students, instead of lecturing.
Also known as backwards classroom, reverse instruction, flipping the
classroom and reverse teaching.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip_teaching]
With the growth of Open Educational Resources (OERs7) and providers such as the
Khan Academy,8 numerous resources enable the student to ‘watch video lectures’,
as stated in the above definition, although the assumption that watching enables a
student to ‘learn new content online’ is highly contentious, if not totally incorrect.
The distracting component for the designer is the extent to which strategies such
as this become a fad, with the focus placed on the process: the learner studies the
content at home, and then the teacher works on issues in class. However, how many
teachers already perform in this way, considering it their personal ‘best practice’?
In my own practice this model was used in the mid-1990s within a flexible program
on computer-based learning; so the concept is not new. A sceptical observer might
see the emergence of practices such as the ‘flipped classroom’ as supporting the
providers of the ‘online content’ rather than any particular enhancement of
pedagogy!
Whether or not the flipped classroom is new, it supports Design Alchemy
through privileging problem-solving, guidance and interaction. For the designer it
is not a matter of whether to flip or not to flip, but rather to understand that the
nature of outcomes and activities will determine the type of environment that will
best support learners’ achievement.

Mobile Learning
Another distractor is the recent emergence of the tablet and whether or not it
represents a new pedagogy. Certainly it represents a new technology, allowing
access to materials ‘anywhere, anytime’, but then so do Internet cafes, albeit with a
little less convenience. Nevertheless, the value of mobile learning to enhance

7
8

For example, those available through the OER Commons (http://www.oercommons.org/).
https://www.khanacademy.org/.

114

7 Insight or Distraction?

learning through interaction and access has captured the imagination of educators
and researchers (e.g. Kidd & Chen, 2011), even though designs tend to focus more
on information access while mobile rather than learning while mobile.
The distraction, as with all (new) technologies, is that they bring something new
to learning and teaching; but this is incorrect thinking. In the same way that a new
model car does not change its function when a new model is released (a means for
people to move efficiently from one place to another), a new digital technology
remains a computer responding to a set of instructions. By focusing on design for
learning, the technology becomes a tool of learning; different learning experiences
result from the design and not the technology. The designer therefore cannot be
distracted by each new technology and assume a new pedagogical strategy is
required. Rather the designer needs to adopt an approach to learning and teaching
that is independent of technology and yet is open to integrating any new technology
where it supports the pedagogy.

MOOCs, Virtual Reality and OERs
Multiplayer environments emerged with the large mainframe computers in the
1960s and 1970s, so the concept of a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) or a
virtual reality environment such as Second Life (Linden Research, 2013) reflects
the ability of computer networks to connect many people with a single software
application. With respect to resources, an Open Educational Resource (OER) provides free access and, subject to licensing, options to modify the resource.
Each of these can be a distractor for a designer if the emphasis is placed on the
concept (e.g. MOOC or OER) rather than its affordance. As an example, from a
marketing perspective, the MOOC allows thousands of students to enrol in a single
course, which has clear benefits for the provider in terms of scalability and
economic returns (where there is a fee for access or accreditation). However the
affordance is simply that a student has access to an educational environment in
which many others may be present; the design therefore needs to ensure that each
individual student knows what to do and how the anticipated roles of other
participants might impact on their learning. The case with virtual reality is much
the same; the environment allows learners to assume virtual identities and interact
within a computer-generated space. From an educational perspective, the pedagogy
of both MOOC and virtual reality can be aligned to that of large classes, which has
its own established research base (e.g. Heppner, 2007).
With each of these the distraction factor is when they become the driving force
behind the design; the MOOCs and virtual reality represent an environment, and the
OER a set of resources. If the design process focuses on enabling the environment
and the resources, similar to the at-home activities of the flipped classroom,
learning will not necessarily occur. However if the design focuses on what the
learner should achieve, then the design will be more effective, focusing on pedagogy first and fad, trend or technology second.

Design Distractors

115

Styles, Intelligences, Culture and Generations
Learning styles (e.g. Honey & Mumford, 2006), multiple intelligences (Gardner,
2011), culture (e.g. Rogers, Graham, & Mayes, 2007) and generation (Oblinger &
Oblinger, 2005) are all important areas of research in our field, and each has a
significant literature base and strategies for practice. From the designer’s perspective, however, it is common to be asked by teaching staff ‘which learning style set
am I designing for?’ or ‘how can I design for different generations of students’?
My response is that a designer cannot assume or design for the characteristics of
an individual learner. If a designer attempts to predict styles or culture, it will
become a distractor because it is not possible, certainly in the online context where
learners are so diverse, to design for these particular characteristics or preferences.
However designers can design so learners can apply these individual characteristics
or preferences to the different learning activities. It is then the resources the learner
chooses to use, and the form of the artefacts they choose to create and represent
their learning, that allow them to reflect their style, their intelligence, their culture
or their generation.

Taxonomies and Load
Finally there are focused areas of research such as cognitive load (originating with
Sweller, 1988) or taxonomies of learning (e.g. Bloom & Krathwhol, 1956) that on
the one hand are critical for better understanding learning but on the other can
distract the design process. For example, as a teacher I would not want my students
to experience excessive load in trying to access and interpret explanations or
activities; and I would not want them to be confronted with a screen of
multicoloured and different fonts. However this load is often generated by inexperience in design and development; there are well-established principles of how to
communicate with students and design screens, so these elements should not
influence the designer, who can rightly expect those responsible for implementation
will avoid inappropriate designs which generate cognitive load.
A similar response applies to the use of taxonomies. For example, Bloom’s
Taxonomy (Bloom & Krathwhol, 1956) provides guidance as to sequences of
learning activities, beginning with essential knowledge, its analysis and application
and progressing to analysis synthesis and evaluation. Despite the value of this
classification, it can be a distractor for design if it is used to prescribe the sequence
of activities. In Design Alchemy, the activities embrace each of the elements of this
taxonomy, but not in a prescribed fashion. The final output (a resolution to a
problem) represents the synthesis and evaluation components of Bloom’s Taxonomy, which are achieved by accessing the relevant knowledge from the resources,
analysing that knowledge through collaboration before determining a solution. The
research informs the designer, but does not drive the design.

116

7 Insight or Distraction?

Resolution
The elements of education and educational technology introduced here represent
only a few of the many innovations which have been proposed and researched in the
field. However each in their own way can distract the designer. By adopting a
transformative approach to design thinking, these factors will not distract the design
process but rather enrich and enhance the environments created and the activities
and interactions in which participants engage.

Insight or Distraction?
In reflecting on the question used for this chapter, a response might well be can we
really undertake effective design given these distractors? The response is an
unequivocal yes, as long as the design practice focuses on the learner and the
learning activities rather than the environment or the resources. In contemporary
universities, courses are accessed through and formatted by the learning management system, the learning environment; if that environment defines the design, then
the resultant courses will be inflexible and technology driven. However if the
design is completed independently of the delivery environment, then it is the
implementation that will adapt the environment to fit the design, not adapt
the design to fit the environment.
The range of factors discussed make educational design a fascinating field, and
understanding how they individually and jointly impact on learning and teaching is
essential. However for the designer they act as distractors if they are considered
drivers of design rather than characteristics designers deploy depending on the
activity, the assessment and the outcome.

References
Adlon, P. (Director). (1988). Bagdad Café [Motion picture]. Las Vegas, NV: Bayerischer
Rundfunk (BR).
Blackboard. (2013). Blackboard collaborate. Available from http://www.blackboard.com/plat
forms/collaborate/overview.aspx. Accessed October 10, 2013.
Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification
of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook 1:
Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans.
Coomey, M., & Stephenson, J. (2001). Online learning: it is all about dialogue, involvement,
support and control – According to the research. In J. Stephenson (Ed.), Teaching & learning
online: Pedagogies for new technologies. London: Kogan Page.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1998). Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life.
New York: Basic Books.

References

117

Department of Defense. (1997). Handbook development of interactive multimedia instruction
(imi) (Part 3 of 4 parts). Available from http://www.everyspec.com/MIL-HDBK/MIL-HDBK1300-1499/MIL-HDBK-1379-3_23657/
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (3rd ed.). New York:
Basic Books.
Goodson, I., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Mangan, J. M. (2002). Cyber spaces/social spaces:
Culture clash in computerized classrooms. New York: Palgrave/Macmillan.
Grandstaff, R. J. (1995). Acting & directing (3rd ed.). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook
Company.
Heppner, F. (2007). Teaching the large college class: A guidebook for instructors with multitudes.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (2006). The learning styles Questionnaire, 80-item version. Maidenhead: Peter Honey Publications.
International Board of Standards for Training, Performance, and Instruction. (n.d.). Available from
http://www.ibstpi.org. Accessed October 9, 2013.
Kidd, T. T., & Chen, I. (Eds.). (2011). Ubiquitous learning: Strategies for pedagogy, course
design, and technology. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Kryterion. (n.d.). What we do. Available from http://www.kryteriononline.com. Accessed October
10, 2013.
Kuhlman, T. (2013). Do you really need an instructional design degree?. Available from The
Rapid eLearning Blog [tkuhlmann@articulate.com]. Accessed September 18.
Linden Research. (2013). Second life. Available from http://secondlife.com/. Accessed October
10, 2013.
Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation. Washington, DC:
Educause.
Rogers, P. C., Graham, C. R., & Mayes, C. T. (2007). Cultural competence and instructional
design: Exploration research into the delivery of online instruction cross-culturally. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(2).
Robinson, K. (2013). How to escape education’s death valley. http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_
robinson_how_to_escape_education_s_death_valley.html
Russell, T. L. (2001). The no significant difference phenomenon (5th ed.). Montgomery, AL:
IDECC.
Sims, R. (1997). Interactivity: A forgotten art? Computers in Human Behavior, 13(2), 157–180.
Sims, R. (2000). Learners as actors: Strategies for computer-enhanced learning encounters.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Wollongong University.
Sims, R. (2012). Reappraising design practice. In D. Holt, S. Segrave, & J. Cybulski (Eds.),
Professional education using e-simulations: Benefits of blended learning design. IGI Global:
Hershey, PA.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science,
12, 257–285.
Taylor, R. P. (1980). Introduction. In R. P. Taylor (Ed.), The computer in school: Tutor, tool, tutee.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Part II

Design Alchemy: The Framework

The set of chapters in Part I: Emergence and Alignment provided a comprehensive
analysis of how the concept of Design Alchemy emerged, and how it aligns with
design methodologies and learning theories prevalent in the field. The second part
focuses on the three major elements that constitute the framework of Design
Alchemy: the pedagogy that underpins the thinking of the design alchemist, the
practice or method by which the design alchemist conceptualises, creates and
implements a course, and the range of assets that impact on their design practice.

Chapter 8

What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

Abstract Over the decades many different concepts and strategies have been
considered appropriate for education—experiential, motivational and problem
based—and other factors have also impacted on design practice such as learning
styles, culture and generation. This chapter focuses on the informing theories of
Design Alchemy, which is both integrative and eclectic and provides a theoretical
and evidence-based foundation for practicing as a design alchemist. While
acknowledging that traditionally pedagogy refers specifically to the art of teaching,
in this context the design alchemist also needs a pedagogy, a theoretically sound
framework, on which to base design decisions that will enhance the experience of
both learner and teacher. The elements which make up this pedagogy are based on
an inclusive learner-centred philosophy which integrate learning activities, contextual learning, problem-solving, social learning, creative learning and emergence.

The Design Alchemy Pedagogy
As discussed in detail in the following chapter, the practice of Design Alchemy is
based on a five-step process (Fig. 8.1), and the pedagogy relates specifically to the
third and fourth steps: the learning activities in which students participate and the
assessment items generated by those learning activities, and which in turn provide
evidence of the learning outcomes having been achieved.
Within this practice, therefore, the pedagogy of Design Alchemy reflects a
learner-centred paradigm in which the whole course is conceived and considered
from the perspective of the student. One of the curious aspects of engaging with
colleagues, clients and students is the different interpretation of what learner
centred involves, for example, being equated with discovery learning and the
observation that ‘who would want to place students in a class and let them discover
what they need to learn by themselves’. While Design Alchemy is strongly learner
centred and encourages activities which result in the emergence of new knowledge

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_8,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

121

122

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

Fig. 8.1 The Design Alchemy practice

and perspectives, the pedagogy itself is definitely not about leaving students
stranded or abandoned—in fact, the very opposite.

The Elements
The Design Alchemy framework views learning as a multifaceted approach in
which outcomes are achieved by the individual learner involved in seven critical
and interrelated elements, as depicted in Fig. 8.2. The pedagogy comes into play
when creating the learning activities and the associated assessment tasks that will
demonstrate the achievement of learning outcomes. For the design alchemist, these
factors guide the role of the learning through:
1. Being inclusive—including in the design process and the resultant course design
a diverse range of people, ideas and objects.
2. Being active—learning is defined by the participation in, and completion of, a set
of learning tasks that are explicitly aligned with the assessment tasks and
learning outcomes.
3. Solving problems—each learning activity is based around an issue or problem
which requires a solution or proposed solution.
4. Providing context—the learning activities are defined in terms of the learner’s
context (e.g. environment, culture, expectations, motivations, needs) as well as
the situation of the learner (e.g. student, manager, nurse).
5. Working collaboratively—the activities in which learners are engaged are
(optionally) completed with other course participants.
6. Being creative—the result of each learning activity is the production of an
artefact (e.g. concept, mental model, report, media item, essay) that completes
the activity and forms a component of assessment.
7. Enabling emergence—the course participants are charged with questioning
existing paradigms and encouraged to examine options for emergent (new)
knowledge.

Revisiting Learning
While my long-term involvement in the field of education has resulted in the
evolutionary development of Design Alchemy, it is also eclectic in that it embraces
a range of approaches and models of learning, teaching and design, as shown by

The Design Alchemy Pedagogy

123

Fig. 8.2 Design Alchemy pedagogy

these seven elements. And while there have been many academic texts written on
each of these factors, one that resonates with Design Alchemy is the original work
of Knowles (1975), whose primary focus was on adult learning (andragogy) and
who observed that ‘the purpose of learning is to enable us to understand the
meaning of our experiences and to realize values in our lives’ (p. 17), which reflects
what I endeavour to achieve when designing courses, even though the Design
Alchemy approach is not exclusively for adult learning.
While the specific learning theories that inform Design Alchemy were discussed
in Chap. 4, this section elaborates the alignment of the design alchemist’s pedagogy. A key element of adopting a learner-centred approach is that it privileges the
student or learner, regardless of their age or experience, and in so doing empowers
the student. In articulating the principles of Design Alchemy, I believe that learners,
like all humans, are intelligent, motivated and curious—and that negating any of
these characteristics is the result of poor or misunderstood design practice. There is
therefore an expectation that within the learning environments created by the design
alchemist, students will have the opportunity and be encouraged to be self-directed,
which Knowles (1975, p. 18) suggested was ‘a process in which individuals take the
initiative without the help of others in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating
goals, identifying human and material resources, and evaluating learning outcomes’. It is important to note that for this book, such self-regulation is considered

124

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

to apply within a formal and intentional learning environment, whereas the definition could equally apply to informal learning.
Having worked in the field as a designer, developer, consultant, teacher and
researcher, it becomes more and more apparent that all approaches to and philosophies of learning and teaching have origins that can be traced to the pioneers in the
field and are not recent. Therefore, while the pedagogy of Design Alchemy is
eclectic and designed to address the needs of the contemporary and future learner,
the underpinning concepts have a strong heritage. As an example, Knowles (1975,
p. 18–25) proposed three types of learning which are consistent with the six
elements of the Design Alchemy pedagogy:
1. Instrumental learning, which featured problem-solving and cause and effect
relationships, which supports the value of resolving problems and challenges
within learning activities.
2. Dialogic learning, which focused on communication and the different interactions that involve ‘assertions about the meaning of a vast range of experience in
several dimensions, ranging from the concrete to the abstract and poetic’ (p. 19).
This underpins the inclusive, contextual, social and emergent elements of the
Design Alchemy pedagogy.
3. Self-reflective learning: ‘The learner is presented with an alternative way of
interpreting feelings and patterns of action; the old meaning scheme or perspective is reorganised to incorporate new insights; we come to see our reality more
inclusively, to understand it more clearly, and to integrate our experience better’
(p. 21). This underpins the inclusive and contextual elements.
While these represent one perspective on learning, it demonstrates a particular
approach to education that privileges the learner and their experience and does not
assume that only a teacher provides the knowledge. I believe, as does Robinson
(2013), that humans are inherently diverse, curious and imaginative, reflecting
Knowles’ (1975) perception of the student:
Ideally participants in a discourse have full information about the matter at issue, they are
able to reason argumentatively, they can reflect critically about assumptions and premises,
and they have sufficient self-knowledge to assure the participation in discourse is free from
self-deception. (p. 19)

Learners come to an educational system with some degree of knowledge about
the world, and using that knowledge to develop and motivate learning is a key
element of design practice, as defined by Gagné’s (1965) conditions of learning. So
by privileging the learner, designers necessarily adopt a learner-centred approach.

What Is Learner Centred?
What does having a learner-centred environment mean? Having been privy to
numerous conversations and discussions relating to teaching and learning around

The Design Alchemy Pedagogy

125

the globe, it is amazing what different perspectives exist. Mention ‘online’ and
people will respond, ‘I wouldn’t want my surgeon to have learned their skills from a
computer’, and summarily dismiss the opportunities that online education affords.
Mention ‘student centred’ or ‘discovery learning’ and a common response is,
‘what’s the value in students learning by themselves?’ Sadly these responses only
highlight a growing ignorance of the theories that inform our practice, which is
perhaps the prime reason why our practice is often so maligned and criticised. What
learner centred means for the designer, and subsequently the teacher, is that the
learner, and learning, is the primary focus of the design activity; the mental models
we have of design must have the learner in the lead role of the educational
performance, rather than the content or script.
The value of Design Alchemy is in the synthesis of key theories and principles to
provide an efficient and effective means to design and create educational environments. Consequently, it is important to provide an overview of how the design
alchemist views learning and how those views impact on design practice and the
roles of course participants. Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (2001) provide a useful
perspective on what learner centred means:
environments that pay careful attention to the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs that
students bring to the educational setting (p. 133) . . . teachers who are learner centred
recognize the importance of building on the conceptual and cultural knowledge that
students bring with them to the classroom (p. 134) . . . a sensitivity to the cultural practices
of students and the effect of those practices on classroom learning.

It is concepts and approaches such as these that are critical to achieving
engagement and interaction in learning and teaching.
A useful framework to highlight the principles of a learner-centred approach was
prepared by the American Psychological Association (1997), which reflect the same
ethos as Design Alchemy: ‘active and reflective nature of learning and learners’
(p. 2). While the principles were aimed at the school sector, they are equally
relevant to current online practice, and a summary of these principles and their
relationship to the elements of the Design Alchemy pedagogy are presented in
Table 8.1.

Pedagogy in Review
The Design Alchemy pedagogy focuses on the learner in such a way that the
activities the learner engages in, and the people and resources they interact with,
result in the creation of assessment artefacts that demonstrate the achievement of
learning outcomes and the ability to apply the knowledge in a context relevant to
the individual learner. The subject matter relevant to the course and the knowledge
domain is used as a resource to complete the activities; through accessing,
deconstructing and applying the subject matter to those activities, knowledge is

126

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

Table 8.1 Learner-centred principles (Adapted from American Psychological Association, 1997)
Cognitive and metacognitive factors
Learning complex subject matter is most effective when an intentional process of
constructing meaning from information and experience
The successful learner can create meaningful, coherent representations of
knowledge
The successful learner can link (construct) new information with existing
knowledge in meaningful ways
The successful learner can create and use a repertoire of thinking and reasoning
strategies to achieve complex learning goals
Higher-order strategies for selecting and monitoring mental operations facilitate
creative and critical thinking
Learning is influenced by environmental factors, including culture, technology and
instructional practices
Motivational and affective factors
Motivation to learn is influenced by the individual’s emotional states, beliefs,
interests and goals and habits of thinking
Intrinsic motivation is stimulated by tasks of optimal novelty and difficulty,
relevant to personal interests, and providing for personal choice and control
Acquisition of complex knowledge and skills requires extended learner effort and
guided practice
Developmental and social factors
Learning is most effective when differential development within and across
physical, intellectual, emotional and social domains is taken into account
Learning is influenced by social interactions, interpersonal relations and
communication with others
Individual differences factors
Learners have different strategies, approaches and capabilities for learning that are
a function of prior experience and heredity
Learning is most effective when differences in learners’ linguistic, cultural and
social backgrounds are taken into account
Setting appropriately high and challenging standards and assessing the learner as
well as learning progress are integral parts of the learning process

Active
Contextual
Creative
Creative
Emergent
Problemsolving
Problemsolving
Inclusive
Contextual
Inclusive
Contextual
Problemsolving
Creative
Active
Social
Contextual
Creative
Inclusive
Social
Contextual
Creative
Inclusive
Contextual
Active
Problemsolving

acquired and learning emerges. The essential elements and characteristics of this
pedagogy are discussed in the following sections.

Inclusive Learning
A typical online course today will have students enrolled who bring a variety of
experiences from different cultural influences, and it is this difference which the
designer needs to embrace within the course ethos and the associated learning
activities. The key components for achieving an inclusive learning environment
are the learner’s culture, their personal networks and their experiences.

Inclusive Learning

127

Culture

Culture, n:
the evolved human capacity to classify and represent experiences with
symbols, and to act imaginatively and creatively; and
the distinct ways that people living differently classify and represent their
experiences.
[Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture]
Our culture represents not only our national and religious and political heritage but
also the norms and expectations of our local community. As a teacher, I have
recognised that learners from different suburbs of Sydney manifest different cultures, which in turn are different for students from different cities or different rural
regions. How students view the world is partly dependent on their inherited culture
and partly dependent on the context in which they live.
Culture therefore plays a significant role in design for learning and teaching and
has received significant attention in the literature (e.g. McLoughlin & Oliver, 1999;
Rogers, Graham, & Mayes, 2007). However, while we congratulate ourselves on
networking and collaborating across international boundaries, we must also recognise that cultural norms and expectations impact on the learning anticipated and
expected by the learner, and therefore, the designer’s role is to privilege the
diversity of cultural differences through the learning activities being inclusive of
those cultural differences.

Networks
The majority of learners who study online have established a wide range of social
networks using the ever-expanding social media tools; for example, Dabbagh and
Kitsantas (2012) report that social media is increasing the opportunity for informal
learning outside of the institution and ‘a vital element of education for learners of
all ages’ (} 7). The formation of these networks enables the social element of the
pedagogy to be enacted, as learning can be empowered through collaboration and
community. For the designer the important consideration is how these networks
might be leveraged to enhance the learning experience for all course participants.
Learning is no longer a closed interaction between teacher, student and resources, it
is an open and dynamic exchange between formal and informal networks.

128

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

Experience
The importance of experience to learning and understanding is a characteristic of
transformational learning theory (Mezirow, 1997, p. 5):
Transformative learning . . . is the process of effecting change in a frame of reference.
Adults have acquired a coherent body of experience—associations, concepts, values,
feelings, conditioned responses—frames of reference that define their life world. Frames
of reference are the structures of assumptions through which we understand our
experiences.

While this position is consistent with the practice of the design alchemist in
postsecondary education, I believe that design can adapt to engage the experiences
of learners of any age, providing opportunity for their experience to contribute to
learning, understanding and knowledge acquisition. Mezirow (1997, p. 11) suggests, quite forcefully, the following for the design practitioner:
The process involves transforming frames of reference through critical reflection of
assumptions, validating contested beliefs through discourse, taking action on one’s reflective insight, and critically assessing it. This understanding of the nature of significant adult
learning provides the educator with a rationale for selecting appropriate educational
practices and actively resisting social and cultural forces that distort and delimit adult
learning.

And this perspective of design action and thinking clearly demonstrates the
value an individual’s experience brings to the learning environment and the associated benefits for all participants.

Designing Inclusively
Thinking inclusively involves privileging the learner as an individual who brings
personal experience, networks and culture to the learning environment. As
suggested elsewhere in the narrative, this involves a design so approach: adopting
a design practice in which we design so the experience, culture and networks
brought to the course by the individual learner can be applied and integrated
according to their own preference.

Active Learning
The second element of the Design Alchemy pedagogy relates to active learning,
where the focus for design is on what the learner is doing—how are they involved,
what pieces of the subject matter ‘puzzle’ they are joining or linking and what is
being constructed—either internally through mental models or externally through
the creation of artefacts.

Active Learning

129

Perspectives
Myers and Jones (1993, p. 19) described active learning as consisting of three
interrelated factors. The first represented key learner elements (talking, listening,
writing, reading, reflecting). The second related to the learning strategies which
determined where or how the learner activity would occur (small groups, cooperative work, simulations, problem-solving), and the final element referred to the
provision of teaching resources (texts, media) which informed the strategies and
thus the learner activities. While the context of the environments presented by
Myers and Jones (1993) was teacher centred, face-to-face and classroom based,
their philosophy aligns with Design Alchemy practice which specifies the allocation of resources to support learning activities (Fig. 8.1). The observations of Myers
and Jones (1993, p. 33) not only show the perceived value of working with activities
rather than content but also appear to be a forerunner to the notion of the flipped
classroom (see Chap. 7):
A serious and sometimes perplexing question emerges at this point: Why should teachers
give up some of the information about a subject they include in their courses in favour of
time for active-learning strategies . . . just because teachers may spend less time in class
covering content, they do not necessarily have to decrease the amount of content assigned
to students (p. 33).

In addition, Myers and Jones (1993, p. 35) also suggested that ‘a good technique
is to pose this simple question: What do I want students to know and be able to do by
the end of this class?’ which focuses on the relationship between the learning
activity and the knowledge application element of the Design Alchemy practice.

The E-tivity
An e-learning perspective of activity-based learning is provided by Salmon (2013),
who uses the term e-tivities to promote both ‘active and interactive online learning’
(p. 1). The key components of the e-tivity are (p. 2):
•
•
•
•
•

A small piece of information, stimulus or challenge (the ‘spark’).
An online activity, which includes individual participants posting a contribution.
An interactive or participative element, such as responding to postings of others.
A summary, feedback or critique from an e-moderator.
All the instructions to take part are available in one online message (the
‘invitation’).

The focus of the e-tivity is essentially micro, a single, contained activity that
may take place within an hour. While underpinning the importance of the active
learning, these components emphasise the process or structure of an e-tivity, which
Salmon (2013) elaborates in significant detail. From the perspective of Design
Alchemy, the activity is seen as more global, encompassing a number of discrete

130

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

e-tivities, as the focus is on creating an artefact that may take a number of weeks.
However, the practice of working from macro to micro concepts of the learning
activity has proved very effective in terms of design productivity.
Interestingly, Salmon (2013, p. 4) refers ‘to all online learners and students by
the term ‘participants’ and their trainers, instructors, facilitators or teachers as ‘emoderators’. These words illustrate the different roles that each adopts online when
compared to learning and teaching face to face’. However, this is one area where
Design Alchemy differs, with all players in the learning and teaching process
considered as participants with the potential for the designer, learner and teacher
to have interchangeable roles (Sims & Jones, 2003).
While I use the term participants frequently, the important aspect is that
regardless of formal role of a participant in the process (e.g. employed to teach
vs. enrolled to learn), the increasing heterogeneity of the learning environment
means that any such division between teacher and learner is becoming arbitrary. As
an example, a colleague recently remarked that he had been running a class on
social media and that one of the students happened to be employed in an organisation as a social media specialist; it was the student who ultimately ran that class.
While this is by no means a unique occurrence, it is not always made explicit, and
this underpins a component of the Design Alchemy approach which advocates the
importance of teachers as learners and learners as teachers through the empowerment of all participants.

Designing Actively
Creating an environment where participants are active means that they are
involved; to use the analogy of theatre (Laurel, 1991; Sims, 2000), it implies they
have a clear understanding of the role they have in the performance and the script
they are following, improvising or adapting. The active participant does not sit in
the audience!

Problem-Solving
The use of problems as a focus or learning is well established and can be seen as a
central element to the Design Alchemy pedagogy in terms of active, inclusive and
contextual learning where the focus is on the outcome of the problem-solving
exercise. Equally important is that the problem-solving element also enables the
integration of a range of generic attributes and professional learning outcomes such
as reflection, teamwork, collaboration and critical thinking. The key elements of the
problem-solving elements focus on active tasks such as hypothesising a solution,
experimenting and testing the hypothesis and modifying the experiment to explore
alternative solutions. The problem-solving environment can be presented in the

Problem-Solving

131

form of simulations, scenarios and games which are characterised by factors such as
goals and challenges. While not noted specifically, it is assumed that the problemsolving activities will embrace collegial and collaborative work.

Strategies
As a background to use problem-solving as a strategy, Kahney (1993, p. 15)
proposed that problems had two things in common: ‘first, they all specify a goal
. . . secondly, in each case the solver is not immediately able to achieve the goal
because the goal is blocked either through lack of resources or knowledge’. Kahney
(1993) also identified four typical components that assist with the design process:
1.
2.
3.
4.

The initial state of the problem
The goal state
Legal operators (things allowed to do)
Operator restrictions (constraints on operations)

For problems that are well defined, specific information can be provided about
each component with respect to the nature of the problem. However, there can also
be ill-defined or unstructured problems which have little or no information, making
the solution process more complex, but also encouraging the creation of emergent
ideas.
From a different perspective, Hunt (1994, p. 216) suggested that ‘problem
solving occurs when we understand the external world by exploring an internal
mental model of that world’ which demonstrates the importance of integrating the
individual characteristics of the learner with the problem-solving activities. Importantly the understanding of the external world can be taken broadly to include both
accepted, existing facts and potentially new (emergent) understandings.

Teaching or Solving?
As problem-solving, critical thinking and reflection are considered key outcomes
from any learning experience, it is quite usual to hear academic staff talk about
strategies to teach critical thinking. However, the design alchemist considers that
these elements do not have to be taught, rather the learning activities by their very
specification require the students to use these skills. Rather than thinking about how
someone might teach thinking and problem-solving, the transformation involves
conceptualising an activity where thinking and problem-solving are applied and,
through that application, learned. The teaching role therefore transfers to focus on
the activity and transforms to elder and mentor who can comment and elaborate on
student interpretations and solutions.

132

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

The interplay between teaching and problem-solving was considered by
Nickerson (1994, p. 410), and the language adopted provides a means to further
emphasise the different approaches and philosophies that are adopted by the Design
Alchemy pedagogy:
There are some things that people seldom, if ever, learn to do unless they are given explicit
instruction on how to do them. Playing the violin, solving differential equations, flying an
airplane, and performing surgery are examples of such activities.

This perspective is perhaps one of the most critical transformations to consider
because arguably many of these skills can now be learned without explicit instruction because resources are available from which individuals can learn. People can
solve their own learning needs (problems) without the need of a teacher. And this is
where understanding the current environment of open courses and resources is
critical.
Nickerson (1994) also reveals a particular approach to problem-solving that
acknowledges the innate capacity of humans to solve problems and yet the need
for instruction in specific topics:
Thinking and problem solving are not of this kind. Everyone thinks, and everyone engages
in problem solving, with or without the benefit of formal education. This is not to suggest, of
course, that people think effectively about subjects of which they have no knowledge, or that
all of us can, without instruction, solve the kinds of problems one finds, say, in mathematics
or physics textbooks. But people who lack any formal schooling or training abstract,
categorize, generalize, make inferences, assign effects to causes and causes to effects,
form hypotheses about how things work, imagine the consequences of possible courses of
action, plan, strategize, scheme and so on.
There can be no doubt of the importance of domain-specific knowledge to thinking and
problem solving within a specific domain. One cannot think about chemical processes or
solve problems of a chemical nature unless one knows something about chemistry; the
ability to observe, classify, and predict, or even an abstract knowledge of problem-solving
heuristics, will not suffice. (Nickerson, 1994, p. 414)

While now some two decades old, the observations by Nickerson (1994) remain
current for many educators. However, the notion that people cannot engage effectively about subjects of which they have no existing domain knowledge cannot be
substantiated. There is sufficient knowledge in accessible resources to enable
learning and problem-solving without formal instruction, and students entering
formal education have a level of knowledge that can trigger the problem-solving
and critical-thinking strategies when confronted with a specific problem, issue or
challenge. The approach of Design Alchemy is to privilege the student with the
capacity to think and solve problems; to continue the example of chemistry, the
challenge is to design so a student, without detailed knowledge of chemistry, can
solve chemical problems through engagement in relevant activities with access to
appropriate resources. Supporting this position, Jonassen (2011) suggested that in
terms of their own mental models, humans of all ages can understand complex
principles and problems, even though they may be unable to express them in the
same way as the experts who author the text books.

Contextual Learning

133

Suggesting humans can’t do something without specific prior knowledge reinforces the power role of the teacher and the text book—without that knowledge, a
student is powerless. This is perhaps one of the key shifts needed in design
thinking—that students indeed are capable. This thinking promotes the idea that
learners no longer need extensive instruction because so much knowledge is
digitised and accessible. People can access that knowledge, without instruction,
and, through interaction with the knowledge (based on self-motivation or a welldesigned learning activity), think effectively about those subjects. This is the crux
of Design Alchemy; if people are drawn to formal educational settings, how best
can we cater for the inexorable shift of knowledge from the domain of the teacher to
the domain of the cloud?

Designing Problem-Solving
This brief overview of problem-solving and its role in the design alchemist’s
‘laboratory’ aims to show that by participating in problem-solving, learners will
be actively engaging with critical thinking and reflection and generating solutions.
However, as Bransford and Stein (1993, p. 208) noted: ‘the effectiveness of
problem-based instruction depends greatly on how the learning environment is
structured and how the problem is approached’. It is therefore incumbent upon
the designer to ensure the problems are self-contained as well as integrating the
other pedagogical elements of Design Alchemy.

Contextual Learning
The context or situation of the student is one of the most important elements for the
practice of the design alchemist. The rationale is that, with online courses especially, more and more students are electing to study independently in their own
environment and situation; learning therefore needs to be relevant and contextual
for their personal needs. For example, a learner in India may choose to enrol in a
Management program in the United States in order to enhance employment opportunities in their own country. An enlightened course design will allow them to apply
the principles covered in the course to their own situation, and not constrain them to
those of resources aligned to the United States. For the designer the shift in thinking
is to design so these learners can acquire relevant and contextual knowledge.
Without knowing each student individually, it is simply not possible to design for
them. Despite the perceived value of contextual learning, Bransford and Stein
(1993, p. 219) reported that ‘a challenge facing all educators is to find ways of
assessing learning that focuses on authentic performances that are relevant to
society and the workplace’. And this means relevance to the learner’s context,
not that of the teacher or the institution.

134

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

Situational
The informing theories around contextual learning emerge from the work of Lave
and Wenger (1991) who identified not only the importance of the situation but also
the people within those situations: ‘learning is an integral and inseparable aspect of
social practice’ (p. 31). The description of a phenomenon Lave and Wenger (1991,
p. 29) termed legitimate peripheral participation also highlights the interactions
between people and context:
Learners inevitably participate in communities of practitioners and that the mastery of
knowledge and skill requires newcomers to move toward full participation in the sociocultural practice of a community. Legitimate peripheral participation provides a way to speak
about the relations between newcomers and old-timers, and about activities, identities,
artifacts and communities of knowledge and practice.

Lave and Wenger (1991) concluded that learning would best develop through
participation in what they referred to as communities of practice, which focused on
learning within the real world of practice. While this may seem best be applied
within the workplace context, similar models have been used in higher education.
For example, a program in journalism may up the learning and teaching environment as an actual media organisation with students taking on roles within the
organisation, and as they progressed through the program, they are gaining seniority; the learners transformed into teachers, mirroring the context of the workplace.
This is succinctly summarised by Lave and Wenger (1991, p. 97) and not only
supports the notion of situated learning but also describes the essence of Design
Alchemy:
This leads us to distinguish between a learning curriculum and a teaching curriculum. A
learning curriculum consists of situated opportunities (thus includes exemplars of various
sorts often thought of as “goals”) for the improvisational development of new practice
(Lave, 1989). A learning curriculum is a field of learning resources in everyday practice
viewed from the perspective of learners. A teaching curriculum, by contrast, is constructed
for the instruction of newcomers. When a teaching curriculum supplies—and thereby
limits—structuring resources for learning, the meaning of what is learned (and control of
access to it, both in its peripheral forms and its subsequently more complex and intensified,
though possibly more fragmented, forms) is mediated through an instructor’s participation,
by an external view of what knowing is about. The learning curriculum in didactic
situations, then, evolves out of participation in a specific community of practice engendered
by pedagogical relations and by a prescriptive view of the target practice as subject matter,
as well as out of the many and various relations that tie participants to their own and other
institutions. A learning situation is essentially situated . . .is thus characteristic of a
community.

Designing Context
One of the underpinning approaches of Design Alchemy is to ensure the activities
and assessments are learner-centred in order to align with the student’s own

Social Learning

135

interests and situation. Taking account of context in the design process therefore
means creating activities that are centred on real-world authentic tasks and which
allow the learner to ‘think locally, act globally’.

Social Learning
The advent of online learning has seen the rhetoric of collaboration and community
increase dramatically, with the assumption that because the students are connected
to the Internet, they will collaborate, and if they collaborate learning will ensue.
This works well in theory, but in practice, even though students may have wide and
active personal networks, the attempts to create collaborative environments have
not been consistently successful, even though ‘one advantage of combining cooperative learning with problem-based instruction is that it allows students to deal
with more complex and time-consuming problems than they would be able to work
with on their own’ (Bransford & Stein, 1993, p. 201). From the designers perspective social learning involves focusing on three key aspects of the interactions that
will take place within the learning environment, the roles participants will play, the
value individual participants bring to the learning process (which relating to
inclusivity) and the connections that can be accessed to enhance the learning
process.

Roles and Connections
The major roles that participants play in the educational process are learner, teacher
and designer, and these are typically assigned to people with different skills sets and
employment status: the learner enrols in a course and is the student, the teacher is
employed to teach or lecture, and the designer is employed to design. In the Design
Alchemy framework, these roles are potentially interchangeable, and therefore as
the course and its constituent activities and assessment are devised, the permeability of those roles needs to be integrated. The plausibility and effectiveness of this
comes when all players are clear of the roles they are expected to play, and when;
this is typically achieved by ensuring the expectations for each of the participants
are transparent at the commencement of the course.

Perspectives
Mason and Rennie (2008, p. 2) suggested that ‘using some form of social software
could be beneficial in most courses, given imaginative course design’, although it is
unclear why design imagination is necessary to integrate social software, as it

136

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

represents a technology not a pedagogy; through an integrated and informed
approach, course designs will, by default, utilise the necessary tools to enable
learning. Mason and Rennie (2008, p. 4) also noted that ‘the essence of social
networking is that users generate the content. This has potentially profound implications for education’. Discussions around course design traditionally focus on the
content and how it might be taught; catering for user-generated content implies
quite different design thinking, allowing students to be the creators of the course
content, not the consumers. Through a design that encourages communication and
connections, new content and ideas can be generated.
To illustrate this in action, in a meeting to revise a course titled Introductory
Marketing, the initial discussions focused on the key topics or modules before
stalling. The suggestion that students might create their own marketing artefact
generated renewed interest as academic staff began to see the potential of the
artefact manifesting the different concepts and theories that students were expected
to demonstrate. This transformation in thinking also led to the potential of collaborative activities that could generate alternative ideas. Pragmatically, Mason and
Rennie (2008, p. 5) suggested that ‘through appropriate course design, we can help
learners to pursue their ‘selfish interests’ of passing the course, while at the same
time adding value to the learning of other students’. In this way adding value is
enabled through the various social networking tools available and through an
environment that supports a social pedagogy of collaboration and cooperation.
Continuing the dissection of how we teach and learn and the environments in
which those activities take place, Wenger (1998, p. 3) asked:
Our institutions, to the extent that they address issues of learning explicitly, are largely
based on the assumption that learning is an individual process, that it has a beginning and
an end, that it is best separated from the rest of our activities, and that it is the result of
teaching . . . As a result, much of our institutionalized teaching and training is perceived by
would-be learners as irrelevant, and most of us come out of this treatment feeling that
learning is boring and arduous, and that we are not really cut out for it . . . what if we
adopted a different perspective, one that placed learning in the context of our lived
experienced of participation in the world?

In this introduction to Communities of Practice, Wenger offers two critical
challenges to the traditions of education. The first questions the efficacy of current
design models and the artefacts produced, while the second emphasises the importance of context and participation rather. Design Alchemy focuses on the production of artefacts integral to the course and the context of the student.

Designing Social
Taking account of social interactions, connections and communication in the design
process involves creating situations and contexts where the group is privileged and
creations from collaboration seen as the norm.

Creative Learning

137

Creative Learning
The inclusion of the creative element aims to emphasise the range of meanings that
can be applied to the word. The Collins English Dictionary (2009) provides
definitions of ‘creative’ ranging from a sophisticated bending of the rules to
originality of thought and having the ability to create. Within the pedagogy,
creative learning is primarily used to reinforce that the output from a learning
activity will be an artefact, an item created that is used to assess the extent to which
learning outcomes have been met.
However, creative learning also relates to the ability of learners to be creative in
terms of novelty, as Lubart (1994, p. 290) observed:
Creativity is the ability to produce work that is both novel and appropriate . . . a novel
product is one that is original and not predicted. A novel product stands apart from the
work that the individual and other people have already produced. A novel product provides
surprise in the viewer because it is more than the logical next step.

This perspective integrates the originality and bending of the rules aspects of
being creative and links creative learning to emergent learning. While there is no
intent that students break legal rules, challenging the status quo and conventions of
any knowledge domain is critical to enable learning and the construction of
meaning.
Lubart (1994) also suggested that ‘judgements of creativity . . . involve social
consensus’ (p. 219) and that ‘cognitive, personality-motivational, and environmental components must co-occur for creativity to exist’ (p. 313), which reinforces, for
the designer, the importance of integrating the various elements of the Design
Alchemy pedagogy into a single learning activity, specifically the social element
(connection and collaboration) in order to generate creativity. The design potential
is that through the active process of collaboration and solving problems in context,
the solution or resolution may generate new or adapted forms of conventional
wisdom, such as management practice or engaging learners. The focus on creating
an artefact is therefore inextricably linked to the social and emergent elements of
the Design Alchemy pedagogy.

Designing to Create
Primarily, the create element is included in the pedagogy to reinforce the primary
outcome of the learning activities: an artefact (in any form and format) which is
used to construct one or more assessment items. However, as the notion of creativity is also originality, it aligns with the final element of the pedagogy, emergence
in terms of something new or valuable being created, or emerging, through the
learning process.

138

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

Emergence
Critics of user-created content refer to a breakdown in the traditional place of expertise,
authority and scholarly input. They express concerns about trust, reliability and believability in relation to the move away from the printed world to the more ephemeral digital
world (Poster, 1990). The web contains a plethora of unauthenticated, unfiltered information and most students lack the critical skills to penetrate this mass of undifferentiated
material. In short, traditional notions of quality in higher education seem to be abandoned
in the move to Web 2.0 learning. Mason and Rennie (2008, p. 6):

It is interesting that comments made 13 years ago still hold true, even though the
digital world is no longer ephemeral. We are reaching a stage where the data and
research and analyses encapsulated in texts are available digitally, and, in theory at
least, we have access to any resource we would ever need from our home office.
The concept of emergence (Fig. 8.3) is critical to the way learning activities are
framed and the associated expectations placed on course participants. At its simplest form, emergence represents a counter to traditional form of educations; rather
than learners demonstrating knowledge of established principles, emergence looks
to the generation of new knowledge. As an example, the following represents two
examples of an activity: the first ‘traditional’ and the second ‘emergent’.
Using the leadership principles defined by Smith (2011), describe a scenario
in which they would be applied to enable organizational change.

Select an organization within your own context and assess the way leadership operates to enable organizational change. How does this approach to
leadership compare to the principles defined by Smith (2011). What alternatives would you recommend to enhance leadership?

Perspectives
I was introduced to the concept of emergence through the work of Johnson (2001),
who, starting with slime mould, introduced research which suggested that individual cells released a chemical which resulted in other cells joining; the aggregation
of cells was a bottom-up phenomenon rather than a process that could be attributed
to cell hierarchies. Johnson referred to this as a collective phenomenon which
(p. 18)
In the simplest terms, they solve problems by drawing on masses of relatively stupid
elements, rather than a single, intelligent ‘executive branch’ They are bottom-up systems,
not top-down . . . The movement from low-level rules to higher-level sophistication is what
we call emergence.

Emergence

139

Fig. 8.3 Components of
emergence

Prompted by ideas on education and emergence (Kays & Sims, 2006), the
possibility that a classroom had emergent potential was another magical event for
my practice; rather than learning being the responsibility of an ‘executive’ teacher,
the growth of knowledge might be achieved by harnessing the interactions within
the classroom. Given Johnson’s (2001) observations on the collective phenomenon,
could the classroom therefore be viewed as a complex, adaptive system that
displays emergent behaviour in the same ways that ‘ants create colonies, urbanites
create neighbourhoods, and simple pattern-recognition software learns how to
recommend new books’ (p. 18)? In the following section I review select observations and conclusions made by Johnson (2001) to highlight how and why emergence may become a significant component of learning and teaching.
As an example, in response to the harvester ants determining very accurate
locations for a waste facility and cemetery, Johnson (2001, p. 33) observed that
‘it’s as though they’ve solved one of those spatial math tests that appear on
standardised tests, conjuring up a solution that’s perfectly tailored to their environment, a solution that might easily stump an 8-year old human. The question is, who
is doing the conjuring?’ And so if designers enable opportunities for emergence in
the classroom, the prediction is that new knowledge might be generated through the
very conjuring of interactions.
Another element of emergence is the sense of local (or contextual): ‘Local turns
out to be the key term in understanding the power of swarm logic. We see emergent
behaviour in systems like ant colonies when the individual agents in the system pay
attention to their immediate neighbors rather than wait for orders from above’.
(Johnson, 2001, p. 74). In terms of building an emergent environment, Johnson
(2001, p. 77–78) noted that
If you’re building a system designed to learn from the ground level, a system where macrointelligence and adaptability derive from local knowledge, there are five fundamental
principles you need to follow.
1. More is different (need for a critical mass)
2. Ignorance is useful (we don’t want one brain neuron to become sentient!)
3. Encourage random encounters

140

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

4. Look for patterns in the signs
5. Pay attention to your neighbors (local information can lead to global wisdom)

In a way these are the ‘conditions of emergence’ , and it is fascinating to
compare these with Gagné’s (1965) conditions of learning. With respect to learning
outcomes, Johnson (2001, p. 104) suggested that ‘(learning’s) about altering a
system’s behaviour in response to those (changing) patterns in ways that make
the system more successful, whatever goal it’s pursuing’. Therefore, if the system is
a course of study, with one set of predefined outcomes, then altering the behaviour
of that system, the interactions between participants, could change the nature of
those outcomes. As Johnson (2001, p. 115) reflected, ‘couldn’t individual brains
connect with one another, this time via the digital language of the Web, and form
something greater than the sum of their parts?’ which mirrors the ideas of morphic
resonance (Sheldrake, 2011).
A particular example of this can be seen in the games industry, where emergence
is a key part of the development of a game; according to Webb and Sims (2006).
Self-organization describes the process whereby the organization of a system spontaneously modifies or develops in response to environmental forces, experiential reflection or
other agents. Ison (2000) believes that there is sufficient evidence to suggest that “selforganizing, emergent learning systems” can be expected to develop spontaneously via
internet mediated activities. As an example he points to the history of the Linux software. It
was developed, modified, and improved by granting free access to its operational code. A
self-generating, self-regulating community of practice was created around the code. In
time, Linux developed into a robust operating system that many software experts consider
to be more stable and powerful than Microsoft’s operating systems. Emergent gameplay, a
self-organizing process, is the creative alteration, combination or multiplication of game
elements that are divergent from and unexpected by original design intent and which result
in the ‘realization’ of a new game form. This occurs as a more complex and organized
behavior emerges out of the free and dynamic interaction of simpler game elements. Such
emergence is now commonplace among online gameplay communities and is becoming
increasingly prized by game designers. (Sigman, 2004).

In summary, Johnson (2001, p. 120) notes that ‘relationships in these systems are
mutual: you influence your neighbours and your neighbours influence you. All
emergent systems are built out of this feedback, the two-way connections that foster
higher-level learning’, which reinforces the importance of social interactions as a
means to enable the potential of emergent knowledge. Emergence clearly exists in
game communities through the interconnectedness of the Internet. So why not in
the online class?

Designing Emergence
For the designer, the essential component is to assume that knowledge is not
constant and that learning activities can be designed to enable the creation and
emergence of new knowledge.

References

141

What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?
To integrate the ideas in this chapter, the seven elements of the Design Alchemy
pedagogy can be succinctly presented in a single sentence:
The design alchemist adopts a learner-centred perspective which privileges
the individual characteristics of course participants and creates active learning experiences based on solving problems in real-world contexts which,
through collaboration, result in the creation of artefacts that manifest a
synthesis of existing knowledge and the emergence of new knowledge.

References
American Psychological Association. (1997). Learner-centered psychological principles: A framework for school reform and redesign. Retrieved September 8, 2013, from http://www.apa.org/
ed/governance/bea/learner-centered.pdf
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2001). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1993). The ideal problem solver (2nd ed.). New York:
W.H. Freeman and Company.
Collins English Dictionary. (2009). Collins English Dictionary: Complete & unabridged (10th
ed.). Glasgow: William Collins Sons.
Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and selfregulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The
Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3–8. Available from http://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S1096751611000467
Gagné, R. M. (1965). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Hunt, E. (1994). Problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and problem solving. San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Johnson, S. (2001). Emergence: The connected lives of ants, brains, cities, and software. New
York: Scribner.
Jonassen, D. (2011). Supporting problem solving in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problembased Learning, 5(2). Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1256
Kahney, H. (1993). Problem solving: Current issues (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Kays, E., & Sims, R. (2006). Reinventing and reinvigorating instructional design: A theory for
emergent learning. In L. Markauskaite, P. Goodyear, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the
23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary
Education: Who’s Learning? Whose Technology? (pp. 409–412). Sydney: Sydney University
Press.
Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. New York:
Cambridge Books.
Laurel, B. (1991). Computers as theatre. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Lubart, T. I. (1994). Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and problem solving. San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.

142

8 What Is the Design Alchemy Pedagogy?

Mason, R., & Rennie, F. (2008). E-learning and social networking handbook: Resources for
higher education. New York: Routledge.
McLoughlin, C., & Oliver, R. (1999). Instructional design for cultural difference: A case study of
the indigenous online learning in a tertiary context. In J. Winn (Ed.), Responding to diversity.
Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in
Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE). Brisbane, QLD: TALS, QUT.
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult &
Continuing Education, Summer 97(74), 5–12.
Myers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Nickerson, R. S. (1994). The teaching of thinking and problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.),
Thinking and problem solving. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Robinson, K. (2013). How to escape education’s death valley. http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_
robinson_how_to_escape_education_s_death_valley.html
Rogers, P. C., Graham, C. R., & Mayes, C. T. (2007). Cultural competence and instructional
design: Exploration research into the delivery of online instruction cross-culturally. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(2).
Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning (2nd ed.). London and New York:
Routledge.
Sheldrake, R. (2011). The presence of the past: Morphic resonance and the habits of nature. Icon
Books Ltd.
Sims, R. (2000). Learners as actors: Strategies for computer-enhanced learning encounters.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Wollongong University.
Sims, R., & Jones, D. (2003). Where practice informs theory: Reshaping instructional design for
academic communities of practice in online teaching and learning. Information Technology,
Education and Society, 4(1), 3–20.
Webb, R., & Sims, R. (2006). Online gaming and online gaming communities: Ten reasons why
they matter. In A. Treloar & A. Ellis (Eds.), Making a difference with web
technologies. Proceedings of AusWeb06, the Twelfth Australian World Wide Web Conference. Noosa Heads, QLD: Southern Cross University. http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw06/papers/
refereed/webb/index.html
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Chapter 9

How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Abstract This chapter focuses on the five-step practice of Design Alchemy, which
through a number of course development projects has proved practical, efficient,
effective, flexible and sustainable. The individual steps will be familiar to those
who are experienced designers, as they integrate essential elements of established
design practice, even though their logical progression may present differently. The
design process begins by defining the knowledge application, the knowledge and/or
skills students will be able to apply on completion of the course. This is followed by
the identification of learning outcomes and the assessment items which will manifest these outcomes, which are then aligned with the learning activities that
produce the assessment items. The final step in the process involves linking the
resources (subject matter or content) to the learning activities. The adoption of this
practice has proved effective in terms of creating a complete course syllabus
(excluding mandatory policies and institutional information), including the structure of the online environment, should that be part of the delivery environment.

What’s in the Name?
As the ideas behind Design Alchemy have matured, comparatively small factors
such as the course name or title become significant, as they tend to represent what
the course is about rather than reflecting how the student will benefit from the
course. The way courses are named can reinforce a pedagogy that privileges the
subject matter and not the associated performance and application of that content
material. Changing a course name can alter the nature of the course in terms of how
it is designed, what students do and how they are assessed.
When the design alchemist begins to work with a course coordinator to get a
sense of why the course is being run, by deconstructing the course rationale, it is
common to find that the syllabus presents a set of topics (subject matter) rather than
the broader intent of the course. One strategy to assist the designer develop a clear
understanding of the course rationale is to rename the course or turn its title into a
R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_9,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

143

144

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Table 9.1 Course names: generic vs. meaningful
Original name
Introduction to email
Environmental Science I
Information design
Research methods
Research methods

Revised name
Have you read your mail today?
Can politics impact environmental sustainability?
Making information accessible to humans
Creating an evidence-based proposal
Aligning problem, purpose, questions and method

question; and if this were carried out in practice, it would present those enrolled in
the course with a clearer indication of the course rationale and the likely tasks they
would have to undertake in order to complete the course. To illustrate this Table 9.1
provide examples of course titles and potential alternatives.
While I recognise that renaming course is inextricably entwined with institutional administration and policy, and something that is rarely discussed, as a
designer who considers the learner’s perspective, this very practice can be enlightening for all stakeholders: designers, learners, teachers and administrators.

Practice in Overview
As initially described in Chap. 3, and elaborated in Fig. 9.1, the practice of Design
Alchemy involves a bidirectional, five-step process. The forward direction, working from left to right, focuses on course design and integrates the following five
elements:
1. Knowledge application: a statement which has the dual role of defining the
purpose of the course, why it exists and its role in the program, as well as
describing what knowledge and skills students will be able to apply on successful completion of the course.
2. Learning outcomes: generated from the knowledge application statement, and
describe the desired outcomes based on the knowledge domain, the institution
and the profession. As a general rule four–five outcomes are typical for a
semester-based course.
3. Assessment items: based on and determined by the different learning outcomes;
one assessment item for each learning outcome is recommended.
4. Learning activities: considered as acts of creation and aligned such that every
activity results in the production of an artefact that contributes to the completion
of its corresponding assessment item.
5. Learning resources: identified based on the learning activity they will inform
and support; resources are comprehensive enough to ensure the activity can be
completed.
As a result of this forward process, a course design specification will be
produced that provides an overview of the whole course, how it will be assessed,

Step 1: Knowledge Application

145

Fig. 9.1 Design Alchemy practice

the tasks students will be engaged in and the resources they need to complete those
tasks. The specifications provided by this five-step process also generate the course
syllabus, with additional administrative information identified from the design
assets (see Chap. 10).
The practice also works in the reverse direction (right to left), providing a means
to validate the course design. The identified learning resources are sufficient to
enable the completion of the learning activities, which result in the creation of one
or more artefacts (e.g. report, concept or recommendation) which, in combination,
form an assessment item. Completion of the assessment items provides evidence
that the associated learning outcomes have been achieved, which in turn demonstrates the capacity of the learner to apply the defined knowledge and skills. This
achievement demonstrates both an understanding and an ability to perform. The
practice of Design Alchemy, as proposed originally through the concept of Proactive Evaluation (Sims, Dobbs, & Hand, 2002), therefore, integrates the evaluation
of the course: its very structure ensures quality through alignment.
The following explanation provides a detailed overview of each of the five steps
in the Design Alchemy practice.

Step 1: Knowledge Application
Digital technologies are knowledge technologies in the sense that they change our relationship to what is known and how it can be known . . . (they) shape what is learned by
changing how it is learned. (Laurillard, 2012, p. 3)

146

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Overview
When working with a teacher or course coordinator, the starting point for this step
of the practice is to generate a response to the questions ‘why are students enrolled
in your course?’ and ‘what knowledge will they be able to apply on completion of
the course?’.
My experience with this interaction is that teachers initially respond with a
statement about the course content, for example, ‘it’s about research methods for
business’ or ‘it’s about population genetics’. When probed to consider what
students are expected to get out of the course, the change can be transformative:
‘I’d like students to be able to conduct basic research on business data to assist
management decision-making’ or ‘I want students to understand how and why
population characteristics evolve and change’. Through this process a knowledge
application statement can be generated, such as shown in Table 9.2.
A second example (Table 9.3) also illustrates the way in which a complete
course can be encapsulated within a knowledge application statement. More importantly, by focusing on the knowledge application statement at the outset of the
design process, there is no opportunity for extraneous content or activities to be
introduced, a problem identified and analysed by Moore (2008).
A third example, showing the flexibility of the approach, is taken from a program
level analysis. In this case the course coordinators1 were examining options to
repurpose a traditional music degree into one that focused on a more diverse and
integrated approach. The draft statement produced is shown in Table 9.4.

Practising Alchemy: Knowledge Application
One of the significant and key differences in the Design Alchemy practice is that the
negotiation between course coordinator and designer does not need to address or
focus on the course subject matter. Unlike practices where the initial step is to
deconstruct and sequence content, often using a textbook to define this sequence,
the design alchemist understands that the essential subject matter will always be
available—through people, books, media and the Internet (i.e. as resources)—and
therefore, the design only needs to focus on what the student will be doing with that
content, which is defined through the statement of knowledge application, learning
outcomes, assessments and learning activities.
Knowledge application therefore represents a clear and unambiguous statement
of the course rationale from the perspective of both learner and teacher. Once
completed, the next step in the practice of Design Alchemy is to generate learning
outcomes.
1
My appreciation to Melissa Forbes and Bruce Woodward (School of Creative Arts, University of
Southern Queensland, Australia) for permission to use this example.

Step 2: Learning Outcomes

147

Table 9.2 Knowledge application (business)
Course name

Knowledge
application

Business research methods (My appreciation to Dr. Karen Miller (School of
Management and Enterprise, University of Southern Queensland, Australia) for permission to use this example)
On successful completion of the course, students will be able to apply a valid
methodology to accurately conduct and/or interpret research in order to
inform management decision-making

Table 9.3 Knowledge application (human services)
Course name

Knowledge
application

Introduction to human services (My appreciation to Dr. John Solas (School of
Psychology, Counselling and Community, University of Southern
Queensland, Australia) for permission to use this example)
On successful completion of the course, students will be able to demonstrate
the capability to help other people within a holistic framework

Table 9.4 Knowledge application (music)
Knowledge
application

On successful completion of the course, students will engage with musical
possibilities in diverse situations

Step 2: Learning Outcomes
Overview
Analyses of learning and assessment can refer to either the associated learning
outcomes or the learning objectives as if they are interchangeable or as if they are
quite different. For Design Alchemy, the focus is specifically on learning outcomes,
specified at a macro (course) level; however, it is useful to make a comparison
between the learning objective and the learning outcome to reinforce this approach.
Based on the definitions in Table 9.5, the aim may be aligned with the statement
of knowledge application, although the value for Design Alchemy practice remains
that the expression is learner centred and the duration would typically be that for a
semester. The differentiation of the outcome and objective is important, although
the durations do not align with the practice being discussed; within Design
Alchemy, an outcome may be the result of 2–3-week work (a module), and that
outcome will necessarily integrate a series of ‘objectives’ which are defined
through the assessment criteria. However, rather than being assessed independently
as objectives (e.g. through a quiz), they are manifested through completion of a
learning activity and the creation of an assessment artefact.
It is important to note that the learning outcomes discussed in this step of the
practice relate specifically to the subject-matter domain and the anticipated knowledge application. The learning outcomes associated with an institution (e.g. generic
attributes or graduate outcomes) or the professions (e.g. threshold learning

148

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Table 9.5 Aims, outcomes and objectives (Adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educa
tional_aims_and_objectives)
Objective A measurable, observable behaviour of less than a day’s duration
Outcome A series of successfully completed objectives, possibly measured over a series of days
Aim
An expression of a long-term purpose, usually over the course of one or more years

outcomes) are identified as an asset of the Design Alchemy practice (see Chap. 10)
and integrated through the specification of the assessment items.

Why Not Objectives?
Because the use of learning objectives is widespread across educational sectors, it is
important to explain why learning outcomes are preferred; in essence there is a
deficiency in the practice (understanding) of using learning objectives to effectively
measure learning. Like many in the field, I was introduced to the Mager’s (1975)
analysis of the objective, which includes a statement of performance, the conditions
under which that performance will take place and the criteria that will measure
success or accuracy of the performance. When used appropriately, the learning
objective certainly provides an accurate measure of performance, such as shown by
the following example:
Given a series of ten problems involving calculation of a mean score, without the assistance
of a textbook, the student will complete at least eight of the ten correctly.

In this case, being able to calculate the correct mean at least eight times from ten
attempts provides a degree of confidence that the student understands (has mastered) the mathematics of mean scores. Nevertheless the integrity of the learning
objective has been diluted in at least two ways:
1. Short courses and modules (see Chap. 11 for a case study) use, for example, ten
questions to confirm mastery with a passing score of 80 %.
2. Objectives are used, but measure discrete behaviours rather than overall
performance.
While this dilution represents a lack of understanding of objectives, tests,
measurement and validity, it may also be responsible for general criticism of quality
in education and training.
With respect to the first point, courses or modules may include a set of assessment items that, in theory, cover the subject matter (e.g. patient education).
However, when a passing score is set at 80 %, because those items do not
demonstrate 80 % success for each and every knowledge and performance element
of patient education, the supposedly successful student may be deficient in 20 % of
key elements of patient education performance! The practice of Design Alchemy
prevents this from happening because the focus is on the knowledge application in
total which by definition includes all essential knowledge elements.

Step 2: Learning Outcomes

149

In consideration of the second point, designers can focus on specific tasks
associated with performance and measure those elements independently, rather
than in terms of the overall performance (knowledge application). As an example,
the following learning objectives were defined for training new academic staff on
the Blackboard Learning Management System.2
On completion of the new hire training, faculty will be able to:
1. Upload course documents to the appropriate areas of Blackboard with 100 % accuracy.
2. Create grade center columns for course assignments and exams with 100 % accuracy.
3. Create an assignment submission link, or SafeAssign submission link in the Class
Sessions area with 100 % accuracy.
4. Establish grade center computations to provide students with a My Grades view of their
current accumulative course grade on an on-going basis with 100 % accuracy.

While the conditions of performance are not explicit, the language is accurate in
terms of performance (e.g. upload course documents) and criteria (100 % accuracy). However, from the perspective of the design alchemist, these behaviours are
expressed as discrete elements rather than in terms of the overall performance of
assessment. An alternative expression using the Design Alchemy practice is shown
in Table 9.6.
While the desired outcome is the same (efficient use of a learning management
system), the focus is on the end performance rather than the individual elements of
that performance. Based on experience across a range of course development and
revitalisation initiatives, the value of specifying outcomes is not only more efficient
but also more effective in capturing the essence of the course goals—application of
knowledge and skills.

Generating Outcomes
To further illustrate the creation of learning outcomes, the examples presented in
Tables 9.7, 9.8, and 9.9 illustrate the outcomes generated from the knowledge
application statements presented in the analysis of the first step of the Design
Alchemy practice.

Practising Alchemy: Learning Outcomes
Practitioners will be aware of extreme examples of learning objectives being
deployed, such as the situation where every fact associated with a topic has an
associated learning objective and test item. The practice of Design Alchemy

2

My appreciation to Lacie Bremer-Crone for permission to use this example.

150

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Table 9.6 Transforming learning objectives to learning outcome
Outcome
Assessment
Activities

Resources

Complete the grading process for a single assignment
Each element of the grading process completed successfully
1. Access assignments
2. Assess assignment and provide feedback
3. Upload marked assignment
4. Complete grade book
‘How to grade using Blackboard’

Table 9.7 Learning outcomes (business)
Course name
Knowledge
application
Learning
outcomes

Business research methods
On successful completion of the course, students will be able to accurately
conduct and/or interpret research in order to inform management decisionmaking
1. Articulate the principles and processes of applied business research methodology
2. Synthesise research sources to communicate relevance to decision-makers
3. Design a research study to address a specific business problem or opportunity
4. Create a research report based on a specified dataset

Table 9.8 Learning outcomes (human services)
Course name
Knowledge
application
Learning
outcomes

Introduction to human services
On successful completion of the course, students will be able to demonstrate
the capability to help other people within a holistic framework
1. Distinguish human services from other health professions and their place
within both
2. Explain differences in similarities in the way clients and helpers are
perceived
3. Analyse and demonstrate what helping is
4. Reflect on the effectiveness of approaches to and processes of helping

Table 9.9 Learning outcomes (music)
Knowledge
application
Learning
outcomes

On successful completion of the course, students will engage with musical
possibilities in diverse situations
1. Communicate and critique musical concepts
2. Create musical artefacts
3. Recognise musical diversity
4. Value and apply co-construction
5. Differentiate musical genres

obviates the need for learning objectives to be specifically stated because they are
expressed through the achievement of a learning outcome and, as shown in the
following section, defined through the assessment criteria. The effect of this
practice, as emphasised in the creation of the knowledge application statement, is

Step 3: Assessment

151

that the design focuses not in discrete elements of the subject matter but in the use
and application of that content.

Step 3: Assessment
Overview
The steps (moving forward) in the practice of Design Alchemy are sequenced in
such a way that one flows into the next, working in effect from the top to the bottom
of a hierarchy. One knowledge application statement leads to a specification of a
number of outcomes which each have (normally) a single assessment item. This
section provides an analysis of the third step in the practice, which focuses on
creating and aligning assessment tasks with course (domain) learning outcomes as
well as institutional and professional outcomes, and the specification of criteria that
will measure and assess achievement of those outcomes.

What Is Being Assessed?
Because Design Alchemy views assessment items as being a creation (artefact) of
the associated learning activities (described in the following section), it is important
to comment on the nature of that artefact, and a recent discussion with a colleague
provides an excellent example. The issues explored focused on the nature of
learning and assessment, with the observation that educators often view evidence
of learning as best manifested through written expression. Using the example of a
lesson on Pompeii and its destruction by the erupting Vesuvius, the student who
writes ‘The city of Pompeii was close to the volcano Vesuvius, and when it
violently erupted many of the residents were trapped and entombed in ash and
lava’ is given more credit than the student who produces a dramatic illustration of
the eruption and people fleeing the fiery threat. Even if students were given the
opportunity to submit alternative reactions to the lesson, why should writing be
privileged over illustration? This raises questions as to what learning represents and
to how it is assessed. Based on Design Alchemy practice, these issues are addressed
not only through the pedagogy (see Chap. 8) but also through aligning the learning
outcome with the assessment and enabling the expression of that assessment
through an artefact, which can take on a number of forms dependent on the
assessment criteria and the knowledge domain.

152

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Authentic Assessment
For Design Alchemy, assessment is the central component because it is (a) defined
by the knowledge applications and learning outcomes and (b) created by the
learning activities using the associated learning resources. As an example of the
philosophy behind defining assessment, the following analysis presents a case
where assessment (certification) of learning has traditionally been measured by
multiple-choice tests.
The project involved an organisation which planned to create a self-paced
computer-based module to support technicians preparing for certification in radiography. As the design required an independent learning module, the use of
contextual scenarios and simulations to focus on the application of the knowledge
base was recommended and incorporated seven of the nine elements of authentic
learning defined by Herrington, Reeves, and Oliver (2010): authentic contexts,
authentic activities, access to expert performance and modelling, multiple roles
and perspectives, reflection, articulation and authentic assessment. The options for
collaborative construction of knowledge or coaching and scaffolding by a teacher
were not considered because of the self-paced nature of the product, although
teacher presence is enabled through the design philosophy where the teacher is
the design (see Chap. 8).
After preparing a prototype based on this strategy, one reviewer asked ‘but
where are they learning the different radioactive levels?’ From the Design
Alchemy perspective, there is no requirement for specific multiple-choice questions
about radioactive levels (see the preceding section on Learning Outcomes); rather
the technicians need to be able to demonstrate that they can access, interpret and use
their knowledge of radioactive levels appropriately. Based on this particular example, an overview of the design specification would include the information shown in
Table 9.10.

Where Are They Learning Levels of Radioactivity?
To elaborate on this approach, the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists
(2013) indicates that their certification is designed to assess ‘the knowledge and
cognitive skills underlying the intelligent performance of the tasks typically
required of staff technologists practicing at entry-level within the discipline’.
Based on this description, there appears to be an assumption that having ‘knowledge’ and ‘cognitive skills’ about a particular area implies that one will be able to
‘intelligently perform’ in that area. In the same way that having knowledge about
scales, keys, melody and rhythm (i.e. knowledge about the notation of music) does
not necessary mean one is a musician, as confirmation of musicianship can be based

Step 3: Assessment

153

Table 9.10 Sample design specification
Course name
Knowledge
application
Learning
outcomes

Assessment item
Learning activity
Resources

Preparing for certification (radiography)
Apply knowledge of radiography to successfully complete a series of case
studies
• Assess patient information and procedure protocol
• Select and apply the most appropriate contrasting agent to align with
protocol and patient factors
• Prepare patient according to standards
• Produce optimum image based on protocol
Scenario using three patients and associated protocols
Process protocol and patient information, position patient and produce a clear
image
• Textbook
• Radiography technician Website

on quality of performance, so assessment of radiology knowledge needs to be
applied, not memorised.3
The modules designed for the radiology technologists were self-paced, and
therefore to ensure engagement with the materials, the strategy proposed was to
assess knowledge through performance; to be able to complete a task, such as
injecting a patient with the appropriate dosage of radioactive contrasting agent,
demonstrates the ability to access and apply the appropriate knowledge associated
with that task. More importantly, in terms of an independent self-paced computerbased course, one that has no teacher or embedded collaboration options, rather
than a design which presents all the relevant content (knowledge) and then provides
a test on that knowledge, a design based on completing a simulated case is far
preferable. The only way a task can be completed is to correctly or appropriately
apply the relevant knowledge; the scenario is the assessment, and completion of the
scenario represents success.
An important part of this design strategy is that there is no change to the depth or
breadth of content (subject matter) covered, rather the content is repositioned
compared to more traditional design practices. If translated to an online course,
with the opportunity for interaction and collaboration with peers, or a face-to-face
class, the underpinning design strategy remains the same: completion of the scenario tasks represents an acceptable measure of knowledge. However, the learning
activities associated with the scenario would include the development of solutions
through collaboration between course participants rather than individual resolution.
To further illustrate the difference in approach to design, the following represents a typical exam question related to radiology contrasting agents:

3

While beyond the scope of this analysis, the concepts presented suggest that the protocols by
which many fields are certified could be transformed by addressing quality of performance rather
than correct responses to discrete test items; the latter cannot guarantee the former.

154

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

From the list below, select the contrast media with the lowest iodine concentration:
a) Omnipaque 240
b) Optiray 16
c) Ultravist 150
d) Conray 400
e) Isovue 370

Answering this question correctly may indicate the respondent knew the answer,
or it may have reflected a guess. Had this information been placed into a scenario,
for example, where a patient comes in and through an assessment interview, the
technologist learns the patient has a shellfish allergy, then the iodine concentrations
become significant with respect to the procedure and therefore in context. The
possible logic of a scenario where this piece of information is applied is as follows:
Assess patient
If student does not detect allergy from patient information, provide corrective feedback
and suggest further assessment If allergy detected, provide positive feedback and continue
Select Contrast Media
Based on information from protocol and patient assessment, choose contrast media
If contrast media selected incorrect, then interrogate choice and ensure, through
corrective feedback, the correct (best) choice is made
If contrast media correct (i.e. low concentration of iodine) confirm technician knows
why choice made

The scenario is also constructed in such a way that all necessary information to
make the correct/best choice is available by way of resources, accessible at every step.

Assessment Rubrics: Integrating Outcomes and Content
The rationale behind this design is that the technician who can correctly complete the
scenario is demonstrating more knowledge about iodine concentrations than a correct
answer to the corresponding multiple-choice question. If the design is conceptualised
in this way, the criteria associated with the assessment also emerge; based on the
scenario discussed, an assessment rubric may have the format shown in Table 9.11.
The specification of criteria and performance levels can be completed as the
second phase of design because only the assessment items are required to specify
the associated learning activities. However, in defining the assessment criteria and
associated performance levels as an assessment rubric, there are two critical
elements which must be addressed:
1. Criteria must be discrete.
2. Levels of performance must be discrete.
As elaborated with the example of assessment in Chap. 12, too often individual
criteria are blurred, and the performance measures convoluted and/or subjective,
making valid and reliable assessments impossible. Based on assessment criteria and
rubrics encountered in my professional practice, this is one aspect of design that requires
critical attention and improvement and may explain why graduates of programs are not
always able to perform in alignment with the stated learning outcomes.

Step 3: Assessment

155

Table 9.11 Sample assessment rubric
Criterion
Assess
patient
Recognise
abnormal
findings
Identify
contrast
ing agent
Implement
protocol

Generate
image

Not evident
Satisfactory
Partially
Each step completed to standard
completed
Not recognised Abnormality recognised and
protocol followed

Exemplary
Two or more steps assessed
beyond standard
Confirm response to abnor
mality with radiologist

Not able

Select best choice of best
contrasting agent

Select and explain choice of
best contrasting agent

Steps not
followed

Steps followed according to
standard

Follows steps according to
standard and patient care
individualised beyond
protocol
Image is flawless

Image
Image can be interpreted for
unacceptable
specific findings but room
for improvement

As a result of the specification of the assessment criteria and rubric, two
additional elements are integrated. The first relates to the course content; rather
than specific elements being included in a quiz or test, they are embedded in the
performance criteria. For example, the performance level stating ‘Two or more
steps assessed beyond standard’ (Table 9.11) includes a subject matter relating to
(a) steps in the protocol, (b) standards of the protocol and (c) potential ways to
assess the patient beyond standard practice. The student therefore needs to know
these before the criteria (and performance) can be completed successfully.
In addition, this process also incorporates generic outcomes and professional
outcomes such as critical thinking and collaboration. For example, to be able to
‘assess two or more steps beyond standard’ is a demonstration of the application of
critical thinking. It is not essential to teach students about these outcomes, rather
they are incorporated by and through the design. Additional details on including
institutional and professional outcomes can be found in Chap. 13.
The design alchemist enables a transformation from the tradition of assessment
as a recall to one where assessment is a successful application of knowledge. The
outcome remains constant, the design makes the difference.

Practising Alchemy: Assessment
This section explained, through example, the reason for using the concept of
outcome rather than objective and the strategies used by a design alchemist to
transform assessment thinking and create environments where assessment is
contextualised, generates the necessary criteria and performance levels and integrate institutional and professional outcomes. Through this, Design Alchemy practice ensures the alignment of the assessment with the learning outcome and in so

156

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

doing provides course stakeholders with the confidence that when a student successfully completes the course assessment, they will have demonstrated achievement of the learning outcomes and therefore the ability to apply the relevant
knowledge and skills in practice.
Having defined the assessment items, the next step in Design Alchemy practice
is to articulate the learning activities which will create the artefacts used for
assessment.

Step 4: Learning Activities
If students are to learn desired outcomes in a reasonably effective manner, then the
teacher’s fundamental task is to get students to engage in learning activities that are likely
to result in their achieving those outcomes . . . what the student does in determining what is
learned is more important than what the teacher does (Shuel, 1986, p. 429).

Overview
The fourth step of Design Alchemy practice is to define and specify the learning
activities, which result in the creation of the assessment items by which the outcomes are measured. The learning activities embody the active and creative learning element of the pedagogy (Chap. 8) and consist of a set of interrelated and
integrated informing learning tasks or e-tivities (Salmon, 2013). The practice of the
design alchemist focuses on defining one or more learning activities per assessment
item, with the expectation that each activity, or set of activities, will result in the
creation of an artefact for subsequent assessment.
As typical semester-based courses run for 10–12 weeks, each outcome would
cover 2–3 weeks assuming that five learning outcomes had been specified; consequently one set of activities would be designed to span those 2–3 weeks. At the end
of this period, an artefact would be produced for assessing the respective learning
outcome. A challenge for the design alchemist is to ensure that at any place in a
course, all participants are engaged in an activity directly aligned to a learning
outcomes and its corresponding assessment task.

Defining Activities
In defining a learning activity, the critical strategy is to integrate each element of the
Design Alchemy pedagogy (see Chap. 8) while enabling the learner-centred philosophy where individual students may choose to complete a task on their own
terms, for example, by working independently rather than collaboratively. To

Step 4: Learning Activities

157

Table 9.12 Learning activities embracing pedagogy
Learning activity
What is learning?

Pedagogy
Problem
based
Based on your analysis of the resources and discussion with peers, what learning
Social
theory, or theories, make best sense to you? Why?
Inclusive
Contextual
In what way are these theories appropriate for the kind of learning environment you Problem
would like to operate in?
based
Contextual
Are learning theories generic, or are they dependent on factors such as gender,
Problem
politics and age?
based
Inclusive
If the theories you select do not resonate completely with your view or experience of Inclusive
learning, how might you modify that theory?
Contextual
Emergent
As a result of these deliberations, collaborate with your peers to create an entry in
Problem
the Wiki which substantiates the use of one or more learning theories to support
based
education design
Social
Active
Creative

illustrate the integration of pedagogy with learning activity, Table 9.12 illustrates a
single learning activity divided into segments and the pedagogical element that
aligns with each segment.
The structure of activities in this way also demonstrates that the result of
learning activities can be unpredictable; by providing the learner with relevant
resources and guiding them to individual and group analyses, the opportunities for
learning and engagement are enhanced, as is the potential for new ideas and
syntheses to emerge. A more detailed elaboration of the specification of learning
activity, as well as the supporting elements of Design Alchemy practice, can be
found in Chap. 13.

Practising Alchemy: Learning Activities
The learning activities reflect the underlying pedagogy of Design Alchemy and are
constructed in such a way that completion of an activity results in the creation of
one or more assessment artefacts. A set of activities provides the structure and
process for creating and producing an assessment artefact, which is conceptually
different from those traditional designs where assessment, subject matter and
activities are not always closely and explicitly aligned. To complete the practice
of Design Alchemy, the final step in the course design is to identify the range of
resources that will support the completion of a learning activity.

158

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Step 5: Learning Resources
Overview
One of the interesting aspects of Design Alchemy is that a detailed analysis of the
subject matter is not required to complete a course design. One of the reasons for
adopting this approach is that it discourages designers and developers repurposing
that content for the course. As readers will be aware, when an Internet search is
conducted for a topic, such as ‘instructional design’, many millions of hits are
generated (as I write I scored 26,000,000), and many of these sources identified will
contain summaries, elaborations or interpretations of primary works, for example,
the site on Instructional Design Models credited to Ryder (2013) or the Theory Into
Practice site that classifies learning theories (Kearsely, 2009). Consequently there
is no reason to design courses that contain any subject matter, as it is available
elsewhere; either through texts, many of which are electronic and downloadable or
open resources, which freely provide learning materials, courses and supportive
information.
A second reason for this approach is sustainability, no doubt reflecting my early
computer programming experiences. At that time, single subroutines could be used
in many different programs, which not only avoided duplication of code but also
maximised maintainability, for example, if the subroutine was used to calculate
principal and interest payments on mortgages and was used by many different
applications, a change to the formula would be made in the single subroutine and
the change reflected in all programs accessing that subroutine. In course design this
can be applied to the textbook (subroutine) which is typically referred to by chapter
and page throughout a syllabus or study guide. If the textbook changes, every
reference to that text must be edited and updated, which requires significant time
and therefore additional cost.
The impact of this is shown in Table 9.13 where a revision to the traditional
specification (in this case the fictitious text from Smith, 2011) would require
potential changes to date, chapter and page for each occurrence. The sustainable
specification will require only one change for the life of the course, the details of the
new edition of the text. It has been argued that students need specific references;
otherwise, they will not be able to locate the correct information; however, the only
reason for this appears to be to maintain a sense of power with the teacher and to
prevent creativity, emergence and innovation. When given a prompt (e.g. ‘features
of electromagnetic fields’), students are quite capable of finding the associated link
in the allocated resources.

References

159

Table 9.13 Traditional vs. sustainable resource specification
Traditional
Read Chap. 3 of Smith (2011, pp. 11–12), focusing
especially on electromagnetic fields

Sustainable
Use the resources to identify the major
features of electromagnetic fields

Practising Alchemy: Resources
Focusing on resources as the final step for course design practice reinforces the
emphasis being on learning, not content. In addition, the radical change to the
availability of and access to resources has shifted the traditional roles of education;
for the teacher the transformed role involves being an elder and mentor to learners
(experienced, but not in everything), and for the learner the transformed role
involves being experience and context (motivated and situated). Together, through
the use of an appropriate set of resources, the educational experience can focus on
meaningful and engaging learning activities.

How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?
Design Alchemy is enabled through a five-step process, in collaboration with key
course stakeholders, which results in the design specifications for a course of study.
A feature of the practice is that design continuously focuses on what the learner will
do and what they will accomplish. As a result, the practice does not need to examine
in detail the informing subject matter, as the learning outcomes and assessment
tasks define the required content. The design of courses using Design Alchemy can
be achieved without a textbook, although a course specialist and domain expert are
essential to confirm the alignment of assessments, outcomes and activities. While
the practice aligns with the philosophies of learning design (see Chap. 6), based on
implementations observed across the world, the completion of design specifications
independent of subject-matter resources represents a critical difference between
Design Alchemy and other more traditional practices.

References
American Registry of Radiologic Technologists. (2013). AART Certification. Available from
https://www.arrt.org/Certification. Accessed October 12, 2013.
Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2010). A guide to authentic e-learning. London and
New York: Routledge.
Kearsley, G. (2009). Explorations in learning & instruction: The theory into practice database.
http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/tip/
Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning
and technology. New York: Routledge.

160

9 How Does the Design Alchemist Practice?

Mager, R. (1975). Preparing instructional objectives (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Lake Publishing Co.
Moore, C. (2008, May 12). Be an elearning action hero. Let’s save the world from boring training.
Available from http://blog.cathy-moore.com/2008/05/be-an-elearning-action-hero/. Accessed
October 10, 2013.
Ryder, M. (2013, March 10). Instructional design models. Available from http://carbon.ucdenver.
edu/~mryder/itc/idmodels.html. Accessed October 10, 2013.
Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning (2nd ed.). London and New York:
Routledge.
Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research, 56(4),
411–436.
Sims, R., Dobbs, G., & Hand, T. (2002). Enhancing quality in online learning: Scaffolding design
and planning through proactive evaluation. Distance Education, 23(2), 135–148.

Chapter 10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

Abstract The assets of Design Alchemy represent the wide range of factors that
impact on and influence design practice, and are considered as a positive energy,
providing both support and guidance for the design alchemist. In many ways the
assets provide similar information to that generated by the traditional analysis phase
of instructional design; however, the difference lies both in positioning and influence. With respect to position, the assets are considered to inform practice, but the
practice of course design can be completed without defining the assets; consequently the assets are considered as the third of the Design Alchemy trinity.
Nevertheless, it is recommended that new or inexperienced designers understand
the nature of the assets and their impact on a course before commencing the formal
design practice. In terms of influence, the assets define the parameters of the course
(e.g. delivery mode) and therefore impact on certain decisions; however, the
primary task of course design can be completed independently of defining the
impact of the different assets on the design. For example, a course can be specified
in terms of knowledge application, outcomes, assessment, activities and resources
before a detailed specification of the activities, based on information from the
assets, is required. In this chapter the essential characteristics of six classes of
assets are introduced and explained: people, standards, programs, technology,
process and evidence. When assets are integrated with the pedagogy and practice
of Design Alchemy, the emerging course manifests a powerful design that is not
only educationally effective but also flexible, maintainable and sustainable.

Assets in Overview
To complete an effective course design, the design alchemist needs to be aware of
the different parameters and factors that influence design decisions, which ultimately impacts on the extent to which a full transformation can be completed.

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_10,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

161

162

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

Fig. 10.1 Assets of Design Alchemy

The Design Alchemy framework classifies six areas which provide and generate
assets that inform the designer’s practice (see Fig. 10.1); in summary these assets
are based on:
1. People: the various stakeholders who contribute to and influence the design of a
program or course.
2. Standards: the range of performance and outcome standards that are either
imposed or expected and which can be used as measures of quality; these are
typically generated by regulators, the professions and the institutions.
3. Programs: the award offering (such as a bachelor’s degree), its constituent
courses and the domain (subject area).
4. Technology: the systems that underpin design, access and delivery of courses
and the tools that specifically support the completion of learning activities.
5. Process: the components of the overall design and development process that
impact quality (continuous improvement) and sustainability.
6. Evidence: the research data and information that informs design practice.

People as Assets

163

People as Assets
Contextualised in the online environment, the importance of the different people
and the encounters they experience as part of the course design and implementation
process was addressed by Sims and Hedberg (2006, p. 44) who suggested that
Through an analysis of online teaching and learning environments we have proposed that
interaction can be framed as a recurring set of encounters and negotiations between
designers, teachers, learners, technicians and administrators. These different encounter
modes will change with technology as it moves from the common asynchronous to the
synchronous and on to multiple realities where the learner is participating in a multi-user
online environment. As we shift from online communication contexts that are frequently a
series of many one-to-one negotiations to environments that are many-to-many we need to
ensure we are prepared by better understanding how all stakeholders within the online
context can best cooperate and achieve.

What is critical therefore is that a design alchemist recognises the contributions
that different stakeholders can make to the success of a design project, as they
represent people from the course, the institution, the design team as well as those
accessible through external connections.

Course People
Within a course are the two critical participant groups, learners and teachers, and in
traditional instructional design practice, the task of target audience analysis is
considered essential to define the range of characteristics and entry skills of the
enrolled students. However, while this practice was justified when the geographic
catchment area for those students was relatively well defined, the same no longer
holds true. As more and more students choose to study in flexible modes, they are
able to choose the program that best suits them, regardless of their location or that
of the program provider. While general assumptions about learners may be made,
for example, an ability to read English at a post-secondary level, in the contemporary environment very little can be explicitly stated as the cohorts have a wide range
of skills, backgrounds and cultural experiences and that diversity changes from one
delivery of a course to the next. This is why a pedagogy that is learner centred and
inclusive is so critical to success.
The teacher represents a significant asset for design practice. When their role
also encompasses course coordinator, they are responsible for confirming the
knowledge application, learning outcomes, assessment tasks, learning activities
and learning resources. However, when the teacher is an unknown (contracted
externally to deliver a course), then it is their experience, perspective and context
which provides an asset for the designer and which can be incorporated into the
design framework with which all participants engage. An example integrating the
teacher into the design is represented in this example of a learning activity:

164

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

Using your own experience, and that of the course instructor, compare and contrast
approaches to management with that of the textbook and other course participants. What
are the similarities and differences you observe? Is there a specific management approach
that is relevant to your own environment? In what ways is it relevant and how might you
modify the approach to enhance its relevance?

For the design alchemist therefore, the task is to create a course for each
participant, with the attitude that each participant is an asset the course through
the diversity and contributions they can make to the achievement of learning
outcomes. The convergence of unpredictable combinations of course participants
generates a rich diversity of experience, knowledge and skills and it is that diversity
which provides an asset to design practice.

Institutional People
The term institution applies to schools, colleges and universities across the education sector as well corporate, health and other organisations that offer education and
training. Within these institutions the range of departments who can impact on the
design of a course span administration, information technology, student services,
learning and teaching and marketing. Representatives from each of these areas are
considered an asset to the design process because they can provide insight into the
operations, policies and priorities of the institution. As an example, maintaining
close communication with the group that supports the learning management system
will ensure that any significant updates or changes can be catered for. An alternative
example relates to marketing; there are instances when course coordinators have
been surprised by discovering a cohort of students from an overseas country has
enrolled in their course and therefore ensuring the currency of marketing initiatives
is also an asset to design.

Design People
Hedberg and Sims (2001, p. 109) discussed the encounters that can take place both
within the design team and between artefacts of the educational experience. While
the primary focus was on creating computer-based learning resources, the conclusions hold true for the online and face-to-face environments of today:
New types of design dialogues are important if the products developed are to effectively
combine the skills of both the educationalist and the technical expertise of other members of
the development team. In the design process while most models focus on the learning task,
with interactive environments it is how the user or learner will undertake the task with the
tools and functionality built into the software that is more important for creating motivation
and engagement.

Standards

165

The design team itself needs to embody the appropriate set of skills to achieve
the desired project outcomes, integrating a combination of media (graphics, audio,
video), subject matter, technology and education. Together each member represents
an asset, as their own specialist experience can provide insights as to the different
facets of design such as learning, teaching, interface and interaction. A case study
illustrating the importance of these skills, and the consequences if these skills are
not part of the design team, has been documented by Sims and Waldron (2013).

Connected People
More and more it is important to recognise the value of connections available to
design practice. This was the essence of Siemens’ (2005) proposal of connectivism
as a learning theory: that learning can no longer be seen only as province of the
individual, but rather of the collective whole that results from the connections those
individuals bring to the learning process. In the same way, a designer can benefit
from professional, personal and even random connections as each has the potential
to provide an asset to design practice and quality. Viewing the creative ideas of one
designer or assessing another’s approach as impractical are both design assets
through adding to experience and options for practical application.

Designing with People
Identifying people as an asset for design supports the artistic element of alchemy;
their collective interactions, which generate improvisation, innovation and creativity, activate the design alchemist to integrate and transform those ideas into inspired
learning and teaching experiences.

Standards
Overview
As standards become more established and defined across the academy, the impetus
for quality in course design and learning outcomes has increased. The standards
defined by both national accrediting bodies and quality assurance agencies, as well
the institution, work as an asset to the design process because they provide guidance
and frameworks by which to structure and develop various elements of a course.
For example, an institution might adopt a policy that all students will finish their
program of study with a set of defined graduate attributes, such as abilities in

166

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

problem-solving or critical thinking, and a professional body might define a set of
threshold learning outcomes. Consequently, program and course coordinators have
the responsibility to integrate and be able to demonstrate how and where those
attributes or outcomes are addressed within a program. One response has been to
identify and assign one attribute or outcome to a single course; the practice of
Design Alchemy, however, views these measures as holistic assets that should
infiltrate each course within a program. This section addresses standards from the
institutional, professional and government agency perspective to demonstrate how
they represent an asset to the course design process.

Institutional Standards
Some 10 years ago, when I had responsibility for the accreditation of two undergraduate programs, the specification of graduate attributes and outcomes was
largely left to the institution. Since that time the professions and quality agencies
have taken a leading role in defining standards and outcomes which institutions are
now applying and adopting. The value of an institutional set of graduate attributes is
that they provide a guide for the designer as to the form and structure learning
activities should take in order for those attributes to be attained. This is illustrated in
Table 10.1 where a set of graduate attributes are aligned (in parentheses) with
Design Alchemy practice and pedagogy.
Through this approach a learning activity can integrate both course (domain)
learning outcomes and institutional attributes without having to make them explicit
or discrete, as shown by the following example of a learning activity:
Instructional Design as a practice has failed to deliver consistent quality in course design
and learning outcomes. Using the resources as a starting point, examine current interpretations of Instructional Design methods to propose and develop a solution to this conundrum. Is the consistency defined by factors other than design, such as nation, culture,
community or government? Through consultation and collaboration with your peers,
create a presentation that explains and substantiates your solution.

In addition, there will be a range of policies and procedures which impact on
various aspects of course delivery such as assessment, grading and plagiarism. The
key for the design alchemist is to be cognisant of these assets in conjunction with
the pedagogy and practice as they form a powerful means to ensure activities not
only focus on the knowledge domain but also achieve graduate attributes and cater
for policy at the same time.

Professional Standards
Similar sets of standards have also emerged through the professions. In 2010 the
then Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC), which is now part of the

Standards

167

Table 10.1 Typical set of graduate attributes
On completion of this course, students should have extended their ability to:
• Think critically, by analysing and evaluating information pertinent to the field of study (problemsolving)
• Solve problems, by adapting knowledge gained to new tasks and identifying relevant solution
strategies (problem-solving)
• Communicate to diverse audiences through clear, logically presented works and planned, spoken
presentations (creativity and production of assessment artefacts)
• Analyse data and information, by retrieving, evaluating and presenting information from a range
of sources (use of resources to complete learning activities)
• Think inclusively, by adapting to socially, culturally and linguistically diverse environments
(inclusive learning; contextual learning)
• Think globally, within the context of local, national and international perspectives and environments (inclusive learning; contextual learning)

Office of Learning and Teaching (2013), established a project on Learning and
Teaching Academic Standards to facilitate and coordinate the definition of academic standards with specific discipline communities, such as in the Creative and
Performing Arts (Australian Learning and Teaching Council, 2010). As an example, the threshold learning outcomes defined for the relevant disciplines within the
Creative and Performing Arts (creative writing, dance, music and sound, screen and
media, drama and performance, visual arts) are shown in Table 10.2.
As these threshold learning outcomes are similar to those identified for an
institution (Table 10.1), it is incumbent upon the program coordinator to ensure
both are covered; as the practice of Design Alchemy integrates the essence of these
attributes through the pedagogy associated with the learning activities, these standards represent an asset to design as a means to confirm the integrity of learning
activities.
A second aspect of the profession is the role of associations in accreditation and
certification. For example, in the health professions, radiology technicians can be
formally registered by the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists (2013)
who describe their process as
Certification is the initial recognition of an individual who satisfies certain standards
within a profession. Employers, state licensing agencies, and federal regulators look at
the ARRT credential as an indication that a person has met a recognized national standard
for medical imaging, interventional procedures, and radiation therapy professionals.

As with the professional learning outcomes, the requirements of accrediting
organisations provide an asset by identifying the critical areas of subject matter that
need to be demonstrated through the learning activities.

Agencies
At the regulatory and quality level, standards can also be governed by national
agencies. For example, in the current Australian environment, the Tertiary

168

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

Table 10.2 Threshold learning outcomes (from ALTC, 2010, p. 12)
Upon completion of a bachelor’s degree in
Creative and Performing Arts, graduates will be
able to:
Demonstrate skills and knowledge of the practices, languages, forms, materials, technologies and techniques in the Creative and
Performing Arts discipline
Develop, research and evaluate ideas, concepts
and processes through creative, critical and
reflective thinking and practice
Apply relevant skills and knowledge to produce
and realise works, artefacts and forms of
creative expression
Interpret, communicate and present ideas,
problems and arguments in modes suited to a
range of audiences
Work independently and collaboratively in the
Creative and Performing Arts discipline in
response to project demands
Recognise and reflect on social, cultural and
ethical issues, and apply local and international perspectives to practice in the Creative and Performing Arts discipline

Upon completion of a master’s by coursework
degree in Creative and Performing Arts,
graduates will be able to:
Integrate specialised and advanced skills with a
developed knowledge of the Creative and
Performing Arts discipline
Generate, research and explore ideas, concepts
and processes in the field through integrated
creative, critical and reflective thinking
Apply and refine technical skills and specialist
knowledge within a sustained and resolved
body of work
Interpret, communicate and present complex
work and ideas to specialist and
nonspecialist audiences using professional
conventions
Initiate, lead, negotiate and interact with others
in planning, adapting to and executing creative and performing arts projects
Engage critically with social, cultural and ethical issues and apply local and international
perspectives to extend practice in the Creative and Performing Arts discipline

Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA, 2013) is the independent regulator
of the higher education sector and as part of its charter engages with professional
bodies to ensure:
• the development of a complementary approach to course accreditation processes and
requirements
• the use of professional bodies as a source of expert advice
• the sharing of information with professional bodies to inform TEQSA’s regulatory
activity and to protect the interests of students and the higher education sector;
• encouraging alignment of professional outcomes with learning outcome requirements of
the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF); and
• fostering communication between TEQSA and professional bodies regarding each
other’s respective roles.

Closely related is the work of the Australian Qualifications Framework (2013):
The AQF is the national policy for regulated qualifications in Australian education and
training. It incorporates the qualifications from each education and training sector into a
single comprehensive national qualifications framework. The AQF was first introduced in
1995 to underpin the national system of qualifications in Australia encompassing higher
education, vocational education and training and schools.

The AQF (Australian Qualifications Framework, 2013) has defined levels of
performance expected with the structure organised such that

Standards

169

Table 10.3 AQF level 7 criteria
AQF level 7 criteria
Summary

Graduates at this level will have broad and coherent knowledge and
skills for professional work and/or further learning
Knowledge
Graduates at this level will have broad and coherent theoretical and
technical knowledge with depth in one or more disciplines or areas
of practice
Skills
Graduates at this level will have well-developed cognitive, technical
and communication skills to select and apply methods and technologies to:
• Analyse and evaluate information to complete a range of activities
• Analyse, generate and transmit solutions to unpredictable and
sometimes complex problems
• Transmit knowledge, skills and ideas to others
Application of knowledge Graduates at this level will apply knowledge and skills to demonstrate
and skills
autonomy, well-developed judgement and responsibility:
• In contexts that require self-directed work and learning
• Within broad parameters to provide specialist advice and functions

AQF levels and the AQF levels criteria are an indication of the relative complexity and/or
depth of achievement and the autonomy required to demonstrate that achievement. AQF
level 1 has the lowest complexity and AQF level 10 has the highest complexity. The AQF
level summaries are statements of the typical achievement of graduates who have been
awarded a qualification at a certain level in the AQF.

Together, these agencies define program and course outcomes, especially in
terms of learning outcomes and the basis on which they will be assessed for quality.
The descriptors for a bachelor’s program based on the AQF (2013) are shown in
Table 10.3.

Designing with Standards
Each of these attributes, outcomes and standards represents an asset for the design
alchemist. As part of the transformation process, each of these can be integrated
within the learning activity framework to not only support the achievement of
course learning outcomes but also the overall quality of the course. An example
of this integration through Design Alchemy practice is illustrated in Table 10.4
using concepts from the development of a music program (initially discussed in
Chap. 9).
Through the Design Alchemy process, alignment emerges from the creation of
the knowledge application statement (linked to the appropriate AQF level,
Table 10.3) after which the course and professional outcomes are aligned. The
magic and chemistry of the practice comes through integration; the outcomes
provide the asset that when mixed with the pedagogy, the resultant activities
provide a comprehensive experience covering both course learning outcomes and

170

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

Table 10.4 Outcome alignment
Knowledge application
On successful completion of the course, students will engage with musical possibilities in diverse
situations
Course learning outcome
Threshold learning outcome
Communicate and critique
Demonstrate skills and knowledge of the practices, languages,
musical concepts
forms, materials, technologies and techniques in the Creative
and Performing Arts discipline
Interpret, communicate and present ideas, problems and arguments in modes suited to a range of audiences
Create musical artefacts
Apply relevant skills and knowledge to produce and realise works,
artefacts and forms of creative expression
Recognise musical diversity Recognise and reflect on social, cultural and ethical issues, and
apply local and international perspectives to practice in the
Creative and Performing Arts discipline
Value and apply
Work independently and collaboratively in the Creative and
co-construction
Performing Arts discipline in response to project demands
Differentiate musical genres Develop, research and evaluate ideas, concepts and processes
through creative, critical and reflective thinking and practice

the standards documented by the institution, the profession and the national quality
agencies.

Programs
The traditions of the different domains of knowledge and the associated discourse
(e.g. arts, sciences, humanities, education) in tandem with the sector (school,
vocational, higher education) and the level (K-12, undergraduate, postgraduate,
life-long) not only influence designs but also serve as an asset to the design process.
This section examines each of these areas to identify the ways in which they work
as support for design practice.

Domain
For each domain of study, there is an extensive evidence base of good learning and
teaching practice accompanied by awards for quality learning resources and teaching practice. For example, the Office of Learning and Teaching (2013) identifies the
aims of its awards program as
The Australian Awards for University Teaching are designed to recognise quality teaching
practice and outstanding contributions to student learning. It is intended that recipients,
with the support of their institutions, will contribute to systemic change in learning and
teaching through ongoing knowledge sharing and dissemination, for example,

Programs

171

presentations within the learning and teaching community, collegial mentoring, pairing
and networking, and involvement in university and higher education committees.

However, with the growth in demand for education, especially through online
learning, many newly hired teachers don’t possess the knowledge or skills associated with best practice in design for effective learning and teaching. The domain for
which design is focused provides an asset to the process, because the traditions of
that domain provide insights as to the philosophy and discourse that are considered
equally important as the subject matter. At times a designer can find this confrontational, because there are departments (e.g. mathematics) where suggestions to
think differently have been met with adamant claims that courses had to be taught in
a particular way, typically adopting a teacher-centred, information transmission and
exam-based model, because ‘that was the best way for students to learn’. Nevertheless, to be transformational, the design alchemist can use tradition as an asset in
order to inform the structure of the course and the associated learning activities.

Sector
Similar arguments can be made according to the sector in which the learning is
taking place: the kindergarten, the school, the college, the university or the University of the Third Age (U3A—http://www.u3aonline.org.au/). As a designer the
sector is critical because it defines the environment where the learning and teaching
is taking place, and is therefore an asset in determining the context in which
problems can be situated. However, the pedagogy of Design Alchemy is viewed
as constant across all sectors, as the design practice privileges the learner, not the
content or the sector.
Underlying this approach is the philosophy that humans experience the same
world but with different levels of understanding; by perceiving curricula as a spiral,
effectively the same subject matter can be addressed regardless of sectors and
domains. The sector information allows designers to individualise and
contextualise the learning activities by adjusting the complexity of problems
according to that sector.

Level
The same design philosophy also applies to students studying at different levels, for
example, those specified by the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF, 2013)
and illustrated in Table 10.5. In this case each level defines a knowledge application
criterion, reflecting a progressive, spiral approach and which represents a design
asset.

172

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

Table 10.5 The development of knowledge and skills (adapted from AQF)
Level
Certificate I
Certificate II
Certificate III

Certificate IV

Diploma

Advanced Diploma

Bachelor’s degree

Honours degree, Graduate certificate, Graduate Diploma
Master’s degree
Doctoral degree

Graduate application of knowledge
Demonstrate autonomy in highly structured and stable contexts and within narrow parameters
Demonstrate autonomy and limited judgement in structured
and stable contexts and within narrow parameters
Demonstrate autonomy and judgement and to take limited
responsibility in known and stable contexts within
established parameters
Demonstrate autonomy, judgement and limited responsibility in known or changing contexts and within established
parameters
Demonstrate autonomy, judgement and defined responsibility in known or changing contexts and within broad but
established parameters
Demonstrate autonomy, judgement and defined responsibility in contexts that are subject to change and within broad
parameters to provide specialist advice and functions
Demonstrate autonomy, well-developed judgement and
responsibility in contexts that require self-directed work
and learning and within broad parameters to provide
specialist advice and functions
Demonstrate autonomy, well-developed judgement, adaptability and responsibility as a practitioner or learner
Demonstrate autonomy, expert judgement, adaptability and
responsibility as a practitioner or learner
Demonstrate autonomy, authoritative judgement, adaptability and responsibility as an expert and leading practitioner or scholar

While more complex and comprehensive analyses and syntheses might be
expected from students working at the postgraduate level, designers should never
underestimate the capabilities of the human to observe, analyse and create solutions, regardless of their age. This perspective reinforces the importance to privilege students with the capability to undertake complex tasks and, through the
concept of a spiralling curricula, the longer learners remain in the system the
more complex those learning activities can become.

Designing for Programs
Individual programs can be classified according to the domain (subject-matter
area), sector (from kindergarten to life-long learning) and level (from certificate
to doctorate). While each of these represents an asset to the designer in terms of the
complexity of the learning activities, it is also important to emphasise that a design
approach which focuses on learning outcomes and aligned assessment can be more

Technology

173

flexible in catering for the range of performance expected across sectors, levels and
domains.

Technology
Overview
Computer-based technology in the form of learning management systems and the
accompanying tool sets, as well as the various stand-alone applications that provide
problem-solving and simulated scenarios, are commonplace across all educational
sectors. Students also have access to devices which allow them mobility and
options to access courses from their preferred location. This section identifies
three assets (delivery, access, tools) that are essential elements of the design
alchemist’s practice.

Delivery Technology
When conceptualising a learning experience, now more than ever, designers need to
be aware of the means by which students will access and engage with the different
learning activities. One of the most important elements is to ensure students know
the rules of engagement for the different access modes and that they are confident
they have the skills to work in that environment and engage effectively and
efficiently with other course participants. In essence this means that they have the
appropriate literacies to access and control the environment. For the design alchemist, the range of experiences and environments the course participants will
encounter, such as face-to-face, online, bended or distance, will inform the language of the design.
The reason that language is a priority over delivery mode is to enhance transformation and efficiency. As an example, during a consultancy I worked with a
course coordinator of a single unit delivered across three modes—on-campus,
online and external—who had established three separate versions of the same
course to address the different delivery modes. The potential risks from such an
approach are that students from the three groups will have different experiences and
potentially different assessments which can result in variations to the learning
outcomes achieved. The solution offered was to focus on the course as a single
entity, with a single set of outcomes, assessments, activities and resources, and to
view the course as having a range of enrolled students who choose to attend by
different access modes. To use logic from my computer programming days, the
designer then creates an IF . . . THEN structure within a single learning activity,
which provides the following options:

174

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

IF you are on-campus THEN the complete the on-campus activity
IF you are online THEN the complete the online activity
IF you are external THEN the complete the external activity

A variant of this is to ensure students are aware of the different groupings and to
use those groupings to establish collaborative activities between groups. The result
is that the teacher engages with one, not three, cohort. The access and delivery
mode therefore act as a design asset because they can trigger alternative and more
efficient course transformations.

Access Technology
The emergence of the term ‘mobility’ has coincided with the development of small
portable laptops or notebooks, the smart phone and the tablet; and because of the
increase in the use of tablets by students, the concept of mobile learning has also
become topical:
Recent advances in information and communications technologies have led to . . . mobile
devices that have nurtured the development of learning on-the-go and access opportunities
for learning anywhere at any time . . . this new affordance of learning has allowed for
access, integration, and interaction of resources regardless of time or location. (Kidd &
Chen, 2011, p. 1).

The more I reflect on technology developments, even though computers and
learning have been the focus of my career and research, I am shifting to a position
that to be an effective design alchemist means letting go of the technology. The
assumption can be made that there will always be a technology to support the
learning and teaching process, leaving the designer to focus on the essential course
elements: knowledge application, learning outcomes, assessment and learning
activities.
Nevertheless, mobility does provide a design asset. As mobile students have
access to courses while on the move, designers can cater for this through integrating
targeted activities. For example, through options for situational on-the-spot capture
of audiovisual data while mobile, activities can contextualise the learning event
directly and consistently within the learner’s environment, wherever and whenever
they may be.

Tools Technology
The technology-based tools for learning and teaching span simulations, self-paced
learning, self-assessment quizzes and discussion forums. However, as introduced in
Chap. 2, the critical issue for the designer is to consider these tools as an asset rather

Process Technology

175

than a directive. The tool does not determine the activity, the activity determines
the tool.
As an example, institutions frequently support academic staff by providing
training in the use of the learning management system, such as Moodle (n.d.).
However, the training typically focuses on the functionality of the system, such as
the lesson tool (which enables the creation of content pages) or the forum tool
(to establish options for online discussions). The result of such training is that
course design begins with the tool, rather than the learning activity and its associated pedagogy. Design Alchemy views such tools as potential ingredients, but only
if the learning activity ‘recipe’ demands such ‘ingredients’. As an example, an
activity may determine a role-play as the best means to create an assessment
artefact, and yet learning management systems such as Moodle (n.d.) do not
provide a role-play tool. As shown in Chap. 12, this is not an issue when design
thinking is privileged over technology.
It is worth noting that a new set of tools are emerging which focus on the creation
of the type of applications that provided the magic I observed in my early years of
practice. Examples of these are Articulate Storyline (Articulate Global, 2013) and
ZebraZApps (n.d.). Both are designed to create learning tools which enable conditional sequences, which adapt to responses of the individual learner. As with all
tools, however, these represent a design asset to be used when the learning activity
dictates.

Designing with Technology
The majority of institutions in developed countries use computer-based technology
to support learning and teaching, and the three elements of technology classed as
assets for design relate to course delivery and access as well as supportive tools. In
each case knowing what plans the institution has for delivering a course, the options
available to access that course and the tools available for use within that course can
assist the designer in ensuring the activities align with these assets. However, the
key reminder is that design determines whether technology is required, and if so,
the elements of that technology.

Process Technology
Having access to an effective and efficient process is critical to productive design.
While the formal practice of Design Alchemy provides a set of steps by which the
designer can complete the design specifications for a course of study, the process
asset establishes a model by which the specified design can be developed and
implemented through continuous improvement and sustainability.

176

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

Fig. 10.2 Basic three-phase design [Adapted from Sims and Jones (2003)]

Phased Implementation
As noted in Chap. 9, the overall aim of Design Alchemy is to address quality
elements during the design process so that the resultant course, when delivered,
manifests all expected aspects of a quality educational experience. However, the
design must also be viewed as a process of continuous improvement as the world in
which education takes place is ever changing in terms of factors such as access,
content, outcomes, learning and teaching. A phased approach to the design process
is based on a three-step mantra—build, enhance and maintain—which was originally proposed by Sims and Jones (2003) and is represented in Fig. 10.2.
The essence behind this process is that pedagogy is paramount and that a
functional course can be created and implemented without resorting to the use of
the wide range of technology-based tools that might be available. This was illustrated when observing a group developing an extensive range of learning objects for
the schools sector; during a discussion a prototype of one object was displayed,
consisting only of pencil outlines and a brief description of the proposed learning
strategy, which focused on judging distances given a set of parameters. What struck
me was that the design, in terms of learning, was complete, and if not a commercial
product, could have been implemented immediately. Learning success comes from
pedagogy not technology, and the continuous improvement approach ensures
pedagogy remains a priority over technology.

Sustainable
As discussed in Chap. 9, the purpose of a sustainable approach is to minimise the
amount of changes a course requires during its life cycle. The basic philosophy
underpinning a sustainable design ethos is represented in Fig. 10.3, with resources
considered as external to the critical dynamic of learning: the interaction between
outcomes, activities and assessment.
Using this approach as an asset, subject matter can be updated as necessary
without changing the fundamental course design.

Evidence

177

Fig. 10.3 Sustainable design

Designing with Process
Understanding the essence of the continuous improvement and sustainable
approach to design represents an asset, as the process of design will be enhanced
by focusing on the key elements that enable motivation and engagement: an active
and learner-centred pedagogy.

Evidence
The final asset class relates to the evidence available to the designer in terms of
formal research, the media, experience and practice. The evidence can be both
prescribing, in that it supports the ethos and philosophy of the learning and teaching
environment, and it may be contrary, proving examples where strategies have not
been successful.

Research
Fewer and fewer designers can rely on a single source, such as a text on educational
design, as the only asset for practice; it is essential to maintain currency with respect
to what is being published and to assess its relevance to the context of the design
effort. There is a vast literature base of textbooks and journals that provide evidence
for educational design, ranging from the theoretical to formal research to case

178

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

studies, which is too complex and diverse for any one designer to integrate into their
practice. Consequently, the design alchemist needs to identify a research framework that operates as a design asset by providing substantiation for the
decisions made.

Media
With the growth of social media, the designer can subscribe to a range of social
networks (e.g. Twitter) and Internet (RSS) feeds to generate current and relevant
information. While maintaining this currency requires effort and commitment, the
immediacy of the information provides an asset to support decisions based on not
only research but also the field of practice.

Experience and Practice
Finally, the practice and experience of colleagues within the design team and those
who are part of the designer’s broader social network will provide significant input
into design approaches and therefore must also be seen as an asset.

Designing with Evidence
This book is a testimony to the different ways that research, media and practice
have synthesised and evolved into a design practice that remains open to change
and development as the theory and practice of our field continues to mature.
Essentially, the designer needs to ask ‘what are others doing’ and, through observation and analysis, assess the alignment of their practice and how it might be
enhanced.

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?
While the design alchemist implements a pedagogy and a practice, these cannot
operate effectively without engaging with the assets that support the design process:
people, standards, programs, technology, process and evidence. The ways in which
these can be leveraged are shown in Fig. 10.4.
The following summary addresses how the assets (in italics) are embedded
within five design thinking components, creates a design that is:

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

179

Fig. 10.4 Leveraging
design assets

• Strategically aligned: the emergent program and courses align with the strategic
goals of the institution as well as the standards defined through professional
accreditation and national agencies.
• Pedagogically driven: the decisions made through interactions with people will
manifest the Design Alchemy pedagogy which embraces a learner-centred,
contextual and authentic learning ethos.
• Evidence based: the design process is based not only on adhering to a particular
methodology but uses evidence to demonstrate consistency with current research
evidence.
• Technology enabled: the designs will ensure that the available technology is used
to focus on the learning outcomes of the course and enabling the effective access
to the learning and teaching environment.
• Sustainably created: using appropriate processes and thinking, the design process will show both continuous improvement and sustainability, enhancing the
longevity of programs and minimising maintenance.
Together with the pedagogy and the practice, the assets complete the tools
required to transform the way we think about teaching and learning. In Part III, a
series of examples are provided to illustrate Design Alchemy in practice.

180

10

What Are the Assets of Design Alchemy?

References
American Registry of Radiologic Technologists. (2013). ARRT Certification. Available from
http://www.arrt.org. Accessed October 13, 2013.
Articulate Global. (2013). Articulate Storyline. Available from http://www.articulate.com/prod
ucts/storyline-overview.php. Accessed October 13, 2013.
Australian Learning and Teaching Council. (2010). Learning and teaching academic standards
project: CREATIVE & PERFORMING ARTS learning and teaching academic standards
statement. Available from http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-creative-performing-arts-ltas-state
ment-altc-2010. Accessed October 13, 2013.
Australian Qualifications Framework. (2013). The AQF sets the standards for Australia’s qualifications. Available from http://www.aqf.edu.au/aqf/in-detail/aqf-levels/. Accessed October
13, 2013.
Hedberg, J., & Sims, R. (2001). Speculations on design team interactions. Journal of Interactive
Learning Research, 12(2/3), 189–204.
Kidd, T. T., & Chen, I. (Eds.). (2011). Ubiquitous learning: Strategies for pedagogy, course
design, and technology. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Moodle. (n.d.). Welcome to the Moodle community. Available from https://moodle.org/. Accessed
October 13, 2013.
Office of Teaching and Learning. (2013). Available from http://www.olt.gov.au. Accessed October 13, 2013.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved September
9, 2013, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Sims, R., & Hedberg, J. (2006). Encounter theory: A model to enhancing online communication,
interaction and engagement. In C. Jawah (Ed.), Interactions in online education: Implications
for theory and practice (pp. 27–45). London: Routledge Education.
Sims, R., & Jones, D. (2003). Where practice informs theory: Reshaping instructional design for
academic communities of practice in online teaching and learning. Information Technology,
Education and Society, 4(1), 3–20.
Sims, R., & Waldron, N. (2013). Margaret Janson. In P. Ertmer & J. Quinn (Eds.), The ID
casebook: Case studies in instructional design (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA). (2013). Engagement with professional
bodies. Available from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/regulatory-approach/engagement-with-profes
sional-bodies. Accessed October 13, 2013.
ZebraZapps. (n.d.). Available from https://zebrazapps.com/. Accessed October 13, 2013.

Part III

Design Alchemy: In Practice

The third part of the Design Alchemy narrative provides a series of examples from
personal practice that represent the thinking behind transformative design. The first
chapter documents four examples of courses from health services, education,
business and compliance training that underwent change and revitalisation using
the principles of Design Alchemy. The second chapter reviews three examples—a
module, an activity and an assessment—that also underwent transformative design.
Together these examples demonstrate the ways in which the Design Alchemy
practice can produce engaging and meaningful experiences for course participants
and transform the look and feel of the course to enhance that experience.

Chapter 11

Transforming Programs and Courses

Abstract In Parts I and II, the Design Alchemy architecture has been analysed in
terms of its origins, its place in the design community and the three components that
constitute its practice: pedagogy, practice and assets. In this chapter, four examples
are provided to illustrate the efficiency and results of that process, as well as the
thinking behind the practice. In each case the selected programs or courses have
been targeted for revitalisation through conversion from traditional face-to-face to
online delivery, and the teaching staff assigned had limited experience in either
design or online teaching and learning. Applying Design Alchemy practice to
redesign a course, including activities and assessments, is both practical and
efficient. The essential design specifications for each of these courses were completed in a matter of hours, highlighting the efficiency and practicality of the
transformational process. Following specification of these essential course components, the specifics of learning activities, assessment tasks and online implementation required additional, but not extensive, effort. Design Alchemy is able to
achieve its efficiency through focusing the design effort on five critical and interrelated course elements: knowledge application, learning outcomes, assessment,
learning activities and learning resources.

Health Technologist Training
Overview
The first example to demonstrate the thinking behind Design Alchemy is based on a
project undertaken with a health science educator to establish a blended learning
environment for three technician programs: histology, phlebotomy and clinical
neurophysiology. The initial focus concerned the interrelationship between the
didactic, laboratory and clinical components of the existing programs, with the
project sponsor considering an option to convert only the didactic components to an
online format in order to achieve the blended learning environment. However, after
R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_11,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

183

184

11 Transforming Programs and Courses

Fig. 11.1 Transformation from traditional to blended

analysis and presentation of alternative design concepts, it was recognised by each
program director, and the project sponsor, that the primary outcome for each
program was the technician’s performance: the effective and appropriate application of knowledge. Consequently, all three programs focused on integrating the
didactic, laboratory and clinical courses, which resulted in the transformation of
each program from three independent ‘silos’ to an integrated set of learning
activities (Fig. 11.1).
More specifically, the overall transformation was envisaged as one where the
teacher’s role would shift from lecturer and quiz-giver to mentor and expert who
would confirm each student’s readiness for laboratory and clinical work through a
series of planned synchronous and asynchronous activities.
The general concept is illustrated in Fig. 11.2, with the teaching/learning cycle
for any specific outcome described by six discrete but potentially overlapping
activities. In more detail the steps of the transformed program involved:
1. Foundations and context: face-to-face interaction to ensure students know the
nature of the outcome, the way in which the outcome would be assessed and the
relationship of the outcome to application of knowledge in the clinical setting.
2. Independent research and preparation: self-paced activities where students
access and analyse relevant resources as well as complete computer-based
learning modules.
3. Problem-solving/self-assessment: in groups or individually, and with support
from teachers, students complete problems associated with the learning outcomes and self-assess their understanding.
4. Confirmation/readiness: face-to-face interactions to clarify student understanding and to assess their readiness to participate in laboratory and/or clinical
environments.
5. Observation: students are observed in a practical context and provided with
feedback as to the effectiveness of knowledge application.
6. Assessment/certification: formal external certification or internal assessment of
knowledge and understanding and the ability to apply knowledge in a clinical
setting.

Health Technologist Training

185

Fig. 11.2 Course design concept

Design Alchemy in Practice
This project represented an early manifestation of Design Alchemy practice,
addressing the transformation from traditional to blended environments. The specific alchemy undertaken included:
(a) Transforming the program structure from silos of didactic teaching, laboratory
preparation and clinical practice to an integrated set of activities focused in
learning outcomes and knowledge application.
(b) Transforming course and program structures to integrate online technology and
provide opportunities for self-paced and collaborative learning.
(c) Transforming participant roles from learner and teacher to collaborating course
participants.

186

11 Transforming Programs and Courses

Fraud and Corruption
Overview
One of the major changes affecting organisational training has been the legislative
requirements to demonstrate compliance with a range of policies such as workplace
health and safety or ethical practice. Another compliance area is fraud and corruption, and this example addresses a course on this topic I was required to take as part
of workplace orientation. The existing course consisted of a series of PowerPoint
slides that participants worked through screen by screen; after viewing the slides a
test had to be completed in order to confirm completion of the training program.
The slides included scenarios to which participants could select an answer, although
there was no response analysis, after which the presentation continued to the next
slide in sequence. The end-of-course quiz consisted of ten questions, and a pass was
achieved with a result of 80 % or better.

Observations
While this form of compliance training is common across sectors, the design of this
particular course manifested a range of issues which do not align with effective
learning or knowledge acquisition (see Sims, 2006):
1. As a PowerPoint presentation, the course could be completed without having to
engage with the screen content, simply by continually pressing the right
arrow key.
2. The end-of-course quiz could be passed by guesswork or repetition, as there
were no limits to the number of attempts. The 80 % score did not necessarily
provide evidence of learning or understanding across all topics addressed in the
course.
3. As a self-paced course, there was no interaction whereby questions were posed
and feedback provided based on the nature of those responses.
4. The course was designed and presented using an information (subject matter)
transmission model which is inconsistent with a personalised, interactive ethos.
5. The title of the course was misleading; ‘fraud and corruption training’ could be
interpreted as a course to teach fraudulent and corrupt behaviour!
Because of a personal interest in effective design, this course was adopted as a
case study for a professional development exercise introducing the basic features of
Design Alchemy. The results of this exercise created a completely different course
design, generated in approximately 2 h, reinforcing the practical and efficient
aspects of Design Alchemy. This efficiency is achieved because the whole process
focused on learning knowledge application, learning outcomes and assessment
rather than content, even though the existing subject materials were made available

Fraud and Corruption

187

(a printed sheet of each PowerPoint slide). Had this content been used to drive the
design strategy, the available time would have been filled with discussion of the
relative merits of the current approach and the value of the content and examples.
However, with a subject matter specialist on hand for the session, there was no need
to access the subject matter in order to complete the course design.

Knowledge Application
Using the starting question ‘what should students be able to do on completion of the
course’, the group agreed on the following statement of knowledge application.
Based on the earlier comment relating to the course title (see Chap. 9), a revision
was suggested to better integrate the course with others in the compliance training
suite and to reflect why the course was required (to keep an organisation free from
fraud and corruption). Both these transformations are shown in Table 11.1.

Learning Outcomes and Assessment
The second stage of the process involved defining the learning outcomes, which in
this particular case also resulted in the related assessments being generated
(Table 11.2). The structure of outcomes and assessment also ensured the
personalisation of the process, rather than the existing course which was generic.
Having completed the first two steps in the Design Alchemy practice, it became
evident that through the specification of the assessments the learning activities had
also been defined, as they would logically revolve around different scenarios
associated with fraudulent or corrupt behaviour. In addition, because the course
resources related to existing and accessible institutional and government policy,
there was no requirement to identify additional materials. The course design was
complete!

Design Structure
However, one additional factor came into play as a result of the identification of a
design asset (see Chap. 10). The subject-matter specialist noted that users of the
course represented different roles in the organisation (manager, professional or
academic), and consequently different scenarios for each role would be required.
Initially, this was perceived as a barrier to the design; however, on further analysis it
was determined that the course design was valid because the knowledge application, learning outcomes and assessment were constant across the three different

188

11 Transforming Programs and Courses

Table 11.1 Defining knowledge application
Title
Creating a safer workplace
iii. Keeping us free from fraud and corruption
Application of knowledge and/or skills
On successful completion of the course, participants will be able to use legislation and policy to
recognise and respond to fraud or corruption

Table 11.2 Emergent outcomes and assessment
Learning outcome
Discriminate between fraud and corruption

Assessment
Given a behaviour the student will be able to correctly identify whether or not it represents an
example of fraud or corruption
Locate and interpret legislation and policy Given a fraudulent or corrupt behaviour, the student
will be able to use the correct legislation and/or
policy to make an appropriate response
Independently recognise and respond to
Given a workplace scenario presenting potential
fraudulent and corrupt behaviour or
fraudulent or corrupt behaviour, choose an
events
appropriate response
Initiate a fraud and/or corruption complaint Given a complaint, initiate the process within policy
within policy
Produce an action plan to minimise fraud
Generate an action plan which aligns with your
and corruption within your workplace
workplace context (management, professional
or academic)

roles. The only modification required was to ensure that different scenario sets were
provided for these different roles, as shown in the design structure (Fig. 11.3).
This approach also reflects design thinking that separates outcome from learner;
if organisational requirements require different scenarios as a function of employment then the student can make selection decisions based on the following set of
conditions:
IF
THEN
IF
THEN
IF
THEN

You are employed as a manager,
Select the scenario for managers
You are employed as a professional
Select the scenario for professionals
You are employed as an academic
Select the scenario for academics

As a final observation, because the scenarios could only be completed if the
student applied the correct policies or procedures, assessment could be defined
through completion of scenarios and consequently an end-of-course quiz was not
required.

Fraud and Corruption

189

Fig. 11.3 Fraud and corruption: design structure

Design Alchemy in Practice
In this case the transformation was significant; the existing course lacked interaction and feedback and presented a quiz that did not comprehensively assess the
essential knowledge and skills. Completion in this case met an organisation measure, but was not a demonstration of an ability to apply in practice. The transformed
course integrated active problem-based learning through scenarios which confirmed learning outcomes and knowledge application. The resultant design structure, shown in Fig. 11.3, not only catered for the three different roles but also
generated the basic structure for an online version of the course.
Above all, the case study demonstrated that Design Alchemy is real; transformations happen practically and efficiently using a combination of art, science
and a learner-centred ethos.

190

11 Transforming Programs and Courses

Corporate Law
Overview
The third case on an online corporate law course that was targeted for redevelopment and the options for transformational design of the course were considered
during a professional development session for design and development staff who
were actively developing a range of online courses for online delivery.
The institution offering the courses used a 5-week teaching model where students enrolled in only one course for the 5-week ‘semester’. At the time of this
design activity, I was unsure how a 5-week period was adequate to fully engage
with a topic and acquire the knowledge to apply in practice; however, Trekles
(2013) conducted a study which examined the extent to which deep learning
occurred with accelerated courses and determined that indeed there was evidence
of deep learning. While the uncertainty remains, the resultant transformed design
illustrates how Design Alchemy can enhance options for learning, regardless of
course duration.
The following provides a summary of the existing course in terms of aims,
outcomes and general structure followed by an exposition of the transformed course
using Design Alchemy.

Existing Course
For the purposes of this analysis, one section of the course is used to demonstrate
the inputs to the design exercise, which is presented in Table 11.3. These course
elements were supported by detailed information relating to the week-by-week
activities and assignments. The information shown in Table 11.4 represents a
synthesis of the weekly course design, in generic format, which prescribe activities
on a daily basis.

Initial Analysis
The participants in the professional development session agreed that the existing
design was well structured and provided clear and explicit instructions to students, a
critical factor for successful completion. Similarly, the assessment requirements
and discussion activities were clearly documented; however, although students
were asked to read a number of chapters from the set textbook, only selected
sections of the text were covered in the associated activities and quiz. This
represented a discrepancy between the subject matter allocated for a particular
week and the expected engagement by students with that content material.

Corporate Law

191

Table 11.3 Original course information
Title
Aim

Corporate law
Introduction to the corporate legal environment including the constitution, administrative law, contracts, agency, competition, consumers, employees, investors, the
environment and international trade
Design
Students will gain an understanding of the way the law affects corporate operations.
Resources will relate to legal concepts and laws that apply to both national and
international corporations. Students will also develop an appreciation of the law in
terms of legal and ethical practice
Outcomes Upon successful completion of this course, students will be able to:
1. Demonstrate a general overview of corporate law
2. Understand the philosophy of law and how ethics plays an important role in this
philosophy
3. Apply law to intellectual property and technology

Table 11.4 Sample structure of weekly activities
Week X
Day
3
4
6
7

Activity
Discussion
Discussion
Quiz
Assignment (essay)

Topic
Intellectual property
Ethics
From textbook
Ethics

Resources
Textbook
Chapters 6–14
Websites

The major assignment was in the form of a written essay, focusing on a legal issue
or situation that related to a corporate environment or activity.

Design Alchemy
Commentary
The basic difference in design philosophy is that the existing course was based on
working with content, rather than focusing on how the information in the textbook
might be applied in practice. For the design alchemist, the resources contain
information that, when integrated with an activity, provide the environment in
which the learners can transform that information into acquired and useful knowledge. Therefore, the first task of the professional development activity was to
develop a statement of knowledge application and align the associated learning
outcome with assessment, activities and resources, as represented in Table 11.5.
Based on discussions it was agreed that one learning outcome encapsulated the
essential learning as producing a proposal, rather than an essay, was both appropriate for the course and aligned more closely with practices in the corporate
environment. The learning outcome also defined the format of the assessment,
with artefacts from each week contributing to different sections of the proposal:

192

11 Transforming Programs and Courses

Table 11.5 Design Alchemy
Knowledge application
Apply knowledge of corporate law to establish or maintain a commercial business structure
operating legally and ethically
Outcome
Assessment
Activity
Resources
Apply the principles of corporate law legis- 1. Justify
Compare corTextbook
lation to develop a proposal to establish
poration
or modify a commercial business
types
Identify
stakeholders
2. Contract and
Ask question
Textbook
property law
Solve problem Legislation
3. Human
Ask question
Textbook
resources, tax
Solve problem Legislation
and liability
laws
4. International,
Ask question
Textbook
federal and state Solve problem Legislation
laws
5. Ethics
Debate ethics
Textbook
Justify legal
change

first justifying the need for a business and then addressing the ways each different
form of legislation would impact on that enterprise. Importantly, the enterprise was
defined by the student, and not the course or the teacher.
Consequently, the associated learning activities focused on students developing
an enterprise that was of interest to them, and the role of the teacher was to mentor
the students by responding to questions asked about the various laws being considered. This strategy also opens the course for all participants to contribute, a strategy
that makes for more interesting and engaging learning and teaching. Finally, the
textbook was retained as a resource for the learning activities. However, rather than
students being asked to read a series of chapters, the nature of the activities and
assessment required them to research and identify the relevant information from the
text and, through completing the assessment component, begin the process of
transforming the information in the text to acquired knowledge.

Summary
This example illustrates the way Design Alchemy works; it takes the designer’s
focus from the textbook (subject matter) and, through adopting a learner-centred
approach, enables the creation of a design which is functional, flexible and enables
meaningful, goal-directed interaction between participants. The process was also
efficient, with the complete design transformation taking half a day; this outcome

Science and Mathematics

193

from Design Alchemy practice demonstrates its efficiency in course design without
compromising quality.

Science and Mathematics1
Overview
This case illustrates the application of Design Alchemy to redesign two postgraduate courses for online delivery. Both courses were designed for current and future
school teachers, as well as other professionals, seeking to upgrade their knowledge
of science and mathematics. Working with Dr Spence and Dr Flegg, the course
coordinators for science and mathematics, respectively, the options for design
strategies were negotiated to involve a revised focus which utilised Design
Alchemy practice to enhance the alignment of outcomes and assessment items as
well as position the course for online delivery.
While the original course objectives for both courses were linked to the assessments, the existing practice had been to inform students by the course statement
(syllabus) of only the number of assignments, their weighting and submission dates.
In addition to making significant changes to the originally stated course objectives,
the revisions also integrated essential assessment information.

Learning Outcomes
The first phase of the project focused on the original statements of learning
objectives and an analysis of the extent to which they aligned with the knowledge
and skills students would be expected to apply on completion of the course. The
result for both courses was a rewording of the objectives, taking account of terms
that can be difficult to measure such as ‘understanding’ and focusing on the items
(artefacts) students might create in order to demonstrate the key aims of the course.
The overarching statement of knowledge application was
Have the knowledge and skills to effectively teach mathematics/science and assess student
learning in alignment with the Australian Curriculum.

To ensure the courses also aligned with the relevant professional standards, those
from the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL, 2012)
were integrated ensuring the course also addressed the expected knowledge,

1
The materials in this case study are used with the permission of Dr Karen Spence and Dr Nicholas
Flegg, School of Teacher Education and Early Childhood, University of Southern Queensland.

194

11 Transforming Programs and Courses

Table 11.6 Transforming outcomes (science)
Original outcomes
(i) Have a thorough understanding
of the key science concepts
across the four strands (physical sciences, chemical sciences,
biological sciences and earth
and space sciences) of the
Australian Curriculum: Science
(Assignments 1 and 2)
(ii) Translate conceptual ideas and
processes about science into
classroom learning activities
for students (Assignment 2)
(iii) Develop an understanding of
the variety of assessment techniques available for use in science teaching contexts
(Assignment 2)
(iv) Explore ways of unpacking
scientific misconceptions and
effectively facilitating student’s in their explorations of
their own questions and investigations (Assignment 1)
(v) Evaluate and reflect on their
past and present science experiences (Assignment 1)
(vi) Develop, through the exploration and experience of a variety
of learning and teaching strategies, a personal approach to
teaching science (Assignments
1 and 2)

Revised outcomes
Professional outcomes
(a) Create classroom learning pro- 1. Know students and
grams and/or activities that
how they learn
integrate the key science concepts for the physical sciences,
chemical sciences, biological
sciences and earth and space
sciences (Assignments 1 and 2)
(b) Create classroom learning
2. Know the content
activities to address and correct
and how to teach it
mathematical misconceptions
(Assignment 1)
(c) Create assessment tasks which 3. Plan for and implealign with the learning
ment effective
program and/or activities
teaching and
(Assignment 2)
learning
(d) Develop a personal teaching
plan for your role as a science
teacher

4. Create and maintain
supportive and safe
learning
environments

5. Assess, provide
feedback and report
on student learning
2. Engage in professional learning

practice and engagement of teachers. The original outcomes, the revised outcomes
and those for AITSL are presented in Tables 11.6 and 11.7.

Assessment
With respect to alignment of outcomes with assessment, the redesign process
elaborated on the learning outcomes to create, develop and integrate and defined
two assessment tasks in each course (the number of assessments at the time of
development was restricted by institutional protocol). As shown in Tables 11.8 and
11.9, an explicit relationship was articulated between what students were expected
to learn from the course (the learning outcomes) and the tasks on which they were

Science and Mathematics

195

Table 11.7 Transforming outcomes (mathematics)
Original outcomes
(i) Demonstrate knowledge of the
developmental continuum for
learning key topics from the
Australian Curriculum (mathematics) (Assignment 1)
(ii) Understand the importance of
addressing and correcting
mathematical misconceptions
(Assignment 1)
(iii) Develop educational learning
opportunities by sequencing
curriculum and lessons to
assess conceptual growth and
other key mathematical competencies (Assignment 2)
(iv) Assess major contemporary
mathematics curriculum initiatives designed to improve
learning (Assignment 2)

Revised learning outcomes
(a) Create classroom learning programs and/or activities that
integrate the developmental
continuum for mathematics
teaching (Assignments 1 and 2)
(b) Create classroom learning
activities to address and correct
mathematical misconceptions
(Assignment 1)
(c) Create assessment tasks which
align with the learning
program and/or activities
(Assignment 2)

Professional outcomes
1. Know students and
how they learn

2. Know the content
and how to teach it

3. Plan for and implement effective
teaching and
learning

(d) Integrate resources into learn- 4. Create and maintain
ing programs and/or activities
supportive and safe
which are available to mathelearning
matics teachers, with particular
environments
emphasis on the use of ICT
and the Internet (Assignments
1 and 2)
(v) Develop knowledge of
(e) Develop a personal teaching
5. Assess, provide
resources available to a teacher
plan for your role as a mathefeedback and report
of mathematics with particular
matics teacher (Assignment 2)
on student learning
emphasis on the use of ICT
and the Internet (Assignments
1 and 2)
1. Engage in professional learning

assessed. The course outcomes (CO) and professional outcomes (PO) were also
linked to each assessment task.

Summary
The two courses identified in this case study demonstrate how a learner-centred
approach and a specific design strategy can shift the focus of a course from the
content associated with the learning outcomes to the activities and artefacts that
demonstrate those outcomes.

196

11 Transforming Programs and Courses

Table 11.8 Alignment of assessment and outcomes (science)
Assessment task 1: physical and chemical sciences
Details:
(a) Using the three strands of the science curriculum, create one
activity for physical sciences and one activity for chemical
sciences that integrates strategies to address key concepts and
misconceptions for each science sub-strand
(b) Present a plan to implement your physical sciences learning
activity which elaborates on the evolution of your personal
approach to teaching physical science. Explain why you have
chosen this approach by comparing and contrasting your
approach to one other approach
Outcomes: CO: a, c, e
Assessment task 2: biological and earth and space sciences
Details:
Using the three strands of the science curriculum, create an outline
for a unit of work (i.e. for at least 6 weeks) which integrates
biological sciences with earth and space sciences and then
create an aligned assessment task
Outcomes: CO: a, c

Due

Weight

Week 60 %
9

PO: 1–4, 6
Due
Weight
Week 40 %
15
PO: 1–3, 5

Table 11.9 Alignment of assessment and outcomes (mathematics)
Assessment task 1: mathematical misconceptionsa
Details:
(a) Create two learning activities that integrate strategies to address Due
Weight
two key concepts and misconceptions for mathematics
Week 50 %
(b) Integrate within each of the activities in (a) an explanation of the
9
developmental continuum employed and a justification for at
least one ICT resource within each activity
Outcomes: CO: a, c, e
PO: 1–6
Assessment task 2: sequencing and assessment
Details:
(c) Create and justify two learning activities that demonstrate the Due
Weight
importance of sequencing in the teaching of mathematics
Week 40 %
(d) Integrate within each of the activities in 2(a) a substantiated
15
assessment tasks and a justification for at least one ICT resource
to support that activity
Outcomes: CO: a, c
PO: 1, 3, 5
a
Following this design activity, a determination was made to combine the two assignments and
change the second assessment to a formal test on the basic math concepts a primary teacher is
required to have in order to teach mathematics

References
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2012). Standards. Available from http://
www.teacherstandards.aitsl.edu.au/organisationstandards/organisation. Accessed October
13, 2013.
Sims, R. (2006, May 16). Beyond instructional design: Making learning design a reality. Journal
of Learning Design, 1(2), 1–8. (Keynote Paper) Available from http://www.jld.qut.edu.au/.
Accessed October 6, 2013.
Trekles, A. M. (2013). Learning at the speed of light: Deep learning and accelerated online
graduate courses. Capella University, ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing, 3558242.

Chapter 12

Activities and Assessment

Abstract A central component of the Design Alchemy framework is the creation
of learner-centred activities and assessments. In the numerous asynchronous online
courses I have encountered, the activities presented revolve around the discussion
forum, and even though learning management systems provide a wide range of
tools, it is the discussion forum which often predominates, largely I suspect because
discussion is between people and designers equate that to the perceived benefit of
online collaboration, even though a discussion is only one way in which course
participants might interact. This chapter provides three examples of how the mindset of the design alchemist can impact on the way learning activities and assessments are reconsidered. The first details the transformation of a discussion to a roleplay and the richness that resulted in terms of engagement, contribution and
enjoyment for course participants. The second illustrates the way assessment
criteria can be repurposed to explicitly focus on the learning outcomes, while the
third represents a demonstration of the ways in which a course created with Design
Alchemy might look in an online environment. Although there are numerous
examples of role-play strategies, assessment rubrics and online design in the
educational design literature, these examples highlight the importance of design
focusing on the learner and the learning outcomes.

Discussion or Role-Play?
In 2011 I had the opportunity to present at the University of Otago, New Zealand,
focusing on strategies to enhance online teaching and learning. As part of the leadup to this event, I had begun to question in more detail the actual value of the
discussion forum, as many I had participated in as an online teacher seemed to
consist largely of posts and responses, rather than actual interaction and engagement through discussion. While there is extensive research on best practice for
online activities (e.g. Alexander & Boud, 2001; Palloff & Pratt, 2007; Salmon,

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_12,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

197

198

12

Activities and Assessment

Table 12.1 Discussion-free zone
Alternative
Debate
Theory
building
Roving
reporter
Role-play

Concept
modelling
Selfassessment
What if?

Activity description
Assign participants to two groups, each group is asked to collaborate to argue the
point. Subsequent collaboration works to achieve a consensus on the issue
Participants are given a hypothesis to test from which a theory or proposition can
be developed
Participants use mobile devices to ‘report’ on a situation they encounter while on
the move
Participants choose a role to play in a particular situation. The results of the
encounters between those in different roles provide a means to address
challenges associated with that situation
Participants create a mental model of a theory or situation and upload for other
participants to compare and contrast
In combination with other tools, participants complete a task and assess the
extent to which their solution aligns with those identified from research and
practice
Similar to a role-play, participants are given a situation and asked ‘What if?’ or
‘What would you do?’

2013), many courses do not embrace designs to engage and generate knowledge and
understanding.
During the presentation, in order to highlight the importance of activities other
than the discussion, I presented the idea of a ‘discussion-free zone’ to encourage
teachers and designers to transform their thinking: because a learning management
system provides a ‘discussion’ or ‘forum’ the tool does not mean every activity
must be a discussion. Possible alternatives to the discussion, but which use the
discussion tool, are shown in Table 12.1.
Having presented this challenge, Dr. Tim Cooper,1 initially sceptical of the
online environment as place to generate engaging discussions, agreed to experiment
with a discussion-free zone and use a role-play strategy. The results, as shown in the
following contributions, reveal a rich set of interactions in which students both
adapted to their chosen role and generated rich and meaningful dialogue with
respect to the situation. Dr. Cooper (Personal Communication, October 2013)
provided the following reflections on the process:
The idea of online activities, rather than online discussions, was just the spark I needed. I
have to admit I found online discussion a fairly dreary affair. I think my students did too. No
one was inspired; the results were insipid. But the idea of online activities changed all that.
They appealed to the creativity and humour in me, and in my students. I think that element
of humour is very important.
Introducing a touch of judicious anachronism into exercises that are part of a History
course really works well. I think it conveys to students that we can have some fun with this,
and we do. Online activities are enjoyable for the students, and so much more fun to assess

1

My thanks to Dr. Tim Cooper, University of Otago, who generously gave permission to use the
online learning role-play devised as a result of transforming the original discussions and provided
personal reflections on the process.

Discussion or Role-Play?

199

than a standard essay. Sometimes I laugh out loud when I read what my students write. But
the value is not just for entertainment, I think that leads to good learning.
In my first year of using online activities (the ones in the example) one student said this: ‘I
liked getting creative in the online posts. When I first read what was required I thought it
was stupid—but actually it turned out to be my favourite part of this course and really made
me think and retain the information which I had to work with.’ Another student also
‘appreciated the balance between the essays, audio conferences and on line activities. It
kept the pace of the course going but allowed depth. The on line activities were fantastic for
this. They allowed me to approach the course from different perspectives than I had
expected’.
I have found them to be very rewarding. I shudder to think how I would have got on without
the idea of online activities—it has been one of the most helpful and transformative
pedagogical insights I have received.

Role-Play: Expectations and Assessment
The following sets of examples are extracted from the learning management system
and illustrate the design, the assessment and a selection of responses generated.
For all of these online activities you will use the discussion board function
on Blackboard, but as you will see not all of these activities are simple
discussions. In each of the three ‘windows’ you will choose one of three
activities, and in that activity you will make one substantive post that will be
assessed. I encourage you also to read what the other students have posted
and make your own further contributions to the activities (those subsequent
contributions will not be assessed).
Because the class is so large you will be divided into groups. Even though
you will be assessed individually, do think of yourselves as working as a
group to create something that is worthwhile and effective. In the audioconference I will give some feedback on the online activities and acknowledge the group that I think created the best activity together.
For some activities I have put a specific reading on Blackboard. If there is
no such reading, begin by looking at what is available on e-reserve (in the
document called ‘E-reserve’) or in the many Church History books.
A post of around 150 words is perfectly acceptable; please don’t go
over 350 words. Each post will be marked out of 5. Here is a guide to how
your posts will be marked; it will indicate what I am looking for.

200

12

Activities and Assessment

Mark Description
5
This is exceptionally good. I can tell that you have done some excellent reading and
thinking. There is nothing discordant. Your post is relevant, creative, intelligent and
accurate.
4
This is a solid post. It doesn’t have quite the flair or the intuition of a 5, but it is still good. It
is accurate and knowledgeable, with no errors or misunderstandings.
3
This is certainly passable. You have shown good effort but the post may contain an error or
misunderstanding, something that suggests you haven’t fully grasped the subject.
2
Your post is either too brief to do justice to the subject or it is badly wrong in at least one
aspect. It is not convincing. It does not convey much in the way of independent reading
or critical thinking.
1
I’m sorry to say that this is substandard. It is severely off-track, or inadequate in its content,
or fundamentally mistaken. It conveys that you haven’t understood the subject very well
at all.

Once each round of posts has been assessed you will find your mark in the
‘Grade Centre’ section of Blackboard. As you construct your posts, please
observe the following guidelines:
Keep your posts relevant, focused and to the point. You don’t have to
write everything you know about a topic. The purpose is to engage with your
fellow students to build a fruitful conversation together. Try not to dominate
the discussion; give others space.
Do respond specifically to the posts of other students, and where you agree
or disagree offer specific reasons for doing so. Keep an open mind, and
respect all contributions from others.
Electronic discussion is prone to misunderstanding, and it is reasonably
easy to cause offence without intending to. So choose your words carefully
and precisely, giving thought to how they might be received. Feel free to use
emoticons—they are an important way of conveying tone. And don’t take
offence too quickly—perceived slights may not be real or intended. If you
don’t understand what someone has said online, ask them to clarify it. If that
doesn’t resolve the matter, contact me directly.
I welcome humour, but please make it in good taste. Your posts can be
informal in their tone, creative and fun.
In each ‘window’ there are three activities to choose from. One is a
standard online discussion, but the other two require more creativity. You
might think of these as an exercise in creative writing. Even though it is not
academic prose, it still conveys to me whether or not you have understood the
period or the focus of the activity. Let me clearly signal, then, that I will
reward creative writing and even good storytelling. What I want to see is that
you have engaged with the issues and understood them, so you have lots of
room to move around in and be creative. Enjoy it. I look forward to reading
what you put together.

Discussion or Role-Play?

201

You will find the instructions you need for making your post further along
in the ‘Details’ section of this introduction. So here are the online activities. . .
Window 1: Late Antiquity [Module 1/Study Units 9 and 10]
6 a.m. Monday 12 March to 11 p.m. Sunday 18 March
Choose ONE of the following three activities. . .
1. Conference
Let’s say it is the early fifth century and a group of notable theologians
have gathered together for a Theology conference in Constantinople. The
theologians are Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil of Caesarea,
Jerome, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem and Cyril of Alexandria. It is
the evening before the conference begins and they are all sitting together in a
pub in the suburb of Chalcedon. They are telling each other what they have
been working on lately and, being opinionated, they are each telling the
others where they have gone wrong; they are also talking about Augustine
in his absence. Who knows where the conversation will lead, but Theology
will be at the heart of it. You are one of these theologians (take your pick).
Write a post that is their contribution to what looks like a genuine
conversation.
There is a reading on Blackboard under ‘Course Documents’ to help you
work out who these theologians are. Once you have made your first post I
encourage you to make further contributions to the conversation.
2. Debate
Imagine it is the year AD256. Pope Stephen I and Bishop Cyprian of
Carthage are sitting together in a boat, bobbing on the Mediterranean. They
are meeting on neutral territory to debate the claims of papal primacy. You
can choose whether to be Stephen or Cyprian. Whoever you choose, make his
case in the debate, and begin your post with either S: or C: If you are not the
first student to make a post, follow on from the previous post(s). Even though
it is AD256 you are welcome to bring in other, later claims for papal primacy.
Essentially you are debating the rights and wrongs of such claims, so in the
end this activity should look like a genuine debate between concerned,
informed participants.
Once you have made your first post I encourage you to make further
contributions to the debate.
3. Discussion
This is a fairly standard online discussion. Unlike the other two options,
you are writing just as who you are, not as someone else. I’d like the
conversation to be open-ended. Feel free to ask and answer your own
questions about the subject, ones that particularly interest you. Keep each
distinct question in a separate thread. Here are a few questions that might help
to get you started:
(continued)

202

12

Activities and Assessment

1. What were the main challenges to Christianity in late Antiquity?
2. What were the main achievements?
3. Is ‘fragmentation’ an appropriate description of what is going on in this
period? Why, or why not?
Once you have made your first post I encourage you to make further
contributions to the discussion.
19 March 2012 11:15 AM: JAMES
1. Conference Basil of Caesarea
Well I tell you I have quite a journey getting here on time, for a while I
didn’t think I would make our gathering at all, and I thank the Good Lord I
am here early and unscathed albeit I have left most of my digestive tract
floating out in the Mediterranean. I’m not quite ready to eat just yet but will
have some wine. Thank you all for your prayers and concern.
I have been most occupied with two issues, one local and one concerning
our blessed church. Firstly, there is continuing extreme poverty in our
province last year’s drought has caused widespread food shortages. I am
fortunate to have a few well educated landowners as Christian converts we
are discussing ideas around how we can use what water we do have most
efficiently and how to store water so we have a continual supply. We are not
above pinching a few ideas from the Romans; the aqua duct is their invention
after all. Reliable water for crops would be revolutionary.
The second issue my fellow men of God is the threat posed to our faith by
Arius and his peddling of the belief in the idea that our Blessed Lord and
Saviour is in some way less than Our God and Father. I have heard it said
Arius believes Jesus Christ to be a creature. A heavenly creature but creature
nonetheless, I find this an outrage. I trust that you also find this belief
outrageous. I object to such nonsense on two points firstly, if Jesus is created
then surely he is finite to be created is to have a beginning and an end. Yet
John tells us in the Holy Scripture “in the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with
God.” I ask you how can our Lord and Saviour be eternal and be created.
Secondly, and possibly of more importance is the saving work which Jesus
Christ undertook on our behalf on the cross dying and being risen to new life.
How can a being lesser than
God overcome the sting of death, absorbing all the sin of the created order
redeeming the cosmos in the process. I will go to my death believing that Our
Lord and Saviour is nothing less than one being with the Father.
19 March 20121:47 PM: JUDITH
In a Chalcedonian pub (called ‘The Anachronist ’), Cyril of Jerusalem is
holding forth . . .

Discussion or Role-Play?

203

“. . .yes, John, this Bithynian ale’s not bad. It’s a bit warm, though. I hear
some Roman named Ici-Coldi Refrigerata is working on a method of cooling
beer, but at the rate he’s progressing I reckon it’ll take him about 1,500 years!
Ah, here’s the Cappadocian trio;
Greetings, how are you? Still giving those Arians a hard time, I hope?! By
the way, Gregory [of Nyssa], I haven’t forgotten how you helped me out in
the heresy accusations back in ‘78 -thanks again for your support.
[Talking to Basil and the two Gregorys] I suppose that you guys will be
pushing the ‘common substance’ barrow in tomorrow’s debate on the interrelationship between the Father, Christ and the Holy Spirit? That common
substance phraseology really does smack oftri-theism, you know! I’ve been
thinking more and more in terms of one common nature as a much better
descriptor.
I really think, too, that the sacraments are where it’s at. If you’re going to
talk about ‘substance’, well, talk about the Eucharist! The bread and wine are
trans-substantial of Christ’s actual body and blood. It’s at the Eucharist where
we can feel the real presence of Christ.
And, after all, it is Christ’s death and resurrection that’s the foundation of
our Faith. I reckon that young whipper-snapper Augustine (good grief, I was
already a Bishop when he was still in nappies!) might have a good point about
Christ being the minister at Eucharist.
And don’t forget Baptism! As I keep saying to all my Baptism candidates,
it’s at Baptism that those who seek to follow Christ receive remission for sins.
That’s why Baptism is such a big thing- and I don’t think preparation for it
should be taken lightly.
[Waving an empty goblet] Anyway, Basil, it’s your round. . .oh, that’s
right; you pro-ascetic types never seem to have any money. Maybe your kid
brother here [nodding towards Gregory of Nyssa] could help you out. . .?!”
20 March 2012 6:41: SAM
(Cyril of Jerusalem replies. . .)
Ah, yes, we had a similar problem in Jerusalem back in the fifties- serious
food shortages. The people were starving. In ‘58 I sold some of the treasures
from the church to buy food for these good folk- I got into a lot of trouble over
that one! I actually got officially charged for it, but I don’t hold that against
anyone.
I’m surprised, Basil, that, having been an ascetic yourself, you’re not
encouraging those Christian landowners to sell up for a more simple lifestyle?! And then the money from the sale could be used communally for food
etc. Anyway, if you do decide to go with the aquaduct idea, just make sure
that no-one ’loses their digestive tract’ in that baby. . .yuk!
(continued)

204

12

Activities and Assessment

Now, I know that I’ve been accused of being an Arian myself in the past (..
I’ve now got over the sympathy I had for them!), I do think it’s also going a
bit far the other way to say that Jesus is ‘one being’ with the Father. ‘One
substance’ I can live with (..after all, I did vote for this at the Constantinople
conference back in ‘81, but only because there was at the time no better
description offered!). ‘One nature’, is, I think, a better term. But ‘one being’?
Definitely not. God is a- the(!)- heavenly ‘being’. But Jesus was and is, to
some degree however small, a human being. That is how and why He can
relate to our human suffering and sin.
Anyway, it must be my round. That wine’s no good for your guts- some
decent Bithynian ale is what you need. Guaranteed to clear you up (or out!)
good and proper! Here you are. cheers. . .

Summary
The energy displayed by students as they understood the purpose and value of the
role-play illustrates the transformation that can take place initially by focusing on
outcome rather than tool, which is then followed by transformation in engagement
and learning because the design reflects the teacher ethos and expectations, even if
they are not present for all of the interactions which take place.

Which Assessment Type?
Overview
The way we assess learners to establish a measure of the extent to which learning
outcomes have been achieved has always been a critical component of any educational endeavour, and the ways that assessment is defined and undertaken are many
and varied, including the use of:
1. National standards2
2. Formative and summative assessment
3. Competency-based and continuous assessment
In addition, the specific measures used to determine success (grades, marks,
competency) also vary, dependent on a combination of tradition, institutional

2

For example, the Common Core Standards Initiative (http://www.corestandards.org/), the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (http://www.acara.edu.au/default.asp) or
the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (http://www.teqsa.gov.au/).

Which Assessment Type?

205

practice and assessment philosophy. In my personal practice, marks are not provided to avoid questions asking ‘why did I get 9¼ rather than 9½?’; instead I use a
grade which reflects the level of performance; this has proved consistently acceptable to the learners.
There is however a tendency, partly in response to demands from accrediting and
funding agencies who wish to promote student persistence, to allocate marks to
everything a student does. This is not a component of Design Alchemy, which
focuses on learner achievement through the creation of artefacts. Being able to
solve complex problems and generate new knowledge is considered more important
than scoring 100 % on a memory test.

Activity and Assessment
With that background the following example illustrates an assessment strategy
which, through focusing on the learning outcomes, was repurposed and
transformed. The course (addressing communication for nursing) was being
redeveloped for online delivery, and a component of this process involved application of elements of Design Alchemy.3 To illustrate the process of alignment, a
summary of two learning activities and the corresponding assessment items and
rubrics is presented. The first activity (Table 12.2) focuses on personal approaches
to learning, and specifically integrates the problem-solving, inclusive, active and
creative elements of the Design Alchemy pedagogy in the creating of the assessment artefact. Its corresponding assessment rubric is presented in Fig. 12.1.
The second activity selected relates to academic writing and the strategies to
develop a strong argument. The specific details for the activity are shown in
Table 12.3 and the associated assessment rubric in Fig. 12.2.

Design Alchemy
The examples shown in Figs. 12.1 and 12.2 represent two key elements in the
transformation process. The first related to the range of levels of performance;
because the institution allocates grades ranging from fail (<50 %) to high distinction (>84 %), the initial rubric had five levels of performance to distinguish (fail, C,
B, A, HD), and for criteria such as ‘paragraph structure’ (Fig. 12.2), it is complex
and time consuming to create five variations of paragraph structures that are
discrete and incremental in terms of quality. The alternative was to create only
three levels which reflect the Design Alchemy recommendation of not evident,

3
Used with permission of Associate Professor Jull Lawrence, School of Arts and Communication,
University of Southern Queensland, Australia

206

12

Activities and Assessment

Table 12.2 Learning activity one
Activity 1. My learning skills, style and approach
Spark: Video: ‘Students Today’. How do you relate to these views?
Purpose: To gain insight into my strengths and weaknesses in learning and align with the
university’s requirements. This will help me to adjust to and succeed at university
Tasks
1. Complete the learning profile questionnaire and reflect on the feedback you receive and post an
entry to your group forum
2. Write a 100-word summary describing what you found out about yourself from this feedback
3. Based on the summary, develop your submission for the Assessment 1

Fig. 12.1 Assessment rubric one

Table 12.3 Learning activity two
Activity 3.1 Writing thesis statements
Spark: How to write strong thesis sentences
Purpose: To consistently present the content and structure of an academic argument
Tasks
1. Choose a clinical aspect of hand washing in a particular context. This topic area will help you
write your thesis statement
2. Write 50 words about why this hand washing topic interests you, why it is clinically relevant and
why you have chosen the particular context
3. Post your 50-word reflection to your group forum and respond to another post explaining why
you liked the post
4. After reading your tutor’s comments, select the aspect of hand washing that you will use for
Assignment 2 and then write out your thesis statement and submit

satisfactory and exemplary (see Chap. 13 for further example). In this way the
allocation of marks, a requirement of the institution, can be allocated more
effectively.
The second transformation was to ensure the clear separation of performance
levels. The development of rubrics is complex, and a typical example of those
created is shown in Table 12.4 and illustrates the factors we resolved to eliminate

Which Assessment Type?

207

Fig. 12.2 Assessment rubric two

from the rubric. In this example, the single criterion (use of passage and development) is assessed at four different levels, with each level having three conditions
(A, B, C; 1, 2, 3; p, q, r; x, y, z). However as an assessor, the way the rubric is
structured a submission could be scored as a ‘4’ only if the submission was rated as
A AND B AND C; in reality however a submission may manifest B AND 1 AND p
and z; how is this graded? Certainly, automated systems within learning management software enable this flexibility, but when used manually, such structures
nullify validity and reliability.
A second observation is the separation of levels; examining Table 12.4 and
Levels A and 1, what differentiates ‘ample, well-chosen data’ and ‘sufficient and
appropriate data’? It would appear in this case that selecting either ‘A’ or ‘1’ is
subjective rather than objective. These factors also impact on the validity and
reliability of rubrics.

208

12

Activities and Assessment

Table 12.4 Assessment rubric sample

Use of story and
elaboration

4
Consistent
narrative with
many strengths
A. Includes
ample,
wellchosen data
from the
story
B. Elaboration
of ideas
developed
thoroughly
C. Data is relevant and
accurate

3
Reasonable
narrative with
some strengths
1. Includes sufficient and
appropriate
data from the
story

2
Inconsistent
narrative with
more weaknesses 1
than strengths
Little or no narrative
(p) Includes
(x) Includes minimal or
insufficient or
no data from the
data from the
story and/or misunstory
derstands the story

2. Elaboration of (q) Ideas are not
ideas develelaborated
oped
adequately
adequately
3. Data is usu(r) Some data
ally relevant
may be irreland accurate
evant or
inaccurate

(y) Minimal/no
elaboration

(z) Data is irrelevant,
inaccurate and
confusing

Summary
By aligning the activity with assessment, learners have a clearer understanding of
the rationale underpinning the learning tasks. Equally important is the validity of
the assessment rubric, which involves ensuring both horizontal and vertical separation of the criteria and performance levels. Assessment is another element the
design alchemist can address and transform: the alignment of activities and assessments and the integrity of the rubrics that measure the alignment of assessment with
learning outcomes.

Design Alchemy Online
Overview
This example represents one design strategy from a larger suite of support resources
for academic staff. The course outline shown in Fig. 12.3 was developed to
demonstrate how a course might look to a learner once implemented on the Moodle
learning management system.
The critical element for this exercise was to demonstrate the use of questions as
titles in order to focus the learner’s attention on the purpose of the section and
thereby minimised the need of extensive explanations. In addition, the use of the

Design Alchemy Online

209

Fig. 12.3 The look and feel of Design Alchemy online

question is designed to help the student determine the relevance of the section to
their own practice and situation. The second element demonstrates a means to
highlight both learning activity and resources. As this site was designed primarily
as an information source, with no accompanying assessment, users were not
expected to create artefacts as a result of completing the nominated activities.

210

12

Activities and Assessment

Activities and Assessment
This second chapter in Part III has provided three examples to highlight the results
of Design Alchemy practice and to emphasise the importance of focusing on
learning outcomes as a means to generate successful learning experiences.

References
Alexander, S., & Boud, D. (2001). Learners still learn from experience. In J. Stephenson (Ed.),
Teaching & learning online: Pedagogies for new technologies. London: Kogan Page.
Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for
the virtual classroom (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The key to active online learning (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Part IV

Design Alchemy: Self Service

The final part of the text provides a set of resources for design practitioners,
especially those who are new and inexperienced in the theories and practices of
educational design. In the first chapter a sample design is presented, including the
syllabus, for a course where the practice of Design Alchemy can be learned. The
second chapter provides a series of templates which can be used to support the
practices documented across the narrative. To complete the analysis, the final
chapter provides a manifesto, a set of reflections on design thinking, and a brief
perspective on the future of learning, teaching and design.

Chapter 13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

Abstract To illustrate Design Alchemy in practice, this chapter provides a selfpaced course, developed using the principles and practices of the framework, to
enable readers to work through the essential elements of the methodology. The
materials are presented with the assumption that users will have access to the
specified resources. The creation of this course involved the use of the worksheets
(provided at the conclusion of this chapter) to demonstrate how their use can assist
in the efficiency of designing and developing course specifications.
The initial part of the course presents the outline or syllabus document that would
be made available to students, which normally provides the specifications which make
the institution accountable for delivery and to which students could appeal should they
believe appropriate process was not followed. This example presented assumes the
course is a single, self-paced course within a fictitious Advanced Diploma program. It
should be noted that many institutions require, as part of the formal course outline,
specific information on course elements such as submission of assignments and
grading. While this example addresses such factors where practical, it should not be
taken as covering such materials. Because of the importance of professional learning
outcomes I have included those relevant to the discipline of creative and performing
arts, as specified by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council.

Syllabus
Course code
Course name
Program
Coordinator
Prerequisites
Corequisites
Mode
Offered
Duration

ALCH101
Being a design alchemist
Advanced diploma of creative design
Roderick Sims, Ph.D.
Interest and motivation to create effective designs
None
Self-paced
As required
2 days

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_13,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

213

214

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

About This Course
This course aims to provide you with the knowledge and skills to be able to apply
the principles of Design Alchemy to efficiently create a complete set of course
specifications.

Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this course you will have demonstrated these course
and professional outcomes, which together will confirm your acquisition of the
essential knowledge and skills of Design Alchemy.
Course learning outcomes (CO)
CO-1 Identify the asset characteristics that will inform and/or impact on the success of the design
project
CO-2 Consult with teaching staff to produce a statement of application of knowledge and skills
CO-3 Define a set of learning outcomes to demonstrate the ability to apply the relevant knowledge
and skills
CO-4 Specify assessment items for each course learning outcome that will demonstrate achievement of that outcome
CO-5 Identify learning activities for each course learning outcome that, on completion, will result
in the creation of the respective assessment artefact
CO-6 Select resources that will support the completion of each learning activity
Professional learning outcomes (PO)
PO-1 Demonstrate skills and knowledge of the practices, languages, forms, materials, technologies and techniques in the discipline
PO-2 Develop, research and evaluate ideas, concepts and processes through creative, critical and
reflective thinking and practice
PO-3 Apply relevant skills and knowledge to produce and realise works, artefacts and forms of
creative expression
PO-4 Interpret, communicate and present ideas, problems and arguments in modes suited to a
range of audiences
PO-5 Work independently and collaboratively in response to project demands
PO-6 Recognise and reflect on social, cultural and ethical issues and apply local and international
perspectives to practice

Syllabus

215

Assessment
These assessment items, when successfully completed, will confirm your achievement of the respective course (CO) and professional (PO) learning outcomes.
Assessment task
1. Design part A: Design assets
Document the asset characteristics that will inform the design
effort
2. Design part B: Knowledge application and learning outcomes
Document the agreed statement of knowledge and skill application and the alignment with course, institutional and professional learning outcomes
3. Design part D: Assessment
Document the assessment items that will demonstrate achievement of the learning outcomes
4. Design part E: Learning activities and resources
Document each activity that will result in the creation of an
assessment artefact, and the resources that will enable each
learning activity to be completed

Due
Day 1
AM

Weight CO
15 %
1

PO
1–6

Day 1
PM

15 %

2, 3

1–4

Day 1
PM

20 %

4

1–5

5, 6

1–6

Day 2 50 %
AM/
PM

Policies
This course is not affiliated with an institution and therefore no explicit policies apply
However, where resources are used to inform and create the assessment artefacts, appropriate and
legal recognition of copyright, attribution and acknowledgment is essential

Learning Activities
Completion of each of these activities, using both the identified resources as well as
those you introduce, will result in the creation of an artefact for the respective
assessment item.
Design part A: Design assets
A1.1
Analyse course and program materials.
Analyse institutional policies and procedures.
Synthesise critical factors.
A1.2
Confirm synthesis with course authority.
Document the key informing assets.
Create
Specifications part A: Design assets

Resources
• Program/course materials
• Policies and procedures
• Program/course personnel
• Sims (2014)

216

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

Design part B: Knowledge application and learning outcomes
A2.1
Work with course personnel to agree on a knowledge application
statement
A2.2
Identify and integrate institutional and professional learning
outcomes
A2.3
Work with course personnel to agree on the course learning outcomes
that will confirm the ability to apply the knowledge and skills
Create Specifications part B: Knowledge application and learning outcomes

Design part C: Assessment
A3.1
Align assessment tasks to course learning outcomes.
Confirm all institutional and professional outcomes addressed by
assessment tasks.
Define assessment criteria.
Create Specifications part C: Assessment items

Resources
• Course personnel
• Professional
standards
• Institutional
standards
• Biggs and Tang
(2011)
• OULDI (2012)
• Sims (2014)
Resources
• Course personnel
• Institutional
policies
• Sims (2014)

Design part D: Learning activities and resources
A4.1
Define a set of learning activities, aligned to each assignment that will Resources
generate the respective assessment artefact
• Course personnel
A4.1
Identify the resources that will inform the completion of each learning
• LMS Inforactivity
mation
Create Specifications part D: Learning activities and resources
• Sims (2014)
• Individual
research

Resources
These resources are used to inform the learning activities you will participate in.
Recommended sources
Research
• Biggs, J and Tang C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. McGraw-Hill and
Open University Press, Maidenhead
• Open University Learning Design Initiative (2013). About the project. Available: http://www.
open.ac.uk/blogs/OULDI/ (Accessed: September 9th, 2013)
• Sims, R. (2014) Design alchemy: Changing the way we think about teaching and learning.
Springer
Policies and reports
• Institutional teaching and learning policies and procedures
• National accreditation and standards agency requirements
• Professional standards for learning outcomes
(continued)

Being a Design Alchemist

217

Recommended sources
Media and other resources
• Learning management system (LMS) information
• Design alchemy worksheets
People
• Program and course coordinators
• Course teachers (subject-matter experts)

Learning and Teaching
The following information will assist you to complete this course.
Triggers for success
Learning and teaching strategies
• This is a self-paced course designed for individual designers, or design teams, to complete in
collaboration with stakeholders responsible for revising an existing or creating a new course
• The strategies are based on applying the Design Alchemy method described by Sims (2014)
Effort
• To achieve the course and professional outcomes, you will need to commit to up to 2 days of
research, collaboration and documentation

Being a Design Alchemist
Learning Guide
Welcome
Welcome to this self-paced course that will develop your ability to efficiently apply
the principles and practices of Design Alchemy to the creation of new courses, and
the revitalisation of new courses.
This course learning guide has been created as part of this book to present the
practices in a practical and accessible fashion.
The attached syllabus provides an overview of the specific learning outcomes
you will address, the assessments that will confirm those outcomes and the activities you will participate in to complete the assessment tasks.
This learning guide provides a sequenced set of activities and assessment tasks
designed to confirm your readiness to apply Design Alchemy: by applying Design
Alchemy you will become a design alchemist!

218

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

To gain maximum benefits from this course, it is recommended that you identify
a course, and the academic staff who are responsible for that course, to act as a case.
In this way it will be those academic staff, who become the assessors, determine the
extent to which the assessment criteria have been met.

Design to Enable Learning
If you have been working in the design of learning and teaching environments, you
will already know there are many different theories and models as to best practice in
the field. Design Alchemy (Sims, 2014) represents a synthesis of those practices to
specifically address the growth of online access and delivery as well as the
increasing demand for teachers who do not typically have design experience.
If you are new to the field of design, then you will find Design Alchemy a
practical and efficient means to transform course revitalisation or development
initiatives into a functional and pedagogically sound online course.
The underlying philosophy of Design Alchemy is learner centred, with the aim
to create learning and teaching environments so each participant can learn
according to their motivation and situation.

A: What Are the Assets of Design?
Overview
Experienced practitioners may find they begin with the second set of activities, as
they will be aware of the range of assets which impact on design and are therefore
able to apply them in situ.
The first segment of this course involves identifying and prioritising the various
elements known as design assets, the range of subject domain, program, environmental and institutional characteristics that inform course design.
By completing the following two activities, using the identified resources, you
will have created the necessary components for the following assessment item and
its related course outcome:

Assessment
Design specifications part A: Design assets

Being a Design Alchemist

219

Outcome
CO-1

Identify the asset characteristics that will inform and/or impact on the
success of the design project.

Activity 1.1: Asset Factors
After selecting the course targeted for development or revitalisation, access the
relevant course and institutional policies and procedures and, using your experience
and background, identify what you consider to be the key asset factors that will
impact on the design.
Record these on the asset worksheet.

Activity 1.2: Asset Consensus
Using the worksheet as a discussion point, consult with identified members of the
course teaching team and discuss the different asset factors.
On reaching a consensus of the critical assets, record these in the design
specifications (Part A: Assets).

Resources
Use the resources noted in the syllabus for this set of activities.

Check Point 1
In consultation with a nominated member of the course team, compare the
documented specifications with the assessment criteria.
On agreement that the criteria have been met, continue to the next learning
segment.

220

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

B: Defining Knowledge Application and Learning Outcomes
Overview
While the assets identified define many aspects of the course, the critical components of the design begin with the five steps of Design Alchemy practice, the first of
which are to identify the knowledge application and the associated learning
outcomes.
By completing the following two activities, using the identified resources, you
will have created the necessary components for the following assessment item and
its related course outcome:

Assessment
Design specifications part B: Knowledge application and learning outcomes

Outcome
CO-2
CO-3

Consult with teaching staff to produce a statement of application of
knowledge and skills.
Define a set of learning outcomes to demonstrate the ability to apply the
relevant knowledge and skills.

Activity 2.1: Knowledge Application
Courses are often defined in terms of the topic (subject matter) that they address.
The first step of Design Alchemy is to identify the knowledge and skills that
learners will be able to apply on successful completion of the course. The knowledge application statement provides a succinct overview of the reasons a course is
delivered.
For this activity you will collaborate with course personnel to first develop the
knowledge and skill application statement.
Record the agreed statement on the Knowledge Application Worksheet.

Activity 2.2: Institutional/Professional Learning Outcomes
In addition to course learning outcomes, it is also critical to integrate institutional
outcomes (often referred to as graduate attributes) and professional outcomes (those

Being a Design Alchemist

221

defined by professional accreditation bodies and national agencies). It will not be
unusual for the professional outcomes to embrace the institutional outcomes; in this
case only one set need to be defined.
Collaborate with appropriate course personnel and develop consensus on the
strategy to integrate institutional and professional outcomes into the course design.
On reaching a consensus of these outcomes, record the outcomes and the
strategies on the Learning Outcomes Worksheet (institutional and professional).

Activity 2.3: Course Learning Outcomes
The course learning outcomes are those which together demonstrate the learner’s
ability to apply the stated knowledge and skills. A typical course would normally
have 4–5 course learning outcomes.
Collaborate with appropriate course personnel and develop consensus on the
course learning outcomes.
On reaching a consensus of these outcomes, record the outcomes and the
strategies on the Learning Outcomes Worksheet (Course).

Resources
Use the resources noted in the syllabus for this set of activities.

Check Point 2
In consultation with a nominated member of the course team, compare the
documented learning outcomes specifications with the assessment criteria.
On agreement that the criteria have been met, continue to the next learning
segment.

C: Defining Assessment
Overview
Course assessment, measuring the extent to which the learning outcomes have been
achieved, is a process of alignment. While there are many factors which impact on
the possible assessment protocols to deploy, it is practical to create one assessment
item for each learning outcome.
By completing the following two activities, using the identified resources, you
will have created the necessary components for the following assessment item and
its related course outcome:

222

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

Assessment
Design specifications part C: Assessment

Outcome
CO-4

Specify assessment items for each course learning outcome such that
completion of the assessment item demonstrates achievement of that
outcome.

Activity 3.1: Alignment
A critical aspect of course success is the alignment of learning outcomes and
assessment. In essence one (or more if appropriate) assessment task will demonstrate that the learner has demonstrated the associated course learning outcome as
well as the relevant institutional and/or professional learning outcomes.
Collaborate with course personnel to design and develop the assessment items.
Record the agreed assessment tasks on the Assessment Task Worksheet.

Activity 3.2: Criteria
When a learner completes an assessment task, there needs to be a means to assess
whether or not the associated learning outcome has been achieved. A common
strategy to achieve this is to develop a set of criteria that together provide a measure
of success. Within the Design Alchemy framework, the criteria can be used to
highlight the essential subject-matter components that must be integrated to successfully achieve the learning outcome.
In collaboration with course stakeholders, and using the relevant domain and
design resources, develop the criteria for each assessment item.
On reaching a consensus of these outcomes, record the assessment tasks and
associated criteria on the Assessment Worksheet.

Resources
Use the resources noted in the syllabus for this set of activities.

Being a Design Alchemist

223

Check Point 3
In consultation with a nominated member of the course team, compare the
documented assessment specifications with the assessment criteria.
On agreement that the criteria have been met, continue to the next learning
segment.

D: Defining Learning Activities and Resources
Overview
The final step in the design process is to determine the set of learning activities
participants will engage in and the resources that will inform those activities. The
primary role of these activities is to create an artefact (an analysis, idea or media
element) for the associated assessment task.
By completing the following two activities, using the identified resources, you
will have created the necessary components for the following assessment item and
its related course outcomes:

Assessment
Design specifications part D: Learning activities and resources

Outcome
CO-5
CO-6

Identify learning activities for each course learning outcome that, on
completion, will result in the creation of the respective assessment artefact.
Select resources that will support the completion of each learning activity.

Activity 4.1: Learning Activities
The learning activities associated with each learning outcome/assessment pair or
group (depending on their definition) are designed to integrate each of the elements
of the Design Alchemy pedagogy to present a learner-centred focus.
Using your own experience as a course participant, collaborate with course
personnel and colleagues to develop a set of activities that together will create the
relevant assessment artefact.
Record the agreed statement on the Learning Activity Worksheets.

224

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

Activity 4.2: Resources
To complete a learning activity, the course participants need access to
recommended and additional resources. It is these resources which contain and
provide the relevant subject matter for the activity and the course.
Based on your own research and the resources identified by the course personnel,
create a recommendation of the resources required for each learning activity.
On reaching a consensus of these outcomes, record the resources on the Learning
Activities Worksheet.

Resources
Use the resources noted in the syllabus for this set of activities.

Check Point 4
In consultation with a nominated member of the course team, compare the
documented learning activities and resources specifications with the assessment
criteria.
On agreement that the criteria have been met, the course has been completed.

Assessment
1: Design Assets
Description
Complete the documentation of the first section of the design specifications which
address the assets of design.

Course Learning Outcome
CO-1

Identify the asset characteristics that will inform and/or impact on the
success of the design project.

The professional learning outcomes (POs) to which this assessment links are PO
1–6; full details are provided in the accompanying syllabus.

Assessment

225

Submission Information
Format
Due
Weight

Design specifications template
Day 1 (AM)
15 %

Grading
To successfully complete this task, you will need to achieve at least a satisfactory
rating on all criteria.
Criterion
Consultation

Not evident
Satisfactory
No
Collaborates to achieve
consultation
consensus

People assets

Not addressed

Standards
assets

Not addressed

Program assets

Not addressed

Technology
assets
Process assets

Not addressed
Not addressed

Evidence assets Not addressed

Describes program, institutional, professional and
design team
stakeholders
Describes institutional,
professional and agency
standards
Describes course domain,
sector and level
Describes access, tools and
mobility options
Describes phased implementation and sustainability strategy
Describes research, media
and practice sources

Exemplary
Collaborates to achieve consensus and introduces new
strategies
Substantiates need for program,
institutional, professional
and design team
stakeholders
Substantiates institutional, professional and agency
standards
Substantiates course domain,
sector and level
Substantiates access, tools and
mobility options
Substantiates phased implementation and sustainability
strategy
Substantiates research, media
and practice sources

2: Knowledge Application and Learning Outcomes
Description
Document the agreed statement of knowledge and skill application and the alignment with course, institutional and professional learning outcomes.

226

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

Course Learning Outcome
CO-2
CO-3

Consult with teaching staff to produce a statement of application of
knowledge and skills.
Define a set of learning outcomes to demonstrate the ability to apply the
relevant knowledge and skills.

The professional learning outcomes (POs) to which this assessment links are PO
1–4; full details are provided in the accompanying syllabus.

Submission Information
Format
Due
Weight

Design specifications template
Day 1 (PM)
15 %

Grading
To successfully complete this task, you will need to achieve at least a satisfactory
rating on all criteria.
Criterion
Consultation

Not evident
Satisfactory
No
Collaborates to achieve
consultation
consensus

Knowledge
application

Not addressed

Institutional
Not addressed
and professional
outcomes
Course learning Not addressed
outcomes

Exemplary
Collaborates to achieve consensus and introduces
new strategies
Documents statement which Documents and substantiates
identifies knowledge
statement of knowledge
and/or skills to be applied
and/or skills to be applied
on successful course
on successful course
completion
completion
Documents institutional
Synthesises institutional
and/or professional learnand/or professional
ing outcomes to be
learning outcomes to be
integrated
integrated
Documents course learning
Substantiates course learning
outcomes
outcomes

Assessment

227

3: Assessment
Description
Document the assessment items that will demonstrate achievement of the learning
outcomes.

Course Learning Outcome
CO-4

Specify assessment items for each course learning outcome that will
demonstrate achievement of that outcome.

The professional learning outcomes (POs) to which this assessment links are PO
1–4; full details are provided in the accompanying syllabus.

Submission Information
Format
Due
Weight

Design Specifications Template
Day 1 (PM)
20 %

Grading
To successfully complete this task, you will need to achieve at least a satisfactory
rating on all criteria.
Criterion
Not evident
Satisfactory
Consultation No
Collaborates to achieve
consultation
consensus
Assessment Not addressed Aligns and documents at
items
least one assessment
item for each learning
outcome
Not addressed Integrates institutional
and/or professional
learning outcomes with
assessment
Assessment Not addressed Creates an assessment
criteria
rubric for each assessment item

Exemplary
Collaborates to achieve consensus
and introduces new strategies
Aligns and substantiates at least
one assessment item for each
learning outcome
Integrates and substantiates institutional and/or professional
learning outcomes with
assessment
Creates an assessment rubric for
each assessment item and
articulates the integration of
subject matter into the criteria

228

13

Design Alchemy: Self-Service

4: Specifications Part D: Learning Activities and Resources
Description
Document each activity that will result in the creation of an assessment artefact, and
the resources that will enable each learning activity to be completed.
Course Learning Outcome
CO-5
CO-6

Identify learning activities for each course learning outcome that, on
completion, will result in the creation of the respective assessment artefact.
Select resources that will support the completion of each learning activity.

The professional learning outcomes (POs) to which this assessment links are PO
1–6; full details are provided in the accompanying syllabus.
Submission Information
Format
Due
Weight

Specifications template
Day 2 (AM/PM)
50 %

Grading
To successfully complete this task, you will need to achieve at least a satisfactory
rating on all criteria.
Criterion
Not evident
Satisfactory
Consultation No
Collaborates to achieve
consultation
consensus
Learning
Not addressed
activities
Not addressed

Resources

Not identified

Exemplary
Collaborates to achieve consensus and introduces new
strategies
Describes at least two learning Describes and substantiates at
activities for each assessleast two learning activities
ment item
for each assessment item
Learning activities manifest a Justified inclusion of learnerlearner-centred pedagogy
centred pedagogy incorpoincorporating inclusive,
rating inclusive, active,
active, problem-solving,
problem-solving, social,
social, contextual, creative
contextual, creative and
and emergent elements
emergent elements
Identifies at least 1–2 research, Identifies more than two
media and people resources
research, media and people
resources

Chapter 14

Design Alchemy Templates

Abstract This chapter provides a set of annotated templates which address the
overall practice of Design Alchemy and provide scaffolding for designers undertaking course development and revitalisation projects. The templates follow the
basic sequence of the practice and the specifications that are generated as a result of
completing the five major steps of the process: knowledge application, learning
outcomes, assessment items, learning activities and learning resources. Additional
templates are provided for detailing the assessment criteria, learning activity
details, a scenario-based learning activity and the course syllabus. The final set of
templates address the assets of design.

Knowledge Application
Application of Knowledge and/or Skills
On successful completion of this course, the learner will be able
to:

To establish a statement of
knowledge application, ask the
course-coordinator questions
such as:
•

Why is this course in the
program?

•

What do you want students
to be able to do on
completion of the course?

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_14,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

229

230

14

Design Alchemy Templates

Learning Outcomes
Learning Outcomes
1.

The learning outcomes
represent the subset of
knowledge and skills the learner
will demonstrate to confirm
their ability to apply that
knowledge on successful
completion of the course.

2.

It is recommended that a
course or module have between
three and five learning
outcomes.
Each outcome should begin with
a verb which identifies the
means by which the outcome
will be expressed.

3.

4.

5.

Assessment, Learning Activities, and Resources
Learning
Outcome
Assessment

Assessment
Task
Learning Activities
1.

Specify the assessment task or
item.

Resources

It is recommended that one
assessment task be defined for
each course learning outcome.
Learning Activities
The result of each learning
activity is the creation of an
artefact for assessment.

2.

The number of activities per
assessment task will vary, and
may include a number of subtasks in order to complete the
assessment artefact.
Resources

3.

These represent the people,
ideas or objects that can be
used to inform and complete
the learning activities.

Assessment, Learning Activities, and Resources

231

Assessment Detail
Assessment
Task
Course Learning Outcomes

Professional Learning Outcomes

Outcomes
Stating Course and
Professional Learning
Outcomes maintains
focus on alignment
Description
Detail precise
information about
the assessment task.

Description

Submission Format
Specify the range of
acceptable formats
the deliverable can
take
Due Date
When the task can or
should be submitted.

Submission
Format

Due Date

Weighting

Policy

Weighting
The contribution of
the assessment task
to completion status
Policy
Link to relevant
institutional policy
(e.g. late
submission,
plagiarism)

232

14

Design Alchemy Templates

Assessment Criteria
Assessment
Task
Outcomes

Criterion

Not Evident

Satisfactory

Exemplary

For each assessment task the
criteria should be kept to a
minimum.
Outcomes
Identify the Course (CO) and
Professional Outcomes (PO)
that align with the criterion
Criterion
The standard on which
assessment judgements will be
made.
Alignment
Measures which define levels of
alignment with the criterion. It
is essential that these are
discrete items that enable
differentiation by the assessor.

Learning Activity Detail
The aim for each activity is that it includes each element of the Design Alchemy
pedagogy, presented at the right side of the template.
Learning
Outcome
Assessment
Task
Activity Description

Learner-Centred Pedagogy
Inclusive

Active

Problem
Based
Contextual

Social

Triggers the inclusion of individual
gender, cultural, spiritual and
experiential factors..
Focuses on participants “doing”
throughout the activity.
Define the problem, challenge or
issue which is to be resolved by the
activity.
Set the activity in both the context of
the knowledge domain and of the
situation of individual participants.
Integrate collaboration and
connections.

Creative

Identify options for the artefact to be
created.

Emergent

Encourage exploration of alternative
explanations, contested solutions and
new knowledge.

Assessment, Learning Activities, and Resources

233

Problem-Based Activity
Scenario
Name
Details

Overview:

Media:

Introduce the context of the
scenario and the factors which
learners will have to address.
Some
scenarios
may
be
presented without prompts to
assess learner performance.
Identify specific media required
to complete the scenario

Student Action

Overview:

Specify any action required by
the student.
For example: “How would you
respond to the client’s question
about over-pricing?”

Media:
Response Required

Overview:

Specify the response required
from the student. For example,
if a multiple choice option then
details for each option and the
correct choice.

Media:
Feedback

Correct:

Detail what response will be
made when a correct response
is made.

Media:
Incorrect:

Detail what response will be
made
when
an
incorrect
response is made. This may
include
an
additional
questioning sequence.

Media:
Next Steps

Overview:

Media:

Specific information to prepare
the student for the next phase
of the procedure. This will often
be linked to the response
feedback.

234

14

Design Alchemy Templates

Design Alchemy Assets
People
Course Title

Program

Program Coordinator:
Course Coordinator:
Course Teacher:

The program people are
those who provide input to
and confirmation of the
course design

Course Teacher:
Institution

Media Production:
Software Development:
System Support:

The institution provides
access to key contacts who
can action design and
development requirements

Library / Resources:
Marketing:
Administration:
Profession

Designers:
Subject Matter:
Resources:

The profession identifies
connections in the course
domain as well as in design
and development practice

Technology:
Design / Development Team

Design Alchemist:
Subject Matter Expert:
Media Specialist:
Resource Specialist:
Software Developer:

The design and
development team are
those specifically assigned
to complete the design,
development and
implementation of the
course

Design Alchemy Assets

235

Standards
Course Title

Institutional

Graduate Attributes:
Access Modes:

Identify links to relevant
institutional standards

Policies:
Professional

Threshold Outcomes:
Certification:

Identify links to relevant
professional standards

Accreditation:
Agencies

State:

Identify links to relevant
state and national
accrediting agencies

National:

Programs
Course Title

Domain

Subject Area:
Notes:

Identify the major subject
area to which the course
aligns and relevant
information or advice

Sector

Name:
Notes:

Identify the sector, formal
or informal, to which the
course aligns

Level

Award:
Notes:

Identify the level of the
award for formal courses

236

14

Design Alchemy Templates

Technology
Course Title

Access

Modes:

Notes:

Detail the different options
for access to and delivery of
the course; for example
•

on-campus, face-to-face

•

on-campus, online

•

distance / online

•

online

•

blended / hybrid

Tools

Design:

Development:

Identify the different tools
that can be used to support
all aspects of the course
design and development
process

Delivery:

Notes:

Mobility

Factors:

Notes:

Identify specific factors with
respect to access and
delivery via mobile devices

Design Alchemy Assets

237

Process
Course Title

Phased

Build:

Identify the delivery periods
where the anticipated
elements of continuous
improvement will occur

Enhance:

Maintain:

Sustainable

Resources:

Editorial:

For course revision, identify
segments of the existing
course where information,
subject to frequent change
or variation, needs to be
removed

238

14

Design Alchemy Templates

Evidence
Course Title

Research

Texts:

Articles:

Identify the research which
informs both the design
practice and the course
subject matter.
Identify the mode of access
and link, where available,
for each research item.
Identify the “openness” of
each item.

Papers:

Reports:

Media

Associations:

Identify relevant evidence
from informal sources.

Publications:

Marketing:

Practice

Local:

External:

Identify evidence of bestpractice from both intrainstitutional and interinstitutional programs and
courses

Course Syllabus

239

Course Syllabus
Course Name
Course Code:
Course Name:
Program:
Coordinator:
Prerequisites:
Co-requisites:
Mode:
Offered:
Duration:

About This Course
[Statement and elaboration of the knowledge application]

Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this course, you will have demonstrated these course
and professional outcomes, which together will confirm your acquisition of the
essential knowledge and skills of [course focus].
Course Learning Outcomes (CO)
CO-1.
CO-2.
CO-3.
CO-4.
CO-5.
CO-6.

240

14

Design Alchemy Templates

Professional Learning Outcomes (PO)
PO-1.
PO-2.
PO-3.
PO-4.
PO-5.
PO-6.

Assessment
These assessment items, when successfully completed, will confirm your achievement of the respective course (CO) and professional (PO) learning outcomes.
Assessment Task

Due

Weight

CO

PO

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Policies
[Details of policies which impact on the course]

Learning Activities
Completion of each of these activities, using both the identified resources as well as
those you introduce, will result in the creation of an artefact for the respective
assessment item.
[Activity 1: Name]
A1.1:

Resources

A1.2:

•

Create:

Course Syllabus

241

[Activity 2: Name]
A2.1:

Resources

A2.2:

•

A2.3:
Create:

[Activity 3: Name]
A3.1:
Create:

Resources
•

[Activity 4: Name]
A4.1:

Resources

A4.1:

•

Create:

Resources
These resources are used to inform the learning activities you will participate in.
Recommended Sources
Research
•

Policies and Reports
•

Media and Other Resources
•

People
•

242

14

Design Alchemy Templates

Learning and Teaching
The following information will assist you to complete this course.
Triggers for Success
Learning and Teaching Strategies
•

Effort
•

Chapter 15

Design Alchemy: A Manifesto

Abstract This final chapter presents a set of heuristics and design concepts
extracted from different sections of the book as well as my own personal practice
and observation, presented as a manifesto for the design alchemist. These concepts
are designed to capture the thinking behind Design Alchemy and to provide triggers
to think of design as mix of science and art, of alchemy, in order to transform the
way we all think about learning and teaching. The chapter concludes with a brief
reflection on possible futures for educational design, followed by the Design
Alchemy transformation trilogy: pedagogy, learning and teaching.

Design Alchemy: The Manifesto
Design Thinking
• You are a magician, an alchemist, creating and transforming courses to achieve
intentional learning outcomes through engaging and motivational experiences.
• Quality through alignment.
• Assign course names which reflect purpose, not topic.
• Learning outcomes are the priority, not subject matter.
• At every point in a course, learners must be engaged and active.
• Online, the learner is alone; therefore the design becomes the teacher.
• Clear expectations are essential for all course roles.
• Teachers are learners, learners are teachers.
• You cannot design for individual learning preferences.
• You can design so learners apply preferences when and how they choose.
• Allow learners to adapt and contextualise activities to their own situation.

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3_15,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

243

244

15

Design Alchemy: A Manifesto

Assessment Thinking
•
•
•
•

Completing an activity creates an assessment artefact.
Completing an assessment demonstrates a learning outcome.
Minimise plagiarism: ensure learners define assessment parameters.
Knowledge emerges from well-crafted activities, exams are unnecessary.

Activity Thinking
•
•
•
•

Use the diversity of participant experience, knowledge and skills.
Each activity must involve problem-solving.
Domain knowledge is dynamic, not static.
Formal and informal connections privileges emergent (new) knowledge.

Unthinking Technology
• Design determines the tool; the tool does not determine design.
• Create discussion-free zones.

Imagination and Memories
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
Alan Kay (1971)1

Humans are complex and can be viewed from a wide range of perspectives—as a
marvel of biology, as a contributor to community, as a focused individual or as
engaged with the spiritual. Humans are also creative, imaginative and innovative,
as evidenced by the possible futures we see imagined in films such as The Matrix
(Wachowski & Wachowski, 1999) and fiction such as The Diamond Age (Stephenson, 1995), both of which show insights on the possible evolution of education and
technology.
In The Matrix, a complex virtual world, the characters fight the technology that
conquered humanity, and in one scene the main characters Neo and Trinity find they
need to fly a helicopter. Linking to her base, Trinity is connected and, based on the
script ‘Trinity’s eyes flutter as information surges into her brain, all the essentials of

1

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Kay.

Imagination and Memories

245

flying a helicopter absorbed at light-speed2’. In The Diamond Age, the young
protagonist Nell finds herself with a ‘Primer’ (something akin to an iPad) that she
discovers guides her through her education, which we find is also part of Miranda’s
life as she is a ‘ractor’—a human who performs the stories appearing on Nell’s
Primer. Both of these excerpts show that while learning and teaching of the future is
unlikely to be anything like our current experience, it is all about the learner and the
learning, and the strategies can be put in place to make that experience
transformative—from the unknown to the known.
Design Alchemy is not about technology. It is about learning. Content is no
longer the driver of education, as content is easily accessible. The trick, the alchemy
and the magic are to make learning experiences engaging for all participants, and
until we can just plug in and learn, we will require the skills of the design alchemist
to transform educational plans into ‘golden’ learning and teaching events.

2

http://thematrixtruth.remoteviewinglight.com/html/original-matrix-script-27.html.

246

15

Design Alchemy: A Manifesto

Design Alchemy
Transforming
Pedagogy
Teacher-Centred
Learner-Centred

Content-Based
Outcomes-Based
Transforming
Learning
Creating
Consuming

Imagining
Watching

Transforming
Teaching
Sage
Elder
Master
Apprentice
Presenter  Facilitator
Guide
Mentor

References
Stephenson, N. (1995). The diamond age: Or, a young lady’s illustrated primer. New York:
Bantam Books.
Wachowski, L., & Wachowski, A. (Directors). (1999). The Matrix [Motion picture]. New York:
Warner Brothers.

Index

A
Action mapping, 74
ADDIE, 22
Alchemy, 1, 7, 9, 84
Alessi, Stephen, 16
Alexander, Shirley, 59
Allen, Michael, 21, 73
American Registry of Radiologic
Technologists, 167
Articulate, 175
Assessment, 31
is learning, 58
as learning, 58
for learning, 57
of learning, 57
Australian Institute for Teaching and School
Leadership (AITSL), 193
Australian Learning and Teaching
Council (ALTC), 166
Australian Qualifications Framework, 168

B
Bandura, Albert, 54
Beetham, Helen, 79, 89
Biggs, John, 71, 84
Bitzer, Donald, 103
Bloom, Benjamin, 115
Bloom’s taxonomy, 115
Boud, David, 59
Bransford, John, 125
Brown, Ann, 125
Brown, John Seely, 55

C
Carey, Lou, 20, 66
Center for Applied Special Technology
(CAST), 80
Clancy, William, 56
Clark, Richard, 70
Clark, Ruth, 16
Cocking, Rodney, 125
Collins, Allan, 55
CompendiumLD, 89
Conole, Gráinne, 4, 71
Constructive alignment, 84–88
Content, 29
Control data, 17
Course rationale, 28
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly, 22, 27, 104
Cycles of forgetfulness, 15–18
knowledge half-life, 17, 97
D
De Crook, Marcel, 70
Design, 22–23
as alchemy, 7–8
as art, 6
for change, 2–3
for diversity, 3
for quality, 3–4
as science, 5–6
as transformation, 8–9
Design alchemist, 8, 9, 17, 22, 24, 36, 43, 81,
101, 105, 112, 125, 133, 143, 149,
155, 161, 164, 171, 173, 178, 191,
208, 217, 245

R. Sims, Design Alchemy, Educational Communications and Technology: Issues
and Innovations 8, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3,
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

247

248
Design alchemy, 23–24, 27, 42–43, 53, 66, 68,
74, 108, 143–144, 183, 185, 189,
191–192, 205–208, 246
Design alchemy assets, 35, 46
evidence
experience, 178
media, 178
research, 177–178
people
connections, 165
courses, 163–164
design team, 164–165
institutions, 164
process
phased, 176
sustainable, 176
programs
domain, 170–171
level, 171–172
sector, 171
standards
agencies, 167–169
institutional, 166
professional, 166–167
technology
access, 174
delivery, 173–174
tools, 174–175
Design alchemy futures, 244
Design alchemy learning guide, 217–218
Design alchemy manifesto
activity thinking, 244
assessment thinking, 244
design thinking, 243
unthinking technology, 244
Design alchemy pedagogy, 31, 37, 44, 66
active learning, 59
e-tivity, 129–130
contextual learning, 59, 60, 86
situational, 134
creative learning, 59, 137
emergent learning, 86
conditions, 140
inclusive learning, 59
culture, 127
experience, 128
networks, 127
inclusivity, 86
learner-centred, 124–125
problem solving, 59, 86
strategies, 131
social learning, 60, 86
roles and connections, 135

Index
Design alchemy practice, 45, 122, 179
assessment, 86, 187, 194–195, 204–208
authentic items, 152
rubrics, 154–155, 206
knowledge application, 86, 145–147, 187
learning activities, 86, 209
pedagogy, 156–157
role play, 197–204
learning outcomes, 86, 187, 193–194
why not objectives, 148–149
learning resources, 158–159
Design alchemy syllabus
assessment, 215
knowledge application, 214
learning activities, 215–216
learning and teaching, 217
learning outcomes, 214
resources, 216–217
Design alchemy templates
assessment, 230
assessment criteria, 232
assessment detail, 231
assets
evidence, 238
people, 234
process, 237
programs, 235
standards, 235
technology, 236
knowledge application, 229
learning activities, 230
learning activity detail, 232
learning activity scenario, 233
learning outcomes, 230
resources, 230
syllabus, 239–242
Design alchemy terminology, 42
Design alchemy transforming
learning, 246
pedagogy, 246
teaching, 246
Design distractors, 110
digital whispers, 111
flipped classrooms, 113
mobile learning, 113–114
MOOCs, Virtual Reality, OERs, 114
plagiarism, 110–111
styles, intelligences, culture and
generations, 115
taxonomies and load, 115
Designer-by-assignment, 4
Design for learning, 36–38, 79
cognitive activity, 37

Index
course completion, 36–37
feedback, 38
interface and media, 38
learning styles, 36
roles, 37–38
Design so, 115, 133
Dewey, John, 50
Dick, Walter, 20, 66
Diversity, 3, 56
Dobbs, Graeme, 28
Duffy, Thomas, 53, 85
Duguid, Pau, 55

E
Earl, Lorna, 31, 57
Emergence, 29, 41
Epistemology, 51

F
Farrow, Peggy, 27
Flipped classrooms, 113
Fry, Ronald, 57

G
Gagné, Robert, 65–66, 124, 140
conditions of learning, 65
Gardner, Howard, 81, 115
Graham, C.R., 81, 115

H
Hand, Tim, 28
Harper, Barry, 18
Hedberg, John, 18, 33, 163
Herrington, Jan, 152
Higher Learning Commission, 21
Honey, Peter, 81, 115

I
Information transmission, 4
Instructional design
challenges, 73–74
models, 69–73
Interactivity, 31
art of, 26–27
levels, 26
Interface design, 30–31

249
International Board of Standards for Training
Performance, and Instruction, 99
Irlbeck, Sonja, 39

J
Johnson, Steven, 138
Jonassen, David, 26, 53, 85, 132
Jones, Deborah, 6, 33, 39, 130

K
Kay, Alan, 3
Kays, Elena, 39, 139
Kearsely, Greg, 158
Keller, John, 51
ARCS model, 51
Kemp, Jerrold, 20
Knowledge, 50–51
Knowledge acquisition, 72
Knowles, Malcolm, 123
Kolb, David, 57
Krathwhol, David, 115
Kryterion, 102
Kuhlmann, Tom, 75, 99

L
Lanarca Declaration, 29, 80, 89–90
Laurillard, Diana, 83, 84, 145
Learner as actor, 30, 106–107
Learner-centred, 32
Learning, 51–52, 122–124
connectivism, 58–59
constructivism, 52–54
experience, 59
experiential learning, 57–58
philosophy/theory, 49–50
situated cognition, 57
social constructivism, 55
social learning, 54
theories, 49–60
Learning design, 29–30, 79–80, 82–83
Librettos, 20

M
Mager, Robert, 148
Magic, 5, 13–15, 107
Mason, Robin, 138
Mayer, Richard, 16

250
Mayes, C.T., 81, 115
McLoughlin, Catherine, 127
McTighe, Jay, 71
Merrill, David, 3, 5, 53, 67–68
Mezirow, Jack, 128
Mobile learning, 113–114
MOOCs, 114
Moodle, 175, 208
Moore, Cathy, 73
Morgan, Chris, 31
Morphic resonance, 25–26, 58, 86, 140
Morrison, Gary, 20
Mumford, Alan, 81, 115
Munari, Bruno, 6

N
Neil, A.S., 50
Nickerson, R.S., 132
Norman, Donald, 56

O
Oblinger, Diana, 115
Office of Learning and Teaching, 167
Oliver, Ron, 127, 152
Open Educational Resources (OERs), 35, 113
Open University Learning Design
Initiative, 88–89
O’Reilly, Meg, 31

P
Paradox
to be, or not to be, credentialed, 98
collaboration/collusion, 101
information/interaction, 103
to listen/to perform, 106
technology, tool or trauma, 94
Pedagogy, 18–19
Personal Pattern Collector (PPC), 84
Plagiarism, 110
Proactive design for learning, 39–47
collaboration, 41
context, 39
emergence, 41
innovative, 41
interactive, 40
theory, 39
Proactive evaluation, 28–33

Index
Q
Quality, 4
Quality matters, 21

R
Reeves, Tom, 152
Regan, Tillman, 21
Reigeluth, Charles, 63
Rennie, Frank, 138
Reusable designs, 82
Robinson, Kenneth, 21, 97
Rogers, P. Clint, 81, 115
Ross, Steven, 20
Russell, Thomas, 96
Ryder, Martin, 158

S
Salmon, Gilly, 129, 156
Second Life, 114
Sharp, Rhona, 79
Sharpe, Rhona, 89
Sheldrake, Rupert, 25, 26, 59, 86, 140
Siemens, George, 7, 58
Sims, Roderick, 6, 15, 22, 27, 28, 33, 36, 39,
58, 103, 112, 130, 139, 140, 163,
165, 213, 215–218
Skinner, B.F., 16, 52
Smith, Patricia, 21
Stage struck, 18
Steiner, Rudolph, 50
Stephenson, Neal, 244
Sustainability, 34–35
Sustainable design, 35
Sweller, John, 30, 115

T
Tang, Catherine, 71, 84
Teaching as a design science, 83
Technological innovation, 16
Technology, 8, 18, 94
constraint/freedom, 97–98
design quality, 19–20
empowering/constraining, 95–97
role in education, 94
Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency
(TEQSA), 21, 167–168
Three-phase design, 33–36, 176

Index
Time and place, 56
Tolkein, J.R.R., 26
Transform, 14
Transformation, 2, 84, 184
Trekles, Anastasia, 190
Trollip, Stanley, 16
Tyler, Ralph, 87

U
Understanding, 72
Understanding by design, 71–72
United States Department of Defense, 105
Universal design for learning, 80–81
Universe of possibilities, 15
University of the Third Age (U3A), 171
University of Wollongong, 81

251
V
van Merrienboer, Jeroen, 70
Vygotsky, Lev, 55
W
Waldron, Naomi, 165
Webb, Richard, 58, 140
Wenger, Étienne, 102, 134
Wiggins, Grant, 71
Y
Young, Neil, 9
Z
ZebraZApps, 175